Balance Suggestions

[1990BW]

How did Geralt/Hjalmar buff Olaf?

You absolutely do not need to nerf a card in order to prevent an INCREDIBLY STUPID combo deck. Especially when said combo is hard countered by nearly a dozen commonly played cards (off the top of my head: Peter, Mardroeme, Mandrake, Margerita, Scorch, Schirru, Villentretenmerth, Witch Hunter, Morvunn somewhat, gigni, and regis regis), and there are several other cards I've not mentioned that aren't played often that also counter it, like cockatrice and Frangilla, Geralt Yrden and Dimeritium Bomb.

Geralt and Hjalmar can be buffed with the warcrier so if you destroy one of the 3 golds there are still 2 options left.
Off course you can put a lot of removal in your deck but that doesn't make sense for just 2 or 3 decks to play against.
In some cases you'll brick your own deck because you lose synergy between your golds, silvers and bronzes.

Removal, buffing to insane levels (either with hand or graveyard) and create destroy the game if you ask me.
It has nothing to do with player interaction, strategy and skill they are just dull routine plays copied from the web resulting in no GG.
Today I had 2 examples of that when I played twice against NG's famous handbuff decks.
In both games I coincidentally revealed their mandrake and both players still played Vesemir with Emhyr and found out too late that mandrake was in their hand.

I tried using Ihuarax in hanbuff but i never managed to triger that cursed unicorn. Maybe he hates me...
Hello cdpr why is this card so bad??

Stefan Skellen does the trick but be aware Ihuarax targets random enemies so you don't always get full value out of it.

 

[iamthedave]

Geralt and Hjalmar can be buffed with the warcrier so if you destroy one of the 3 golds there are still 2 options left.
Off course you can put a lot of removal in your deck but that doesn't make sense for just 2 or 3 decks to play against.
In some cases you'll brick your own deck because you lose synergy between your golds, silvers and bronzes.

Removal, buffing to insane levels (either with hand or graveyard) and create destroy the game if you ask me.
It has nothing to do with player interaction, strategy and skill they are just dull routine plays copied from the web resulting in no GG.
Today I had 2 examples of that when I played twice against NG's famous handbuff decks.
In both games I coincidentally revealed their mandrake and both players still played Vesemir with Emhyr and found out too late that mandrake was in their hand.

Removal has been a part of this game from day one and always will be. Every deck should run some removal, or all you get are 'I play my engine, you play your engine, whoever engine generates the most points wins'. And it gets no better if removal gets replaced with locks.

 

[1990BW]

Removal has been a part of this game from day one and always will be. Every deck should run some removal, or all you get are 'I play my engine, you play your engine, whoever engine generates the most points wins'. And it gets no better if removal gets replaced with locks.

Removal wasn't so strong as it is now and there were less options.
In the past you also had quen to protect your engines.
Locks are more balanced than removal because it can be counter'd.
These days engines only work with resurrect and deathwish (they also can be abused because of it).
Engines from NG and SC for example can't do that so they are stuck with a crippled deck against removal.

 

[iamthedave]

Removal wasn't so strong as it is now and there were less options.
In the past you also had quen to protect your engines.
Locks are more balanced than removal because it can be counter'd.
These days engines only work with resurrect and deathwish (they also can be abused because of it).
Engines from NG and SC for example can't do that so they are stuck with a crippled deck against removal.

Did you not play the game back in the days of old-style spellatael, when Villentretenmerth triggered twice and had gold immunity? That deck was way more oppressive than the removaly-est deck today. Or four-scorch Eithne? Which - by the way - was one of the beneficiaries of Quen because it used it as a booster for the sentries in round 3.

I really, really, REALLY wish people could remove their rose-tinted glasses and remember how bad the game was back then, when round 3 almost invariably came down to who had the most golds to put down and games were literally decided based on whether or not you had a dim shackles to stop certain cards. Imlerith Sabbath caused a huge flap because he could 'force people out of rounds'; there were TONS of golds that did that back then. Villentretenmerth, unanswered, instantly ended any round he was in, because very, very few decks could handle getting scorched twice in a row.

Removal in the past was even stronger than it is now. It's just now there's more of it. And remember, removal did less damage back then, but creatures were also smaller back then, so it's really six of one, half a dozen of the other. Alzur's could still kill just about anything you really wanted to kill. And if it couldn't, it's SCORCH TIME, BABY!!!!

 

[1990BW]

Did you not play the game back in the days of old-style spellatael, when Villentretenmerth triggered twice and had gold immunity? That deck was way more oppressive than the removaly-est deck today. Or four-scorch Eithne? Which - by the way - was one of the beneficiaries of Quen because it used it as a booster for the sentries in round 3.

I really, really, REALLY wish people could remove their rose-tinted glasses and remember how bad the game was back then, when round 3 almost invariably came down to who had the most golds to put down and games were literally decided based on whether or not you had a dim shackles to stop certain cards. Imlerith Sabbath caused a huge flap because he could 'force people out of rounds'; there were TONS of golds that did that back then. Villentretenmerth, unanswered, instantly ended any round he was in, because very, very few decks could handle getting scorched twice in a row.

No I started playing last year in march or april I think golds weren't immune.
NG spies was my starting deck and it was competative back then.
The second or third season I played reveal and remember that SC + Ithlinne Aegli + Sentries + Vrihedd Dragoon + placing Quen on those bronzes were very popular.
But with NG you could outplay them with Avalach, Albrich and Tibor as finisher.

Removal in the past was even stronger than it is now. It's just now there's more of it. And remember, removal did less damage back then, but creatures were also smaller back then, so it's really six of one, half a dozen of the other. Alzur's could still kill just about anything you really wanted to kill. And if it couldn't, it's SCORCH TIME, BABY!!!!

Scorch is ok to me because it's a silver card and is more strategic because you have to wait to target as many units possible.
With the bronze removal being so powerfull it's just boom and gone and like I said with some decks that ain't a big deal in others it's crucial atm.
The poor state of the game is also expressed in dosens of useless cards which have no synergy at all.

 

[1990BW]

Added this suggestion:

Yennefer: Necromancer, there are decks with no (interesting) soldiers so you'll basicly end up with a bricked gold card or in some cases poor value

• To make this card viable it needs 2 options:
  Keep: it's current ability.
  Add: cast the silver necromancy spell (Banish a Bronze or Silver unit from either graveyard, then boost an ally by its power).

Perhaps CDPR should also consider to bundle some (neutral) cards into 1 body or make them faction unique.
Suggestions for this will follow.

 

[1990BW]

A new suggestion to solve the current anti-machine meta because of removal:

Removal, in the current meta it ruins the game especially for machine decks which can't resurrect.

• Let removal cards only be targetable on units like humans and non-humans.
• Machines can only be locked.
• And/or machines can't be removed but only damaged (to 0 value) and disabling their ability.
  A new type of crew can repair machines to enable their ability again.
  Some decks that have bronze humans/non-humans that function as machines need to be transformed in actual machines (to make sense)

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

That is a pretty interesting suggestion and might be worthy of its own thread as it is probably far too complex far this place.
Personally, I can't clearly see all consequences that it would imply. Also, it would require quite a lot of work for to make all engines machines. And isn't a bit contraintuitive that the main use of Dimetrium Shackles, which work lore wise only against mages, only would be used against machines xD

And while I support this suggestion, it could be quite strong actually, as destroyed machines would soak up a lot of damage effects this way.

 

[1990BW]

And isn't a bit contraintuitive that the main use of Dimetrium Shackles, which work lore wise only against mages, only would be used against machines xD

Just rename them to locks because the whole concept of dimeritium shackles has been removed from the game for a while.

And while I support this suggestion, it could be quite strong actually, as destroyed machines would soak up a lot of damage effects this way.

I noticed until now that it essentialy works the same as resurrecting....but more complicated.
So I'll remove the latest suggestion because it's unnecessary.

 

[Wirxaw]

I wish the game added a card priority mechanic. For example, you can set a card or two as the priority cards for round one draws, and, also a card or two as low-priority. Not in general, not as a buff to the Truce cards, just round one.
I've always wondered how to solve the deck-thinning problem, which makes draws pretty much ruin the game, and now, after more or less safely winning with starting brainless decks(and only getting wrecked by netdeckers), I've decided to spent some 1k scrap to build something more than basic for a daily. Well, this led to 5-10 lose streak, not exactly the best day of Gwent. Okay, when I paired Temerian Infantry with BSCommandos(ironic name, ain't it) - that was pushing it too far(even though I've literally seen another player perfectly execute BSScout-BSCom-Temerian Infantry-Foltest, resulting in 21 point Infantry round 3....), but when I just left it to basic BSScout-BSCom - I didn't expect to find much draw difficulty. I was wrong. My strat was simple and just designed to get a daily at ~1.5k rank, which, technically, isn't impossible, but the game's RNG left little room to work with.
All I needed was BSScouts round one and at least one Reaver round 3. Game in, game out I ended up with no either no reavers, all reavers round one, no BSScouts and worse. Games that were forced to quit either instantly, at round 2 or even round 3.
As far as I've watched Mogwai, most end-game decks have similar setups, especially deck-thinners.

So why not do a minor tweak that shouldn't, technically, imbalance the game(because when the RNG works at least remotely as intended, this wouldn't be necessary), but which would ensure that the decks you build have a least a CHANCE to work. Of course, that doesn't take into account any enemy removals, it's just about round 1 draws.

At the very least, let's say, if I could set BSScouts as a priority card, just one card - and I'd be sure to draw at least one of it every game round one, how much would that break the game? I'd still have to work around cloning it, either trying to re-draw more or draw into Reaver Scouts. But I'd at least know that I wouldn't start a game in a rather hopeless situation.
Likewise, if Reaver Hunter or BSCommandos could be set as "low-priority cards", they wouldn't be drawn round one at all. Find me a single, SINGLE player that enjoys rerolling an auto-summon deck-thinning card. Sure, they are "easy targets", but, let's be honest, every other game you see 2-3 of these cards, and the "easy" targets become mandatory rerolls that otherwise stifle your options.
Hell, as far as I know, even having these cards can make rerolling round one dangerous, because if you roll into them - you are jeopardized.

Again, I'm talking about purely round one. And only the initial draw priority. No round two/three, no Avallac'hs, no Mulligans. Maybe start with only low-priority for deck-thinning cards. Because, I assume, there COULD be cases, where setting a card as a guaranteed draw round one would make it broken. Maybe restrict these cards to bronze only, because such luck usually concerns engines, not silvers and golds.
By all means, the last thing I want is to see a guaranteed Hjalmar round one, or something like that. There's enough incessant point spam and dry passes. Seriously, passing round 2 is a more or less tactical thing, but dry-passing round one is practically ensuring that the game ends in either Round 2 or Round 3, which goes against the nature of Gwent. That's, FWIW, Hearthstone territory. A curved, long, imbalanced and non-tactical game.

So, TL;DR:
I want bronze engines to be accessible round one, and I want deck-thinners to not affect rerolls(again, at least just round one).

 

[eatmysh0rtz]

There are quite a few cards that need minor tweaks (just a value change of 1 or 2). But seeing which ones is often difficult for players, since you are biased towards the factions you like, so I dont really want to even comment on it. (CDRP knows which cards are strong and highly played and which are not)

There is just one big issue on which I would like to make a suggestion: the create mechanic. I generally like this mechanic as it offer flexibility with the trade off of potentially getting a useless card (=randomness). However, if the creation is caused by a unit, you will always get a value boost of one. This problem is especially severe for ST because many of their faction cards work well in any deck, which makes Elven scout a reliable choice with almost no risk, but the benefit of an additional value (and target for boost effects). My suggestion is to reduce the choice provided by those cards (e.g. giving only a selection of two cards instead of the three we have right now). This increases the randomness and makes the card more risky overall. All special cards with create effects (doppler, runestones...) should be changed to: "Create one out of two random cards/units from your faction. Chose from three cards instead, if the card was player from your hand." This does effectively the same as mentioned before (increase the risk of having a bad card).

Further more I would change all cards like Dwarfen agitator that create copies to the recruit's effect (play a card from your deck, instead of creating a copy of it). This comes with the risk of running out of cards and compensates for the additional +1 value (randomness is also involved of course). Furthermore, you cannot play the same card more than three times this way.

I hope you like the suggestions. Please let me know what you think.

 

[1990BW]

There are quite a few cards that need minor tweaks (just a value change of 1 or 2). But seeing which ones is often difficult for players, since you are biased towards the factions you like, so I dont really want to even comment on it. (CDRP knows which cards are strong and highly played and which are not)

I'm not really biased to factions there are just a lot of cards and mechanics I detest, don't like, have no value or don't make sense.
Yes I'm a NG player have you tried a deck besides alchemy that is competative?
There are none because of many reasons it's the same with other archetypes from other factions as well and some suggestions in this topic cover them as well.
It really takes a lot of time to dive into them and understand why they don't work (in the current meta).
I can't do that on my own for every faction/archetype so I stick to the one I know the best.
The suggestions from other factions in general are broken mechanics, bugs or problems I've encounterd that have influence on the game balance.

Further more I would change all cards like Dwarfen agitator that create copies to the recruit's effect (play a card from your deck, instead of creating a copy of it). This comes with the risk of running out of cards and compensates for the additional +1 value (randomness is also involved of course). Furthermore, you cannot play the same card more than three times this way.

This would be fair.
My own suggestion for this card would be: play golden froth from the deck.

 

[iamthedave]

I'm not really biased to factions there are just a lot of cards and mechanics I detest, don't like, have no value or don't make sense.
Yes I'm a NG player have you tried a deck besides alchemy that is competative?
There are none because of many reasons it's the same with other archetypes from other factions as well and some suggestions in this topic cover them as well.
It really takes a lot of time to dive into them and understand why they don't work (in the current meta).
I can't do that on my own for every faction/archetype so I stick to the one I know the best.
The suggestions from other factions in general are broken mechanics, bugs or problems I've encounterd that have influence on the game balance.

You really are biased towards NG. Almost all of your suggestions for NG are buffs, and you suggest nerfs to cards in other factions so sweeping that you'd annihilate entire archetypes and reduce them to have even fewer viable competitive options. But that's just that you know NG best and don't have a broader view of the implications of some of your suggestions. Your werewolf nerf suggestion, for example, would delete moonlight as a deck archetype.

 

[1990BW]

You really are biased towards NG. Almost all of your suggestions for NG are buffs, and you suggest nerfs to cards in other factions so sweeping that you'd annihilate entire archetypes and reduce them to have even fewer viable competitive options.

Do or did you play NG?
You may call them buffs but I rather see them more like a redesign that fixes some real problems in this faction.
I won't go to much in detail but there's so much half work and no thought behind cards and deckbuilding in this faction.
Soldiers have no synergy, machine and spy decks are crippled by removal, alchemy is OP, some cards are outdated and have no value anymore etc. etc.

But that's just that you know NG best and don't have a broader view of the implications of some of your suggestions. Your werewolf nerf suggestion, for example, would delete moonlight as a deck archetype.

I've played this game long enough to understand the other decks as well.
It's so easy to say I'm NG biased because I play the faction but thats just not true.
Perhaps my list of suggestions has become so big that it's too hard to see what I'm after and how some suggestions co-exist with eachother.
All I want is a better balanced game because I think the current meta is very bad and removes all the fun this game potentially has to offer.
I've made this thread because I care about Gwent and really want it to be good.
But if you mug an entire thread with dozens suggestions off without going in to depth in your comments I think you're the one being biased in the end.

 

[Khreygond]

Do or did you play NG?
You may call them buffs but I rather see them more like a redesign that fixes some real problems in this faction.
I won't go to much in detail but there's so much half work and no thought behind cards and deckbuilding in this faction.
Soldiers have no synergy, machine and spy decks are crippled by removal, alchemy is OP, some cards are outdated and have no value anymore etc. etc.




I've played this game long enough to understand the other decks as well.
It's so easy to say I'm NG biased because I play the faction but thats just not true.
Perhaps my list of suggestions has become so big that it's too hard to see what I'm after and how some suggestions co-exist with eachother.
All I want is a better balanced game because I think the current meta is very bad and removes all the fun this game potentially has to offer.
I've made this thread because I care about Gwent and really want it to be good.
But if you mug an entire thread with dozens suggestions off without going in to depth in your comments I think you're the one being biased in the end.

To be fair a lot of your suggestions I completely disagree with, and NG is my favorite faction as well. I respect the work you've put in this however, and the effort that you make to keep it updated and suggestions you've included. So there is that. That's why I didn't voice any extreme opinion.

It's true that NG needs a buff, but you are suggesting things that would immediately make some archetypes absolutely DEAD. Even archetypes that are already dead.

 

[LevokosM]

6 games against Brouver, in a row.. Great game. And tech support just ignored (only gog support answers).
So tired of seeing this gay deck for 2 months. If it won't be nerfed/removed in upcoming patch - i think a lot of players just stop play.

 

[iamthedave]

Do or did you play NG?
You may call them buffs but I rather see them more like a redesign that fixes some real problems in this faction.
I won't go to much in detail but there's so much half work and no thought behind cards and deckbuilding in this faction.
Soldiers have no synergy, machine and spy decks are crippled by removal, alchemy is OP, some cards are outdated and have no value anymore etc. etc.

The problem is that alchemy isn't OP. Of the T1 decks it's by far the weakest and has been fighting around top 5 for about a month now. In fact, as of the most recent meta report it isn't top 5 anymore with a sub 50% win rate.

And yes, I've been a NG player for a good while. It's probably my no. 2 after Monsters, though the no. 2 slot rotates based on whatever deck I prefer playing the most. I'm on an alchemy kick at the minute.

Also, you're wrong about soldiers. Soldiers are highly synergistic; the problem that soldiers has is that it's an archetype with no finisher. That's literally all it needs. You can make a direct comparison to NR 40 card swarm soldiers; the one thing NG soldiers lacks is a round 3 play after it's (probably) won a long round 1/2. I'd prefer them to switch it up and make it soldier/officer synergy rather than straight soldiers, but that's neither here nor there. Slave infantry and sentries are crazy powerful in theory, especially if you do it with Emhyr to reuse one or the other.

I've played this game long enough to understand the other decks as well.
It's so easy to say I'm NG biased because I play the faction but thats just not true.
Perhaps my list of suggestions has become so big that it's too hard to see what I'm after and how some suggestions co-exist with eachother.
All I want is a better balanced game because I think the current meta is very bad and removes all the fun this game potentially has to offer.
I've made this thread because I care about Gwent and really want it to be good.
But if you mug an entire thread with dozens suggestions off without going in to depth in your comments I think you're the one being biased in the end.

I don't say it because you play the faction, I say it because you don't understand the ramifications of many of your non-NG balance suggestions. I main monsters but I think I pretty legitimately am not biased in favour of Monsters. But then I have a comparitively deep understanding of how card game balance works, so I see a little bit further than 'x thing annoys me so I want it changed', and I'm very leery of changes that would damage archetypes. How you made your nekker suggestion, as someone who's been around long enough to understand the deck, I can't fathom. Nekker warrior? Sure. We've been bouncing that idea around the forums for ages in some form. But making it so nekkers have to be on the board or in hand to benefit from consume would instantly, irrevocably kill the deck.

You're also in a tough spot because the current meta is actually one of GWENT's better metas. It's really pretty well balanced with a lot of different competitive decks spread across most of the factions. Can it be improved? Hell yes. But if you think this meta is bad... I'm sorry, that's because the game changed, not because the meta's broken. The best comparison for the current Meta is actually pre-midwinter in terms of its overall balance. It's even evolving and changing, as we saw with the brief rise of Imlerith and NG handbuff, and the ups and downs of the top decks and fighting over the top spot.

It seems to me at times that many of your suggestions are based more on feels than data. For example your suggestion to stop a completely random silly Skellige combo deck, despite such a thing clearly being no problem at all. Honestly I'd laugh if I ran into that deck. In fact I might try and build at some point for next time I have the win as Skellige challenge. But the point is that if you truly want GWENT to get better as a game it's really important to look at the data and what the data says about the game's health, and if you want to talk balance, you especially need to look at the data to see how cards and decks are actually performing against the field.

The point stands that if CDPR took your entire suggestion as their next patch, the only faction that would truly benefit would be NG, and the other factions would severely suffer.

 

[1990BW]

To be fair a lot of your suggestions I completely disagree with, and NG is my favorite faction as well. I respect the work you've put in this however, and the effort that you make to keep it updated and suggestions you've included. So there is that. That's why I didn't voice any extreme opinion.

It's true that NG needs a buff, but you are suggesting things that would immediately make some archetypes absolutely DEAD. Even archetypes that are already dead.

It's fine to agree and disagree about things and argumenting them.
But empty reactions like you're a NG player and only buffing this faction and nerfing others imply that you don't read the entire post.

I don't say it because you play the faction, I say it because you don't understand the ramifications of many of your non-NG balance suggestions. I main monsters but I think I pretty legitimately am not biased in favour of Monsters. But then I have a comparitively deep understanding of how card game balance works, so I see a little bit further than 'x thing annoys me so I want it changed', and I'm very leery of changes that would damage archetypes. How you made your nekker suggestion, as someone who's been around long enough to understand the deck, I can't fathom. Nekker warrior? Sure. We've been bouncing that idea around the forums for ages in some form. But making it so nekkers have to be on the board or in hand to benefit from consume would instantly, irrevocably kill the deck.

Maybe some suggestions aren't described so subtle and provoke a certain type of reaction.
The whole Nekker suggestion you mention here is removed because of the discussion about it.
If the cards are discussed it can lead to better suggestions and a higher chance the devs may consider to apply them.
Do you realise that?

You're also in a tough spot because the current meta is actually one of GWENT's better metas. It's really pretty well balanced with a lot of different competitive decks spread across most of the factions. Can it be improved? Hell yes. But if you think this meta is bad... I'm sorry, that's because the game changed, not because the meta's broken. The best comparison for the current Meta is actually pre-midwinter in terms of its overall balance. It's even evolving and changing, as we saw with the brief rise of Imlerith and NG handbuff, and the ups and downs of the top decks and fighting over the top spot.

If it's better it doesn't mean it's good and opinions will differ strongly about this meta.
In another thread I already mentioned the deeper problems I have with the game.
Perhaps it will add some more perspective to my suggestions:

'It's a bit early to say whether I buy it or not.
I don't want to be rude because it's beta (and free) and it's easy to criticize from the sideline but right now the game is a mess.
The major problems are lack of vision, bad decisions and poor game design even with the most simple things.

The description on the website about Gwent is clear.
But when I play the game why is the battlefield divided into melee, ranged and siege?
How do the rows work and how do they interact between both players?
If you ask me the game has drifted away from these basic concepts.

There are 480 cards in total (incl. leaders) most of them are not used for whatever reason.
I wonder why the devs decided to create such an huge amount of cards.
What were their thoughts behind them? How should they fit into a deck?

I can go on and on about this but to me it looks like the devs don't know what Gwent is anymore.
The announcement of a roadmap is encouraging and I'm looking forward to it.
Let's wait and see but for now I've stopped playing because I don't like it anymore.''

It seems to me at times that many of your suggestions are based more on feels than data. For example your suggestion to stop a completely random silly Skellige combo deck, despite such a thing clearly being no problem at all. Honestly I'd laugh if I ran into that deck. In fact I might try and build at some point for next time I have the win as Skellige challenge. But the point is that if you truly want GWENT to get better as a game it's really important to look at the data and what the data says about the game's health, and if you want to talk balance, you especially need to look at the data to see how cards and decks are actually performing against the field.

I do look at the data and yes I sometimes run into a unusual game and mention it here because I think it's silly and should be investigated by the devs to ''prevent'' possible problems in the future.
There's is a lot more sense behind my posts if you're open and dive into them.
And data isn't everything whats more important is to stick to the game concept, crafting on it and by adding improvements that do make sense and fit into the initial game concept.
I believe the devs went wrong here and forget what Gwent is.

The point stands that if CDPR took your entire suggestion as their next patch, the only faction that would truly benefit would be NG, and the other factions would severely suffer.

This is another empty comment wrapped into over-exaggerated expletives.
Sorry I have to put it this way but this not how you discuss things.

 

[Khreygond]

This is another empty comment wrapped into over-exaggerated expletives.
Sorry I have to put it this way but this not how you discuss things.

It is how you state opinions. That's all he is doing. He's disagreed with some of your suggestions already. So have I, a bit more constructively, in a previous post, if you remember, where I said it's pretty transparent you play NG Reveal. This is actually the second time I read the entirety of your suggestions. And while some are good, some are just broken, or bad. Which is how it happens with suggestions. Want examples? here you go:

1) you say Slave Infantry is very weak and vulnerable to battering rams and ask that it is spawns a STR 4 and STR 5 copy. On quote:

Slave infantry, too vulnerable against epidemic and NR battering rams.

• Let it spawn 3, 4 and 5 strength units instead 3x 3 strength.
  Set the cards strength to 4 so it fits into the ointment suggestion further ahead.

However, that really doesn't make it any less vulnerable, since battering rams next to a crewman hit for 4, and next to 2 crewmen, they hit for 5.
Also, you say that Half-Elf Hunter is a 12 point bronze with no risk and synergy which needs to change:

Half-Elf Hunter, a 12 bronze without a compromise ain’t fair.

• Set it to 2x 5 strengt

despite the fact that both your suggestions for slave infantry will make that card exactly what you think needs to be changed.

2) You say this about Letho:

Letho, it can't be countered making the Regis combo too powerful.

• Change it (back) to lock & drain two adjectant units instead of picking 2 on a row.

However, this won't work as enemies who use this combo play Cantarella on the row they target, and can obviously play her adjacent to some big target. Also, this combo is a non-issue, simply because it is unreliable, as its winrate (Meta report) suggests.

3) You suggest this for Regis and Unseen Elder:

Regis, it doesn't make sense that he's stronger than unseen elder.

• Swap abilities:
  Regis: drain a unit by half.
  Unseen elder: drain all boost from a unit.
• Or give Unseen elder a new ability like summon 2 lesser vampires or 1 higher vampire.

However, he is NOT stronger than Unseen Elder, and that is evident by the fact he is never used alone, without Letho (well, I've seen him once, in a Skellige deck by a noob he had nothing supporting it xD I was SO surprised)
As for the other suggestion, it cannot be implemented, definitely not before vampires come in the game. And even then, it will only be a sort of monster Brouver.

4)

First Light, let it only clear weather; keep play random bronze unit from deck.

• Draw a line between weather and hazard effects.
• For example it's weird to remove a pit trap by letting the sun shine
• Clear weather on just 1 or 2 rows, this gives gold weather cards some value.
• This will make the game more dynamic and the clear hazards units more popular/necessary.

I've been around since the closed beta, where First light cleared only one row. Weather quickly became a win condition and the most oppressive thing around except Scoia Scorch Spam. Remember that there is a bronze limit, so you can include up to 3 First Lights.

5)

Play against the same deck, I don't like this.

• Give the players the choice to continue the game or draw without penalty.

What if the other player wants to continue when one doesn't?
.
.
.
And lots more.

 

[1990BW]

It is how you state opinions. That's all he is doing. He's disagreed with some of your suggestions already. So have I, a bit more constructively, in a previous post, if you remember, where I said it's pretty transparent you play NG Reveal. This is actually the second time I read the entirety of your suggestions. And while some are good, some are just broken, or bad. Which is how it happens with suggestions.

In this case there have been a lot of changes since those posts.
And you can't expect from me to look at all the previous reactions from a user before I react on something.
The other way around it's easier to notice because I mention nearly every change or update in this thread.
But hey people can make mistakes and maybe iamthedave overlooked this, but thats a assumption right now.
By the way I also play SK with another account but yes reveal is my favourite for quite some time now.

Want examples? here you go:

1) you say Slave Infantry is very weak and vulnerable to battering rams and ask that it is spawns a STR 4 and STR 5 copy. On quote:
However, that really doesn't make it any less vulnerable, since battering rams next to a crewman hit for 4, and next to 2 crewmen, they hit for 5.

That requires some more setup than it does now.
Now it can eliminate 2 units in 1 turn without crew.

Also, you say that Half-Elf Hunter is a 12 point bronze with no risk and synergy which needs to change:
despite the fact that both your suggestions for slave infantry will make that card exactly what you think needs to be changed.

True let me explain about this one, the suggestion for the half-elf hunter was there from the beginning.
The slavedriver suggestion was added just a few days ago.
I still think 12 str bronzes need a penalty or some kind of requirement but if the devs decide it shouldn't then every faction should have such bronzes.
Also note that you should't see the whole bunch of suggestions as a package but more as seperate ones.
Just a few are meant to be related to eachother while others can undo a whole chain of them.
Complicated right?

2) You say this about Letho:
However, this won't work as enemies who use this combo play Cantarella on the row they target, and can obviously play her adjacent to some big target. Also, this combo is a non-issue, simply because it is unreliable, as its winrate (Meta report) suggests.

It worked in the past so I don't see why it shouldn't right now.
It will give players at least some counter possibilities by placing weak units around the strong ones.
There is actually a broken deck out there which benefits a lot by how these golds work right now.
Probably it isn't played much so you can't see it in the data.
And nonetheless Regis ability counts double, if it targets a 26 str Letho you'll effectivily gain 52 points.

3) You suggest this for Regis and Unseen Elder:
However, he is NOT stronger than Unseen Elder, and that is evident by the fact he is never used alone, without Letho (well, I've seen him once, in a Skellige deck by a noob he had nothing supporting it xD I was SO surprised)
As for the other suggestion, it cannot be implemented, definitely not before vampires come in the game. And even then, it will only be a sort of monster Brouver.

With the Letho combo he is, I'll edit the description a bit because this is confussing.
And if you change Regis to Unseen Elder's ability it would also fit in more decks.
I remember he was quite popular with Kambi (SK) in the past.

4)
I've been around since the closed beta, where First light cleared only one row. Weather quickly became a win condition and the most oppressive thing around except Scoia Scorch Spam. Remember that there is a bronze limit, so you can include up to 3 First Lights.

Set it to 2 rows then?

5)
What if the other player wants to continue when one doesn't?

The game doesn't continue because thats the whole point of the suggestion