Balancing the Coin Flip

[Pruny]

Lets begin with 20 then

 

[Laveley]

Well, in a game where you're guaranteed to get to play to the last card this is exactly the direction you want to go in my opinion. More cards doesn't just give you more options like in games where you can get killed and stuck with cards in your hand. It also directly contributes to your end goal, i.e. points that wins you the game. Any effect that comes from a CA card is basically free, cause you get a new card, that you're get to play in addition. Which is on top of the other benefits like better access to your key cards, being able to delay playing your finishers, etc. I mean even if the "effect" of the CA card is giving your opponent 13 points it's still OP. I couldn't imagine how broken the game was if it wasn't even the best CA option. Would people even bother to play other cards than ones that gives you CA?

Ah, but that's enough, I don't want to get sucked into another conversation about the "good old days".

To summarize I think the only thing they did wrong is not seeing this to the end and remove the CA spies as well along with coming up with a fix for the coin flip CA issue.
(CA options along the line of Ciri and Ocvist (so hard work, high risk and counterable) might be okay, though I wouldn't shed too much tears if they got removed as well.)

There are so many things that i disagree about what you said that i would have to write a book so i could show all of them. Thing is, i'm already tired of arguing this and is obvious that this game wont go on the opposite direction, so i'm not going to waste my time arguing it anymore. Suffice to say; CA cards dont need to be "play this card and gain CA", but it can be attached to conditions, conditions that depend on the player tactical awareness that so, at the end of the game, frequently the best player will have the CA because he made the best calls that his opponent didnt.

 

[time_drainer]

Thing is, i'm already tired of arguing this and is obvious that this game wont go on the opposite direction, so i'm not going to waste my time arguing it anymore.

Fair enough. I also have a feeling it wouldn't be much point in discussing it further.

 

[CallMeHoot]

I do agree about who ever starts first get's an advantage but I don't think your idea is a solution :/

You've got it the wrong way around, mate. Whoever goes second has the advantage.

Are there really still people who don't understand why the coin flip favours the player who goes second?

 

[Restlessdingo32]

You've got it the wrong way around, mate. Whoever goes second has the advantage.

Are there really still people who don't understand why the coin flip favours the player who goes second?

I mean, the "problems" with coin flip typically have very little to do with the coin flip itself. They're a result of leveraging the small advantage of going second into a much larger advantage via some other mechanism. Spies + coin flip is the prime example. It's not a problem with spies. It's not a problem with coin flip either. It's a problem due to the ability to overcome the points of a spy + opponent card in a single card play and, to a lesser extent, cases where one player cannot find their spy. Going second by itself, in a vacuum, isn't that big of an advantage.

The above is probably why fixing it is so elusive. You don't fix it easily by addressing the coin flip itself. You fix it by addressing those other mechanics which afford the ability to... amplify that advantage.

 

[CallMeHoot]

I mean, the "problems" with coin flip typically have very little to do with the coin flip itself. They're a result of leveraging the small advantage of going second into a much larger advantage via some other mechanism. Spies + coin flip is the prime example. It's not a problem with spies. It's not a problem with coin flip either. It's a problem due to the ability to overcome the points of a spy + opponent card in a single card play and, to a lesser extent, cases where one player cannot find their spy. Going second by itself, in a vacuum, isn't that big of an advantage.

The above is probably why fixing it is so elusive. You don't fix it easily by addressing the coin flip itself. You fix it by addressing those other mechanics which afford the ability to... amplify that advantage.

You're right about some things, but wrong about going second having no innate advantage. In a game which is pretty much built around having card advantage, going second is a massive innate advantage.

By going second you have complete control of the tempo of the round (and possibly the match). The onus is on the player who went first to either stay ahead on points or keep the gap recoverable by playing a single card, otherwise he loses card advantage and although wins the round, goes into Round 2 a card down. If he can't manage that gap he will either be forced to cede the round with no card advantage/disadvantage or go 2 cards down to secure the round.

This says nothing of the ability of the player going second to be able to simply drypass in most cases, going into round 2 with a guaranteed 1 card advantage that he could then leverage into maintaining into Round 3.

Make no mistake, going second is an innate advantage all by itself.

 

[Jeydra]

This says nothing of the ability of the player going second to be able to simply drypass in most cases, going into round 2 with a guaranteed 1 card advantage that he could then leverage into maintaining into Round 3.

This is incorrect. The player going first can also drypass in most cases, going into round 2 with a guaranteed 1 card advantage. Only exception is vs. a Wardancer mulligan.

Why it's preferable to go second:

1) Many cards require the opponent to have a unit on the board to be most effective, e.g. Wild Hunt Hound, Elven Archer.
2) A little more subtle: the player going first is, at best, shooting to win down one card. The player going second can aim to win on equal. If you go first, you have to stay ahead on points because otherwise the opponent can just pass and you'll go down two cards. This also makes it harder to set up your own engines. Example:

If you go first you can't start with gold weather (unless you are OK with going down two cards if opponent drypasses). If you go second, you can. That means that if you go first, you're playing without a crucial engine, while if you go second, your opponent is the one that has to deal with the engine.

If you go first, after you've played your first card, you're down a card. If you go second, after you've played your first card, you're still on equal cards. If opponent starts with e.g. Half-elf Hunter, you can play Wild Hunt Hound. If opponent passes, you can still win in a card to take the round down a card, which is an acceptable result. If you're the person who went first, you cannot: when it's your turn, you're already on equal cards; if you aren't ahead in points, your opponent gets to win the round on equal.

This second point actually has little to do with spies. Try playing lots of games vs. consume, some on the red coin and some on the blue coin, and the difference should be apparent. If you're on the red coin vs. consume, you have a much easier chance winning the round on equal or even up a card (if you have a spy). On the blue coin, you have a much harder time getting anything better than winning down a card. You need to build up enough of a lead that the opponent cannot catch up with three cards, which is not likely.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

You're right about some things, but wrong about going second having no innate advantage. In a game which is pretty much built around having card advantage, going second is a massive innate advantage.

By going second you have complete control of the tempo of the round (and possibly the match). The onus is on the player who went first to either stay ahead on points or keep the gap recoverable by playing a single card, otherwise he loses card advantage and although wins the round, goes into Round 2 a card down. If he can't manage that gap he will either be forced to cede the round with no card advantage/disadvantage or go 2 cards down to secure the round.

This says nothing of the ability of the player going second to be able to simply drypass in most cases, going into round 2 with a guaranteed 1 card advantage that he could then leverage into maintaining into Round 3.

Make no mistake, going second is an innate advantage all by itself.

Going second is undeniably an advantage. The disagreement is on how much of an advantage it is by itself and where it comes from. Let me put it this way. If both player decks consisted of 25 five point cards with no additional abilities who wins the game ?

 

[time_drainer]

If both player decks consisted of 25 five point cards with no additional abilities who wins the game ?

Good example, cause only needs to be tweaked a little bit to make the importance of second player advantage apparent.

Just add a couple 6pt card to the mix. Now if 1st player plays one of his "big units", 2nd player can just pass and lose -1 card (acceptable) and keep better resources for later rounds. If on the other 2nd plays a 6pt unit, 1st player now has to respond with with one of his own otherwise lose round on even, which probably also costs him the match. The only way out for 1st player is to pass on even, e.g. dry-pass (Arena anyone? ). Now it's gonna be a draw assuming a balanced drawing, because last say has no meaning in this scenario.

So also add a special card that deals 6pt damage. Assume each player starts the game with a 6pt unit and the damage card and all the rest is 5pt units. Now it's auto-win for 2nd player. Update: strike that, I just came up with a game plan for 1st to hold on to that draw if he can guess right what the other is holding. But the fact remains, the only two outcome is 2nd player winning or a draw.

Now Gwent is of course way more complicated than that, but these simple examples show just how powerful going 2nd is.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Good example, cause only needs to be tweaked a little bit to make the importance of second player advantage apparent.

Just add a couple 6pt card to the mix. Now if 1st player plays one of his "big units", 2nd player can just pass and lose -1 card (acceptable) and keep better resources for later rounds. If on the other 2nd plays a 6pt unit, 1st player now has to respond with with one of his own otherwise lose round on even, which probably also costs him the match. The only way out for 1st player is to pass on even, e.g. dry-pass (Arena anyone? ). Now it's gonna be a draw assuming a balanced drawing, because last say has no meaning in this scenario.

So also add a special card that deals 6pt damage. Assume each player starts the game with a 6pt unit and the damage card and all the rest is 5pt units. Now it's auto-win for 2nd player. Update: strike that, I just came up with a game plan for 1st to hold on to that draw if he can guess right what the other is holding. But the fact remains, the only two outcome is 2nd player winning or a draw.

Now Gwent is of course way more complicated than that, but these simple examples show just how powerful going 2nd is.

The workaround for the first component of this scenario is for P1 to hold his 6 pt cards until he needs to play them. In doing so, assuming both players have the same number of 6 pt cards in their deck, he stays equal on resources. At worst he can only be even on points with P2 until P2 plays one of his big cards.

It's not true to say P1 is forced to play a 6 pt card in response to a 6 pt card from P2. He went first and on any given P2 turn will already have a card on the board. As an example, say it goes like this.... P1 > 5 pts, P2 > 5 pts, P1 > 5 pts, P2 > 6 pts..... Here the score would be 10-11 in favor of P2 with cards at even. If P1 plays a 5 pt card here the score is 15-11 in favor of P1 with P1 down a card (and he gets back to even in R2).

Yes, it's true to say P1 is forced to continue into the round if he loses the lead. So.... don't lose the lead? Get the lead back at some point? In other words, if you cannot respond to the points the player going second can throw on the board you probably needed to pass earlier. If you don't getting punished feels appropriate.

The special card case is a bit trickier because it's possible for the 6 point damaging special to end up as a dead card. It's still a tie provided neither player screws up (unless I'm missing something).

Going back around to the point.... Coin flip by itself isn't the issue.

 

[time_drainer]

Yes, as I stated before both can end in a draw.

My point with the first case was to illustrate that if second player is just slightly ahead after playing the same amount of cards, first player has to continue playing. While second player can still pass if that would be the case or any time really and still only lose on -1 card. Also staying ahead is easier said than done, see later.

On second case I'm on the assumption that both players know each others deck, but not their draw (that's more complicated in real Gwent but usually close to the truth, as you usually know what to expect from opponents deck in a settled meta).
In this scenario passing on even is not a solution for first player in general, because 2nd player can take the round with a 5pt card and 1st player will then lose because of last say. He can't play damage because it would be under its value and playing the 6pt card would result in 2nd player playing the damage card so not unlike the zero sum game of two 5pt units. The only way 1st player can get a draw if he guesses right what 2nd player is holding and pass on even in just in a moment where 2nd player has to commit a 6pt value card (unit or damage) to secure victory, because she no longer holds a 5pt unit.

But actually both scenarios are seriously limited, because most cards are exactly equal, which is the only reason that keeps 1st player's chances alive. In reality most cards are about the same value, but not the same, so one player will usually be slightly ahead after playing the same amount of cards. And as stated above 2nd player has the powerful advantage that she can gain CA by being lightly ahead, while 1st player can't. To make matters worse she can play reactively which is a value in itself as several cards get more value when opponent has more units on board so staying ahead just slightly is not even that hard.

Being forced to play 1st is very often a desperate struggle to stay ahead to at least get a pass (don't even bothering anymore about losing last say), to at least not lose CA, while 2nd player is in a very comfortable position. 1st player can have an easier time in 1st round by playing something big (which is very often exactly what you're forced to do if you don't want card disadvantage), but in that way he's blown away one of his best plays and then 2nd player can just yawn and pass. If it happens the other way around and he can't or don't want to respond with a similar big play, he's lost CA.
It's no wonder, that so many times blue coin player just dry-passes, if he can.

 

[断背烈焰]

This is the advice of an amateur designer to help you solve the question of priorities/coin mechanic.
After nine draws, the top three CARDS of the deck are displayed, one for each hand. The side with a higher base score wins the second, but the opponent gains the puppet/combat/ambush card with the corresponding combat power.
May homecoming,and create more happyiness.

 

[Shelinn]

Currently, everyone starts with 10 cards, mulligans thrice, and then someone gets the random coin.
This is obviously not optimal.
There should be some strategic decision with being on the second or first draw.
I have had the following idea for a coinflip:
First, every card gains a value(isn't the developer team doing that for Homecoming anyways?), with rarer cards being generally of higher value.
Then everyone starts with 11 cards, mulligans twice, and then they select one card as Advantage Card.
The card with the lower value starts the game with blue coin. In the case of a tie, the blue coin is random but the second round starts with the round 1 red coin.
The blue coin of round 1 starts round 2 with one point.
The Advantage Card cannot be used for the rest of the game.
The result?
People have to think on how they want to go against the opponent, and what the opponent will select. Select a high value card and your opponent selects a low value card - ok, you go second but you lost a good card which will be a problem for you later.