Barclay change idea (the real problem with Brouver coinflip)

[hi_im_Tyy]

So I know throne breaker is being worked on so we may not see any balance changes until then. And I know they are already trying to work out ideas on how to balance Brouver elves, but I thought I would still submit my idea regardless of how late I am.

Barclay Els reads: "Play a random Bronze or Silver dwarf from your deck and strengthen it by 3."

by now everyone knows if you only put cleaver in he will be drawn from deck guaranteed every time, and this combined with Brouver having a guaranteed draw of Yaevinn means Brouver elves control coinflip with a 26pt swing in tempo from one card play. (after spy)

My suggestion is you keep Barclay Els ability the same, but add the restriction of: "minimum of 3 dwarves in deck." having only a 33% chance to pull cleaver instead of a 100% seems like a more than fair balance change in my opinion. that way the combo is still possible, but not always going to happen.

It should be considered an exploit anyway that players have worked around the description of the card. I mean changing your odds of a card being drawn so that you have a guaranteed play to happen, a guaranteed 26 points from 2 silvers should no doubt be considered too powerful.

I know that the community has suggested to remove Yaevinn from Brouver's draw, but if this change were to come in then maybe that wouldn't need to happen. or maybe both can happen.

Anyway that's all. thanks.

 

[Draconifors]

Thread moved to Suggestions.

 

[mission_deadman]

Stennis, Skjall and Joachim basically have the same effects and are way better when you know what you're getting. Cleaver only does damage for cards in hand so if there's not a good target early on he loses value so the problem isn't Barclay/Cleaver it's Brouver/Yaevinn. Like Thaler/Dun Banner and Nilfgaardian Knight/ Mandrake, people with no actual strategy will just find a way to exploit what they can.I don't see it changing any time soon. Someone like Swim will just find another one and that's all you'll see until October.

 

[Iuliandrei]

The real problem is Cleaver, not Barclay, that's the one who should be changed. His value is balanced around an average, however in a Brouver deck it always hits for max value, it never averages out to the value it's balanced around.

 

[time_drainer]

I can find problems with each card in the combo, but I find Barclay the least offending.
- Brouver shouldn't pull a Spy (that's gonna be fixed). Actually I find his ability a bit too strong even it's limited to non-Agent units, but that's debatable.
- I think CA Spies have way more problems than this specific abuse, and should just be removed.
- Cleaver is problematic because it's a very binary and chance-based card. If you you have a way to tutor him or just lucky enough to have him in starting hand, he's insanely powerful. If you get him in late game, he's very weak. And this has nothing to do with skill, only luck or exploitative deck design.
- Barclay's sin in the mix is that it's nothing more than a stupid point spam card, similar to Skjall. You're either playing him with one target and he's included only to get +5 points to the table (+1 thinning), or you're playing with multiple targets and just don't care what you pull, because you're just point spamming anyway (Dwarfs deck). Joachim and Stennis is slightly different as you can't limit your options to a single target because there's no tag involved. Still not a fan of this card design.

 

[Sorroth]

I am happy to see someone else having the problem with Brouver elves. Though, I have to say one thing in the defense of balancing Cleaver. I am so happy (this "exploit" considered) that Cleaver no longer does his power worth of damage. It was a confusing transition, but for the better. Now he SHOULD be rather balanced (bit too powerful as the first play, but weaker as the hand thins). Should. He is not due to the way he is exploited as a.... +20 power or so early play. (and close even without Barclay tutoring, considering he has a meaty target).


For someone who plays more dwarves than elves in his deck, I would absolutely LOVE the Els's suggested restriction of minimum dwarves. But I can see the counter arguments, and it wouldn't be intuitive considering the majority of decks mixing dwarves and elves (like mine).
Barclay isn't the issue. Though.. maybe weaken the strengthen with one point if you absolutely must nerf him (And the removal of spy-tutoring already mentioned).

Unfortunately no suggestions for Cleaver. He's Neutral, so he has to work okay with all sorts of decks so.. his damage tied to only him or some constant (like hand-size as it currently is) would be reasonable.

PS. Bit curious, where was this originally if not Suggestions? (in ST gameplay thread?)

 

[Khreygond]

I am happy to see someone else having the problem with Brouver elves. Though, I have to say one thing in the defense of balancing Cleaver. I am so happy (this "exploit" considered) that Cleaver no longer does his power worth of damage. It was a confusing transition, but for the better. Now he SHOULD be rather balanced (bit too powerful as the first play, but weaker as the hand thins). Should. He is not due to the way he is exploited as a.... +20 power or so early play. (and close even without Barclay tutoring, considering he has a meaty target).


For someone who plays more dwarves than elves in his deck, I would absolutely LOVE the Els's suggested restriction of minimum dwarves. But I can see the counter arguments, and it wouldn't be intuitive considering the majority of decks mixing dwarves and elves (like mine).
Barclay isn't the issue. Though.. maybe weaken the strengthen with one point if you absolutely must nerf him (And the removal of spy-tutoring already mentioned).

Unfortunately no suggestions for Cleaver. He's Neutral, so he has to work okay with all sorts of decks so.. his damage tied to only him or some constant (like hand-size as it currently is) would be reasonable.

PS. Bit curious, where was this originally if not Suggestions? (in ST gameplay thread?)

Cleaver can become a neutral lock again. He wouldn't see much use in the current meta but it would be alright to have a neutral lock again. I know everyone will use Vaedermakar but the point of locks is that they go around Greatswords and Nekkers and Deathwish. If you can take the low tempo they offer, the returns are far better than removal.

Also, I agree as well that the problem is not Barclay - Cleaver. It's Brouver - Yaevinn along with wardancer preventing you from passing.

 

[1990BW]

My suggestion is you keep Barclay Els ability the same, but add the restriction of: "minimum of 3 dwarves in deck." having only a 33% chance to pull cleaver instead of a 100% seems like a more than fair balance change in my opinion. that way the combo is still possible, but not always going to happen.

Cleaver will return to the large realm of unused cards with this requirement.
I'd rather see him changed to his old ability + doing some damage.
Like a 7 str body, lock a unit and deal 5 damage.

Barclay should only tutor bronze dwarves but should let you pick one instead of playing a random card.
Perhaps he should also get a bit more strength to compensate.

It worries me though that most of the attention goes to Brouver while SK, Henselt and Alchemy also have (very) broken combo's and mechanics.
They also deserve nerfs, changes and weaknesses.
Everyone knows what will happen if Brouver gets nerved and the others slightly or not.........

 

[BornBoring]

No, Barclay is no problem at all. Cleaver should be changed. Just look at his requierement: "Deal 1 damage for each card in your hand". This doesn't fit in a game, where your hand size is reduced evey turn. You're either dependent on drawing this card early (too unreliable) or you have ways to make sure you can play him whenever you want (in this case his value is too good). This kind of boring and moronic card design is one of the reasons why I haven't played gwent for weeks. Cards should have requierements, which promote strategic gameplay and not just "play this card early".

 

[ChaosPhantom819]

The problem is cleaver is a dwarf. Swap Cleaver's ability with Sigi Reuven. Nothing changes besides this combo in this one deck.

 

[time_drainer]

It worries me though that most of the attention goes to Brouver while SK, Henselt and Alchemy also have (very) broken combo's and mechanics. They also deserve nerfs, changes and weaknesses. Everyone knows what will happen if Brouver gets nerved and the others slightly or not.........

I agree with pretty much everything you wrote (although I don't think Barclay needs his power increased with your suggestion: compared to Maerolorn for example he would be still more points.)
I only want to reflect to the quoted remark.

SK especially Greatsword archetype definitely needs a nerf. The deck dominates the meta, it's even stronger than Brouver abuse decks (though maybe bit less common). I actually have package of changes in my mind, maybe I'll post it later when I have time.

Henselt has two things going for him, the Dun Banner spy abuse and the leader ability interacting with Winch. I've already posted a suggestion to Dun Banners, but other option may also work. Also I really hope with Create patch Winch won't be a problem anymore. (Though there's a chance that they rework it to still spawn copies of machines in your deck, so Henselt could still pull 3-4 cards.)

Alchemy yeah, it has some broken things there, but that's the only deck considered Tier 1 that I don't find OP. The design of Witchers is still unhealthy though, as they make elimination way too easy and also result in a deck with lot of mediocre cards slammed in, just to make an OP one work. I'd much rather like if Witchers would for example deal only damage for Alchemy cards played that far, but the archetype would get better Alchemy options and even more importantly some meaningful Alchemy synergies, rather than just a Bronze and a Gold tutor.

 

[Bleach25]

I was thinking something similar myself. I don't believe, however, that Barclay is the problem of the combo. Though I'd like to see it doomed.

 

[Gamer_Matt]

As much as I hate brouver/nova decks, I have to disagree with you, adding rng elements is not going to fix broken cards.

 

[1990BW]

I agree with pretty much everything you wrote (although I don't think Barclay needs his power increased with your suggestion: compared to Maerolorn for example he would be still more points.)
I only want to reflect to the quoted remark.

SK especially Greatsword archetype definitely needs a nerf. The deck dominates the meta, it's even stronger than Brouver abuse decks (though maybe bit less common). I actually have package of changes in my mind, maybe I'll post it later when I have time.

Not only greatswords but also:

1 Hym -> Skjall -> Udalryk
2 Pirate captain -> Corsair -> Light Longship
3 Olgierd -> (Morkvarg ->) Control over R2
4 Restore -> Bearmaster (boosted with veterans) -> Keeping it in hand for r3

Henselt has two things going for him, the Dun Banner spy abuse and the leader ability interacting with Winch. I've already posted a suggestion to Dun Banners, but other option may also work. Also I really hope with Create patch Winch won't be a problem anymore. (Though there's a chance that they rework it to still spawn copies of machines in your deck, so Henselt could still pull 3-4 cards.)

Thaler/Dun Banner is really annoying and Winch + Nenneke is terrible especially if your deck has limited removal.
Siege master basically has 3 abilities: heal a machine, repeat ability and passive bonus damage.

Alchemy yeah, it has some broken things there, but that's the only deck considered Tier 1 that I don't find OP. The design of Witchers is still unhealthy though, as they make elimination way too easy and also result in a deck with lot of mediocre cards slammed in, just to make an OP one work. I'd much rather like if Witchers would for example deal only damage for Alchemy cards played that far, but the archetype would get better Alchemy options and even more importantly some meaningful Alchemy synergies, rather than just a Bronze and a Gold tutor.

Alchemy is not very broken but the problem is the amount of removal and slave driver.
Some machine decks can't deal with that and mirrormatches are stupid.

 

[hi_im_Tyy]

the feedback and suggestions on this thread have been great. I know now there are problems with my original concept.

I believe that bornboring nailed it with

Cleaver should be changed. Just look at his requierement: "Deal 1 damage for each card in your hand". This doesn't fit in a game, where your hand size is reduced evey turn. You're either dependent on drawing this card early (too unreliable) or you have ways to make sure you can play him whenever you want (in this case his value is too good). This kind of boring and moronic card design is one of the reasons why I haven't played gwent for weeks. Cards should have requierements, which promote strategic gameplay and not just "play this card early".

 

[time_drainer]

Not only greatswords but also:

1 Hym -> Skjall -> Udalryk
2 Pirate captain -> Corsair -> Light Longship
3 Olgierd -> (Morkvarg ->) Control over R2
4 Restore -> Bearmaster (boosted with veterans) -> Keeping it in hand for r3

I meant Greatswords as a deck not just the card, which includes 3 out of 4 what you mentioned (okay not Bearmaster, but Restore)

Siege master basically has 3 abilities: heal a machine, repeat ability and passive bonus damage.

I'm okay with Siege Masters. Heal doesn't count too much in current meta, experienced players know better than to do non-lethal damage to a siege machine and there enough direct removal, that it's not even necessary. Okay, it's a bit strong against damage you can't control, like random damage engines (Mangonel) or weather, so this ability could really be removed.
The other 2 abilities just let him generate good bronze value, but not too good. Also without Winch it would be harder for him to find good targets.

Alchemy is not very broken but the problem is the amount of removal and slave driver.
Some machine decks can't deal with that and mirrormatches are stupid.

I didn't mention Slave Drivers as with Create patch I hope they'll cease to exist as an issue.

 

[1990BW]

I'm okay with Siege Masters. Heal doesn't count too much in current meta, experienced players know better than to do non-lethal damage to a siege machine and there enough direct removal, that it's not even necessary. Okay, it's a bit strong against damage you can't control, like random damage engines (Mangonel) or weather, so this ability could really be removed.
The other 2 abilities just let him generate good bronze value, but not too good. Also without Winch it would be harder for him to find good targets.

In the past Shani, Dijkstra, Nenneke, Stennis and Reinforcements were used to enable Henselt.
They still work well if you design the deck around them.

 

[time_drainer]

In the past Shani, Dijkstra, Nenneke, Stennis and Reinforcements were used to enable Henselt.
They still work well if you design the deck around them.

Working well sounds good to me. I'm not looking to obliterate Henselt Machines, only make them less OP. With the new balance patch that deck may actually become balanced. Well, except I suspect everybody's gonna arm to the teeth with elimination against Greatswords, so any engine deck will have a hard time.