clear skies and weather: unhealthy game design

+
clear skies and weather: unhealthy game design

when a mechanic in the game requires a specific counter, it makes the experience highly frustrating.
if your opponent plays RNG and you don't have a clear skies in hand, you pretty much lose the round; regardless of what you've done so far. that, to me, is very unhealthy game design, and should be reworked as quickly as possible.

so many cards in the game have been reworked for this purpose, to avoid "infinite value" (commander's horn being the first that comes to mind)
the new movement mechanics certainly help, but most units in the game are still tied to a row. playing queensgard, for example, there's little you can do against an enemy who constantly spams fog, and even if clear the weather constantly, your opponent will be getting 2-6 value while you are getting none. (if you don't, you'll eventually lose the round...)

creating more and more cards to clear weather effects just shows how the mechanic is unhealthy for the game (in its current state). no matter how many weather clearings you have, you'll eventually have matches where you lose for not drawing one of them, and that never feels good. i play double clear skies along with ithline, and i've lost a couple of matches today to a 27+ RNR play
this is especially frustrating when playing around weather contradicts one another. if you spread your units to play around fog, you'll get crushed by RNG. if you stack them in a row to play against that, you'll be crushed by fogs...

the best way to solve this issue is to give the same treatment to many cards before: set a limit to their effectiveness.
keep weather on the board for a maximum number of turns, with a rework of the numbers. this way, the weather play will be rewarded - if played at the right time - without snowballing out of control when the enemy can't counter.
(removing or reworking "clear weather" goes without saying...)

for Ragnaroog and drought, make them differ from each other by their tempo vs value. RNR deals 9 damage a turn, (3 to three 3 units) for a total of two turns, while drought deals 5 (spread amongst the weakest) for a total of five turns. 18 vs 25, one is better for immediate value while the other is better in long rounds

i know in open beta it's less likely to change, but i don't think the game should be released with weather as it is
 
Last edited:
There are some scenarios where weather is definitely too strong, but also in general, how can the wild hunt not be immune to frost, in reality it would buff them.
 
I totally get where you are coming from. I wish I could suggest a way to balance it but I really cant. I used all 3 of my clear skies in one match and still lost to weather. 3 TIMES like come one, im losing value and they just wild hunt frost for a plus 7 at least. Maybe if clear skies was permanent it would work out, once you clear a row of weather it stays clear for that whole round.
 
Laveley;n8654810 said:
They need to make weather affect both sides of the board again. And stop with this bs of 80% agile units, this screwed up the tactical aspect of rows in the game.

There's no point even looking at a unit's row when building a deck because it makes no difference. That was one of the best aspects of Witcher 3 Gwent because each faction specialized in a particular row so you could counter them by playing the appropriate weather.
 
doctorcheese;n8655030 said:
There's no point even looking at a unit's row when building a deck because it makes no difference. That was one of the best aspects of Witcher 3 Gwent because each faction specialized in a particular row so you could counter them by playing the appropriate weather.

Exactly. They crippled one of the main tactical aspects of the game. Now you can see the board as a huge one row basically.
 
I think most problem would be solved if cards like Ragnarok and Drought didn't exist at all.

Because of their Gold Neutral status literally every kind of deck could include them, and you cannot foresee their presence because they suit pretty much all game strategies.
Sometimes the player who draws more of those two cards wins the game, so the randomness is really increased; that doesn't reward strategy or planning.

There is no way you can have enough Clear Skies (and Clear Skies spawning mages) in your deck, the weather cards are too many.

Furthermore, their effect begins to be applied when the turn ends, before you had the chance to counter.
It means that in some scenarios Rag/Drought will deal a minimum of 3+3+3 damage, which is not trivial even if you clear skies immediately.
At the very least, weather should start having effect after you had a chance to answer.

A simple solution could be making Clear Skies last for 2 rounds instead of one, automatically neutralizing the weather effects of the round following the one CS was played, if any appears.
 
Last edited:
Laveley;n8655340 said:
Exactly. They crippled one of the main tactical aspects of the game. Now you can see the board as a huge one row basically.

Cripples the flavor as well, I always thought the Siege row was far away from the front line, but apparently my infantry can fight from any distance. May as well call them rows A,B and C.
 
Only unhealthy thing with weather is fact, that weather hits instantly without any delay. Even when You have clear skies this stupid Ragnarook will hit you 9 points.
But even more unhealthy than weather is possibility to pick up and reuse/ ressurect ANY, ANY nongold units. This is riddiculus. QG, infinite spies in Nilfgaard etc this is way too op.
 
Laveley;n8654810 said:
They need to make weather affect both sides of the board again. And stop with this bs of 80% agile units, this screwed up the tactical aspect of rows in the game.

on the contrary, it actually added a lot more management of positions.

previously, if you were to play a unit, you just tossed it on the board and that's it. i don't recall anyone ever choosing units based on their rows, outside of buff stacking decks (which were killed with the positioning update)

as for the "80% agile units" thing, it couldn't be less true. most bronze units are still stuck to a row (and many silvers as well) except, of course, the ones with movement abilities and the ones which rely on buffs (such as spotters and wild hunt riders)
 
Units with 3 base strength who get a buff whenever an action happens (mulligan, reveal, special card played) have to be agile.

CB taught that Spotters forced to be played on ranged row basically painted a bull'seye on them for G:Igni (and Scorch).
The reason why such units can be effectively used now is that you can avoid row stacking.

If you add to the count the 'standard' agile units due to ST factions and those who were agile before in any faction, you'll see the difference with CB isn't huge.
 
RickMelethron;n8655900 said:
on the contrary, it actually added a lot more management of positions. previously, if you were to play a unit, you just tossed it on the board and that's it. i don't recall anyone ever choosing units based on their rows, outside of buff stacking decks (which were killed with the positioning update) as for the "80% agile units" thing, it couldn't be less true. most bronze units are still stuck to a row (and many silvers as well) except, of course, the ones with movement abilities and the ones which rely on buffs (such as spotters and wild hunt riders)

Yes, you just tossed it there on that row, and you actually had to think before that because you were compromising part of your game plan on that row. More restriction makes you use your brain and try different strategies instead of just clonsing your eyes and picking the best units with the best effects because you know you can can toss then whenever you want without any drawback.


Now, i will pick just one faction to prove you that there are more agile units. Lets pick NR which as i reckon, hhad just 2 or 3 agile units.

Now they have 43 units of which 26 units are agile (60%)

Checco515;n8656610 said:
If you add to the count the 'standard' agile units due to ST factions and those who were agile before in any faction, you'll see the difference with CB isn't huge.

Please explain me how going from 2 or 3 agile units to 26 is not a HUGE difference?
 
supp... played vs controll ST.. first skellige weather with 3 + 2 + 1 dmg.. i waited 4 rounds bc i could handle it and he could easily use hero ability to use it again.. then he was in trouble and plays RnR.. i played clear sky after and then comes drought and i had no 2 clear sky.. RnR + drought is just no more fun.. closed beta was fun.. now i think if they dont do something, i will make a break with gwent.
 
Laveley;n8656890 said:
Please explain me how going from 2 or 3 agile units to 26 is not a HUGE difference?

The bolded part is what you conveniently picked and does not represent the whole picture, no reason to argue over this statement.

 
Checco515;n8657970 said:
The bolded part is what you conveniently picked and does not represent the whole picture, no reason to argue over this statement.

I picked the first faction that came to mind. Monster also had around 3 or 4 agiles, now it has more than 20 too. I'm not counting all the factions, but if you pick any faction you will see at least a considerable amount of + agile units, even ST which already had some agile now have more, thats pretty obvious even at a glance. But if you want to just ignore the reality, whatever, i dont really care.
 
Laveley;n8656890 said:
More restriction makes you use your brain and try different strategies

how..?

Laveley;n8656890 said:
Now, i will pick just one faction to prove you that there are more agile units.

no one is denying that there are more agile units, anyone can see it with a simple look at the collection.
you claim was that the vast majority of units in the game are now agile, and that is simply not true.
 
RickMelethron;n8661030 said:

Already explained that

RickMelethron;n8661030 said:
no one is denying that there are more agile units, anyone can see it with a simple look at the collection. you claim was that the vast majority of units in the game are now agile, and that is simply not true.

I claim that the majority of the units are agile and that is simply true.
 
Laveley;n8654810 said:
They need to make weather affect both sides of the board again. And stop with this bs of 80% agile units, this screwed up the tactical aspect of rows in the game.

Do the devs even understand their own game?
 
Top Bottom