DOES CDP RED transform GWENT into next copy of HS?!

[Keymaker7]

DOES CDP RED transform GWENT into next copy of HS?!

Hi everyone!

Experiences related to standalone version of Gwent which I gathered during last few days forced me to write this post and ask question mentioned in the topic.

TO BE CLEAR, HS is very good game, even great if we take the popularity of it and number of better (The Elder Scrolls: Legends) and worst copies. BUT, why I consider Gwent as better game? Because is based more on (it does not mean entirely) tactic and skill rather than strong cards in deck and luck. This is why I think about Gwent as a different and unique card game, but due to reasons I show below, future of uniqueness of Gwent isn’t so bright…

So why the question? That is why:

1. I’ve heard that CDP RED has problem with balancing spies and they thinking about get rid of them, or maybe not them, but spy mechanic of drawing cards. The have problems with balancing card advantage. One factions have spies, other have not, so get rid of them and give every faction ability to draw cards (for example after each round…). So Gwent without spies as we know them from Wither 3 Gwent of Gamescome Gwent? I do not buy it, but it is not the worst…
   Source: please check lately explanations from one of CDP RED devs: @Rethas, he mentions about spies and problem of card advantage
   
   
2. Mechanic of drawing cards after each round. I have written many posts on that topic both here and on polish forum and I am a bit tired. I will probably gather all my strength again and put all my arguments in separate thread to explain, why drawing card after each round is wrong choice for Gwent.
   Source: Gwent The Wither Card Game Kill the Servers Edition and again, please refer to @Rethas posts, where he very firmly defend that solution, what makes me even more sad, because it can indicate, that CDP RED are sure to make this solution permanent
   
   
3. Targeting, wounding and at the end – destroying mechanic. Wait, WHAT? So we will be able to attack not only entire row as it was, but even separate cards? Again, NEXT mechanic taken from HS. So we wound card and then if it’s strength! (not HP!....jet…) comes to 0 then card is destroyed? Really? REALLY?? What more you will change in Gwent CORE mechanics? I wish to add GOOD and a bit UNIQUE mechanics which we love.
   Source: youtube video by KingBlackToof: [Gwent] New Unseen Cards! | Gwent: The Witcher Card Game and such cards as: http://imgur.com/a/C53mt
   
   
4. What will be next change? So if we can wound card and as a result destroy it so change strength to HP and we all be happy to be able to play the next copy of HS… (but it is in Wicher world!, but we have 3 rows instead of 2 like on The Elder Scrolls: Legends or 1 in HS!, but we have no mana! just great….really great)

Free thought:
Hero =/= gold!. Why? Because Heros are invulnerable, they resists all, they are Heros! And know? They are only gold (I do not have problem with change from troops, characters, heros to bronze, silver, gold, it is even reasonable and good in my opinion). But heros supposed to be your secret weapon, fired once, in special moment, to crush your opponent. You should think twice before used them. And now, thanks to cards like new Dijkstra I can use my Geralt Igni, then thanks to Dijkstra remove his “gold” status and then I can use on my Geralt decoy, medic, scorch, weather and so on… So now my Geralt Igni is no so special, does he?

I do not know if the interest of Gwent is too low, financial plans are endangered, hype train is too slow. I really do not know. I do know that changes I listed above make Gwent less unique, more casual, they look like to be the way to steal some of people who love HS and other card games with similar mechanics. But it is the way for Gwent?

Do not take me wrong, I love Gwent and I will play it a lot, but those changes are wrong. And I am sure it is not only my opinion.

Sorry for a lot of butthurt, I had to say all it out loud, please give me my cream…

 

[stiefel1888]

I agree 100% with your post. The new changes lower the planning and tatics which they always highlighted in interviews.

 

[mjul]

While I agree with some of what you said, I'm not sure I agree with the rest.

To begin with. Gwent will not become another Hearthstone, that comparison is a bit much. Although, you do have some merit in the points I'll discuss below:


Let's tackle the wounding mechanic first. Personally, I'm not sure I like it. It is interesting and provides some curious interactions between cards (Scorches, Epidemics and so on, cards that depend on the strength of other cards). Is it a departure from the established Gwent policy so far? Yes. Does it make Gwent like Hearthstone? No. The effects are one time effects played when the card is placed.

What I do not agree with is the destruction of cards and in this you have my full support. People will say: "But what about Scorch?" To which I reply: Scorch was situational, it depended on what cards you had and what card your opponent had. This does not have that restriction.


Second. Gold cards. I like the change. I like the streamlining in classes of cards. I like the fact that there are no overbearing rules and cards simply do what is said on the box. I like all those things. Whether gold cards should be destroyable (e.g.: Draug) I don't know. That's a balance issue not a mechanics issue, so I can happily leave it until Closed Beta.


Third. Drawing cards, I don't like it. I know why they did it, but in my opinion there were better options to deal with the issue of "spy wars" than to change the mechanic completely. This topic has already been debated extensively and I have nothing new to add apart from what was already said.

 

[jvc125]

They are messing things up badly and its starting to get worst and worst. Hurting golden cards is BS just like drawing between rounds mechanics. They try yo make game "more fun" like @Rethas said but in my opinion they just want to attract more casual players to make more profit. The game was fun enough they just ripping heart out of it with this changes!!

 

[checheno_0]

There's still a lot of string left to go in the Gwent ball; it's just early days here so I'm sure that not everything you're pointing out as solid predictions will happen.

This game is targeted at a specific fan base from which I'm sure their points of view matter almost entirely to the devs.

Most of the threads do support your very valid and well written opinion.

Lets just voice ours and see how the beta plays... if we get in :cheers3:

 

[LK96]

1. What problem with spies ?, You can see in any card base that they are giving Spies to all Factions, and there are a few neutral spies, I don't see any problem here.

2. This is what I really don't like - in Gwent, cards in mulligan are your resources and you have to know how to use it, you can't so mindlessly use it, knowing that you will draw next in a moment.

3. It looks to me that a wounded units is simply a debuffed by a any source (weathers, Duda etc.)

 

[Keymaker7]

1. What problem with spies ?, You can see in any card base that they are giving Spies to all Factions, and there are a few neutral spies, I don't see any problem here.

I base on for exemple new Dijkstra card, which is loyal now and it is not a spy.

3. It looks to me that a wounded units is simply a debuffed by a any source (weathers etc.)

Wounding is not the problem, because if you decrease strenght of units by weather or some sort of row debuff it is completely fine. What is wrong in my opinion is the mechanic, when the strenght goes to 0, card is destroyed.

 

[jvc125]

About spies CD Projekts first attempt was good. Make spies disloyal and stronger then average cards that will make people think twice before they play it.

 

[LK96]

I base on for exemple new Dijkstra card, which is loyal now and it is not a spy.

Well before this change, Djikstra and Thaler were exactly identical cards, Maybe CDPR is going to made spies now from characters that fits lorewise to it, like Thaler, who was confirmed to still be a spy in one post today.

EDIT: Also, based on Heroics and Shani, for example, maybe Djikstra will work only on units that aren't originally Gold ?. cause if not, some cards with decoys will be extremely OP

 

[stiefel1888]

2. This is what I really don't like - in Gwent, cards in mulligan are your resources and you have to know how to use it, you can't so mindlessly use it, knowing that you will draw next in a moment.

This. When I played in the KTS event, I saw that a lot of people would play a lot of their cards in the first round, because they knew they would get 2 cards after this round. I adapted to this quickly, but i didn't like it, because you didn't have to plan all three rounds in the beginning. This is a lot less tactical in my opinion.

 

[SilverSeaMist]

I agree

 

[Azgorat]

+1. Devs, don't change core mechanics of Gwent.

 

[KingBlackToof]

Please be aware that this game is still in development.
And I am only speculating on Wounded / Destroyed mechanic.

Destroyed could easily just be a term used when a card reaches 0 strength from Debuffs. It might remain on the board ready for buffs later on.

And I think a lot of people are jumping the gun calling it the next Hearthstone clone before closed beta

 

[KeyStance]

Please be aware that this game is still in development.
And I am only speculating on Wounded / Destroyed mechanic.

Destroyed could easily just be a term used when a card reaches 0 strength from Debuffs. It might remain on the board ready for buffs later on.

And I think a lot of people are jumping the gun calling it the next Hearthstone clone before closed beta

I agree we can complain about Gwent when we can actually play it everyday so we have to wait til closed beta.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

Let's tackle the wounding mechanic first. Personally, I'm not sure I like it. It is interesting and provides some curious interactions between cards (Scorches, Epidemics and so on, cards that depend on the strength of other cards). Is it a departure from the established Gwent policy so far? Yes. Does it make Gwent like Hearthstone? No. The effects are one time effects played when the card is placed.

I think wounding is an interesting concept if they balance it right. And as we have seen there are certain cards (like young berserker) that can even have benefits from being wounded, so I am eager to learn what they did with it in regard to the rest of the cards. I think it deserves a chance, hopefully it will be a good mechanic in the beta.

What I do not agree with is the destruction of cards and in this you have my full support. People will say: "But what about Scorch?" To which I reply: Scorch was situational, it depended on what cards you had and what card your opponent had. This does not have that restriction.

Uh, idk, I think that is just their logical conclusion for cards that reach a 0. I mean sure, if there are cards that have permanent situational effects that apply as long as they are on the battlefield having a card with STR value "0" might still be useful. Also, if you have an ability like "destroy the enemies weakest card" it might actually help defend against that if said card has STR value of 0 opening up more tactical challenges. That being said, I assume CDPR just thought that a card with STR 0 is useless and therefore removed them from the battlefield when they reach 0. A simple solution would be to just leave them on the field. Another (more active) solution might be to let the cards drop to a min. of 1 and not below.

Second. Gold cards. I like the change. I like the streamlining in classes of cards. I like the fact that there are no overbearing rules and cards simply do what is said on the box. I like all those things. Whether gold cards should be destroyable (e.g.: Draug) I don't know. That's a balance issue not a mechanics issue, so I can happily leave it until Closed Beta.

I like the change too and my opinion is that gold cards SHOULD be destoryable. Heroes are not invulnerable in stories (especially not in a world as grim as the Witcher one), so I do not see how this would be nonsensical. It makes sense in the lore, it makes sense from a balance perspective, it makes sense from a challenge perspective, and it is strategically more interesting in my opinion.

Third. Drawing cards, I don't like it. I know why they did it, but in my opinion there were better options to deal with the issue of "spy wars" than to change the mechanic completely. This topic has already been debated extensively and I have nothing new to add apart from what was already said.

Yeah especially since they said they would nerf spies on top of that. I said it in the GWENT discourse chat before, and maybe I even mentioned it here on the forums, but depending on the changes they do to the Spies every faction drawing cards after each round (and the same amount) might make spies even MORE powerful. Imagine someone draws a good hand and plays a spy just to draw 2 additional cards. So he drew 2 good cards after round 1 (the enemy drew cards that are not so good), he uses a spy to draw good cards again, and the enemy has no spies, so the enemy is absolutely outmatch with almost no chance to win the game.

I mentioned it before but the main problem is the drawing of 1 card before round 3 (the final round). Since both players have only a few cards left it makes the last round very luck-based and makes any previously established strategy less effective. So the ideal solution if they really want to keep the drawing mechanic is to just remove the draw before the last round.

 

[jvc125]

Please be aware that this game is still in development.
And I am only speculating on Wounded / Destroyed mechanic.

Destroyed could easily just be a term used when a card reaches 0 strength from Debuffs. It might remain on the board ready for buffs later on.

And I think a lot of people are jumping the gun calling it the next Hearthstone clone before closed beta

I think now its the best time to say that they going in wrong direction, after beta they probably make some small changes in the game not the entire core game change.

Btw very nice channel you have there. Keep up good work.

 

[crazymmogamer]

I'll post here exacly the same thing which i wrote as a comment on YT as a respond to Keymaker comment.

DOES CDP RED transform GWENT into next copy of HS?!

You guys are saying this with every new idea/mechanic CDP is trying to implement in Gwent to make a deeper gameplay. Everything they did so far is in your opinion "very similar" to HS. So what do you guys want ? Do you want CDP to not adding anything to the game ? By doing this what will be the point of adding new cards to the game if new cards will be completly the same as the old ones except the graphic on a card. The more the mechanics in game the better, because it gives us more possibilities in a game it self and more possibilities for CDP to make more new interesting cards. And who said that even if some of the mechanics are similar to HS is a bad thing. And btw i dont play HS I dont like HS, for me it looks like crap with shitty candy graphics and ugly ass round small cards on a battlefield.

 

[jvc125]

I'll post here exacly the same thing which i wrote as a comment on YT as a respond to Keymaker comment.

DOES CDP RED transform GWENT into next copy of HS?!

You guys are saying this with every new idea/mechanic CDP is trying to implement in Gwent to make a deeper gameplay. Everything they did so far is in your opinion "very similar" to HS. So what do you guys want ? Do you want CDP to not adding anything to the game ? By doing this what will be the point of adding new cards to the game if new cards will be completly the same as the old ones except the graphic on a card. The more the mechanics in game the better, because it gives us more possibilities in a game it self and more possibilities for CDP to make more new interesting cards. And who said that even if some of the mechanics are similar to HS is a bad thing. And btw i dont play HS I dont like HS, for me it looks like crap with shitty candy graphics and ugly ass round small cards on a battlefield.

If you dont even play HS how can you say someone is wrong comparing gwent and HS? I'm not saying all the changes are bad. It looks like they are making completely new game. If they change name and cards would you recognize it?

I dont like the direction of changes and the fact that they dont ask players what they feel about it.

 

[crazymmogamer]

If you dont even play HS how can you say someone is wrong comparing gwent and HS?

Because i dont see anything wrong with the new "wounded cards" mechanic. And i dont really need to play HS to understand how it works, actually i'm one of the guys who probably quessed first how it would work in Gwent under KingBlackToof video when he announced it. This specyfic mechanic will make Gwent only deeper. And no i dont know how it works in HS. But i can see how it would work in Gwent.

So sorry mate but i dont see the point here.

 

[jvc125]

Because i dont see anything wrong with the new "wounded cards" mechanic. And i dont really need to play HS to understand how it works, actually i'm one of the guys who probably quessed first how it would work in Gwent under KingBlackToof video when he announced it. This specyfic mechanic will make Gwent only deeper. And no i dont know how it works in HS. But i can see how it would work in Gwent.

So sorry mate but i dont see the point here.

You want a point here is one. How can I discuss with you about HS and gwent similarities or discuss how gwent is becoming similar to HS when you havent even played HS? There is no point.

I dont mind changes I really dont I even think there are needed but not huge changes.
Its looks like they want just use TW3 gwent fans as a base for they new game so they kept the name and changed everything else.