Eldain and traps = Needs a nerf (now more for Madoc + Milva)

+
Well, Mantis transform into a unit, so the Trap ceases to exist and therefore Iorveth cannot pick it up.
Makes sense but its another reason why the spring should still poison. The trap really isn't that good as it is. But i find it fun occasionally. I even play poison madoc with the poison bomb and forest whisperer but the cost of the 2 forest whisperers atm is not really worth it.
 
Serpent trap spring on kolgrim relies on him being the lowest or only unit on the board. This is very unlikely. Its ambush relies on the opponent using a special card afterwards. That is also very unlikely. I forgot to add that the mantis trap is also not replayable by iorveth. Iorveth i'm not sure should cost the same as hattori. Hattori is obviously more valuable. I wouldn't mind the harmony tag on the mantis strike but that would require a base power reduction. It could be the 4th poison completion for harmony. However i would prefer a buffed 4p forest whisperer serve that purpose. Would be nice if it at least triggers harmony on spring. Cos i'm Pretty sure it doesn't. And it doesn't make sense. Its like when madocs cataclysm removes the dragons dream(a bomb) effect. You expect synergy with certain cards and it just isn't there.
"Fire trap" Kolgrim refers to Incinerating trap, not Serpent. Very unlikely to catch Kolgrim with Serpent.
 
"Fire trap" Kolgrim refers to Incinerating trap, not Serpent. Very unlikely to catch Kolgrim with Serpent.
Oh yea you could do that too. I do that to eist. Was just giving an example. Vs natures gift the poison ambush would shine cos they have so many purifies
 

rrc

Forum veteran
Eldain and Traps are so bloody powerful that all 8 participants in the Gwent Open brought it, but unfortunately, it got banned by everyone that we didn't see it getting played at all.

Or, the reality is, Eldain and Traps are mediocre that no one even teched against it and no one brought it. If you know that you are facing Eldain, it is very very easy to beat it. Eldain decks want to go to a long R3. In a short to medium R3, this deck can do nothing. They will try to bully you with committing Scenario in R1 for the tempo. But if you also commit your strong cards and even win with a card down and push R2, you WILLWIN.

You see, for Eldain to be good, the deck must have a lot of traps. If you smoke them out in R1 and R2, in R3 the ST bronzes are so crappy that they will have no chance to win. You see Dead Eye Ambush (or GT as there are some variants running GT), you push and win R1 and R2. In R3, even if you draw your junkest bronzes, it will be more power than anything the Eldain players can play.

But if you don't read the game and allow a long R3 against Eldain without smoking out most traps, I am sorry to say this and this is how strategy games go, the opponent deserves the win. I have been playing Dwarfs from R4 to Pro rank and I never lost a single game to Eldain decks. In fact, on rank 1, for the last few games, I was praying that I get matched against Eldain decks.

Now, lets assume you are a good player and know you are facing an Eldain deck and prepare to play against/around it. You can and will win 100% of the time (unless your deck is hard countered by Eldain - I can't think of any, but it is, that is tough luck). Now, you are facing Eist+BoG nonsense. You know what is going to happen. You know you can't win a long R3 and you know you have to push and get that non-sense out. So, you do it. The opponent commits his leader and Eist and win R2 with a card advantage and in R3, they stlll have so much fire power left. They throw Herald and all their bronzes play for 8+ points and you lose a miserable game.

I am afraid Eldain may get a nerf, but it is an undeserved nerf for an archetype which was just made playable couple of months back after couple of years of being dead. Are traps annoying to play against? So are a lot of decks. Mill, Clog, DoubleCross-4-times-Jouchin-nonsense, Anything SK, Eist-BoG, Viy, Arachas Swarm, Lined Pockets, NR Witchers. If annoying decks need to be nerfed, I would start with these.
 
Last edited:
But if you don't read the game and allow a long R3 against Eldain without smoking out most traps, I am sorry to say this and this is how strategy games go, the opponent deserves the win. I have been playing Dwarfs from R4 to Pro rank and I never lost a single game to Eldain decks. In fact, on rank 1, for the last few games, I was praying that I get matched against Eldain decks.

Bolded the important part. Dwarves are notably resistant to control and aren't a good example at all.

I am afraid Eldain may get a nerf, but it is an undeserved nerf for an archetype which was just made playable couple of months back after couple of years of being dead. Are traps annoying to play against? So are a lot of decks. Mill, Clog, DoubleCross-4-times-Jouchin-nonsense, Anything SK, Eist-BoG, Viy, Arachas Swarm, Lined Pockets, NR Witchers. If annoying decks need to be nerfed, I would start with these.

Most of these decks leave you at least a token opportunity to counter them, if in a binary "tech/no tech" way (SK Warriors being a major exception). They still do. Traps just don't. Your stuff is dead on arrival/soon afterwards. It can't be healthy for the game. Arnaghad, who specialises in this exact thing, costs what, 10 provisions? While being adrenaline-restricted, lockable, removable and not leaving a 3-size body upon expiration (also not reacting to specials), his only advantage being armor (that isn't always guaranteed). And even at 10 provisions, quite a few people around here, Reddit and Youtube consider this card toxic even before getting into the Sukrus business. Now look at the Serpent/Incinirating provision costs... see anything wrong here?

As for this "just bleed them bro" ... it's Double Ball-era argument, and much like back then, I should say -
It's really bold of y'all to assume it's always possible to win r1 against a scenario and most likely, several engines. Most of the time you get bullied out of round hard, unless you're playing a bully, likely non-devo deck yourself, in which case sure, yeah, this could sometimes be possible. Provided your hand is good and you aren't playing very wide or very tall - and still have enough steam to take r3 after a violent r1 and a bleed that's definitely gonna end up in a card disadvantage.

Point is, "getting to a long r3" shouldn't automatically translate to almost guaranteed victory for any deck ever, especially if it's hard to prevent.
 
Bolded the important part. Dwarves are notably resistant to control and aren't a good example at all.



Most of these decks leave you at least a token opportunity to counter them, if in a binary "tech/no tech" way (SK Warriors being a major exception). They still do. Traps just don't. Your stuff is dead on arrival/soon afterwards. It can't be healthy for the game. Arnaghad, who specialises in this exact thing, costs what, 10 provisions? While being adrenaline-restricted, lockable, removable and not leaving a 3-size body upon expiration (also not reacting to specials), his only advantage being armor (that isn't always guaranteed). And even at 10 provisions, quite a few people around here, Reddit and Youtube consider this card toxic even before getting into the Sukrus business. Now look at the Serpent/Incinirating provision costs... see anything wrong here?

As for this "just bleed them bro" ... it's Double Ball-era argument, and much like back then, I should say -
It's really bold of y'all to assume it's always possible to win r1 against a scenario and most likely, several engines. Most of the time you get bullied out of round hard, unless you're playing a bully, likely non-devo deck yourself, in which case sure, yeah, this could sometimes be possible. Provided your hand is good and you aren't playing very wide or very tall - and still have enough steam to take r3 after a violent r1 and a bleed that's definitely gonna end up in a card disadvantage.

Point is, "getting to a long r3" shouldn't automatically translate to almost guaranteed victory for any deck ever, especially if it's hard to prevent.
The scenario is actually quite weak. The engine is easy to remove because it unlike thirsty dame can't boost more than once per turn. It's strength relies on you committing leader charges and vernossiel. Vernossiel btw who is just a poor mans jacques de aldesberg that cant even deploy as a 12 for 12. The elf scenario needs a provision nerf and vern need a body increase or a provision nerf. If you want an eldain nerf. Buff the other trap and scoiatel cards
 
The scenario is actually quite weak. The engine is easy to remove because it unlike thirsty dame can't boost more than once per turn.
Engines. As in, plural. I am yet to see a trap elf without at least two, and double sword-dancer seems to be the norm. Even then, they keep tempoing ahead, removed or not, they just develop their points faster than you do. Also, Feign Death is relatively weak, sure, but it's still a scenario that plays for anywhere between 12 and 22, before counting in various synergies. Also enabling a quick-release Aelirenn.
If you have Korathi, that's a very different story, but one card shouldn't be an obligatory inclusion.

It's strength relies on you committing leader charges and vernossiel
Or Isengrim. Or the big ping dude. Or just completely halting your points accumulation/setting you back with a couple of traps, it's totally affordable even in r1. If you somehow keep up with their tempo, there's always either a Serpent or a Crushing Trap, depending on the type of the deck they're facing. Realistically, oftentimes you need to go at least a card down or all the way down to 4 to close the point gap, at which point bleed is out of question.

I can fathom Lined Pockets having a comparable/superior tempo, but that one is going to the same chopping block as Eldain next patch.

Vernossiel btw who is just a poor mans jacques de aldesberg that cant even deploy as a 12 for 12.
Technically true, but she has much stronger synergies as a tradeoff.
 
Engines. As in, plural. I am yet to see a trap elf without at least two, and double sword-dancer seems to be the norm. Even then, they keep tempoing ahead, removed or not, they just develop their points faster than you do. Also, Feign Death is relatively weak, sure, but it's still a scenario that plays for anywhere between 12 and 22, before counting in various synergies. Also enabling a quick-release Aelirenn.
If you have Korathi, that's a very different story, but one card shouldn't be an obligatory inclusion.


Or Isengrim. Or the big ping dude. Or just completely halting your points accumulation/setting you back with a couple of traps, it's totally affordable even in r1. If you somehow keep up with their tempo, there's always either a Serpent or a Crushing Trap, depending on the type of the deck they're facing. Realistically, oftentimes you need to go at least a card down or all the way down to 4 to close the point gap, at which point bleed is out of question.

I can fathom Lined Pockets having a comparable/superior tempo, but that one is going to the same chopping block as Eldain next patch.


Technically true, but she has much stronger synergies as a tradeoff.
makes this deck re

Engines. As in, plural. I am yet to see a trap elf without at least two, and double sword-dancer seems to be the norm. Even then, they keep tempoing ahead, removed or not, they just develop their points faster than you do. Also, Feign Death is relatively weak, sure, but it's still a scenario that plays for anywhere between 12 and 22, before counting in various synergies. Also enabling a quick-release Aelirenn.
If you have Korathi, that's a very different story, but one card shouldn't be an obligatory inclusion.


Or Isengrim. Or the big ping dude. Or just completely halting your points accumulation/setting you back with a couple of traps, it's totally affordable even in r1. If you somehow keep up with their tempo, there's always either a Serpent or a Crushing Trap, depending on the type of the deck they're facing. Realistically, oftentimes you need to go at least a card down or all the way down to 4 to close the point gap, at which point bleed is out of question.

I can fathom Lined Pockets having a comparable/superior tempo, but that one is going to the same chopping block as Eldain next patch.


Technically true, but she has much stronger synergies as a tradeoff.
The problem with overpricing of these cards for the sake of this synergy is that it makes a deck that doesn't thin rely so much on draws. If you miss scenario, vernossiel and/or eldain its over for you. Cards that create deadeyes, without vernossiel in hand feel expensive like waylay, eleyas etc. However looking at the new update video i'm hopeful.
 
  • RED Point
Reactions: rrc
Eldain and Traps are so bloody powerful that all 8 participants in the Gwent Open brought it, but unfortunately, it got banned by everyone that we didn't see it getting played at all.
The same you can say about clog and mill. But is it fun to play against such shit? No.
When I play against clog, mill, no-unit shit like traps the only thing I'm thinking about is "wasting my time".
 
The same you can say about clog and mill. But is it fun to play against such shit? No.
When I play against clog, mill, no-unit shit like traps the only thing I'm thinking about is "wasting my time".
Clog and mill all you have to do is fill your deck with every clog and mill card and then drop them on the board one after the other. This is like Viy decks where all you have to do is add every imaginable tutor card and a consume engine and haunt and just spit them out mindlessly one after the other. They are NOTHING like traps. Traps both players have to think, and bluff, and gamble. If you see no difference where it is so obvious, you are focusing too much on your losses.
 
Eldain and traps clearly don't need a nerf since nothing about them will be changed in 8.5 (at least) enough to warrant highlighting. Eldain wasn't even mentioned even though many of the new old Leader cards were tweaked.

It will take objective proof and data that the archetype is OP -- or rather, would, since none exists -- to it significantly nerfed.
 
Last edited:
Eldain and traps clearly don't need a nerf since nothing about them will be changed in 8.5 (at least) enough to warrant highlighting. Eldain wasn't even mentioned even though many of the new old Leader cards were tweaked.

It will take objective proof and data -- or rather, would, since none exists -- to get the archetype significantly nerfed.
There's data showing Eldain is a 50% deck, so... no nerf needed obviously.
 
Clog and mill all you have to do is fill your deck with every clog and mill card and then drop them on the board one after the other. This is like Viy decks where all you have to do is add every imaginable tutor card and a consume engine and haunt and just spit them out mindlessly one after the other. They are NOTHING like traps. Traps both players have to think, and bluff, and gamble. If you see no difference where it is so obvious, you are focusing too much on your losses.
Explain how being completely uninteractable while deleting anything your opponent throws out is bluffing and gambling. I'd say the biggest gamble is the matchmaking itself.
You even have the big consistent pointslams like Eldain now.
Old Serpent Trap now that was a gamble but Gwent players don't like gambling so they added Spring to everything.

I have fun pretty much autowinning against anything relying on interaction as traps, but at no point do I think to myself "this is such a risky deck". And I certainly don't feel any more clever than mill while doing it.
One can say the exact same line about traps, "All you have to do is fill your deck with traps". That's what you do, right? By doing this you downplay the risks and strategies of mill in order to elevate traps. It's lazy.

If instead of being mostly a control deck traps had more niche stuff like Mahakam Horn I'd agree that it was about bluffing and gambling. But I don't think the current iteration is with how consistent it can be.
 
Last edited:
Explain how being completely uninteractable while deleting anything your opponent throws out is bluffing and gambling. I'd say the biggest gamble is the matchmaking itself.
You even have the big consistent pointslams like Eldain now.
Old Serpent Trap now that was a gamble but Gwent players don't like gambling so they added Spring to everything.

I have fun pretty much autowinning against anything relying on interaction as traps, but at no point do I think to myself "this is such a risky deck". And I certainly don't feel any more clever than mill while doing it.
One can say the exact same line about traps, "All you have to do is fill your deck with traps". That's what you do, right? By doing this you downplay the risks and strategies of mill in order to elevate traps. It's lazy.

If instead of being mostly a control deck traps had more niche stuff like Mahakam Horn I'd agree that it was about bluffing and gambling. But I don't think the current iteration is with how consistent it can be.
Explain how having 6 traps out of 25 cards is "completely uninteractive." Explain how 6 traps "delete everything your opponent throws out." I'm sure you have fun "autowinning," but I also have a feeling you hyperbolize more than you autowin. Might also want to specify what it is you autowin against that's "relying on interaction" while you're at it.

Meanwhile, do I actually need to explain how traps is different from mill? And how "filling the deck with" is obviously not the key, but the "AND" part where you don't care what your opponent does but just play your mill or clog cards one after another until his deck runs out or doubles in size, and how that's different from either playing your 5 for 5 into a 2 point tutor, or playing your pit trap into a useless 4p card, or having to play your 6p row punish traps into 2-unit rows with armor, or having to play the serpent into a swarm of 3-4HP units or no units at all? Or having to play the traps in R1 instead of "uninteractive" R3? And on the other side how you have to guess what trap it is and play into it accordingly?

Again, I can't understand how is this not obvious and self-explanatory.
 
Traps both players have to think, and bluff, and gamble. If you see no difference where it is so obvious, you are focusing too much on your losses.
Lol. There is nothing about bluff and bla bla bla. Just play in a non-interactive way. Yes, I see no difference because all of them are toxic decks.
If you see the difference you are focusing too much on what others focusing on.
 
Lol. There is nothing about bluff and bla bla bla. Just play in a non-interactive way. Yes, I see no difference because all of them are toxic decks.
If you see the difference you are focusing too much on what others focusing on.
Toxic being the standard answer for things u dont enjoy in the game or decks you dont like playing against is the most overused word in the community i guess [...]. Playing Horn once or even twice in the round is apparently blablah? Ive always though u have to play body cards to utilize it so hows this noninteractive? Are Elven scouts also uninteractive?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
People keep repeating this, but that's just not true. You CAN interact with traps, just not destroy them without Heatwave. You interact by triggering the trap in a way that will give your opponent the least possible amount of value. Your opponent meanwhile, is trying to play his traps in such a way as to get the most of value out of them. Which to me seems a lot more interesting of an interaction than placing a bunch of zero-trap traps on board for you to destroy in a bunch of different ways.

And I'm not crazy about bringing back the shackles flavor. Personally, I'd rather see the "flavor" of traps hitting before deploy :D
That would be great if you knew what trap your opponent played... but of course by their very nature you don't...so, no... You CANNOT interact with traps... AT ALL without heatwave.

And even if you can make an educated guess which trap they played, you still can't do anything about it in most cases. So if you're pretty sure they just dropped the N00B horn, for example.. You have to either spend heatwave, or potentially 2+ other cards to make up the eight points you know are coming when you pass... It's Obsurd!! Make it trigger when YOU pass instead of your opponent and see how that feels!! :)

I Stand by my opinion that there should be more than a single very expensive way to deal with artifacts, including traps.

Essentially you're saying "Viy is fine, just play cards that give you more value.". Or "Mq Ball is fine, just don't give them any valuable targets." Or "Eist is fine, just...pray.". Makes no sense..
 
Last edited:
N00B horn, for example.. You have to either spend heatwave, or potentially 2+ other cards to make up the eight points you know are coming when you pass... It's Obsurd!! Make it trigger when YOU pass instead of your opponent and see how that feels!! :)
How is this absurd, exactly? It's 8 for 8 that your opponent just played. How is this different that the opponent playing a unit or multiple units for 8 points? I'll tell you how: The horn needs units around to create those points, and has no actual point value at all by itself. So by removing the target unit you are not only removing that unit's point value, whatever it is, but ALSO gain plus 4 points it would get when the horn is tripped. And if there are MULTIPLE units on either side of the horn to make sure you can't kill all of them in one turn, well, then, guess what? Your opponent just spent several turns setting up the horn, and those units were FAR from uninteractive.
I Stand by my opinion that there should be more than a single very expensive way to deal with artifacts, including traps.

Essentially you're saying "Viy is fine, just play cards that give you more value.". Or "Mq Ball is fine, just don't give them any valuable targets." Or "Eist is fine, just...pray.". Makes no sense..
These analogies are what makes not sense. Those are all separate subjects for discussions, not having a lot in common beetween them, tbh, and if you need pointers on how to beat those decks, go to youtube maybe or create/browse through existing threads on the subject here. And yeah, no, that's not what I'm "essentially" saying at all.

As for your opinion on the number of ways to destroy the traps (not "deal" with traps, since I've pretty much already exhausted my capacity to repeat how a person would "deal" with traps in a match), I mean, I don't agree, but I'm not going to be mad if the devs throw you a bone here, as long as it's fairly priced and fairly pointed according to the provision costs of the cards it's able to destroy. So with the traps being priced between 5 and 8p, the card that would destroy ANY of them should be priced at at least 7, have no other utility, and that provision cost should go up at least 1 for 1 for any point value that card creates on your side of the board, i.e. if it's a unit and not a special card. That's what seems fair to me.
 
Top Bottom