Again, and I sound like a parrot here, the issue is that Golds weren't redesigned to reflect this change. Quite a few of them are weaker than a lot of broze cards. Why use an 800 scrap card when an 80 scrap one does a better job?
They need to redesign the whole scrap value system and even card rarity. Not all Golds are now the same and some are weaker than bronzes. Golds should be 400 max.
They need to redesign the whole scrap value system and even card rarity. Not all Golds are now the same and some are weaker than bronzes. Golds should be 400 max.
marina22;n9421351 said:
Because they look nice in your collection, hand and graveyard. And besides that they wont get destroyed every single game.
You will gather dust to upgrade normal cards to premium cards over time anyway. So premium cards are just an visiul improvement you will be able to unlock anyway.
While I'm not fond of the removal of gold immunity, it's not the biggest problem in itself. Sure, I'd rather they were immune, it had a nice bit of uniqueness and flavour to it. It let you invest your meteorite powder safely if you wanted to, and made it feel justifiable that they cost four times more than silver cards. Now, not so much. With the apparent average value of bronze cards having skyrocketed, and golds being swept off the board like no man's business, the cost just seems excessive. Sure, gold cards can still be powerful, but they feel like they've lost their impact in a big way.
Now to come to the core of the problem, while some golds have been changed to compensate for the change, others haven't, and most certainly not enough. Let's take Triss for example. Sure, she's a starter card, but still gold, and still takes up a gold slot. Yet there's an argument to be made that she's actually worse than the silver card Myrgtebrakke. Triss has the advantage of 1 power, while Myrgtebrakke is far more versatile with her potential to split damage. This just doesn't make sense to me. Another shining example is Tibor Eggebracht, who's only change was that he goes back to his original power once he enters the graveyard. As an immune gold, he was awesome and unique. Now the only reasonable thing to do is update his art with a giant bullseye on his bald head. Another example is Geralt, who was never the strongest card to begin with, but is now consistently less valuable than many bronze cards. I just really struggle to see the logic here, hopefully these issues will be addressed soon.
Now to come to the core of the problem, while some golds have been changed to compensate for the change, others haven't, and most certainly not enough. Let's take Triss for example. Sure, she's a starter card, but still gold, and still takes up a gold slot. Yet there's an argument to be made that she's actually worse than the silver card Myrgtebrakke. Triss has the advantage of 1 power, while Myrgtebrakke is far more versatile with her potential to split damage. This just doesn't make sense to me. Another shining example is Tibor Eggebracht, who's only change was that he goes back to his original power once he enters the graveyard. As an immune gold, he was awesome and unique. Now the only reasonable thing to do is update his art with a giant bullseye on his bald head. Another example is Geralt, who was never the strongest card to begin with, but is now consistently less valuable than many bronze cards. I just really struggle to see the logic here, hopefully these issues will be addressed soon.
Last edited:
I hate the change to golds, am I the only one?
I just don't like the new system for golds. And I want them back. I think it's a regression rather than an improvement. It kills the gold meta, which was really interesting and nice. Now, golds just feel like common cards and in some situations they are even worse than silvers cause silvers can be used multiple times with Decoy and Ehmyr ability for example. Am I the only one feeling this way?
I just don't like the new system for golds. And I want them back. I think it's a regression rather than an improvement. It kills the gold meta, which was really interesting and nice. Now, golds just feel like common cards and in some situations they are even worse than silvers cause silvers can be used multiple times with Decoy and Ehmyr ability for example. Am I the only one feeling this way?
Making golden cards targetable is the biggest BS you ever pulled of
Now then screw this damned game, this sucks. Foe does not even need Dimeritium shackles anymore to screw over my gold cards! Why even still make a cap on gold cards if they are not more better than most bronze cards??
Now then screw this damned game, this sucks. Foe does not even need Dimeritium shackles anymore to screw over my gold cards! Why even still make a cap on gold cards if they are not more better than most bronze cards??
I think the best reply would be that it goes both ways. You can screw with your opponent's golds the same way he does with yours.
And if golds were worse then most bronzes I'd reckon all the meta decks would just ditch the golds for bronzes, but that didn't happen (yet).
And if golds were worse then most bronzes I'd reckon all the meta decks would just ditch the golds for bronzes, but that didn't happen (yet).
Schmaddi1;n9421281 said:
Which is why I'm agree to give it more value....but not spawn a new bronze card with a shield and all the carry over that comes with it.
I don't say that I'm not agree to give more than the original value created by the spell in the first place but a 6 str body would have been enough imo.
el_Bosco;n9352291 said:
Have you seen the version of the game? THIS IS BETA!!! They SHOULD experiment and change thins on beta version to decide what exactly put into the release. If you want settled rules - wait for the official release.
About new Golds - this is great! Now gold cards aren't held until last round, but played in all rounds of the game. I like it very much!
Andrey82;n9427191 said:
It definitely has it upsides but there is also a few downsides that are important to mention imo.
Overall, the system works great and even some Golds that I was worry about are playable and works fine but for example, units like Mangonel, Longship and the like tend to me much more annoying now.
With Golds not being targetable, if your opponent play a Mangonel you could buy some time and deny targets by playing your Golds but it's not possible anymore and if your opponent plays 2 of them and you have nothing to deal with the damn things it's basically an instant pass unless you have some hard counter in hand (Mahakam Marauder, An Craite Greatsword...).
Same thing with Weather, I had a game today, my opponent played Drought on turn 1 which causes me to pass prematurely and then turn 2 he casted Rag Na Roog....and of course I didn't drew my anti weather cards in either of those round (it wouldn't be funny otherwise) but this type of play wasn't as problematic with the previous version. Now it's either you have a counter in hand or you're screwed...
Andrey82;n9427191 said:
Ok this is beta but at beta experiment with changes wich promote the games and not demoted....CDPR has may smart ppl who work on this way for better changes and not for worst. Thats why they are in this corporation and we are not..... cause supposed they are smarter........(or not)
Now about gold cards you spoke about, here my opinion my friend...If you dont know the right way to create a good strategy for the opponents gold playing cards, thats your problem and only. You can continue playing this patch building a deck with 20 special damag cards, 3 spawn special cards units and 2 golds with leader Eithne from Scoia and you can always win ...WITHOUT ANY F$#$%#NG MIND STRATEGY BUILDING........
Gold cards were never really played for the body anyways. Otherwise Geralt would have seen much more action.Lornick77;n9429471 said:
The only cards I can think of that were ever played for big bodies were Unseen Elder (and you had to eat 3 of your own units), Kayran (had to eat one of your cards in hand), Tibur (gave opponent another card), and Hjalmar (had to kill the spawn to buff).
Because for the most part, the golds still have pretty unique abilities.freeelancer;n9425961 said:
But if it were extended to say... 8 golds, I doubt many people would field all 8. I think 5 or 6 would be the limit because a deck is worthless without multiple bronzes to synergize.
Last edited: