Has Iron Judgement finally killed Gwent?

[Evangium]

Before tactical advantage everyone complained the game was unfair.

True. Then people found ways to negate TA and everyone complained that red coin abuse and tall removal was unfair. TA isn't a bad thing on its own, however player perception regarding coin flip and TA not being protection from removal seems to be driving it so that tall removal either gets its threshold raised (e.g. Geralt and Leo going from killing 8+ str to 9+ str), or becomes somewhat RNG (CoC). So in that sense, TA is something that, while not directly impacting the design space, has seen the utility of all tall removal decline outside of what we would have called 'Scorch Metas' in beta. That said, the state of tall removal is neither here nor there at the moment, since it seems to be only MO that still run jolly green giant-type decks. The other factions seem to run wide rather than tall.

 

[Archan6el]

It may not have killed it, but it hasn't salvaged it either.

For me personally, Gwent is very much on life support right now. I was so disappointed with Homecoming, but was willing to stick with it in the hope that CDPR could still turn things around. My first impression of HC was that it was like an early beta, and based on development progress in the original beta, I figured it would take about 9 to 12 months of steady positive progress to hone it into a good and enjoyable game again.

I wouldn't classify the last 12 months as steady positive progress. Things have been all over the place and mistakes keep being repeated. There have also been some questionable design choices, with cosmetics taking priority over gameplay. Sure, it looks more fancy now, but it seems to get less and less fun to play. It is also obvious that they are desperately pumping out more and more new content at the expense of addressing long-standing problems. They may grab a quick boost with the mobile launch and a few new flashing lights and distracting baubles, but such weak foundations will not support this game in the long-term.

Yes, I'm being quite harsh, but I think the track record to date is not reassuring. I don't like to be so negative about something I used to enjoy so much, but my faith is almost entirely extinguished. Good will and good memories only go so far.

This does not necessarily mean that I think Gwent is about to die, but it is very close to dead for me.

This sums it all up pretty nicely. Some people may ask what exactly is wrong. If you want to know, check the older threads on this forum. Very little has been done to fix core issues that many players were not happy with. With the expansions, new mechanics and changes have been introduced with the same core issues and even new issues. Most of these issues are no longer discussed on this forum as they have already been explained at length, but are still without proper fix from CDPR. Then there comes a point when enough is enough and you uninstall the game and stop actively posting on this forum. That's where I'm at.

 

[thetruerenter]

TA might have it's good intentions for fairness ingame but I belief the game could be as much fun without it, even when you use TA on an important card, if that card is a threat its best eliminated anyway or pass so it's gone in the other round, that is especially the case when you got like 4 points and the opponent has 20+ after playing 1 card already. Sure you can and sometimes should draw out the cards via pushing but against the stronger decks as mentioned earlier with OP combos then this would be akin to hitting a wall with your head. Live to fight another day. TA on the other side is sometimes nice for the engines, but....like said, important cards die anyway with or without TA. Besides, it does look odd in a cardgame, like someone gets a cookie and the other doesn't. It might raise questions by new players about fairness. Meanwhile the powerlevels also have changed to the good making TA a lesser necessity.

 

[Evangium]

TA might have it's good intentions for fairness ingame but I belief the game could be as much fun without it, even when you use TA on an important card, if that card is a threat its best eliminated anyway or pass so it's gone in the other round, that is especially the case when you got like 4 points and the opponent has 20+ after playing 1 card already. Sure you can and sometimes should draw out the cards via pushing but against the stronger decks as mentioned earlier with OP combos then this would be akin to hitting a wall with your head. Live to fight another day. TA on the other side is sometimes nice for the engines, but....like said, important cards die anyway with or without TA. Besides, it does look odd in a cardgame, like someone gets a cookie and the other doesn't. It might raise questions by new players about fairness. Meanwhile the powerlevels also have changed to the good making TA a lesser necessity.

I tend to agree, that TA has perhaps outlived its usefulness. It seems many cards are either strong enough to stand on their own, so long as the player knows how to bait removal, or at least combo in such ways that the extra points TA gives doesn't really mean much for the player who is behind. I'm starting to think that maybe CDPR should start looking into fixed handsize for R2 & R3. The last two seasonals have shown that mechanics that place both players into a position where it's most advantagous to play your hand in R1 tends to lead to both players commiting to R2. This then frees up R3 to be a tie breaker round as intended. Of course doing something like this probably would require the resilience mechanic to be monitored closely to ensure it doesn't warp the meta (thinking of the days of resilient dwarves).

 

[partci]

It was long suggested that the TA points be "phantom", not affecting anything on the board itself.

Maybe time to try this out. After all, from all I can see the game is still in Beta.

 

[Balm-Cake]

Right, I am absolutely not making this up - I experimented with an Imlerith deck, bit like the old days with some ale to unlock, couple of big units, "carapace" as the leader ability, just to mix it up a bit. After winning one match quite easily (against Mystic Echo, no less!), the next match I am up against - really weirdly - a ST deck with a whole bunch of lock/poison units. I mean, Ciaran's usually an auto-include, but I'm talking about cards like Shackles, Jade Figurine, Aguara, etc.

It's weird enough anyone would build a ST lock deck in the first place, but what makes this SO weird is including the likes of Aguara. What place does it have in this ST deck? What does it do, except lock a unit, because there's no real reason to include such a hefty card when all of the ST cards I faced had deploy (mainly poison). So what, exactly, would you play Aguara for in the first place? Aren't cards like Ciaran, Treant Boar, Iorveth much, much more relevant - particularly when this opponent used the Deadeye leader ability!!!!

It just struck me as particularly odd that I'd build a new deck focused on Imlerith and the opponent would specifically have poison (designed to target one big unit) and locks galore. I still won the game, so this isn't a salty rant, but I just found it really, really suspicious that I'd face such an odd deck, so out of keeping with decks I normally face.

(by the way, I'm well aware that I'm not going to do much to a win %age with an Imlerith deck - I'm just trying, desperately, to make the game fun).

Again this happens to me all the time. I’m not going to go down the conspiracy theory route though. There are that many people playing the game that there will always be decks out there that you haven’t come across. I do think that the matchmaking actively seeks out counter decks though.

 

[nedders]

Again this happens to me all the time. I’m not going to go down the conspiracy theory route though. There are that many people playing the game that there will always be decks out there that you haven’t come across. I do think that the matchmaking actively seeks out counter decks though.

I agree, I don't mean it's a conspiracy against me as an individual, that makes NO sense. I just think there's a code written into the game which influences match-making. I don't doubt the intentions were honourable - but the binary nature of some cards and their affect on certain decks makes some match-ups unfair from the outset.

 

[Alrun24]

Right, I am absolutely not making this up - I experimented with an Imlerith deck, bit like the old days with some ale to unlock, couple of big units, "carapace" as the leader ability, just to mix it up a bit. After winning one match quite easily (against Mystic Echo, no less!), the next match I am up against - really weirdly - a ST deck with a whole bunch of lock/poison units. I mean, Ciaran's usually an auto-include, but I'm talking about cards like Shackles, Jade Figurine, Aguara, etc.

It's weird enough anyone would build a ST lock deck in the first place, but what makes this SO weird is including the likes of Aguara. What place does it have in this ST deck? What does it do, except lock a unit, because there's no real reason to include such a hefty card when all of the ST cards I faced had deploy (mainly poison). So what, exactly, would you play Aguara for in the first place? Aren't cards like Ciaran, Treant Boar, Iorveth much, much more relevant - particularly when this opponent used the Deadeye leader ability!!!!

It just struck me as particularly odd that I'd build a new deck focused on Imlerith and the opponent would specifically have poison (designed to target one big unit) and locks galore. I still won the game, so this isn't a salty rant, but I just found it really, really suspicious that I'd face such an odd deck, so out of keeping with decks I normally face.

(by the way, I'm well aware that I'm not going to do much to a win %age with an Imlerith deck - I'm just trying, desperately, to make the game fun).

I guess your opponent was desperately trying to win with Deadeye. I 'm also playing Deadeye sometimes, I like it, but the winning chance is very low without neutral cards that can deal with machines. Never tried poison though, but now I have to think about it ...

 

[nedders]

I guess your opponent was desperately trying to win with Deadeye. I 'm also playing Deadeye sometimes, I like it, but the winning chance is very low without neutral cards that can deal with machines. Never tried poison though, but now I have to think about it ...

Nope. Very next game, I'm playing same deck, I face NG with locks/seize everywhere.

No idea what CDPR do or why they think this works, but it's absolutely bloody absurd. Next game, NG again, oppo plays Tibor, unit pulled from my deck "at random"??? Ozzrel. It basically cheats me so I lose matches. Don't know why it does it. Hate it.

Then Mystic Echo. I mean, what's the point in playing this game? I'm literally bored to death and I've barely played 3 matches, all of which I've quit because it's just boring, boring, boring, boring, same things over and over and over again. The card pool is small, the usable cards utterly woeful. Honestly, I don't think this game will ever get better. It's more like filler until Cyberpunk, then they'll probably kill it.

Play a META or go home. I ask again, what is the point in this game? Flappy Bird has more depth and skill.

 

[Archan6el]

I agree, I don't mean it's a conspiracy against me as an individual, that makes NO sense. I just think there's a code written into the game which influences match-making. I don't doubt the intentions were honourable - but the binary nature of some cards and their affect on certain decks makes some match-ups unfair from the outset.

Looking at CDPR's balancing skills, I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is actually true. I've had suspicious match-up experiences myself. A great way to "balance" strong decks and to keep players grinding even longer to rank up or get some MMR.

 

[partci]

So, this just happened:

 

[Guerreroymago]

Usually I play no meta decks in actually rank 4.
My win/lose rate is aproximatelly 50%. I do not jump to rank 3, but I win a lot of matches.

I think in this year this is the moment when the game is most balanced.

 

[nedders]

Usually I play no meta decks in actually rank 4.
My win/lose rate is aproximatelly 50%. I do not jump to rank 3, but I win a lot of matches.

I think in this year this is the moment when the game is most balanced.

What deck do you play, then? I am stuck at Rank 10 for the first time ever, because all I face is META decks or counter-decks.

 

[Guerreroymago]

What deck do you play, then? I am stuck at Rank 10 for the first time ever, because all I face is META decks or counter-decks.

Different special card decks for removal, for example.
Or non meta NG decks stealing units.
Non meta Calanthe´s hability decks as well effective.
Also a deathwish deck.
I've climbed like this from rank 8 this season.

 

[nedders]

Different special card decks for removal, for example.
Or non meta NG decks stealing units.
Non meta Calanthe´s hability decks as well effective.
Also a deathwish deck.
I've climbed like this from rank 8 this season.

"Non Meta" decks, with NG steal and MO deathwish?! Hilarious!

3 games played before I turned it off this morning. 1 x Mystic Echo, 1 x NG Seize, 1 x MO Bleed. DNF any of them. Changed over and played an Arachas Swarm deck boosting a row of units. Oppo's final card? Geralt Yrden of course.

Fck this, I'm out. CDPR - what have you done to this game?!

 

[Guerreroymago]

"Non Meta" decks, with NG steal and MO deathwish?! Hilarious!

Maybe for you, if you use a particular leader the deck are meta. Ok, but not for me. I invent this decks, I did not copy these in team arenuza web or others players.

This moth deathwihs is the first moth whit a deathwish decks playable in this year... Playable but not tier 1 or tier 2.
I see evolution in the game.

In all this year, only one or two decks are stronger and watched. Thist moth more than 5 sure and whit anothers decks winning this decks.

 

[Guerreroymago]

Now, I play the traps deck and I win more that 50% matches in rank 3.

 

[nedders]

Now, I play the traps deck and I win more that 50% matches in rank 3.

"The traps deck"? You insinuate you're creating your own decks. Your comments indicate you're not.

 

[Guerreroymago]

"The traps deck"? You insinuate you're creating your own decks. Your comments indicate you're not.

Perhaps you are being somewhat rigorous with a person who does not know much english.

Sometimes I play copied decks, but all the decks I referred earlier are not copied.

My traps deck is not copied.

 

[SirusR2PO]

The relentless matchups against META net decks, the endless broken combination, the constant feeling of "why am I matched against this?" and "how the hell has my opponent drawn the perfect hand R3, yet again?".

I can feel myself getting the same level of rage I felt back when HC76 was originally released, to gasps of "what the hell have they done?" and "where did Gwent go?". I've rage quite three games on the bounce - twice against the absurdly overpowered Monster bleed deck, and I've just played an absolute monster deck for NR where my opponent had the defender and every, single Gold you could possibly imagine (Dandelion/Priscilla/Anna/Shani/etc.). It was just a relentless boost fest with absolutely no counter. We're talking about a game that's supposed to be balanced, yet the opponent was basically slamming 10+ points on the board with every turn.

How does everyone seem to have these perfect decks? How does everyone seem to get the perfect deal? My Skellige deal had Dagur still in the deck whilst my opponent - with no thinning - pulls gold after gold after gold.

It's getting to the point where I'm not just bored with it, I'm sick of it. There's no room for error, there's no allowance for trying new things, you either copy what everyone else is doing and subscribe to Team Aretuza or just don't bother. God only knows how bad a new player must find the whole experience, but it's such a narrow game there's no ability to grow with it. Add in the fact some of us spent scraps getting leaders, only to then see it all disappear in favour of 'skins' (which I really couldn't give a stuff about) and again you feel cheated. Feeling cheated is a very common theme in this game:

- Let's try an Arachas deck. Vs. Usurper? Cheated.
- R3 where's my finisher? Still in the deck. Opponent playing perfect hand? Cheated.
- Mill my leader cards, and give me skins instead of scraps? Cheated.
- Spent money on Gwent Beta, only to see this game replace it? Cheated.
- Playing a defender R3 - opponent happens to have a purify card? Cheated.

I'm not saying it's actual cheating, I'm saying it's the feeling of being stitched up, with nothing you can do about it. Bad matchup? Nothing I can do. Crap deal? Nothing I can do. Seems to me that no matter which way CDPR turn with this game, it's always down a blind alley. No more hard removal? Well you better have enough scraps to craft the mega boost meta else you're just going to lose, time and time again. It's not even as if you can spend money to get anywhere. I've opened 30+ Iron Judgement kegs and have found ONE Gold card. One. Out of 150. I had to craft the couple I wanted to use, and they're not even that good - that's an expensive waste of scraps when you're trying to experiment.

I dunno, my love for the game is hanging by a thread. It feels pointless - I don't see why people clearly copy a deck, what's the point? I played IDENTICAL Monster decks twice in a row. Identical (bleeding/big units). That means something is desperately, badly wrong with the game. And, honestly, I'm probably about half a dozen games away from uninstalling it. Anybody else finding that their love for Gwent is being sorely tested?

i totally agree with you here its very refreshing to read this. Very funny also to see that all this "nice" suggesting desks are requiring you to spend 5000+ scraps. Not likely that a new player can cough up this amount.