Heat Wave and the 'Tall Removal' Problem

[Duhad]

Hey friends, I've got a wild, insane, totally outrageous hot take that no one here has ever voiced before! A tack so radical, I fear even by saying it, I may well be dragged through the streets for my unbelievably brave stance! What is this mindbogglingly hot take?

Heatwave kind of sucks!

What's that? No one cares? Everyone and there mother has either said that or at least heard a few dozen people complain about heatwave over and over again already and DO NOT CARE anymore? Ya I know, but hear me out as I think I have a point that might be a little fresher and a little more actionable then just saying, "Heatwave bad, get rid of it!"

See as a long, long time Gwent player and one who has gone on record as being pretty happy with most of the changes to the game that have come over the years and who is, over all, pretty happy with the dev team's work, I DO feel like one very specific aspect of the game has gotten noticeably worse and less interesting over time. Something that I think has ALLOT to do with why so many people hate Heatwave and, I think, a reason why 'its over used' and 'it should just be removed' aren't really the issue here...

To explain my point, I want you, as a Gewnt player to imagine three situations:

1. Your opponent has 24 points stacked onto a single massive unit: What card do you play to punish them?

2. Your opponent has five 6 point units lined up on a row: Can you punish them?

3. Your opponent has left a 30 point Viy on the board: How do you get that worm out of the game?

Currently the answer to these three situations is likely to be Heatwave for two of them and 'nope, nothing to do about that' for the other despite the fact that, at least on paper the correct answer SHOULD be something like:

1. Geralt or Leo or Geralt Pro or Ike

2. Geralt Igni

3. Heatwave

Heatwave is and for a long time post Homecoming WAS a VERY expensive, very nitch tech card that's biggest benefits where that it could remove artifacts and that it blocked graveyard manipulation. For normal tall punish and a number of other situations you had other cards that could remove big targets cheaper and left a body on the board, but at the cost of having limitations that the opponent could play around. This meant that whenever you where playing a game of Gwent and wanted to go big, you had allot of things to keep in mind, golden numbers where the opponent could punish you if you got to greedy and line ups that could give them an opening to do some real crazy stuff! Heck, do you remember Scorch? That card used to be so devastating and iconic that whole games would hinge on trying to keep your bodies form lining up or staying juuuuuust under your opponent! But these days, I doubt many people even remember what that card did without having to google it first for a refresher.

So what's my point? Well... Heatwave sucks, yes, obviously, its a boring, binary card that has no real way to play around and can make games with big bodies just come down to weather or not one card is in the hand, but... That's not really what I think the problem is. I mean its not great, but its not just about Heatwave being good and thus making playing tall bad. Its about tall punish, a key and integral part of Gwent's DNA and strategy being... Boring! Its about the fact that when your playing a game the question is not, "What can my opponent do to punish me if I do X, Y or Z?" Its, "How can I bait out the one big removal card so all the rest of my engines and big boys stick?"

Whenever people bring up Heatwave being a bad card it tends to be about how it makes tall nonviable or it being boring and thus should be removed, but... To me the issue isn't Heatwave. The issue is that tall removal in Gwent currently has been made so pricey and fiddly that even pro players would rather just spend the additional points on Heatwave as a blanket solution for all problems rather then consider which of the many and varied tech cards would be best to deal with a particular meta. The problem is I'm never even thinking about playing around a devastating Igni or a sly Yrden or a board clearing Scorch or even just one of the big monsters hunters reminding me that "9 Is Death!"

The problem, in short, is that tall removal and to a lesser degree, non damage control in general is kind of non existent.

You have damage (normally capped at 5 for single cards), poison (and I'll go out on a limb here and say thanks to val and purify, poison is a fine, counter-able, somewhat interesting method of control) and then just Heatwave as the big red button who's only counters are defenders and having not drawn or already played it.

What's the solution? I donno, honestly I don't want to just say, "REMOVE HEATWAVE" as I think Heatwave SHOULD have a place in the game, as a BIG commitment tech card that you ONLY bring if you think you need it or want that reliable removal.

Maybe add a few more provision points to its cost, bring down the price of some of the other big removal cards, add some mercy benefits to the Geralts... Like let 'Of Rivia' do 3 damage like Pro so its at least playing for 6 and can be a small removal in a pinch, have Igni do 1 damage to a row if you can't line up a big board as a secondary benefit and take 'initiative' off Scorch so it at least has a CHANCE to do the one thing it's uniquely good at... And obviously tweak, buff and/or nerf as needed to make these changes not utterly busted so it doesn't go the other direction of making these tech cards TOO good! The point is just, make it so that Heatwave is not the 'one true tall punish' and that the other, more interesting tech cards are good enough to see play. Not just so they are more viable, but so even if your NOT running any of them, you actually do need to think about some of the ways your opponent can punish you.

Gwent is a game about planning, risk management and deck building, Heatwave currently being the one and only big removal card seeing play has a detrimental effect on all of these aspects... So please, Gwent Dev Team, consider addressing the games Tall Removal Problem.


(And that's my TED Talk, thank you all for reading and I look forward to hearing why I am actually wrong and all tall removal is bad and should just be blanket banished.
Seriously though, love this community, love the dev team, I hope if you have read this far, your not to upset and have a wonderful day!)

Post automatically merged: Jun 8, 2021

Also as a small footnote, I want to mention that I don't think Heatwave and Oneiromancy being really strong, 'auto-include' neutral cards is a huge issue since to me, as long as 'Devotion' is in the game and is supported properly, having a couple really good neutral cards as temptations to NOT play devotion is fine.

Basically if Devotion makes your deck over all better and adding (often situational and slightly sub par) neutrals as tech cards gives you flexibility, then cards like Oneiromancy and good neutral removal are important to make the choice between the two styles of deck an interesting one.

As long as devotion is a viable choice and I'd say it is in most factions and hopefully will continue to be supported in future, then Heatwave and Oneiomancy aren't actually really auto-include. They are the payoffs for giving up the over all power spike of getting devotion benefits. Now that doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't be tweaked or nerfed, just that I don't think its a big problem to have one or more very good neutral cards if the deck cost of adding them is not just that they are expensive, but that your taking them instead of getting something equally tempting.

Again, NOT saying they are perfectly balanced, just that my problems with Heatwave are not just that 'no neutral card should be so good it basically belongs in every deck!' Since as long as devotion is good enough, that will hopefully keep powerful neutrals in check.

 

[WarGreymonAlfa]

On one hand it's frustrating to gave a "delete" button. On the other it's also frustrating for your opponent to summon 2-3 copies of an overpowered legendary.

 

[kachigar_gwent]

I think it would be interesting to look what would happened if some other removals like vanilla Geralt become cheaper.

 

[Damashiuchi]

But heatwave is still just a card for a card. I suppose they could make it more expensive, but I don't think that would quell a lot of the complaining about it because for the most part people (OP excluded ; thanks for the different angle on it, btw) seem to be upset about what it does, not how much it costs. It's almost as if people don't realize heatwave does not counter every card in their deck. It counters exactly 1 card in their deck, and that's if they're opponent draws it. I know some people say they refuse to run it, but I would be willing to bet 10 years salary that if it popped up on an RNG from some other card or leader ability they played somewhere they would use it in a heartbeat... No hesitation. In the end, it's 1 card... And no it's not the same type of "one card" that Viy is either, thankfully you play it one time and it's done

 

[Fargothwave]

But heatwave is still just a card for a card. I suppose they could make it more expensive, but I don't think that would quell a lot of the complaining about it because for the most part people (OP excluded ; thanks for the different angle on it, btw) seem to be upset about what it does, not how much it costs. It's almost as if people don't realize heatwave does not counter every card in their deck. It counters exactly 1 card in their deck, and that's if they're opponent draws it. I know some people say they refuse to run it, but I would be willing to bet 10 years salary that if it popped up on an RNG from some other card or leader ability they played somewhere they would use it in a heartbeat... No hesitation. In the end, it's 1 card... And no it's not the same type of "one card" that Viy is either, thankfully you play it one time and it's done

Okay, there is a serious issue with that "1 for 1" equation.

Namely that many tall units are in fact payoff cards, and not high base strength/engine kind of deal, or at least some mix of the three. Their power comes from both the card itself AND some additional commitment, the best examples here would be Hamadryads and Sea Jackals. Why is it fair that you can instantly erase a card I dumped a couple of expensive specials/a ton of coins on? Because it's 1 for 1, according to you, but it's just not true. Now, if we were talking about, say, Spores, it would be a much fairer trade, despite Spores being much cheaper, because you actually run a risk of bricking hard by using them, which should be rewarded/punished occasionally. Korathi, on the other hand, is virtually unbrickable - even if you're dealing with no-unit, you get your points from erasing Madoc (instantly turning all the bombs into garbage as icing on the cake) or the Sabertooth.

Next thing is that some card even have a steep strategic price in the sense that you have to build your entire deck around them which also tends to constrain your tactical options at times (like making your sequencing very awkward). Consider Dagur, Aglais, Fallen Flaminica, Mourntart, Whispess: Incantation, Artis, also Fulmar to a degree. All of these are demoted to meme tier (though I've had some unironic success with Artis and Aglais before WotW patches finally powercrept them). All of these come with major risks and force suboptimal plays to achieve results that modern meta decks get effortlessly and rather safely. Killing them thus, does far, far more than just trading 1 for 1.

Korathi, on the other hand, comes with no strings attached. Fire and forget, no deckbuilding/tactical/strategic restrictions.
Yeah, sure, it breaks Devotion, but as of now, Devotion decks that are good typically have all the tools they need anyway and breaking it for Korathi isn't even a consideration most of the time (except maybe in Nature's Gift, but I said good decks). Meanwhile, if you aren't playing a good Devoiton deck, Korathi is always a good idea because it's AT LEAST a 1 for 1 and can be much more depending on the context. It's too cookie-cutter, solve-all good.

Please note that I actually agree with OP in that removal cards like Igni or Scorch need some love. But: conditions are good and important for the game's health, they create tension and make skill more of a factor, and Korathi might just be the worst and stupidest card in the game in this regard. Of course, there's also this whole pesky artifact removal issue...but that's mostly an unrelated topic (artifacts should honestlly have armor durability or something).

So in order for Korathi to truly be "fair" it needs to come with some sort of meaningful condition, like not actually being instant and giving a turn to react, or maybe only affecting units/artifacts with a status (like VVM). Might even go down to 9 provisions if it gets some restraining bolt for all I care.

 

[quintivarium]

First, I want to thank to original poster for a very insightful analysis. I agree that a big problem with heatwave is that it does too much too well. It is able to destroy artifacts as well as any units accumulated value, future value, deathwish value, and graveyard value with the only restriction of needing to target the card. except for wide punish, heatwave is THE go-to removal card. But as changes to the card are considered, I have two caveats.

First, any effective card (unless absolutely critical tech) must be able to give a reasonable expected return based upon actions it’s player can take. In other wards, a card that only obtains value from situations outside a player’s control, that card will either be very binary or never used. Thus assigning an attribute like “destroy an artifact” to an otherwise weak card will not be healthy for the game.

Second, Heatwave is so ubiquitous, it plays a vital role in game balance and changes will have far reaching consequences. For instance, anything that weakens Heatwave (making it less played) automatically strengthens scenarios by reducing threat of their removal. Obviously, many such consequences will be undesirable.

That said, I cannot resist suggesting an adjustment to heatwave: banish an artifact or a unit 7 strength or under. Heatwave then still has many potential applications — but tall removal is not among them. It also offers ways to play around heatwave. It would be reasonable to reduce heatwave’s cost accordingly.

 

[Damashiuchi]

@N228
I can see your point, to a point. I agree that some tall units require some type of setup. But that does not mean that anything capable of countering them should require a reciprocal amount of setup. Any strategy that relies on a single card (weather that card is a tall payoff unit, or heatwave itself) is begging to fail. If your deck wins 99% of the time when your opponent does not use heatwave, but only 1% of the time when your opponent does use heatwave, then I say, "Thank the maker for heatwave!!" No wonder everyone uses it!!

My point is, there are 2-3 rounds of cards being played and if a single removal is all it takes to beat you then you should probably rethink your strategy... No matter how unstoppable it may be if heatwave didn't exist... The fact is heatwave does exist and everyone knows it exists and everyone should be prepared to have a backup plan to deal to deal with it. It is still a 1 for 1 card.

 

[Fargothwave]

@N228
I can see your point, to a point. I agree that some tall units require some type of setup. But that does not mean that anything capable of countering them should require a reciprocal amount of setup. Any strategy that relies on a single card (weather that card is a tall payoff unit, or heatwave itself) is begging to fail. If your deck wins 99% of the time when your opponent does not use heatwave, but only 1% of the time when your opponent does use heatwave, then I say, "Thank the maker for heatwave!!" No wonder everyone uses it!!

My point is, there are 2-3 rounds of cards being played and if a single removal is all it takes to beat you then you should probably rethink your strategy... No matter how unstoppable it may be if heatwave didn't exist... The fact is heatwave does exist and everyone knows it exists and everyone should be prepared to have a backup plan to deal to deal with it. It is still a 1 for 1 card.

Well, you're operating under the assumption that general game dynamic isn't gonna change or even that it SHOULDN'T, and that's not something I can get behind either way.

My point is, strategies heavily relying on a single card have the right to exist.
Many of them are cool strategies. Why even have stuff I listed in the previous post if control options are so numerous and affordable?

Legendaries that require a lot of commitment shouldn't be as easy to disrupt, that doesn't make much sense even in terms of the provisions trade. Generally, it's too easy to kill stuff in Gwent right now to have any cool strategies, and CDPR knows this. Look at all these new gold 6s and engines that instantly grow beyond 5p removal - obviously a step towards reining removal a bit. More to come, probably.

Of course, allowing Damiens and Aglaises go off uninterrupted is a bad idea, too, but you know what? There's a bunch of non-removal tech for these situations already in the game, and it mostly gets ignored because it's just so easy to kill stuff. But locks, resets and weird conditional tricks like Igni, Compression, Glorious Hunt or Villetrenne...dragon thing...are just so much cooler and interactive that I would happily see Korathi and Yenvo go forever(even though I love the latter as a hopeless assimilation junkie), and I am absolutely unconvinced that game would devolve into Solitaire instantly. There're still Geralts, locks, resets, damage engines, Tremors, all these beautiful little things that would make game - especially the deckbuilding aspect - that much more interesting and analytical in absence of cookie-cutter cards.

 

[quintivarium]

The question for every card should be not merely “is the card fair (balanced)?” — it should be “does the card make the game more interesting?”

So what makes the game interesting? It is certainly not “Who drew the most, highest value units?” And it’s not “Who drew stuff for which the opponent didn’t draw counters?” It’s the unique, back and forth strategies where one takes what is drawn and uses it to develop points or to contest points an opponent is trying to develop with the tools that opponent drew.

And by that criteria, the present Heatwave is a horrible card: it supports boring, RNG based plays while requiring no development and, in an incontestable way, wiping out significant development that was established.

Now heatwave is not the sole issue — it may even be an essential answer for two many cards that generate too many points too easily — but that is a different topic.

 

[ya1]

My point is, strategies heavily relying on a single card have the right to exist.

Yeah, so called "degeneracies." I'm not using this word pejoratively. It's just how they are called. Draw R1 for the win, get that long R3 and knock yourself out with Igor Townsfolk, Rat Clog, She-Troll and other Idarran shenanigans, etc.

It's just my opinion but these things - although super cool and fun as a gambling endeavor - they don't make for good Gwent. They are one-trick ponies. Imagine top-tier tournaments being played with Igor Townsfolk and no control. Casters would have only 4 things to say: "He won R1 by any means, he drypassed R2, he topdecked right, he will pull it off." And that's all there is to those strategies. No offense intended. Personally, I love those memes. But they should NEVER be competitive. Wincon management should ALWAYS a part of Gwent.

Legendaries that require a lot of commitment shouldn't be as easy to disrupt

And they aren't. Heatwave and other tall punish are also legendaries that require a lot of commitment. It's not exactly easy to include another 10p card, is it? Heatwave is one of the most committal cards in any deck.

Besides, there are only a few cards in Gwent Heatwave actually trades up with. She Who Knows is one. Can you name 5 such cards without looking in the deckbuilder? I have problem with 3, honestly...

Spoiler: here they are

SWK, Old Speartip, War Elephant, Syanna, Damien and Alzur, also Gerhart if patienced, Sigi if overprofitted, Ruehin if not eaten on deploy and Kelly if not burned a unit - that's it.

 

[Fargothwave]

they don't make for good Gwent.

Spoiler: spoiler

They are one-trick ponies. Imagine top-tier tournaments being played with Igor Townsfolk and no control. Casters would have only 4 things to say: "He won R1 by any means, he drypassed R2, he topdecked right, he will pull it off." And that's all there is to those strategies. No offense intended. Personally, I love those memes. But they should NEVER be competitive. Wincon management should ALWAYS a part of Gwent.

Not necessarily. I was talking about heavy realiance, not total reliance. Rat clog is one example I can agree with, but there's a lot of routes the Igor/Artis/She-troll games could go down, like a forced short r3 that still isn't hopeless for example. Besides, you definition of degeneracy certainly fits Ball and Siege, and definitely Tunnel Drill, which is just one more proof that "degeneracies" aren't as binary and linear as you would think. Kolgrim also is one, but is every single bit as stupid as you claim. yeah.

And they aren't. Heatwave and other tall punish are also legendaries that require a lot of commitment. It's not exactly easy to include another 10p card, is it? Heatwave is one of the most committal cards in any deck.

Besides, there are only a few cards in Gwent Heatwave actually trades up with. She Who Knows is one. Can you name 5 such cards without looking in the deckbuilder? I have problem with 3, honestly...

Spoiler: here they are

SWK, Old Speartip, War Elephant, Syanna, Damien and Alzur, also Gerhart if patienced, Sigi if overprofitted, Ruehin if not eaten on deploy and Kelly if not burned a unit - that's it.

What do you mean, "another"? For some decks it's literally one of the central cards (like for the latest iterations of Scottish Metabreaker), and for those where it isn't, it's still definitely one of less committal - probably the least committal - 10p as it has no risks, conditions, or secondary deckbuilding requirements whatsoever. You don't have to add a bunch of crappy aristocrats or elves or slow engines to your deck or have your target have a certain value to make it work, you don't need to give it a status, it's just a raw delete button.

Your list only considers linear 1 to 1 interactions which is a weird way to look at the game where value mostly comes from card interactions rather than "isolated" per-card contributions. You kill my Hamadryad after I use Shaping nature, you trade 10 to 14 and negate two cards at once. You destroy Feign Death, you make my Elven payoff cards significantly worse on top of denying direct Feign Death value...there's a lot more deep numerical consequences to this interaction than a direct provision trade, and in this sense heatwave is favored under almost any circumstances (maybe not against SK Warriors, but even then you get A LOT of value by erasing damage engines, even while trading down)

 

[quintivarium]

And they aren't. Heatwave and other tall punish are also legendaries that require a lot of commitment. It's not exactly easy to include another 10p card, is it? Heatwave is one of the most committal cards in any deck.

Ok, let’s make a simple comparison. You want to include Heatwave in your deck. You commit 10 provisions. That’s it — it will now fully work for whatever value your opponent’s deck and play allows. Moreover, it frees you somewhat from other considerations. Worried about a defender? You have less need for a purify. Worried about tall units? You have less need for curse of corruption. Worried about graveyard play? Less need for Lemmens. Worried about deathwish? Problem solved. So you spend 10 provisions for a very good card that likely saves a need to spend provisions and tempo on certain other cards.

Now I want to include Artis in my deck. So I spend only 9 provisions on Artis. But to use him, I need some payoff cards. Maybe spells and summon, over a long round, could give payoff (my opponent takes damage I don’t), but SK doesn’t really support either so self-damage is the natural route. So I add four or five (likely even more) berserk cards — and maybe a Heymaey Flaminica to get more value from non-berserk cards. But since Artis can win only one round, maybe I should take Sigrdrifa’s rite to play him in two rounds. And since he is vulnerable to removal, maybe I take defender and/or Sukrus to protect him. But, if I take both, it is already three plays into a round before Arts enters the board. So maybe I take Battle Trance leader (even though it is relatively weak and does not otherwise particularly support the deck). Then, because I’m not stupid, I know I might not draw Artis, so I take a good number of self-damage cards for contingencies where Artis is not available. By now, I’ve probably committed 80% of my decks’s cards and provisions.

But wait! Now let’s talk about what we can’t play because it’s anti-synergistic. Your Heatwave probably can’t play too much tall punish — and that’s it. I can’t play super tall cards because the half base vale damage becomes significant. I can’t play one strength cards because they die instantly. I don’t want to play cards like Drummond Berserkers or Dimun Light Longships because they’ve already lost most of their value. Even Raging Bear, which might otherwise be a reasonable self-damage option will play for 1 point when Artis is on the board as I won’t want the self damage then. And forget about non self damage combinations — I don’t have room in the deck.

Artis may be an extreme example. But I would not call it a one trick pony; I would not call it a gimmick deck; I would not call it ill-conceived or poorly constructed. And if it is outpowered — well, that’s strictly a matter of card balance.

So I challenge you: claim again, with a straight face, that including Heatwave is a significant deck-building commitment.

 

[iXenite]

For scenario's 1 and 2 there are actually a lot cards you can use to counter that sort of careless play. You could play Curse of Corruption to destroy them, or with a lock heavy imprisonment deck Vanhemar can snipe any cards that get too tall. Peter Saar Gwynleve can also be a helpful card to reset cards to their base levels late in a round. Yennefer's Invocation is also pretty good to grab powerful cards off the board. With an Enslavement 5 or 6 deck you can steal cards away from your opponent before things get out of hand, like in scenario 2. Now if you don't like Nilfgaard these scenarios aren't too helpful - but it is a fairly strong faction right now. When something like scenario 2 happens you can also attempt to out point slam your opponent, like using the slave infantry + cows tactic going around.