GenLiu;n10252042 said:
Errrr...Well...I'm talking about the actual game where Warriors make 2 copies of the unit you target, if you make up the way they work it's obviously easier to deal with...(what if Nekkers don't bring another one from the deck when they die though...that would make things even easier).
But back to the real world, you seem to have an incredible amount of removal in your deck, I don't think it's possible to get that many in real life, even with a control deck (unless you build it specifically to kill consume in which case you're just gonna lose every other match up...not sure it's reliable).
Also, Nekkers can have a huge power the first time they show up, as a consume player, you're not in a rush of playing them immediately (in fact patience is key while playing this deck). When I play Consume it sometimes happens that the first Nekker appear in the late round 2 sometimes even on round 3. It's entirely possible to win without them (I mean, it can, depending on how you build the deck and your opening hand but it's not a sure thing).
Plus, Nekkers can grow very fast, just using your leader bring them to 7 str, a few more consume and they're out of range of Alzur for example.
It's also interesting that you're suggesting to play an hybrid proactive/reactive deck in order to take them down since, when this kind of deck can perform just fine, it's probably the worst choice you can come up with while fighting consume (simply because you'll most likely be short on pure power since you're not completely proactive and be short on removal too since you're not completely reactive).
You may remember that this ENTIRE quote chain began with talking about a 'fix' for nekkers, under the assumption that nekkers are some sort of problem.
But sure, going back to the game as-is.
No, 3-5 cards dedicated to removal isn't an incredible amount of removal, especially when they're there to be searched after by other cards. Do Henselt decks pack an 'incredible amount of removal' because they regularly have NINE CARDS that handle removal duties? Most decks run a minimum of 4-5 because if you don't you have no answer to engines. Dorfs and nekkers don't bother because they're dedicated to points vomit and engine creation/protection. I'd say my average hand in my average deck can spit out 3 bits of removal on the first round, of varying power and quality. It's very, very easy to arrange it so this is almost guaranteed in every faction in Gwent, though admittedly some are better at it than others. Monsters actually have some trouble with it as their spot removal's a bit on the weak side and they don't have a dedicated spellcaster (tormented mage, elven merc etc.). But saying that, weather strategies are a massive pain in the backside for nekkers, because the new nekker just spawns into weather and keeps getting hurt.
Note: Most pro decks run 4+ removal unless they're point vomit/engine decks. Be it weather or direct damage or coral or whatever, they normally have a 5th of the deck dedicated to killing other people's stuff. If yours isn't and it's not an engine/point vomiter, you should seriously ask yourself why you aren't trying to kill the other guy's stuff.
Playing nekkers really late in the game is great for the opponent. That means your warriors were wasted and your entire game plan is weaker as a result, making the entire deck much easier to deal with.
Consume is ONLY overpowering if they play a ton of nekkers into the library and boost them all, then chain-summon them through consume. If we're now talking about nekker players being cautious, the deck isn't close to overpowered in the first place, making the entire discussion moot. The whole thing spins out of people complaining because they find it unthinkable to play around Sweers.
You mention getting nekkers to 7 points as though it's something to be impressed by. You know as well as I do that core bronzes average out at around 12 power now. You need eight consumes to get nekkers to that level, and for the nekkers themselves to do their thing you need to start eating nekkers as well, and duplicate them, otherwise they're only... alright? Not awful? Synergistic but not overwhelming, is my point.
I think hybrid proactive/reactive is the best sort of deck to play against nekkers, honestly. As I said, so long as you're within 10 points the nekker player is going to be hesitant to pass the round as it's very very easy to make up 10 in a single play. That makes it increasingly easy to stall out them actually starting their strategy in the first place. Not to mention how easily you can disrupt egg/arachas consume strategies without even losing tempo (sure, an elven merc is weak, but it's stronger than a dead arachas behemoth). And the longer the round goes without a consume player actually consuming anything, the more they're stymied for the long game.
The only problem as it stands is that the nekker player can put so many into their deck that it's just about impossible to stop them without using banish mechanics. And Monsters now have a way around that, assuming they got one into the yard earlier. I think CDPR would be well served to make it so removal is a legitimate strategy against them. As it is - while I HAVE murder-death-killed a nekker player recently due to them having a mediocre hand - the only way to really slow them down is to ignore the nekkers or pack anti-boost tech, else force a short round 1 and long round 2 to gas them out for round 3 (and hope they can't summon a nekker then, too).
For my own experience I honestly say I find beast consume more difficult to play against than nekker consume.
