I'm quitting Gwent

[Slizzl]

I quite enjoyed discarding them with Sweers, after the opponent had used their Nekker Warriors.

Playing around Dun Banners was interesting, and sometimes annoying. The latter especially when they were in every NR deck.

That's true, they gradually got more and more annoying when the points people played kept getting higher and higher. It wasn't really fair at all.
But I do wonder if such a card could be balanced with the right points and right provisions in the current game. Just have it be one gold card instead perhaps. Maybe the devs just wouldn't consider it healthy for the game, which is kinda understandable.
There's just something so satisfying of seeing cards shoot out of my deck I don't know why.

 

[Draconifors]

There's just something so satisfying of seeing cards shoot out of my deck I don't know why.

Especially when they have voicelines like "Finally!" said in that specific tone.

I didn't play NR much when DB were strong, but it was satisfying to have them trigger, yeah. Even when they arrived to help out an opponent the animation was fun.

PS. That SY ship is kind of similar, and Aelirenn hasn't changed from her beta ability. So the "summon from deck when X" mechanic does still exist. Just not in any bronzes that I can think of.

 

[Allistre]

Cintrian Royal Guards are pretty much like old Reavers and those are getting support in this patch. Maybe I'll give them a try.

I mean Reaver hunters were a lot more complex than +3 patrol, but yeah royal gaurds are like the really simplified homecoming version without the carryover potential.

 

[Rammyp]

if you played you would know the cards rules and game mechanics were completely different

There is a difference between winning consistently a deck. Decks playing the same way every time.

that's why i suggested the minimum deck size should be upgraded to 40

there should be ultra good cards that if you top deck they can change the etier game.

I'm quite aware of the card rules and mechanics being different during beta. Suggesting to upgrade the deck size is one thing and i'm not going to argue if its good or not, everyone has his own opinion and enjoys different things in a game. However consistancy is the ability to get the cards you need. The more cards you can get during a match the more consistant your deck is and being able to tutor or thin to 0 cards is as consistant as it gets. My point is that you can't say that gwent today is too consistant for your taste and then go on and praise beta that was way more consistant than homecoming - you just contradict yourself by these statements.

Reaver Hunters had bonded keyword where they would grow exponentially for each one you had on board. They also had trio, where if you got 3 of them adjacent on board they would gang up and bomb the strongest enemy. You could combo these with field medics that had another awesome ability that exchanged wounded bronzes for others in your deck.

Queensgaurd would all resurrect each other all at once. So as long ad you could play 1 you could discard/strengthen them and keep bringing them back for resurrect triggers on your Cerys.

The funny thing is that back then many were complaining about these decks, I played both myself and the reavers were really fun to play with.

Post automatically merged: Aug 31, 2020

Homecoming has 1000 cards that are just point plays, slightly different ways of counting up points. They are all so dull and it drives me crazy that all of the unique abilities have been purged.

That is the result of trying to balance all the factions, as factions will get more balanced thay will get more and more similar unfortunately. I have to agree with luvCiriTrissYen on the balancing, CDPR might overdo with their balancing attempts as in the last expansions we already see that many cards nearly duplicate eachother (for instance the 7 provision golds of every faction that buff/dmg until order is used).

 

[Sheet1221]

I liked this game so much that I have spent +300 hours on it. When I reached Pro Rank a few months ago I felt like I had accomplished something of great difficulty.

The game had a lot going for it even though it was never really balanced but right now it's astonishingly unbalanced and boring.

I've been playing old decks as of late which had granted me fair success in the past, but my winrate has now dropped to a meagre 20%. It's really frustrating.

I fully understand that some decks can be (and must be) a bit more powerful than others (depending on their synergies and the player's deckbuilding skills) but it's unacceptable for a deck with good archetype synergy to perform as poorly as they have been especially since the last expansion.

SK is so powerful now that in the last match I played against it I was beaten in round 3 despite having 2 card advantage and a good hand. Ridiculous.

As of now, it's more about your deck strength than anything else. I would say 75% deck strength, 15 % luck and 10 % skill.

This is my review of Gwent in its current state:

Art - 9/10
Balance and consistency of cards and abilities - 2/10
Fun - 4/10
Lore - 7/10
Interface (on PC) - 8/10
Basic concept of the game (factions, archetypes, abilities, rounds, mulligans....) - 8/10
Reward system and progression - 6/10
Bug-free mechanics - 7/10 (some bugs appear when destroying/spawning units if the row is or will be full, for example)
Different game modes - 5/10
Matchmaking - 7/10 (too slow now)

Sadly, I'm leaving the game, I've grown so tired of it already.

I am leaving after 600 hrs of gameplay, because the game is unbalanced.

 

[OuterSpaceDoggo]

Those were cool abilities, now the game strives to be more streamlined and tries to accomplish simmetry across factions which is why many players are left disappointed patch after patch.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

Stopping by. I left basically because the game was no longer fun or interesting. Oh and problems were never fixed and made worse.

 

[DRK3]

I mean Reaver hunters were a lot more complex than +3 patrol, but yeah royal gaurds are like the really simplified homecoming version without the carryover potential.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words, so here's some reaver hunters and reaver scouts:

(The reavers are the ones on ranged row, siege row is a whole nother madness...)

 

[DMurder]

Best to quit unless you are an SK or NG main. Come back when the devs figure their game out. They add insane abilities to already strong decks; nerf decks that are already struggling for wins. They are either out of touch with the game, burnt out from the new expansion, or doing this on purpose.

 

[Slizzl]

So much pointslam these days. I don't get how the game feels like it has less depth now when there's more cards than ever.
I swear every top tier deck is just throwing out absurd numbers with little strategy involved. It's really tiring.

 

[quintivarium]

So much pointslam these days. I don't get how the game feels like it has less depth now when there's more cards than ever.
I swear every top tier deck is just throwing out absurd numbers with little strategy involved. It's really tiring.

Maybe you and I interpret point slam differently. I believe my most strategic deck is an experiment I made that basically just contained the highest power monster cards that I owned. Having the ability to push when I want, the reach to be able to “play just one more card”, and the flexibility to play any card at any time rather than having to set aside a closer opens more strategic options than it closes. Deciding when to push and when to pass is a major feature of Gwent in general, and it is highlighted in a pointslam deck. Knowing how big to play to knock an opponent out of a round, or how small to bait them another round before knocking them out is tricky, and when you wish to do which is subtle. I guess my argument is that pointslam, well played against a good opponent, is anything but brainless.

I suppose there are decks with so much power that they win no matter how poorly played. There are probably others that are so mechanical they play essentially the same way regardless of opponent action. These might be brain-dead — but probably not in the hands of a good player. And they are not always strictly associated with pointslam.

 

[Slizzl]

Maybe you and I interpret point slam differently. I believe my most strategic deck is an experiment I made that basically just contained the highest power monster cards that I owned. Having the ability to push when I want, the reach to be able to “play just one more card”, and the flexibility to play any card at any time rather than having to set aside a closer opens more strategic options than it closes. Deciding when to push and when to pass is a major feature of Gwent in general, and it is highlighted in a pointslam deck. Knowing how big to play to knock an opponent out of a round, or how small to bait them another round before knocking them out is tricky, and when you wish to do which is subtle. I guess my argument is that pointslam, well played against a good opponent, is anything but brainless.

I suppose there are decks with so much power that they win no matter how poorly played. There are probably others that are so mechanical they play essentially the same way regardless of opponent action. These might be brain-dead — but probably not in the hands of a good player. And they are not always strictly associated with pointslam.

These strategies don't really matter when the top tiers can dominate both short and long rounds easily, and they simply put more points on board. I guess I don't really contemplate it it's just a feeling I get when I play the new Nature's Gift for example. I know I most often want last say, but other than that I'm just following the motions. I see a 5 point engine I play my Rebuke giving me 9+ points counting Gord. I see something I can remove with 3 I choose Circle instead. I gradually place Symbiosis on board making me spawn bigger points.
All these elements just leaves me with the feeling "pointslam". All the top tiers play like this with slight variations.
I like decks with some deeper strategy than this.

 

[zacadoo]

These strategies don't really matter when the top tiers can dominate both short and long rounds easily, and they simply put more points on board. I guess I don't really contemplate it it's just a feeling I get when I play the new Nature's Gift for example. I know I most often want last say, but other than that I'm just following the motions. I see a 5 point engine I play my Rebuke giving me 9+ points counting Gord. I see something I can remove with 3 I choose Circle instead. I gradually place Symbiosis on board making me spawn bigger points.
All these elements just leaves me with the feeling "pointslam". All the top tiers play like this with slight variations.
I like decks with some deeper strategy than this.

This game is a one sided grief fest. So quitting it is understandable. The game is so unbalanced. Oh and sorry for having an opinion[...].

 

[miniliQuid]

Well I stopped as well for the time being but mainly cause they just change too much and too fast. When you think balance is close they just add in more new stuff which throws off the balance again, requiring more updates.

Just not worth the time playing when 30-50% of the time I play I have to spend on changing decks. Might go back to it when they settle down a little bit.

 

[Celadyl]

I'm usually leaving when the game doesnt change and becomes stale. for me, a constantly changing meta is a much more exciting one although I understand it is off-putting for new players

 

[ShinAkira00]

I'm usually leaving when the game doesnt change and becomes stale. for me, a constantly changing meta is a much more exciting one although I understand it is off-putting for new players

Change isn't the same thing as course correction which is what we've been getting. That tells us there's no one at the steering who knows what the game is aiming to be. They're just throwing things at the wall and see what sticks.

When you have worked out the foundation of the game, then you can make changes. Not the other way around

 

[Celadyl]

Change isn't the same thing as course correction which is what we've been getting. That tells us there's no one at the steering who knows what the game is aiming to be. They're just throwing things at the wall and see what sticks.

When you have worked out the foundation of the game, then you can make changes. Not the other way around

I very much agree

 

[Elliezrah]

I have to agree it was much more fun playing with less intense cards.
There are lot of one hitters and insane combos now that people repeatedly play.
Being creative in deck building and to win at the same time is nearly not possible, especially after they released scenario cards. Wasnt gwent much fun when it was spontaneous? They play scenario at certain point and sometimes theres no point playing for that match anymore because you know that you cant counteract with your remaining hands.

 

[Sj8407]

I've stopped playing gwent few months ago and it was one of the best decisions in my whole life. No more stress about OP cards/factions after every expansion, no more sleepless nights thinking how to improve my deck, no more pressure to play all the time to keep up with others, no more rat-race competition for nothing. Now I just play Diablo 3 online coop when I want, and even if I don't play for weeks I just come back to play with another players on similar level with no pressure or stress at all. So I post that only to encourage others that are hesitating if it is worth to quit gwent and I tell You from my own expirience: ITS WORTH WITH NO DOUBT, JUST QUIT. And your life will become much more beautifull than ever;
Cheers

 

[___kabanoS___]

Scary post. I'm playing, not playing, regardless not stressing about Gwent. It's just a game, still like to play but can't see point to be stressed about this ....

Reading your post I can agree that it was best decision for you.