Jobs Support Register

Is Wardancer A Problem?

+

Ic3Purple

Junior Member
#21
In my opinion, the unfairness of wardancer as carry over is simply the fact that playing it doesn't require to play a card. While all other carry overs int eh other factions are all cards played, not mulligan to play it. That's what makes this card too LAME and OP.

 

Khreygond

Junior Member
#22
Jeydra;n10816521 said:
Brouver was always one of the most popular decks this patch, and had one of the highest win rates. Popularity should have nothing to do with win rates. But that's not the point. We're discussing Wardancer, not Brouver.

There're two problems with Wardancer. The first is that if it's mulliganed in round one + on the blue coin you can't drypass. This has severe consequences on CA. Beating any deck on the blue coin with a mulliganed Wardancer - or god forbid multiple mulliganed Wardancers - is very difficult.

The other problem with Wardancer is that you don't know if the opponent has it. If they have it then they have carryover, making losing round 1 more attractive; however if they don't, winning round 1 is preferable. Some decks might not care (especially those that were going to bleed round 2 anyway) but others will find this very problematic

I think if Wardancer did something like "when this unit is mulliganed, at the end of your next turn, play it on a random row" then there'd be no problem.
I would say the fact that you cannot drypass ties very much into Brouver's absurd initial tempo. Wardancer has been like that for ages, well before Midwinter, and it was not problematic because ST did not have a way to generate that amount of points that fast. Now, with Cleaver working as he does now, you've got only one card to play before your opponent tutors or plays the spy, and if that single card on an empty board is not worth at least 17 points, you are screwed royally. Even if they don't have access to Barclay Els, you can't know that, and you can't risk passing and letting them take the round on equal cards. And even if they don't use that whole combo, there will only be a very small window for you to take the pass as when they reach 5 elves, Aelirenn hits the board, making Vrihedd Officers into Vanguards worth at least 17 points.

Brouver will essentially have a massive advantage on the red coin. On the blue coin though, he is very much beatable as long as you can play your own spy.

Think about how many decks can reliably put 17 points with a single card on an empty board. Henselt can't, unless you can tutor Ronvid with Natalis, which is literally the only play that can do this proactively at that early stage in the game. Seltkirk needs a target, so does Vernon Roche, Leo Bonhart, Rainfarn into De Wett that early is BAD, Vilgefortz needs a target, Villentretenmerth needs 3 turns. And Ciri: Nova, you are at your opponent's Schirru's mercy. Even leaders, Henselt needs a target, Harald does too, Calveit into Slave driver needs to pull you a unit worth 11 points.

So, in my opinion,, Wardancer was not a problem, it became a problem after midwinter, when CA started to matter more than anything, and it became far worse when Cleaver was changed.
 
Last edited:

Barracuda88

Junior Member
#23
Wardancer is fine, has been fine for a year. High risk/reward card. Could thin your deck and prevent opponent from dry-passing (literally, that's ALL it does), but could also essentially lose you CA when it's a dead 3-point card. The problem is clearly in the coinflip abuse T1-26 decks ONLY. Give Cleaver back his lock and the problem goes away. But no, wardancer is getting "fixed," of course, a.k.a. no one is ever going to play it again.
 

WildFeo

Junior Member
#24
Barracuda88;n10820571 said:
Wardancer is fine, has been fine for a year. High risk/reward card. Could thin your deck and prevent opponent from dry-passing (literally, that's ALL it does), but could also essentially lose you CA when it's a dead 3-point card. The problem is clearly in the coinflip abuse T1-26 decks ONLY. Give Cleaver back his lock and the problem goes away. But no, wardancer is getting "fixed," of course, a.k.a. no one is ever going to play it again.
So, assuring a CA advantage is literally all it does? Isn't it a bit too much for a bronze?

 

Jeydra

Junior Member
#25
ser2440;n10820211 said:
I would say the fact that you cannot drypass ties very much into Brouver's absurd initial tempo. Wardancer has been like that for ages, well before Midwinter, and it was not problematic because ST did not have a way to generate that amount of points that fast. Now, with Cleaver working as he does now, you've got only one card to play before your opponent tutors or plays the spy, and if that single card on an empty board is not worth at least 17 points, you are screwed royally. Even if they don't have access to Barclay Els, you can't know that, and you can't risk passing and letting them take the round on equal cards. And even if they don't use that whole combo, there will only be a very small window for you to take the pass as when they reach 5 elves, Aelirenn hits the board, making Vrihedd Officers into Vanguards worth at least 17 points.

Brouver will essentially have a massive advantage on the red coin. On the blue coin though, he is very much beatable as long as you can play your own spy.

Think about how many decks can reliably put 17 points with a single card on an empty board. Henselt can't, unless you can tutor Ronvid with Natalis, which is literally the only play that can do this proactively at that early stage in the game. Seltkirk needs a target, so does Vernon Roche, Leo Bonhart, Rainfarn into De Wett that early is BAD, Vilgefortz needs a target, Villentretenmerth needs 3 turns. And Ciri: Nova, you are at your opponent's Schirru's mercy. Even leaders, Henselt needs a target, Harald does too, Calveit into Slave driver needs to pull you a unit worth 11 points.

So, in my opinion,, Wardancer was not a problem, it became a problem after midwinter, when CA started to matter more than anything, and it became far worse when Cleaver was changed.
Heavy initial tempo exacerbates the issue but isn't the root cause. If you remember the spelltael decks from several months ago, some of them would drypass round 1 because they absolutely could not afford to risk going down on cards. Some other decks, such as Axemen, do that in the current patch as well. Note that these decks that drypass round 1 have a problem with early tempo. You don't need 20-point plays to force them down on cards.

Wardancer's ability to interfere with this strategy is one-of-a-kind, and very powerful. You not just force the opponent to play, you force them to play at a -3 handicap. If it's easy to tempo them out from even points, how much easier is it to tempo them out at -3 points.
 

Barracuda88

Junior Member
#26
WildFeo;n10820721 said:
So, assuring a CA advantage is literally all it does? Isn't it a bit too much for a bronze?
See, it doesn't do CA, though. It prevents you from dry passing the round TO GAIN CA by doing nothing.
 

partci

Junior Member
#27
Barracuda88;n10822151 said:
See, it doesn't do CA, though. It prevents you from dry passing the round TO GAIN CA by doing nothing.
I don't know how many times and in what language this issue should be explained to people like you, so I won't even bother anymore. Have fun in your fantasy land - meanwhile I can't wait for the card to be gone in couple of weeks and will stay in hope that the game will not die because of issues like this one.
 
Last edited:

NYCardplayer

Junior Member
#29
Wardancer has been highly problematic for a long time and imo it's the primary reason why ST has dominated the ladder.

In a game where CA is everything, this card is toxic. It's a unique tool and strong enough to be a default inclusion to every deck, yet only a single faction has access to it. Maybe CDPR can make it a neutral card but I'd much rather they just remove it.
 

1990BW

Junior Member
#30
Isn't it weird te be ahead/behind when the match/round starts without playing a card?
It's like starting a football match with 1-0.
 

Barracuda88

Junior Member
#31
1990BW;n10823671 said:
Isn't it weird te be ahead/behind when the match/round starts without playing a card?
It's like starting a football match with 1-0.
More like starting a basketball game with 3-0? Sure, it's a quirky faction advantage, but game-breaking? And at the cost of possibly getting to play that 3-point card from hand in round three.

How about NG shooting from hand or damaging my cards before they hit the deck? Is that not a bit weird? What's that like, in terms of sports scores?

How about SK discarding carryover and bronzes resurrecting 20+ point bronzes?

There's plenty of OP stuff in the game, and honestly, wardancers are way down the list of issues.
 

Barracuda88

Junior Member
#32
partci;n10822671 said:
I don't know how many times and in what language this issue should be explained to people like you, so I won't even bother anymore. Have fun in your fantasy land - meanwhile I can't wait for the card to be gone in couple of weeks and will stay in hope that the game will not die because of issues like this one.
Ah, well, I'll take another crack at explaining it to "people like you", though. A Gwent match consists of three rounds. Dry-passing should NOT be a valid tactic to either start the game, or gain card advantage in round two. People like YOU should NOT feel entitled to dry-passing. Wardancer at least carries some risk. Dry-passing requires nothing and is truly uncounterable.

If they do away with the wardancer (which it's been established they will gut at the very least, of course), they should also remove the dry-pass.
 

x1Cygnus

Junior Member
#33
Amusing thread.

Wardancer was introduced well over 18months ago and its ability was changed to what it is now in May 2017 patch. Having done a search of the forums for "OMG WARDANCER IS OP!!" type threads between 01 May 17 and 31 Dec 17, and given all the amount of crying over Wardancer, and how much of a problem it is, I was expecting to find a good number of threads complaining about it.
But there just aren't threads like that.
Until you hit the period around the mid-winter update, there are almost zero threads complaining about Wardancer, and only two or three that mention it in conjuction with other carry over cards like Morkvarg / Olgierd etc and describe it as a 'possible problem'.

So what does this tell us? That people were more forgiving between May - Dec 2017? That they just didn't care about Wardancer? That it wasn't seen as OP/requiring a nerf or needed removal from the game completely?
Or maybe that "something else" changed. Given the approximate date of when the complaining started, I'll let you all work that out for yourselves.

Anyway, now that the boss of CDPR has mentioned this single card by name in their plans to 'fix' it - what about all those other problematic carry over cards that prevent your precious R2 dry pass? Shouldn't they need nerfing as well? Cards like Morkvarg / Olgierd / Cerys and so on? Are we going to start a campaign to get them nerfed/removed too? Or are they OK?
 

1990BW

Junior Member
#34
Barracuda88;n10824301 said:
And at the cost of possibly getting to play that 3-point card from hand in round three.
No there are enough cards with synergy like Vrihedd Officer, Saskia and Francesca.
Almost all (good) players use the bronzes in their SC deck.


There's plenty of OP stuff in the game, and honestly, wardancers are way down the list of issues.
It has nothing to do with overpowered, It's unfair competition.


How about NG shooting from hand or damaging my cards before they hit the deck? Is that not a bit weird? What's that like, in terms of sports scores?
The fire scorpions are fair when compared to removal because they at least require setup.
With removal it's just boom and gone while firescorpions require a reveal unit-> conceal unit -> reveal unit etc.
And you can counter them just by not giving them a good target because at some point they have to play them anyway.
Venendal elites in general are bad units because you'll have to sacrifice reveals on your enemy's hand at the cost of losing synergy with your own hand.


How about SK discarding carryover and bronzes resurrecting 20+ point bronzes?
SK discarding is far from competitive at the moment but apart from that aren't they comperable to all other hyperthinning decks?
Greatswords are good but if you allowed them to strengthen to 20+ you did something wrong earlier in the match or your deck can't handle them.
I've played them a few games and the ironic thing in this removal/point bash meta is that It's the only deck where locks matter.
Against all other decks removal will do the trick so the problem is more situated in the value of locks than greatswords.
 

Cipher90

Junior Member
#35
It's obvious that this card is a problem. It can be used to get a card advantage which is one of the most important strategies in game. Much to powerfull for a bronze card.

Simply fix it by changing it to: "If you mulligan this card play it at the end of the turn" just like Ronvid. If you drypass it won't show up at all.

Problem solved and SC swarm deck won't be harmed
 

Barracuda88

Junior Member
#36
1990BW;n10824601 said:
No there are enough cards with synergy like Vrihedd Officer, Saskia and Francesca.
Almost all (good) players use the bronzes in their SC deck.
Wow, we're gonna break this down? Partially, even? OK...

The three cards you listed are all part of the same archetype. The only way you're correct when saying that "almost all (good) players" use them is if we assume almost everyone plays Mulligan swarm deck, which (by the way) includes the T1-26 gimmick already mentioned.


It has nothing to do with overpowered, It's unfair competition.
OK, so it's not overpowered? Just unfair? And overpowered is fair? Is the dancer the only "unfair" card in Gwent, while the rest of the problem cards are merely OP?

I happen to think drypassing is unfair competition, though. Not to mention it's boring.


The fire scorpions are fair when compared to removal because they at least require setup.
With removal it's just boom and gone while firescorpions require a reveal unit-> conceal unit -> reveal unit etc.
And you can counter them just by not giving them a good target because at some point they have to play them anyway.
Venendal elites in general are bad units because you'll have to sacrifice reveals on your enemy's hand at the cost of losing synergy with your own hand.
This is just funny. So a merc pulling AT is just boom and gone, but an Alchemist revealing 2 scorpions, which then shoot for 10 from hand (a 19-point play) is "requiring set up"? And I can "counter them by not giving them a good target because...they have to play them anyway"? What does that even mean? How am I not going to give them a good target? Not play any cards with value over 3? And having to play them is somehow bad? And venendal elites are just bad cos what now? Cos you have to swing like 18 points by hitting my hand instead of cheesing a 1-point spy? Wow, how dare I prevent your drypass with my uncounterable 3-point bronze? My bad. Obviously you're wrestling with some terrible stuff already.



SK discarding is far from competitive at the moment but apart from that aren't they comperable to all other hyperthinning decks?
Greatswords are good but if you allowed them to strengthen to 20+ you did something wrong earlier in the match or your deck can't handle them.
I've played them a few games and the ironic thing in this removal/point bash meta is that It's the only deck where locks matter.
Against all other decks removal will do the trick so the problem is more situated in the value of locks than greatswords.
I was talking specifically about discarding carryover, which you also can't counter. Whether or not they are competitive at the moment is debatable and more importantly beside the point. Bronze rezzes, on the other hand, were not specifically Greatswords, though they might be the only ones going over 20. But beastmasters are 12-point stock and more when "veteraned" up to 19 after a Restore. Berserkers are routinely 18-19, hunters are like 14-15, etc. etc. And you can just spam that pretty much infinitely (in match terms, anyway). Though, again, I didn't mean to go into detail of SK OP or have it broken down play-by-play. It was more to illustrate how insignificant wardancer seems in comparison to some of these other things in the game.

But whatever, the card's been mentioned by name. Rejoice all ye faithful! It's getting nerfed hard. The Golden Age of Gwent is soon to follow, I'm sure.
 

Hellsmoke77

Junior Member
#37
Barracuda88;n10824301 said:
More like starting a basketball game with 3-0? Sure, it's a quirky faction advantage, but game-breaking? And at the cost of possibly getting to play that 3-point card from hand in round three.

How about NG shooting from hand or damaging my cards before they hit the deck? Is that not a bit weird? What's that like, in terms of sports scores?

How about SK discarding carryover and bronzes resurrecting 20+ point bronzes?

There's plenty of OP stuff in the game, and honestly, wardancers are way down the list of issues.
Well said.
 

time_drainer

Junior Member
#38
Barracuda88;n10824351 said:
Dry-passing should NOT be a valid tactic to either start the game, or gain card advantage in round two.
And that is because...?

Here's what I think things would look like in a fair, non-coinflipped world (because some people suggest that Wardancer is only problematic because of coinflip):

One player takes the first round by going 1 card down. I know currently it's possible for second player to win the round on even without much effort, but remember we're in a fair world now, so both player can only snatch the 1st round victory by going 1 card down.
From here 1st round winner has two choices:
  1. Dry-passing hence winning back card disadvantage. This way we go into final round on equal cards, with 1st winner having the advantage of going second. That is his reward for winning 1st round.
  2. Playing into 2nd round and by that taking the very likely risk of keeping that card disadvantage for the final. In exchange he gets to control round length and the possibility of bleeding his opponent out of his key cards.
You want dry-pass first round? Good for you, giving up the control of the match without a fight!

All in all, it all sounds fair to me. Except for that fricking bronze card single-handedly messing up the whole balance, putting decks that favor long rounds in a huge disadvantage and making losing 1st round actually an appealing option, which I think is the opposite of how it supposed to be.

x1Cygnus;n10824571 said:
Anyway, now that the boss of CDPR has mentioned this single card by name in their plans to 'fix' it - what about all those other problematic carry over cards that prevent your precious R2 dry pass? Shouldn't they need nerfing as well? Cards like Morkvarg / Olgierd / Cerys and so on? Are we going to start a campaign to get them nerfed/removed too? Or are they OK?
If you ask me, actually it's a pretty good idea. Not a very new one, but a good idea nonetheless.
 
Last edited:

Barracuda88

Junior Member
#39
time_drainer;n10825091 said:
And that is because...?

Here's what I think things would look like in a fair, non-coinflipped world (because some people suggest that Wardancer is only problematic because of coinflip):

One player takes the first round by going 1 card down. I know currently it's possible for second player to win the round on even without much effort, but remember we're in a fair world now, so both player can only snatch the 1st round victory by going 1 card down.
From here 1st round winner has two choices:
  1. Dry-passing hence winning back card disadvantage. This way we go into final round on equal cards, with 1st winner having the advantage of going second. That is his reward for winning 1st round.
  2. Playing into 2nd round and by that taking the very likely risk of keeping that card disadvantage for the final. In exchange he gets to control round length and the possibility of bleeding his opponent out of his key cards.
You want dry-pass first round? Good for you, giving up the control of the match without a fight!

All in all, it all sounds fair to me. Except for that fricking bronze card single-handedly messing up the whole balance, putting decks that favor long rounds in a huge disadvantage and making losing 1st round actually an appealing option, which I think is the opposite of how it supposed to be.


If you ask me, actually it's a pretty good idea. Not a very new one, but a good idea nonetheless.
You base your argument on the idea that in this fair, non-coinflipped world the ONLY way to win Round 1 will be to go down a card, which I think is neither correct, nor desirable. Personally, I would prefer: a) the coinflip issue be fixed in a way that makes it possible to go first and still win on even cards without exploiting stuff like Spy-Barclay-Cleaver; b) that everyone must play at least 1 card in every round; and c) that CA would not matter as much as it does now in round 3.

edit: Also, I think it should be perfectly acceptable tactic to want to lose a round, as long as you participated in it and accomplished what you needed to do.
 
Last edited:

1990BW

Junior Member
#40
Barracuda88;n10824841 said:
Wow, we're gonna break this down? Partially, even? OK...

The three cards you listed are all part of the same archetype. The only way you're correct when saying that "almost all (good) players" use them is if we assume almost everyone plays Mulligan swarm deck, which (by the way) includes the T1-26 gimmick already mentioned.
Isn't the whole point of deckbuilding that your cards have synergy?
The problem you mentioned can be a fault in your deck or a unlucky swap.
It's a card game so you can't be lucky all the time.


OK, so it's not overpowered? Just unfair? And overpowered is fair? Is the dancer the only "unfair" card in Gwent, while the rest of the problem cards are merely OP?
It depends how you define things.
The problem is not that it's overpowered but the Wardancer's ability grants the player an advantage before the match/round starts.
When something is unfair it requires a new ability (or remove) and when something is overpowered it requires balancing (without ability change).
Both are changes but they are not the same.


This is just funny. So a merc pulling AT is just boom and gone, but an Alchemist revealing 2 scorpions, which then shoot for 10 from hand (a 19-point play) is "requiring set up"?
Yes it requires setup because you need reveal and conceal units to do this.
First of all to fully benefit from it you need atleast 2 firescorpions in your hand, to fire them once you need a reveal unit, firing twice conceal + reveal units and firing thrice another set of reveal and conceal units.
You need (2 + 1 + 2 + 2 ) 7 specific cards in total to do this while for example the only requirement for a viper witcher or tormented mage is your deck.


And I can "counter them by not giving them a good target because...they have to play them anyway"? What does that even mean? How am I not going to give them a good target? Not play any cards with value over 3? And having to play them is somehow bad?
When you play against machines reveal you know 99% for sure they have fire scorpions.
If you don't want to sacrifice certain units to removal and you have the knowledge your opponent can do this you can try to play around it strategy wise.
Thats what I'm trying to say here it's not a guarantee it will work everytime but hey Gwent is not about playing cards tactics are also involved.


And venendal elites are just bad cos what now? Cos you have to swing like 18 points by hitting my hand instead of cheesing a 1-point spy? Wow, how dare I prevent your drypass with my uncounterable 3-point bronze? My bad. Obviously you're wrestling with some terrible stuff already.
If the explenation of the venendal isn't clear enough play them yourself, they really suck thats why nobody plays them in ranked.


I was talking specifically about discarding carryover, which you also can't counter. Whether or not they are competitive at the moment is debatable and more importantly beside the point.
You mean Morkvarg and Olgierd? You can lock them.
Funny we return to the lock value thing again :)
Necromancy can banish one of them so there are options and they are all neutral cards.


Bronze rezzes, on the other hand, were not specifically Greatswords, though they might be the only ones going over 20. But beastmasters are 12-point stock and more when "veteraned" up to 19 after a Restore. Berserkers are routinely 18-19, hunters are like 14-15, etc. etc. And you can just spam that pretty much infinitely (in match terms, anyway). Though, again, I didn't mean to go into detail of SK OP or have it broken down play-by-play. It was more to illustrate how insignificant wardancer seems in comparison to some of these other things in the game.
Yes bearmasters are also unfairish so I count them to the same category as the wardancer.
To me that means they need a change.
 
Last edited: