Lifecoach (Open Beta's champion) shares his thoughts about Homecoming

+
I really want to enjoy new Gwent, new progression system is unique, art and sound is amazing, but gameplay feels less engaging now, 10 card limit is killing all enjoyment for me from playing.
 
Old Gwent: Play shit you have in appropriate order. It does not matter what your opponent does you both play your own game. Whoever play their order better wins. Oh wait they probably talking about mechanics where the first round your opponent just auto passes. How interactive.

New gwent: way more reactive with bunch of mechanics that are actually choice driven. But i guess people are just stubborn and entitled. Yes arguably some things are out of touch but with the new provision system CDPR has a great setup going into balancing cards.

The real problem is this: the game is way harder then it was before and people who cannot build decks ( which is majority ) are stuck with shitty decks that they just get steamrolled by people who have better understanding of the game. Yes it is not fun but you have to put effort and once you do the game feels super rewarding. The combos, outplay and setup you can pull of in this gwent are very very fun.
You might just be on to something with that last comment. ;]
 
I really want to enjoy new Gwent, new progression system is unique, art and sound is amazing, but gameplay feels less engaging now, 10 card limit is killing all enjoyment for me from playing.
How is new 10 card limit is less engaging?
Was autopassing in first round more engaging for you?
How is making decision which cards to keep/waste and when to muligan is less engaging then just auto passing and wining because of card advantage?
 
Old Gwent: Play shit you have in appropriate order. It does not matter what your opponent does you both play your own game. Whoever play their order better wins. Oh wait they probably talking about mechanics where the first round your opponent just auto passes. How interactive.

New gwent: way more reactive with bunch of mechanics that are actually choice driven. But i guess people are just stubborn and entitled. Yes arguably some things are out of touch but with the new provision system CDPR has a great setup going into balancing cards.

The real problem is this: the game is way harder then it was before and people who cannot build decks ( which is majority ) are stuck with shitty decks that they just get steamrolled by people who have better understanding of the game. Yes it is not fun but you have to put effort and once you do the game feels super rewarding. The combos, outplay and setup you can pull of in this gwent are very very fun.

Not only the building of decks, but also the general understanding of the game core mechanics such as a max hand of 10. So many times I see players passing even though they still have 8+ cards in hand. It's gonna take time for the majority of players to get used to it I guess.
 
Not only the building of decks, but also the general understanding of the game core mechanics such as a max hand of 10. So many times I see players passing even though they still have 8+ cards in hand. It's gonna take time for the majority of players to get used to it I guess.

Problem - Bunch of PRE HC high ranked players who have no ability to build decks but can only netdeck are not happy because currently you cannot netdeck without effort. Loosing is not fun so this means new game is less engaging (absolute lol) and shit.
People argue like this: 10 card limit sucks and less interactive.
People cannot provide any good logical reason for this.
 
How is new 10 card limit is less engaging?
Was autopassing in first round more engaging for you?
How is making decision which cards to keep/waste and when to muligan is less engaging then just auto passing and wining because of card advantage?

Maybe we did play a different game, but i almost never passed first round (ofc there are exceptions like big tempo play by Morvran with golems and foot soldiers etc), but i enjoyed possibility to make or play against a deck that is build around 1 turn pass, and use this as a opportunity to gain card advantage or bleed my oponent until i feel I got some good cards out of him, and still got a good finisher myself like Shani, DJ,(or Queensguard before all graveyard hate).
 
Dont know and dont care who "lifecoach" is (ironic name, really, shouldn't he get a life instead of being a "Gwent master"?)

However, most of what he says is true. Two rows is terrible - @tussauc said he feels it's more important on card placement now. Well, to a point, in that some cards just dont do anything unless you put them on a specific row! Hardly science, though, is it? A MUCH better idea would have been to bring in row mechanics to the old beta. Seige/ranged engines and crew only on the seige row, for one example, then just work out from there. Nekker, for example - you can remove the spam effect by only allowing them on one or two rows. It could have been brilliant, so much of Beta was, but this devastating mish-mash of a mobile game is not fit for purpose.

Keep it, CDPR, but restrict it to Thronebreaker and CALL IT Thronebreaker! Then get to work on Gwent and bring it back. Reopen the Beta and get to work testing new row mechanics, better deal, better allocation of cards.

I'm no Lifecoach, but I'll help for free if you want!!
 
initially I was very underwhelmed with HC, but after playing a few games, I did begin to appreciate it.

at this point, honestly, I simply do not understand the hate.
it is really not that different from beta. really not. it may look very different, but in its essence, it really isn't.

3 rows were really meaningless, 2 works much better. the whole point of multiple rows was positioning. that has just as much role with 2 rows as with 3, except that now it's more streamlined. just to say one thing. anyway I guess there's no way to convince the complainers.
 
“Prima Aprilis – uważaj, bo się pomylisz!”


First of all,


thank you Team - C D Projekt Red for your great work around the Witcher Universe... u did well so far...a few comments:


1. Andrzej Sapkowski - Genius


2. The Witcher III - G.O.A.T


3. Gwent Beta - great


4. Gwent Thronbreaker - must have for all Witcher Fans


5. Gwent The Witcher Card Game - confusing


After playing the Game Thronbreaker i was motivated to go for good old 3-Lines Gwent and play some match. I quick realise there is no more Gwent :cry: How can u do such a radical change? First i thought Thronbreaker would be a lil game bit itself but nope... i waited that somebody came around and say its April Fools’ Day. Nobody came :confused: ...


U guys have really big balls to release a "different" game...jesus


Nevermind - i wish u success with the new version of Gwent! On my part - i have to go through Witcher 3 again to play the old version of Gwent - not bad at all!


Do następnego razu...
 
How is new 10 card limit is less engaging?
Was autopassing in first round more engaging for you?
How is making decision which cards to keep/waste and when to muligan is less engaging then just auto passing and wining because of card advantage?

It's less engaging to some extent because hand limit prevents playing for CA until rounds hit a certain point. It does offer some benefits, namely engines have more room to become established, playing under the opponent at critical points isn't nearly as punishing and coin flip advantage is less exploitable. The question is, is it worth these detriments to the CA/passing games to gain these benefits?

Bear in mind, my own personal issue with the hand limit is it's a complicated fix to a simple problem. People were constantly dry-passing R1 on blue to avoid getting punished by flip abuse. The thing is this flip abuse was not due to the flip. This is a fact numerous people seem unable or unwilling to grasp. The flip abuse essentially boiled down to tempo abuse. If you couldn't slam huge points on the board instantly the catch-22 the blue coin player faces doesn't exist (down 2 to win, lose on even).

The spy problem is not really the same thing. That was more if the opponent drops a spy as red coin and you cannot counter-spy you're almost forced out of the round. Otherwise you play another card and he passes (forcing you down 2 to win it). Even this wasn't a huge problem until, once again, you toss in on demand high tempo. Now if you pass he can overcome his spy and your additional card on the board in a single play. This gets us back to the catch-22. Go down 2 to win or lose on even.

Fun fact, you can orchestrate the exact same scenario in HC. The difference is it can only happen around the point where each player has 4 cards in hand (when CA starts to matter, interesting....). In any case, both problems exploding into a huge issue were more due to card design. They always have been. If they wanted to fix this making every high point value play require a specific board state or setup would have been a good starting point (cards like Scorch, engine setup, multi-card combos/chains, etc).

If they wanted to go further just make spies on-demand. Poof, spy issue gone. I don't think it'd be completely necessary if spy points were very difficult to overcome in one play though (very difficult meaning impossible without outplaying the other player before the spy goes down). So you get forced from a round... Win the other two.

Short version, I don't think HC is all bad. The game play isn't nearly as terrible as some are making it out to be. There were some improvements. The negative aspects, IMO, are not about the problems they tried to fix. They're about how they chose to fix them and miscellaneous damage done to other areas in the process.
 
Dont know and dont care who "lifecoach" is (ironic name, really, shouldn't he get a life instead of being a "Gwent master"?)

However, most of what he says is true. Two rows is terrible - @tussauc said he feels it's more important on card placement now. Well, to a point, in that some cards just dont do anything unless you put them on a specific row! Hardly science, though, is it? A MUCH better idea would have been to bring in row mechanics to the old beta. Seige/ranged engines and crew only on the seige row, for one example, then just work out from there. Nekker, for example - you can remove the spam effect by only allowing them on one or two rows. It could have been brilliant, so much of Beta was, but this devastating mish-mash of a mobile game is not fit for purpose.

Keep it, CDPR, but restrict it to Thronebreaker and CALL IT Thronebreaker! Then get to work on Gwent and bring it back. Reopen the Beta and get to work testing new row mechanics, better deal, better allocation of cards.

I'm no Lifecoach, but I'll help for free if you want!!

Sorry but you don't really explain why 2 rows is terrible. What's exactly the difference in having nekker allowed on one or 2 rows in a 3 rows game and only on 1 row in a two rows game? This is just a basic matrix transformation from n+1 to n.

So far I haven't seen a single interesting argument as to why 3 rows is better than 2 on this forum. Still waiting for some real explanation from haters of the new system.
 
Literally "yawn".

I mean, he doesn't play the game for a looong while, already moved on to Artifact (and even contemplates not participating in Gwent Masters), plays HC very little amount of time and gives it a verdict that some hmm... herd people will take as validation of their insecurities and resentment to change. Could not care less.
 
Initially I was very offput by the technical issues with PTR and HC release, which for some reason I had plenty. Aesthetics of the battlefield and leaders still do not work for me either, the colours are washed out and gloomy (it's bloody autumn here where I play, I've got more than my share of gloom and sunlight deprivation already :p ) and the 3D models are nowhere near as good as the card portraits.

Still, I do greatly appreciate the new account management system, with contracts and reward book and I'm trying to give new gampelay a chance. One thing I am concerned about is that, where with the Closed Beta I immediately fell in love, here I am just feeling like... it's fine. I know love at the first sight is not always a thing, but still, I can't find the new gameplay and pacing as captivating. it feels more tactical, maybe, but also way more sluggish and when something big happens, it feels underwhelming. Not sure if I like how many artifacts people can spam on the table.

Don't like the row reduction, it really feels like it was just done for the mobile conversion purposes. Are they meaningful? Well, in my Skellige deck I have to play virtually all my shite on the Melee or else it does nothing. Sort of meaningful, I guess :p.

New card mechanics seem altogether unimaginative, one could argue that the one true archetype we have in Gwent right now is "boost/damage, in a pretty straightforward way"

With deckbuilding, I am not hating the provision system, but would prefer epic cards to stay silver rather than gold, just for being able to differentiate between their power level at a glance.

About Lifecoach - he's by no meeans an oracle, but the guy knows a thing or two about competitive play and he used to be pretty engaged in Gwent community, so I would at least hear him out, even if I do not agree with his every word.
 
People were constantly dry-passing R1 on blue to avoid getting punished by flip abuse. The thing is this flip abuse was not due to the flip. This is a fact numerous people seem unable or unwilling to grasp. The flip abuse essentially boiled down to tempo abuse.

Tempo abuse is not the core problem because even if you tone down the points, there will also be a superior play. As such, the coin flip and the spies remained the problem in Open Beta, made worse by the tempo abuse *cough* Cleaver *cough*. One of the reasons behind this can be found in Closed Beta. During that time the coin flip wasn't an issue. Scoia'tael even had it's own coin flip leader ability. The reason why none of this really mattered is because there were so many ways to gain card advantage that the coin flip didn't make or break it. Then, in Open Beta, CDPR streamlined (removed) all the Card Advantage cards. Of course, the Closed Beta that a myriad of other balancing issues, but the gameplay was less rigid compared to Open Beta.

Fun fact, you can orchestrate the exact same scenario in HC. The difference is it can only happen around the point where each player has 4 cards in hand (when CA starts to matter, interesting....).

It's not the same because you can plan ahead and pass before that point, if you cannot overcome the points on the board. This means there is a lot of room in the first few turns to setup your game. As it stands now, no matter who goes first, you can always go to round 3 on even cards. This makes the game more balanced and maybe somewhat more boring at the same time.
 
I like a lot of the new features, leaders, 2 rows and all that jazz.

However, my main disappointment is that many good mechanics are gone and a lot of great cards have been changed to generic ones. Take for instance Sile from NR. A great card that could have generated some great and rewarding combos, now deals 4 damage. Or Vincent that was a blast of a finisher now sets a non boosted unit to 1. That's more or less 4 damage, same as Sile. A total let down.

So in comparison, there are far less rewarding combos in the new Gwent and most stuff you can do feels too generic, like boost that, damage that, or charge that to boost or damage. Meh.
 
Sorry but you don't really explain why 2 rows is terrible. What's exactly the difference in having nekker allowed on one or 2 rows in a 3 rows game and only on 1 row in a two rows game? This is just a basic matrix transformation from n+1 to n.

So far I haven't seen a single interesting argument as to why 3 rows is better than 2 on this forum. Still waiting for some real explanation from haters of the new system.

It's about the FEEL of it, as much as anything. Two rows feels...stunted, constricted, subsequently less fun. Ge'els is an example of this - why on earth would I play it on a melee row, when it then doesn't do anything? It just feels like a very pointless mechanic. I do think there should have been more made of the three rows in Beta, but removing one of them just feels off.

Just my opinion, and my feeling about it.
 
This is rather interesting. Honestly, I feel like it's still waaaay too soon to say much about Homecoming. The current game feels weird. Very weird. But not necessarily in a bad way. I've sort of started to like it already. I think think the biggest complaint is definitely the matter of CA. Removing the CA spies was a mistake. A matter where CDPR clearly bent over to casual masses who didn't bother to think about how complex and intuitive system CA spies was. CA spies have been a great for the game after they made them all 13 str. I'm gonna miss them. I know people will miss them. Especially the more hardcore players.
 
Top Bottom