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

[Bra1nss]

Problem with new Gwent is not only it's different, lots of new mechanics are so non-inituative...
Like those deply and then you can use battlecry, or you can use it after a round.. Or a leader which buffs battlecry so it can be used within the same round...

Previously Gwent had simple cards for complex synergies which was perfect imo, now it's complex retarded cards to be used in the end as buff + 1 / damage -1... Like for real CDPR... For real... This shit is what we got after polished Gwent mechanics?

What old Gwent needed is removal of simple but point-providing systems (like NG had or some Monsters deck). If devs were smart enough to boost decks like Queen's guard or Henselt 40 cards deck, game would be perfect... But it crashed under it's own complexity and now we have this shiet.

 

[tedeschman]

Half TL: DW

-Initial impressions of HC are NOT Positive. Does not see himself playing it competitively in the future.
-Really likes CDPR developers, says they are very nice people and very sympathetic, and really wants Gwent to succeed but he just doesnt see it.
-He is still undecided about taking part in Gwent Masters. Said IF he does go he will not go unprepared. Will practice at least 1 month consecutively. If he decides not to go, he will forfeit his spot.
-Feels like many of the old things which he fell in love with in old Gwent are gone and none of the new things in HC have replaced that feeling for him.
-Says the coinflip issue and spy abuse were not as huge of a problem as people made it out to be and that HC has greatly reduced the skillcap and fight for Card Advantage.
-Really enjoyed the spy mechanic, the positioning of spies, that card advantage actually mattered etc.
-Says 10 card limit feels very weird and unintuitive.
-Doesnt like 2 row limit. Feels like gameplay is too confined, less space, less stats, less positioning opportunities. Like playing on a "minature" board.
-Doesnt like Heroes being part of the game board, and "fighting" on the board as well.

I agree with all of this. I have been playing Gwent since closed beta and it seems almost like an insult to the beta players to release this version of "Gwent" (if you want to even call it that) Why have people play a game for so long and then scrap it almost completely for a totally different game entirely. The cards may have the same names but the mechanics of the game are completely different. I played hearthstone in the closed beta as well and they kept the core game the way it is, thus the success of the game.

I tried to give it a chance and have played for the last few days. But I just cannot get into it, its extremely slow, all the strategy has been removed and its just not fun at all to play. Not all is bad though, i think the reward tree is cool. But i really hope they take into account the people who have played the game the longest and make some serious changes to this update. Until then I have to go back to hearthstone I guess, as playing Gwent right now is not fun at all.

 

[scorba]

I think the nostalgia for Beta comes from that it used the same cards for so long.

now people seem to complain that "these cards do different things, it's ruined now!"

however if a game is alive (and not in constant Beta with the same cards), then it does change. expansions come, with the inevitable Rotation after a few expansions.

all this makes the game and dominating mechanics different with each release. when an expansion brings in different cards and strategies, the whole game will feel just as different as it feels now compared to Beta.
imagine when a whole set rotates out! how much changes with that!

this here is like people facing a Set rotating out for the first time. yes, it's always shocking if you haven't played any CCGs before. but by now, it's routine even in Hearthstone.

 

[nedders]

I think the nostalgia for Beta comes from that it used the same cards for so long.

now people seem to complain that "these cards do different things, it's ruined now!"

however if a game is alive (and not in constant Beta with the same cards), then it does change. expansions come, with the inevitable Rotation after a few expansions.

all this makes the game and dominating mechanics different with each release. when an expansion brings in different cards and strategies, the whole game will feel just as different as it feels now compared to Beta.
imagine when a whole set rotates out! how much changes with that!

this here is like people facing a Set rotating out for the first time. yes, it's always shocking if you haven't played any CCGs before. but by now, it's routine even in Hearthstone.

But why not just do that? Rotate cards, keep reinventing and shifting, but what they did was rip up a good game and replace it with something bordering on unplayable.

If it was just a new set of cards most players would be like "oh, ok, got to learn but they look really cool". Instead it's two rows, weather doing practically nothing, less synergy, no faction identity, and a number of unfathomably pointless dynamics. Orders are broken, nobody is ever going to enjoy it, the need to click "end turn" - it's just crap. Restricting to 10 cards makes no sense, it might as well be a one round, 10 card game with a 5 point boost if you go first. And I mean that sincerely and sarcastically; as people get experienced, R1 and R2 will just be Mulligan rounds. There's no CA. There's no spies (I never played with them but enjoyed the challenge against them). The deal is still flawed, but it's magnified with less cards being pooled from the same size deck. If it's 10 cards, the deck should only be 20.

An example - Ge'els only works on the Ranged row, why is it even an option that he can be played on melee? Is it just so some low-cost bronze can essentially nerf it with a simple move?! Just all seems so dumb. Like you can play what you feel is an important high cost artefact. One of the lowest cost cards in the game, Bomb Tosser, nerfs it instantly.

It's a horrible game. It's a kind of 1 star attempt you often find lurking around Apple Store, attempting to suck your money with card purchases. It's quite unfathomable how this abomination emerged from Gwent Beta, I literally have no idea what CDPR's motivation was. To kill it? Job done.

 

[flyhy]

it really is not that different. it is just not.

you will be able to "predict" archetypes, once some time has passed and archetypes (netdecks if you like) are more common.

until then, some of us do like if you can't just predict a deck at first sight.

rows matter just as much when there's 2 of them as when there's three. weather is still a thing.

the one thing you're right about is that most cards don't look that imaginative. I actually chalk it up to "they want to keep it simple for the base set and will experiment in expansions".

I find this type of comment exceedingly annoying, and yes, also stupid and pointless especially when it's directly replied to me. What? Do you expect me to nullify all my experience and take your word for it cuz you said so?

This topic is getting more and more pointless since it's getting more and more like talking to a wall.

(To a broader note, to anyone who disgruntledly dismisses the upset ... )
It must be their fault for not liking HC, right? What else can it be? It must be my fault that I didn't give HC 100 hours of attention to brainwash me into liking it. It must be my fault for not getting used to it, adopting to the changes like my life depends on it to survive. It's just impossible for anyone who doesn't like what I like, to see how I see, except being a bitchy little hater who got nothing better to do, right?

Don't worry. I will disappear from the scene of Gwent here entirely. And very soon, there won't be anyone left to poop on your rainbows and unicorns and burst your happy bubbles.

 

[4RM3D]

This topic is turning into another heated discussion. As mentioned, members are free to express any opinion, whether positive or negative. However, any opinion, must be expressed respectfully, which means NOT to ridicule, threaten, sling accusations, or try to shut others down.

 

[gizchoroszy]

I read 80% of comments on this topic and my first thing to say is, why should I make a long explanation and write my arguments here like CDPR is reading all off messages carefully? Secondly, ofc I have reasons but why should I try to convince anyone why the thing I don't like is something to not like? If I don't like something, it is because I just don't like. This is the best argument, if moderators want to keep respect, the first thing to do is this. Just respect someone's preferences. Nobody has to convince anyone, I just don't like many things in this new version and it is BORING. Why am I not writing my reasons down is as I said in my first sentence. CDPR doesn't care. But why I want to comment on this topic is because I want this topic to stay on the hot page, I still have tiny hope that maybe someone will notice or stop ignoring. And my second reason is, I paid for the game I played which was the old one. And my money is important, I'm sorry but don't expect me to be calm after I see that the cards I paid just disappeared or changed its function. I'm not finding my coins from the street.

 

[-Arkane]

Miss playing against Lifecoach. Everything he touched upon in that portion of the stream is what I've been stating for a while now. Removal of Gold immunity/faction passives/faction Identity/Archtypes/Card Advantage/Drypass/bleeding and flavourful interesting cards/mecahnics being changed for generic boost/damage/ping abilities. Especially the part about the game being simplified for a mobile client and lowering the skill ceiling. Removing a row on the false premise that rows will be impactful..[again] it's just binary and something you could've done with 3 rows but that horse won't rest. You have cards like Swordmaster having an ability on melee row but being a vanilla on ranged.. where2place card help.

The plethora of unecassary changes this game went through to get to this bland version is very sad. Won't derail the thread with all the other things mentioned but it's worth listening to from a credible source instead of being dismissive. Freddybabes also touched upon his own concerns on HC. You have players like Merchant who used to love this game and cast who simply walked away because they were unhappy with the direction of where the game was heading. It's just sad that some of us who check in on the state of the game were mislead by the ''homecoming''Letter, 2 years of the longest beta of any game down the drain for a new game that needs a beta in itself. It's disheartning because this could've been the best skillbased Digital CCG on the market it had so much potential just sad to see it wasted and slip away like this. Only so it could pander to a specific demographic.

Gwent lost alot but most importantly it lost it's identity.

 

[MystereSC]

At first glance the game looks simplified but in reality it isnt at all. Yes, there are a lot of synergies and mechanics missing but the foundation is there. I disagree that it lost its identity. That would imply it had one, that is sustainable.
What @Bra1nss calls unintuitive is just actual descisionmaking. Yes, Old Gwent had simple cards for complex strategies, but that exactly was the problem.
Old Gwent was very scripted and came down more to simple math instead of dynamic tactics than anything else, even Pre-Midwinter. Sure there was always more skill involved than in most other cardgames, but much less once you have figured it out. It became very predictable. Thats why they introduced Create in the first place, and yes that was a big mistake, but it got acknowledged reasonably fast.
I am very glad the devs had that much foresight and i hope they can persevere now. Homecoming sure does have some issues, but nothing unfixable. The provision system makes everything so much easier to balance in the future. Thats an actual formula there. Yea, some cards now seem underwhelming to the more interesting versions they were before, but i am absolutely sure we will see interesting and original cards in the future now that we have solid groundwork.

It was fun back then, but for longevity it was the wrong course. What i find disheartening is the fact so many players, even pro players dont seem to be able to see that. I reckon a lot of the disapproval some popular streamers show is less based on levelheaded objectivity but on a very subjective perception and some kind of exhaustion and other potential competitive card games on the horizon. Lamenting what Gwent could have been or that 2 years of beta are going to waste is pointless because sometimes shit simply doesnt work out and you have to start over. That is something people had half a year for to accept. Also i am sure they will still profit a lot of the experience.

Edit: My biggest concern is that having only two rows could backfire in the future with new mechanics affecting the boardstate.

Post automatically merged: Oct 27, 2018

The tone in this thread and on Reddit (as usual) is very strong. Maybe tone down the critique to a more adequate level, then it would probably be less "hater vs fanboy" flaming. Nobody needs to convince anyone, just maybe share a view without being overly dramatic (or wearing rosetinted glasses either)?

 

[Bajoli]

The main problem is the addition of mechanics that increase variance of the game.
For instance the provisioning system increases variance. The reveal and create mechanics are random. And besides that a lot of other things. For instance "boost random unit card in your hand" It is crazy that cards get burned if not 10 cards. It means card advantage is meaningless.

All gwent websites you can find on google:
gwentdb
gwentify
topdeck.pro/gwent
All types of other sites.
Basically stopped their support for gwent 100%. And many of them have adopted artifact.

I think that gwent is still a nice game. But it seems that the public opinion is going negative really fast. Which means that only non-opportunist will keep playing gwent...

 

[Snake_Foxhounder]

Console players are going to have a great time playing, what with all the targeting you do in one round. Moving the cursor card by card take a while. And if you have to hold a button to pass each time, like you do now, it'll take ages to finish a round.

 

[MystereSC]

In my opinion that added variance is the saving grace for Gwent, i dont mean the RNG of Create (which is toned down though to be fair) but the fact you have to take possible burning of cards into account is one factor that makes the game less scripted. Doesnt mean Card advantage is meaningless in any way, its jujst something you have to consider and CA is not always king and a gameplan can change.

All these websites (besides Gwentdb) have stopped their support long before HC. It all went down with the Midwinter patch.
Gwent definitely lost a big chunk of momentum but its not "ded" or reviewed mostly negatively by the public. Thats just your perception. But Gwent will have to build up that momentum again before websites like that pop up again. Most likely not happening before the first expansion is released.


Btw i tried playing Gwent HC with a gamepad, while i prefer mouse, its not too bad.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

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.

A superior play, yes. A single, zero setup card play vomiting so many points on the board the opponent cannot regain the lead, no. Previously, on blue you were forced to stay ahead or remain within striking distance. If you did not do so you were most likely going to lose CA. The difference between a superior play and point vomit is one can be planned and adjusted around. The other cannot. It's one or the other, a response is available or it isn't. When someone dumps 20-30 points on the board in one card play as red coin you are forced to respond in kind. If you cannot respond there is no correct play.

The above wasn't an evident problem in CB because, yes, we had more CA tools. CA tools like Ciri mitigate this catch-22 because you get a card back. Even without Ciri you may be able to afford being at a CA disadvantage and still find a way to recoup it with another CA tool, provided you set it up properly. Yes, you could argue the red coin player burns a valuable resource to create this scenario, so you should be able to return the favor later. Unfortunately, with the way card draws work, and how last say plays into finishers, it's not a guarantee.

High tempo point vomit cards are fine if CA tools are plentiful. You cannot have the former without the latter. Otherwise the only truly viable counter to these high point plays is to have your own and draw them or pass before they're played. Hello R1 dry-passing, so nice to meet you.

Let me put it this way.... Using your Cleaver example. What would prevent that type of behavior from being possible? Finding a solution to make the coin flip completely even, assuming one exists, or taking out Cleaver? One of these is the area getting abused. The other is the object abusing it. The plentiful CA tools didn't fix anything. It just provided another avenue to mitigate the problem. Hand limit is yet another example of this practice. Instead of correcting an issue you make some odd change to make it irrelevant for most of the game and/or cover it up.

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.

You can, sure. Up until the point where CA becomes relevant again. The thing is, dry-passing R2 still isn't always the right play. I know it's become the norm but a lot of decks getting called a problem right now can get boxed into a corner if you aggressively push both R1 and R2, and deny them a long R3 (or put certain cards in your deck ).

 

[flyhy]

What i find disheartening is the fact so many players, even pro players dont seem to be able to see that. I reckon a lot of the disapproval some popular streamers show is less based on levelheaded objectivity but on a very subjective perception and some kind of exhaustion and other potential competitive card games on the horizon. Lamenting what Gwent could have been or that 2 years of beta are going to waste is pointless because sometimes shit simply doesnt work out and you have to start over. That is something people had half a year for to accept. Also i am sure they will still profit a lot of the experience.

Gwent is a game, a personal experience, that doesn't require a belief system. In other words, I don't have to see what you see to know what I like or don't like because it is my experience and my relationship with the game. And that doesn't mean to dismiss your perspectives since what you think stems from your own relationship with the game. When you step far back and look at HC, yes it is still Gwent, but when you start make incisions, there are many attributes that defined Gwent do not exist anymore.

For example, having rounds doesn't matter as much. Playing cards is now mandatory due the hand limit rather than freedom of choice that you can use for a tactical advantage. Yes, you may argue that "this tactical advantage" can still be there in HC but that change restricts and alters the gameplay thus a fundamental has changed. Round 1, both players play x cards to reduce the hand size, then move to round 2. If it was a long round 1 where both player have depleted cards down to a few and the hand limit won't punish the draw then dry pass since there's absolutely no reason to bleed. Both players start round 3 with 8 or 9 cards like round 1. The previous rounds were pretty much pointless.

The card abilities have been reduced and generalized. In those terms, HC is relatively dull since the gameplay doesn't go beyond mere boosting a little or damaging a little. The old Gwent was fine. All those pro streamers loved it, but it got terrible due to the winter update and became egregious after CDPR abandoned it to work on a Hearthstone imitation, err, HC. And also, something I found odd that you mentioned, a card game rarely goes beyond a simple algebra such as subtraction and addition which is the same for HC.

That being said, if I look at HC objectively, it is not a bad or simple game. I would've enjoyed it for what it is if I discovered Gwent just around now. However, I wouldn't have obsessed over it like I was with the old Gwent nor gone beyond f2p casual playing. I started MTG right after PTR and instantly got hooked due to the myriad of interesting cards. First couple of weeks, I went as far as 15 wins per day, but then the novelty wore off and now I barely get 3 wins. The gameplay is heavily influenced by draw rng and the pace is slow. Two things that I don't like about a card game and I see both in HC.

 

[BornBoring]

It was fun back then, but for longevity it was the wrong course. What i find disheartening is the fact so many players, even pro players dont seem to be able to see that.

 

[NouveauBlanc]

I played gwent since the open beta begins（wasn't able to join closed beta）and HC is just unplayable for me, worse than the create abuse version, spy abuse version... there is no balance at all, just lots of broken mecanics , it doesn't feel the same anymore, not even a little bit... I finished Thronebreaker in 3 days( it's really good) and just have zero interests in multiplay after a few rounds. Waiting for the new patch, hope they can make it right.

 

[Riven-Twain]

Moderator: Several posts deleted. Back on topic, please, and keep it respectful. Thank you.

 

[Shmakkles]

The pro has a point. Evidently.