Just passing by, but I wanted to say that I agree that we should have an option to lock already locked unit with adrenaline rush applied after the first lock. No idea how to make it work with units who can lock, though. DShackles could have an option like First Light or smth.
Mahakam Deffender's (and other Resilient cards') description should be no doubt changed to Deploy: Gain Resilience, however there is yet another discrepancy... The lock's description itself does nowhere state that it should remove tokens, so it should be either stated as such in the description, or tokens should not be affected by lock. Generally the descriptions are deffinitely something that needs substantial improvement, the way things are now it is unclear wheter is intended- description or actual behavior (another example is Letho, former Blizzard not having Special tag etc.). Hopefully these issues will get sorted out with patch...
Mystikast;n8909220 said:
I'm not too sure, I didn't play enough of it to know.
Mystikast;n8909470 said:
Probably why, I mean most people just buff their resilient units to 25+
Take a Good Look Design Team: 'Toggle' Card Design Inconsistency
Short Version:
Something I notice recently: I added resiliency to a unit on my side of the board. My opponent locked the card. I waited till the end of the round and then Radavided to unlock the card. The resiliency was gone.
Long Version:
Maybe I'm crazy but in my opinion adding a toggle effect on a unit should act as a layer on top of the current state of the card. If we take resiliency for instance: Take any card in any state and add resilience to the card. Toggling 'On' resilience takes the card in what ever state it was in and adds on top of that card that the resilience effect. If you then toggle off resilience its like peeling off that top layer; you're left with exactly what you started with, the card in its previous state. It's like an onion...toggle on add a layer...toggle off peel off the layer.
For Reference: {
'Locked Unit' Layer
^
|
| Toggle 'On' Lock
|
'Demoted Unit' Layer
^
|
| Demote Unit
|
Base: Yen Con Initial Card State
}
Further, lets imagine that your opponent plays a Yen Con. You response by play D Shackles which reads: "Choose a Unit (can be Gold) and toggle its Lock. If it is Gold, Demote it first." So what happens is we take the initial base state of Yen Con and add a 'Demoted Unit' layer on top of the card. After that, we take that state of the card and add a 'Locked Unit' layer to the top of it which reads: "Disables a card's abilities. Disables and reveals Ambushes. Prevents the card from being part of a Trio." Note that adding this layer to the card has no effect on the underlying layers of the card. It doesn't change the base card. It doesn't change the 'Demoted Unit' layer, rather it is it's own layer that resides on top of the pre-existing 'card layer stack'. As such, if we take a look back at our example, my opponent then plays Cleaver and toggles off the lock; in essence taking off the 'Locked Unit' layer. We now have a silver Yen Con on the board with its normal abilities. This is because we still have the initial base Yen Con layer with the 'Demoted Unit' layer on top of it. THIS MAKES SENSE! Note that the 'Demoted Unit' layer was not magically removed from the card making the card gold when it was unlocked, nor were any of Yen Con's abilities taken away. No! Both were in there own respective layer and neither was removed from the top of Yen Con's "layer stack" when the 'Locked Unit' layer was removed. This is consistent with the reading of the card! Good shit!
For Reference: {
'Locked Unit' Layer
^
|
| Toggle 'On' Lock
|
'Boosted Strength' Layer
^
|
| Reaver Hunters Ability Boosts the Card
|
Base: Reaver Hunter Initial Card State
}
Moving on to our second example. Your opponent has two Reaver Hunters on the board at the moment. You play Cleaver and toggle 'On' lock on one of them to prevent you opponent from completing the 'Trio' effect. This is temporarily successful since the 'Locked Unit' layer added to the Reaver Hunter's layer stack, WHILE STILL ON THE LAYER STACK, disable the effect of the underlying base instance of the Reaver, including the Trio effect. Your opponent then toggles 'Off' the lock on his turn, which effectively removed the 'Locked Unit' layer and leaves us with the card from its previous state. You then take your turn...blah blah blah. Then on your opponents turn he completes the 'Trio' and gets the effect; And this works since the 'Locked Unit' layer was removed from the Reaver in question allowing the underlying 'Trio' ability to take effect once again. Note: toggling on lock DID NOT permanently remove the buffs on the underlying card nor any effects from its base state. All Good! This is consistent with how all the abilities read.
For Reference: {
'Locked Unit' Layer
^
|
| Toggle 'On' Lock
|
'Resilient Unit' Layer
^
|
| Adrenaline Rush; Toggles 'On' Resilience
|
Base: Redanian Knight Initial Card State
}
Now for the problem child. You play Red Nite. Next turn you play Add Rush on Red Nite to carry its strength to the next round, this adds a 'Resilient Unit' layer on to the layer stack of Red Nite. Your opponent plays Cleaver and locks your Red Nite, which adds a 'Locked Unit' layer to the layer stack of Red Nite. You then play Cleaver and toggle 'Off' the lock, which removes the 'Locked Unit' layer from the layer stack of Red Nite leaving you with the layer stack for Red Nite as it existed prior to the 'Locked Unit' layer being added. Which means that we should have a card whose layer stack consists of: 1. The base card state of Red Nite 2. The 'Resilient Unit' layer. IN REALITY THIS IS NOT THE CASE! Rather than adding a disabling effect that acts as a layer on top of the layer stack for a card it turns out that toggling 'On' lock on a card ADDITIONALLY PERMANENTLY REMOVES RESILIENCE FROM THE UNDERLYING LAYER STACK. This is inconsistent with the reading of the lock effect as it stands in the game, as well as every other locking interaction in the current state of Gwent. Please Please Please either update the reading of the lock effect to say "PERMANENTLY remove resilience from the CURRENT state of the card" or have the interaction follow EVERY other interaction with lock toggling, which has absolutely no effect on the underlying layer stack.
Thanks for taking the time to read this! Yall Rock! Happy Gwenting!
Short Version:
Something I notice recently: I added resiliency to a unit on my side of the board. My opponent locked the card. I waited till the end of the round and then Radavided to unlock the card. The resiliency was gone.
Long Version:
Maybe I'm crazy but in my opinion adding a toggle effect on a unit should act as a layer on top of the current state of the card. If we take resiliency for instance: Take any card in any state and add resilience to the card. Toggling 'On' resilience takes the card in what ever state it was in and adds on top of that card that the resilience effect. If you then toggle off resilience its like peeling off that top layer; you're left with exactly what you started with, the card in its previous state. It's like an onion...toggle on add a layer...toggle off peel off the layer.
For Reference: {
'Locked Unit' Layer
^
|
| Toggle 'On' Lock
|
'Demoted Unit' Layer
^
|
| Demote Unit
|
Base: Yen Con Initial Card State
}
Further, lets imagine that your opponent plays a Yen Con. You response by play D Shackles which reads: "Choose a Unit (can be Gold) and toggle its Lock. If it is Gold, Demote it first." So what happens is we take the initial base state of Yen Con and add a 'Demoted Unit' layer on top of the card. After that, we take that state of the card and add a 'Locked Unit' layer to the top of it which reads: "Disables a card's abilities. Disables and reveals Ambushes. Prevents the card from being part of a Trio." Note that adding this layer to the card has no effect on the underlying layers of the card. It doesn't change the base card. It doesn't change the 'Demoted Unit' layer, rather it is it's own layer that resides on top of the pre-existing 'card layer stack'. As such, if we take a look back at our example, my opponent then plays Cleaver and toggles off the lock; in essence taking off the 'Locked Unit' layer. We now have a silver Yen Con on the board with its normal abilities. This is because we still have the initial base Yen Con layer with the 'Demoted Unit' layer on top of it. THIS MAKES SENSE! Note that the 'Demoted Unit' layer was not magically removed from the card making the card gold when it was unlocked, nor were any of Yen Con's abilities taken away. No! Both were in there own respective layer and neither was removed from the top of Yen Con's "layer stack" when the 'Locked Unit' layer was removed. This is consistent with the reading of the card! Good shit!
For Reference: {
'Locked Unit' Layer
^
|
| Toggle 'On' Lock
|
'Boosted Strength' Layer
^
|
| Reaver Hunters Ability Boosts the Card
|
Base: Reaver Hunter Initial Card State
}
Moving on to our second example. Your opponent has two Reaver Hunters on the board at the moment. You play Cleaver and toggle 'On' lock on one of them to prevent you opponent from completing the 'Trio' effect. This is temporarily successful since the 'Locked Unit' layer added to the Reaver Hunter's layer stack, WHILE STILL ON THE LAYER STACK, disable the effect of the underlying base instance of the Reaver, including the Trio effect. Your opponent then toggles 'Off' the lock on his turn, which effectively removed the 'Locked Unit' layer and leaves us with the card from its previous state. You then take your turn...blah blah blah. Then on your opponents turn he completes the 'Trio' and gets the effect; And this works since the 'Locked Unit' layer was removed from the Reaver in question allowing the underlying 'Trio' ability to take effect once again. Note: toggling on lock DID NOT permanently remove the buffs on the underlying card nor any effects from its base state. All Good! This is consistent with how all the abilities read.
For Reference: {
'Locked Unit' Layer
^
|
| Toggle 'On' Lock
|
'Resilient Unit' Layer
^
|
| Adrenaline Rush; Toggles 'On' Resilience
|
Base: Redanian Knight Initial Card State
}
Now for the problem child. You play Red Nite. Next turn you play Add Rush on Red Nite to carry its strength to the next round, this adds a 'Resilient Unit' layer on to the layer stack of Red Nite. Your opponent plays Cleaver and locks your Red Nite, which adds a 'Locked Unit' layer to the layer stack of Red Nite. You then play Cleaver and toggle 'Off' the lock, which removes the 'Locked Unit' layer from the layer stack of Red Nite leaving you with the layer stack for Red Nite as it existed prior to the 'Locked Unit' layer being added. Which means that we should have a card whose layer stack consists of: 1. The base card state of Red Nite 2. The 'Resilient Unit' layer. IN REALITY THIS IS NOT THE CASE! Rather than adding a disabling effect that acts as a layer on top of the layer stack for a card it turns out that toggling 'On' lock on a card ADDITIONALLY PERMANENTLY REMOVES RESILIENCE FROM THE UNDERLYING LAYER STACK. This is inconsistent with the reading of the lock effect as it stands in the game, as well as every other locking interaction in the current state of Gwent. Please Please Please either update the reading of the lock effect to say "PERMANENTLY remove resilience from the CURRENT state of the card" or have the interaction follow EVERY other interaction with lock toggling, which has absolutely no effect on the underlying layer stack.
Thanks for taking the time to read this! Yall Rock! Happy Gwenting!
I agree that locking a resilient unit should "suppress" the token, rather than remove it. If we compare Monsters (Ekkimaras) to Morkvarg as examples of carry-over, we see that Ekki's get the short end of the stick. We see proper counter play with Morkvarg - locking him stops the carryover, and unlocking him restores it. But with monsters, unlocking a locked Ekkimara does nothing. No counter play to a lock. IMO this is why Skellege is so good right now, compared to Dwarf decks and other resilience-based decks.
Mystikast;n8908980 said:Is this working as intended? I threw a shackles in my deck to unlock mahakam defender, only to find out, that was useless
The whole thing is inconsistant.
Unlocking a locked mahakam guard = no restoration of resilience token.
Locking a locked card with adrenaline rush = keeps the resilience token.
Just watch as this gets totted as "intended behaviour" even though it's plain stupid. Unlocking should restore the token, and locking should remove any tokens regardless of whether the card was locked prior.
Issues with Locking and Resilience
Hi, I pre-emptively locked a unit. The person used a combat engineer on it to give it resilience. I used another card which unlocked it but did not remove resilience.
Is this working as intended? Presumably it should have unlocked the units ability but removed the resilience.
Hi, I pre-emptively locked a unit. The person used a combat engineer on it to give it resilience. I used another card which unlocked it but did not remove resilience.
Is this working as intended? Presumably it should have unlocked the units ability but removed the resilience.
fort-hobo;n9072210 said:
That's as it should be, since the unit was already locked, it performed an unlock, which is why it didn't get rid of the resilience.