Yeah when I experimented with a different set of cards a few days ago and lost a lot I was matched with more and more people using pretty basic decks. Matchmaking really seems to work but considering there are still complaints it might be necessary to seperate stronger between beginners and more experienced players.
Matchmaking and Progression Unbalanced?
I like Gwent, I think it's a great game, but there are some balancing issues I think need to be fixed. So, thanks for the beta!
First off, when the game says that it's "finding a worthy opponent" I feel like it's really stretching the meaning of "worthy opponent". Usually I get into a match with a player who has at least 2 gold cards (plus Geralt, so that means 3). Gold cards are pretty amazing, and can sometimes change the tide of the game by themselves. However, for someone like me, who only has Geralt, I feel I am no match for (insert player name) who has for example, ciri, geralt, and igni. For this reason, I feel that maybe matchmaking should take into account how many gold cards the opponent's deck has.
My second complaint is that progression is a bit to brutal. If you're me (hopefully you're not), and you get into a game with someone who has all the nice cards 10 times and a row, and you try (with blood, sweat, and toil) to win all 10 of those games, you will likely lose. This wouldn't be that rage-inducing except for the fact that losing doesn't give you anything. This makes Gwent feel like the big fish eating the little fish. The big fish (super pro player with 20000 different cards) eats the little fish (new player with starter deck plus 2 card kegs). The little fish stays at the bottom, while the big fish gets a little bigger. And the little fish can't live off + 5 ore from Good Game all the time. So, for this issue, I think loosing should at least give you a small boost to the experience bar.
Besides these two issues, I think Gwent is a great game!
I like Gwent, I think it's a great game, but there are some balancing issues I think need to be fixed. So, thanks for the beta!
First off, when the game says that it's "finding a worthy opponent" I feel like it's really stretching the meaning of "worthy opponent". Usually I get into a match with a player who has at least 2 gold cards (plus Geralt, so that means 3). Gold cards are pretty amazing, and can sometimes change the tide of the game by themselves. However, for someone like me, who only has Geralt, I feel I am no match for (insert player name) who has for example, ciri, geralt, and igni. For this reason, I feel that maybe matchmaking should take into account how many gold cards the opponent's deck has.
My second complaint is that progression is a bit to brutal. If you're me (hopefully you're not), and you get into a game with someone who has all the nice cards 10 times and a row, and you try (with blood, sweat, and toil) to win all 10 of those games, you will likely lose. This wouldn't be that rage-inducing except for the fact that losing doesn't give you anything. This makes Gwent feel like the big fish eating the little fish. The big fish (super pro player with 20000 different cards) eats the little fish (new player with starter deck plus 2 card kegs). The little fish stays at the bottom, while the big fish gets a little bigger. And the little fish can't live off + 5 ore from Good Game all the time. So, for this issue, I think loosing should at least give you a small boost to the experience bar.
Besides these two issues, I think Gwent is a great game!
Last edited:
The new patch changed level Up completely. Now you gain exp even if you lose the game. So theoretically you can go from lev 1 to 10 for example without winning a single game.
So now Levels are even more irrelevant then before the patch. The only thing Lev wise that matters now are lev up rewards.
So now Levels are even more irrelevant then before the patch. The only thing Lev wise that matters now are lev up rewards.
Level opponents
Sorry! But why my opponent have 19 lvl while my level is 1 or 2 ??? That system finding opponents is terrible.
Thanks :thinking:
Sorry! But why my opponent have 19 lvl while my level is 1 or 2 ??? That system finding opponents is terrible.
Thanks :thinking:
Level 1's playing against level 20+ isn't fairv
The game needs some serious help in matchmaking. I don't even want to grind out to ranked play to get a balanced game.
I don't care if someone hasbetter cards than me in general, but it's ridiculous to think that a level 1 is going to stand a chance against a level 20. I played 5 matches today, everyone was against someone over level 20.
The game needs some serious help in matchmaking. I don't even want to grind out to ranked play to get a balanced game.
I don't care if someone hasbetter cards than me in general, but it's ridiculous to think that a level 1 is going to stand a chance against a level 20. I played 5 matches today, everyone was against someone over level 20.
While it's true that your at a significant disadvantage is nearly always possible to win at least one round.
Winning the match itself isn't nessacery tbh, the best way to progress is by doing the first two daily reward tiers (18 rounds won) It gives you enough for two kegs everyday and about 75 scraps.
When I first started I did get lucky and get a Legendary on my first ever keg (The Caretaker) and noticed I was beating decks clearly better then mine. Monster imo is the best deck to start with, The rest needs crazy combos or chains to be truly effective.
Winning the match itself isn't nessacery tbh, the best way to progress is by doing the first two daily reward tiers (18 rounds won) It gives you enough for two kegs everyday and about 75 scraps.
When I first started I did get lucky and get a Legendary on my first ever keg (The Caretaker) and noticed I was beating decks clearly better then mine. Monster imo is the best deck to start with, The rest needs crazy combos or chains to be truly effective.
Honestly ... i think level really doesnt hold much value in how a player plays...more or less shows how much he has played.
Im almost level 30..if you include the roll back to 10..i would be 60
And i have had my ass handed to me more than i would like to admit by players under level 10... lol
Im almost level 30..if you include the roll back to 10..i would be 60
And i have had my ass handed to me more than i would like to admit by players under level 10... lol
I versed a level 5 today decked out will a full Skellige deck who completely crushed me.TheShift;n7488560 said:
I'm sure he must have bought a lot of kegs which is completely fine but doesn't change the fact a level 5 beat me lol
Tamacountry13;n7488590 said:
I hear ya. Theres games i have lost.. i think to myself.. should i even still play this game...
then of course i play 30 more matches in a sitting... lol
What we are trying to say flame6 is Keep Playing... from the bottom..there is no where else to go but up
Birkewedd;n7489690 said:
Guys like this are the exact reason why it should be hidden in casuals. If they don't know there is a lvl discrepancy they feel fine, if they see 2 different levels despite similar MMR they are frustrated. Just hide it - problem solved.
Birkewedd;n7489950 said:
If they have similiar MMR then statistically the chances are equal. If they have different MMR then there is just not enaugh ppl in the queue, problem will be solved upon release when there are more players. Better match them than make the wait 10+ minutes queues.