Merchants of Ofir - Impressions and Strategies

[DRK3]

So, now that we've had a few days with this expansion, what do you think about it?

Personally, even though it's the smallest of the 4 expansions we got this year (around 70 new cards compared to +100 on the other ones) it is actually my favourite.

We got scenarios that are interesting and powerful, they brought back binariness with artefact removal, but not as bad as before, since there's more possibilities - use leader ability to advance scenario instantly to ch.1, so removal of scenario is not that significant; or do you just destroy scenario? can be revived with caretaker, but if you banish or steal it, that is a big blow if the scenario was gonna be played twice.

Stratagems are a great idea, but i think most are lackluster. I use the Djinn one when i want to avoid big units, and the SC elf one seems great in elf swarm decks, and maybe the NG locks is nice too, but i think the rest arent worth it instead of tactical advantage.

Matta Hu'uri which is amazing (OP?) in every deck. And Shupe got support in the form of Radeyah, which is basically another shupe, easily providing 12pts min, with 4 possibilities, making it versatile. Did Shupe really need this help? I think this trio of cards will make Shupe decks too strong, i already see it a lot in NG, and less in NR decks.

I really like what they added for SK and MO, making swarm, beasts and consume more viable and with more possibilities. The SC new cards are a bit too basic, making elf swarm too easy and make me angry of the time i tried elf swarm a few months ago and how it would have been so much more successful if i had these tools.

One thing i find really strange: i see scenarios are really popular, i've seen all being played at least 5 times... except Syndicate's which i have YET to see. Why is nobody playing Passiflora? Is it because it generates crimes instead of units? Last time i checked Crimes were pretty popular, its just me who hates them, so i dont see why a reason.

Post automatically merged: Dec 15, 2019

And now, time for some strategy sharing. Im really proud of this one, as it proves my point that lots of cards are really good and players just dont see their potential until it's smacked on their face.

So, im trying to finish Pincer Maneuver mastery, but i HATE that it's the NR Meta, so i wanna try something really different. But it seemed all NR did was damage with charges or buffs... until i tried something with a new bronze card:

CARAVAN VANGUARD

Clearly most players have ignored it, as they seem confused when they see my deck.
Basically, its NG's Daerlan Soldiers deck, but with NR and even better.

Daerlan soldiers generate 2 units, 3 pts each. Caravan Vanguard can do the same, but it has BONDED, which means every caravan vanguard you put after is 6+3. Not bad at all, for a 6prov bronze.

1. This new bronze is neutral, so you can use it on any faction. But only NR and NG can make many copies of bronzes. But this unit is not a soldier, taking away some possibilities, so NR is better.

2. You can use Operator to make the 1st one, then Queen Adalia, Reinforcements, and the 2 actual bronze units, and necromancy if any gets killed, if you wanna go all in with this strategy (my style)

3. This is also better than Cintrian Guard decks, where each gets stronger, because you get many points but they are distributed by many units, so you re not vulnerable to tall removal or resets.
Also, its really easy to trigger the bonded since its unlikely the opponent can deal with all the 3pts units before you put the next.
Even with just 2 of these units you get 15 pts, while with Cintrian guards that would get only 10 pts.

4. After all the swarm, use Voymir (another underused card, now actually having potential), since it can boost any unit, not just NR ones.

Good luck and here are some examples:

 

[bessel00]

We got scenarios that are interesting and powerful, they brought back binariness with artefact removal, but not as bad as before, since there's more possibilities - use leader ability to advance scenario instantly to ch.1, so removal of scenario is not that significant; or do you just destroy scenario?

Those leaders who can play two cards in one turn have already been in favor for two months, the devs provide them with yet another toy -- scenarios. It's really unfair for the other leaders that the inclusion of scenario in deck means binary when faced with artefact removal, while the decks of two-card leaders are more consistent.

The SC new cards are a bit too basic

You surely remember back in around February when everyone include the two unicorns in their deck. Before nerfed to ground, one is 4+4 for 9 provisions and the other is 4-4 for 9 provisions. When you have both, you get another bonus 4 point. So you always fall 1 point below provision when you only have one played. And combined, you get only 2 points above provisions. Now let's see what we have with Etriel and Muirlega. Both are 4+3 for 7 provisions alone, which means each provide you with strength equal to its provision when played alone. And combined, you get 4 more points from Etriel or up to 6 points from Muirlega. This means that when played together, they can achieve 4 to 6 points above their cost.
How hilarious and sarcastic for Devs to nerf some cards to ground, yet design some even more powerful cards in the same pattern paying absolutely no regard to their own previous work nor the ratio between card strength and provision.
Basicaly, I think the balance for Gwent is a joke and it hurts the whole game a lot.

 

[partci]

... I think the balance for Gwent is a joke and it hurts the whole game a lot.

Well, hello.

I think the first step they need to do towards balancing the game is to calculate how much PP* does 1 Damage Point costs and how many PP does 1 Health Point cost, how many PP a Shield costs, a point of Armor, poisoning, etc. Which is exactly 1, which is 1.2 and which one is 1.5.

One more thing: why is Elven Swordmaster (at 5 PP) at 4 STR, but NG Scorpion is 3 STR, with pretty much the same condition? And the Swordmaster was even nerfed from 5 STR. At least give the scorpion 1 Armor or Shield or something.


*Provision Points

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

You surely remember back in around February when everyone include the two unicorns in their deck. Before nerfed to ground, one is 4+4 for 9 provisions and the other is 4-4 for 9 provisions. When you have both, you get another bonus 4 point. So you always fall 1 point below provision when you only have one played. And combined, you get only 2 points above provisions. Now let's see what we have with Etriel and Muirlega. Both are 4+3 for 7 provisions alone, which means each provide you with strength equal to its provision when played alone. And combined, you get 4 more points from Etriel or up to 6 points from Muirlega. This means that when played together, they can achieve 4 to 6 points above their cost.
How hilarious and sarcastic for Devs to nerf some cards to ground, yet design some even more powerful cards in the same pattern paying absolutely no regard to their own previous work nor the ratio between card strength and provision.
Basicaly, I think the balance for Gwent is a joke and it hurts the whole game a lot.

There are a lot of points you overlooked in that argumentation.
First of all, the unicorns were a neutral card, such that they could have been used in any faction not just ST. While easy and efficient removal cards might be ok for ST, there are other factions that shouldn't get access to them that easily.
Also, there is a lot of difference between a card that deals 4 damage and a card that deals only 3. If there were two cards with a 4 point body, but one has 8 provisions and deals 4 damage, while the other has 7 provisions and deals 3 damage, the first would be a lot stronger.
Moreover, there was the bronze strength adjustment in between, which made 3 damage a lot less valuable.

I'm not saying that the two unicorns weren't overnerfed or that the new cards aren't powercreeped, but your argumentation is far too simplified.

By the way, the two unicorns were 8 provision at first, so they basically started out pretty similar to those 2 new cards.

I think the first step they need to do towards balancing the game is to calculate how much PP* does 1 Damage Point costs and how many PP does 1 Health Point cost, how many PP a Shield costs, a point of Armor, poisoning, etc. Which is exactly 1, which is 1.2 and which one is 1.5.

One more thing: why is Elven Swordmaster (at 5 PP) at 4 STR, but NG Scorpion is 3 STR, with pretty much the same condition? And the Swordmaster was even nerfed from 5 STR. At least give the scorpion 1 Armor or Shield or something.

I'm pretty sure the devs have a base formular for new cards, but it isn't that easy.

For example a shield/armor on an engine is a lot more valuable than on a unit the opponent doesn't need to remove. Or the example above, 4 damage is a lot more powerful than 3 damage.
And there are other variables playing a part too. How easy is it to get this tool in a faction? For example Pavetta shuffling all bronze copies of a card back into the deck is a lot more valuable in a faction that can create copies of a card.

Concerning Swordmaster and Fire Scorpion there are some reasons. Previously there weren't just enough good elves card to make the archetype work, therefore even with a stronger Swordmaster the archetype wasn't too strong. Fire Scorpion on the other hand was nerfed, because it was useable with Portal, which was a huge advantage for this card and not removing this advantage would have kept fire Scorpion far too strong.
Another difference between those two cards is that Fire Scorpion can keep charges which is pretty usefull, compared to Swordmaster, who has to attack something.
Also, if we look at the turn after they are played, both are able to get their provisions back.

 

[DRK3]

I think the devs forgot the concept that expensive cards should provide less value than their provisions, or if its the same or more, only with a high risk associated.

Look how popular muzzle was, but it's a 10pts for 12 prov, max (and possible engine removal). Shupe and Radeyah on the other hand provide 12 or more points for what, 13/11 prov? Phillipa and Falibor, same thing, easily providing their cost in points (and removal! which should be more expensive)

I think the devs should focus on balancing old cards and their provisions now, and a few of this expansion.

 

[bojerbela]

I think the devs should focus on balancing old cards and their provisions now, and a few of this expansion.

That would be great. Many old cards need buff or rework...they could support existing archetypes and make not viable strategies a bit more stronger. The devs said, they go slower now with expansions, and I think, it's a good idea now.

 

[Luckless_Jack]

I think the devs should focus on balancing old cards and their provisions now, and a few of this expansion.

People have been saying this for much of Homecoming's existence. Many of us might assume that CDPR haven't really tackled this yet because they are too busy focusing on other more pressing things - like expansions and the release for mobile. The question I haven't seen asked much is whether CDPR actually have any intention of doing a proper balance overhaul?

Sure, we get semi-regular minor tweaks to appease us, and we did have an essential NR overhaul and a minor rework of some other faction's archetype cards, but have CDPR really actually committed to tackling balance properly yet?

Is it a question of unable or unwilling? Unable, because it is indeed somewhat tricky - a bit like "whack-a-mole", where tackling a problem in one area just causes it to pop up in another. Or unwilling, because selling new expansions with all the powercrept cards is both simpler and more lucrative than doing the hard tedious balancing work that is really needed? All they need to be able to do is have enough artists to generate enough new artworks to keep ahead of the impending demise that such a lack of balance could cause.

CDPR often talk about wanting to have more fun cards and abilities. Perhaps they actually embrace more of a chaotic wild west approach to game balance - i.e. "let the chips fall where they may" and "the devil take the hindmost". If every faction has an OP leader and some OP cards, then all factions are viable and "everything is fine" (despite the fact that the majority of the leaders and a hefty chunk of the collection sees little or no play under that regime). Their actions and inactions certainly seem more aligned with that than with a carefully balanced and competitive game "where skill beats luck".

Unless and until they prove otherwise, I am inclined to believe that a thorough re-balancing is just not on their agenda any more. After all, isn't this "replace, not revise" approach with new cards making older ones obsolete the one that most other CCGs take? It's not necessarily bad, it's just not my preference. I may be in the minority though.

 

[DRK3]

@bojerbela I vote for crow's eye and Ciri Nova to be the first to be reworked. The first is a card that in whole of HC was never viable, the latter is a card that was super popular in open beta, but now its the worst of the Ciris, and that is saying a lot!

@Luckless_Jack I also think that despite our constant pleas, CDPR doesnt want to really do a rebalance of all the cardpool, specially the old, unused cards.

But i think it wouldnt be that difficult. They could do small provision changes like they've been doing on each patch, and see if that's enough to increase use of an unpopular card. I think in most times it is, since players tend to be attracted by buffs and repelled by nerfs, regardless of the card's actual strength.

Post automatically merged: Dec 15, 2019

@bessel00 Yeah, maybe that's why the SY scenario isnt seeing anyplay (at least from my perspective).

Here are the factions and leaders that can instantly play a scenario and advance it to Ch.1:
NR: with mobilization and pincer maneuver
NG: with strategic withdrawal and tactical decision (and on a mirror match with double cross i guess)
SC: with Mystic Echo and Call of Harmony
SK: with Second Wind
MO: with Death's Shadow

SY: cant do

 

[Luckless_Jack]

They could do small provision changes like they've been doing on each patch, and see if that's enough to increase use of an unpopular card. I think in most times it is, since players tend to be attracted by buffs and repelled by nerfs, regardless of the card's actual strength.

They could for sure. Little and often would certainly be a welcome start, even if a proper balance overhaul is never going to happen. At the moment it feels like such changes are still a bit too few and far between, probably because they are concentrating on the whole "replace, not revise" thing lately instead.

I think a couple of changes that they made for Homecoming made this more difficult than it could have been though. The general reduction in point values made fine tuning much more difficult. A buff or nerf of 1 point of strength or damage is sometimes too big a change for a card to remain playable or to not become too strong - and as provisions are roughly 1 to 1 with points, they suffer from the same lack of granularity. I also think the removal of silver cards as a category removed a potential tool for restricting things such as which abilities and tutors can target which cards (doing it via provision cost is rather clunky in comparison and causes cards to potentially shift in and out of a target group as their provision cost changes).

I doubt they are going to change either of those things now, so we are probably stuck with what we have. As a result, CDPR will have to keep coming up with creative ways to hobble or boost such awkward cards to try to keep them balanced, if they bother at all. There are also many cards for which a simple value tweak won't really be enough, two of which you mentioned above.

If there was one thing that I would like them to address most to begin with, it would be a full review of all the leader abilities as well as their associated provision allowances. They seem to me to have the most direct impact on deck diversity at the moment. Perhaps a lot of the lack of deck diversity is just down to players mindlessly sticking to the meta decks promoted on the team websites, but some seems due to certain leader abilities just being plain better than others (both more powerful and more flexible in some cases).

 

[bessel00]

I'm not saying that the two unicorns weren't overnerfed or that the new cards aren't powercreeped, but your argumentation is far too simplified.

By the way, the two unicorns were 8 provision at first, so they basically started out pretty similar to those 2 new cards.

Thank you for your clarification above. However, I feel like we are focusing on different aspect of the problem.
It's true fewer damage point with larger body strength help to shift the balance between engine and control decks. While I mainly want to point out that there are certain cards with obvious advantage in their strength to provision ratio.
We often complain of how netdecks dull the game, yet it is the very existance of these cards which limit the option for anyone to compose a competitive deck. They are auto-included and repeated again and again and again, just like the unicorn duo back then simply because they are much more effective for their provision. By saying 'auto-included', I don't mean auto-win. However, compared to those decks running no such cards, like NR without Philippa, SY without Luiza & Savolla, SC without the new elf-beast-duo, NG without new Vincent, the inclusion of these cards surely increase winning probability significantly.
It matters not whether these cards are neutral or faction specific, the difference is just whether they are included by all players in all decks or just by players of certain faction in certain faction deck, which I think is not the essential of the problem. The obvious advantage in strength to provision ratio without any strict condition to block for some cards is the core of problem. And the same mistake has been repeated again and again, patch after patch.

By the way, the two unicorns were 8 provision at first, so they basically started out pretty similar to those 2 new cards.

I only started playing Gwent around Februay this year, when unicorn duo had already been adjusted to 9 provision. I think the fact that they once were 8 provision provides even another verification of how Devs tend to forget their own work and if not deliberately make the same mistake. They got the unicorn duo nerfed from 8 provision to now oblivion, yet they keep pushing out new cards like Etriel and Muirlega. Hard to understand the underlying logic if not for the pressure of making profit. Yet by doing so they are sacrificing game quality, which I doubt is not a long term strategy.

I think the first step they need to do towards balancing the game is to calculate how much PP* does 1 Damage Point costs and how many PP does 1 Health Point cost, how many PP a Shield costs, a point of Armor, poisoning, etc. Which is exactly 1, which is 1.2 and which one is 1.5.

It's a tough work to figure these things out as @FG15-ISH7EG pointed out. However, I also think this is the right direction if Devs truly want to make an overall balance. Though I doubt if Devs really have the intention or budget to get it work.

 

[ThomHjj]

Sorry for posting without reading first all the above.
For a player that has almost all the cards and almost 1100 hours I find it very difficult to play different styles of decks. Cards that give vitality like Oxenfurt Naturalist which I never seen anyone playing are now worthless thanks to Thirsty Dame. The same with cards like Fisstech Trafficer and Wretched Addict now that everyone is playing poison. The game is becoming like MtG, whoever plays the best removal in their decks wins.
Is there a thread to discuss about the game in general?

edit: giving shield is also kind of useless now
edit 2: lock was already a problem, we didn't need more cards

 

[4RM3D]

Is there a thread to discuss about the game in general?

No, and I don't think that's wise because it leads to a mega-thread without any focus. However, feel free to start a new thread with a specific topic, e.g. comparison to MtG removal.

 

[DRK3]

Sorry for posting without reading first all the above.
For a player that has almost all the cards and almost 1100 hours I find it very difficult to play different styles of decks. Cards that give vitality like Oxenfurt Naturalist which I never seen anyone playing are now worthless thanks to Thirsty Dame. The same with cards like Fisstech Trafficer and Wretched Addict now that everyone is playing poison. The game is becoming like MtG, whoever plays the best removal in their decks wins.
Is there a thread to discuss about the game in general?

Although a thread for everything in general doesnt exist and isnt advised, i created a few threads that you may wish to see and add your opinion:

Removal and control (a constant problem in gwent, in all of its phases):

Removal and Control Post-Patch

Bronzes in particular – in our opinion – shouldn’t dish out 4 or more damage. We want to limit those high-damage abilities to specials cards, which we believe are better suited for it. Right now, the meta mostly revolves around units with high damage output, but for the future we want to limit...

forums.cdprojektred.com

Gwent's problems (where one of the major is control):

Gwent's Problems (All of Them)

Note: i planned on adding this to my gwent retrospective thread. But since nobody commented, it would just get attached to the other post and the thread wouldnt get bumped. Im sorry but i didnt spend hours thinking and writing this for it to be never read. Even if it's just a few who have the...

forums.cdprojektred.com

 

[Guerreroymago]

Here are the factions and leaders that can instantly play a scenario and advance it to Ch.1:
NR: with mobilization and pincer maneuver
NG: with strategic withdrawal and tactical decision (and on a mirror match with double cross i guess)
SC: with Mystic Echo and Call of Harmony
SK: with Second Wind
MO: with Death's Shadow

SY: cant do

I think whit Damien de la Tour, NG can advance to CH.2. using two times the leader.

 

[nedders]

Here are the factions and leaders that can instantly play a scenario and advance it to Ch.1:
NR: with mobilization and pincer maneuver
NG: with strategic withdrawal and tactical decision (and on a mirror match with double cross i guess)
SC: with Mystic Echo and Call of Harmony
SK: with Second Wind
MO: with Death's Shadow

SY: cant do

Er, Skellige can get through all the chapters in a single turn. Oh, look, I've found another broken mechanic. There's more of these in Gwent than Easter Eggs in Ready Player One.

 

[DRK3]

Er, Skellige can get through all the chapters in a single turn. Oh, look, I've found another broken mechanic. There's more of these in Gwent than Easter Eggs in Ready Player One.

Hmmm i hadnt thought about that, but i think i know what you mean - play SK Scenario from hand then use second wind on ermion (Ch1) to tutor a bronze revive, revive crow clan druid (Ch2) to boost 2 of the crows previously generated with Ch1, all in one turn. Did i get it right?

 

[nedders]

Hmmm i hadnt thought about that, but i think i know what you mean - play SK Scenario from hand then use second wind on ermion (Ch1) to tutor a bronze revive, revive crow clan druid (Ch2) to boost 2 of the crows previously generated with Ch1, all in one turn. Did i get it right?

Nailed it!