Mobility killed the game

+
Please remember to stay respectful. And let's not turn this into yet another SK-Point-Spam debate.
 
with the gold immunity present, they were decks abusing it, having unbeatable finishers.

Would you mind providing examples? I do not recall unbeatable gold finishers ever being a real thing. Yes, some decks were designed around using powerful golds as a finisher, reserving most of their golds for R3 or otherwise leveraging gold immunity into an advantage. In all of these cases there were ways to upset the strategy. Only a few made players feel like specific counter cards were obligatory to do so. In all of these cases it had much less to do with the card border color and much more to do with the design of specific gold cards.

Besides, a lot of the reasoning provided behind removing gold immunity had nothing to do with the above. It was to allow players to interact directly with gold cards, thus raising the overall.... interaction. This is an understandable reason for making the change. It does not mean it was necessary.

and row-specific units made certain removal cards like Igni or Hailstorm imposibble to balance.

Again, care to explain why you feel this way? The only difference in playing around Igni or row targeted cards after everything went agile is it became far easier to do so.
 
Would you mind providing examples?

For example, YenCon was a pretty big issue during the gold immunity phase. Another fun one was Isengrim during the early days of Closed Beta with the Neophyte spam. Of course, Henselt with gold promotion took the cake.

Anyhow, I like the suggestion that bronze can only target bronze, silver can target both and gold can target all.
 
For example, YenCon was a pretty big issue during the gold immunity phase. Another fun one was Isengrim during the early days of Closed Beta with the Neophyte spam. Of course, Henselt with gold promotion took the cake.

YenCon was poor card design, pure and simple. The issues with it were more related to the passive damage effect paired with other cards boosting from damage anyway. It could be argued Isengrim was highly questionable. Henselt has always been a badly designed card and still is to this day :). Promote deserves the blame there anyway. Golds didn't need to lose immunity to fix any of this stuff.
 
[...] poor card design [...]

This seems to be a reoccurring trend *cough* Sabbath *cough*. Regardless, making gold cards immune limits design space. Gold cards should not become immune again, but they do deserve a bit more protection by either having an inherent damage resistance or, like suggested by others, only immunity from silver and bronze cards.
 
This seems to be a reoccurring trend *cough* Sabbath *cough*. Regardless, making gold cards immune limits design space. Gold cards should not become immune again, but they do deserve a bit more protection by either having an inherent damage resistance or, like suggested by others, only immunity from silver and bronze cards.

Well, it's hard to argue they haven't made mistakes in certain cases with the card design. It's beta, so it happens I suppose...

For clarification, removing gold immunity isn't the end of the world. It's understandable why they decided to do it. The disagreement is with claims it absolutely had to be done, or there wasn't other available options to achieve similar benefits.
 
And jumping to conclusions without knowing which deck I played isn't embarrassing, eh?

My SK deck worked against ST points spam because I played an engine deck, and ST generally has only Cleaver and Ida to remove ships. Sure, restore -> captain -> corsair -> ship can be considered points spam, but that's not what the deck is about (no bears, no freyas, no veterans, only marauders to capitalize on the wounding effect from the ships).
Well, I knew what deck you were playing since you mentioned SK curse ... ships + marauders or bears + marauders... what else more would there be? I saw it was played by a streamer (Freddy) a few seasons ago before it was posted on Gwentdb. I played it a few times and realized didn't like it much.
 
I'm disappointed these huge changes are getting pushed through so long after beta. We should be way past this community guinea pig stage.

I am not a fan of either the gold or positioning updates because they both just serve as crutches to help low skill players stay relevant in the game. There used to be so much more tactical play and intricacies to deck building from both these mechanics.

Also, reworking a large percentage of the cards, and just plain moving effects between cards really kills their aura. For example, KOB > Marching Orders, promote, and the leader card promotions and demotions (ge'els and Kayran). It just adds confusion and makes the cards less enjoyable. It's like swapping Harry Potter's and Ron's personality mid series.
 
Not necessarily, you could introduce some kind of demote effect for some cards, maybe even timer based.
If I remember right you could shackles a gold to demote it to a silver and damage it that way. Golds just don't feel the same since the change. A bronze is almost always better than most gold now
 
If I remember right you could shackles a gold to demote it to a silver and damage it that way. Golds just don't feel the same since the change. A bronze is almost always better than most gold now

You could but Shackles was a sub-par card in general because it had no point value associated with it (positive or negative). Nobody wanted to run Shackles. In the cases where Shackles saw usage it was because certain gold card abilities were highly oppressive. If you didn't stop those gold cards by demoting and killing them you could lose the game. Barring that, you had to force them to be played outside of where the deck carrying them wanted to use them. Shackles in almost all of these cases was designed to give a backup plan, where if you failed to do this you still had a way to stop the gold. Even there it was reliant on drawing it.

It was the same situation created by the weather change when it first went live. Weather provided a point change but CS did not. This wasn't huge if weather was placed on the board off a weather card. It was a serious problem when weather was pulled from a unit, however. There you had the positive points from the unit and the damage tick off the weather. Clearing it with a CS meant playing 0 points in response to positive points + damage. This is why nobody used CS off a first light to clear weather unless it was a case where several weathers were on the board. Instead, everyone used mages and CS units. CS stopped being a weather counter.

One note on weather... It probably would have worked better if they kept weather as a temporary point reduction but instead of dropping units to 1 make it a flat point reduction. For instance, frost could apply a temporary -2 or -3 points to anything played on the row. In a nutshell, a temporary weaken effect.

Going back to gold immunity, the problem here was never gold immunity. It was oppressive gold cards. Taking out gold immunity to solve this problem didn't directly correct it. It removed part of the game to treat the symptom of the problem. The correct approach was to stop designing oppressive gold cards and change the ones already in the game. Attaching points to Shackles was another obvious solution.

Sure, you can say taking out gold immunity opened up card design. The irony is poorly designed gold cards is what was creating the issue to begin with. Opening up card design is not necessarily an improvement if it there is a history of oppressive gold cards finding their way into the mix and questionable card design in general. This pushes the game more toward removals as well, as oppressive cards are usually oppressive because you have to kill them.
 
If I remember right you could shackles a gold to demote it to a silver and damage it that way. Golds just don't feel the same since the change. A bronze is almost always better than most gold now

Yes, but I also remember a lot of matches where not drawing D-Shackles meant losing the game. Frankly, it was pretty annoying for me. Also demoting gold cards to silver most of the time was used for questionable plays (for example Mill). Sure, once in a while it was used for fun plays but overall I'm not sad it's gone...

Usually gold cards still get you more points than silvers or bronze cards. Of course some cards are underpowered or overpowered - but you'll find those in every type of card.
 
Not necessarily, you could introduce some kind of demote effect for some cards, maybe even timer based.
ou could but Shackles was a sub-par card in general because it had no point value associated with it
Thats the point, you have to play o-point cards to limit the opint from a gold card in further round, so you have the chance keep up. YenCon for example was worth to spent 1 or 2 cards to destroy, because she can easiely destroy you hole army. Yes you lose tempo, but tempo isnt all. You cant design all Cards for being tempo plays, thats excactly what is the problem now.
Btw. D-Bomb had demote too.
 
You cant design all Cards for being tempo plays, thats excactly what is the problem now.

That's not actually the main problem. During CB there were many ways to regain card advantage. CDPR streamlined all those options away, meaning that losing tempo is a big(ger) deal now.
 
Thats the point, you have to play o-point cards to limit the opint from a gold card in further round, so you have the chance keep up. YenCon for example was worth to spent 1 or 2 cards to destroy, because she can easiely destroy you hole army. Yes you lose tempo, but tempo isnt all. You cant design all Cards for being tempo plays, thats excactly what is the problem now.
Btw. D-Bomb had demote too.

The problem with 0 point Shackles was it compromised your deck when you faced something where demote/lock on golds wasn't very useful. Even in match ups where these abilities were useful you still had to draw it at the right time. Dead cards are bad news. Even where it was useful it was conceivable to end up in a "go down 2 to win or lose on even" situation because it had no point value. In most cases this type of situation means you lose the game.

As an edit, as 4RM3D pointed out the liability for running 0 point cards goes up when the methods for gaining CA go down. This is because your options for CA get pushed more toward point values. When the only way you can get CA is with a spy it means the only other way you can get CA is by trading a single, big card for multiple, small cards.
 
Top Bottom