My Summery for the syndicate faction update and the general State of the Game!
TLDR:
GOOD:
Depth (Carry-Over, Combos, Deck building, New mechanics)
Consistency (Card Value and Thinning)
NEUTRAL:
Balance (Tech cards, Flexibility, Bronze Strength)
BAD:
Interactivity and Binary Design (Direct Dmg, Artefacts, Coins and Big Finishers)
Hi everyone: I need to make my own thread to discuss what's happening in the design of Gwent and the direction we are headed.
I hope people will actually value my opinion here and feel encouraged to reply and join the discussion, instead of simply downvoting without any explanation (posted this on reddit because of the 10 post rule).
I am open for any critic you might have and promise to consider it. I am only a casual player, so I will for sure have flaws in my logic and maybe enjoy parts of Gwent that other might find annoying.
That being said, lets dive into it:
THE GOOD:
first off: like most of you guys, I am having a great deal of fun playing the new faction.
Deck building is challenging and the game plan is complex and asks you to think about your future turns to maximize the profit you gain out of your coins.
So the two things i enjoy most about this expansion is DEPTH and CONSISTANCY. And that is awesome - that's why I fell in love with Gwent in the first place. To have more of it is a true joy.
For me, DEPTH is the multitude of decisions you make during the game to maximize the points at the end of each turn, round and match.
This includes setting up combos over multiple turns (preparing bounties, setting up scorch or AoE, ...), as well as thinking about resource management.
The later could mean to save a lock/movement/removal for an important engine or to keep your Geralt round 1, to have an edge in round 3 to destroy something huge.
Another great thing to think about is carry-over into the next round - how can I secure an advantage in the rounds to come?
The Coin-Mechanic does a wonderful job here, even influencing things like deck building by the need to balance coin generation and spending.
This is probably what i enjoy MOST about the new expansion!
The second thing that I like is the CONSISTANCY the new faction offers. Part of it is also thanks to the Coin-Mechanic, but a lot of it also comes from the increased strength of the low bronze units and the two nice thinning tools. I really enjoy the idea behind both of those. Hoard and Insanity MAKE you think about when you actually want to have coins, and when not.
I think this should be used even to a greater extent, so piling up your gold is not always the best option!
For an example, my idea would be to remove the FEE bleeding from Whoresons Freakshow (i expand on SY redesign/balance in my other thread), so that you really have to plan when you want to use it, because you cant use the insanity ability if you have coins.
As for the strong bronze units: they have great synergy - and that's what really makes them shine! almost none of them are just a point slam without setup.
If you meet their condition you get rewarded - A LOT, that makes it fun to play them! Bounty setup, swarm engine, bonded interaction/engine or hoard value - you name it, they deliver!
So to sum it up: THIS FACTION IS A HUGE FUN TO PLAY!
But all good things come to an end at some point and the new expansion has some flaws as well. One it produced itself (BALANCE), which I take as a neutral - because I expect CDPR to correct it (which they already announced) and one that is more of a general design problem Gwent has been struggling with, that got multiplied by the Syndicate update (INTERACTIVITY).
This is my biggest concern and it really makes me worry about the future of my beloved game.
to continue see first post: to long..
THE NEUTRAL:
So lets tackle the part, which I am confident will be resolved soon, before diving into the unpleasant last bit. Obviously the power creep is real, but I wont argue about that, because the result speaks for itself: its a blast to play these bronze bombs. CDPR stated that the other factions will catch up and I fully support this idea, bronzes should be the backbone of a deck.
So now for the more relevant topics surrounding balance which need to be discussed: Tech Cards and general Flexibility/Consistency.
To get into it: this how I understand balance:
In the perfect meta, each leader has a (tier 1) deck that follows a specific game plan. all of these decks have a 50% chance to win against ALL other (tier 1) decks. Now some Leaders/Decks are more popular then others, be it because people like to slam huge stuff on the board (big monsters), or because boobs - lets call it "aesthetics" (dryads) or because a leader is just a crowd favourite from the games lore.
That's where tech cards come in: they get more value in a specific match up, but loose value in others.
Lets look at two cards that have a similar goal, but a different approach: Geralt of Rivia (GoR) and Geralt: Professional (GP). Both have 3 strength and costs 10/11 provisions, so very close as well. GoR destroys any units with 8 or more strength and blanks on anything below. GP damages any unit by 3 and if its a multiple of 3, destroys it. Both of these cards will vastly improve your chance of winning against big monsters, GoR even more than GP - so lets say GoR makes it a 60/40 match up while GP manages a 55/45. But against something like an NR engine deck, both of these cards may loose you the game! Again, GoR more then GP: lets assume 40/60 and 45/55. These are good tech cards, they have upsides and downsides - they will help in a specific situations, but be a burden in others!
If we now compare them with cards like Kalkenstein (purify) (7 for 7) or Tunnel Drill (artefact removal) (6 for 6). We notice that there is no value loss if the conditions are not met and that is REALY bad.
Tech cards NEED to loose value if they do not find their target, otherwise there is no point in trying to play the countered archetype any more - they do not have to fear the downside to having a much higher winratio against your deck. This destroys deck diversity.
As for which out of GoR or GP has the better design? For me its GP by a long shot, mostly because it is less binary. you will always get some value by removing something small, but you may gain huge value if you hit the right target. But it also promotes counter play and interactivity (I'm ignoring Eithne for this), because both sides can influence the outcome and play around it.
This can be extremely rewarding for both players. We need more tech cards like this!
to continue see my third post
THE BAD:
And so we get the the main issue I have with gwent atm: INTERACTIVITY and BINARY DESIGN!
Almost all balance updates try to improve these two issues: be it the Artefact disaster in dez/jan, or the no unit decks, or the constant nerves to direct dmg cards like Ifrit, Regis, Chironex,... or lastly the broken game finishers like HUGEBERT (lets ignore the thinning nerves, because that's a huge topic on its own). And now, after all these nerves regarding this issue, we are in the worst state we have ever been. EVERY deck revolves only around DIRECT DMG vs POINT SLAM, ARTIFACTS and most importantly A HUGE FINISHER. We have more and better direct removal than ever, making any engine without zeal utterly unplayable. This was getting worse over the last expansions, because CDPR keeps printing new direct dmg cards - we have a solution for everything now: dmg through shield, purify + dmg, dmg and banish, dmg and dmg.. and more dmg (and now steal, abduct and abuse as well). Not even the graveyard is save any more. This has to stop.
Because of this, the only counter is to not play any interactable units at all and end with a huge finisher on the last turn. Due to the coin mechanic, SY excels at this. Best examples are coerced blacksmith: (a 5p Fee engine that can produce a swing of 22 points for Gudrun) and WH executioner bounty abuse that gets more and more popular, stacking indirect value and then cashing it all in on the last possible turn, so no one can react to it. Bronze cards should not be able to produce this much value as a finisher. Even gold ones are very critical (hello hubert, hello dagur, hello sheldon). but because these cards cost just 5p, you have so much provision left to win the first round with your gold cards that its almost impossible for other factions to compete.
We need to break out of this cycle and focus on another kind of removal again: soft removal. The interaction between Lock and Purify is actually really interesting and fun. But it never comes to this, because why lock an engine when you can also just kill it with no deficit? Row restrictions and movement is also a great interaction. You could add weather like biting frost that adds a cool down to engines, or make fog make a lane untargetable for units with reach (and add more unit-interaction like blood moon/vampire,..). And then add weathers that have a positive effect, like a warm breeze that buffs a unit each round.
Let the timers of these weather conditions stack, like bleeding and vitality does, to cancle each other out. And most importantly: make removal less binary! If an order deals 1dmg to 3 targets on the ranged row, it should still deal 1 dmg to 1 target on melee. make lock time based (like lock for 5 turns) so there is interaction! (you can pass before the engine can get used again, or you could lock it again in the final round, ....)
Ofc a lot of engines would have to be balanced as well, cap them by a cool down, or a maximum of charges they can use, ...
and the last part below:
TLDR:
GOOD:
Depth (Carry-Over, Combos, Deck building, New mechanics)
Consistency (Card Value and Thinning)
NEUTRAL:
Balance (Tech cards, Flexibility, Bronze Strength)
BAD:
Interactivity and Binary Design (Direct Dmg, Artefacts, Coins and Big Finishers)
Hi everyone: I need to make my own thread to discuss what's happening in the design of Gwent and the direction we are headed.
I hope people will actually value my opinion here and feel encouraged to reply and join the discussion, instead of simply downvoting without any explanation (posted this on reddit because of the 10 post rule).
I am open for any critic you might have and promise to consider it. I am only a casual player, so I will for sure have flaws in my logic and maybe enjoy parts of Gwent that other might find annoying.
That being said, lets dive into it:
THE GOOD:
first off: like most of you guys, I am having a great deal of fun playing the new faction.
Deck building is challenging and the game plan is complex and asks you to think about your future turns to maximize the profit you gain out of your coins.
So the two things i enjoy most about this expansion is DEPTH and CONSISTANCY. And that is awesome - that's why I fell in love with Gwent in the first place. To have more of it is a true joy.
For me, DEPTH is the multitude of decisions you make during the game to maximize the points at the end of each turn, round and match.
This includes setting up combos over multiple turns (preparing bounties, setting up scorch or AoE, ...), as well as thinking about resource management.
The later could mean to save a lock/movement/removal for an important engine or to keep your Geralt round 1, to have an edge in round 3 to destroy something huge.
Another great thing to think about is carry-over into the next round - how can I secure an advantage in the rounds to come?
The Coin-Mechanic does a wonderful job here, even influencing things like deck building by the need to balance coin generation and spending.
This is probably what i enjoy MOST about the new expansion!
The second thing that I like is the CONSISTANCY the new faction offers. Part of it is also thanks to the Coin-Mechanic, but a lot of it also comes from the increased strength of the low bronze units and the two nice thinning tools. I really enjoy the idea behind both of those. Hoard and Insanity MAKE you think about when you actually want to have coins, and when not.
I think this should be used even to a greater extent, so piling up your gold is not always the best option!
For an example, my idea would be to remove the FEE bleeding from Whoresons Freakshow (i expand on SY redesign/balance in my other thread), so that you really have to plan when you want to use it, because you cant use the insanity ability if you have coins.
As for the strong bronze units: they have great synergy - and that's what really makes them shine! almost none of them are just a point slam without setup.
If you meet their condition you get rewarded - A LOT, that makes it fun to play them! Bounty setup, swarm engine, bonded interaction/engine or hoard value - you name it, they deliver!
So to sum it up: THIS FACTION IS A HUGE FUN TO PLAY!
But all good things come to an end at some point and the new expansion has some flaws as well. One it produced itself (BALANCE), which I take as a neutral - because I expect CDPR to correct it (which they already announced) and one that is more of a general design problem Gwent has been struggling with, that got multiplied by the Syndicate update (INTERACTIVITY).
This is my biggest concern and it really makes me worry about the future of my beloved game.
to continue see first post: to long..
Post automatically merged:
THE NEUTRAL:
So lets tackle the part, which I am confident will be resolved soon, before diving into the unpleasant last bit. Obviously the power creep is real, but I wont argue about that, because the result speaks for itself: its a blast to play these bronze bombs. CDPR stated that the other factions will catch up and I fully support this idea, bronzes should be the backbone of a deck.
So now for the more relevant topics surrounding balance which need to be discussed: Tech Cards and general Flexibility/Consistency.
To get into it: this how I understand balance:
In the perfect meta, each leader has a (tier 1) deck that follows a specific game plan. all of these decks have a 50% chance to win against ALL other (tier 1) decks. Now some Leaders/Decks are more popular then others, be it because people like to slam huge stuff on the board (big monsters), or because boobs - lets call it "aesthetics" (dryads) or because a leader is just a crowd favourite from the games lore.
That's where tech cards come in: they get more value in a specific match up, but loose value in others.
Lets look at two cards that have a similar goal, but a different approach: Geralt of Rivia (GoR) and Geralt: Professional (GP). Both have 3 strength and costs 10/11 provisions, so very close as well. GoR destroys any units with 8 or more strength and blanks on anything below. GP damages any unit by 3 and if its a multiple of 3, destroys it. Both of these cards will vastly improve your chance of winning against big monsters, GoR even more than GP - so lets say GoR makes it a 60/40 match up while GP manages a 55/45. But against something like an NR engine deck, both of these cards may loose you the game! Again, GoR more then GP: lets assume 40/60 and 45/55. These are good tech cards, they have upsides and downsides - they will help in a specific situations, but be a burden in others!
If we now compare them with cards like Kalkenstein (purify) (7 for 7) or Tunnel Drill (artefact removal) (6 for 6). We notice that there is no value loss if the conditions are not met and that is REALY bad.
Tech cards NEED to loose value if they do not find their target, otherwise there is no point in trying to play the countered archetype any more - they do not have to fear the downside to having a much higher winratio against your deck. This destroys deck diversity.
As for which out of GoR or GP has the better design? For me its GP by a long shot, mostly because it is less binary. you will always get some value by removing something small, but you may gain huge value if you hit the right target. But it also promotes counter play and interactivity (I'm ignoring Eithne for this), because both sides can influence the outcome and play around it.
This can be extremely rewarding for both players. We need more tech cards like this!
to continue see my third post
Post automatically merged:
THE BAD:
And so we get the the main issue I have with gwent atm: INTERACTIVITY and BINARY DESIGN!
Almost all balance updates try to improve these two issues: be it the Artefact disaster in dez/jan, or the no unit decks, or the constant nerves to direct dmg cards like Ifrit, Regis, Chironex,... or lastly the broken game finishers like HUGEBERT (lets ignore the thinning nerves, because that's a huge topic on its own). And now, after all these nerves regarding this issue, we are in the worst state we have ever been. EVERY deck revolves only around DIRECT DMG vs POINT SLAM, ARTIFACTS and most importantly A HUGE FINISHER. We have more and better direct removal than ever, making any engine without zeal utterly unplayable. This was getting worse over the last expansions, because CDPR keeps printing new direct dmg cards - we have a solution for everything now: dmg through shield, purify + dmg, dmg and banish, dmg and dmg.. and more dmg (and now steal, abduct and abuse as well). Not even the graveyard is save any more. This has to stop.
Because of this, the only counter is to not play any interactable units at all and end with a huge finisher on the last turn. Due to the coin mechanic, SY excels at this. Best examples are coerced blacksmith: (a 5p Fee engine that can produce a swing of 22 points for Gudrun) and WH executioner bounty abuse that gets more and more popular, stacking indirect value and then cashing it all in on the last possible turn, so no one can react to it. Bronze cards should not be able to produce this much value as a finisher. Even gold ones are very critical (hello hubert, hello dagur, hello sheldon). but because these cards cost just 5p, you have so much provision left to win the first round with your gold cards that its almost impossible for other factions to compete.
We need to break out of this cycle and focus on another kind of removal again: soft removal. The interaction between Lock and Purify is actually really interesting and fun. But it never comes to this, because why lock an engine when you can also just kill it with no deficit? Row restrictions and movement is also a great interaction. You could add weather like biting frost that adds a cool down to engines, or make fog make a lane untargetable for units with reach (and add more unit-interaction like blood moon/vampire,..). And then add weathers that have a positive effect, like a warm breeze that buffs a unit each round.
Let the timers of these weather conditions stack, like bleeding and vitality does, to cancle each other out. And most importantly: make removal less binary! If an order deals 1dmg to 3 targets on the ranged row, it should still deal 1 dmg to 1 target on melee. make lock time based (like lock for 5 turns) so there is interaction! (you can pass before the engine can get used again, or you could lock it again in the final round, ....)
Ofc a lot of engines would have to be balanced as well, cap them by a cool down, or a maximum of charges they can use, ...
and the last part below:
Last edited: