NG is the curse of this game

[StanislavOZZO]

I'm back after a couple of months break from Gwent. I played a few games today and did not enjoy it.
NG is everywhere - standard, seasonal...

I strongly suggest to the devs to delete this faction for good when they abandon the game to community management.

NG is not bringing anything good to this game. In my opinion, NG toxicity was one of the key factors for gradual Gwent demise.

R.I.P. Gwent

 

[quintivarium]

I'm back after a couple of months break from Gwent. I played a few games today and did not enjoy it.
NG is everywhere - standard, seasonal...

I strongly suggest to the devs to delete this faction for good when they abandon the game to community management.

NG is not bringing anything good to this game. In my opinion, NG toxicity was one of the key factors for gradual Gwent demise.

R.I.P. Gwent

Actually, what is killing Gwent is all the binary, remove or lose cards cards that only NG has the control to contain. 9 times out of 10, if you show me a player who objects to NG, I will be able to take that player's main decks and complain about the use of binary garbage within them.

 

[Barracuda88]

I'm back after a couple of months break from Gwent. I played a few games today and did not enjoy it.
NG is everywhere - standard, seasonal...

I strongly suggest to the devs to delete this faction for good when they abandon the game to community management.

NG is not bringing anything good to this game. In my opinion, NG toxicity was one of the key factors for gradual Gwent demise.

R.I.P. Gwent

There are other problems - focus on spamming cards, for example - but I agree that NG is and always was the biggest one. Somehow, when you create an entire faction based on griefing other players, it doesn't promote a healthy and fun gaming environment. Go figure.

 

[Luclon1474]

I'm back after a couple of months break from Gwent. I played a few games today and did not enjoy it.
NG is everywhere - standard, seasonal...

I strongly suggest to the devs to delete this faction for good when they abandon the game to community management.

NG is not bringing anything good to this game. In my opinion, NG toxicity was one of the key factors for gradual Gwent demise.

R.I.P. Gwent

Dear friend...constantly sharing your pain here.
I thought the July season was the worst ever (with all those Ogroids, Skellige Armor and Scoiatel Elven Deadeyes decks dominating the scene) but the August season is giving me even more stomachache. Not only we have still all those Ogroids, Skellige Armor and Scoiatel Elven Deadeyes decks around, but in addition the old Nilfgaard meta toxic garbage decks came back, plus the new fantastic Nilfgaard Flanking garbage.
Two days ago I played 15 out of 20 games against Nilfgaard, beyond ridicolous. I mean, players with more than 3000 wins are really unable to create an original deck and are still playing with that Nilfgaard garbage? Gwent has sadly became a game for ParrotPlayers.

Let's say that I played around 100 games with the new version of the Iris card in the last 7 days. Do you know how many opponents try to use Iris? Two. All the rest were stupid ParrotPlayers who didn't even know who Iris was...They got to know her only when they stole her from me, or copy her or just Heatwaved her not having anything better to do.

Why don't the devs give for example 13 provisions cost to John Calveit or 13 to Yennefer Invocation and then we see how good all those ParrotPlayers really are...

[. . .]

 

[quintivarium]

Dear friend...constantly sharing your pain here.
I thought the July season was the worst ever (with all those Ogroids, Skellige Armor and Scoiatel Elven Deadeyes decks dominating the scene) but the August season is giving me even more stomachache. Not only we have still all those Ogroids, Skellige Armor and Scoiatel Elven Deadeyes decks around, but in addition the old Nilfgaard meta toxic garbage decks came back, plus the new fantastic Nilfgaard Flanking garbage.
Two days ago I played 15 out of 20 games against Nilfgaard, beyond ridicolous. I mean, players with more than 3000 wins are really unable to create an original deck and are still playing with that Nilfgaard garbage? Gwent has sadly became a game for ParrotPlayers.

Let's say that I played around 100 games with the new version of the Iris card in the last 7 days. Do you know how many opponents try to use Iris? Two. All the rest were stupid ParrotPlayers who didn't even know who Iris was...They got to know her only when they stole her from me, or copy her or just Heatwaved her not having anything better to do.

Why don't the devs give for example 13 provisions cost to John Calveit or 13 to Yennefer Invocation and then we see how good all those ParrotPlayers really are...
[. . .]

I think you are being a bit unfair to many opposing players when you describe them as parrots — it is an unfortunate feature of game design choices that competitive decks lack variety. Let me explain through example.

Suppose I want a competitive enslave deck. Of course, I am going to include tactic cards because otherwise the leader is worthless. And because of the leader threshold and deck design limits, 9-12 tactics would be desirable. But before I choose my tactics, let me consider units. What units fit a tactics heavy archetype? Skellen, Helga, and 2 Fire Scorpion are obvious choices, with intertwining synergies. Two Nauzicca Seargents are too good not to use (especially with synergies with Helga and Scorpions). From here, my units are not as obvious: there are still several units that acquire good return with tactics synergy: Calveit, Ffion, Menno, False Ciri, Vennendal Elite, Magne Division. But I am also getting a lot of generation of new cards (which gives Assimilate synergy). And I may need to address some deck weaknesses. I have three particular concerns. So far, the deck has only one strong round. Decks with many special cards can feel unit-poor. They lack proactivity and they sometimes have trouble putting points on the board. And I need some consistency since Skellen is too many points to miss. But resolving consistency is obvious — Calveit is much better value than Royal Decree. So let me add Calveit, but put further unit choices on hold pending obvious specials.

Battle Stations would be an excellent tempo boost in an early round. The thinning might not be essential for consistency, but it also allows more provisions to be used. Two Tourney Joust and two Assassination seem like good removal choices. I also like two imperial diplomacy — they are cheap and provide units. They might also proc assimilate. Bribery is not consistent, but can have good value, and also procs assimilate. Battle Preparation is cheap with decent value, I’ll add two.

Back to units, I’m liking Menno and two Magne Division — both improve tempo and access more provisions.

I have provisions for a couple more big cards — and they won’t be tactics since the only big possibility is Coup de Grace; without cards to give spying, it is unlikely to give value. Let’s finish our tactics with Treason and Surrender — two often valuable cards.

Since I have no assimilate units for that synergy, how about Torres and Artorius. But I now need an 8 provision unit and I see no good options. Replace an Assassination with Buhurt. Now with 9 provisions I can choose either Ffion or Vilgefortz.

Is this starting to look pretty familiar? I guess that makes me a net decking parrot. Seriously, my deck might slightly differ from the standard net decks. But would it really feel different to play against?

So let’s try a second deck — how about one featuring the new Iris card. So let’s begin with Iris von Everec. Best case scenario, I get Iris in the graveyard round one, with 15 units in deck to boost by one. Then I manage to later use all 15 boosts. If I actually played her (rather than discarding her), she plays for a whopping 21 points — a decent amount, but hardly match dominating. Without significant help, she will play for more like 10 to 12 on a lucky day — which is not great for her provisions.

So let’s consider what she adds value to. There’s Iris’s Companions — used mainly to guarantee having a necessary card in hand. But that deck will be defined more by the card Companions calls to hand, not Iris von Everec. And there’s Erland. But then the deck would be more an Erland deck than an Iris deck. And that’s really it. No grand overarching theme.

I’m sorry; I might be able to build a viable deck using Iris (but it wouldn’t be viewed as an Iris deck); I am not creative enough to make an Iris deck. Don’t be upset — there are hundreds of cards around which I cannot build a deck. [. . .]

 

[Luclon1474]

I think you are being a bit unfair to many opposing players when you describe them as parrots — it is an unfortunate feature of game design choices that competitive decks lack variety. Let me explain through example.

Suppose I want a competitive enslave deck. Of course, I am going to include tactic cards because otherwise the leader is worthless. And because of the leader threshold and deck design limits, 9-12 tactics would be desirable. But before I choose my tactics, let me consider units. What units fit a tactics heavy archetype? Skellen, Helga, and 2 Fire Scorpion are obvious choices, with intertwining synergies. Two Nauzicca Seargents are too good not to use (especially with synergies with Helga and Scorpions). From here, my units are not as obvious: there are still several units that acquire good return with tactics synergy: Calveit, Ffion, Menno, False Ciri, Vennendal Elite, Magne Division. But I am also getting a lot of generation of new cards (which gives Assimilate synergy). And I may need to address some deck weaknesses. I have three particular concerns. So far, the deck has only one strong round. Decks with many special cards can feel unit-poor. They lack proactivity and they sometimes have trouble putting points on the board. And I need some consistency since Skellen is too many points to miss. But resolving consistency is obvious — Calveit is much better value than Royal Decree. So let me add Calveit, but put further unit choices on hold pending obvious specials.

Battle Stations would be an excellent tempo boost in an early round. The thinning might not be essential for consistency, but it also allows more provisions to be used. Two Tourney Joust and two Assassination seem like good removal choices. I also like two imperial diplomacy — they are cheap and provide units. They might also proc assimilate. Bribery is not consistent, but can have good value, and also procs assimilate. Battle Preparation is cheap with decent value, I’ll add two.

Back to units, I’m liking Menno and two Magne Division — both improve tempo and access more provisions.

I have provisions for a couple more big cards — and they won’t be tactics since the only big possibility is Coup de Grace; without cards to give spying, it is unlikely to give value. Let’s finish our tactics with Treason and Surrender — two often valuable cards.

Since I have no assimilate units for that synergy, how about Torres and Artorius. But I now need an 8 provision unit and I see no good options. Replace an Assassination with Buhurt. Now with 9 provisions I can choose either Ffion or Vilgefortz.

Is this starting to look pretty familiar? I guess that makes me a net decking parrot. Seriously, my deck might slightly differ from the standard net decks. But would it really feel different to play against?

So let’s try a second deck — how about one featuring the new Iris card. So let’s begin with Iris von Everec. Best case scenario, I get Iris in the graveyard round one, with 15 units in deck to boost by one. Then I manage to later use all 15 boosts. If I actually played her (rather than discarding her), she plays for a whopping 21 points — a decent amount, but hardly match dominating. Without significant help, she will play for more like 10 to 12 on a lucky day — which is not great for her provisions.

So let’s consider what she adds value to. There’s Iris’s Companions — used mainly to guarantee having a necessary card in hand. But that deck will be defined more by the card Companions calls to hand, not Iris von Everec. And there’s Erland. But then the deck would be more an Erland deck than an Iris deck. And that’s really it. No grand overarching theme.

I’m sorry; I might be able to build a viable deck using Iris (but it wouldn’t be viewed as an Iris deck); I am not creative enough to make an Iris deck. Don’t be upset — there are hundreds of cards around which I cannot build a deck. [. . .]

My bad, I forgot to say that I actually win some of the games against Nilfgaard, and I am winning a good part of the games I play with Iris in my deck (but I do not wish to disclose more details about it - my original decks are what is keeping me in the game at the moment).

But the point is that it's very sad that on the other side of the barricade I see a total lack of creativity, always the same decks, with the same combination of cards played in always the same order. It's sad that the game and the devs decisions seems to promote that kind of behaviour and choices from players.

Lastly, I agree with what Barracuda said earlier "when you create an entire faction based on griefing other players, it doesn't promote a healthy and fun gaming environment". When you don't have fun, you end up not enjoying the game anymore, not even when you win games.

My mission now is to be relegated every season and go backwards in the ranks, in order to breath a less toxic air. Can you imagine? But it's hard, it shouldn't be like that. Sometimes I just forfeit as soon as I see leader abilities like Enslave 6 or Carapace (because it's Ogroids) or Onslaught (because it's Pirates with infinite armor) or Inspired Zeal (because either there is Demavend with Temple of Melitele or Reavers). It really shouldn't be like this.

 

[quintivarium]

My mission now is to be relegated every season and go backwards in the ranks, in order to breath a less toxic air. Can you imagine? But it's hard, it shouldn't be like that. Sometimes I just forfeit as soon as I see leader abilities like Enslave 6 or Carapace (because it's Ogroids) or Onslaught (because it's Pirates with infinite armor) or Inspired Zeal (because either there is Demavend with Temple of Melitele or Reavers). It really shouldn't be like this.

Things are not necessarily rosy at level 25 either (prior to summer cycle, I had happily dropped back by simply always playing unranked). The issues here are different. Yes, I rarely encounter current net decks (I do encounter occasional net decks from earlier metas — I don’t know whether that’s due to returning players or players purchasing decks from older sources).

Instead of constant repetitious net decks, I have to put up with atrocious play. I can’t really fault my opponents — many are true beginners and I have no business playing at that level even if I am using junk decks just to complete cycle quests. Then, to avoid climbing, I have to work to lose,

Maybe there is a level with a happy medium. If you find it, let me know.

 

[Luclon1474]

Things are not necessarily rosy at level 25 either (prior to summer cycle, I had happily dropped back by simply always playing unranked). The issues here are different. Yes, I rarely encounter current net decks (I do encounter occasional net decks from earlier metas — I don’t know whether that’s due to returning players or players purchasing decks from older sources).

Instead of constant repetitious net decks, I have to put up with atrocious play. I can’t really fault my opponents — many are true beginners and I have no business playing at that level even if I am using junk decks just to complete cycle quests. Then, to avoid climbing, I have to work to lose,

Maybe there is a level with a happy medium. If you find it, let me know.

I see.
Two seasons ago I was at Rank 1 (because I declined the Pro Rank) and the air was toxic, not breathable.
Then previous season I was at Rank 4 and the air was toxic, not breathable.
Now I am at Rank 6 and the air is toxic, not breathable.
I will let you know if next seasons (when I will be relegated even more) the situation changes. Perhaps around Rank 12-15 it's a bit better? I don't know, but that's my target .

 

[DRK3]

Didnt take long to find a NG-hate thread to share some recent thoughts, decided it was better than to create yet another one.

NG has always been tremendously popular, and hated by the same amount. Its known for its toxic style, whether its mill, clog or - taking things literally - with poison. Or how its able to play almost any archetype better than the faction to which it belongs to.
But for the past year, it added a new crime to its record:

NG - TWISTING THE FACTIONS IDENTITY

I don't mean NG is twisting its own identity. What is twisting is the balance and identity of the other factions.
There are 3 paradigms - pointslam, control and engines. MO is the pointslam faction, NG is the control faction, AKA the 'i wont let you do what you're trying to do' faction (Note: SK is also known as a control faction, but in a much more straightforward way, with damage). And NR is the de facto engine faction, which has been bullied by NG since they both came into fruition...

Not anymore. NG is doing NG things, taking stuff for itself, this time is "invading the North", and by far becoming the best engine faction, which has been for a whole year, since NG soldiers rework. Pretty much all the flanking soldiers are 2pts per turn, and cost 4-5p. As if that wasnt enough, they got that leader to easily put them outside of cheap removal and battle stations and baccala to play multiple engines in a turn.

Why should only NG have this privilege? Pratically no other faction has 2pt per turn engines. MO has three (Selfeater, witch apprentice, endrega larvae) but they're all 5/6p, more vulnerable to removal and they're pointslam engines, less valuable than control engines. NR and ST need to work a lot and create synergy between engines to extract more value than 1pt per turn.

As if this wasnt enough, NG also has Nauzicaa sergeant, which breaks the point-prov system, but that is topic for another time.

I sincerely hope there is a change to this in a near-future. I dont see them buffing 5 entire faction's bronzes to be on par with NG's, so the best next thing is asking for nerfs.

TIER 1 AND WHAT IT MEANS

The flanking soldiers metadeck that has been going around (i curse the person who thought on adding Aerondight to it) was considered Tier 1, and i dont see many people arguing otherwise. Now, at least according to Team Elder Blood (which is the only one still doing metareports, AFAIK), there's two other tier 1 decks. I have to disagree with their evaluation, and i'll explain why soon.

What are these tiers? There isnt any consensus. Some players simplify it into winrates in pro rank. So tier 1 are able to get 65+%, tier 2 is 55-60%, tier 3 is around 50%. Personally, i prefer to think more of a qualitative system rather than quantitative.
So tier 3 is a deck that is solid, but has some bad matchups, a tier 2 is a very strong deck able to beat almost all other decks, while a tier 1 is a deck with many strengths and virtually no weaknesses.

To give examples, i want to compare MO ogroids to NG flanking soldiers. The latter has been discarded by now, but was pissing off a lot of people in the first couple of weeks of the Tide Rises. Some said it was too strong. But it was definitely not tier 1. Why? Its counterable. If i wanted, i could go into the deckbuilder and make a deck that totally ruins ogroids (most likely, it would be NG... surprise!)
Now, a tier 1 deck like flanking soldiers is so strong because even when the opponent knows exactly what they have, there's no weak links to explore, no bad matchups for it. I go into the deckbuilder and i am not sure on how to counter that crap, so reliable it is.

That's one of the reasons i disagree with the metareport. The SY list should not be on the same level as NG's. One of the things i havent mentioned yet is how ridiculously easy flanking soldiers is to play, while SY is the opposite. But its also much more disruptable, as they require a lot of setup to protect their big vice engines.

If you disagree, feel free to share your opinion, but more importantly, the advice on new ways to defeat that NG atrocity until its hopefully (but not likely) balanced out.

 

[WorstMetaEver]

One of the things i havent mentioned yet is how ridiculously easy flanking soldiers is to play, while SY is the opposite. But its also much more disruptable, as they require a lot of setup to protect their big vice engines.

Usually i'm not against NG. Actually i enjoy control-oriented nature of faction and appreciate NG ability to keep humble braindead numerous NR abuses.
Yet soldiers trully braindead at NR level albeit stronger.
Deck is absurdly easy to pilot AND almost every core card cost so cheap that current NG soldiers list run Trahaern (most ugly and unfair card in current Gwent imo) mor often than not.

 

[Barracuda88]

Didnt take long to find a NG-hate thread to share some recent thoughts, decided it was better than to create yet another one.

NG has always been tremendously popular, and hated by the same amount. Its known for its toxic style, whether its mill, clog or - taking things literally - with poison. Or how its able to play almost any archetype better than the faction to which it belongs to.
But for the past year, it added a new crime to its record:

NG - TWISTING THE FACTIONS IDENTITY

I don't mean NG is twisting its own identity. What is twisting is the balance and identity of the other factions.
There are 3 paradigms - pointslam, control and engines. MO is the pointslam faction, NG is the control faction, AKA the 'i wont let you do what you're trying to do' faction (Note: SK is also known as a control faction, but in a much more straightforward way, with damage). And NR is the de facto engine faction, which has been bullied by NG since they both came into fruition...

Not anymore. NG is doing NG things, taking stuff for itself, this time is "invading the North", and by far becoming the best engine faction, which has been for a whole year, since NG soldiers rework. Pretty much all the flanking soldiers are 2pts per turn, and cost 4-5p. As if that wasnt enough, they got that leader to easily put them outside of cheap removal and battle stations and baccala to play multiple engines in a turn.

Why should only NG have this privilege? Pratically no other faction has 2pt per turn engines. MO has three (Selfeater, witch apprentice, endrega larvae) but they're all 5/6p, more vulnerable to removal and they're pointslam engines, less valuable than control engines. NR and ST need to work a lot and create synergy between engines to extract more value than 1pt per turn.

As if this wasnt enough, NG also has Nauzicaa sergeant, which breaks the point-prov system, but that is topic for another time.

I sincerely hope there is a change to this in a near-future. I dont see them buffing 5 entire faction's bronzes to be on par with NG's, so the best next thing is asking for nerfs.

TIER 1 AND WHAT IT MEANS

The flanking soldiers metadeck that has been going around (i curse the person who thought on adding Aerondight to it) was considered Tier 1, and i dont see many people arguing otherwise. Now, at least according to Team Elder Blood (which is the only one still doing metareports, AFAIK), there's two other tier 1 decks. I have to disagree with their evaluation, and i'll explain why soon.

What are these tiers? There isnt any consensus. Some players simplify it into winrates in pro rank. So tier 1 are able to get 65+%, tier 2 is 55-60%, tier 3 is around 50%. Personally, i prefer to think more of a qualitative system rather than quantitative.
So tier 3 is a deck that is solid, but has some bad matchups, a tier 2 is a very strong deck able to beat almost all other decks, while a tier 1 is a deck with many strengths and virtually no weaknesses.

To give examples, i want to compare MO ogroids to NG flanking soldiers. The latter has been discarded by now, but was pissing off a lot of people in the first couple of weeks of the Tide Rises. Some said it was too strong. But it was definitely not tier 1. Why? Its counterable. If i wanted, i could go into the deckbuilder and make a deck that totally ruins ogroids (most likely, it would be NG... surprise!)
Now, a tier 1 deck like flanking soldiers is so strong because even when the opponent knows exactly what they have, there's no weak links to explore, no bad matchups for it. I go into the deckbuilder and i am not sure on how to counter that crap, so reliable it is.

That's one of the reasons i disagree with the metareport. The SY list should not be on the same level as NG's. One of the things i havent mentioned yet is how ridiculously easy flanking soldiers is to play, while SY is the opposite. But its also much more disruptable, as they require a lot of setup to protect their big vice engines.

If you disagree, feel free to share your opinion, but more importantly, the advice on new ways to defeat that NG atrocity until its hopefully (but not likely) balanced out.

To me, the tiers basically mean that if you pilot the deck well and grind, tier 1 decks will have the best winrate overall, within some arbitrary small margin of each other. Tier 2 is the same, except it's going to be noticably smaller winrate overall than tier1, etc. So based on that, the tier list is decent, even though SY is a lot harder to pilot than Soldiers and Svalblod (another absurd card). IF you pilot it well, that Vice nonsense, even nerfed now, is still really hard to deal with. But of course, people would rather play SK and NG .

As for NG, the whole "control faction" thing has never been true, just like "bUt iT hAs WeAk BrOnZes," but yes, it's been getting worse. It's as if the steady 25% playrate of NG on the ladder wasn't enough, so the devs keep trying to make NG better. So that EVERYONE plays it ALL of the time I guess is the goal. Enslave 6 Assimilate has been easy mode meta for over a year, and now they added this ridiculous flanking. Based on this trend, I wouldn't hold my breath for "balance" if I were you.

I don't really know a solid counter. I play ST, which has been garbage for about as long as NG has been meta, but I've been having a decent winrate (read: slightly above 50% lol) against this meta with Traps and a bit less so with Elves, and those are the only two ST decks one can play at the moment, as far as I can tell.

 

[SalsaBandito]

There just isnt ANY justification for how fine tuned NG decks are to tamper with SK. Other snowball decks like scoital deadeyes and NR reivers and monster ogroid decks exist but they just do thier own thing. NG has cultists that are way way way more powerful snowballs a distressing number of lock units and all of that on top of being able to pull so many of my cards put of my deck; and unlike every other factions meta decks NG can make almost all of these archetypes synergies with each other whereas everyone else has to pick a flavour and stick with it. More so if you're trying to run decks that foxus on devotion, SK doesnt have any devotion deck synergies that can counter ANYTHING NG has. It is just too much to deal with in its current state. Hard number limits on how many cultists they can spawn, a reduction on the number of units that can lock units, no more removing my cards from my deck only copying them. Something, anything, im sick of being at rank 1 and playing against NG 8 games out of 10.

 

[Luclon1474]

If you disagree, feel free to share your opinion, but more importantly, the advice on new ways to defeat that NG atrocity until its hopefully (but not likely) balanced out.

How to defeat NG atrocities...
1) Play the game only if you are not starting first, otherwise immediately forfeit and save yourself 10-15 minutes of stomachache
2) When the opponent starts first, you got a chance in your hand. Try whatever you can in order to win the first round, because then you can either:
- play round 2 with equal amount of cards, and force the opponent to play some (if not all) of his best atrocities. Doesn't matter if you lose round 2, then you can play round 3 with less stress...equal amount of cards, the opponent will not have his most powerful cards, and most importantly you will play the last card of the game
- pass round 2, and play round 3 with 1 card more than your opponent...so you will play the last 2 cards of the game without any countermeasure from the opponent

But, just to be clear, i don't like what I just wrote above. It's just the sad outcome of months and months of disappointing patches that never addressed the complaints of the majority of players. This is what you get when the devs don't properly care about the game.
if they will not balance Nilfgaard in the next patch (and the card drop will ruin the game even more) I am ready to uninstall.
Actually, I would prefer not having a new card drop at all, but rather a substantial balancing of this game.

 

[ellegirl100]

At this rate I just boycott NG & NR -- insta-forfeit.

SK is a headache with soooo much control, so I do think their damage should be lowered, otherwise all faction bronzes' base power would need to be increased to stand a chance--especially with the graveyard exploits. ST & SY are particularly vulnerable, since most of their cards are 2-4 power (which sucks, since those are my main factions). But SK is still more bearable than NG/NR--it's not that often I see them at least.

To give examples, i want to compare MO ogroids to NG flanking soldiers. The latter has been discarded by now, but was pissing off a lot of people in the first couple of weeks of the Tide Rises. Some said it was too strong. But it was definitely not tier 1. Why? Its counterable. If i wanted, i could go into the deckbuilder and make a deck that totally ruins ogroids (most likely, it would be NG... surprise!)

Agreed, Ogroids are very beatable (I use Reset cards to handle the boosts, and moving cards to different rows to mess with their Might). But because I want those frikkin cycle cardbacks I'm usually forced to play with junk decks, which makes preparing my decks for different situations so much harder.

So I really wonder what CDPR thought they were doing forcing people to play with these old defunct cycle expansions that don't stand a chance against the newer powercrept cards. I HOPE they're taking statistics so the old cards can see some buffs VERY soon, because all these season cycle quests are doing is showing just how poorly balanced the game really is.

if they will not balance Nilfgaard in the next patch (and the card drop will ruin the game even more) I am ready to uninstall. Actually, I would prefer not having a new card drop at all, but rather a substantial balancing of this game.

IMO we need more cards that can hit the entire row--there's neutral Lacerate, and SY has Tinboy, but when Reavers are constantly being re-armored on BOTH rows it's nowhere near enough. Even new weather cards or devotion-abilities would be great. We saw this same issue with NR boosting whole rows and Yrden was the only thing that could counter it--then they nerfed Geralt, like wtf!?! You can't have all these cards that can swarm the whole board in 1-2 moves (same with Cultists), with nothing to counter them.

And I've said before how we need more Locations/Resilience/Scenarios; it's beyond unfair how many NR/NG have, compared to other factions.

 

[DRK3]

At this rate I just boycott NG & NR -- insta-forfeit.

SK is a headache with soooo much control, so I do think their damage should be lowered, otherwise all faction bronzes' base power would need to be increased to stand a chance--especially with the graveyard exploits. ST & SY are particularly vulnerable, since most of their cards are 2-4 power (which sucks, since those are my main factions). But SK is still more bearable than NG/NR--it's not that often I see them at least.

I've mentioned many aspects on how NG is overtuned in my post in this thread, but not NR. Because its not as bad, but still problematic.

Basically, the faction is being kept competitive by 2 cards alone - Mutagenerator and Reaver Scouts.
If you check all NR metadecks of the past two months, virtually all of them have either one or both of these cards (the only exception i can think is Renfri priestesses, but that one has other strengths like Renfri herself and Onagers).

Agreed, Ogroids are very beatable (I use Reset cards to handle the boosts, and moving cards to different rows to mess with their Might). But because I want those frikkin cycle cardbacks I'm usually forced to play with junk decks, which makes preparing my decks for different situations so much harder.

So I really wonder what CDPR thought they were doing forcing people to play with these old defunct cycle expansions that don't stand a chance against the newer powercrept cards. I HOPE they're taking statistics so the old cards can see some buffs VERY soon, because all these season cycle quests are doing is showing just how poorly balanced the game really is.

I dont think this cycle will be as bad, because i've read somewhere it includes Cursed Toad set.
That is the set that includes all cards released in 2022, like Golden Nekker and Renfri. There hasnt been much powercreep between '22 and '23, in fact a lot of those cards still dominate the meta of their respective factions.

IMO we need more cards that can hit the entire row--there's neutral Lacerate, and SY has Tinboy, but when Reavers are constantly being re-armored on BOTH rows it's nowhere near enough. Even new weather cards or devotion-abilities would be great. We saw this same issue with NR boosting whole rows and Yrden was the only thing that could counter it--then they nerfed Geralt, like wtf!?! You can't have all these cards that can swarm the whole board in 1-2 moves (same with Cultists), with nothing to counter them.

And I've said before how we need more Locations/Resilience/Scenarios; it's beyond unfair how many NR/NG have, compared to other factions.

Sadly, in around 10 days, Gwent will have its last card drop EVER, only 12 cards, legendary.
Probably 2 per faction, no neutrals, and there wont be any massive innovations on mechanics and archetypes.
The best one could hope for are reworks of existing cards in the upcoming 4 months into something more interesting, after that its only small power-provision changes.

 

[Luclon1474]

A new low point has been reached, from my point of view...I have stomachache.
Today, after facing (as always) lots of opponents using Nilfgaard, the game offered me the icing on the cake.
A Nilfgaard Enslave 8 deck

And, as you can easily imagine, Stefan Skellen joined the battlefield at the end of the game, playing 6 Ace up the sleeves.
This is beyon ridicolous. I am really tired of all this. Why is this even allowed?
It's not a matter of winning or losing (for the records, I won this match in the end). It's a matter of enjoying the game.
I don't enjoy this anymore. There is this tendency from the devs to promote a playing style that prefer controlling or destroying or humiliating the opponent, and from the players to follow this style obviously.
From my point of view, it's frankly embarassing that the devs didn't nerf Stefan Skellen as well as several other Nilfgaard cards that break the game and discourage players to keep playing this game. Why Jan Calveit is still there untouched? Why Yennefer Invocation and Anna Henrietta are still at 9 provision cost? Why it took them ages to nerf Vilgerfortz, it wasn't clear that it was a very unpleasant (and cheap) card? Why now there will a new card that will break the game (Rosa and Edna Var Attre) and it is set at 9 provision cost?

 

[DRK3]

I come with another mega-post on why NG is so toxic and the bane of Gwent.
I dont want to pile on NG based on emotional purposes, i believe i am bringing fresh, solid arguments to the table that in all these years ive never seen pointed out.
I didnt create a new thread because in this forum, at this point, that would be somewhat ridiculous...

NILFGAARD - LEADERS AND SURPRISE VALUE

Nilfgaard has strong leader abilities. We all know that. But there are other factions with equally strong leaders and they're not as problematic. Why?
Because NG leaders are also interchangeable.
Most abilities are useful and can fit most NG archetypes. So when you are matched to a NG opponent, you cant deduce what you're facing just from leader and do the mulligans accordingly.

OTHER FACTIONS: Especially MO and ST, are the opposite, and have very well defined leader abilities, which are also restrictive in deckbuilding. MO has the WH leader, the vampire leader, the DW leader, etc.
ST has the elf leader, the dwarf leader, symbiosis, harmony, handbuff, etc.
Its not always been like this - it was something the devs strived to do with leader changes and reworks, and im not implying that was wrong... but NG got a different treatment.

NILFGAARD: The difference between NG archetypes is thinner. Poison/status, soldiers, assimilate, and "everyone's favourites": mill and clog.
There are 7 leader abilities, and with the exception of the recent Toussaintois Hospitality, all other 6 arent too restrictive.
Ive seen enslave-6 lists in doublecross and they worked just as well, if not better.
Seen cultists with imperial formation.
Seen virtually every possible deck with imprisonment.
Seen mill with all leaders, except toussaintois and enslave.

This suprise element and versatility would be OK for other factions to have, but not NG, the "deck manipulation faction".
Mill and clog are two of the most toxic archetypes, and they wouldnt be as bad if at least you knew you were facing them before the mulligans R1: In other matchups you may want to save your best cards for later rounds, but not when you're facing mill or clog, where you definitely want round control and if your win conditions are in deck, they may be banished or no longer accessible.

I am making this post perfectly aware this paradigm wont change now, a few months before dev support ceases. But i considered its still relevant to bring up criticism and inform other players of what they sense but cant explain for themselves, and better understand the downfall of Gwent.

 

[Barracuda88]

Just another thing that makes the most toxic faction also the easiest to play, which in turn (both, the toxicity and the ease) leads to its constant overwhelming pop, which in turn leads to infuriating and alienating players who keep getting griefed. And the sad part is the devs have ALWAYS been aware of it (how could they not be if they have access to all the numbers?) and always encouraged it.

 

[LeticiOrel]

I didn't play a single match using NG deck and I'm gonna stick to this attitude to the very end. (my wins counted as NG come from my pure neutral deck, which I played for the sake of completing daily quests, using double cross ability just for fun). @DRK3 I totally agree with you. From my 1,5 year experience, I can say that NG as a faction sucks all the fun out of the game, because..... well, when you play a game, you simply want to play with your deck. NG denies that at the very core. It's designed to destroy your deck in multiple ways, and let's be honest, a great amount of non-NG decks can't do a s**t about it. You just watch your deck ruined. How is it supposed to be fun?! Yeah, you can win even if you're milled, clogged, locked million times or so, but... what the hell?
Yes, I don't GG NG opponents like never, sometimes I just forfeit after r1, because I want to play with my deck. And I woudn't be surprised if some players abandoned Gwent for good simply because of this.

 

[EduFerraz]

I think the most problem of ng its they have points/engine and control in the same deck.

A deck from other factions you usually have:
- control and big pointslam finishers.
- engines with low control.
- only pointslams with low control wich usually dont win again engines but win again control.

Of course good decks has 2 of it or at least a mix of it, and those decks are usually called meta and they got nerf in the next few patches.

But ng its a different story. I really dont remember when it was The last nerf ng get it (and i stayed out for 6 months). Maybe Torres second form, but He still pretty good.

Also, we have The cheaps lockers they didnt change it.

The oy thing that ng doenst - ussulay - have its pointslam. But whatever deck you create you Will have control and engines and it will be kind of meta