NR charge/order decks are anti-fun

+
Playing against these decks feels like crap. Maybe I'm playing the wrong deck vs them, but that goes against what Gwent is about (at least, how I remember it).

Most decks you play a card, and then the opponent plays a card. You try to build your board, balancing immediate points, with some cards that may do something later for a bonus, giving you time to counter it perhaps.

The problem with charge/order is that they play a card, and that card gets value for the rest of the match. There's not enough removal/counterplay if you choose to play a deck that goes for points, because they'll just ping you down the whole time. So what, has gwent become like hearthstone where we need to have specific decks to counter other decks? Rock/paper/scissors is not good game design. And it's not like NR just has a few cards that do this, all of their cards have some minor effect that synergizes with any other card they can play more or less. So it's not good enough to just "remove this" because they'll just adapt and play into something else. I think this flexibility is actually fine, but other factions don't have these capabilities.

Should I be playing unitless decks? More decks that are anti fun for the game.

I don't remember NR having anything this broken before, but every time I face this deck, it's just super annoying to go against. This would be fine to go against if there were more answers, allowing for more flexible decks, but there are not. This also goes back to another complaint I made with weather... either you can counter it, or not (specifically RNR).

I don't know what they can do fix these annoying issues, short of completely reworking NR charge units, or reworking other factions to make them more flexible.

Perhaps have more cards behave differently depending on their row. Why not give all cards a melee/ranged effect, giving players more choices.

Edit: Let me clarify. I don't care if I lose. I care that I know exactly what's happening, and have 0 counterplay ... It's not even a problem with top-decking. It's a problem with absolutely no chance of comeback because they played X and you played Y. I'm not talking about random cards. I'm talking about properly put together decks, at max provisions -- I just think the game would be better if your cards had more flexibility and counterplay.
 
Last edited:

rrc

Forum veteran
The game is of course a Rock/Paper/Scissors of Engine/TempoValue/Control where NR is the Engine faction. NR can't do anything against heavy control decks and mostly lose to them. So, unless you run plenty of removal/locks/move your chances of winning against NR is minimal. I agree that NR has plenty of amazing game winning engines which are much cheaper and much effective. It is because of this NR fear, people tend to run heavy control decks or unit-less decks and because of that NR is considered as a weak faction. Most of the decks our there can shut down NR.

I don't know anything about HearthStone, but shouldn't all the games have like this; the rock-paper-scissors kind of cycle.
 
I don't think games should have a rock paper scissors cycle. That means that playing games out is more or less pre-determined and gets boring to play out.

I'd prefer if every deck has a chance to beat another deck.
I think strengths/weaknesses are fine, but to have a deck 95-5 hard countered is not good design in my opinion.

Like I said, I'm fine with them having NR have such fluid decks where all the cards interact, but it feels out of place in this game where the other cards (mostly) are just played and done. You can't keep up with removal.

This is why I suggested that they make ALL cards have some sort of flexibility -- maybe have stronger/weaker effects on each card, but allow the player more options, otherwise you just run into nonsense that you have 0 chance against.

They advertise Gwent as a game of pure skill.. This would be true if you could actually respond to your opponent. So many times I see exactly what my opponent is trying to do, and I know how I could counter it, but there is absolutely nothing I can do because their cards will just beat my cards.
 
I don't think games should have a rock paper scissors cycle. That means that playing games out is more or less pre-determined and gets boring to play out.

I'd prefer if every deck has a chance to beat another deck.
I think strengths/weaknesses are fine, but to have a deck 95-5 hard countered is not good design in my opinion.

Like I said, I'm fine with them having NR have such fluid decks where all the cards interact, but it feels out of place in this game where the other cards (mostly) are just played and done. You can't keep up with removal.

This is why I suggested that they make ALL cards have some sort of flexibility -- maybe have stronger/weaker effects on each card, but allow the player more options, otherwise you just run into nonsense that you have 0 chance against.

They advertise Gwent as a game of pure skill.. This would be true if you could actually respond to your opponent. So many times I see exactly what my opponent is trying to do, and I know how I could counter it, but there is absolutely nothing I can do because their cards will just beat my cards.

Yup.

In fairness, rock/paper/scissors can be mitigated by playing a deck where your strategy does not revolve entirely around one of the three. Also, navigating non-ideal match-ups with a deck goes outside the deck build and involves the approach in the game itself. Case and point, various builds can be vulnerable to bleeding R2. Other builds are vulnerable to bleeds and can take steps in the game play to mitigate those weaknesses. For example, by conserving valuable resources R1 when you get blue coin, a sub-par opening draw and are matched against a deck you expect will aggressively push R1 and bleed R2.

In terms of the advertisement... Yeah.... It's like any other form of advertisement. It ultimately boils down to whether you believe it :).

I don't know anything about HearthStone, but shouldn't all the games have like this; the rock-paper-scissors kind of cycle.

Nope.

A better model for a "skill-based" CCG would be one where nearly every deck has a fighting chance against nearly every other deck, assuming proper play. It's fine if deck A is weak against deck B and strong against deck C. It's an entirely different animal when deck A is nearly or completely an auto-loss against deck B but an auto-win against deck C. HC certainly isn't this lopsided. It's definitely shifted far more toward it, however.
 
Problems with NR and balance of engines/removal in general is caused by low base power. It would be brave if CDPR admit it and start to increase base values while keeping points generated by engines on the current level. Maybe even run PTR for it. Eventually, the better player players expirience is the faster the game grows. And i'm sure that broken engine/removal balance is caused by low base values and its a one of few things keeping the game from growing faster.
 
The triangle concept (rocket, paper and scissors) in Gwent, its not a 3 point concept, you have in the vertex control, engines, and point slam, but you can add control to a point slam, or you can add engines to a control etc... if you are playing a vertex deck, then you will find itself in more matchups where the result feels predetermined, if you are playing something in the middle of two vertex, it would be harder for that to happen, in the end its your choice.
 
Even this concept of "engines" is about damaging and ultimately removing opponents cards. It should be reasonably expensive to be so disruptive as the bulk of the game should be about a slow build strategy on your side of the board, with elements of removal/control. Instead it's almostentirely about counters/removal/damage, you're barely able to keep a decent card on the board and most decks run nothing but counters.

I like concepts such as vitality, bleed, blood moon, etc. - they add a calmness to the game that's better. It feels like a lot more cards should only do things like damage + bleeding, or boost + vitality (i.e. Cleaver damages for 2, then adds bleeding based on number of cards, Wild Hunt Hound does 1 damage, 2 bleeding). Instead it's just MASSIVE DAMAGE BLAMMO DEAD CARDS EVERYWHERE!!!
 
So, people are starting to agree that cards need more base power then? Finally? Maybe that's something the devs willl do as it's too easy to remove cards.
 
I don't think engines are overpowered, or boring. It's much more strategic than pure damage cards. Against them it's a matter of choosing what card you have to remove, what card you can work around.
I also don't think more base power would do much good. I'd like to see armor back in the game, that would help I think. You would still have the same value, but cards that don't get immediate reward would be harder to remove. You don't even need much, just a couple of points. The addition of shield already was a step towards that I think.
 
I don't think engines are overpowered, or boring. It's much more strategic than pure damage cards. Against them it's a matter of choosing what card you have to remove, what card you can work around.
I also don't think more base power would do much good. I'd like to see armor back in the game, that would help I think. You would still have the same value, but cards that don't get immediate reward would be harder to remove. You don't even need much, just a couple of points. The addition of shield already was a step towards that I think.

Yes, Armor plus more bleed (or wound?) and boost/heal cards would really balance the game out a lot more.

Still firmly believe there should be a third row.
 
Honestly, I don't know what the fix should be, but I'm getting sick of this deck. Even going up a full card on him, he plays yen, and just pings down everything I have.
So my deck that focuses mainly on building my board is completely nullified because I just have everything shaved down to 0 because I can't remove 5 point things.
 
Yes, Armor plus more bleed (or wound?) and boost/heal cards would really balance the game out a lot more.
That would be interesting I think indeed to have bleed go through armor. It would give it an edge versus direct damage.

Honestly, I don't know what the fix should be, but I'm getting sick of this deck. Even going up a full card on him, he plays yen, and just pings down everything I have.
So my deck that focuses mainly on building my board is completely nullified because I just have everything shaved down to 0 because I can't remove 5 point things.
That's the rock/paper/scissors previous members were talking about, which applies mostly if you play full engine, control or points. Full engines are super powerful if you let them build up, and they will destroy the guy trying to set up a board to spam points. Point spams are usually faster than removal, so they can beat full damage decks. Full control decks (damage or lock) can wipe the engines as they appear. The problem you have with the engines being too strong, I -playing at the moment a full engine deck- have the same complaint about full control. Nilfgaard and their hundreds of lock/seize, or the decks made with all the neutral damage cards like ifrit, cleaver, regis etc make me rage sometimes.
You have 3 options: either you learn to play against the deck that is supposed to beat you (and sometimes pray a little if that's your thing), or you make mixed decks, which are jack-of-all-trade like (good everywhere but excellent nowhere). Or, you sacrifice a few slots in your deck to add tech cards to counter the type that bothers you (shield/purify for engines vs damage, reset for control vs point slam/boost, and AOE, removal or whatnot vs engines).

Actually ask a lot of people, I am not sure many will tell you engines are too powerful. They have many counters and you mostly rely on a few specific cards to guarantee a win. I kind of came back a little with Meve, and now that a lot have been added in different factions (ST or SK can make pretty good engine decks too).
 
The basic strategy against NR is to go all in to win round 1 (you play your finisher cards if you have to), and then bleed in round 2, so that round 3 is short. Engines need long rounds to access their full potential, you want to disrupt that.
 
The basic strategy against NR is to go all in to win round 1 (you play your finisher cards if you have to), and then bleed in round 2, so that round 3 is short. Engines need long rounds to access their full potential, you want to disrupt that.

That's generally true, but I do want to point out that I can clear the whole board with Foltest's Pride, Bloody Baron and Siege Support, only needing 3 turns. Having said that, the opponent almost always has a counter to disrupt this.
 
These NR decks are an abomination. OP bronzes everywhere means you have to take out low prov cards leaving their huge finishing golds untouched.

Dreadful design - typical CDPR "damage/remove everything" garbage.

CDRP - please rewrite this bloody game.

Every game, every deck, is just remove, remove, remove, remove. Unless you play remove, everything you have gets removed. It's so relentlessly frustrating.
 
Last edited:
The basic strategy against NR is to go all in to win round 1 (you play your finisher cards if you have to), and then bleed in round 2, so that round 3 is short. Engines need long rounds to access their full potential, you want to disrupt that.
And if you lose Round 1 ... your rekt. gj.

Jan/Ken/Pon is boring. Playing counter against counterdecks. There are naturally 5 Elements... why not bring in a system that reflects more this variety then Hulk Smash everything except Paper?
 
Yeah mostly agree. They're the most frustrating and hard to beat by far imo. All those charges and orders, you usually get overwhelmed unless you have lots (and I mean lots) of damage/locks at the ready. Not impossible ofc, but I do feel they're the most powerful decks by a good margin atm and feel pretty cheesy.
 
These NR decks are an abomination. OP bronzes everywhere means you have to take out low prov cards leaving their huge finishing golds untouched.

Dreadful design - typical CDPR "damage/remove everything" garbage.

CDRP - please rewrite this bloody game.

Every game, every deck, is just remove, remove, remove, remove. Unless you play remove, everything you have gets removed. It's so relentlessly frustrating.

I agree but I will say I bet it's very unfun for the NR player when I come along and lock remove so many of their engines they can't recover and it's game over. They dynamic is just boring. I made a thread awhile back on how the game was most likely designed wrong and removal should have been much much less in the game.
 
I have an idea how to rework Order mechanic so it feels snappy, neat and also give a lot more meaning for the rows, positioning and players interaction.

If you play a unit with Order on meele row, target arrow will automatically apear at the start of your next turn (visually target arrow will apear like old Empera enforces in Nilfgaard spies was triggered for each spying unit).
If you play a unit with Order on ranged row, target arrow will automatically apear at the end of your next turn.
Same for units with Order and cooldown ability (e.g. Pavko Gale) - meele ability triggers and the start of the turn, ranged at the end.

Sequence of triggering multiple Order abilities is the same as for engines - from left to right.

If a unit with Order (that is on board for 1+ turn) receives a charge, target arrow will automatically apear so you have to choose where to click and use charge immediately.


Meele - trigger Order ability on Deploy
Ranged - trigger Order ability at the end of your current turn


Thunderbolt - "2 charges. Whenever you play a unit adjacent to this, boost it by 3."

the list will be supplemented

If this change will be made in couple with increased base power, i think the game will take a huge step forward.
 
Top Bottom