Oneiromancy - The Autoinclude Problem

[InkognitoXI]

Someone already came up with the perfect fix for Oneiromancy and the rest of the other Echo cards a while ago in one of the other threads: make the second use be like an actual echo, as in a weaker version of the original. For example, Oneiromancy could choose any card from your deck when it's first used, but its Echo could only choose a Bronze card.
[...]

That is an interesting consideration, although in the suggested case for Oneiromancy it would make the card horrible, given tha the Echo only enabling bronze card would make it a negative forced topdeck.
I would agree if it would instead be something limited by provisions, i.e. something like "Echoed: Play a card with 9 provisions or less from your deck".
The idea sounds interesting if the Echoed version would be worth slightly less, but not as horrible as the suggested version with only bronze access.

 

[Tucoffin]

Someone already came up with the perfect fix for Oneiromancy and the rest of the other Echo cards a while ago in one of the other threads: make the second use be like an actual echo, as in a weaker version of the original. For example, Oneiromancy could choose any card from your deck when it's first used, but its Echo could only choose a Bronze card.

Very intriguing idea, and also quite adequate flavor-wise. I endorse this.

 

[quintivarium]

While it is tempting to suggest a adding the power, “if doomed do nothing” to Oneiromancy (at least then it has a drawback together with some strategic considerations), I really believe that powerful tutoring is ruining the game. I believe it should not be possible to tutor ANY gold card.

Adding consistency to bronze cards allows a bronze core to define a deck. Consistency to any card encourages overloading on the most powerful cards which reduces variety and increases RNG

 

[Molock7]

[...]
Adding consistency to bronze cards allows a bronze core to define a deck. Consistency to any card encourages overloading on the most powerful cards which reduces variety and increases RNG

 

[Tucoffin]

While it is tempting to suggest a adding the power, “if doomed do nothing” to Oneiromancy (at least then it has a drawback together with some strategic considerations), I really believe that powerful tutoring is ruining the game. I believe it should not be possible to tutor ANY gold card.

I'll just vent in here a little bit: for the fifth time today, it was round 3 and I have a sizeable advantage with a Frost devotion deck. Then opponent plays their last card and it's Oneiro into Heatwave and I lose by 1-2 points. This is getting really old, and I agree that this ruins the experience when almost every non-devotion deck has the same answers to everything.

I'm unsure if I wanna keep playing Gwent due to these integral consistency problems, even though the game's art design and soundtrack are arguably unrivalled. But the frustration is starting to make me consider my options.

 

[Guest 4375874]

To be honest I like the idea of Echo cards. Why?

1) It encourages including graveyard hate tech cards.
2) Dependent on the card one should be aware of the fact that having the echo deck in hand also means having a unit from your deck (with potentially even higher value) not in your hand.
3) Actually, I also think about cards which have a "negative Echo". E.g. strong bronze units which you usually only want to play once but have Echo to compensate for it.

You don't need echo cards to encourage graveyard and even if you did it creates more problems than it does solutions. We already had SK and Lippy for that, Crow mother...flying redanian ...the list goes on. And other cards like Succubus could be introduced. The game is more binary since echo's than it was before. Matches are veeeeery short now because you either have an answer for a card or you don't. There's no possibility your opponent may not get the card they need to pull off a play because oh...oneiro is there.

 

[CallMeHoot]

Honestly, this card is starting to really piss me off now.

It's in EVERY deck. People playing like absolute trash, making misplays, sub-optimal plays and then their final play of each round, oh, Oneiromancy! "Don't worry, even though I'm a terrible player I'll just play the card I need now guaranteed and sweep the round!"

Thinking of actually stopping GWENT (yes, CDPR, that means no more money from me) for now until they fix a few things. Oneiromancy is a massive problem but power creep is so evident it hurts. Every single turn is a 15-20 point swing. It's redonkulous.

 

[Jamborinio]

Yeah Oneiromancy is a broken card, introduced I'm guessing, to try to reduce RNG and 'missing your golds', but instead it just promotes an RNG of a different kind - if you don't draw Oneiro...

 

[Damashiuchi]

Every single turn is a 15-20 point swing. It's redonkulous.

Lol. Exactly. Oneiro is a part of the problem, but this is the real problem. I don't understand why they feel it necessary for every play to have such a huge swing potential with very little effort. Oneiro just enables this nonsense to be done more consistently.

 

[EduFerraz]

Well i dont like to use oneiro because, almost all the time i use, oneiro is in the last 5 cards of my deck and i dont get it.

So its a 13 provision cost wich i almost never get it.

But, of course, i have it in some decks and i think its fair enought. I mean, its 13 provision to you put your good cards, but your deck in overall its weaker comparable a deck without oneiro. Also, oneiro doesnt work as a thinning card because his eco (unless you use in first and second round).

So, for me, the best decks are those decks where you have good thinings and good chances to get your good cards without oneiro.

And for the idea to make it "weaker" in the second use, i think that is stupid. I mean, in first use i will get a good card and, in the second use i will only get a crap card, so problably i will swip off oneiro eco and try to find something more valuable.

 

[Markus_Wirth]

Let´s compare Oneiro to Royal Decree:

Category	Royal Decree	Oneiro
Provision Costs	10	13
Ability	Tutor one time a unit	Tutor any card twice if there is no graveyard attack.
Synergies	Play twice via Stefan Skellen Fire Scorpion (1 dmg) + Hefty Helge (2 dmg). If target unit is Menno Coehoorn the dmg can be doubled Venedal Elite (+ 1 power)	Alzur´s ability to spawn a 13 provisions unit
Tutor	Menno Coehoorn

Taking a look at the table shows that for only 3 provisions more you can tutor every card and this in 2 rounds. As already stated Oneiro deserves a nerf and should get its Echo based on specific conditions either in deck builder or as already proposed in the game (control a mage, play a low provision card)

 

[Tucoffin]

And for the idea to make it "weaker" in the second use, i think that is stupid. I mean, in first use i will get a good card and, in the second use i will only get a crap card, so problably i will swip off oneiro eco and try to find something more valuable.

Actually, for its provision cost, Oneiromancy is not fair enough, as you can see multiple reasons explained above in previous posts from several people. Moreover, just because you don't agree with the proposal of changing Echo to target weaker cards doesn't mean you should use the first word that comes to your mind. Clearly English is not your mother language, yet there are many ways to express your point without offending who put it up for discussion.

Disagreeing with it is fine, but the idea is not stupid at all and may as well be a step in the right direction. We have good bronzes in the game, in fact we just witnessed a SY bronze unit nerf due to overtuning.

 

[Markus_Wirth]

Taking a look at other tutors without Echo show that 13 for basically two tutors is too cheap.

Avallac'h: Sage: costs 10 for tutoring only an artefect once
Call of the Forest: Costs 10 for tutoring any SC unit plus one boost
Geralt: Quen: Costs 8 for tutoring only witchers + shield at Adrenaline below 3
Land of a Thousand Fables: Costs 10 for tutoring only specials (+ the new RNG transform ability)

Assuming that Oneio is played in two rounds the average cost of one tutor is 6,5. Yes, we have graveyard attack as a counter. Nevertheless, I just think that it´s too cheap. So I strongly speak in favor of getting the Echo only conditional. Furthermore, with the upcoming expansion I expect more spell synergies which will make it even stronger. And did I already mention the synergies with Gord (+2 boost)`?

 

[InkognitoXI]

[...]
Avallac'h: Sage: costs 10 for tutoring only an artefect once
Call of the Forest: Costs 10 for tutoring any SC unit plus one boost
Geralt: Quen: Costs 8 for tutoring only witchers + shield at Adrenaline below 3
Land of a Thousand Fables: Costs 10 for tutoring only specials (+ the new RNG transform ability)
[...]

Avallach Sage is trash.
Call of the Forest is tutorable and the only tutor for units in ST devotion.
Geralt: Quen is good, a body + tutoring + potential Shield
Land of a Thousand Fables is currently trash and will remain complete trash, outside of a single combo (being Land of a Thousand Fables + Amphibious Assault, so that one can get one use of Amphibious Assault and the 13p Draug for 10p + 13p).

I do not get why so many people argue that cards they deem too good are stronger than the least usable options available (in this case half the examples and I would argue Oneiromancy is not that much better than Geralt: Quen, IF the targets are comparable).

[...]
Assuming that Oneio is played in two rounds the average cost of one tutor is 6,5. Yes, we have graveyard attack as a counter. Nevertheless, I just think that it´s too cheap. So I strongly speak in favor of getting the Echo only conditional. Furthermore, with the upcoming expansion I expect more spell synergies which will make it even stronger. And did I already mention the synergies with Gord (+2 boost)`?

No, the average cost would be (13+x)/2, where x is the cost of the card you would play instead and only if you play it in 2 rounds (also x is >=4).
=> The average cost of Oneiromancy is at the very least 8.5, 9 if you would play a 5p card instead.

 

[1990BW]

There is no need to express Oneirmancy's cost and value.
What this card simply does is finding a particular combo card or an answer to your opponents card consistently.
If you play Oneiromancy 99% of the time it also runs Heatwave, it does miracles with Lippy - Cerys, in ST & SY Gort decks it's auto-include etc. etc.
The card is the auto-include of many high tier metadecks over the last couple of patches.

Oneirmancy is just the tip of the iceberg the game is full of this inconsistencies just open the deckbuilder and compare cards within the same provision/ability tier.
From what I've seen in the early 8.5 patch notes there is not much hope this line of gamedesign will change.
We'll get a lot of micro adjustments, some extra location cards and buffed leaders that see no play.
I honestly don't expect they will change echo cards because out of fear & negativity from the 'community'.

 

[Markus_Wirth]

Avallach Sage is trash.
Call of the Forest is tutorable and the only tutor for units in ST devotion.
Geralt: Quen is good, a body + tutoring + potential Shield
Land of a Thousand Fables is currently trash and will remain complete trash, outside of a single combo (being Land of a Thousand Fables + Amphibious Assault, so that one can get one use of Amphibious Assault and the 13p Draug for 10p + 13p).

This examples are just there to show how expensive one time tutors are and Oneiro is a two times tutor if not countered.

I do not get why so many people argue that cards they deem too good are stronger than the least usable options available (in this case half the examples and I would argue Oneiromancy is not that much better than Geralt: Quen, IF the targets are comparable).


No, the average cost would be (13+x)/2, where x is the cost of the card you would play instead and only if you play it in 2 rounds (also x is >=4).
=> The average cost of Oneiromancy is at the very least 8.5, 9 if you would play a 5p card instead.

-> Of course I know: If you go for witcher swarm or king roegner Geralt: Quen is the card of your choice. Also I see the symbiosis synergies with call of the forest.
-> My basic argument is that tutoring cards costs a lot of provision in gwent (can also add all those special card tutors whose tutoring basically cost 6) and that Oneio is comparable cheap tutoring for all cards if played twice. Thus, I suggested a conditional Echo.

 

[InkognitoXI]

This examples are just there to show how expensive one time tutors are and Oneiro is a two times tutor if not countered.
[...]

To be fair those tutors do benefit from being just as good if drawn during round 3, while Oneriomancy loses a lot of its value, also if Oneiromancy would be as expensive as including 2 tutors, which would do the same one would always include those instead, given that those could both be used in the same round (although admittedly one would have to draw both.

[...]
-> Of course I know: If you go for witcher swarm or king roegner Geralt: Quen is the card of your choice. Also I see the symbiosis synergies with call of the forest.
-> My basic argument is that tutoring cards costs a lot of provision in gwent (can also add all those special card tutors whose tutoring basically cost 6) and that Oneio is comparable cheap tutoring for all cards if played twice. Thus, I suggested a conditional Echo.

I do get your arguments, however your calculation was off and once corrected shows a somewhat different picture.
That being said, I agree that Oneiromancy could be a bit undercosted (although only by 1 provision).

The thing is that if Oneiromancy would cost 14 provisions the price would be the following (depending on the card one would draw instead):
One would have draw a 4p card instead: (14+4)/2 = 9p
One would have draw a 5p card instead: (15+4)/2 = 9.5p
One would have draw a >=6p card instead: (14+(>=6))/2 >= 10p

In fact the comparisons you mentioned (Geralt: Quen and Call of the Forest) would then be superior at their one use, compared to the one use of Oneiromancy, in fact if we consider their utility they are already more efficient at one tutoring than Oneiromancy.

if you would however argue that Echoes being slightly weaker during the second use would make for a more interesting mechanic, then I agree.
However in that case the second use of an Echo would still require a larger value than the average card, so that the Echo tag would not become a downside.
Shaping Nature and Ard Gaeth are already close to being a negative Echo, in the fact that drawing them again is already almost a downside.

 

[Markus_Wirth]

To be fair those tutors do benefit from being just as good if drawn during round 3, while Oneriomancy loses a lot of its value, also if Oneiromancy would be as expensive as including 2 tutors, which would do the same one would always include those instead, given that those could both be used in the same round (although admittedly one would have to draw both.

Of course Oneriomancy only gets full value if you are able to play it twice. The big tutoring advantage is that you get the unit which fits in a specific situation. Adding consistency to your deck basically costs provisions.

I do get your arguments, however your calculation was off and once corrected shows a somewhat different picture.
That being said, I agree that Oneiromancy could be a bit undercosted (although only by 1 provision).

The thing is that if Oneiromancy would cost 14 provisions the price would be the following (depending on the card one would draw instead):
One would have draw a 4p card instead: (14+4)/2 = 9p
One would have draw a 5p card instead: (15+4)/2 = 9.5p
One would have draw a >=6p card instead: (14+(>=6))/2 >= 10p

In fact the comparisons you mentioned (Geralt: Quen and Call of the Forest) would then be superior at their one use, compared to the one use of Oneiromancy, in fact if we consider their utility they are already more efficient at one tutoring than Oneiromancy.

if you would however argue that Echoes being slightly weaker during the second use would make for a more interesting mechanic, then I agree.
However in that case the second use of an Echo would still require a larger value than the average card, so that the Echo tag would not become a downside.
Shaping Nature and Ard Gaeth are already close to being a negative Echo, in the fact that drawing them again is already almost a downside.

Comparing other units being played instead does indeed make sense at Echo cards. The alternative is always to play the unit you have drawn instead of the Echo card. However you play those tutoring echo cards like Oneiromancy, Amphibious Assault and Blood Eagle to play the card you want from your deck and not the card you have drawn from your deck. So I would not go for this calculation for Echo cards.

Regarding Shaping nature: Card makes only sense in Symbiosis deck + Harald Gord boost twice.
Regarding Ard Gaeth: This really depends on the strategy (e.g. 4x Joachim) and the drawn cards whether you want to play it twice.

 

[InkognitoXI]

[...]
Comparing other units being played instead does indeed make sense at Echo cards. The alternative is always to play the unit you have drawn instead of the Echo card. However you play those tutoring echo cards like Oneiromancy, Amphibious Assault and Blood Eagle to play the card you want from your deck and not the card you have drawn from your deck. So I would not go for this calculation for Echo cards.

Regarding Shaping nature: Card makes only sense in Symbiosis deck + Harald Gord boost twice.
Regarding Ard Gaeth: This really depends on the strategy (e.g. 4x Joachim) and the drawn cards whether you want to play it twice.

For the sake of efficiency it does not matter if you still tutor a card, given that no matter what you do play a card (which is also the reason why the brief consideration I made to consider the intercept of the approximately linear relation between provisions and value makes no sense, given that it vanishes in the difference).

if you consider this case in the case of transformed provisions (i.e. correcting the provisions by subtracting the minimal provisions, i.e. the shown provisions - 4) Oneiromancy costs 9 tp (so 9 provisions above the minimum one has to invest), so half of that is 4.5 tp per use and if you transform this back to the regular provision system you get 8.5p per use (this however does not correct for the fact that the card one would use instead could cost more than 4p, so the actual cost is higher).

My point is that you would still have to consider the Echo as a card of its own and not the card it tutors, given that quantifying the value of a tutoring itself in that equation makes things needlessly complicated, when we can just subtract it between 2 tutors.

[...]
Comparing other units being played instead does indeed make sense at Echo cards. The alternative is always to play the unit you have drawn instead of the Echo card. However you play those tutoring echo cards like Oneiromancy, Amphibious Assault and Blood Eagle to play the card you want from your deck and not the card you have drawn from your deck. So I would not go for this calculation for Echo cards.
[...]

In case I was not precise enough above.

For any Echo card the full value will be the value of the Echo played as a whole card and the improvement of playing the Echo a second time, instead of the card that would have taken the spot in one's hand otherwise.
In case one gets milled this would of course change for all Echo cards, except the tutors.

The whole value one can attribute to the second instance of the Echo is not the card itself, but the relative improvement.
Since all cards have at the very least 4 provisions, the second instance of an Echo card is at best the difference between the value of playing the Echo card and playing the >=4p card, given that this is the value one squeezes out by playing the Echo a second time with their keyword.

 

[quintivarium]

I still hold the opinion that consistency is something earned by careful deck building — not something to be universally granted by excessive tutoring.

To my view, cards like Oneiromancy — at any price — are bad for the game. And comparing them to any of the myriad of other unhealthy tutors (Royal Decree, Land of a Thousand Fables, Geralt Quen, Call of the Forest, Avallac’h Sage, Amphibious Assault, Blood Eagle, Roderick of Dun Tynne, Whispering Hillock, John Natalis, Ermion, Ge’els, Menno Coehoorn, Vabjorn, Whisperess: Tribute, Fauve, Ferko the Sculptor) is not meaningful.