Playing 4 scorches in 1 match should not be possible, but it is

[TweetyLeaf]

Playing 4 scorches in 1 match should not be possible, but it is

Just played a game where my opponent used 4 scorches.
First regular Scorch
Then Schirru -> Scorch
Then Uma's curse -> Schirru -> scorch
Then Eithne -> Scorch.

With gold resurrect that would have been 5 scorches.

My point is this is not "fun" mechanics nor is it balanced to be able to play 1 silver card 4 times. I do not see how this is individual skill to manage and use your deck.
I play monsters and nilfgaard and I cant even play 1 single silver from my graveyard because no such card exists...

Now that alzur's thunder got buffed most cards that I did like pre-patch are so bad it's not even funny.
Triss:but, Yennefer:con etc golds can be destroyed with single bronze spell. Blue Dream is not worth having anymore because it does not steal specials and because most golds these days are "boost your dwarves" that are not useful for all decks.

Please look into this.

 

[4RM3D]

It used to be worse. Besides, this is not something that can be fixed. There will always be multiple Scorch effects available because you have cards like Igni and Villenmethingy. Also, Scorch effects have diminishing returns, which means you don't want to run too many, anyhow, usually, no more than 2 (or occasionally 3 With Eithne). The situation you've described is very uncommon.

 

[TweetyLeaf]

It used to be worse. Besides, this is not something that can be fixed. There will always be multiple Scorch effects available because you have cards like Igni and Villenmethingy. Also, Scorch effects have diminishing returns, which means you don't want to run too many, anyhow, usually, no more than 2 (or occasionally 3 With Eithne). The situation you've described is very uncommon.

Ville and Igni are not the problem because you can somewhat affect those cards. Vanilla Scorch played 4-5 times in a match from graveyard/spawn effect is ridicilous and the combos are super easy to pull off. It should require skill not RNG and "hey there are 10 ST cards that lets me scorch opponent, this will be fun... not".

 

[FG15-ISH7EG]

When playing against an Eithne deck, and the enemy already used scorch one should always expect the scorch to be resurected. Also I expect the enemy to have Shiru when I play against Eithne.

And the mentioned scenario includes 1 silver, 1 leader and 2 or 3 golds, while placing only 11 value on the board. And expcept one plays a deck which only relies on huge bodies (and where therefore scorch is the obvious drawback), it should be really hard to get value out of more than two scorches for the enemy.

 

[Jeydra]

How is this a problem? Any deck playing this many Scorches will simply lose to a deck that doesn't play big units. It's like playing Eredin and running into the guy with 3x Vrihedd Brigade + 3x First Light. Sure you lose, but you have the consolation that the opponent is going to lose to everyone else. That's a good thing - it implies that Eredin will never dominate the metagame, since if people want to beat the deck, they can.

 

[Rawls]

If somebody is playing scorch 4 times they are not planning wisely. Unless opponent has LOTS of high value targets (which is somewhat uncommon in current meta IMO), they'll end up getting +10-15 value on scorches 2-4 ... which is not great considering they've spent three golds and silver to get there. I play Schirru and Eithne ... and rarely end up using Eithne for scorch. Also in your Scenario Uma draws Schirru ... there's what ... a 1 in 50 chance of that happening?

 

[altaybek]

4?? Just 4???

Spoiler

 

[DRK3]

Eheheh, sorry for the OP but im also one of those players that when i go SC, and i want to go with Fire, its ALL. THE. WAY.

I do have a deck with Scorch, Schirru and Villentretenmerth, but in the old days i used to Scorch even more times.

My advice: if you're playing against SC and see the 1st Fire, expect more.

 

[TriforceDragon]

While never a viable deck I do love returning to SC from time to time to see how many Scorch effects I can pack into a single deck, just because. Scorch the World!

 

[Noela]

No Title

 

[iamthedave]

Scorch.deck is not a problem. It leads to hilarity a lot of the time. You frequently win silly round 3s with weak cards because they can't scorch you without killing their own stuff. I've seen tons of passes with cards in hand due to this.

 

[senatormolotov]

Remember you generally get diminishing returns on scorches.

 

[TweetyLeaf]

I generally do not think that people understand why scorch decks are problematic for the game.

The idea of Gwent in my humble opinion is to create combinations of cards, they may affect your opponent (like scorch) or may be just units interacting with each other.

I am not talking about that scorch is overpowered etc. I am talking about enjoying the game. This includes both players.

Last round play with 4 cards and the other player just scorches/alzurs everything you try to combo/build takes the fun out of it. Its no challenge to the other player either to manage combination like that.
And it does not matter anymore in what order you play your cards, they all are gonna get scorched.

This means that card advantage is name of the gwent. Nothing else matters. Personal skill and thought process is not needed. Just burn everything with fire, because it is possible.

People speak of "diminishing returns" of scorch. This is wrong.

For example monsters really need 2 cards on table for combos to work. If you never get your combo of because that other player just scorched your 8 power arachas behemoth where is the fun in that.

I have no problem enemy scorching high units and its perfectly valid and good tactic to deny those, but when you start to deny every combo there is by scorching turn after turn and at the same time building your own strenght it just feels... Stupid.