Please change full row effects - Reduce variance in general

+
In beta Gwent, there were 3 rows and units with more strength. Now there are only 2 rows and units only have a 3-5 average strength. There are full row damage effects like Lacerate, Dragon's Dream and Crushing Traps doing 2-3 damage, in addition to a multitude of movement cards, so that an entire row or even board can be wiped. There is a finisher with only neutral cards (Dragon's Dream and Nivellen) that is stronger than most faction-specific finishers (which is ridiculous imo). Seriously, how is this possible? How can this be missed when going to 2 rows and putting the average strength of units around 4? Golden Froth got nerfed, please do the same with the other row effects as well.
 
Out of the cards you've mentioned, only Dragon's Dream can be problematic when you cannot see it coming. The card could be changed to trigger on your turn's end, instead of the start, to give more room to counter the card. As for Lacerate and Crushing Trap, those cards a fine. Trap decks usually lack tempo and Lacerate isn't being used much.
 
Out of the cards you've mentioned, only Dragon's Dream can be problematic when you cannot see it coming. The card could be changed to trigger on your turn's end, instead of the start, to give more room to counter the card. As for Lacerate and Crushing Trap, those cards a fine. Trap decks usually lack tempo and Lacerate isn't being used much.
Even if you can see Dragon's Dream coming, there's usually nothing you can do against it. Trap decks don't lack tempo. Their tempo is at the end of a long round, doing tons of damage. But that's all beside the point that these effects are OP with only 2 rows (yup, binary), units of an average 4 strength, Nivellen and several movement units in ST that cannot be countered by any other faction.

Dragon's Dream is 12 provisions, with a potential max damage of 9 x 3 = 27. Lacerate is 7 provisions, with a potential max damage of 9 x 2 = 18. Crushing trap the same 18 max damage for 6 provisions. In combination with Nivellen and lots of other movement, these cards are simply OP. That's why I like what was done with Golden Froth. 6 provisions for max 3 x 2 = 6 boost points. This card is now super for boost decks.
Why not make Dragon's Dream similar to Commander's Horn? 12 provisions, damage 5 adjacent units by 3 after three turns. This reduces the variance of cards, thereby allowing for better balancing through the value : provisions ratio. And that's what we want right, less RNG and variance, and more strategy.
 
Even if you can see Dragon's Dream coming, there's usually nothing you can do against it. Trap decks don't lack tempo. Their tempo is at the end of a long round, doing tons of damage. But that's all beside the point that these effects are OP with only 2 rows (yup, binary), units of an average 4 strength, Nivellen and several movement units in ST that cannot be countered by any other faction.

Dragon's Dream is 12 provisions, with a potential max damage of 9 x 3 = 27. Lacerate is 7 provisions, with a potential max damage of 9 x 2 = 18. Crushing trap the same 18 max damage for 6 provisions. In combination with Nivellen and lots of other movement, these cards are simply OP. That's why I like what was done with Golden Froth. 6 provisions for max 3 x 2 = 6 boost points. This card is now super for boost decks.
Why not make Dragon's Dream similar to Commander's Horn? 12 provisions, damage 5 adjacent units by 3 after three turns. This reduces the variance of cards, thereby allowing for better balancing through the value : provisions ratio. And that's what we want right, less RNG and variance, and more strategy.

I think you may have misunderstood something in your breakdown of the numbers. Let's assume the average round 3 (typically the longest round) involves playing 10 times for a maximum of roughly 12-14 cards (Witcher trio, multiply cards, etc...) The average player does not fill a row. More often to avoid these types of row effects they spread out between the rows. Individual movement cards are required. Individual movement cards are base 4. Most cards have a higher value than 4. Therefore, if 2 cards are moved to get hit by lacerate or traps, the value of the movement cards goes from 4 to 6-11 (depending on the effect and repetition.) I point this out, because all movement cards have an opportunity cost. You might not get Regis or DD or lacerate, or the proper trap. In which case putting the enemy on the same row does little good. Moreover, knowing what the enemy is capable of gives great incentive to try and bleed these decks in round 2. If you are playing Eldein you know what to expect and thus have an incentive to mitigate.

Not saying you don't have a point, just saying there are plenty of cards that have big payoffs with the proper setup. For example, unicorn and chronix cost 18 to do 20. For lacerate to do 18 requires setup as well.
 
Achieving a full row even with Nivellen and movement isn't that easy. While there are decks that play multiple cards in a turn, there are other decks playing special cards and artifacts too. And furthermore, assuming an average deck plays 10 cards during round 3 (ignoring Arachnas Queen, because there you will get a lot less value anyway), you can only remove one of them or you will reduce the value of those row effects. And that means there is a limited amount of heavy removal you can include in your deck without loosing too much value, which makes such a deck weaker against engine decks.
 
Dragons dream is a real burden. It will fail when
* your opponents deck is focused on strong single cards
* your opponents deck is focused on traps
* the round is too short (it takes 4 turns until it triggers.)
* you can not place it in time, due to have to block some other urgent card from your opponent instead
* as soon as the other players sees it coming he will put his units into the other row, so you may only get damange for units played in the turns before, which could be distributes between rows

so generally therefore the card is more than fine, maybe even too weak for its high provision costs. i also never see it in the top ranks being played.
 
I guess we all have a point. Dragon's Dream can hit crazy hard, or be underwhelming for the provision cost. And the root cause is the huge variance (0 - 27 points). If Gwent is supposed to be strategic, this kind of variance does not belong here. That's why I brought up the Golden Froth change. Changing it from a full row effect to boost 3 adjacent cards by 2 for 6 provisions significantly reduces variance (getting much more consistent value of around the provision cost) and makes it much more strategic.
 
from that point of view, you are right. it would mean less luck, more strategic .... but maybe it would be also a little more boring. :)
I don't think so. It will be hard strategic thinking and fighting over single points to win the game. It will be more fun!
 
I don't think so. It will be hard strategic thinking and fighting over single points to win the game. It will be more fun!

The point swings are part of the strategy. There is a difference between RNG (create has no place in Gwent,) and point swing. Lacerate is a perfect example. Against MO with thrive, lacerate will likely due big damage. Against an Eldein trap deck it will do considerably less damage. This is not luck. Having multiple ways to handle multiple opponents is strategy. Set up is also important. For example, if the game is all about small point plays, then every deck will run the same cards (best deploy and safest orders like botchling who self heals.) The point swingers like Two blades, Cahir, DD, etc, are the game allowing for variation. By the way, there are ways to block almost every point swing. You just have to commit to a more reaction heavy deck, which most people don't do.
 
The point swings are part of the strategy. There is a difference between RNG (create has no place in Gwent,) and point swing. Lacerate is a perfect example. Against MO with thrive, lacerate will likely due big damage. Against an Eldein trap deck it will do considerably less damage. This is not luck. Having multiple ways to handle multiple opponents is strategy. Set up is also important. For example, if the game is all about small point plays, then every deck will run the same cards (best deploy and safest orders like botchling who self heals.) The point swingers like Two blades, Cahir, DD, etc, are the game allowing for variation. By the way, there are ways to block almost every point swing. You just have to commit to a more reaction heavy deck, which most people don't do.
Well, it is luck of course, the luck/RNG of getting a good match up and play of cards during the game. Depending on this, Lacerate and Dragon's Dream do a little or a lot of damage. And that is only possible because of their large inherent variance. Having decks that auto-lose against other decks because of this is not fun. The way to fix this is to reduce variance to allow for better balancing.
 
The point swings are part of the strategy. There is a difference between RNG (create has no place in Gwent,) and point swing. Lacerate is a perfect example. Against MO with thrive, lacerate will likely due big damage. Against an Eldein trap deck it will do considerably less damage. This is not luck. Having multiple ways to handle multiple opponents is strategy. Set up is also important.

DD + Nivellen doesn't involve a lot of strategy or setup though. You put two cards in your deck, hope to draw them and potentially gain obscene value in a long round. Putting cards in a deck and drawing them doesn't constitute setup. Perhaps it involves strategy in the strictest sense of the word but it's more akin to telling the troops to march directly forward and overpower the enemy. DD requires movement to achieve peak value, barring opponent row stacking, which is all but guaranteed with Nivellen.

Yes, there are "counters" to dirty dragon dreamers :). Unfortunately, every counter hinges on knowing it's DD + Nivellen ahead of time. You could bleed but wouldn't know to do so unless it was the plan no matter what and you won R1. You could carry weather removal but, once again, you're unlikely to keep a lackluster weather counter unless you know it's DD + Nivellen. Furthermore, the opponent can intentionally attempt to hide the fact they're running DD + Nivellen. Even if you do win R1, recognize DD + Nivellen and bleed vs it they could wisely mulligan away the combo or use it early.

Sure, you could say it's match-up dependent. But in most cases where the opponent is running limited units DD doesn't really need to achieve obscene value. Such decks are geared more toward a reactive style of play. Any type of control tends to lose value in these scenarios.

Lacerate is a bit different because it's a lower cost bronze card. So it doesn't need as much commitment. Ideally it pairs with movement but wouldn't necessarily need to be due to this lower commitment requirement.

The point swingers like Two blades, Cahir, DD, etc, are the game allowing for variation.

These examples have much in common with most high variance cards. They don't take a lot of setup. Two Blades doesn't need a lot of support to gain access to high upside. As mentioned above, DD doesn't either. Uni/Chiro fit the same theme as DD + Nivellen with far less variance. Cahir doesn't exactly require much thought either.

I wouldn't disagree point swing cards and concepts add variation. It could easily be argued those cards do not need such high variance to provide that variation, however. In that sense some type of target cap for row targeted cards wouldn't be a bad thing. Granted, overall it may not change anything. Inflated, limited setup point swings aren't exactly isolated to row targeted cards. Reducing the variance or point swing potential in a single area like row targeted cards would probably result in people steering away from them and toward the other inflated, limited setup swing options. So instead of addressing this area, if it's even considered a problem (it probably isn't), it would effectively only serve to shrink the viable card pool (what most CDPR nerfs accomplish).
 
I wouldn't disagree point swing cards and concepts add variation. It could easily be argued those cards do not need such high variance to provide that variation, however. In that sense some type of target cap for row targeted cards wouldn't be a bad thing. Granted, overall it may not change anything. Inflated, limited setup point swings aren't exactly isolated to row targeted cards. Reducing the variance or point swing potential in a single area like row targeted cards would probably result in people steering away from them and toward the other inflated, limited setup swing options. So instead of addressing this area, if it's even considered a problem (it probably isn't), it would effectively only serve to shrink the viable card pool (what most CDPR nerfs accomplish).
High variance is a problem when you envision and advertise a game to be about strategy and skill. High variance and the associated inflated swing options are indeed not isolated to row targeting cards, so it needs to be addressed for all cards to balance across all decks. The big picture.
 
High variance is a problem when you envision and advertise a game to be about strategy and skill.

I mean.... With Gwent CDPR has kind of established a track record of saying X and arguably not providing X. Whether it's deliberate or due to a failure somewhere is difficult to say. So they can advertise the game how they wish. A strategy card game based on skill, card art with numbers, rainbows and unicorns, whatever :). I'd agree there are various problems. A lot of high variance cards is arguably one of them. Multiple row targeted cards certainly fit that description. Ultimately, it boils down to whether CDPR sees it as a problem.

High variance and the associated inflated swing options are indeed not isolated to row targeting cards, so it needs to be addressed for all cards to balance across all decks. The big picture.

Again, I'd agree. I've never liked high variance cards unless the upside requires significant setup to achieve. Plopping down DD and using Nivellen after the right number of turns doesn't really fit that viewpoint. The bigger issue is the size of the swing. Obscene swing cards make the game more draw reliant and, as a result, based on RNG. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter unless CDPR Gwent devs see it as a problem and have the ability/desire to properly address it.
 
Dragon's Dream together with Nivellen is a complete abomination. A two neutral cards combo stronger than most faction-specific finishers. I can't believe this hasn't been fixed yet. I just had three consecutive matches against Gernichora, Foltest and Broover, all with a Dragon's Dream - Nivellen finisher. Interesting coincidence by the way, because they wouldn't have won otherwise.

Think about it. A neutral card that damages all cards on a row by 3 after a few turns. And a neutral card that moves all enemy units to the same row. What a lame play, but even worse design. Row effects should never be this powerful, especially after removing a row. As Gwent seems all about winning no matter what and how, the only hope is indeed with the devs.
 
Dragon's Dream together with Nivellen is a complete abomination. A two neutral cards combo stronger than most faction-specific finishers. I can't believe this hasn't been fixed yet. I just had three consecutive matches against Gernichora, Foltest and Broover, all with a Dragon's Dream - Nivellen finisher. Interesting coincidence by the way, because they wouldn't have won otherwise.

Think about it. A neutral card that damages all cards on a row by 3 after a few turns. And a neutral card that moves all enemy units to the same row. What a lame play, but even worse design. Row effects should never be this powerful, especially after removing a row. As Gwent seems all about winning no matter what and how, the only hope is indeed with the devs.

If you had a row clear you could void it. Also I like the idea of positive row effects like bloodmoon coming back. Also a row is limited to nine units. Depending on what deck you run there are ways to limit the effect of the blast.
 
If you had a row clear you could void it. ... Also a row is limited to nine units. Depending on what deck you run there are ways to limit the effect of the blast.
[sarcasm] Really? That would be amazing! [/sarcasm] Please, the if/then answers bringing up one generally useless counter card or suggesting to completely adjust your deck to counter it are not helpful at all. These answers actually prove that Dragon's Dream and Nivellen are not balanced.
Also I like the idea of positive row effects like bloodmoon coming back.
Me too. The old Golden Froth.
 
[sarcasm] Really? That would be amazing! [/sarcasm] Please, the if/then answers bringing up one generally useless counter card or suggesting to completely adjust your deck to counter it are not helpful at all. These answers actually prove that Dragon's Dream and Nivellen are not balanced.

Me too. The old Golden Froth.

I carry row clear on all seasonal decks. Not as necessary in ranked because people don't run weather nearly as often.
 
Bump. The fact that a 7 provision bronze (Lacerate) can be used as a big finisher in a long round, doing max 18 damage is simply ridiculous. There should be a limit to the maximum amount of units it can damage so that the value : provision ratio actually makes sense, especially now that there are only 2 rows and row-limited abilities.

Allowing cards to have a huge variance and through that be hugely OP against specific match-ups is exactly why some decks are prone to auto-lose against others (rock-paper-scissors), thereby significantly reducing the fun, amount of viable decks and "strategic game concept" of the game. Therefore most cards should have a limited range for the value : provision ratio, certainly cheap cards like Lacerate.
 
Dragons Dream, Lacerate and Crushing traps are not overpowered. But there is something not quite right about rows and row effects. In addition row movement seems too cheap and easy. I understand it is exclusive to MO, ST and Neutrals, but still, the general tactic and row effects seem to not really be optimised in a good way.

Brouver has one of the best leader abilities in the game. Row movement, in combination with row cards should not be underestimated. Can you really expect that all decks should have to include a row clearing card and be able to play this "on demand"?

This is why row effects seems to lack optimisation.. Some cards (even gold) are row dependent, and it seems a bit unreasonable that a 4p-5p bronze can deactivate it. There being 2 rows instead of 3 does not really balance this out well either. To me it almost seems like the row effects etc was build for the 3 row game, then kind of bricked for the 2 row version.

Countering row stuff is currently near impossible unless you have a deck that can specifically handle that. Say Jan Calveit with Albricht and some kind of row clearing cards. That "powerful" combination also is only able to handle half the issue with a Francesca deck, which can probably still move units to the Ragnarok row.

The ONLY decent card to deal with this situation is Iris von Everec, but are you seriously going to keep a gold card at hand at all times during a game, and pay that much for it? It doesn't really make sense. The only reason the card is decent is because it can also remove an artifact, and since most people don't use row effects, it can be useful for the huge amount of decks that do not use row effects.
Post automatically merged:

Ps. Once your row dependent card is moved to the other row, unless you play SC, you have no way to fix the issue and re-activate your row dependent card. Even if you planned to play against a row moving enemy with row dependent cards, there is no counter.
 
Top Bottom