It seems to me that Gwent's deckbuilding is weird. The idea is to play more provisions than opponent, because more provisions usually means more points which usually means a victory. Since each game of Gwent lasts about 16 rounds, that means the ideal 25-card deck runs all its provisions in 16 cards, 0 in the rest, and hopes to simply never draw the 0-provision cards.
Of course that's not how it works in practice because of thinning and whatnot, but the idea seems to hold. For example take this Mystic Echo Harmony list. At the top there's a bunch of cards it always wants to draw, and at the bottom there're a bunch of filler cards that it never wants to draw. In fact if it weren't for the fact that there are no cards with 0-3 provisions, I suspect the deck would try to polarize its provisions even more: run more top-end, compensating with 0-3 provisions cards that it will always be mulliganing away.
Ultimately, then, Gwent's deckbuilding feels weird because one is putting cards one never wants to draw in the deck. Yes, in every card game some cards are going to be better than other cards, but Gwent's card quality is easily measured and some cards (e.g. The Great Oak) are literally 3x better than others (e.g. Dwarven Skirmisher). Back during beta gold cards were stronger than silvers which were stronger than bronzes, but not to this extent. Thinning to gold cards was a real thing, but it actually seems to me now that too much thinning will get you killed in post-Homecoming Gwent because it forces you to actually play those low provision cards.
I played Gwent seriously before Homecoming but have not played it much since, so I'm wondering if 1) this view of Gwent's deckbuilding is correct and 2) if so, whether that constitutes a design problem.
Of course that's not how it works in practice because of thinning and whatnot, but the idea seems to hold. For example take this Mystic Echo Harmony list. At the top there's a bunch of cards it always wants to draw, and at the bottom there're a bunch of filler cards that it never wants to draw. In fact if it weren't for the fact that there are no cards with 0-3 provisions, I suspect the deck would try to polarize its provisions even more: run more top-end, compensating with 0-3 provisions cards that it will always be mulliganing away.
Ultimately, then, Gwent's deckbuilding feels weird because one is putting cards one never wants to draw in the deck. Yes, in every card game some cards are going to be better than other cards, but Gwent's card quality is easily measured and some cards (e.g. The Great Oak) are literally 3x better than others (e.g. Dwarven Skirmisher). Back during beta gold cards were stronger than silvers which were stronger than bronzes, but not to this extent. Thinning to gold cards was a real thing, but it actually seems to me now that too much thinning will get you killed in post-Homecoming Gwent because it forces you to actually play those low provision cards.
I played Gwent seriously before Homecoming but have not played it much since, so I'm wondering if 1) this view of Gwent's deckbuilding is correct and 2) if so, whether that constitutes a design problem.