Played a couple of games today, every time I had to start I either lost on even or had to play too many good cards to not lose on even whereas my opponent played bronzes most of the time and fared well with it. Everytime I got blue coin I lost, everytime I was allowed to go second I won. Something definitely needs to be done about this, going first just puts you at such a huge disadvantage against so many decks that not even the stratagem seems to matter.
I left because of this in 2019. I came back for stratagems but they didn’t quite fix it either. The solution is blue coin starts round 1, red coin starts round 2 and the win differentials are added up if there is a round 3. So if you win round 1 by 7 and lose round 2 by 9 then you start round 3. If you win round 1 by 7 and lose round 2 by 4 then your opponent starts. If the differentials are a draw a new coin flip is used and a stratagem is awarded. Stratagems are awarded in both round 1 and 2 automatically.
Too many complicated solutions.
Just simply give immunity for 1 turn to the 1st played card if it's a unit.
Just simply give immunity for 1 turn to the 1st played card if it's a unit.
That doesn’t help anything. Not only could I kill it with a special card, but I could just scorch it and then second card the next round. Also for order units it would be exploited ad nauseam.
Also addressing the root of the problem, the responding player dictates the pace and gets the last move. Anytime the opening player passes they take a huge risk of starting the final round. This means they may not get to respond to the final play (which is often a big point finisher.) My solution not only factors in pacing long term but it gives incentive to play good cards in round 1 for red coin.
Ok. I will call it then "1st trun immunity "
which will prevent it to use its orders and to be removed by any other way for one guaranteed turn
Or make it like traps, be an ambush kida thing.
The 1st card played on blue coin will be face down until next trun start.
Or luke whether cards were in witcher 3, put the 1st card in a separate box for one turn.
I am not an advanced player, and I have very limited cards (only 5 legendaries in my most developed faction). But I much prefer the blue coin.
Not only do I find the strategem to be adequate compensation for going first, I appreciate the stability offered by the extra Mulligan.
Yes, going second gives you better knowledge of minimal cards needed to control the first round; but going first gives you a tempo advantage. With a deck designed to do so; I can usually either win the first round or force my opponent to commit more to it than I do. Even losing on even is not end of the world if I keep good cards and drain my opponent. Losing last say is also not that serious if I stay attuned to how an opponent might be able to deflate my board or inflate his and if I play to minimize his potential. I must admit that playing Second Wind Skellige helps as I can spend gold cards early, always knowing I can play them again.
Not only do I find the strategem to be adequate compensation for going first, I appreciate the stability offered by the extra Mulligan.
Yes, going second gives you better knowledge of minimal cards needed to control the first round; but going first gives you a tempo advantage. With a deck designed to do so; I can usually either win the first round or force my opponent to commit more to it than I do. Even losing on even is not end of the world if I keep good cards and drain my opponent. Losing last say is also not that serious if I stay attuned to how an opponent might be able to deflate my board or inflate his and if I play to minimize his potential. I must admit that playing Second Wind Skellige helps as I can spend gold cards early, always knowing I can play them again.
Some decks can also work, but these are mainly pointslam or engines which means they can generate quite a good amount of points on their own. However, this often comes with quite some commitments. The strongest decks at the moment generally favour at least a certain degree of control and don't exactly like proactivity, making even their bronze cards really threatening as their potential can be exploited to the maximum. May I ask at which rank you currently are?
Yes and with so many big removal cards it is especially important to have the final turn. More often than not the final turn goes to red coin. While I have won round one as blue (many times,) I often do so by the discretion of my opponent rather than my own dominance. Whether they are saving synergy cards for the final round or are just not convinced they can beat me in a 10 v. 10 round. Final say for Syndicate can be 17 points. For SK between 12 and 15. For ST can be 11. I could go on, but the point is final say is the key to most games. Also, it is important to remember that with final say you can keep a defensive card like scorch, heatwave, Geralt, etc... and kill the opponents finisher instead.
I got to rank 12 last month. This month, I have sat out of ranked play (except when I accidentally overlook a need to check the unranked box) as I felt I had advanced beyond my card holding ability to be competitive. I could probably advance a bit more now that my holdings have improved, but I doubt I could get to the next reward level anyway, so I prefer the creativity I encounter in unranked. Although I have used a lot of barrels for cards, I have been saving scraps (over 13,800 now) until I have better understanding of exactly which cards would prove useful. I strongly resist net-decking (unless I “accidentally” discover that deck on my own).
My best deck is a hybrid of self damage for growth (Olaf and Blueboy with Svalbard Priests and cultists) and enemy damage for growth (Dahir and Greatswords triggered mainly by neutral special cards - I don’t own Wild Boar and don’t use Morkvarg). It makes heavy use of replay cards (Freya’s Blessing, Sigrdrifa’s Blessing), and decoys ( An Craite Longships, Olaf, Blueboy, even priests) to draw out enemy control cards, and absolutely revolves around Covenant of Steel for points, drawing fire, and protecting engines.
I usually try to use the self damage engines to either win the first round or to overextend my opponent, and save the Greatswords for the final round, although I may reverse that if my initial deck leans heavily toward the latter. Although I love to have my defender destroyed (I just bring him back) and I can usually withstand having him purified or moved, the deck always tanks if he’s stolen by Yennifer or Philipa. The only defense possible against these cards is to offer a juicy (but expendable) target like Olaf first and hope my opponent bites. Good players usually don’t.
I like going first for several reasons: the Longships get more shots if played before the opponent; the tactical advantage strategem makes them a heftier (and more attractive) decoy target for enemy removal cards; first play helps with the tempo to set up my ideal row of Priest, Blueboy, Cultist; and the extra Mulligan helps me avoid an unfortunate situation where I have Blueboy and Olaf with nothing to trigger them, Priests and Cultists with nothing to target, or Greatswords with nothing to damage the enemy. Usually by third round, I’ve drawn necessary cards to have a solid hand, but first round can be iffy. For me, these advantages more than make up for loss of tactical control in the first round. Of course, my deck is much more proactive than reactive.
My best deck is a hybrid of self damage for growth (Olaf and Blueboy with Svalbard Priests and cultists) and enemy damage for growth (Dahir and Greatswords triggered mainly by neutral special cards - I don’t own Wild Boar and don’t use Morkvarg). It makes heavy use of replay cards (Freya’s Blessing, Sigrdrifa’s Blessing), and decoys ( An Craite Longships, Olaf, Blueboy, even priests) to draw out enemy control cards, and absolutely revolves around Covenant of Steel for points, drawing fire, and protecting engines.
I usually try to use the self damage engines to either win the first round or to overextend my opponent, and save the Greatswords for the final round, although I may reverse that if my initial deck leans heavily toward the latter. Although I love to have my defender destroyed (I just bring him back) and I can usually withstand having him purified or moved, the deck always tanks if he’s stolen by Yennifer or Philipa. The only defense possible against these cards is to offer a juicy (but expendable) target like Olaf first and hope my opponent bites. Good players usually don’t.
I like going first for several reasons: the Longships get more shots if played before the opponent; the tactical advantage strategem makes them a heftier (and more attractive) decoy target for enemy removal cards; first play helps with the tempo to set up my ideal row of Priest, Blueboy, Cultist; and the extra Mulligan helps me avoid an unfortunate situation where I have Blueboy and Olaf with nothing to trigger them, Priests and Cultists with nothing to target, or Greatswords with nothing to damage the enemy. Usually by third round, I’ve drawn necessary cards to have a solid hand, but first round can be iffy. For me, these advantages more than make up for loss of tactical control in the first round. Of course, my deck is much more proactive than reactive.
In my opinion, if you get red coin you will be more likely to win round 1 and avoid overcommitting.
Then in round 2 your opponent is at your mercy. If you dry pass, they will be forced to play a card to win the round, if you decide to bleed them, they will have to keep playing until the round is secured. On top of that, they will play first in round 3.
So, basically if you get blue coin you are at a disadvantage.
Then in round 2 your opponent is at your mercy. If you dry pass, they will be forced to play a card to win the round, if you decide to bleed them, they will have to keep playing until the round is secured. On top of that, they will play first in round 3.
So, basically if you get blue coin you are at a disadvantage.
+5 free points with lamp + 1 extra mulligan seems fine as it is. 2 extra mulligans could give too much of an advantage?
Devs have statistics. Many months ago, prior stratagems, they pointed out that red and blue coin is fairly balanced in terms of win rates. They wont be making any adjustments if the statistics remain the same. No arguments or opinions will change that.
Devs have statistics. Many months ago, prior stratagems, they pointed out that red and blue coin is fairly balanced in terms of win rates. They wont be making any adjustments if the statistics remain the same. No arguments or opinions will change that.
Last edited:
Then, I think it would be a good idea to give the player who won the initial coin toss the chance to choose between blue or red coin.
I'm sure +75 % of players would choose red coin.
Last edited:
This wouldn't exactly change anything, just cause more complaints about RNG.
Scoia'tael used to have a faction ability that allowed the ST player to choose who went first. Which is basically the same thing as this except without the RNG factor -- and it was widely hated because it was considered unfair.
If nothing else, the coinflip system, at its core, is fair because there is always a 50% chance to win it. The attached mechanics and implications of winning vs. losing are separate matters, and in my opinion should be considered as such (as in, leave the core system as it is, without adding manipulation of the flip result).
I know, my comment was just a way of stating from my part that win rates can't be 50/50 when most people would be choosing red coin if allowed to.
That's not necessarily true. The average player's belief that it's a disadvantage to go first might be completely inaccurate. It's not at all uncommon for something to appear to be a better deal, even when it isn't. Even if every single player opted to go second when given the choice, that would in no way prove that it's advantageous. Only the developers know the actual statistics.
You are right, that wouldn't prove its actual advantage, but it would be strange for it not being true if most people were choosing it. Or maybe developers should break those stats down and assort them by players' rank. It could just be a slight advantage for advanced players (not that I'm one) or maybe the other way around, stats could be deceiving.
Besides, don't you think developers would be a bit reluctant to openly say that the game might be imbalanced? Of course they are going to say it's 50/50, at least until they find a proper solution (if that's the case)
Wondering if anyone else feels this way right now.
Whoever gets red-coin have so much advantage to:
- abuse carryover
- gets to trade bronzes for golds
- otherwise threaten to win on even and pretty much gg
On blue coin, you are forced to at least play 3 cards and stay ahead, if the first 3 cards plus the strategem doesn't help you stay ahead, you pretty much have to continue commit to the round by spending your gold cards, give up last say, or worse case lose on even.
I know it's always been this way but maybe more evident recently as the current meta decks abuse red-coin more than before.
Makes for both a boring experience and frustrating gameplay (if continuously get blue coin 3-4 games in a row)
I think I've read various suggestions before, and some that comes to mind:
- cannot dry-pass round 2 and need to at least play 1 card (gives the blue-coin player that lost round 1 a chance to regain card advantage or regain last-say)
- slight buff to strategem
- slight nerf to carry-over, they are too cheap right now
Whoever gets red-coin have so much advantage to:
- abuse carryover
- gets to trade bronzes for golds
- otherwise threaten to win on even and pretty much gg
On blue coin, you are forced to at least play 3 cards and stay ahead, if the first 3 cards plus the strategem doesn't help you stay ahead, you pretty much have to continue commit to the round by spending your gold cards, give up last say, or worse case lose on even.
I know it's always been this way but maybe more evident recently as the current meta decks abuse red-coin more than before.
Makes for both a boring experience and frustrating gameplay (if continuously get blue coin 3-4 games in a row)
I think I've read various suggestions before, and some that comes to mind:
- cannot dry-pass round 2 and need to at least play 1 card (gives the blue-coin player that lost round 1 a chance to regain card advantage or regain last-say)
- slight buff to strategem
- slight nerf to carry-over, they are too cheap right now