The game can and will be improved on, sure. But HC feels way better than beta gwent and i would never turn back even if possible.
And netdecks are always going to happen, there is no escape.
And netdecks are always going to happen, there is no escape.
Define old. Are we talking CB? OB? Which part of OB? After Midwinter? Archetypes have come and gone for the life-time of Gwent. HC is nothing new in this regard. Likewise, mechanics and game play have changed in major ways over the life-time of the game. HC is also not unique in this regard. HC is arguably the third or forth "major" over-haul.
A lot of archetypes still exist. Reveal even though it's supposedly "RNG". Eithne control builds (there are several) even though there are differences with it. MS still has consume and deathwish centered builds, even a combination of the two. In fact, MS is a extremely flexible faction IMO. There are a lot of synergies there. Many of them can be quite powerful. ST Movement actually exists in a functional form via Brouver. That build is nothing to shake a stick at. Shall I continue?
Archetypes still exist. They're simply less rigidly defined. You aren't forced to build archetype A or B. You can mix and match characteristics of several into a single deck. It could be easily be argued this is an improvement. If this makes it harder for people to figure out a way to make a deck work then it's not a problem with the game.
HC isn't perfect. Please stop pretending it's X, Y or Z just because it makes the "I don't like this game now." argument seem more compelling. I've personally been somewhat critical of Gwent, HC before it was released and to some extent HC after it was released. Not because I have a personal vendetta against the developers or hate the game. Quite the contrary. It's certainly easier to say "this game is bad now". I've done it myself out of frustration. It's still not productive.
Since ST spells archetype effectively doesn't exist anymore, the few remaining weak ST cards still getting their very-very limited bonuses from using spells are basically useless. You should never use them, no matter your strategy.
Now the only ST control option is artifacts, so no wonder everyone uses them. Spells control is not just weaker, it simply doesn't exist, even tho there are cards that kinda should be useful for it.
In other words, when you kill an archetype completely, leaving a few super weak cards that are useful only for the killed archetype is a terrible design. They should have new effects too.
And if devs didn't want to kill the ST spells archetype, well, that's pretty sad. Because they did it anyway.
Now the only ST control option is artifacts, so no wonder everyone uses them. Spells control is not just weaker, it simply doesn't exist, even tho there are cards that kinda should be useful for it.
In other words, when you kill an archetype completely, leaving a few super weak cards that are useful only for the killed archetype is a terrible design. They should have new effects too.
And if devs didn't want to kill the ST spells archetype, well, that's pretty sad. Because they did it anyway.
Last edited:
We must have a wildly different view on ST spells. If memory serves it started as Spell'tael. Spell'tael was complete and utter garbage. It was the same non-interactive concept artifact spam relies upon. Throw a ton of spells in your deck and hold a handful of hand-buff units until the end. Artifact spam does the same thing, only using artifacts. Throw a ton of artifacts in your deck, supplement with removals and purge the board until you end with a big body unit. They're both stupid. Not because they're overpowered. It's the non-interactive part.
Cards like Farseer hardly see play because the card is poorly designed. Reveal a random card, boost if it's a spell. Bad design. Plain and simple. Furthermore, like most low end 3-4 power bronze cards designed to progressively get stronger it gets murdered the moment it hits the board. Swordmasters, Smugglers and Defenders are the exact same way. If you can't put them on the board with additional points on top they get pushed off of it as quickly as they were put down. You cannot use these cards in a deck unless it's tailored to support and prop them up. Otherwise you cannot rely on them to get value.
What you can do is the exact same thing as artifact heavy decks with actual spells. There are pros and cons to each. The thing is it doesn't make sense to use just spells because it's more efficient to use artifacts and spells. Short of artifact removal anyway (spells cannot be removed, as they're done after getting played).
Oh, I didn't play gwent yet when spell'tael were super powerful. So I only know about last few months before HC.
Ways to counter spell'tael:
1) save your own removals until the end to get rid of their buffed units, as they have no more points
2) have your own very powerful finishers like ciri nova or shupe in the end
3) use many unimportant cards instead of relying on a few important ones, for example Adda cursed deck = auto win against spell'tael. Spells can kill many of them, but it doesn't help at all
4) use a bit more complex engines that generate HP/armor on multiple cards at once
Ways to counter artifacts spam:
1) use removal cards to remove artifacts at the correct time
No wonder pre HC spell'tael were outside of meta.
Ways to counter spell'tael:
1) save your own removals until the end to get rid of their buffed units, as they have no more points
2) have your own very powerful finishers like ciri nova or shupe in the end
3) use many unimportant cards instead of relying on a few important ones, for example Adda cursed deck = auto win against spell'tael. Spells can kill many of them, but it doesn't help at all
4) use a bit more complex engines that generate HP/armor on multiple cards at once
Ways to counter artifacts spam:
1) use removal cards to remove artifacts at the correct time
No wonder pre HC spell'tael were outside of meta.
Last edited:
