Remove Scenarios

+
I find scenarios to be horrible cards Gwent would be better off without. Here’s why.

1. One card playing three cards is a violation of the important design principle of one card for turn. This principle serves thes game well and gives Gwent its unique character. While other cards allow two cards to be played, these are generally much more controlled and are already among the strongest cards in Gwent. The eight point spell tutors give a 2 point body and ability to tutor a very specific sort of spell. Dandelion: Poet for 11 provisions, adds a four point body. Triss:Telekinesis spends 11 provisions for a 4 point body and a somewhat random bronze special. For 10 provisions, Novigradian justice will give an extra 5 point body and allow you to tutor a type of bronze card. Note that in each of these cases, the second card is an inert, low value body — for the provision cost, I take no issue with these cards. Some leader abilities grant the playing of a card — but these are Iconic, once a game actions. Portal, for 12 provisions, will summon (not play!) two 4 provision, semi-randomly chosen cards. And I am really not OK with portal either — for this same reason.

2. Every scenario is badly overpowered. If one counts provisions, every scenario plays about 13 or 14 provisions worth of cards for 13 to 15 provision cost. But it only requires one card to effectively play 3 — it effectively saves two turns! Just what is a turn worth? If I very conservatively estimate an average of 8 points per turn, this is 16 points in value. How many provisions would a 16 point card be worth? If we even use the portal model, we pay 12 provisions to summon (not even play) 8 provisions worth of cards, using one play rather than two. Thus one saved turn is worth at least 4 provisions. With two saved turns and 13 provisions of played cards, scenarios should cost a minimum of 21 provisions.

3. Scenarios trade up against virtually everything. If not answered, they generate more points than virtually anything. The few exceptions to this are engines I would argue are themselves badly broken (Cahir, Gezras, Kolgrim, Brouver, Foltest, etc.) At least these engines are susceptible to removal. For 15 provisions, Heatwave and Alzur’s Thunder could remove both the scenario and the card it played — but this takes two turns while scenarions only take one. Again, how much is a turn worth.

4. Scenarios significantly reduce game variety — and they do this in multiple ways. Because they are so OP, they virtually guarantee winning the round in which they are played unless answered. And the only viable answer is Heatwave. Thus, most viable decks contain Heatwave (already less deck variety). Unfortunately, Heatwave also answers everything else. It’s ubiquitous presence prevents the viability of a large number of other decks as omnipresent removal forces every usable card to play for immediate value. Then, scenarios significantly reduce the effective sequencing of cards — making game play more predictable and linear. And finally, scenarios straightjacket deck design by forcing tags and synergies.
 
I agree with you. I have always been saying this to my Gwent friends. I personally have issue with Siege and Masquerade Ball. One is wide punish and other is tall punish. I would like to see Scenarios or any other Artifact to be attach to some unit so if you destroy that unit then Artifact or Scenario will stop working. But well, those are my thoughts.
 
Imho back when they removed Artifact removal they should had also removed it from Heatwave and toned down or even reworked (making some of them more like the Elven Scenario which only supports one archetype and isn't exactly that impressive without Combo cards like Isengrim or Vernossiel) some the Scenarios accordingly.

But now considering the recent Card additions like Sabertooth, Megaescope (if used on Greatswords), Gorthur Gvaed's Order ability, the increased Trap support and a almost risk free Petri's philter (which can be quite devastating with stuff like Vattier or Damien) I think they should return Artifact removal on one Dual Skill Gold Card per Faction (kind of like old Ida Emean aep Sivney Deploy, Melee: Destroy an Artifact. Deploy, Ranged: Boost a unit by 3.) because some of them really feel to strong if there's no decent option to answer them apart from 1 Card that already trades down against most of the Scenarios and additionally this would also decrease Heatwaves playrate because back when Bomb Heaver was still a thing almost no one included Heatwave.

That way playing those powerful Scenarios would come at a higher risk especially against Devotion Decks where it currently is totally risk free.
 
Last edited:
I actually like most Scenarios and I disagree with removing them. Since Scenarios were released, there has been only one of them which has remained a staple within its faction's deck: Masquerade Ball. Despite it getting a provision nerf and then another nerf with being triggered by non-disloyal aristocrats, it still remains one of the strongest scenarios in the game, probably surpassed this meta by Siege due to the many buffs/reworks siege engines got.

Other than that, Passiflora has seen some play now as a good alternative for the Sigi/Caesar combo. Gedyneith is not getting any play. Feign Death is not getting any play either since ST sucks now. The less we speak about Haunt the better.

What needs to be rethinked is artifact removal. And not stuff like Bomb Heaver. A bronze card capable of taking out a scenario is not good design. The game needs some gold cards (preferably neutral) which can remove artifacts.

I am not so sure about Scenarios reducing game variety. If anything, removing some Scenarios would make entire factions useless (looking at NG). So yeah, you would have variety within an useless faction. Other factions, such as SY, SK, MO would not suffer that much at this point since scenario for them is either an alternative or a liability.

Bottom line is no, scenarios should stay, but the developers need to reconsider how to interact with them. There should be more options, other than Heatwave, to remove them. If that becomes a thing, then the scenario problem will be no more.
 

Guest 4375874

Guest
Finally, I've been saying this from Day 1. The moment scenarios were released they became an auto include in every deck. Over time they were nerfed but it stifled creativity for factions like NG. Why build variety when you can just poison anything on the board. Things have improved somewhat now but the scenarios were just replaced by other overtuned cards. The "huge point swing" direction for the game imo is quite terrible and suggests the game needs a new game director unless that is the general direction the company wants to take in which case they'll soon need new players.
 
Bottom line is no, scenarios should stay, but the developers need to reconsider how to interact with them. There should be more options, other than Heatwave, to remove them.
I agree with this.

Especially, in my opinion, Devotion decks should be able to get rid of opponents' Scenarios. Heatwave being the only option is bad in that regard as well.
 
I agree with this.

Especially, in my opinion, Devotion decks should be able to get rid of opponents' Scenarios. Heatwave being the only option is bad in that regard as well.
Devotion needs tons of buffs to have its place in a stale Oneiromancy-Heatwave meta. Devotion decks not only have no artifact removal, they have no row punishers. Maybe scenarios themselves should become devotion-dependent? And yes, scenarios should stay - they at least require some thinking and planning to play.
 
Maybe scenarios themselves should become devotion-dependent?

Interesting idea. Perhaps similar to how evolving leaders can't access their third form unless your deck is devoted, make the third chapter of scenarios inaccessible in non-devotion decks?
 
You're probably having issues with scenarios because your scenarioless deck quite simply doesn't have enough points. In this case i recommend you go play syndicate. It's the only faction that can consistently play against scenarios and feel confident without heatwave
 
You're probably having issues with scenarios because your scenarioless deck quite simply doesn't have enough points. In this case i recommend you go play syndicate. It's the only faction that can consistently play against scenarios and feel confident without heatwave
And this is exactly two of the reasons scenarios are bad - they uniformly generate too many points for one card, and they have one answer that then becomes almost universally required (reducing game and deck variety while increasing RNG).
 
And this is exactly two of the reasons scenarios are bad - they uniformly generate too many points for one card, and they have one answer that then becomes almost universally required (reducing game and deck variety while increasing RNG).
True, but the proper answer for this is not removing scenarios, but adding tools to counter them more efficiently, rather than one single solution in Heatwave. The suggestion provided earlier of making scenarios Devotion dependent is quite interesting and worth testing out. Turn scenarios similar with the third stage of those 6 leader cards for each faction. The prologue and chapter 1 should be triggered anyhow, but the 2nd chapter should be triggered if devotion is met.
 
Top Bottom