Schirru

[M3e0w]

It's not the amount of points schirru can get, it's about it being too easy to achieve and only possible to play around it if your deck allows it, and the sheer fact that Schirru alone can make alot of different decks unviable.
If you play a specific thing and your opponent runs a card that hard counters it that's bad luck. If there's a card that hard counters several decks all with minimal effort then it should be rethought.

 

[nedders]

It's not the amount of points schirru can get, it's about it being too easy to achieve and only possible to play around it if your deck allows it, and the sheer fact that Schirru alone can make alot of different decks unviable.
If you play a specific thing and your opponent runs a card that hard counters it that's bad luck. If there's a card that hard counters several decks all with minimal effort then it should be rethought.

This last line sums up what's wrong with Gwent. Too much thought has gone on "ooh, what if we make THAT card do this SPECIFIC thing, wouldn't that just suck for the other player?". Yrden vs any boost deck is one such example. Ofc that's a costly card to have - but I think the problem is there's FAR TOO MUCH low-cost counters.

I've literally just played a game where my buffed, immune Gold card was blasted by Waylay. I just don't get that, it should surely be a bit more balanced, as in Waylay should only kill bronzes. I played a match yesterday where a Viper Witcher obliterated Old Speartip - in a Mo Consume that's a far too heavy price to pay for what is a 6 prov bronze!!!!! Again, it's another card that should ONLY banish bronze cards.

Sorry, gone off topic - but the bottom line is Schirru is too cheap, too easy to use and for big plays it should be harder to achieve. Just add "order" to his card, or up the prov cost to 15.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

It's not the amount of points schirru can get, it's about it being too easy to achieve and only possible to play around it if your deck allows it, and the sheer fact that Schirru alone can make alot of different decks unviable.
If you play a specific thing and your opponent runs a card that hard counters it that's bad luck. If there's a card that hard counters several decks all with minimal effort then it should be rethought.

Interesting... I can't think of a single deck I've played or faced in recent memory where a single card or leader is an auto-loss. So perhaps we have different perspectives. Sure, it can be difficult to win against certain match-ups depending on the coin result, draws, last say, etc. This is the nature of the game though. Some decks simply have a hard time against other decks or situations. Gwent has always been this way.

I will say if you build a deck with a lot of units, most of which have similar sized bodies, when you have no way to alter them and think you're going to fair well in a long R3 vs a Schirru deck it's no surprise our perspectives differ. A long R3 with this type of deck against Schirru is called playing into Schirru. It's no different from a long round against most ST builds, or stuff like Dragons Dream based decks. It's not much different from what decks hinging on last say can do if you give them what they want. Easy fix, don't give them what they want. Play into R2 to force a shorter R3. Yes, this risks CA. Regardless, sometimes you need to push R1 and/or bleed R2, despite the possibility of lost CA, to avoid getting burned. Identifying when to do so and when not to is one of the harder aspects of the game to grasp.

In regards to countering several decks... Again, this isn't unique to Schirru. There are tons of cards capable of hitting specific decks quite severely. It's sort of why they are so frequently included.

Lastly, "viable" decks have always had a basis in the existing meta-game. You cannot simply throw cards together, pretend there isn't any established meta, and expect to win consistently. Your deck must account for it. Schirru happens to be a large part of it for various reasons. Adjust around it. Calling for nerfs because it beats you is unreasonable. If a deck cannot deal with staple cards in the meta it sounds like it's time to go back to the drawing board.

 

[Iuliandrei]

Interesting... I can't think of a single deck I've played or faced in recent memory where a single card or leader is an auto-loss

Well if YOU can't think of it then surely it doesn't exist.

Anyway i made this point in a different topic, the problem isn't one card, it's a mechanic. Such effects were designed for the old gwent where you were actually able to play around them, now you can have multiple actions in the same turn and it's impossible to stop a schirru or scorch from hitting multiple targets.
So yes for all intents and purposes in most situations you might aswell concede with 10 cards in hand because there is no way to counter this combo

 

[Rammyp]

Well if YOU can't think of it then surely it doesn't exist.

Anyway i made this point in a different topic, the problem isn't one card, it's a mechanic. Such effects were designed for the old gwent where you were actually able to play around them, now you can have multiple actions in the same turn and it's impossible to stop a schirru or scorch from hitting multiple targets.
So yes for all intents and purposes in most situations you might aswell concede with 10 cards in hand because there is no way to counter this combo

I beg to differ. It is impossible if you stick to a certain game plan that was planned ahead without considering your opponent game plan or trying to counter the use of schirru or scorch. Even with multiple actions a good schirru play is rarely done in one turn, the last turn is mostly the fine tuning of the play, and yes if executed properly it will make a difference.

Although i just returned to gwent after a long break, the complaints seem to be the same just about different cards/factions and it always was and will be this way, unless gwent becomes chess.

 

[Iuliandrei]

I beg to differ. It is impossible if you stick to a certain game plan that was planned ahead without considering your opponent game plan or trying to counter the use of schirru or scorch.

[Nope.]
Do you even understand the basics of what i just said? that you can both hit your opponents and cast scorch in the same turn? the game has changed

 

[Rammyp]

[Nope.]
Do you even understand the basics of what i just said? that you can both hit your opponents and cast scorch in the same turn? the game has changed

I understand perfectly, you claim that being able to preform multiple actions in one turn makes schirru uncounterable. Well if u play a bunch of 4-6 str cards without considering the possibility of a schirru play you will be right, there is no counter. However if u take this to consideration when building/playing your deck u can counter it, Restlessdingo32 gave good examples above. Your claim is similar to a claim that Yrden is imba towards heavy boosting decks or units messing with the graveyard towards most SK decks.

My point is that it will always be like that in gwent because of the different factions and playstyles, u can't balance it perfectly, such balance may be achieved in a game where both oponents have the similar pieces, like chess for example.

 

[Draconifors]

A couple of posts edited. Do NOT ridicule or insult others.

 

[Iuliandrei]

I understand perfectly, you claim that being able to preform multiple actions in one turn makes schirru uncounterable. Well if u play a bunch of 4-6 str cards without considering the possibility of a schirru play you will be right

The vast majority of cards are 4-6 value and this is usually what you'll have, and even if you have 10 cards in the final round, based on your draw you know exactly how it ends. And no, it's not similar to Yerden at all, this isn't my argument at all and claiming that shows you still don't get it.
I played Schirru aswell (why woudln't it, it's a broken card) and i don't remember last time, IF EVER, it got me less than 20 points, it's THAT consistent and you just can't play around it.

 

[Restlessdingo32]

Anyway i made this point in a different topic, the problem isn't one card, it's a mechanic. Such effects were designed for the old gwent where you were actually able to play around them, now you can have multiple actions in the same turn and it's impossible to stop a schirru or scorch from hitting multiple targets.
So yes for all intents and purposes in most situations you might aswell concede with 10 cards in hand because there is no way to counter this combo

Sure there is a way to counter it. I won a game recently precisely because Schirru bricked. Not bricked as in hit a single 4. Bricked in the sense it couldn't hit anything. Obviously it's not going to brick frequently. It doesn't have to brick, however. As long as it doesn't wipe your board in a long round and gets kept below ridiculous value.

The problem I see with pointing out Schirru alone is a ton of decks are a huge problem when a game goes a certain way. Schirru is in no way unique in this regard. You cannot nerf Schirru into the ground without addressing these other cards too. It's unfair.

 

[Rammyp]

The majority of cards are indeed 4-6 value but they don't have to be, there is buffing after all, there are heavy control options that leave ur oponents side barren so that even if he uses schirru he barely has anything beside it. Playing into short round 3 is also an option. Again, ofcourse u won't be able to counter (and by countering i mean the entire game plan and not last turn move) with every deck but then again what is counterable with every deck?

 

[jmoyano92]

The only problem I see with Schurrú is the description. In novels he is not an Elf... he is an half-elf. They should fix only that, the description in his card. Also fixing that is a nerf but at least is a correct nerf. From elf to half-elf.

 

[Duhad]

The only problem I see with Schurrú is the description. In novels he is not an Elf... he is an half-elf. They should fix only that, the description in his card. Also fixing that is a nerf but at least is a correct nerf. From elf to half-elf.

Like with the "Half Elf Hunter", Schurrú is labeled as an elf simply for balance reasons, similarly to Ciri getting a Witcher tag in HC. Their not lore accurate, but help fit the theme and flavor of the cards, like Ciri getting buffed after being 'mentored' by Vesemir's card.