Set Gwent free

+
You said gwent is too complicated and then proceeded to describe how to make it more complex. Which I agree with.
You may have gotten me wrong. I want to make archetypes "shorter". Most decks I meet now give a feeling that you are facing the same loop of cards over and over again. And that is kinda irritating.
 
And a few more constructive suggestions (they might be arguable).
1. When the game is ended, it would be good to reveal what is left in both players' decks.
2. When the game just started and players haven't placed anything on board, I suggest enabling players to withdraw without losing points. The reason is that for every possible dack there's always a perfect "counter deck", to win against which is very unlikely. If one doesn't want to face that kind of a challenge - one should have this kind of opportunity. It will also demonstrate to developers the most uninteresting to play against archetypes. It will also help when you have the same faction to play against for 4 or 5 times in a row. But this might put the best players in some sort of isolation too...
3. Along with borders, avatars and titles players might enjoy rare versions of dialogs. Sometimes when the opponent sees that another player is occupied by counting points or decision making he starts sending taunts over and over again to destruct the player. Yes, you can mute all the taunts, but some players are pleasant to chat with and some others - aren't. I can't know which one is my next opponent. So for the moment, I need such dialog options as:
- "just shut up"
- "thanks for the game, I'm leaving now, no point to continue"
- "sorry, I don't like this archetype, bye" etc.
There should be a variety of them, among which you will pick some for yourself.
 

Guest 4021160

Guest
2. When the game just started and players haven't placed anything on board, I suggest enabling players to withdraw without losing points. The reason is that for every possible dack there's always a perfect "counter deck", to win against which is very unlikely. If one doesn't want to face that kind of a challenge - one should have this kind of opportunity. It will also demonstrate to developers the most uninteresting to play against archetypes. It will also help when you have the same faction to play against for 4 or 5 times in a row. But this might put the best players in some sort of isolation too...
What happens when you finally get a favourable matchup and the opponent just backs off.
 
Well i think people are correct. When you make a statement there should be some constructivity there. "The game is too complicated" i want more pretty pictures and lore. That's all i understood from your super long post.

What is complicated in the game so much. You know people invented tutorials for that purpose. If you found something troublesome it can become part of the tutorial and be explained. As for the lore i think that some of the cards will find places maybe later in the game when new factions get released. And in the neutral faction there are cards from all factions included. The game lore is big and vast, include books and you get a whole world of oportunities while GWENT is just a card game. You know how people say about movies :"its not like the book". Well try fitting the whole lore inside card game its natural to have some things that don't exactly make perfect sence.
 
Seeing what each player had left in their deck could be interesting. You could take it a step further and have some type of post game report built into the game. Showing what was played per round, complete decks, etc. It wouldn't be a priority to do this but I don't see the harm in tossing it out there.

Allowing players to back out of games without playing them is going to be problematic. It may seem reasonable to let players duck out of bad match ups but it's unwise to assume it will be the only result of such a change. If everyone decides they're unwilling to play against any match up where they don't have an advantage you're going to have a problem. Games are going to be hard to find :).

The deck building implications are also of concern. Instead of building toward balance so you can handle most match ups people will build toward countering a handful and ducking out of everything else. Not good.

It could work with heavy restrictions on it. Some type of limit on the number of games you can consecutively bail on would be in order. Perhaps with a time-out period following dropping from a game, where you can't do it again until it expires. It's still probably not a great concept because it will add unnecessary overhead to the time it takes to find and play a game.

I'm not sure what you're asking for with the dialog suggestion. I could understand dialog to indicate you're still considering your next move, you need to hit the bathroom, you know you've lost and are conceding early, etc. Telling other players to shut up or otherwise being offensive toward them isn't going to improve anything though. Anything along those lines is out of place, IMO.
 
I suggest enabling players to withdraw without losing

This can't work for so many reasons. Part of all card games is learning what decks are considered the best, and trying to build your own deck around that (or netdecking and becoming a part of the mould).

Every deck will have weaknesses, if you don't like your weaknesses, don't play your deck.
 
I can only see this encouraging copy cats and increasing the homogeneity of Gwent. No thanks.
There are tons of decks on the internet - you just pick one for yourself. Gwent is homogeneous already. I see basically the same decks every day. My suggestion will simply reveal to players how difficult was the game to their opponent and how close were they to victory that's it. I posted a lot of emotional ideas here but this one is actually constructive I guess.
 
Seeing what each player had left in their deck could be interesting. You could take it a step further and have some type of post game report built into the game. Showing what was played per round, complete decks, etc. It wouldn't be a priority to do this but I don't see the harm in tossing it out there.

Allowing players to back out of games without playing them is going to be problematic. It may seem reasonable to let players duck out of bad match ups but it's unwise to assume it will be the only result of such a change. If everyone decides they're unwilling to play against any match up where they don't have an advantage you're going to have a problem. Games are going to be hard to find :).

The deck building implications are also of concern. Instead of building toward balance so you can handle most match ups people will build toward countering a handful and ducking out of everything else. Not good.

It could work with heavy restrictions on it. Some type of limit on the number of games you can consecutively bail on would be in order. Perhaps with a time-out period following dropping from a game, where you can't do it again until it expires. It's still probably not a great concept because it will add unnecessary overhead to the time it takes to find and play a game.

I'm not sure what you're asking for with the dialog suggestion. I could understand dialog to indicate you're still considering your next move, you need to hit the bathroom, you know you've lost and are conceding early, etc. Telling other players to shut up or otherwise being offensive toward them isn't going to improve anything though. Anything along those lines is out of place, IMO.
Completely agree, you put this idea even better than it originally was! ;)
About phrases - I just want the ability to build my custom phrase list for different situations.
 
Moderator: Several posts have gone skipping off into the Graveyard. Back on topic, people, and, please, no insults.
 
That was referring to me, sorry about that, people!

Forum user named nedders put almost everything I've been complaining about in very precise manner:
duplicates make the game tiresome.
So I suggest making every bronze card that summons or resurrects other cards doomed.
Because when I play against decks built on them - 2/3 rounds are almost identical. And you just sit around thinking: "Here we go again..." I'm not against NG or SK, I want them to have more diverse archetypes.

I hope (if it's possible at all) the developers will remove things messing with opponent's hand and deck and graveyards (at least using bronze units). When NG opponent has a revealed card I cannot target it or lock it. But he has the cards that allow him to set a power of a revealed unit in my hand to 1. If he can target cards in my hand - so should I be able to do the same.

I think lock should remove a spy token. What kind of a spy from a locked unit you can get?
 
Top Bottom