Sooo.... create is still around?

[Sheva007]

After a long absence since midwinter update, i came back yesterday to check the new game, and i´m surprised the Create mechanic is still around.

I mean, the community left pretty clear "create" had no place in gwent back in the day. And i took for granted that it would be the first thing removed from the game with homecoming.

It seems i was wrong. And the game deciding RNG is still there. I just lost a game from a random Uma pulling off exactly the needed card.


Is there somethig i´m missing? Is there any reason for not scrapping Create straightaway? does it work differently now?

 

[4RM3D]

Is there somethig i´m missing? Is there any reason for not scrapping Create straightaway? does it work differently now?

There are less create cards now and they do not feel overpowered. Of course, a lucky Uma still hurts. However, at the same time, it can backfire spectacularly.

 

[Sheva007]

they do not feel overpowered. Of course, a lucky Uma still hurts. However, at the same time, it can backfire spectacularly.

How come? They feel overpowered when they pull off one of the maybe 2 or 3 cards needed in certain situation.

Backfire? It hardly can backfire. It can be a mediocre play, but backfire? It is a medium/lowish risk - high reward play.

 

[4RM3D]

It can be a mediocre play, but backfire? It is a medium/lowish risk - high reward play.

Uma is too unpredictable. So, it's not a low risk, high reward, but rather whatever the RNG Gods decide to grant you, which has an average pay-out in the long run. Compare that to the old Hymn, which was very oppressing for a Create card.

 

[Sheva007]

Uma is too unpredictable.

Of course it is, the create ability is pure RNG, so its obviously unpredictable. But Uma CANNOT backfire. Uma is a "Oh-Shit" button than will sometimes straightaway win you the game by giving you the perfect answer to the board situation, and more often than not give you a somewhat useful play.

Can you elaborate on how "Uma can backfire spectacularly"? By giving you to choose between the 3 witchers? Thats not even backfiring, its a mediocre play and its one of the worst case scenarios out there.

Does Uma have a hidden text somewhere where it says "Uma will sometimes do nothing at all"?

Just wait and see, Uma is going to be a staple in pretty much any deck in no time.

And no, sorry, the "its better than the completely broken situation we had before" is not even a remotely valid excuse.

 

[StrykerxS77x]

You aren't the only one surprised.

 

[4RM3D]

Can you elaborate on how "Uma can backfire spectacularly"?

Villen, Schirrú, Tibor, Keltullis, Kambi, Mourntart and anything which can conditionally be bad. And then there is a whole array of mediocre choices. It can backfire, though "spectacularly" might be an overstatement. Regardless, the point still stands that Uma is not oppressing or broken. It's just one of the few remaining Create cards.

And no, sorry, the "its better than the completely broken situation we had before" is not even a remotely valid excuse.

Create needs no excuses. You can dislike the mechanic, but it's not inherently bad, just some of the old Gwent cards were poorly implemented.

 

[Sheva007]

Villen, Schirrú, Tibor, Keltullis, Kambi, Mourntart and anything which can conditionally be bad.

And still, you have to be retarded enough to pick one of those "bad" choices instead of a better one of the other 2 options offered. Your point would be remotely valid if Uma´s text were "summon a random gold card", but its not the case, so the situationally bad options are going to be dodged easily.

Regardless, the point still stands that Uma is not oppressing or broken

Interesting how your excuse is "Uma is not oppresive" 24 hours after the release of the game. Lets talk about how much of a problem Uma is in 1 month.

but it's not inherently bad

Oh, it is. Of course it is. Like some of us said when the create mechanic was introduced, and timed proved us right.

I wont deny "Create" has its place, though. Its place is Hearthstone.

 

[Mancoon1980]

After a long absence since midwinter update, i came back yesterday to check the new game, and i´m surprised the Create mechanic is still around.

I mean, the community left pretty clear "create" had no place in gwent back in the day. And i took for granted that it would be the first thing removed from the game with homecoming.

It seems i was wrong. And the game deciding RNG is still there. I just lost a game from a random Uma pulling off exactly the needed card.


Is there somethig i´m missing? Is there any reason for not scrapping Create straightaway? does it work differently now?

It's incredible really. It's actually increased since midwinter. Faction identity, architypes, armor, moonlight, 3 bronze, 3 rows all gone, but rng remains

 

[Alexandr.Gabriel]

AT least is not random as hearthstone

 

[4RM3D]

Interesting how your excuse is "Uma is not oppresive" 24 hours after the release of the game. Lets talk about how much of a problem Uma is in 1 month.

Uma was not an issue pre-Homecoming and the ability hasn't changed. Now, everything else has, so the impact might be different, but I don't really think the card is going to pose a problem, besides your personal distaste for the Create mechanic in general, that is.

Like some of us said when the create mechanic was introduced, and timed proved us right.

No, that's your opinion. Like I have said, the Create mechanic is just another ability that can be played. As with every mechanic, it should be implemented properly, which wasn't the case for certain cards. And for the record, I also disliked those cards, but Uma isn't one of them.

 

[Sheva007]

armor, moonlight

Actually, yeah, thats something i noticed too. Why getting rid of Armor? It was perfectly fine. Moonlight? I dont know how powerful it was, but at least it was interesting.

"But instead lets keep the RNG mechanic the whole community is so fond of, hihihihihih"

AT least is not random as hearthstone

Create is the exact same mechanic as "Discover" in Hearthstone. An example of lazy design. Maybe you mean there is not a "Yogg-Saron" in Gwent. Which there is, anyway, its called Uma.

I don't really think the card is going to pose a problem

Just wait and see. A staple in every deck, now that there is no restriction for golds. You read it here first.

No, that's your opinion. Like I have said, the Create mechanic is just another ability that can be played.

Dont see any point to be taken here. "Create is an ability that can be played". Yeah, ok. And a pretty bad one for the health of the game, that should´ve been scrapped entirely.

I´m starting to understand the lukewarm reception Homecoming is having. The developers are just completely out of touch with what the community asked for.

 

[sfruzz]

Well, Uma has some new friends: Angouleme, Gascon and Casino Reveal!

From the Open Letter [april 2018]

We heard you discussing the “Create” mechanic. At first, we thought it would be an interesting addition to the game, but — as time passed — we realized that this form of wide RNG is not something that fits our focus on player skill. We will be extra careful with these types of mechanics in the redesign process. That said, if we manage to find some cards interesting enough to include, but ‘too crazy for Ranked’, they will still have their place in Arena and Casual Mode.

Sadly, they haven't tried, not even in the PTR, to have some cards restricted to Arena and Casual. They changed 90% of cards and ability, they havn't removed Create, this should tell us something. Create is meant to stay.

 

[4RM3D]

Gascon

Yeah, with that I can agree. What was the idea behind that card? :unsure: Because it just looks like having pointless RNG.

 

[Gen_Liu]

Of course it is, the create ability is pure RNG, so its obviously unpredictable. But Uma CANNOT backfire. Uma is a "Oh-Shit" button than will sometimes straightaway win you the game by giving you the perfect answer to the board situation, and more often than not give you a somewhat useful play.

Can you elaborate on how "Uma can backfire spectacularly"? By giving you to choose between the 3 witchers? Thats not even backfiring, its a mediocre play and its one of the worst case scenarios out there.

Does Uma have a hidden text somewhere where it says "Uma will sometimes do nothing at all"?

Just wait and see, Uma is going to be a staple in pretty much any deck in no time.

And no, sorry, the "its better than the completely broken situation we had before" is not even a remotely valid excuse.

Of course Uma's curse can backfire, Glustyworp, Vilgeforz, Ihuarraquax, Gollyat, Villentrething...
There is enough cards you potentially may not want to have in your three options to make it possible to backfire if it provides any value at all.

Another thing you need to keep in mind is the provision cost. Uma's curse is an 11 provision card meaning that in order to add it to your deck you need to sacrifice that amount of "points". I'm pretty sure any archetype in the game has better options for that cost and pretty much whatever Uma is gonna pull will worth less than its actual value.

Now I agree that having a bad roll on Uma and losing a game because of RNG is annoying and I feel for you on that point 1OO% but Uma's curse isn't OP, in fact it's a bad card pretty much like any card with the create effect still in the game.

It doesn't mean I like those cards, don't get me wrong, Gascon, for instance, is the biggest BS ever printed imo but as long as those cards are bad I'm okay with that because ultimately you'll mostly cross peoples playing them on casual or at very low rank of play which is fine by me.

 

[Soltblod]

I was totally expecting Create to go as well, given WHAT THEY TOLD US and given that it seems to be pretty commonly agreed that MIdwinter made the game worse.
I understand if a player wants to gamble. That can be fun. But one runestone per faction and maybe one powerful gambling gold should suffice.

I remember that before Create was installed, I really paid attention to what cards my opponent could still have and prepared for it and played accordingly, after Create was installed, I pretty much just stopped because there was no point to it.

 

[Sheva007]

Of course Uma's curse can backfire, Glustyworp, Villentrething, Kayran...

Having a nett gain of 3 power, in case of Glustyworp, or of 4 with Kayran, is not "backfiring", its a mediocre bronze play, thats it, but not a situation where you end up worse than you were, so no, as long as you have more than half a brain, Uma is not backfiring, ever.

Uma is going to be a thing since its a card that can singlehandedly win games that you´d otherwise loose because you dont have an appropiate answer for certain situations. Im sure my enemy was having a blast while he pulled Eyck of Denesle off his arse while i only had 1 card in hand which was not removal.


The speech of "its only going to be a thing in casual play" its the same speech i heard back when Create was implemented. Then, Tournaments were decided on DiscoveRNG.


Try it. Follow my advice. Put Uma in any of your decks, play with it for 20-30 games. Thats what i´m doing now, and the results are simply absurd.

 

[Gen_Liu]

Having a nett gain of 3 power, in case of Glustyworp, or of 4 with Kayran, is not "backfiring", its a mediocre bronze play, thats it, but not a situation where you end up worse than you were, so no, as long as you have more than half a brain, Uma is not backfiring, ever.

Uma is going to be a thing since its a card that can singlehandedly win games that you´d otherwise loose because you dont have an appropiate answer for certain situations. Im sure my enemy was having a blast while he pulled Eyck of Denesle off his arse while i only had 1 card in hand which was not removal.


The speech of "its only going to be a thing in casual play" its the same speech i heard back when Create was implemented. Then, Tournaments were decided on DiscoveRNG.


Try it. Follow my advice. Put Uma in any of your decks, play with it for 20-30 games. Thats what i´m doing now, and the results are simply absurd.

I removed Kayran from the list because I forgot he had an order, my bad.
About Gullstyworp, if your 1 power unit is an engine card it backfires (in fact it can easily lose you the game depending on the situation).

Also, I'm sorry but I strongly disagree with you when you say that everyone is gonna play Uma because it's gonna provide the card you need.

1/ The way you put it, it feels like Uma allows you to just choose the card you want in the game, which is far from being the truth. I tried to play Uma (not in this version but that card didn't change, it's the same card, let's be clear about that) and I lost count on how many times it lost me a game single handed.

2/ Again, the provision system makes this card none competitive and you can quote me on that, I can even bet money and say that, it is and it will always be a bad card as long as they keep its effect and recrutment cost as it currently is. Think about how many cards you can pick for 11 PC, even if you're concerned about not being able to deal with something your opponent is playing there is plenty of control cards that cost less than that.
And even if you're very concerned Korathy heatwave cost 13 and basically reads "remove a problem from the board"...2 points for the consistency seems more than fair to me.

Also, as I said, this card existed before, it haven't been changed and it wasn't competitive in the previous Gwent, I don't see how it would magically become good especially when the recrutement system plays against it now.

 

[Sheva007]

And even if you're very concerned Korathy heatwave cost 13 and basically reads "remove a problem from the board"...2 points for the consistency seems more than fair to me.

Sometimes you dont need hard removal to kill a 15+ card. Uma gives flexibility at the "cost" of consistency.

Cost which is relative, since as far as i´m experiencing Uma is quite consistent on giving you results ranging form Reasonable-Pretty good-Game Changing.

I lost count on how many times it lost me a game single handed.

Correction, Uma didnt lose you anything, you lost, and Uma didnt give you the magic card you needed to miraculously win, its different.

I tried to play Uma (not in this version but that card didn't change, it's the same card, let's be clear about that

The whole system changed. No gold restriction allows to put Uma in without having to sacrifice archetype golds. And well, yeah, the PC system is just a meme.

I invite you to try again. Put Uma in your deck. Cut something off to make room for it. You´ll be surprised how many times Uma is not only not backfiring (99% of the time), but rather good or straightaway game defining.

 

[Gen_Liu]

Sometimes you dont need hard removal to kill a 15+ card. Uma gives flexibility at the "cost" of consistency.

Cost which is relative, since as far as i´m experiencing Uma is quite consistent on giving you results ranging form Reasonable-Pretty good-Game Changing.

Uma don't give consistency, it provides cards based on RNG.
If it works for you it's because you're lucky and that's good for you but I can tell you for trying this card a million times that it's massively underwhelming most of the time.

Correction, Uma didnt lose you anything, you lost, and Uma didnt give you the magic card you needed to miraculously win, its different.

Errrr....No, it straight up lost me the game. It's not even open to debate.
The situations I'm thinking about is when it pulls me only crap while any other Gold (even bronze in fact) would have win me the game.

The whole system changed. No gold restriction allows to put Uma in without having to sacrifice archetype golds. And well, yeah, the PC system is just a meme.

You should have started with that. If you think that the PC system is a meme clearly you haven't given that game enough time to understand it.

I invite you to try again. Put Uma in your deck. Cut something off to make room for it. You´ll be surprised how many times Uma is not only not backfiring (99% of the time), but rather good or straightaway game defining.

Deal! How much do you five me if I'm right. I'm interested lol