Stop Restricting my Deck Options

[StrykerS77]

Tell me, how could Spring Equinox be improved as a 4 provision cost card that you would use?

It would have to either put points on the board or damage what it purifies. That;s the only options I can think of off the top of my head.

Sorry you feel that way.

My feelings don't have anything to do with the statements I made about the card.

Artefacts aren't a problem because they are rarely played. Only the newer scenarios are considered to be a 'problem'. Probably because they have upset the apple cart.

The concept of artifacts in general is problematic. That is why the devs chose to make most of them not strong enough for peole to feel the need to put artifact removal in their decks. Once artifacts become strong like with scenerios now they are a problem again because players need a way to counter. One of the main issues that pops up with artifacts is players using as many as possible and then using up all of the points that they saved on the last turn. That is a giant design problem. Scenerios don't have that exact problem but they still demand an answer.

I don't agree with you. Still, I you could be right and I could be wrong. Still, Gwent is not purely a game for 'pros', it's built to appeal to the bog standard gamer - those who play games on mobile phones and the like. Pro players are, I would think, I minority that CDPR caters for. The bread and butter is from us bog standard players (non-maths whiz kids).

I definitely get your point about the game needing to be balanced for everyone. Beginners and veterans. The one issue I have with that is once you have been playing a long time and you get up to a high rank you essentially have to stay there forever. For example I have hit rank 0 a few times in the past and will most likely hit it again this season. When the next season starts I will only drop down a few ranks so I am stuck playing at this level of competition every season. So I do believe that game has to be balanced with this level of play in mind. The devs have to realize that a weak card like Spring Equinox isn't going to see any play at high rank or pro rank. (I also suck at math btw)

Not necessarily, by purifying a Defender it allows access to cards that were otherwise hidden behind the Defender - this is certainly beneficial in many circumstances.

Depending on the cards you have and the cards your opponent has it could do something. But there are cards that can purify the defender and put points on the board at the same time and those are simply better.

But defenders aren't 10 points, so that's a bit of a weird example to provide... If there is one that is 10 points, please let me know what it's called as I'd like to use it if possible.

No they aren't 10, it's an example that shows a card can be imbalanced even if it has counters. I have only been making he argument that defenders are currently stronger than their provision cost. If they only defended one or two cards instead of the entire row I would probably feel differently.

I'm sorry you look at the game purely from the perspective of maths. While I do a few basic calculations, I certainly don't spend my days number crunching Gwent cards and decks. I'm quite certain that the majority of players are like me. A hardcore faction, probably the 'Pro' player, is more inclined that way. I don't think the average Android player (when it's released on that platform) is going to be playing Gwent with too much maths in mind.

I don't even like math but I am competitive and the use of a card essentially comes down to math because this game is all about having more points than your opponent. If someone plays very casually then they can get away with that and have a good time. But anyone who plays ranked an extended amount of time and wants to win is going to have to evaluate the cards the same way at some point.

 

[Gen_Liu]

The concept of artifacts in general is problematic. That is why the devs chose to make most of them not strong enough for peole to feel the need to put artifact removal in their decks. Once artifacts become strong like with scenerios now they are a problem again because players need a way to counter. One of the main issues that pops up with artifacts is players using as many as possible and then using up all of the points that they saved on the last turn. That is a giant design problem. Scenerios don't have that exact problem but they still demand an answer.

The problem is easy to fix, CDPR just need to make up their mind about artifacts and the design of the game in general.

Either artifacts are designed to provide lower value than their provision cost (spear, shield ect) and can never be associated to a win condition in any shape or form, in which case they remove every way of removing them and make them invincible (giving players the choice of either going for an artifact that provide guaranteed low value or units that give them high risky one).

Or they make them powerful (Portal, scenarios ect), in which case they need to make actual tech cards that works to remove them. Cards like Ida for purify which either serve as a tech or give vitality for 4 turns. This card is so good in term of design, I don't understand why they didn't follow the same model for every tech cards in the game.

What is certain is that a cards like Spring equinox should simply not exist.
Those cards are so awful, they don't even worth it in games where they're supposed to find value.
Like, seriously, your opponent plays a Defender, you play Spring equinox....That's still a zero point play you trade for the body of the Defender as well as all additional value he/she provides on top of existing (armor, token ect).

I had the case yesterday, I honestly felt bad for my opponent who lost easily after spring equinoxing my Defender because that play alone sent him too far behind anyway.

Those type of cards are so out of place that it would probably be one of the first advice I would give to a beginner who wants to get started at Gwent "Don't play cards like Spring equinox or First light....Ever. Avoid them like the plague, they're only designed to make you lose games".

 

[Hiperon]

No, purify is not useful

Hi,
you look much more experienced than me, and I play on much lower MMR/rang. So maybe it works in different way on top, or maybe I'm to newbie to discuss anything about this.
BUT
I would still like to express my thoughts, please don't be angry.

Purify i had in some decks was useful. To counter some lock on NR trebuchet, to counter some poison from ST (they don't run many of them), stopping bleeding from vampire deck even from one source helped a little for free, and yes, even against Nilfgaard many times it made them kill one unit instead of two, or two instead of three, and it usually was incredible advantage, usually enough to change small lose into small win (but win is a win).

I'm not running artifact removal in any of my few decks, because I don't see it worth it this much. There is much less artifacts than I remember (more than a year ago, there was almost full artifact deck) and even against scenario I feel like doing something else... OK, is not better, it's for half points usually, but much more versatile.

I was able to win against people destroying my scenario as NR. If i got machine runinng, i got them runinng, if not, well, scenario will not always help me.
I was able to win against scenario without artifacts, bleeding in round 2, or something. Yeah more loses than win, but still?

I guess, what I'm trying to say, I don't feel FORCED TO use 2 useless cards just in case.

 

[Guest 4368268]

I think if your answer to these binary problems is "Well, there IS an answer available.." you're really missing the point.

Yes, there is artifact removal. There is purify. Back when Imlerith Sabbath was a thing, there was mandrake. Does that mean Imlerith Sabbath was a 'balanced' card? Ask Skellige players from the OB days.

Against some decks you'd need five locks. Against others eight purifies. Against others two/three artifact removals. That is not a good situation. For starters, the game could do with more cards like Gremist, that have a continuing effect if you add certain cards that are useful regardless (Skellige has many good standalone alchemy cards)

Silver weather clear mages were an example of good tech card design in OB.
All these new keywords don't necessarily make archetypes any more interesting but it is sure making things convoluted.
I think bleeding/vitality were good additions to the game.

They can be strong but you'll not auto-lose for not being able to answer them (immediately) bleeding as a mechanic also just points out how OP poison really is.

Two five provision bleeding cards I imagine are worth around 20 points if the round is long enough, two four provision poisons can wipe tridam infantries/svalblod priests you name it and easily top that and a lot quicker too.
Poison is a mistake. If poison was the ST/NG equivalent of bleeding that would be a lot better.

 

[ardeathwinggwent]

Play Arena mode. Nobody restricts your deck options there.

 

[mazeebra]

And then you have people complaining about Yennefer Invocation.

Perhaps instead of complaining, ask for it to be a neutral card instead.