It is super annoying, but I think your proposed solution would be a bit over the top. Just making "no-unit" decks less attractive, by adjusting some current issues (like woodland boosting immune unit on hand) would go a far way in discouraging people to use these kind of decks. I don't think banishing such decks is necessary. Just remove incentives and "glitches".
And those changes will break balance of some Leshii decks (and who knows what else) while need just to fix only one type. Boosting immune cards in hand is not real glitch, cause by game mechanics as target counts only cards that laying on table, not in deck or graveyard, as i understand. And as i can guess it was planned so, to make different mechanics, not just another buff.
It is super annoying, but I think your proposed solution would be a bit over the top. Just making "no-unit" decks less attractive, by adjusting some current issues (like woodland boosting immune unit on hand) would go a far way in discouraging people to use these kind of decks. I don't think banishing such decks is necessary. Just remove incentives and "glitches".
@dwavenhobble
1) How this topic changed from special decks to immunity?
2) Ehm, did you ... notice ... card ... called ... Spring Eqinox?
3) It is nonsene to have purify cleaning all statuses with exception of lock.
And those changes will break balance of some Leshii decks (and who knows what else) while need just to fix only one type. Boosting immune cards in hand is not real glitch, cause by game mechanics as target counts only cards that laying on table, not in deck or graveyard, as i understand. And as i can guess it was planned so, to make different mechanics, not just another buff.
Targeting a card on hand MANUALLY also goes against the immune function of not being able to target a CARD manually. Boosting a card on hand, unless passively, is manual targeting, the card is immune on hand too, not only on the board.
I thought the same thing actually, but then I considered it once more. I'm not sure tbh. But, I thought purify was something related to poison and that it did not make sense to "purify" a lock. Perhaps it makes sense to purify a bleeding unit. But then I looked up all "purify" units in the game, and there are not many. So it's not really a big problem.
But it still does not make sense to purify a lock. How can you purify a unit against dimeritum shackles?
Purify is not described and does not sound like "remove all statuses" either.
At this point it does not hurt the game that it can remove the lock, but it also does not make sense. But if more purify cards are introduced, this lock removal with purify should be reconsidered.
What i'm thinking about this situation:
There is no strategy in special card decks, it's not interesting to play. There's no fun to play against it, it super annoying. And finally it's stupid cause Gwent was created (in W3) as game about tactics and fighting between 2 armies, not about just killing cards 1 by 1 on table.
Solution:
Restrict special cards by 4-8 in deck, anyway normal decks don't need such cards that much.
My ‘no unit’ or ‘special card’ or ‘arifact card’ or call it whatever deck runs 8 spells only. It actually runs 9 units but it’s aim is to play a long R3 with idelly commiting a single unit to the board. So you would need a rule that says no more than 4 spels AND 4 arifacts or go even harder to say no more than 4 spells OR artifacts. Which restricts the game a lot. Not sure everybody would like that.
Also, you can have heavy removal decks even with that restriction. There will aways be some form of ‘control decks’ but control deck are curently not very strong in Gwent anyway.
What is fun to play with and againts is very subjective. To cater for masses we probably need more options in terms of game modes.
The sasonal mode in my view has been poor so far. It would have been much better to have ‘units only’ or ‘bronze cards only’ rather than the crazy bear or random double play double sized decks.
Finally, I much prefer to play Arena lately as I find it not fun to play the very stale and repetive games at the ladder around R10-6, which are very much decided on who makes better draws or what the mysterious matchmaking brings (because people at that level rarely make major mistakes and play almost identical decks). This is also the reason why I try to build outside the box decks whatever it takes to have some fun.
These no unit decks are just ultra-removal. That's why they're so bad for the game - they exacerbate everything that's wrong with Gwent; if you don't have removal vs any type of engine, you lose. Sad thing is, if you have removal and face engines, you win. Therefore the problem is you can have removal and no unit decks BOTH killing engine or boosts, so it becomes less a rock-paper-scissors situation and more like rock-fire-scissors.
Even in really low level decks (playing via Xbox) there's nothing but net decks being used. At L27 I've seen Skellige decks with Olaf/Knut etc, all 800 scrap crafts; Monster Arachas decks with Glustyworp/Germain. This game is going to kill the new players experience, lose the veterans and end up with a bunch of people playing the same half a dozen decks over and over.
Even in really low level decks (playing via Xbox) there's nothing but net decks being used. At L27 I've seen Skellige decks with Olaf/Knut etc, all 800 scrap crafts; Monster Arachas decks with Glustyworp/Germain. This game is going to kill the new players experience, lose the veterans and end up with a bunch of people playing the same half a dozen decks over and over.
This problem is made even worse in that the card collection aspect of the game is ruined by too many scraps and cards costing too few scraps. Pretty much anyone can easily get the cards they need, which renders the whole card collection aspect of the game dead. Sadly.
That would solve the "problem" of "netdecks" as some cards would just be too expensive to get with scraps at an early point in your Gwent experience. It would take significant experience and alot of collection to get "all" the best cards you would need for such a "netdeck".
This problem is made even worse in that the card collection aspect of the game is ruined by too many scraps and cards costing too few scraps. Pretty much anyone can easily get the cards they need, which renders the whole card collection aspect of the game dead. Sadly.
That would solve the "problem" of "netdecks" as some cards would just be too expensive to get with scraps at an early point in your Gwent experience. It would take significant experience and alot of collection to get "all" the best cards you would need for such a "netdeck".
There's very little balance in anything in Gwent. Card Kegs cost money but are frequently garbage, because they've introduced so much poor bronze filler the odds of getting those few Gold cards that make a difference is incredibly slim. So you've got to grind and grind ore to keep buying them with Ore, then you've got to make difficult mill decisions to get the cards you do want. If you make a bad mill decision or spend unwisely on the rewards tree, you're in a lot of difficulty. A new player is clearly going to reference the internet because of these decisions, which is why you end up with basically a pocketful of decks being played over and over again, even now at low levels.
It's the equivalent of someone buying Witcher 3, putting some codes in and running around destroying things with a few button presses. Where's the experience journey? Where's the learning?
I mean, honestly - how on Earth am I playing, at level 27, someone who's throwing down MO/Arachas with 2 x Arachas nests, Germain, She-Troll, Glusty, and using Summoning Circle on Vran's and Forktails? It's META tactics at the very bottom of the ladder. I'm stuck with Eist and a few Skellige warriors!
Sorry - to bring it back a touch, even at low levels I am seeing a lot of decks using low amounts of units. I guess the question for CDPR would be "is this working as intended"? Have they given any answers on the state of Gwent in relation to special decks?
As I said, it seems that removal is the only way to play the game and win with any level of consistency, as that's all special decks are.
Special decks also belong in the game, but the game should not give them any advantages and discourage people from using them, as it's not the main thought behind the game.
Just adjusting some cards that work well with this strategy will go a long way in doing so.
Special decks also belong in the game, but the game should not give them any advantages and discourage people from using them, as it's not the main thought behind the game.
Just adjusting some cards that work well with this strategy will go a long way in doing so.
An easy fix for this to keep the decks being able to be played post nerf would be to allow Vivienne: Oriole able to target any artifact not just enemy ones. Then once you've used all the charges on an artifact you play her and eat the artifact getting a pretty big card on the board.
@dwavenhobble
1) How this topic changed from special decks to immunity?
2) Ehm, did you ... notice ... card ... called ... Spring Eqinox?
3) It is nonsene to have purify cleaning all statuses with exception of lock.
1) because some newer special card decks are using immunity as a way to have cards on the field that can't be targeted.
1b) The argument being made was that special card decks were existing in part due to the immunity meta
2) Yes I did. Did you notice it's not played and in most situations kind of useless oddly enough useless against a number of special card decks themselves?
3) No it's really not because purify shouldn't be a better answer to lock than most other cards as Pellar presently is.
Targeting a card on hand MANUALLY also goes against the immune function of not being able to target a CARD manually. Boosting a card on hand, unless passively, is manual targeting, the card is immune on hand too, not only on the board.
Post automatically merged:
I thought the same thing actually, but then I considered it once more. I'm not sure tbh. But, I thought purify was something related to poison and that it did not make sense to "purify" a lock. Perhaps it makes sense to purify a bleeding unit. But then I looked up all "purify" units in the game, and there are not many. So it's not really a big problem.
But it still does not make sense to purify a lock. How can you purify a unit against dimeritum shackles?
Purify is not described and does not sound like "remove all statuses" either.
At this point it does not hurt the game that it can remove the lock, but it also does not make sense. But if more purify cards are introduced, this lock removal with purify should be reconsidered.
I've personally found Pellar very useful. Though you are right purify is not that widespread yet but already on the few units it's on it's pretty powerful.
Because one strategy in special card decks is to use woodland spirit and boost an immune card on hand, the play that 12 point card, while your opponent likely has no card or only 1 card on the board. If that is the case, the opponent (you) need to come up with one huge card, or destroy that 12 point card somehow. Since you cannot target it due to immune, you cannot use Geralt oR or Leo. You can use Yrden if lucky and you predict the move.
But such advantageous endings to a special card deck should be tweaked, to make those less attractive. Being able to boost an immune card at hand is an issue in it's own right, but it's very relevant to this discussion of special card decks.
I guess another possible solution is the Salantos or whatever it is called for Scoia'Tael, where you can remove immune to boost it at the very end of a special card decks, where the enemy does not have enough artifact destroyers to take out say 2x thunderbolt.
I don't mind immune, I think it has it's place in the game, but relative to the whole special card deck, it can truly be horrible.
Lately I encountered a few Ardal's running 5 tactics. I was playing an Engine deck, so my chances of winning was pretty much 0, the opponent could 2/0 me every time had I not used my leader ability, which would screw me over later on in the game. It was frustrating to encounter those decks, so you know what, I took my pride aside and conceded. If they remove special cards deck, you still end up in a stone paper scissors match, in which you dont stand a chance of winning when you encounter a specific deck. This is frustrating, but it is the way card games of this format work.
So take you pride aside and concede. This game wont go from stone-paper scissors format in the future. Some decks will exist that will crush yours with no strategy required, special cards is just a format that you cannot interact with. So does that ultimately matter when the end result is that you loose (if specials are exactly a perfect counter to your strategy)?
But it's not about winning or losing. I have no problem losing a good game or a bad matchup or just being outplayed by a better player. The issue is that these decks are just awful to play against, allow for limited to no interaction or counterplay, abuse things like immunity, and are fundamentally just unsporting. I don't care how "niche" these decks are; playing against one is too many.
I'm thinking here, it's really very sad to play against decks without units.
It's anti-sports, you can not interact and feel bad about it - it's something that makes me feel bad about playing Gwent, it's the same when we had the Sihil problem, you see?
However, you have to understand that there has to be room to have different dice, this makes the game bigger, even if it's decks that hurt me to have to play against, because I realized the cowardice of my opponent, who resorted to something because he can not win other way!
However, I do not think the solution is to make cards unfeasible like they did with Sihil, which is a useless letter nowadays, but we need smarter solutions, for example two tips:
Remove immunity from the game - since decks of this type use only this type of unit in the end either reinforcing with the leader or as the last move and you do not have time to respond.
If you still want to maintain immunity, then do not let the person interact in any way with the card - werewolves with only 4 body and without the leader being able to reinforce them.
Another tip, and I think best, is to create an artifact that can not be destroyed (even because those decks without units run cards that destroy artifacts) that whenever their opponent uses a card that is not a unit, it is reinforced in 1 or cause a better effect, that way you will penalize your opponent.
But a detail, create another skill for this artifact, because if you play against a "normal" deck it will still have value.
The cards need to have a secondary value, for example Vivienne: Oriole - if your opponent does not have an artifact, reinforce himself in 5 realize ?!
Well, with the recent buff to Harald's (the Cripple) from 13 to 15 provisions, I've faced another unitless deck with Greatswords & Dagur as their wincons. Harald needed those 2 extra provisions, I guess. Gongratulations to the Gwent balancing team. They did it again. Their usual solution to buff or nerf provisions or points by 1 solves all the issues as always, kappa... With the recent update, what's the point to leaders provisions anyway? Almost all of them have the same now.
I take back everything I've ever said about unitless decks. I'm seeing them several times a day now and I'd be lying if I said I wasn't already really sick of them.
It isn't about deck strength, the rules, or anything else like that. They're pretty much the definition of poor sportsmanship and they completely suck the fun right out of a match. It got to the point last night that I wouldn't even bother playing against them and I think I'll keep that up indefinitely. Someone plays five specials in a row in Round 1 and I'm just gonna forfeit so I can move onto a match that I can actually enjoy.
I'm thinking here, it's really very sad to play against decks without units.
It's anti-sports, you can not interact and feel bad about it - it's something that makes me feel bad about playing Gwent,
Exactly it causes me to stop playing Gwent and wait until it get fixed
However, I do not think the solution is to make cards unfeasible like they did with Sihil, which is a useless letter nowadays, but we need smarter solutions
Since HC 1.0 all artifacts got nerfed either in value or provisions.
The whole card type is problematic because of their one sided interactability.
You either have artifact removal or you don't.
Another tip, and I think best, is to create an artifact that can not be destroyed (even because those decks without units run cards that destroy artifacts) that whenever their opponent uses a card that is not a unit, it is reinforced in 1 or cause a better effect, that way you will penalize your opponent.
It would be nice if artifacts are tied to your deck in return of a penalty on your total provisions to spend on 25 cards.
They can be used only once in a game and can't be removed this will enable a lot of combo's on cards that are never played.
