Suggestion for Basic Gwent Mode

[DC9V]

New expansions, balancing issues, hot fixes...
It can get annoying at some point.

What if there was a basic, well ballanced game mode, that we could play instead until balancing issues in ranked have been solved (or accepted)? A very simple mode that is limited to a couple of pre-defined decks?

my ideas:

• You can chose between only two different decks per faction.
• You can replace 2 bronzes or one gold card from a pre-defined pool.
• Pro players will help designing these decks.
• No Scenarios
• No Leader Abilities
• New accounts are not allowed to play this mode
• No Quests
• It has it's own ladder (mmr)

possible names for this mode:

• Prestige
• Mini-Gwent
• 禪那 / Zen
• Basic

What do you think?

Post automatically merged: Sep 9, 2020

The difference between this and Standard-Unranked is that you wouldn't face all that stuff that comes with, like XP-farming, artefacts-quests, new players that need ages to take their turn, etc.

 

[Draconifors]

New accounts are not allowed to play this mode

Not only would this split the playerbase (bad), it would be outright discriminating against new players for no reason whatsoever(really, really bad).

And I really don't even see what the point would be in the first place. Tons and tons of work and time and effort, for what?

 

[Riven-Twain]

Nay, I agree. In my view, 'twouldn't be worth the effort to create, nor the fracturing it could cause. Seems just a wee bit too elite and exclusive.

If players wished for a simple version of Gwent, free of competition, quests, and other on-line behaviour, they might as well call for a single-player standalone of classic Gwent from Wild Hunt.

 

[DC9V]

Not only would this split the playerbase (bad), it would be outright discriminating against new players for no reason whatsoever(really, really bad).

It could be an early achievement to unlock this mode. Just like it's the case with Ranked. It wouldn't split the player base.

Post automatically merged: Sep 9, 2020

If players wished for a simple version of Gwent, free of competition, quests, and other on-line behaviour, they might as well call for a single-player standalone of classic Gwent from Wild Hunt.

There's no ranking in TW3 Wild Hunt. My idea was to keep it competitive. An alternative to the Standard (ranked) ladder.

Seems just a wee bit too elite and exclusive.

I don't know... If there were no rules in Chess, would it be less elite?

 

[Riven-Twain]

My idea was to keep it competitive. An alternative to the Standard (ranked) ladder.

So, if I read this aright, you'd want a light version Gwent, wherein a select group of players could advance in rank, independent of the main ladder?

 

[DC9V]

So, if I read this aright, you'd want a light version Gwent, wherein a select group of players could advance in rank, independent of the main ladder?

Yes, but basically everyone can play this mode, as soon as they've played, lets say 50 unranked Standard matches. Not sure if you could call that selected.

I meant "casual" in the sense of not standard ranked. Might have been a bit confusing.

Post automatically merged: Sep 9, 2020

And I really don't even see what the point would be in the first place. Tons and tons of work and time and effort, for what?

My intention is to put a damper on the negative effects of new expansions and meta changes.

 

[Draconifors]

My intention is to put a damper on the negative effects of new expansions and meta changes.

By allowing players to simply ignore their existence, so that they won't even provide feedback on what they see as issues, which in turn gives CDPR less to work with in terms of fixing issues. Seems counter-productive to me.

It's the equivalent of burying one's head in the sand.

And that's just one of many issues that seem obvious with this suggestion.

 

[Anciluart]

No Leader Abilities

They should never have existed in the first place, I wouldn't miss them if they disappear.
The only thing they do is generate problems, they are not even cards.

I would prefer the game only with the cards and nothing else, also every time they change an ability they do not refund the cost of the cards although they could be much less usable, the new players are affected a lot.

 

[DC9V]

...By allowing players to simply ignore the[ir] existence [of new expansions and meta changes], so that they won't even provide feedback on what they see as issues.

Yea.. The biggest challenge would be to make such mode boring enough to keep people playing Standard. Although I think that the quests will prevent that. Especially if players would still need to craft the cards of the pre-defined deck.

 

[Draconifors]

The biggest challenge would be to make such mode boring enough to keep people playing Standard.

So you want to make a new mode but make it so boring that players would not play it?

 

[DC9V]

So you want to make a new mode but make it so boring that players would not play it?

Yes. For one person it might seem boring, for another person it might seem challenging. It would be a nice contrast to have this mode as an option. I doubt that players would make an ultimate choice between both modes. it rather is a Yin and Yang.

 

[Draconifors]

Summing up...

- a new mode that has very little in common with the actual game
- playerbase split further than it already is with ranked, casual, seasonal, and Arena
- new mode that would require a LOT of work would be so boring that it wouldn't be popular (= wasted time and effort on the devs' part)
- continuous support and updating required
- discriminating against new players for no reason whatsoever
- assuming players would choose to play the new mode, reduced input on the actual game's balance and meta and whatnot, not to mention less data for CDPR (= harder for the devs to fix issues that may exist and balance the game)
- like so many other suggestions, based on a narrow, personal view; failing to look at the big picture and consider other viewpoints

Hmm.

 

[DC9V]

Summing up...

1 a new mode that has very little in common with the actual game
2 playerbase split further than it already is with ranked, casual, seasonal, and Arena
3 new mode that would require a LOT of work would be so boring that it wouldn't be popular (= wasted time and effort on the devs' part)
4 continuous support and updating required
5 discriminating against new players for no reason whatsoever
6 assuming players would choose to play the new mode, reduced input on the actual game's balance and meta and whatnot, not to mention less data for CDPR (= harder for the devs to fix issues that may exist and balance the game)
7 like so many other suggestions, based on a narrow, personal view; failing to look at the big picture and consider other viewpoints

Hmm.

First of all, it's just a suggestion.
1. Why little in common? it's still Gwent, cards are not getting changed.
2. It's not split, it's spread.
3. Ofc it's a lot of work but hiring more people wouldn't be a problem.
4. ^
5. I'm not discriminating anyone. You're imputing that to me and if you keep doing that I'm going to report you.
6. That's true to some degree, but if it keeps people from quiting Gwent, that's not problematic at all.
7. I might have overlooked some of the other viewpoints that have been posted so far. But feel free to elaborate your big picture.

 

[InkognitoXI]

If you hate the meta you can always play seasonal (not true this season, given that NR is even worse in seasonal) or arena.
To be fair I propably will not play something besides arena until we get a hotfix.
Arena is always equal, only more random, so a horrible meta should propably never carry over.

So I wonder why we would need yet another mode, given that we already have options to avoid the regular game.

Edit:

[...]
- assuming players would choose to play the new mode, reduced input on the actual game's balance and meta and whatnot, not to mention less data for CDPR (= harder for the devs to fix issues that may exist and balance the game)
[...]

To be fair, with Burza's recent statement I wonder how much the data they collect even helps them to address issues.
Remember the "DJ is only the 4th most used leader" statement and the fact that Ethereal was problematic, did not have an absurd winrate and still got addressed ?

 

[DC9V]

If you hate the meta you can always play seasonal (not true this season, given that NR is even worse in seasonal) or arena.
To be fair I propably will not play something besides arena until we get a hotfix.
Arena is always equal, only more random, so a horrible meta should propably never carry over.

So I wonder why we would need yet another mode, given that we already have options to avoid the regular game.

fair enough.

 

[DRK3]

Not gonna happen. For all the reasons already mentioned by other users and mods. But another, very important one:

Adding such a mode would mean the devs accept they aren't doing a very good job at balancing their game, they are too proud for that, they prefer to stick their heads in the sand and pretend everything is alright.

 

[DC9V]

Not gonna happen. For all the reasons already mentioned by other users and mods. But another, very important one:

Adding such a mode would mean the devs accept they aren't doing a very good job at balancing their game, they are too proud for that, they prefer to stick their heads in the sand and pretend everything is alright.

You think so? I'm actually optimistic that the so-called bad balancing is for the greater good, and everything will be fine in the end. I believe that having a conservative mode like I suggested, would allow the devs to make extreme changes to Standard more quickly. This slow transition is what bothers me the most. It's like waiting for Pizza.

 

[DRK3]

You think so? I'm actually optimistic that the so-called bad balancing is for the greater good, and everything will be fine in the end. I believe that having a conservative mode like I suggested, would allow the devs to make extreme changes to Standard more quickly. This slow transition is what bothers me the most. It's like waiting for Pizza.

I dont want to be that old bastard in the corner just destroying the hopes and dreams of newer players with his stories... but i will if i have to.

Specially after Homecoming, there was never a moment where i think the game was balanced, and i lost that hope. I do admit there are some highs and lows, so i advise to just play accordingly to how much fun the game is providing you in the current meta.

 

[Draconifors]

1. Why little in common? it's still Gwent, cards are not getting changed.
2. It's not split, it's spread.
3. Ofc it's a lot of work but hiring more people wouldn't be a problem.
4. ^
5. I'm not discriminating anyone. You're imputing that to me and if you keep doing that I'm going to report you.
6. That's true to some degree, but if it keeps people from quiting Gwent, that's not problematic at all.
7. I might have overlooked some of the other viewpoints that have been posted so far. But feel free to elaborate your big picture.

1. Leader abilities are a big part of the game. Scenarios less so but they are a part. None of what you suggest exists in the actual game and it removes several things that do exist in the actual game, therefore it has little in common with the actual game.
2. It's split, because players can only play one mode at a time.
3. Poor counter-argument, and also ignoring the fact it would be wasted work if players didn't play the mode.
4. You cannot deny facts. This is also an aspect that seems to often be overlooked (and I'm not saying I never do that because it's all too easy to do when you're not a dev yourself).
5.

6. An interesting view.
7. I've been looking at the big picture all along, so I'm not going to repeat what I've already posted.

Remember the "DJ is only the 4th most used leader" statement and the fact that Ethereal was problematic, did not have an absurd winrate and still got addressed ?

The first one I actually don't remember, it was so long ago. And I always play(ed) Usurper/Lockdown anyway, so...

I don't know how or how much they utilize community feedback, except when they literally say "we've listened" or something like that, and I'm also not saying I always agree with changes they do or don't make.
However, since they've confirmed multiple times that they do listen (but, according to Jason, while players tend to be good at spotting issues they are not good at suggesting solutions CDPR agree with) the feedback has to count for something. Which means that less feedback means less to work with. To some, unknown extent it does make a difference.

 

[DC9V]

1. Leader abilities are a big part of the game. Scenarios less so but they are a part. None of what you suggest exists in the actual game and it removes several things that do exist in the actual game, therefore it has little in common with the actual game.
2. It's split, because players can only play one mode at a time.
3. Poor counter-argument, and also ignoring the fact it would be wasted work if players didn't play the mode.
4. You cannot deny facts. This is also an aspect that seems to often be overlooked (and I'm not saying I never do that because it's all too easy to do when you're not a dev yourself).
5. Quote: "New accounts are not allowed to play this mode"
6. An interesting view.
7. I've been looking at the big picture all along, so I'm not going to repeat what I've already posted.

1. When I think out of the box, I usually try to think as far as possible. Ideally, we will find ourselves somewhere in the middle.
2. People already have different attempts on the game. Would it really be that bad? Also, people usually change the game mode now and then.
3. How do you know people won't play it? That's an even worse argument.
4. I didn't deny the fact that updates would be required and I still don't see why that would be a problem. It's just work that has to be done, by people that get payed. simple as that. If I look at the Gwent tournament prize pools, I really don't think that money is the problem here.
5. If that's discriminating to you then Gwent in general is discriminating, because new players aren't allowed to play Standard ranked either. Maybe I should have used the term fresh instead of new...
6. isn't it?
7. tbh I would appreciate it, but I can understand.