So this is the rant about "cheap" removals for the player who is second. Did you try to check the other side of the coin? What about cheezy cards for the players who are going first? I think the OP made it clear, that he prefers green faction and does not like the purple one. However, aren't Incinerating trap and Pitfall traps basically the same thing as the OP is ranting about, but for the player who is first?
How fair is to have burned the first card I play, just because there is no other option for me, since there is some uncertain flipped card on the opponents side? How can I play differently around it as you can around marauder or predatory dive?
So short-minded arguements here...
How fair is to have burned the first card I play, just because there is no other option for me, since there is some uncertain flipped card on the opponents side? How can I play differently around it as you can around marauder or predatory dive?
So short-minded arguements here...
And you know what's coming at least. Not saying it's especially fair but you can just throw a cheap card. The other way around not so much.
Problem when you go first is: if you use a card that you actually want to play, you either don't use TA and get removed by all the small removal, or play it and get removed by cleaver or geralt or others... And in the predatory dive case, it just doesn't matter how big or small it is...
Pitfall trap is strong, but rarely played in first player. Incinerating trap you can go around with big units, with shields... I sometimes use Schupe as mage to get a huuuge effect on a first card played with TA (either seize it or just destroy it) but you basically use your joker on the first play and it's 13 provision.
And again, marauder isn't that big of an issue, like you said with incinerating trap the other way around, just don't play a critical card with less than 4 power if nothing's on the board. Any other time, it's from not so good to actually negative points sometimes...
Problem when you go first is: if you use a card that you actually want to play, you either don't use TA and get removed by all the small removal, or play it and get removed by cleaver or geralt or others... And in the predatory dive case, it just doesn't matter how big or small it is...
Pitfall trap is strong, but rarely played in first player. Incinerating trap you can go around with big units, with shields... I sometimes use Schupe as mage to get a huuuge effect on a first card played with TA (either seize it or just destroy it) but you basically use your joker on the first play and it's 13 provision.
And again, marauder isn't that big of an issue, like you said with incinerating trap the other way around, just don't play a critical card with less than 4 power if nothing's on the board. Any other time, it's from not so good to actually negative points sometimes...
That's the right solution. Then the card would return to its intended usage, not as a cheap scorch card for no-units decks.
Please don't compare Pitfall trap to a 4P bronze card. And this thread is mainly about going first and getting punished. Your argument of trap opening itself is moot with that regards. When Eldain opens with a trap, it is either harmless to your units (Horn or Serpent) or Incinerating Trap. No one opens with Pitfall and if they do, you will anyhow win that game. So, you are going next and you know that it is against Eldain and it will mostly be with very less units. So, you can just throw your weakest or junkest card for that matchup. And going second has its own advantage too.
But facing SK or MO, there is a feeling of angst. If I use TA, it will be killed by Cleaver. If I don't, it will be killed by Marauder/Drive. And any proactive play will be killed by those cards. So, this feeling when you face against Marauder is not the same as you going second and facing a Trap. If you don't get the difference, there is no point in discussing further.
Thanks! Well said.
I give GG to Eldain players. I respect that deck even though I hate it. Relatively speaking, I dislike Eldain alot less now that all these no-units decks have popped up. That just goes to put it into perspective.
I think the top 3 most unpopular decks are probably:
1. No-units/special-card decks
2. Trap decks
3. Usurper
And I think the gap between 1 and 2 is huge.
Totally agree with @rrc on this one. The Marauder is the most OP and opressive 4p card in the game. Even if that card dealt 3 damage with the 2 point body it currently has it would still feel opressive. Comparable cards with 4p but worse than Marauder:
Damned Sorceress: Slightly buffed with the reach extension but it's a 4 for 4 at best.
Blue Mountain Elite: Nerfed to the ground with the reach restriction since opponent expects the Skirmisher when playing against Scoia.
Dwarven Skirmisher: It's a 5 for 4 or a 4 for 4 if you really want to instakill an engine played on the melee row.
Marauder needs a nerf ASAP to either 2 STR 3 Damage or stay the same with 1 provision increase.
Damned Sorceress: Slightly buffed with the reach extension but it's a 4 for 4 at best.
Blue Mountain Elite: Nerfed to the ground with the reach restriction since opponent expects the Skirmisher when playing against Scoia.
Dwarven Skirmisher: It's a 5 for 4 or a 4 for 4 if you really want to instakill an engine played on the melee row.
Marauder needs a nerf ASAP to either 2 STR 3 Damage or stay the same with 1 provision increase.
Again, this thread is not about which 4P card can win you the game. Only 4P engines can win you the game. And which engine is the strongest is another topic. Again winning and losing against SK also is not the point of the thread.
While Marauder might be a good card in some situations, it is not defect like Predatory Dive. Fixing Predatory Dive is way more important than even considering Marauder.
PD has way more and widespread negative effects on the game. It does not do what it says in the description, instead it has become a low provision bronze scorch card.
PD has way more and widespread negative effects on the game. It does not do what it says in the description, instead it has become a low provision bronze scorch card.
I have been replying to all the questions and arguments in a polite way in this thread. When people compare a Gold card or a high provision card, I politely say that it is out of the context of this thread. This thread I created to discuss two cards which unconditionally *can* kill the *almost any* of the first card played by the opponent when going second. You had pointed out that it is not true and that the % is not 99%. I agreed to your point that it is not literally 99%, but almost any of the cards played. When someone compares the situation with going second, I would say it is out of context.
But then suddenly you want to discuss about all the other 4P cards. This is not a thread to compare 4P cards. This is not a thread to discuss which 4P cards can win you the game. This is not about winning/losing against SK. If you want to drive the topic away or change the discussion, I will say 'there is no point in discussing about that as it is out of context of this thread'. I don't know how you got the feeling that I don't want to have a healthy polite discussion as I have been replying to all open points. Only when the topic goes out of context, I don't want to discuss that any further.
If you get really angry that this thread puts one of your favorite cards from favorite faction in bad spot and want to let out your disappointments, we can always catch up in GoG chat or Gwent ingame chat. No point in discussing off topic off context things in this thread. I will do my best to explain 'why' I think 'what' about all topics from the game, even though I can be wrong; offline from this forum.
How about if the TA was slightly more than just points - how about if it had some kind of shield that absorbed any effect for one turn plus a three point boost?
Five points is a stupid number in the first place as it takes any strong card to within Leo/Geralt range. You want to have dilemmas when you're going first, but at the moment the "dilemma" is "what card is my opponent going to kill/lock, or what can I afford to lose" which is stupid and adding further disadvantage to the problem of going first anyway.
I'd like to see a Petri's filter type of TA, but with a new boost built on a one-turn immunity (rather than just the shield you get from Filter); so you can play a card and the opponent simply can't damage, lock or touch it. Plus it gets a 3 point boost (not 5). You then have no 'fear' on winning or losing the cointoss, as it would be pretty awesome to be able to put a solid unit on the board - and not have it killed.
Then on top cards like Scorch or Dive can ONLY be played if the opponent has a unit on the board. That way we're talking about multi card set up for cards, etc.
Five points is a stupid number in the first place as it takes any strong card to within Leo/Geralt range. You want to have dilemmas when you're going first, but at the moment the "dilemma" is "what card is my opponent going to kill/lock, or what can I afford to lose" which is stupid and adding further disadvantage to the problem of going first anyway.
I'd like to see a Petri's filter type of TA, but with a new boost built on a one-turn immunity (rather than just the shield you get from Filter); so you can play a card and the opponent simply can't damage, lock or touch it. Plus it gets a 3 point boost (not 5). You then have no 'fear' on winning or losing the cointoss, as it would be pretty awesome to be able to put a solid unit on the board - and not have it killed.
Then on top cards like Scorch or Dive can ONLY be played if the opponent has a unit on the board. That way we're talking about multi card set up for cards, etc.
Actually you are wrong. A marauder cannot take out the first card you play if you use the tactical advantage card. I kind of find it an advantage that Leo/Geralt can take this card out. Then they lost potential value of using Leo/Geralt later on in the game. So even if you use the tactical advantage and Leo/Geralt takes it out, then it is not really a loss, it's a pretty equalized play.
The only problem is the Predatory Dive, which can take out this card at low provisions like a Scorch card could. But hey, if people want to use a 10 provision card like Leo or Geralt to take out tactical advantage plus your first card, then ok, they are welcome to do so. If they want to use their 14 provision scorch card, even better.
The problem here is not Leo or Geralt, nor Marauder. With tactical advantage you cannot be taken out by Marauder, and if they play Leo/Geralt, that's not really added value for them.
People seem to think it is their "right" to save tactical advantage for later on in the round, and then complain if their 4 point unit is taken out by Marauder. That's just not right.
Predatory Dive on the other hand, that's a real issue.
I ignore the unecessary stinger and jump right to this quote.
There's nothing healthy or even discussable in saying that you don't like one specific card, because it does something very specific that no other card does and then only allow those who are of your opinion to make comparisons over comparisons with other cards, but disallow that for those trying to make the point that this is a card game with 25 cards in a deck, where a Marauder isn't nearly as dangerous as you draw it.
Of course it is easy to say "hey card x is op" if you isolate it from the context.
When I pointed out that Marauder even ignores Blueboy's ability and doesn't trigger it, you didn't feel the need to comment it. When I answer to the also uncommented post of TheWildHunt93 full of comparisons with selected other 4p cards, you feel the need to.
So, what are the facts?
- You complain that this 4p card does 4 damage to whatever you draw to the board, when you go first.
- You ignore everything that sets context to it, like the randomness of first hand, the specialised situation where it can do its thing, the fact that it doesn't remove everything you draw, that TA or a card with more than 4 str is sufficient to counter its ability, etc.
- You welcome posts that compare this card with selected 4p cards from ST to "prove" how op it is, but bash those that say, a comparison doesn't make sense unless all 4p cards are compared.
It really is more about getting confirmation, than having a healthy discussion, by banning any arguments that counter your point. Like the fact that there are other 4p cards also dealing 4 dmg. And they do it not only when you go first. A simple fact, that you will answer with "this is about Marauder", as if that would eliminate the fact.
But I'll say this: If you go first and if the opponent had a lucky hand and if you draw a valuable 4 strength card - yes, then Marauder is a good card to play. I still don't see the issue with it.
When people compare other cards which are no way comparable to Marauder, I don't want to comment on that topic. Because it is off topic. Lets say if someone says "Deithwen Arbalist" is a broken 4P card because it can shut of Jutta+SigRitual or Ozzrel+SpearTip or even Francesca, it is way out of context of this discussion. Or if someone says why "Nekker is an engine which comes on board breaking even" it is still not the topic on discussion. Or if someone says "Blue Strips Scout is a 8 point on deploy and it is broken", it is still not the topic on this discussion. Or if someone says "Even Blue Mountain Elite can do 4 damage on deploy", I would reply saying "but she doesn't have reach 2 and even then she bring 1 point on board and she is not nearly as used as Marauder as she is junk", which is a reply on context. A 4P bronze card which can kill any 4 point card which is equivalent to Marauder. That we can discuss further, if someone thinks BME is as broken or OP as Marauder. But if people say there is some other gold card or some other 4P card which has a different ability, it is a topic of discussion on other thread. This is about how a cheap bronze card can punish when going first. The closest to Marauder is Blue Mountain Elite and even she is far far weaker and junk than Marauder.
Marauder ignoring BlueBoy's ability may be a bug. I haven't seen anyone opening with BlueBoy and honestly think it is a bug. If people think he is not working as intended, they should raise a support ticket. Your response on TheWildHunt was "so, how many matches you have lost to SK (with the context of getting Maradered)". I found that it was out of the topic. I didn't say "Marauder is so OP that people lose because of that card". It is more about he is annoying and punishing going first - which in itself is a disadvantage.
Which all cards make you feel annoyed when going first? Cleaver/Geralt/Leo - if you use TA. If you don't use TA, if it gets removed by any other gold card, you don't feel bad. The opponent invested a gold card to remove your card. But when the opponent uses a cheap bronze like Marauder or Predatory Drive to kill a card with 4 point body (or even more for Predatory Drive), it gets really annoying. Yes, we can play around it, by throwing a card you don't want. When you have to do that for the fear of a cheap bronze card, it gets annoying. So, this topic. Requesting that these cards are changed. BME was such an oppressive annoying card. She was changed and no longer played. I don't want Marauder to be made so that he is unplayable. Some different ability for him would be nice and welcome. But with his current ability, he is oppressive, too oppressive for a 4P card, IMHO.
Yes.
Using TA to counter Marauder is punishable by other cards. Here is where the problem comes. We have already discussed about how using TA is bad and is not recommended when going first.
I don't think I bashed anyone or got aggressive in this thread. When people compare completely out of context things, I would say "it is out of context". I honestly don't consider that as bashing. But, if we create another thread with "Which is the most OP/broken/annoying 4P card?", I would definitely participate in that thread and will put forth my opinion about all the 4P cards that get discussed.
Nothing new as I have explained multiple times about the context: Going first getting punished by cheap bronze cards. This is about Marauder and Predatory Drive.
That sums it up. Going first is not a rare thing, my opponent having Marauder doesn't seem like a rare thing as most of the times I get Maraudered, and yes, when I play a 4 point card, and when it gets removed by a 4P card and putting 2 points on board, I find that as an issue with the card. I think it is unfair.
I also agree that, I have seen players playing Marauder for 2 points and sometimes even for negative points. When I play Paulie, they respond with something else and later they take a chance and play Marader in Melee and get punished. Even FreddyBabes had mentioned about the same thing. Marauder is not a good card to play against and if you don't get to play him in the ideal situation, he is not a good card even for the player playing him. Freddy also recommended that Marauder should get changed completely. In the follow-up videos (these came months ago), he said he was surprised that Marauder was not getting changed by CDPR.
That's an example for what I mean. You set the contect but then argue totally out of context. It's fine when you do it, but not when others do it?
What FreddyBabes says, is not relevant. He is one person, as we all are. What people do with Marauder else then answering your first card, is not relevant. The context is defined above by yourself.
I understand that it annoys you to face Marauder. That's of course subjective. I never spent much time on it. I don't play my most important cards first, I sometimes play 2 cards out, or 3, or 4. It doesn't bother me much that Marauder does 4 dmg.
Regarding the facts, I don't see what should be changed about Marauder. Want it more expensive? So be it. As long as all opening 4p cards, with the potential to do 4 dmg, get more expensive as well.
I also still don't see, why you put Marauder and Predatory Dive together. Totally different cards. Would it have been about Dive alone, I'd agree that a special card with such power has to be changed (and there are good proposals here in this thread already). But a 2 str unit dealing 4 dmg? Isn't comparable to PD at all.
Daithwen Arbelist is not broken. The card hardly gets any value ever. Most people also don't keep it at hand if they draw it, at least I don't. Unless I see the need for it. Spread over all the game, the card is quite fair. Not terrible value, but certainly not great.
And, are you suggesting there should be no counter to Ozzrel, Assire, Francesca and SigRitual?
Post automatically merged:
You forget the Marauder cannot take out any card that is placed first and actually have used the tactical advantage. Marauder, at best, takes out 4/5 of the tactical advantage. You still end up with a boosted card.
Marauder is not an issue, predatory dive is, because the card does not do or function how it is described, it is defect.