Jobs Support Register

Suggestions from Freddybabes and other pros

+

Archan6el

User
#2
Freddybabes is presenting good points I think. It would be nice and clear if he could summarize and write them down here.
 

BoYoDes

User
#3
Who is this guy and what he ever did for Gwent to be so critical about Homecoming76 - he knows nothing and can't appreciate how great the game is! HC76 is better off without him!

... and the other 70% of the players that had something that was ripped off of them.
 

dragoonzen

User
#4
Who is this guy and what he ever did for Gwent to be so critical about Homecoming76 - he knows nothing and can't appreciate how great the game is! HC76 is better off without him!

... and the other 70% of the players that had something that was ripped off of them.
He is a multiple gwent tournament winner. Unlike you.
Post automatically merged:

It sounds like Freddybabes and the other pro gwent players wants the old gwent back with HC added changes. Why didn't CDPR just do that instead of creating a new game?
 

nedders

User
#7
I've just played since the patch and it's better. They've already balanced a bit more. though I still yearn for a third row and a board, rather than battlefield, but they have improved it. I'd rather this version of Gwent than the alternative, i.e. nothing but crap like MTG and Artefact. There will be no return to Gwent Beta.
 

Wnb_Free

User
#8
I think Freddy and couple other pros are making really fair points and solid suggestions on how to make Gwent better. I agree with nearly all of his suggestions and think they would really improve the game a lot. Right now HC Gwent feels somehow "off". I keep trying to enjoy the game but I can't enjoy the game as much as I used to with original Gwent. Of course the old game had some huge problems, I do still remember them, no doubt about that. HC brought many good additions and changes, mostly visual (game looks damn good), but I really think the gameplay is lacking. I think CDPR should really listen to some of these suggestion and make Gwent the best card game on the market. The game has huge potential but it needs little tweaking. I would love if they made a poll for people to give their feed back and maybe test some of these suggested changes on a PTR version of the game.

Please let the community to help "steer" the game into greatness. It is not far...
 

felo74

User
#9
I agree with most of the points and i think the game would be better that way. But it will never happen. The devs would have to admit they were wrong and they have a hard time doing that. They will just stick to their vision of the game until it's dead. The game has gone through a lot of "overall changes" already and they don't want to do it anymore. Also Gwent is oficially out so i daubt they are willing to do drastic changes now. Obviously the only reason it is out is beacuse they wanted to make the arrival of HC big and get more players with slogans "officialy out of beta". This is the only reason this game is out. The think is it didn't quite work out this way.
 

JojkoK85

User
#11
In order to stir up a hornet's nest a bit- feedback provided, nice. But what about the same honesty in providing feedback for the greatest card ever made as well? All pros are now very vocal about all the imperfections of Gwent, but I miss the same effort for Artifact. Only feedback there seems to be "..greatest game ever!! Streaming 25h per day and having great fun!!", but Steam reviews are indicating something different.. Do not consume all these objective opinions without thinking a second.
 

Pruny

User
#12
Dont care about artefuct. Valve probably paid a lot of bucks. I agree with fredy that round3 should be shorter, i think to only draw 2 cards.
 
#13
I actually disagree with most of his suggestions. I think tactical advantage for round 2 & 3 might be good, and the casual point about all the boards being too muddy. I'm not a pro player by any means, but I've played beta actively in every season since gold immunity was removed.

I do agree the game somehow feels a bit "off" as Wnb_Free put it, but I don't feel these are the solutions.
 
Last edited:

partci

User
#14
In order to stir up a hornet's nest a bit- feedback provided, nice. But what about the same honesty in providing feedback for the greatest card ever made as well? All pros are now very vocal about all the imperfections of Gwent, but I miss the same effort for Artifact. Only feedback there seems to be "..greatest game ever!! Streaming 25h per day and having great fun!!", but Steam reviews are indicating something different.. Do not consume all these objective opinions without thinking a second.
Yeah, maybe check how political correct every streamer was after Midwinter, before and after Homecoming... than they simply left the building.
 

Shabman

User
#16
In order to stir up a hornet's nest a bit- feedback provided, nice. But what about the same honesty in providing feedback for the greatest card ever made as well? All pros are now very vocal about all the imperfections of Gwent, but I miss the same effort for Artifact. Only feedback there seems to be "..greatest game ever!! Streaming 25h per day and having great fun!!", but Steam reviews are indicating something different.. Do not consume all these objective opinions without thinking a second.
I can't speak for anyone but myself here, but personally I don't care about Artifact. That is not my cup of tea - in fact pretty much 100% of the CCGs out there, I could NEVER get used to their artstyle, and I find the gameplay pretty boring as well. I have no emotional investment in Artifact, no interest in it at the moment, and nothing to gain or lose whether the game is good or bad.

It's the total opposite for Gwent. I care very much about what happens to it, I enjoyed it very much in the past and have a deep emotional attachment to it. It hurts me what's been done with it, and if I'm being a pain in the a** about it, it's because I want the happy Gwent back. I suspect many people who complain are feeling just the same.

We are not here to antagonize the mods, to rain on people's parades, to make the devs waste their time trying to accomodate every contradicting suggestion. We are here because we want our game back.

And in my world, loyalty and service are REWARDED, not IGNORED. We deserve better than "oh we're not going back to the old Gwent, f*** off" "no plans, f*** off" or simply *silence*, f** off. We deserve to be heard, and if there be an irreconcilable difference in vision between what CDPR wants to do and what we want to play, then let us talk about it, then part on amiable terms - not be silenced until our voices disappear like thieves in the night.

For God's sake, is there a malevolent entity in control of the devs' minds? Are they possessed?

Give us CDPR back!
 
#17
Points I agree with:

Mulligans need to be changed and saving mulligans has got to go!

Tac advantage needs to be changed.

Drawing 3 per turn is a huge mistake.

With mulligans changed, leaders will need to cost provisions which means max provisions for a deck needs to be increased to allow for this.

My only addition, not sure if this is a bug or not, but I've noticed going 2nd round 1, going 2nd round 2 and going 1st round 3.

If this is a thing, it has got to stop. The loser of a round needs to go 1st after the initial coin flip for who goes 1st.
 
#19
Provisions are dumb.
Well.... Look at the updates they have done since HC released. The artifact update shifted provisions around. There may have been minor unit adjustments but I don't care to check. The December update shifted provisions around and had some minor unit updates. We got another card too. I think it's quite clear at this point why provisions were added to the game.

I have serious doubts it has much of anything to do with the deck building itself. The reason being is the current implementation restricts deck building, if anything. Want to move up a gold card? Gotta retool the deck. Want to swap in a different bronze? Gotta retool the deck. The deck builder is almost a pseudo mini-game.

What ends up happening is everyone flocks to the cards able to achieve value over the provision cost. Cards unable to do so get relegated to bad card status or filler. The former is a result of cards unable to compete due to the meta, the fact they're flat out under-tuned or poorly designed. The latter is often a result of paragraph #2 above.

It may get modded and it's harsh but the balancing approach thus far feels more fitting for a poor quality, cash grab, five to ten dollar time killer game. I realize the game is F2P. Still, tweaking some provision costs and unit values +/- a few points, or deeming certain cards over-powered and jacking up their provisions so you have to run Wolf Packs and Peasant Militia to play them, is about as corner cutty as you can get.