Was Gwent designed incorrectly? Engines vs. Removal

+
There are too many cards with points that can damage or lock. There are not enough operating the opposite way.

I said ages ago about having a private league where there are o locks or removal of any kind. Could ST compete against NG or MO if the "gloves were off"? And if ST couldn't in that way. Then there is something wrong with ST. Unless of course. CDPR designed ST to be an asshole faction that just damages and locks opponent cards. That's what i'm thinking ST strength is but I don't want to play HC76 like that.

I am seriously thinking about giving up on ST and going with a faction that can generate points. It's not my lifes work but i'm not enjoying ST much anymore. I didn't jump on the dwarfspam bandwagon (more or less had that deck anyway) or eithne deck. Where's the fun in making a deck to take your opponents points away and generate hardly any of your own?
 
I honestly don't think engines becoming dominant would be a bad thing. That's because removal would still be needed. Removal wouldn't become obsolete just because engines are strong and tough to remove.

Removal would become obsolete since the strictly better alternative would be to run more engines. The inherent value of removal is literally just that: removal.

If all engines become strong to a point where it takes more than 1 removal card to deal with 1 engine, it doesn't make sense to run removal at all since the point generating potential of that engine is still there.

Thus, to improve your chances of winning it will be more optimal to run the engines to make sure you're generating enough points on the board; you don't have to worry about the potential down side of that choice since 1 removal would not equate to 1 engine in this scenario... and that's card advantage for the engine player which quickly translates to wins.

So there is a fine line here. Engines might not be at an acceptable competitive level at this moment but you don't want to tilt it so far the other way such that both players are playing solitaire.
 
But the current tilt has been too far towards removal. It's not been addressed in the update, in fact it's worse. HC = removal.

I agree with the others. There should be more engine play I love points on the board. Removal is so negative.
 
But the current tilt has been too far towards removal. It's not been addressed in the update, in fact it's worse. HC = removal.

I agree with the others. There should be more engine play I love points on the board. Removal is so negative.

If the balance favors engines than the faction with the best engine wins. Think about it. Anna is worth four points per turn when paired with tridam. The count is worth 2 points per round or more. Add those points to tridam and they double. Towers plus charges equals at least 2 points.

The compromise would be removing orders so that engines get at least some value before dying, but this has issues as well. For example, Avallach could immune Anna after Maeve boosts and now unless you have a row attack it's over. Or Avallach and the count, or any number of other OP scenarios (syanna anyone?)
 
Removal decks are so proeminent in the meta, Ardyn, Delattr and Dana deck are so easy to play and strong. I did a vamp deck and won like 80% of my game without much though about it. Monster deck in general are very strong. Playing order deck is an ordeal because you need protection card like avallach and lady of the lake, tutors card to get all the element in your combo and if you manage to succesfully implement it the opponent can just pass. Congratz, you wasted 3-4 gold card to win first or second round while your opponent used only cleaver, waylaid, locks and bombs. Not to mentions card like Kiyan, Blood baron and Vernon can be obliterated by any 4 provisions card + Dettlaff/ Eithne/ Bran /Crach etc etc etc . Very hard to play combo and engine based deck atm.
 
Removal decks are so proeminent in the meta, Ardyn, Delattr and Dana deck are so easy to play and strong. I did a vamp deck and won like 80% of my game without much though about it. Monster deck in general are very strong. Playing order deck is an ordeal because you need protection card like avallach and lady of the lake, tutors card to get all the element in your combo and if you manage to succesfully implement it the opponent can just pass. Congratz, you wasted 3-4 gold card to win first or second round while your opponent used only cleaver, waylaid, locks and bombs. Not to mentions card like Kiyan, Blood baron and Vernon can be obliterated by any 4 provisions card + Dettlaff/ Eithne/ Bran /Crach etc etc etc . Very hard to play combo and engine based deck atm.

True, but flip that script. You have the same problem in reverse if you lack the removal to deal with opponents engines. They plan count without interference then follow him up with Anna who now boosts him. Then tridam, then another tridam. Any CCG needs both, you want to talk about balance, the game needs to eliminate any engine that is perpetual. Without perpetual engines (no thrive, harmony, assimilate, drain, etc...) now you can scale back removal. But what's left. One time use cards that swing the game depending on setup, this makes it a luck of the draw. What people never talk about (I really don't understand why,) is how you can sidestep the whole problem with more unique mechanics. Armor, proper reveal, proper ambush, proper row effects. All of this would help.
 
The more casual players amongst us (me) may as well not bother with ladder since it's full of PRO decks right from the bottom up, so I haven't. New players must find this very hard to maintain a respectable showing on the ladder before they think, f*ck this game.
That's not good for the game and it will remain a small player base if it continues like it has done since last year even before HC.
My gaming experience (30 years) has been mostly strategy and RPG, sports sims so, you don't "get the good stuff" till much later. That doesn't apply to this online game. Dayz was my last online fun and that really was, fun. This isn't so I guess i'll keep plugging away with training mode haha

Removed disrespectful remark
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Silly cards that deal x damage with x body must be reworked, they now too overtuned.
For the same provision they are killing engine and left 3-5 body on the board.
Engines can be locked, moved or killed, but they need 2-3 turns to justify its cost. Silly cards x body and deal x damage need nothing, they always justify their value and their provision cost now just too low.
 
Silly cards that deal x damage with x body must be reworked, they now too overtuned.
For the same provision they are killing engine and left 3-5 body on the board.
Engines can be locked, moved or killed, but they need 2-3 turns to justify its cost. Silly cards x body and deal x damage need nothing, they always justify their value and their provision cost now just too low.

I recently had a match where I killed or moved every engine but one. With 5 point charge of Foltest Pride, my opponnent managed to get 25 hubert, along with the 25 he wiped out from my side of the board. So I'm kinda curious what kind of meta we will have if control get nerfed. Brouver will probably be more common, thats for sure.
 
The more casual players amongst us (me) may as well not bother with ladder since it's full of PRO decks right from the bottom up, so I haven't. New players must find this very hard to maintain a respectable showing on the ladder before they think, f*ck this game.
That's not good for the game and it will remain a small player base if it continues like it has done since last year even before HC.
My gaming experience (30 years) has been mostly strategy and RPG, sports sims so, you don't "get the good stuff" till much later. That doesn't apply to this online game. Dayz was my last online fun and that really was, fun. This isn't so I guess i'll keep plugging away with training mode haha

Removed disrespectful remark

Where to start?

I was an open beta player, when I came back they had me at rank 25. I got to 14 without even looking at anyone elses ideas on deck building. I got to 14 without even fully understanding all the changes to the mulligan system. Then I hit a wall. Ironically I started using a leader that I had almost always defeated, and I went all the way to rank 7. The key, it was a net deck. Woodland spirit. At some point, everyone who wants to climb the ladder decides to play the game the way everyone else plays it. In theory it is possible to inovate, but practically speaking, people who play far more than me and who care far more than me took the time to figure out what works. Net decks are abused because they work.

When I first started I didn't have the scrap to build what I wanted and so I wasn't that competitive against fully developed players. But I did what everyone in position does if you want to become competitive, I saved my scraps. Eventually I got the 800 I needed and I bought that game changing gold. It is easier to level up now, easier to get daily rewards now, and easier to be competitive early now. Keep your eye on the prize and you can get there, the question is do you want to?

Personally, as someone who reached pro, I would have quit the game forever if not for seasonal mode. I left for over a year and came back to find a product I didn't like. Had I come back one month earlier I would have missed the introduction of the seasonal mode. If you don't like ranked, don't play it. I went from like 700 on pro leader board to rank 9. I don't regret it because ranked at the end of the day isn't that fun. CC has shown a hint of promise of bringing back some complexity, but CDPR couldn't have a worse track record with Gwent. The strategy is cut in half since beta. If you aren't enjoying this seasonal mode, try another next month.

End of the day I didn't and won't by throne breaker partially because I don't want to support the company. I believe in buying games like the Witcher 2 and 3 because they were well made. I will probably buy the cyberpunk game if it does what the Witcher did well. But Gwent isn't that quality, it sucks but it isn't likely to change.
 
I recently had a match where I killed or moved every engine but one. With 5 point charge of Foltest Pride, my opponnent managed to get 25 hubert, along with the 25 he wiped out from my side of the board. So I'm kinda curious what kind of meta we will have if control get nerfed. Brouver will probably be more common, thats for sure.

That just highlights another problem though. Yes, certain engines and combos are entirely too strong. This is also arguably bad design. I'd agree control getting blindly nerfed would create it's own set of issues. It would be far less of an issue if they also adjusted these engine and combo cards, however. In fact, it could be argued those engine and combos have to be powerful due to the state of control. Basically, bad design in one area isn't a justification for bad design in another (not claiming you're saying it is either).

To put all of that differently.... I think you're spot on if you're trying to say it's not as simple as adjusting control options down a notch. To do that effectively the ridiculous combo and engine options also need to be adjusted down a notch. Both need to happen at the same time. Both arguably should happen.

As much as I'd like to see the glass half full it's hard to do so given what has been done with, say, Witchers. Everyone used these because, given the options, they were the most effective way to thin a deck. Suddenly that tool has been taken away completely with very little done to provide reasonable options in it's place. There are other options, sure. The reliability has unquestionably taken a considerable hit though. Again, arguably too much of a hit. In this particular case I think the approach is fundamentally flawed. A change gets made with far reaching impact with the thought of fixing the fallout later down the line. If they were to do this with something like control it would have a similar impact. One problem fixed, three more to take it's place.
 
That just highlights another problem though. Yes, certain engines and combos are entirely too strong. This is also arguably bad design. I'd agree control getting blindly nerfed would create it's own set of issues. It would be far less of an issue if they also adjusted these engine and combo cards, however. In fact, it could be argued those engine and combos have to be powerful due to the state of control. Basically, bad design in one area isn't a justification for bad design in another (not claiming you're saying it is either).

To put all of that differently.... I think you're spot on if you're trying to say it's not as simple as adjusting control options down a notch. To do that effectively the ridiculous combo and engine options also need to be adjusted down a notch. Both need to happen at the same time. Both arguably should happen.

As much as I'd like to see the glass half full it's hard to do so given what has been done with, say, Witchers. Everyone used these because, given the options, they were the most effective way to thin a deck. Suddenly that tool has been taken away completely with very little done to provide reasonable options in it's place. There are other options, sure. The reliability has unquestionably taken a considerable hit though. Again, arguably too much of a hit. In this particular case I think the approach is fundamentally flawed. A change gets made with far reaching impact with the thought of fixing the fallout later down the line. If they were to do this with something like control it would have a similar impact. One problem fixed, three more to take it's place.

Welcome to Midwinter, and homecoming, and almost every major update. Look at spear and shield. Too powerful so we will keep it at 7 provisions, restrict it to 4 power, and not even let you tutor it cheap. They don't know how to adjust for balance. That said, Witcher trio needed some kind of change given the auto include nature.
 
Both @Mr_Mugglez and @Wonderboy8700 have it spot on. It's like I could've written (most of) both posts myself, even down to the gaming history for Mugglez!

My favourite deck - and I didn't copy, swear! - was MO Eredin/Yen/DD/Nivellen combo. Didn't need to copy, was pretty obvious, really. Got to Rank 2 with it, then - like Sihil, Spears, Shield, etc., before it - it all got nerfed to useless and all this new stuff came in. The 'pro' players had all their fun, created their stuff and as I only went to Rank 6 was facing off against the same handful of top decks, made worse by always seeming to face the perfect counter and of course better players.

There is a good game in there somewhere, and if CDPR only listened they could create something fab. Witchers are a great example - they're now nerfed to useless. Why not change them to be more like the Witch trio? Good synergy, tempo, but EXCLUDE THEM from Monster decks. Put some Lore back into the game - seeing Geralt Professional working for Monsters is just stupid. Bring everything down a couple of notches. Card Str should all be increased, power of cards should all be decreased. Remove orders, but let certain cards have cooldown, it's the only thing that makes any sense. Cooldown should be used FAR more often so you don't have damage, damage, damage, remove, lock, or super-boost/super-boost.

I seem to remember Gwent Beta, for all its faults, would frequently have games coming down to the last card. Now you see people quitting with several cards left to play. It's such a shame as I think it's simple tweaks that could make it pretty solid.
 
Welcome to Midwinter, and homecoming, and almost every major update. Look at spear and shield. Too powerful so we will keep it at 7 provisions, restrict it to 4 power, and not even let you tutor it cheap. They don't know how to adjust for balance. That said, Witcher trio needed some kind of change given the auto include nature.

Yup, pretty much. It's been like this going back to CB. All too often they nerf a card viewed as a problem and go way overboard. The card then drops out of the meta completely. I have difficulty believing it's unintentional. In which case it indicates trying to make the problem go away instead of addressing it. Granted, Gwent is advertised as F2P and it's quite easy to expand a collection. At least, once you accumulate enough cards to field a decent deck. So, perhaps it's a getting what you pay for type of deal :).
 
Top Bottom