Why are we not talking Gord?

+
I'm playing SC and MO only and I advise everybody complaining about Gord: Try it yourself! It's not that easy..
- You have to win the 1st round or you will get him removed with the last card, which is not so easy
- you have strong limitations on deck building (at least Isengrimm's counsel and no other dwarf or use NC) to ensure you really get him
- You have a regular max value of Gord of 15 (if you really use the 12 special cards and no artefact; okay no double play of Oneiremancy or the SC-card I don't know the english name of)
So ist this really so problematic?
I play a SC poison deck with Gord and I never manage to play more than 8 special cards before, so my Gord is normally 3 + 2 (buff Isengrimm C) + 8 = 13. That's not so impressive for a finisher... (Some days ago I had to face a 15-pt-cintrian-guard, so what's the problem...?)
And concerning all the whining about handbuff: Try it yourself! It's not so easy winning round 1 without powerful cards, which you are lacking cause of all the special cards and generally low value SC.
And if you fail (will happen for sure if you use to much handbuff in rd 1) and get bled in rd 2 you're f...d...
So, I think Gord is perfectly fine now.
And besides Aglais. Yeah, same thing here. It's awesome to get the 60 points with Syranna and everything else. But you always know what's coming (handbuff + movement) and can usually counter it because it is one of the most predictable decks out there. And if not: I prefer losing against this, than against a lot of NR or SK decks. ;-)
I am using a more versatile Aglais-deck (only one thunderbolt, Sheldon as handbuff-backup to ensure I can win rd 1). And normally I only manage to win if i get Sheldon buffed in rd1 and use him for >15 value in rd1 to win this. Otherwise my Aglais will be normally removed by the last card of the opponent in rd3.
He's definitely tougher to boost with Syndicate than ST, but he still plays way above his provisions.
I don't want this thread to come off as me hating Gord, I love Gord, he's one of the first cards I transmuted. And he has the best flavor text in the game.
But I don't really find simply playing your specials to be a particularly hard thing to execute. The hardest part of this lies in the deckbuilder. And when one faction (ST) has access to special resurrection and chain tutors even a way to tutor Gord himself while boosting him by +2 with Council you kinda have to balance him around that even if Crimes will suffer a bit as well.
Unlike Aglais you don't have to play low tempo to boost Gord, most Nature cards works fine on their own especially after Symbiosis was introduced. And unlike Ozzrel there's no way to really stop Gord from growing big. This is why I think giving him the same stats as Ozzrel would be justified.
 
Last edited:
What's wrong is that unitless is the only viable high level ST build at the moment.
Okay, this is tad too strong a statement.
While obviously nothing really compares to ease of OH/SW/PF Warriors, SC has plenty of viable builds.

Elves, Gift of Life, obviously, Dwarven resilience shenanigans aren't bad either, movement is okay if you're willing to dabble in some Aglais tomfoolery (doable even without her, but then you'd better come prepared - defender and all), Harmony on its own is nothing impressive right now, but gets much better if you add some side engines (Hamas, movement pack, Abandoned Girls, whatever floats your boat). A bit tricky to play and build, but ultimately not bad either.

All of these are very much playable, but few people go there, because playing t1 is a so much easier and forgiving experience.
Gwent as a whole really needs to get rid of easy, yet super efficient cards and combos. People are goddamn spoiled by them, and meta is made very toxic (NG diehard fans obviously being the most spoiled, but it's close to a tie with NR/SY)
 
Okay, this is tad too strong a statement.
While obviously nothing really compares to ease of OH/SW/PF Warriors, SC has plenty of viable builds.

Elves, Gift of Life, obviously, Dwarven resilience shenanigans aren't bad either, movement is okay if you're willing to dabble in some Aglais tomfoolery (doable even without her, but then you'd better come prepared - defender and all), Harmony on its own is nothing impressive right now, but gets much better if you add some side engines (Hamas, movement pack, Abandoned Girls, whatever floats your boat). A bit tricky to play and build, but ultimately not bad either.

All of these are very much playable, but few people go there, because playing t1 is a so much easier and forgiving experience.
Gwent as a whole really needs to get rid of easy, yet super efficient cards and combos. People are goddamn spoiled by them, and meta is made very toxic (NG diehard fans obviously being the most spoiled, but it's close to a tie with NR/SY)

When I say "viable high level" I literally mean the stuff that can compete with T1 meta decks on the pro ladder. I'm well aware of how playable Elves, Dwarves, Movement, Handbuff and even Harmony decks are right now - I play ST pretty much exclusively outside of pro ladder and go through about a dozen-deck rotation until I get there at the beginning of the season. But once you're there, you quickly realize (or at least this has been MY personal experience over the last few seasons) that nothing in ST aside from Nature's Gift (either devotion (I prefer) or non-devo) OR Precision Strike Schirru (a bit weaker) will get you a winning record and a trip towards 2500. So I'll stand by that statement for now.
 

DRK3

Forum veteran
What's wrong is that unitless is the only viable high level ST build at the moment. The only build that lets ST compete with SK, Shieldwall and OH. So you knock down Gord and it inevitably tweaks the build across the board, what then? ST drops down a peg and out of the "crown" contention until at least the next path. SK, NR and OH solidify their reign. People shocked at how cheap Gord had been breathe a collective sigh of relief. The world rejoices!

You're comitting a fallacy: you defend Gord as it is, because if its nerfed harshly it will probably knock down ST so it cant compete with the other OP faction decks. But those factions have their own issues, that should be balanced too, subject for other threads. And that doesnt change the fact Gord is underprovisioned and OP on its own.

The dev team cant keep just focusing on finetuning the meta cards and leave the remaining 80-90% of cards forgotten.
 
Very cheap provision cost for sure. I try to fit Yrden in every deck anyway since all I see is vitality and hunger
 
You're comitting a fallacy: you defend Gord as it is, because if its nerfed harshly it will probably knock down ST so it cant compete with the other OP faction decks. But those factions have their own issues, that should be balanced too, subject for other threads. And that doesnt change the fact Gord is underprovisioned and OP on its own.

The dev team cant keep just focusing on finetuning the meta cards and leave the remaining 80-90% of cards forgotten.

That's not a fallacy. If a faction leans heavily on one card that plays above its provision cost to stay competitive, nerfing that card simply BECAUSE it plays for more than its provision cost is bad balance, because it will narrow the meta, not widen it, which is the opposite of what should be the goal. I'm not sure what you think the meta should look like in its ideal state adn whether it's ever achievable, but to me it's better to have 6 "OP decks" than 3 or 2.

I also disagree that MM somehow "increased" Gord value, because neither ST nor SY echo cards are tutors, and Oneiromancy is a 13p neutral card.
 
That's not a fallacy. If a faction leans heavily on one card that plays above its provision cost to stay competitive, nerfing that card simply BECAUSE it plays for more than its provision cost is bad balance, because it will narrow the meta, not widen it, which is the opposite of what should be the goal. I'm not sure what you think the meta should look like in its ideal state adn whether it's ever achievable, but to me it's better to have 6 "OP decks" than 3 or 2.

I also disagree that MM somehow "increased" Gord value, because neither ST nor SY echo cards are tutors, and Oneiromancy is a 13p neutral card.

Oneiro->call of the forest->fauve->shaping nature

And now you have 2 echos
 
Oneiro->call of the forest->fauve->shaping nature

And now you have 2 echos

Not sure what that's supposed to prove. It doesn't matter than you have "2 echoes", because only Oneiro is an echo tutor there and it is a - once again - 13p neutral card.
 
Not sure what that's supposed to prove. It doesn't matter than you have "2 echoes", because only Oneiro is an echo tutor there and it is a - once again - 13p neutral card.
You're not understanding, it means each echo card plays twice (ideally) giving Gord 2 extra "guaranteed" points. Id also argue Forest Protector also helps to +1 on Gord.
I'd say he's become an average of 1-3 points stronger by those additions so I'd advocate for it being 8 provisions.
 
You're not understanding, it means each echo card plays twice (ideally) giving Gord 2 extra "guaranteed" points. Id also argue Forest Protector also helps to +1 on Gord.
I'd say he's become an average of 1-3 points stronger by those additions so I'd advocate for it being 8 provisions.

No, once again, Oneiromancy - a 13p neutral card - adds 2 "potential" value to Gord. This, to me, is not a reason enough to nerf him. The other Echo card does nothing, because it's not a tutor and when it "plays twice" it just plays instead of two separate special cards. Forest protector helps about as much as Triss Tele did before MM, so it changed nothing.
 

DRK3

Forum veteran
That's not a fallacy. If a faction leans heavily on one card that plays above its provision cost to stay competitive, nerfing that card simply BECAUSE it plays for more than its provision cost is bad balance, because it will narrow the meta, not widen it, which is the opposite of what should be the goal. I'm not sure what you think the meta should look like in its ideal state adn whether it's ever achievable, but to me it's better to have 6 "OP decks" than 3 or 2.

I also disagree that MM somehow "increased" Gord value, because neither ST nor SY echo cards are tutors, and Oneiromancy is a 13p neutral card.

Im not saying they should nerf Gord and leave the rest as is, which like you said, would cause the meta to be even more restricted.

Im saying they should nerf Gord AND all other broken stuff like SK Warriors or Shieldwall, ideally at the same time. And in a perfect world, also buff and tweak a ton of other cards. I simply didnt mention them at all because this is a topic exclusively about Gord.
 
I don't necessarily have a problem with Gord as much as I have a problem with unitless decks and the amount of removal there is. If they increased the minimum amount of units per deck that alone could solve the problem for me.
 
Both Gord and novigrad justice plays more efficiently in scoia tel than syndicate, if they nerf Gord, it should be solely for those elf lovers, the SY Gord crimes plays very different from natures gift Gord.
 
Im not saying they should nerf Gord and leave the rest as is, which like you said, would cause the meta to be even more restricted.

Im saying they should nerf Gord AND all other broken stuff like SK Warriors or Shieldwall, ideally at the same time. And in a perfect world, also buff and tweak a ton of other cards. I simply didnt mention them at all because this is a topic exclusively about Gord.

I guess to me, Gord is just not one of the "broken" cards. A broken card to me is a card that can immediately wreck the round with little to no setup, not a finisher you spend entire match building. I mean, this used to be a bronze card and we could play four of them :D
 
It's a strong card but requires your whole deck to be built around it, unlike Justice which is probably the most broken card in the game right now and it's what pushes ST to tier 1. Also as i recall Gord was 2 points at one point, but buffed to 3 for no reason. Still if any changes should be made to ST, Justice should be top priority.
 

ya1

Forum regular
Gord is indeed one of the reasons why special-focused ST lists are so far ahead of all other ST lists (not Eithne - mind you - despite it being the only ST card to get any nerfs lol (the nice symmetric nerfs) ;) ). Control ST got what NG doesn't - points. Gord is much of those points.

As someone mentioned, Gord surviving is one of the hiccups of carryover ST strategy because it's not easy to secure round control without much R1 commitment. And as somebody else mentioned, ruin Gord and you ruin competitive ST. But it doesn't change the fact that Gord is very strong.

Imo it is one of the very many cards that should be looked at. Maybe hardcapping his ceiling at 14 or 15. But like somebody said, if Gord is done and Shieldwall duel or some other ridiculous stuff stays, then it's just another episode of "Which Faction Will We FU This Season?"
 
Well for me the leader precision strike is much more toxic than Gord.

Its simple impossible to win that deck
 

DRK3

Forum veteran
I guess to me, Gord is just not one of the "broken" cards. A broken card to me is a card that can immediately wreck the round with little to no setup, not a finisher you spend entire match building. I mean, this used to be a bronze card and we could play four of them :D

True, there have been other cards (and still are) where you spend the entire match building them up for a big finisher. The difference with Gord is that building him up doesnt really set you at a disadvantage, since it provides point slam and removal at the same time, then if that wasnt enough you got Gord as the cheapest big finisher.

And even more: there's little risk of missing him with Oneiromancy, Call of the Forest and Isengrim's Council, you never had that many tutors with similar cards.
 
I made a post about Gord on reddit a while ago and i got my ass chewed by Gord fanbois. Needless to say I wholeheartedly agree that Gord is OP, and probably the most broken card in Gwent at the moment, easily playing for >15 points from a paltry 7 Provisions.

If he was like Aglais, or Dracoturtle, requiring combos and support cards (and shock horror, maybe even some skill), he might be ok. But it’s just have last say and win, and even drawing him is piss easy with 3 tutors.
 
True, there have been other cards (and still are) where you spend the entire match building them up for a big finisher. The difference with Gord is that building him up doesnt really set you at a disadvantage, since it provides point slam and removal at the same time, then if that wasnt enough you got Gord as the cheapest big finisher.

And even more: there's little risk of missing him with Oneiromancy, Call of the Forest and Isengrim's Council, you never had that many tutors with similar cards.

It does set you at a disadvantage. You have to play a bunch of special cards that need symbiosis on the board to provide real value. The disadvantage is less with Nature's gift, of course, but even then your Circles of Life are 6 for 5, your Tempering is 6 for 4, your Caress is 4 for 4 if you have no dryad, even your best card - rebuke - is only 8 for five if you have a 5-point target. Not to mention, all of these "extra" points (which by the way, I wouldn't call the treants "pointslam") come at the cost of your active leader ability playing for slow 6. And in a PS deck all of these cards are worse.

The tutors are strong, yes, and chaining is a thing, but in a devotion deck you don't play Oneiro, and in a non-devo deck you will typically not play CoF or even Council, because god forbid people don't squeeze in Justice and volunteers in every ST deck. So yes, you do miss Gord on occasion. And you do lose R1. And @Jamborinio no, Gord doesn't "easily play for >15," and yes these decks require skill to play. If you want to win more than you lose that is.
 
  • RED Point
Reactions: rrc
Top Bottom