Why Many Players Not Giving GG

+
Because NG and NR don't deserve GG. They playing in Easy Mod when you try hard for Monsters, Syndicate and Skellige
Whaaaatttttt? From when did Skellige have to try hard? I don't know if you were sarcastic or serious. SK is as strong/broken/op as NG and NR, in its own pointslammy-cum-controlly way.
 
Whaaaatttttt? From when did Skellige have to try hard? I don't know if you were sarcastic or serious. SK is as strong/broken/op as NG and NR, in its own pointslammy-cum-controlly way.
SK try hard when u don't play only meta. And even so, now Skellige can't control everything when you play versus NR
 
SK try hard when u don't play only meta. And even so, now Skellige can't control everything when you play versus NR
To be fair, every faction is try hard is you don't play meta. Try to play NG Spy or Soldier archetype. Try to play NR Swarm, Shield or Soldiers. If one choose to play off meta weak deck, they should not complain that the faction is weak when facing other meta decks. @NR4ever feels like NR is so weak and SK is too strong because they choose to play non meta deck against meta SK, even though NR can crush most/all faction when it plays the current meta decks.

Even MO has super binary braindead decks which can win the game in matchmaking and R1 draw itself. Currently only SY is in a weak spot. NR, NG, and SK bring top 3, followed by ST and MO and SY. Sorry for this off-topic rant, but I was shocked/surprised when someone mentions SK as a struggling faction.
 
feels like NR is so weak and SK is too strong because they choose to play non meta deck against meta SK, even though NR can crush most/all faction when it plays the current meta decks.

Can You quote where I wrote exackly that?
 
To be fair, every faction is try hard is you don't play meta. Try to play NG Spy or Soldier archetype. Try to play NR Swarm, Shield or Soldiers. If one choose to play off meta weak deck, they should not complain that the faction is weak when facing other meta decks. @NR4ever feels like NR is so weak and SK is too strong because they choose to play non meta deck against meta SK, even though NR can crush most/all faction when it plays the current meta decks.

Even MO has super binary braindead decks which can win the game in matchmaking and R1 draw itself. Currently only SY is in a weak spot. NR, NG, and SK bring top 3, followed by ST and MO and SY. Sorry for this off-topic rant, but I was shocked/surprised when someone mentions SK as a struggling faction.
Not quite. U can win meta SK and ST playing non meta decks but it's big difference when u met NG and NR because they too power creep and today it's very difficult task even for Meta decks to win this two. And here is little problem if whole ur Fraction live by one deck one archetype. Delete Assimilation and u delete NG.
Post automatically merged:

To be fair, every faction is try hard is you don't play meta. Try to play NG Spy or Soldier archetype. Try to play NR Swarm, Shield or Soldiers. If one choose to play off meta weak deck, they should not complain that the faction is weak when facing other meta decks. @NR4ever feels like NR is so weak and SK is too strong because they choose to play non meta deck against meta SK, even though NR can crush most/all faction when it plays the current meta decks.

Even MO has super binary braindead decks which can win the game in matchmaking and R1 draw itself. Currently only SY is in a weak spot. NR, NG, and SK bring top 3, followed by ST and MO and SY. Sorry for this off-topic rant, but I was shocked/surprised when someone mentions SK as a struggling faction.
Of course I can complain, and I will continue to do so. Because it's sick things with Gwent. When u CAN play Only Meta decks, and other is just 2 0 or Esc Enter. U can't win the meta NG and NR with non meta decks
 
Last edited:
I've said this before on here I think: I don't understand why giving a GG rewards the other player instead of the player giving the GG... Why give the reward to someone else (who, might I add, probably won't return the favor) instead of rewarding the player showing good sportsmanship? You win because of an afk/time out? GG to them for leaving the game and they get free rewards while you get nothing (well, besides a free win I guess). What about people who just get rolled by someone with a dominating deck? $5 says they give a GG but the other person who loss doesn't (probably because they've rage quit). Giving the reward to the player who said GG might encourage more people saying it. Maybe even give a reward to both players when one says GG, or make it to where both players have to say GG to get rewarded.
 
I've said this before on here I think: I don't understand why giving a GG rewards the other player instead of the player giving the GG... Why give the reward to someone else (who, might I add, probably won't return the favor) instead of rewarding the player showing good sportsmanship?
Because GG isn't a reward for good sportsmanship. It's a reward for a good game. You get it if your opponent acknowledges that you played good.
 
I usually give GG. The exception is, when I pass - sometime with card in hand -, and have less points then the opponent, but it still keeps playing cards. This is a kind of surrender, and if doesn't respect it, doesn't deserve my GG.
 
I usually give GG. The exception is, when I pass - sometime with card in hand -, and have less points then the opponent, but it still keeps playing cards. This is a kind of surrender, and if doesn't respect it, doesn't deserve my GG.
I already say it in this topic but i have to repeat time to time.

Why people pass? Why you just dont forfeit? What is the diference?

I always interprect that if my opponent just pass and dont forfeit, i relly think my opponent wants to know my cards (because just forfeit its the logical chose here).

But noooooooo, my opponent just have the freaking idea to pass and not forfeit and i need to have cristal ball to understand his idea to do that.

i always plays my card, because i always think in that way, but than i discover doing that i disrespect my opponents weird chose to pass and not forfeit.

Well, i really dont care about GG, because i always dont give it too, but for me its really funny when someone complains about the opponents plays his cards while you give an early pass (and not forfeit).
 
I already say it in this topic but i have to repeat time to time.

Why people pass? Why you just dont forfeit? What is the diference?

If you forfeit, you don't get any XP for completing the round. If you pass and your opponent passes, then the round will be considered complete and you get your XP. So passing the round is saying "I surrender, but I'd like to get my XP please". Continuing to play in those situations is usually interpreted by the passing player as poor sportsmanship: "But wait, I really want to show off how badly I was going to destroy you before I'll let you get your 20 XP".

Think of it this way... When is the last time you saw a tennis match where one player injures themselves and walks up to the net to concede but their opponent refuses to shake their hand and spends the rest of the match firing unanswered serves across the net?

EDIT - I'm going to make one caveat to when I think it's not only acceptable but advisable to play a card (or two) after your opponent passes. That's if they're playing ST, have an un-flipped trap on the board, and the game is close enough that a Mahakam Horn playing for 8 points if you pass could decide the game. But that's not actually a situation when your opponent is conceding, that's them gambling on you being too sportsmanly to realize what they're doing. :p
 
Last edited:
Anyone who's using a meta deck (currently Hensel, vamps, patience/virtue) I don't give GGs to. No point too bc your win isn't your own. Did you make your deck? Nope someone else did you just bought the cards and copied like everyone else. Did you do anything unique? Probably not bc you're using a foolproof strategy that's proven to be OP. If there is nothing special about your win I don't give GGs unless it is a amazing match and they do something I've not seen a million times from every other player running a replica meta deck.
 
If you forfeit, you don't get any XP for completing the round. If you pass and your opponent passes, then the round will be considered complete and you get your XP. So passing the round is saying "I surrender, but I'd like to get my XP please". Continuing to play in those situations is usually interpreted by the passing player as poor sportsmanship: "But wait, I really want to show off how badly I was going to destroy you before I'll let you get your 20 XP".

Think of it this way... When is the last time you saw a tennis match where one player injures themselves and walks up to the net to concede but their opponent refuses to shake their hand and spends the rest of the match firing unanswered serves across the net?

EDIT - I'm going to make one caveat to when I think it's not only acceptable but advisable to play a card (or two) after your opponent passes. That's if they're playing ST, have an un-flipped trap on the board, and the game is close enough that a Mahakam Horn playing for 8 points if you pass could decide the game. But that's not actually a situation when your opponent is conceding, that's them gambling on you being too sportsmanly to realize what they're doing. :p
Sorry, but what?

As far as i know, You only not get the xp if you forfeit without playing any card. Also, i think there is a bug that if you win round 1 or 2 and forfeit without playing any card in the next round, you wont gain the round win crown. But you only need to play one card and just forfeit (i already did that sometimes, i need to go card disvantage to win round 2 and i know round 3 was a lost, so i just play one card and forfeit).

But in all those cases you can only play one card and forfeit.

I really dont understand why players do an early pass instead forfeit.

As i said, i always interprect that my opponent wants me to show my cards, because i myself do that (early pass instead forfeit because i want my opponent to show me his cards)
 
As i said, i always interprect that my opponent wants me to show my cards, because i myself do that (early pass instead forfeit because i want my opponent to show me his cards)
No one wants to see your cards. Forfeit/pass means surrender. If you continue to play after pass, don't expect GG.
 
Sorry, but what?

As far as i know, You only not get the xp if you forfeit without playing any card.

XP is calculated as follows:

- 3 XP per card played
- 5 XP for completing R1
- 20 XP for completing R2
- 20 XP for completing R3
- 30 XP for a draw
- 40 XP for a R2 victory
- 50 XP for a R3 victory

If you forfeit a round, you lose the XP for completing that round because you didn't finish it. However, passing is considered finishing the round. For someone who is convinced they've lost a game, forfeiting means giving up roughly 25% of their XP for that game.
 
Sometimes I do want to see an opponent’s cards. Sometimes I just want to allow an opponent opportunity to play more to progress toward a quest.

When there is already a button to immediately end the match (forfeit), do not blame an opponent for viewing a pass as an invitation to play on.
Post automatically merged:

XP is calculated as follows:

- 3 XP per card played
- 5 XP for completing R1
- 20 XP for completing R2
- 20 XP for completing R3
- 30 XP for a draw
- 40 XP for a R2 victory
- 50 XP for a R3 victory

If you forfeit a round, you lose the XP for completing that round because you didn't finish it. However, passing is considered finishing the round. For someone who is convinced they've lost a game, forfeiting means giving up roughly 25% of their XP for that game.
If you care that much for the experience points, why don’t you just play out your cards to get value for playing them?
 
Last edited:
Based on the countless discussions on the topic that I've seen over the years, both here and elsewhere, I would say that while there indeed are players who pass instead of forfeiting because they'd like to see the opponent's last card(s), a majority of players do not want to see the last card(s) even if they do pass early.

I've never understood why anyone would want to basically waste time watching cards be played after they've already lost.

I think passing with cards in hand while losing is an indication that the game is finished, just like a forfeit is. It's certainly not a universal "I want to see your cards" message, and if you treat it as such you really can't blame the opponent if they send no GG.
 
Sometimes I do want to see an opponent’s cards. Sometimes I just want to allow an opponent opportunity to play more to progress toward a quest.

When there is already a button to immediately end the match (forfeit), do not blame an opponent for viewing a pass as an invitation to play on.
Post automatically merged:


If you care that much for the experience points, why don’t you just play out your cards to get value for playing them?

It's fine if you want to see how things end, but in that case why would you ever pass in the first place? But a lot of players know when they've lost and consider it bad form to keep playing after they concede, so you shouldn't be surprised if someone doesn't give a GG under those circumstances.

As to not playing out the cards for 3 XP each? Well, cards played is a function of time spent in the game. The time saved by not playing them out in a losing match is time that I can use to play an equal number of cards in the next match. Which is another possible reason why some people won't GG a player for continuing after a concession - they consider their opponent to be wasting their time.
 
It's fine if you want to see how things end, but in that case why would you ever pass in the first place? But a lot of players know when they've lost and consider it bad form to keep playing after they concede, so you shouldn't be surprised if someone doesn't give a GG under those circumstances.

As to not playing out the cards for 3 XP each? Well, cards played is a function of time spent in the game. The time saved by not playing them out in a losing match is time that I can use to play an equal number of cards in the next match. Which is another possible reason why some people won't GG a player for continuing after a concession - they consider their opponent to be wasting their time.

Well, i really think if you just play one card in r3 and forfeit you will gain the 20 xp anyway. I will test it and see if i am right.

Anyway, if you are so worry about xp, what makes you think your opponent its not too? If you just pass and not forfeit, its an invitation for your opponent play card without think and gain more xp quick, so i think its correct take the opportunity to win more xp (since my opponent also didnt forfeit to gain more xp, i think i can gain more xp too playing my cards) , otherwise you are being selfish.
Post automatically merged:

Based on the countless discussions on the topic that I've seen over the years, both here and elsewhere, I would say that while there indeed are players who pass instead of forfeiting because they'd like to see the opponent's last card(s), a majority of players do not want to see the last card(s) even if they do pass early.

I've never understood why anyone would want to basically waste time watching cards be played after they've already lost.

I think passing with cards in hand while losing is an indication that the game is finished, just like a forfeit is. It's certainly not a universal "I want to see your cards" message, and if you treat it as such you really can't blame the opponent if they send no GG.
Yes i agree we have both interpretation.

But as i always says, i dont have cristal ball to know what are my opponents intention. If myself only do an early pass only when i want to see my opponents cards, why i will think diferent than that?

For the GG, i really dont worry if my opponent dont give it. But what i dont understand its people who thinks i am not being sportmanships if i continue playing my cards.
 
Top Bottom