|
Normal Adult Human posted:crach is terrific when skellige has a single non poo poo silver to base their entire faction around this is funny because SK is the one faction that has a lot of good faction silvers NR probably has the shittiest silvers and that's why so many of their decks run neutral silvers crach is decent enough, he'll be better once they add more card that synergize with his leader ability harald on the other hand is seriously sad General Morden fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Jul 30, 2017 |
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:51 |
|
|
The GwentUp team posted a new win% chart and in response, Rethaz went ahead and posted statistics from CDPR's own statsCDPR Rethaz posted:I've held off on doing this for some times because I am sure the guys at GWENTUP only mean well, but these statistics do not portray the full picture of what is happening in the game. They paint a skewed view of what is really happening in the game and many players are taking it at face value as facts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
I mean they have good silvers for specific archetypes but it's not the same as Bran dropping 19 points and thinning your deck of 3 bronzes
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Like u can design your deck to fetch a specific silver as crach or you can play discard skellige and make your deck 70% non-bronze cards in 4 turns as bran
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
I don't think I'll swap out Crach simply because he's basically never a bad card to use. You get two cards for the price of one, and he can set up some great combos. I usually have him call in those An Craite axemen guys who take damage when they enter the field; I have one in my hand, Crach always calls the other, and those two damaged units side-by-side can be boosted half of 10 or 11 points when I use the card that boosts damaged units by half their power. Being able to set up a combo that isn't reliant on my graveyard is actually a great counter if somebody tries to turn my dead against me; I can still call in some large numbers to make an attempt at a defense. Of course, the flaw is that this requires a good hand to make work. Bran can always do a minimum five damage and he can keep going and going if you have a line-up of weaklings. He's not great against a deck like mine, since I put up big numbers on errybody, but I can definitely see him being a very effective counter to NR and Monster decks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
And there are so many variants of discard skellige it basically comprises all the skellige decks that aren't damage or Kambi (I think most Kambi decks still run Bran)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
Half of Bran's strength is honestly turning your hand+deck into 45% non-bronze and doing a 19 point play because of how trivial it is to keep raiders out of your opening hand
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
Wait am I misunderstanding or is Rethaz seriously claiming that 11 out of the 15 leaders have a positive win rating? How the gently caress does that math work out? Dude should really just stop posting on Reddit. When you're a company PR person and some people are complaining all you need to do is go "I understand why many people are frustrated by [issue], we're looking into this, thanks for your continued support". Implying that all the leaders and factions are equally viable also indirectly implies that everyone trying and failing to run Emhyr is just bad at the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
Subvisual Haze posted:Wait am I misunderstanding or is Rethaz seriously claiming that 11 out of the 15 leaders have a positive win rating? How the gently caress does that math work out? I wonder if it counts draws as wins for both since Gwent is kind of unique in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
Yeah something is up with that math because if you average them all out it comes out to a 52% win rate. I'm not a rocket scientist but that doesn't seem correct.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
Or it's high mmr players getting matched against lower mmr opponents who are not included in the statistic
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Reminds me of the time Ben Brode came in to the hearthstone reddit to say that the obviously-overpowered shaman class was A-OK because its winrate was totally fine...at the lowest possible ranks where you can't lose stars and half the players are rank noobs with default decks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
Class Warcraft posted:Yeah something is up with that math because if you average them all out it comes out to a 52% win rate. I'm not a rocket scientist but that doesn't seem correct. The only way it could possibly balance is if the sole 4 with losing rates accounted for an enormous percentage of the decks played. And why wouldn't you buy that Emhyr/Harold/Voorhis/Francesca account for almost half the decks played in highest part of the ladder? Doesn't that match everyone else's experience?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
I see Emhyr played quite a lot in the NG decks I come across. I don't really know why, he's not that exciting but revealing cards can do cool stuff for NG I guess. Radovid is honestly one of the best leaders, yet most people run Foltest still. And nobody runs Henselt (except me, if for some insane reason I feel like playing NR)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
Hah I thought the ladder worked like Hearthstone and once you got past 4500 you started doing ranked play, so i was just taking it easy doing my dailies, hey neat I'm almost up to legend but no actually I'm top 150 in North America now  wait am I actually good at this game?at that point I immediately started outthinking myself and losing a bunch of games I would have won otherwise, took a while to stabilize again. Take it easy, fun game no pressure. I was doing all sorta wrong stuff, even queued up the wrong deck once on accident. 'Course, playing smarter players means the game's way more difficult now. Don't get to see much of the round one misplay oops emote (PLAYER HAS FORFEITED) A lot of games do seem to come down to who draws their golds, so yeah Bran is great for that. Still mad that it denied me a bunch of kegs by not starting me at the bottom of the ladder tho. I'm an RPG dude I just wanna level up a bunch until the game is too easy and then I start playing a different game EvanTH fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
I get why Radovid is the lowest wr NR leader, you don't shut down anything meaningful with 4 points of damage and all the non-witcher plays are so low tempo you virtually always have the option to pass with one card advantage against any variant
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
Problem with Radovid is you know they have it. Kinda trivial to play around and bait that out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
Also some decks are simply built without cards that are super afraid of getting locked. If they don't have any good abilities to lock, radovid is only 13 points, whereas foltest's 5 + 1 on bronzes will probably add up to a lot more than that, and henselt will easily surpass that with 2 + 2 bronzes, especially the obvious choices of reavers / sergeants, and foltest and henselt aren't as concerned about which cards your opponent is playing. Also I bet emhyr's winrate remains low because every single player I see playing him at low mmr just plays rot tossers over and over, instead of, say, vanhemar for extra frosts / tremors, picking units out of weather, locking a huge number of things with auckes... perhaps that is the rot tosser's fault for being easy to counter. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:Or it's high mmr players getting matched against lower mmr opponents who are not included in the statistic Actually that would explain the data. It would not explain why said data was collected that way, or is in any way useful or relevant for any kind of assessment, but at least it explains why the math makes no loving sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 08:25
|
|
|
Captainicus posted:Also some decks are simply built without cards that are super afraid of getting locked. If they don't have any good abilities to lock, radovid is only 13 points, whereas foltest's 5 + 1 on bronzes will probably add up to a lot more than that, and henselt will easily surpass that with 2 + 2 bronzes, especially the obvious choices of reavers / sergeants, and foltest and henselt aren't as concerned about which cards your opponent is playing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 08:32
|
|
|
Class Warcraft posted:Yeah something is up with that math because if you average them all out it comes out to a 52% win rate. I'm not a rocket scientist but that doesn't seem correct. The more I think about this the more bullshit it is. No matter the explanation for how rethaz got those numbers, the fact that they don't sum to a 50% win rate means he is trying to prove gwentup wrong with data that isn't even measuring the same thing. I'm hoping he just made a mistake not realizing that he was making an apples and oranges comparison. Not that gwentup's data is perfect but it is dishonest to try to discredit it using incomparable data. Honestly they should just release the raw matchup data if they don't want people making their own guesses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 11:01
|
|
|
Its impossible to have a greater than 50% winrate - a whole bunch of people, for some reason
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 11:41
|
|
|
I wish they wouldn't release these numbers mostly because people are so infuriatingly bad at interpreting them. That said, there's something fucky going on here. There's absolutely no reason the numbers have to average out to 50% - but in this case the high average winrate would imply the lower winrate leaders are more heavily played. Given that I'm pretty confident that Emhyr/Francesca/Harald/Morvran don't make up well over half of the metagame, something isn't right. I suspect Trogdos! has explained it correctly, but that's a very weird way to crunch those numbers. King Pawn fucked around with this message at 12:09 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Yeah other games have this data problem too, where bronze players are reported to have a 45% winrate and grandmasters a 55% winrate. It must be the same sort of data error that makes the top end of the mmr here have a >50% win rate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
Delete Bekker's Twisted RNG from the game please.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 12:55
|
|
|
Did he really just say that it's not their fault if the best players all play the same deck because it's clearly the best? Isn't that a balance problem?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
moush posted:Did he really just say that it's not their fault if the best players all play the same deck because it's clearly the best? Isn't that a balance problem? But its really not a problem at the moment. Deck variety is pretty good given the small current card pool especially. We have: Dagon Swarm Consume Wild hunt frost type deck Radovid Control Foltest - reaver hunter Hensalt - Reaver hunter Dorfs Elves Mulligan Queensguard Pure Discard Reveal Cal Control Axemen All seen regularly at >4k mmr, that's a huge amount of variety and I'm sure I'm missing some.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
moush posted:Did he really just say that it's not their fault if the best players all play the same deck because it's clearly the best? Isn't that a balance problem? I read it as him saying that they can't do anything about streamers and other vocal 'experts' declaring this and that as the best / meta which leads to people playing those leaders/decks. =Popularity is community driven. It's true that ~the meta~ has shifted quite a bit since the patch which to me indicates that those meta decks weren't 'clearly the best' after all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 13:33
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:I read it as him saying that they can't do anything about streamers and other vocal 'experts' declaring this and that as the best / meta which leads to people playing those leaders/decks. =Popularity is community driven. There's also the fact that a lot of people like to play anti-meta decks. The goal of the developers shouldn't really be perfect balance because that's basically impossible or really boring (eg. all units are identical). What they should do is ensure no deck is completely uncountable. META deck has many giant buffed units -> People play decks with mushrooms/Scorch/Bork/graveyard hate based around beating them META deck is many small units -> People start to tech in mass AOE or bloody baron And so on and so forth, a good META should keep moving as people exploit the 'META deck' and then it in turn gets counter exploited and so on in a big old loop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
Cast_No_Shadow posted:Just hit 4k mmr with a tempo - bork & scortch nilfguard Been playing this myself after I couldn't progress any further with my standard spy deck. Been working quite well so far around the 3700MMR level, as so many opposing decks at that level rely on the buff-in-deck-when-X-happens finishers. It can put down some solid tempo in R1 as well, but what I also like is that it doesn't have to win R1 as long as you can maintain CA; even -0.5 CA or better and Borkh will still scorch all their identical finishers in the end. And if you have CA yourself in the last round, then they're almost always hosed. Edit: Wow, went 8-0 with this deck today somehow. Last game was against a Dagon who helpfully Trissbutted his entire board to the same strength except two stronger units. He was not happy when I scorched those two before Borkh went off. Bastard forfeited before I got to watch his entire board burn to ash, though... 
dennyk fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
I'm not sure what qualifies as the top ranks of the ladder, but I've mostly been playing in the top 5k-10k range I'd say the current metagame is the most diverse since the start of open beta. Dagon still feels like the strongest leader, but way, way easier to counter than past top decks, and also not as rampant as stuff like sk axemen was, or as boring to play against as the calviet meta before that. That's just anecdotal, but honestly, anecdotal evidence is about as useful as any of the stats that have been given out recently. I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers that dev posted on reddit are accurate, since you need to have a greater than 50% winrate to climb much past 4k mmr. It really just depends on how the stats were collected - what's obvious is that they are using a different methodology than the gwentUp people. Unfortunately without more information the numbers don't mean much in the end, because we can't really know what they are describing. I've also always suspected that the stats from gwentup are mostly garbage. It has the same problem (not saying how it was collected, what data was used, etc). It's possible that they're recording data from both the user and their opponent, which would skew things a lot. Only counting data from opponents would be better, since otherwise these charts are just showing what gwentup users are playing, rather than what the general population is playing. But that's just speculation - again it's impossible to really know anything other than that they're looking at this a different way from the developers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
The developers numbers make more sense if you dont read it as pure win/lose and instead as mmr gain/loss.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 08:15
|
|
|
I've already got some OK golds for a bunch of decks so I was looking for some amusing gag decks... is it time to craft Xarthisus and treason? ... does Xarthisius even work on golds?
Captainicus fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Jul 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Captainicus posted:I've already got some OK golds for a bunch of decks so I was looking for some amusing gag decks... is it time to craft Xarthisus and treason? ... does Xarthisius even work on golds?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Xarthisius does work on golds, but alas, Treason doesn't. As a result, it's not as great a combo as it sounds, sadly; the odds of there being a silver card that's useful to you in your opponent's top three are already slim, and moving a card to the bottom of the deck is often as much of a denial as stealing it with Treason unless your opponent is running a ton of thinning. About the only plus is that you can use Xar to make sure you ain't gonna Scorch yourself with your opponent's Scorch or something equally detrimental. About the only place you'll see Treason used is in hardcore mill decks, and that's really just for the milling, not for actually getting any benefit from whatever random card you pull with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Dang, it sounded like a funny gimmick... maybe I'll go for Iorveth to go with my Aard Geralt. I guess the only use for treason is to steal something that has to be on the bottom of the deck, like nekkers from nekker warrior. Somehow I don't think nekkers are going to be so problematic as to make this a desirable strategy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Ok so, I've finished most of the challenges (except Scoietal) and am now undefeatedin the super beginner leagues of haven'tevenunlockedranked. Fear me. What deck should I aim for? I like the idea of returning stuff to hand and replaying so I've only been using Emhyr. Plus I got lucky the other day snagging Leo, who definitely helps and is probably the strongest card in my deck by quite a fair bit. Is there a deck that revolves around some sort of return to hand / resurrect / discard shenanigans that I could aim for? Reading the last few pages and it seems Nilfgaard might be underpowered in higher level play. I realise I'm quite a while a ways from that but eh, might as well keep a lookout now. And if I know the decks that prominently feature these mechanics I enjoy I could look up replays/games with them. I also snagged Woodland Spirit for Monsters in my latest keg, if that makes a difference. PS - There's no equivalent to Hearthstone's Arena atm right? I've been freely buying kegs whee.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Artelier posted:Ok so, I've finished most of the challenges (except Scoietal) and am now undefeatedin the super beginner leagues of haven'tevenunlockedranked. Fear me. I came across a guy playing Emhyr in top 50 global a couple days ago. It's not unplayable, at least. If you want the easiest climb, Discard Skellige is very powerful and has the resurrect/graveyard stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
It's kind of funny how Bran managed to sneak into the most played and most winning leader at the top of the ladder. Everyone was expecting huge shakeups after the weather changes but somehow Monsters and Skellige remain remarkably durable factions. (Once again, its all about the bronzes. Priestesses of Freya and resurrection mechanic syngergizing with discard for SK, monsters with their much elaborated on harpies and carryover/swarm mechanics.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:51 |
|
|
I'm really enjoying Queensguard, it's such a chill deck to pilot. Buff them up in graveyard, play some discard stuff, then bleed the decks down like crazy. I mostly like how the flow of the game is so different, you can set up such nasty burst damage via a single res in the later rounds that it changes round one calculations regarding card advantage. Going down 2 cards is no big deal at all, I've won going down by 3 a couple times. That it has a natural second win condition via pirate captains is just icing on the cake. A properly teched monster deck will naturally wreck it (gryphon, katakan, caretaker), but outside of that it's surprisingly effective and straightforward to run.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 16:44
|
|