|
Henselt was significantly nerfed and foltest was buffed, another intelligent choice from this patch.
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:14 |
|
|
No Wave posted:Henselt was significantly nerfed and foltest was buffed, another intelligent choice from this patch. Not sure why Foltest couldn't just buff Temerian units or something. Henselt isn't too bad, but Machines are. Edit: Pro Ladder delayed, until new teaks to game balance in the coming days. https://www.playgwent.com/en/news/7681/the-first-pro-ladder-season-start-date-important-message-from-the-development-team Probably for the best. Electronico6 fucked around with this message at 14:29 on Sep 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
I do imagine that Henselt into sergeant/commando was obvious cheese that occurred at the bottom of the ladder a lot (the sort of thing I am guilty of enjoying). What I don't get is why summoning circle, one of the ultimate dumb cheese cards, was buffed so significantly that you don't even have to run operator with it anymore.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
Captainicus posted:I personally haven't ran into more than literally one person playing Eskel, but I'm still low ranked (10ish), so I've got no idea if that is a big concern in the current netdeck environment. Thankfully, minimal mulligans and zero spellatael down here! I run Eskel specifically for the big strengthened bronzes/silvers you see in some decks. Mostly that SK greatsword/ship deck. Also, Radovid is way better now than he used to be. Everyone's running decks with tons of poo poo that can be locked. Radovid armor, in particular, is dope.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Gigni not pushing these big ST bronzes out of the meta. Very perplexing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
No Wave posted:Gigni not pushing these big ST bronzes out of the meta. Very perplexing. 25 is too much, even if you take in CDPR's assumption that stat inflation would average it out. A good ST player can delay the game till the point where Gigni will no longer be a significant swing. Everything being Agile also doesn't help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:25 is too much, even if you take in CDPR's assumption that stat inflation would average it out. A good ST player can delay the game till the point where Gigni will no longer be a significant swing. Definitely my biggest qualm with the beta. Way too many units have agile. They should lock down most bronze units to specific rows for all factions but ST like the original game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
I'm all for having so many more agile units, I don't really get what the downside is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
No Wave posted:I'm all for having so many more agile units, I don't really get what the downside is. The downside is that Gigni is sort of worthless at such large threshold, and that the faction that can move the largest amount of opponent units has an advantage. Coral and old Caranthir died, but currently Zoltan into Hailstorm is probably more powerful than those two, and it feels very unfair to be on the receiving end. This on top of everything else ST has going on at the moment. Agile is important so CDPR doesn't have to nerf weather every single patch, so I don't think they should make it like it use to be, with only ST having them, but maybe not every 4 in 5 cards needs to be Agile.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
how can we still not see which graveyard a unit is in, holy loving poo poo. i almost lost a game just now by first stealing, then mistakenly returning a clan tuirseach skirmisher from/to my opponent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
I sort of like what they did with axemen, they are agile but you have to think about where to place them beyond "least crowded row". I think it would be cool if more units cared about placement. Honestly there should be very few agile units that you can just plop down anywhere, most units should be row locked or have row (dis)incentives or only affect the row they're put on. The change to heymaey skald is particularly weird to me, it just targets anything now instead of leftward units.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:I sort of like what they did with axemen, they are agile but you have to think about where to place them beyond "least crowded row". I think it would be cool if more units cared about placement. Honestly there should be very few agile units that you can just plop down anywhere, most units should be row locked or have row (dis)incentives or only affect the row they're put on. The change to heymaey skald is particularly weird to me, it just targets anything now instead of leftward units. Moving opponents' units is fairly new (were there any in CB? Not to my recollection) and I think the mechanic is mostly a mistake because it hoses and renders decisions irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
No Wave posted:I think the devs correctly assume that more options for placement increases the gap between high and low skill play. Having cards that punish specific placements is good, forcing players to play into them is mostly bad, but having a few row-locked units makes you play differently depending on what you're running. In CB there was only Aard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
No Wave posted:I'm all for having so many more agile units, I don't really get what the downside is. They made so many things agile to the point where the lanes are almost becoming irrelevant. What's the point of a single unit that has to stay in the cc lane? Or the ranged lane? Or siege? Why not just make everything agile? But then why not make more lanes? Or less lanes? Too many questions arise from so many agile units.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
MarshyMcFly posted:They made so many things agile to the point where the lanes are almost becoming irrelevant. What's the point of a single unit that has to stay in the cc lane? Or the ranged lane? Or siege? Why not just make everything agile? But then why not make more lanes? Or less lanes? Too many questions arise from so many agile units. 1.) What's the point of a single unit that has to stay in a cc lane? Or ranged? Or siege? It changes how you play your other units. 2.) Why not just make everything agile? See 1. 3.) But then why not make more lanes? Or less lanes? Three was always an arbitrary number.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Electronico6 posted:In CB there was only Aard.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Ah the good old days of closed beta Skellige with a billion carryover every game and everything had veteran
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
No Wave posted:One by one: I don't think you really answered the question of "why not make everything agile"? Do you want everything to be agile or not? Or somewhere in between? And if so why?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
I think agile would make the most sense as something a significant minority of cards had, but that still felt "special." One of the big problems cdpr has had is that they just can't seem to pin down how powerful they want row dependent effects to be. Uber-weather, Coral/hailstorm, lacerate, and Igni all really harshly punished row stacking and it seemed like they "solved" the problem by making a bunch of power bronzes agile. It's not that this is wrong exactly, but it is really weird and arbitrary which cards are agile and which aren't. A lot of barely playable bronzes (like arbalests) would benefit hugely from agile, but they seem to prefer giving it to cards that are powerful already.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
A lot of the over abundance of agile is just ST, where not only is everything agile but they even have multiple ways to move all their units into and out of rows at leisure. But it's still good to have some agility as a soft counter to weather that adds some skill and thought to where and how you place units. They did go a little overboard with NG and Monsters, though. Giving Impera Brigade agile was fine, but probably overkill for both Infiltrators and Enforcers. For example, SK is still going to have guaranteed melee units (skirmishers, morkvarg, raiders) and siege units (priestess, longships, most of their silvers) and is probably the "ideal" way to balance agile units for a faction. If they want to keep all the agile units, it would be nice if they gave some benefit to being in a certain row still. Like +1 power if you put impera brigade in melee.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
 thanks for making one of my favorite characters from TW3 actually good CDPR
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
this ugly son of a bitch is about to be locked/scorched immediately
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
frajaq posted:
Yup, this is my favorite change. Trollolo was the best character in TW3 and I love that he's actually a great card. It's a shame they can't figure out a way to make Iorveth or Vernon any good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
The new Trololo is horrible design, one of the dumbest cards of the new patch. The mechanic of play a card then a bronze that's broken with it for 20 extra points is why this update sucks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
Waiting for a card that lowers all cards boosted by more than 5 to only be boosted by 5.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 08:03
|
|
|
I don't understand how this patch went live. How do you print a bronze that commonly reaches 12-18 with a strong upside. How do you print a bronze that boosts your elves without giving any indication to your opponent how it happened. How do you print a veteran synergy card that only works with one bronze, one silver and one gold. How do you justify a vanilla silver at 12 and vanilla geralt at 13. Priestess of freya, but 3 power and can resurrect the same card infinitely. What the gently caress are they thinking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
Arteza adept and sage exists but herbalist had to be one power for some reason Farseer gains 2 every turn so it starts at 8, axemen struggles to gain one each turn now that everything is agile so it starts at 3 Lol
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 09:22
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:I don't understand how this patch went live. How do you print a bronze that commonly reaches 12-18 with a strong upside. How do you print a bronze that boosts your elves without giving any indication to your opponent how it happened. How do you print a veteran synergy card that only works with one bronze, one silver and one gold. How do you justify a vanilla silver at 12 and vanilla geralt at 13. Priestess of freya, but 3 power and can resurrect the same card infinitely. What the gently caress are they thinking. CDPR are... not very good at this? The last few patches have been mostly flailing and panic, and dragging them further and further away from actually being able to release this game. MarshyMcFly posted:I don't think you really answered the question of "why not make everything agile"? Do you want everything to be agile or not? Or somewhere in between? And if so why? Someone made a pretty nice suggestion on reddit, make every unit agile but assign them a "preferred" row. If played on the preferred row, give +1 or some other buff. Double Bill fucked around with this message at 11:23 on Sep 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 11:02
|
|
|
It makes zero sense that cards like ballistas and battering rams can be agile tbh
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 12:49
|
|
|
Double Bill posted:CDPR are... not very good at this? The last few patches have been mostly flailing and panic, and dragging them further and further away from actually being able to release this game. The irony is that the game was at its most balanced right at the start of Open Beta. There was a good variety of deck/factions too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
Kawabata posted:The irony is that the game was at its most balanced right at the start of Open Beta. There was a good variety of deck/factions too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Eh, it's always a lot of variety right after a patch comes out. There were some good tweaks to stuff that really needed fixing in the later OB updates, but I think the balance was actually pretty decent right before the gold immunity patch. Sure, Bran and Dagon dominated the top of the top, but below that there was a decent variety of decks in play, and there weren't any games where I'd go "welp, I lost" as soon as I saw the opponent's leader. The Bran/Dagon edge wasn't as big as some folks would have you think, they were just over-represented in the 4.5k tier because you need such a high win rate to gain MMR there and the edge they provided was critical. Some small nerfs to Bran and Dagon's meta would have balanced things out nicely (the current harpy change alone would probably have been enough for Dagon), and the NG changes they actually provided in the last patch (while keeping the new bronze strengths at reasonable values) would have helped bring the power level of that faction up enough to be a solid competitor. Some small changes to some of the lesser-used archetypes could have been made as well. Instead CDPR went "AAAAAAAAAAAAA gently caress IT!" and doubled bronze power across the board and made golds vulnerable because...who the gently caress knows? I don't get CDPR's reasoning about golds needing to be vulnerable to avoid a whoever-draws-the-most-golds-wins scenario. Golds were never an I-win button; most of them were just more powerful and less vulnerable utility cards. A few decks had win conditions that were based on golds, sure, but plenty of other builds relied on silvers or bronzes. And it's not like it was hard to draw them when you needed them; even a deck with no thinning whatsoever could potentially see 18 of its 25 cards in hand at some point through mulligans. Add in some thinning and it's quite rare not to see at least a few of your golds, and unheard of not to get at least two of 'em. I can't recall a game *ever* where I saw less than two golds on either side. And for every game I lost where the gold I didn't draw would have won it, there was another game or two where the key silver or even a situationally useful bronze that I didn't draw would have won it for me as well. Active golds were hard to deal with, but almost all of them could be played around. It was relatively easy to deny value from Yen:Con or Triss:Butt by buffing or damaging units. Borkh could be trickier, but there were still a number of ways to deal with him if you planned ahead (which a lot of players didn't do; can't count the number of times my opponent would drop Unseen Elder in R1 or R2 completely unforced, despite facing an obvious Dashgaard deck...). If CDPR really wanted to provide more options to deal with golds, they should have added one or two more spells/units that could target them. Hell, maybe even adding DShackles (the old zero-tempo version) to all the mages would have been a reasonable solution; players would have had to choose between saving their mage for an active gold they thought might be coming later or getting value from a weather clear or value spell earlier. The big thing about invulnerable golds was that they could be used strategically. Bran drops a Longship, Morvran drops a Mangonel, Dagon simply exists, and you answer with an opening gold, and now they have to adjust their plans. It made games much more strategic; is it worth dropping this gold so early just to deny them value from that unit? Where do I position my golds when I play them to protect my other units? Will they interfere with my own buffs? Can I draw out an enemy Shackles early to protect my later golds? Should I use my gold card to take this round or do I need to save it for Scorch/Kambi/Borkh later? Where can I position my gold spy to disrupt their plans? Now all of that strategy is out the window, since golds are just big juicy targets now, and have no more inherent value than useful silvers. It removes a key aspect of the overall Gwent strategy and makes the game dumber as a result.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 13:55
|
|
|
No Wave posted:Wait wasn't that the start of the weather apocalypse? it was before the start, with drought and rnr running rampart the thing is, after a few weeks nobody gave that much of a gently caress about rnr and the card wasn't even in the majority of tier 1 decks anymore
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Kawabata posted:it was before the start, with drought and rnr running rampart That was because a few weeks after OB started it was nerfed, and we got Bearmageddon. dennyk posted:I don't get CDPR's reasoning about golds needing to be vulnerable to avoid a whoever-draws-the-most-golds-wins scenario. Golds were never an I-win button; most of them were just more powerful and less vulnerable utility cards. ST scorch won the game on R3 on the back of Ciri Dash and Villen. As the game goes on, you could bet more and more decks like this would pop up, or CDPR would keep printing more Vabjorns as golds to not break the game. Electronico6 fucked around with this message at 14:27 on Sep 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
I think he means when Nilfgaard was the best deck, which didn't strike me as significantly more balanced than end of last season (plus weather was a lurking problem that had yet to be resolved at that point).
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
No Wave posted:I think he means when Nilfgaard was the best deck, which didn't strike me as significantly more balanced than end of last season (plus weather was a lurking problem that had yet to be resolved at that point). Yeah, it was just that period barely registered in the game's beta lifespan. It was 3 weeks from the start of Ob to the patch that got us into that Axe Weather meta.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
No Wave posted:I think he means when Nilfgaard was the best deck, which didn't strike me as significantly more balanced than end of last season (plus weather was a lurking problem that had yet to be resolved at that point). NG was the most popular but SK was right up there along with weather Monsters, Spelltael and a couple of weird NR decks that stubbornly stayed at the top ranks in spite of NR being poo poo. It was, literally, the most balanced and varied Gwent ever was.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 14:53
|
|
|
Maybe one day CDPR will know what they actually loving want with the game also really want to know what payment model they're gonna use for the Thronebreaker expansion
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Anyone know a good net deck to follow for a good long ship/ greatsword combo deck?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:14 |
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:I don't understand how this patch went live. How do you print a bronze that commonly reaches 12-18 with a strong upside. How do you print a bronze that boosts your elves without giving any indication to your opponent how it happened. How do you print a veteran synergy card that only works with one bronze, one silver and one gold. How do you justify a vanilla silver at 12 and vanilla geralt at 13. Priestess of freya, but 3 power and can resurrect the same card infinitely. What the gently caress are they thinking. One can imagine their design team lacks direction and is given constant conflicting demands that result in weird delays and poo poo being released that shouldn't. For this particular patch I imagine the developers got a laundry list of poo poo to implement, cards to nerf, factions to completely redesign, golds suddenly need to no longer be immune etc. Except naturally not all at once, you'd probably be mostly done with one change, when suddenly priority shifted to implementing a completely new crazy demand from the top. And then after the Gamescom tournament wrapped up and the stupid ban on game changes lifted some BigWig appeared in the department and demanded that everything currently on the PTR be patched into the main game immediately because the entire fanbase wanted to kill themselves from Dagon matches. Really it seems like they need someone with a solid vision and ability to make plans and set deadlines. From a balance perspective the game just needs more frequent and conservative hotfix tweaks to cards that are way out of norm instead of 2 months of Dagon followed by a hundred crazy unrefined changes dropping at once.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2017 17:51
|
|
