• 0

    posted a message on Imleritth : Sabbat is a beast

    First off, I'm talking as a self-confessed I;S player (and also complainer) even though I've benefitted from him far more than I've been burnt by him.

    Firstly, when tryign to work out whether he's a problem you can't just think about the card alone but the deck in which he is in and what options that creates. For example, it's all well and good ^ saying that you have cards which can block him by their strength e/g Ronvid, but equally I have both weather options and warriors to decrease that strength. As a resort, and really only a resort, I have Mandrake and Parasite, and Vandemar for Azur's Thunder, and for very big units I can use Morvudd, again only if necessary. My drakkars increase Imleriths strength by 1 per copy I play, and that makes a big difference.

    To those saying it's fine because you can run Mandrake and a lock, brilliant; but I also run these cards, so if you lock me I'll unlock myself. If you mandrake me before I've mandraked myself I may be fucked, but that's almost never happened, honestly. 

    The thing is, you can't play every game with the certainty that Imlerith is coming, and therefore it's been extremely easy for me to bait out removal just by waiting a bit longer before playing Imlerith. Hell, I've even been able to bait out 6 Viper Witchers (including Ointment) by playing a mixture of perceived threats such as Drakkars. I plan for the fact that Imlerith might be removed, and don't worry about it because I've got Renew - it's all part of the gameplan.

    At the end of the day, my biggest worry is not drawing either Imlerith of Ge'els in order to get Imlerith, rather than removal my opponent has; I'm hardly the worlds best player, currently grinding at rank 18, but Iv'e still found it relatively easy to bait out my opponents answers to Imlerith. Most of my losses which my Eeredin Imlerith deck have been because I either didn't draw the cards I needed, I played badly, or because I was drunk (and therefore played badly).

    The only deck I've really had problems with is NR armour decks.

     

     

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Imleritth : Sabbat is a beast

     

    Quote from Bondonkadonk >>

    Thanks, Mctravis, that's exactly what I mean. 2 golds and a silver to beat Ciri:nova in a duel relates to the fact you have to use two golds and a silver from your deck, over several turns, to beat a single gold. Just because pulling Sabbath with royal decree happens in one play, you're still using a gold to pull a gold, which is two golds from your deck.

    So what, I don't get this - many decks will play Royal Decree because of the importance of the other 3 golds rather than having 4, just as plenty of decks play Renew. Many decks won't even mulligan that hard for their golds because it's the bronzes providing their engine, and may end up using fewer than 3 throughout the game.
    I really fail to see how you count this as a massive weakness with the card or the decks it's in.
     
     
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Imleritth : Sabbat is a beast

    How is that two golds? If you play royal decree you hit Imlerith as long as it's in your deck - you're trying to imply it takes two golds to make that happen but it only needs one, Royal Decree. You can mulligan Imlerith provided you have RC

    Why is ciri nova being used as an example? Because it's an example of one of the highest strength units you typically see, and it can not only be defeated by imlerith with the latter at 13 strength, it can be defeated without imlerith losing anything except armour, leaving him good to go for the rest of the game.

    The Change needing addressing is for armour and health to be taken in one hit. To make that work, he should probably be given more armour. The fact is that with armour, imlerith can destroy any enemy in a duel provided he has at least 50% as much strength as the enemy he duels. To me, thats bonkers but obviously there's always people on these forums who will defend literally any card.

    To the guy talking about win rates, what? Just no. The cards been out barely a week, are you really surprised that refined archetypes with him haven't appeared yet? And maybe they never will, but to me that doesn't make a card automatically unproblematic. Because in the future a deck where he can be used well may appear, and then, if he's not already, he WILL be a massive problem for developers.

    Also, I presume you're not including arena stats, which is where the bulk of my encounters with imlerith apart from the ciri one have occured?

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Imleritth : Sabbat is a beast

     

    Quote from Banedon >>

    ^Mandraked Sabbath can't win a duel with Ciri: Nova. Mandraked Sabbath is at 11 strength, 4 armor at best. Ciri: Nova is 22 points. After first hit Ciri: Nova is at 11 strength, hits back, Sabbath is at 4 strength, hits Ciri: Nova who goes to 7, who hits back, RIP Sabbath.

    Of course, the Sabbath deck can play Parasite instead of Mandrake (in which case Sabbath will win) or something like Scorch / Igni / Unseen Elder etc and then Sabbath will win the game.

     
     My bad, he must have been calling it from Royal Decree. Either way, I can tell you he certainly won the duel with Ciri. 
    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Imleritth : Sabbat is a beast

    Sorry but anyone trying to argue that Imlerith: Sabbath is balanced is an absolute idiot. I guarantee you, literally 100%, that CDPR will rebalance this card pretty imminently. The fact that a mandraked Imlerith can win a duel with Ciri Nova is bonkers. The point swing is insane and far beyond anything CDPR could have envisaged. It has to be changed and again I guarantee you it will be. 

    Love the design of the card, though, and feel this of thing really heightens the fun and interactiveness. Well done overall to CDPR>

     

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on At a crossroads with Gwent

    Firstly this post isn't coming from a salty place, I fortunately haven't had too many negative feelings even from losing a game narrowly or unluckily.

    However right now as a player I feel like I'm at a crossroads in terms of whether I stick with it or try something else. I gave up playing hearthstone over a year ago because the things which annoyed me about the game annoyed me A LOT. Despite that, the game had the ability to create funny and ridiculous stories and the deck building element was great.  I've enjoyed gwent a lot but right now I'm not feeling that compulsion to keep queuing up, even though nothing is annoying me about the game. For me at the moment I'm not sure where those funny games / stories are going to come from. There is a danger of the game not being interactive enough, but simply slamming points on the board.

    I strongly believe gwent can be an incredible game but I feel it needs to be mindful of it's direction. We need a game emphasizing skill not luck (HS flirted with the latter)) whilst managing to be interactive and perhaps less predictable from game to game. 

    I'd be interested to know if others have the same thoughts about gwent and whether you feel it can take its unique strengths and also learn from other ccgs out there?

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Stuck in rank 19

    The gwent up meta gives a good sense of how win rates change at different mmr levels.

    https://gwentup.com/report/18/4

    It shows the insane popularity of Eithne, Brouver and Bran at over 4000 mmr, making up close to 50% of the meta. If you don't want to play any of those leaders, it seems that Arachas Queen/consume has the next highest win rate, and it has favourable matchups against Brouver and Bran.

    So although I know consume may be despised by some, it may be the way to go if you're having trouble at this level and aren't looking to play Scoiatel.

    ...that's not the same as saying consume is good to climb with at lower ranks.

    Posted in: Scoia'tael
  • 0

    posted a message on Is Nilfgaard winning the faction battle?

    Based on my calculations, in the previous Gwentup meta snapshot, monsters won 149,267 and nilfgaard won 308,623.

    That would give monsters just 32/33% and nilfgaard 68/67%.

    So there's quite a lot of movement from that to the results given by CDPR today, where monsters had 41% and nilfgaard 59%.

    It could be influenced by:

    - The snapshot sample not being representative

    - changes in the game between then and now

    - The effect of the challenge on peoples choices. The existence of the challenge would have made more people play both factions, but you could argue that since more people were already playing nilfgaard as it's considered pretty strong right now, there was more slack to pick up in monsters, I.e more people who maybe do play mobsters a bit but aren't playing them much right now as they are one of the weakest factions.

    Either way, there's still a big gap and Nilfgaard was always going to smash this challenge.

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Is Nilfgaard winning the faction battle?

    Probably just me but I feel like the challenge would be more interesting if only head to heads counted. 

    When they say monsters 41% nilfgaard 59% do they just mean out of the total number of wins from both factions combined, 59% of those were by nilfgaard?

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on The Spotter Nerf

    I really don't get how you can claim spotter wasn't nerfed, unless you weren't around when the nerf happened. Just look at how often spotter is played now compared to before.

    As the poster above says, the game should incentivise you to consistently carry out your strategy. Needing to reveal as many cards as possible meant your spotters power could vary. Now it's just reveal geralt, repeat until done. Zero skill or variation in what happens, and I have to run geralt which is not a strong gold card.  To me it's not a benefit that I can instantly play spotter, even if it takes DBP the game to reach those levels they do it absolutely consistently every game. Meanwhile Mahakam Marauder and Farseer can reach extremely high power levels as well.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on The Spotter Nerf

    I wanted to see what other people thought about the nerf to this card. I realise it wasn't one of the recent nerfs of course but in the current meta I've been more aware of this.

    I have been playing reveal nilfgaard and I don't believe it's as strong as some people believe. In light of this I think it's a shame that formerly powerful cards like Spotter aren't able to help nilfgaard reveal be a more powerful deck.

    I think all factions should have really strong bronze cards which can reach high power levels. At the moment Scoiatel have Dol Balthanna Protector and Farseer which can reach extremely high power levels with fairly little variation from game to game. They also now have the new swordsman card.

    I know that Spotter could reach very high levels with the right hand, but in my experience it most usually reached medium power levels, nothing too out of control.

    So I wanted to see what other people think. In my opinion this may have been a fairly heavy-handed nerf which leaves reveal in not the best place, and I would like to see CDPR being a little more consistent in curteiling each factions power level.

    I realise it's early days for the game and overall I think CDPR are doing a great job.

    Happy gwenting.

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Struggling to win in season 3

    For the record I don't see myself as a bad player. In seasons 1 and 2 I reached around 4100 mmr without too much stress and although that doesn't make me great,

    it shouldn't make me terrible either.

    And yet in season 3 I can't seem to buy a win. I'm bumbling around some really low ranks basically losing to Scoia'tel and occasionally monster. I'm playing reveal nilf and trying some slyzard decks neither of which I guess I've figured out properly yet in their new forms. 

    Anybody else struggling to progress? And what are others seeing as the meta decks right now?

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Group Therapy! Release your frustration here

    Totally fucked off with balistas spamming their shit ad nauseam. Fresh crew is ridiculous

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Deck for New player

    Although it's good advice to hold off crafting until the meta settles down, it's simply far easier in gwent than say hearthstone or other games to grow your collection. The rewards simply from playing are amazing, plus you get 10 scraps for milling duplicate commons rather than 5 in hearthstone, there are fewer cards so you accumulate scrap quicker, and you get to choose your fifth card. As a result, if you make a duff investment with scraps its not the end of the world. 

    Agree that wild hunt is a good choice to start - I hit 4150 mmr in my first season after picking up the game without ever feeling I was particularly good at the game. One thing I will say is if you can't choose between decks and end up switching too often you will probably lose a lot, so try and get that choice right from the beginning.

    Posted in: General Deck Building
  • 0

    posted a message on Rank 20

    Congrats. I'm currently on 4,030 ish, not sure if I have the mental energy to get near Grandmaster but rank 20 and the cool portrait would do nicely. Likely won't find the willpower though..

    I'm thankful that however grindy it becomes in gwent its nowhere near the sheer tedium level of hearthstone grinding. 

     

     

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.