Dr_Badthur wrote:how does the game compare to hearthstone? never played it, but a lot of my friends were pretty addicted to it for some time. watched them play it a few times and it looked cool.
From what I've gathered so far Gwent feels like it gives you more ways to control your game plan. There are two things I mean by that, mulligan and deck building itself. When you make a deck you get to chose how much "thinning" you run in order to gain consistancy. It is expecially important in decks with a big combo finisher. Both games have tech cards that counter certain archetyoes, I supose it's the case with most card games of this sort. In Gwent however it, and I really don't know if it's because I'm quite new to the game, the tech cards either seem insanely good, or terrible, which to me feels like it should be the case. If you want to fuck certain strategies up, there should be some kind of a price for that, shouldn't there be? In Hearthstone that price is usually reassembled by slightly weaker stats of a minion, here the card could be literally unplayable.
Now, why is that not the end of the world for players? Why do they still use it? Easy, as I already said, the mulligan stage of the game, or rather... 3 of them. On every turn start (in a game you may have up to 3, if you don't rush or get rushed in the 2nd round) you get to mulligan cards. After every round you draw 3 and if your hand had more than 7 cards, you get an additional mulligan. If you have a dead card in hand, you can always throw it away and look for a combo pice/something with actual value. The game simply feels more competitive.
I love Hearthstone, I still think that in general it is the better game BUT the RNG levels in HS are off the chart, especially on draw and while generating cards from cards. There is nothing more frustrating than the feeling of having lost from the start, which I get in HS a lot more than in Gwent.
Hopefully all of this makes sense to you.
I didn't vote for Duda.
