Yet the computer game is all about coming to the final battle with him, is it? I do not believe he's somewhat less important there... Accurate, complete, and lol??? You obviously never saw it.
Let us check the attached picture of it... The description is exactly this: "Destroy the weakest non-Gold unit(s) twice in a row."

Now, WHAT row could that be??? Mine??? The opponent's??? The one where the card is put on??? You tell me...

Inaccurate, incomplete, misleading, and Gaunther O'Dimm probably wrote it, says I... I understand each deck has different strategy and tactics, and everyone will play the one he likes best... But if Scoiatel is THAT good, then why of all the games I played against Scoiatel, I lost about 2 or 3 games only, if I rememcer correctly? Why do I loose very rarely with Northern Realms or the Monsters? Also, if a card is golden, it does not mean authomaticaly it is good. Radovid card can make a very short process with any opponent's gold card, whether it is Zoltan Chivay, Shani, or Bork Three Jackdaws...

What I wanted to say is, that the Scoiatel deck, in comparison with the Scoiatel deck from The Witcher 3 computer game, is a lot weaker, and in comparison with other decks in the computer gwent game I find it the weakest...

True, but only partially, as Radovid is not the only card that can reduce the strength of gold units - Scoia have the means to do exactly that as well (Iorveth)... Also, a golden unit that stays on the field every round (Zoltan) is in my opinion OP nevertheless. There's lots of ways to play cards of this faction (most of the time combined with some neutral units), but as someone said before, you pretty much depend on the initial draw/mulligan.

@ that 2nd paragraph: well yes, but we're still in the beta and there are lots of cards to be released yet. I can already tell you that they won't make Scoia decks less powerful/interesting.

EDIT: on a completely different note - Northern Realms deck's cards with the "... and set base strength to current" are really unfair. <-- looking forward to that part being changed/omitted in the next update.

Description of Pavetta
It says that it destroys the weakest units on the battlefield

on the BATTLEFIELD. Not your side, not the opponent side. The BATTLEFIELD..... So all the place....

Eredin Gold card was to OP. Thats why silver now.

Not the strongest monster the best..... So the Scoiatel is good deck. Just use a good strategy. Not just strong cards....

NO IT DOES NOT SAY THAT.

Are you completel BLIND??? Check the very card or the picture that I posted!

"Destroy the weakest non-Gold unit(s) twice in a row."

THIS is the card description. How the hell am I to understand that the whole battlefield is meant???

Well... Set the base strength to current is also a misleding description that can be understood differently... For example, the Redanian Elite has base strength 4, right? Now, I use a swallow potion and make it 12. Then a card is used that "sets the base strength to current". How? I would understand that it takes the base strength of 4 and sets it again, no? Or will it set 12 as the base strength (which it will, actualy)... It seems to me that someone does not understand the semantics of English language here, and after 43 years of speaking English I somehow do not want to believe it's me...

I absolutely loved Scoiatel in the Witcher 3 gwent... It does not need less, but MORE power... In this gwent I mean of course... As I love Northern Realms here, I did not like it much in Witcher 3, because of all the weak base strength cards... I realy can't wait to see the Nilfgaard deck, which was also my favourite in Witcher 3.

MISLEADING DESCRIPTIONS

Another case I stumbled upon today - The Redanian Elite Card

This being one of my favourite cards, I tried to add another one to the 3 I already have in my deck. The game did not allow me to do that, so I contacted the support. It was explained to me that I can have only 3 cards of the same type in my deck.

Now let us compare what the support girl said with the card's description:

"If 3 or more Redanian Elites are on your side, add 2 strength to them and convert them to Gold (setting base strength to current)."

According to the card's description, I should be able to have as many as I wish in my deck...

Now, is there someone else who wants to go and try to persuade me the cards descriptions are correct and accurate?

Well done, you have written three posts in the row without any response. If you just want to complain then maybe you should do it somewhere else. Personally I am not interested into talking to you because seeing your behaviour allows me to claim that such conversation will be pointless. You are unable to understand the simplest things such as card descriptions, you have your own opinion on every single thing and when other people proves you wrong you just keep seeming that nothing has happened.

Although, I will give it a try once again and I will try to convince you that the description is correct.

As you probably know, you can copy some cards with abilities such as Foltest's or for example Nekker's Warrior. So it is technically possible to put a Redanian Elite on the table, then copy it using Foltest's skill, and then to use Reinforcement card to bring two more Redanians from the deck. It will give you 4 of the units in the battlefield and their skill will work for every single one of them, not just three. Do you see it now?

Aaah well, some people are realy from another world...

LOL... Who and when proved I am wrong? I'm very glag that besides jacking off your ego on me and having not a slightest idea on semantics of a language (which would not be such a big sin, since you're not a native speaker), you have at least something to say on the topic. If you don't mind the descriptions, fine by me, your problem. You probably would not mind if a fiend unit would besides appearing on the battlefield produce 2 units of fiend shit each of which would destroy the strongest cards "in a row" allowing you to choose whose and it would not be in the description, it would appear... I DO mind the descriptions. When there are new cards that have not been in the witcher version of gwent, they are essential to anybody who uses them or thinks upon adding them to his deck. I do not like it when someone pulls mine or other's leg.

BTW - Foltest is not the only card capable of copying another cards... Want to know which one it is? Check the descriptions for yourself :D

Don't like my post(s)? Fine by me, not gonna kill myself because of that. Me personaly, as Gerealt says often, I do not give a flying fuck what you are or are not interested in... Happy playing ;-)

Just let it go! We all do that... :DDD

^ First this "accusation", then
^ this "answer".

Seems to me that you're exactly doing the thing you're accusing others of. Why are you explaining something to someone, who knows/understands that there are other cards such as Foltest... Semantics much?

Please don't, just don't. Whatever it is you're doing here. Keep up a positive attitude in the discussion instead of ranting away on everything people reply to you <-- as that is the primary reason to join the discussion in the first place: feedback.

Also, sorry mods, I couldn't resist.

:D :D :D That's rich, really, "ALL" three of you do, indeed :D :D :D

That has nothing to do with semantics and you're missing the point, of course and again.

"If 3 or more Redanian Elites..." etc. etc. etc. would mean 3, 4, 5, or even 7, 12, or 55 if a hand could hold that many cards and since your "accurate" descriptions say nothing about where would they appear from (deck, collection, graveyard, Mars, or galaxy M31), which makes our babbling about which cards do or do not copy another cards irrelevant, well, this COULD seem to any sentient being to be an exception of the 3 bronze cards of one type max in the deck rule... You know, gwent is literally stuffed with exceptions of the rules ;-) Now, THIS is semantics, dear friend... Oh, no, I can't say, that, since one can choose his friends, fortunately.

Now... Do you get it finaly or not... I don't realy care anymore. The cleverer steps down, as they say (so that the stupider might have their party - my addition to that proverb). Last words from me on this, so "all" (3) of you can start your party right away...

Happy playing :-)

steal nekker warrior from a monster opponent with johnny
play redanian elite
copy nekker warrior with operator and use it to create 2 redanian elites in your deck
then use the stolen nekker warrior on the first nekker warrior to create 2 nekker warriors in your deck
then clone a nekker warrior on the field with foltest and use it to create 2 more redanian elites in your deck
use 2 reaver scouts on a nekker warrior to summon the previously cloned nekker warriors from your deck which will copy 4 redanian elites
kill all 5 nekkers using manticore venom and resurrect them with 3 medics, nenneke and shani to create 10 more redanian elites
use dummy on a nekker warrior to re-summon it and copy 2 more redanian elites into your deck
kill 1 nekker with alzur's thunder or anything that can kill it, play bloody baron and resurrect it with lubberkin to create 2 more redanian elites

use reinforcement on redanian elite and you'll have 27 redanian elites on your field, if thats of course enough to stop you from stupid trolling

Amusing :D :D :D ... Might I challenge you to a round or two of gwent, so that you could show me this hallucination in praxis? Since it seems to me, that besides missing the point again, you omit several facts: 1) why would I want to play against monster opponent, 2) Johnny chooses cards RANDOMLY (but perhaps you have a personal agreement with him so that he passes to you just the cards you need) and you have to be lucky enough to get him at the start of the round, 3) you completely omit the counter moves of the opponent (I seriously doubt that he would allow you to do all you say without any action in return), 4) besides three redrawings you cannot choose what cards will there be in your hand, etc. etc. etc.

The point is this: there is a basic rule of 3 bronze cards max per one type of a card. Some cards can change that, and there is nothing about it in their descriptions. If this is so, why not allow the player to do the exception when HE CREATES HIS DECK and chooses cards from his collection? And when we want to deny him the possibility, why allow exceptions that BREAK BASIC RULES at all??? From the description of the Redanian Elite card emerges directly the possibility of adding MORE than 3 cards to the deck when creating it from the collection cards, that is off-game (what I'm talking about the whole time while "all", now 4 already, of you talk about in-game situation(s). Now, if a basic rule says something is not possible and we discover it is in spite of them, in certain situations, it might be possible very well, what good the rules are at all and what worth are they. There's that...

Happy playing ;-)

"Silent" update?

As I started to play today in the afternoon, I was pleasantly surprised... Several things changed on the game.

1) my favourite topic - card descriptions - many of them have been changed, and now they are much more precise; so much as for who was and who wasn't right in the recent discussion ;-)

2) I noticed a completely new card when playing an opponent, maybe there are more, haven't checked yet...

3) Base strength of many cards have been changed. Scoiatel for example became more powerful. Redanian Elites got higher base strength, they are 6 now... The only thing I did not like was that Radovid now takes only 8 strength units off a card, not 10 like before and lowering Ciri's base strength from 8 to 6 was also a mistake. According to the significance of their roles in the computer Witcher's world I think they would deserve more power, not less...

Why at all were these changes not announced? I'm sure I haven't discovered all of them yet, and I'm looking forward to...
Sometimes changes are positive. Developers did a good job on them this time.