Not an Axemen player, but 8 rows of weather? That might be overdoing it. You're also running Scorch in a deck that makes big units which is weird, and no spy either. Are you not concerned about spy wars and / or opponents with carryover after winning round 1?

Scorch in an Axemen deck seems really wide to me when your units are designed to go super tall. I'm with Banedon on swapping him for the spy or at least Summoning Circle.

Yeah, it's only pulling about 45% win percentage for me right now. And mill was rekt by the fact that Infantry are now doomed units. I'm basically back at the drawing board. I don't see much I like out there.

Yeah, Scorch could probably go, but it came in quite useful already. And no, I'm not concerned about Spy Wars, because for as long as that has been a thing it has never happened to me *shrug*. Summoning Circle might be nice for some Derran/Blueboy Lugos shenanigans.

They hotfixed and removed the "Doomed" tag from the Infantry, so back to mill for me.

How are you not concerned about spy wars? Just so we're on the same page, my concept of spy wars is like what happened my last game.

1. I lose the coin flip and don't have a spy or Summoning Circle in hand, but I do have a Wardancer. I dry pass round 1. Opponent plays something and wins the round.
2. In round 2, I mulligan the Wardancer to stop the drypass. Now I'm up a card + 3 points and the onus is on my opponent to catch up.
3. He plays some cards and eventually realizes that he's not going to catch up. So he plays spy. I'd drawn Summoning Circle so I copy his spy. He has Summoning Circle as well. My Summoning Circle drew into my spy, so I play that. Spy wars!!
4. He passes and I go into round 3 up a card.

#3 is really the crux of the issue. If I didn't have spy + Summoning Circle I'm actually at a considerable disadvantage - opponent gets to choose how long to bleed me for, and gets the last play in round 3. But since I'm able to fight the spy war, he ends up going into round 3 down a card, which is a large disadvantage for him. The game's outcome depends extremely crucially on these two cards. During the spy war, these cards are worth more than golds. Spy wars are so silly yet so crucial that I feel like if I'm ever given the breathing room in round 2 + haven't drawn spy / Summoning Circle, I should try to Francesca for Yaevinn.

Anyway if not fighting spy wars I think Summoning Circle isn't a good card. All or nothing - either run Uldaryk + SC, or neither. I'd run both to be honest. You're a weather deck after all, you can play spies into empty rows to minimize the lost points.

I'm considering -Iorveth +Aglais in my mulligan list, but I've never used Aglais before. She doesn't seem that effective when played against me most of the time as well, bar the rare times when she resurrects Commander's Horn.

Has anyone used Aglais before and if so how good is she?

EDIT: On another winning streak, above 3500 MMR now and I've only lost like 2 games on the way here. Wow! (Or Scoiatael is beyond broken)

Yeah, we mean the same thing by spy wars. But it's as I said: I can't recall the last time someone has played more than one spy against me. Also, I don't usually bleed people in round 2 as I like long round 3s

Consume works really well this patch as well with a combination of behemoths, nekkers and forktails. Felt weird, though. The last time I played monsters was in closed beta.

I don't get consume. It's as though the deck is almost unbeatable if it wins the coin flip, unless you are running anti-consume tech cards. I asked trancenergy2 who reached rank 1 in the world with consume how to beat it, and he stressed tempoing them out in round one. Ideally you win the round up a card, or lose up three cards (he said two cards isn't enough to win, although if you still have your golds then you're in decent shape). Tempoing them out in round one isn't hard, but if you're going first the opponent can also pass at any point and all you've managed to do is win round one down a card - not enough to beat the deck. The standard "bleed it out" play doesn't work well either, since Phoenix provides a huge amount of points for a single card, almost comparable to Ciri: Nova.

Meanwhile it's also very ridiculous to watch SuperJJ flatten everyone with his anti-consume decks in Gwent Open. Like seriously. Opponent even adapted by mulliganing into three Nekkers in the opening hand. One gets Muzzled, the other gets Isengrim: Outlaw'ed into Artefact Compression, and the third promptly gets Eithne'd and compressed again. Game over in three plays. Ridiculous. I'm hoping for some kind of change to the archetype.

This game has gone to **** and it's sad.

Yeah, it was much more diverse and entertaining pre-Midwinter.

Kind of, but I'm still having fun and remain hopeful that they fix the issues. Don't get me started about the card name changes or the destruction of SK veteran and greatswords, though.

Oh i won’t

I find the game somewhat annoying right now. It seems to be a points fest. Both sides just sit there and do their stuff and generate as much points as possible. Having said that, now that I think about it, past metas also feel like this. "At every point you make the play that generates the most points for you relative to your opponent over the course of the game" seems like a pretty good summary of Gwent.

Also I'm teching some hate cards vs. Consume. Scorch + Iorveth: Meditation don't seem to be enough, at least not consistently. What's the best single hate card for Consume? Are there any other options to Muzzle, Artefact Compression and Mandrake?

As power outpaces weather, that build is dead. And mill is dead. So they are greatly reducing the available builds.

I'm not going to blame them for that though. Do you remember the time when frost did one damage to all units on a row? Weather has been overpowered for much longer than it's been underpowered, and it's understandable that CDPR are trying to find a balance. There're always decks that are viable and decks that aren't, e.g. mulligan, handbuff, Deathwish consume, etc. Several leaders were unviable for extended periods of time (Voorhis, Harald).

Having said that I do rather hope for a balance patch sooner rather than later. Right now decks just vomit points onto the board. Decks like Dwarves make one high-tempo play (12+ points) after another. It's as though they don't need to stop to catch their breath. If this is going to be the new normal, low-tempo plays such as setting weather really need to be buffed.

Yeah, the problem is they buff weak cards and simultaneously nerf strong ones. So it's just a see saw. If you want to nerf strong cards, that's fine, but then don't take the weak cards and suddenly make them much stronger.

And also, the "Create" mechanic has caused a ton of RNG.

They didn't nerf that much last patch (NG spies didn't get hit at all, did it?), but boy were the buffs huge. Iorveth used to be one of the best golds in the game and now nobody's even using him.

Just curious by the way: in Magic, do you prefer fair or unfair decks?

I like diverse metas in a magic, where every deck seems to have a clear weakness. But then magic allows for sideboards, alot of teching, and the 60 card deck means that games have enough RNG without gambling esque mechanics.

But do you prefer fair or unfair decks? If you go to a legacy tournament, are you more likely to be running 4c Leovold or ANT?

Also, currently 4170 MMR top 1000 with my mulligan deck. Wondering if that's good enough to post it Going even higher is ... stressful ... whatever Barney might say about fear of losing, fact is I can't fully conquer it. Even before starting a game, my heart rate would show a noticeable increase. Game's hard.