Meta Snapshot #10
With a huge new patch has come a brand-new meta. In the early days, we have seen Northern Realms and Syndicate stand out as the dominant factions, though the meta is always developing and counter options have begun to develop. In particular, buffs to King Foltest and the advent of Sigismund Dijkstra have vaulted these leaders to the top of the meta. Much of the developments have centered around finding advantages against these two leaders.
In the first update of this Meta Snapshot, we present 19 updated decks that focus on key archetypes seen in the metagame. Included are options from each faction, although some factions have been explored more than others. While Sigismund Dijkstra has emerged as the predominant Syndicate leader, we have included other options for players seeking alternatives. In Skellige and Monsters, fewer decks are included due to their lower popularity, but we will monitor the situation closely to identify decks from these factions that emerge later in the patch cycle.
We hope you enjoy our Meta Snapshot and happy Gwenting!
Update: 17 August 2019
First published: 12 August 2019 (Game version: 220.127.116.11)
- 17 August 2019:
- Added: Big Gernichora, Brouver Midrange, Calanthe Charges, Dijkstra Crimes and Harald Midrange
- Tier adjustments:
- No Unit Francesca Tier 3 ⇒ HM
Consultants: Adzikov, Damorquis, Jamedi, JMJWilson23, Kochua, Kolemoen, Molegion, Santtu2x, Sergi2Vamos.
Editors: Apero, Kochua
Decks in this tier have favourable matchups against the majority of lower tier decks and some favourable matchups against other Tier 1 lists. Another criterion is that these decks should be able to win against lower-tier decks on blue coin most of the time.
Decks in this tier can beat Tier 1 decks if the player can access its full potential, or are strong decks with a clear counter; in addition, these decks should win consistently against lower tiers.
While decks in this tier remain good laddering options that can successfully achieve high winrates, they can struggle to achieve the same winrate when matched up against decks we place in higher tiers. They may make for strong tournament options.
Decks here aren't strong or popular enough to be tiered, but have enough potential to be better with the adequate support cards. They may win against unsuspecting opponents and can make for interesting tournament options, but are otherwise worth just keeping an eye on.
Written by Jamedi; Consultation: Damorquis, JMJWilson23 and SwanDive
What is a Meta Snapshot?
A Meta Snapshot is a comprehensive list of the decks which are played in a CCG. The decks are ordered by criteria, accounting for their power level through a tier (used by Team Aretuza & Team Nova), star or numerical system. If you would like to discuss our current Meta Snapshot, you can join our Discord server.
Which kind of criteria are used to classify a deck into a tier?
While the list of criteria is extensive, here are the most important aspects:
- Power level is the amount of points a deck can output in comparison to others in the meta. In general, decks of higher tiers tend to have a greater number of unconditional points without depending on what rival decks do.
- Consistency is focused on the draw dependency of a deck and the amount of thinning this deck has. Better thinning means more consistency, which usually means easier access to higher-value cards. If a deck is too dependent on drawing one or two certain cards but runs no thinning, it lacks consistency.
- Counterability is the difficulty that other decks have to tech for the matchup against a certain deck and how much they need to sacrifice to improve the matchup. In Gwent, there are a lot of ways to prepare a deck for a concrete matchup and we can expect players to tech against the strongest/most popular decks of the metagame. The capability of a deck to win despite teching plays a role in its tier placement.
The data are collected by the players in several hundred matches and is then translated into the Snapshot. While the normal ladder experience can be different, tiered decks are good to climb the ladder to Pro Rank with relative ease.
What is the meaning of the different tiers?
- Tier 1: Decks in this tier are the strongest, the most difficult to counter and heavily influence how decks in other tiers adapt.
- Tier 2: Usually this tier covers decks which are still good, but due to some reason, they cannot be qualified as Tier 1. They usually have less strength than Tier 1 decks or have another factor that makes them slightly worse than top tier decks. In some particular metagames, a deck can be Tier 2 due to how easy it is to tech against it.
- Tier 3: Decks in this category are still viable for climbing the ranked ladder, but they encounter more difficulty at high fMMR. They can still be used as tournament picks (in formats in which you can ban). They may still have favorable matchups versus some Tier 1 decks, but they are usually unfavored. Decks which are inconsistent or too draw-dependent also fall into this category.
- Honorable Mentions: Here, we put decks whose strength is not enough to be tiered, but which have the potential to be much better with some support. These decks are always worth keeping an eye on. A deck which has been discovered recently and has not been played enough to be tiered can also fall into this category.
My experience differs from what you describe in the Snapshot. Does this mean that the Snapshot is not accurate?
Short answer, no. Long answer, there are a huge number of factors that can influence the development of a matchup between two players with their respective decks, which includes player skill, knowledge of the matchup and the respective decks, cards drawn and how they have played the match. Also, it is worth noting that a meta snapshot represents a picture of how the meta is in a particular moment. “Tiers” as defined above are never rigid constructs. In any given day, the meta can shift dramatically.
In general, inexperienced players tend to play worse and with more unpredictable lists. As we move up on the ladder, decklists tend to be more optimized, sometimes influenced by content creators such as popular streamers or the most recent meta snapshot. Reaching Pro Rank, we can expect to face the best possible players with the most optimized decklists.
I have a different list from the one shown in the Snapshot. Does this mean that one of the lists is incorrect?
Lists provided in our snapshots are usually stock lists, which are supposed to be a base to be modified according to the meta you are currently facing and your own playstyle. The tech section provides some card replacement options which may be more effective within a particular meta. This normally does not affect a deck’s overall consistency.
I haven’t seen this deck which appears in the Snapshot / I play this list or this archetype and it isn’t in the Snapshot.
The Snapshot tries to be as accurate and complete as possible. We release an initial snapshot as soon as the meta has settled after a game patch and make as many updates as possible afterwards. If a deck is not included, it will most likely be added in one of the next updates, as we try to prioritize the most popular and relevant decks. Despite that, we have to skip some decks which are unpopular or are very similar to existing ones. If you would like to be informed about our updates, feel free to check our website regularly or follow Team Aretuza or Team Nova on Twitter or Discord.
Are you just including the most popular decks/FOTM lists? Do you keep the best lists for yourselves?
No. While it is true that part of our work is to try and create a representation of the meta that is as accurate as possible and this, of course, includes the popularity of decks, popularity has no impact on how decks are tiered. We do not keep the best lists for ourselves. We are creating meta snapshots to share our collective knowledge of this game and provide players of all levels with a more enjoyable Gwent experience.
Do you have more questions? Join the discussion on Discord!
Over the course of the past few months, the “Big Monsters” archetype has evolved in a way that moves away from the original core of playing large units and units that Consume them from the graveyard. With Gernichora as our leader, we have limited provisions and the deck has trimmed down to utilize more midrange concepts as a result. In general, our game plan is to press hard to win Round 1 and then play out Round 2. In Round 2, we try to take advantage of our valuable leader ability to force our opponent’s strong plays out of them without losing card advantage in the final round.
- Ozzrel is our true power play and one of the reasons we are able to play for a short- to medium-length Round 3. Typically, we want to fill our graveyard with Pugo Boom-Breaker or Golyat in one of the earlier rounds to set up Ozzrel as an 11-point play that also procs any Thrive effects we may have on board. On rare occasions, Ozzrel also acts to disrupt opponent graveyard strategies, but in the current meta these are somewhat rare.
- Katakan was a major enabler for this deck printed in the Crimson Curse expansion. It has synergies with the deck on two fronts. First, it is a proactive play that provides 8 points for 9 provisions with solid distribution across two bodies. The Katakan itself has Thrive, which can pay off in the form of Pugo Boom-Breaker, Golyat, Ozzrel, Protofleder, and Brewess. Secondly, it places two Vampire bodies on the board which lets Orianna provide us with Bleeding for a longer duration, making it a core piece of our small Vampire package.
- Gernichora's strong leader ability allows us to push hard in both Round 1 and Round 2
- One of the stronger decks at forcing the opponent out of key resources in Round 2
- Has essentially no control tools, so engine decks completely overrun us
- Gernichora’s recruit cap of 161 limits the card quality in our deck, so we often fall short to stronger factions with more provisions available to them.
- Orianna, Alzur's Double-Cross, Queen of the Night, Cyclops ⇒ Naglfar, x2 Ice Giant, Ghoul
- Kayran, Cyclops, Harpy Egg ⇒ Adda: Striga, x2 Wyvern
We can choose to remove some card from the Vampire package to resort to a more traditional “Tall Gernichora” deck. This change includes double Ice Giant and a Ghoul to give us an additional power play for late in the game in exchange for running less efficient Ice Giants. This change is likely one that would also see the deck add additional Thrive cards, but that is not necessary.
Our package surrounding the Kayran inclusion is quite dependent on drawing Kayran itself, so we can remove this for a more consistent feel to the deck. Adda: Striga adds the potential for removal with a condition that is met fairly easily in the current meta. The card is weak when we go second (which is one of the weaknesses of the deck already), so there is consideration to instead find means to add Carlo Varese for more removal.
Written by JMJWilson23.
5,160 25 24 161
57Queen of the Night
35Wild Hunt Riderx2Deploy, Dominance: Summon a copy of this unit from your deck to this row.
44Plumardx2Deploy: Give an enemy unit Bleeding for 2 turns. Bonded: Give it Bleeding for 4 turns instead.
34Fogletx2Deathwish: Summon a copy of this unit from your deck to a random allied row.
14Nekkerx2Thrive. Deploy: Spawn a base copy of this unit and Summon it to this row.