Know that the card exists to counter absolute greed, but must say out of the matches I saw on day 1 (didn't watch any on day 2, I'm afraid) it felt like Yrden and Igni were way too determining. They were present in 14 out of like 19 non-GN decks, I think? Everyone knew not to bring any NR, and it felt like people were pushing really hard for R1 to have last say with it (which maybe helps explain Blue Coin having 55% winrate overall). Not drawing yours when your opponent did was absolutely decisive.
Igni at least required players to try and line things up cleverly, which introduced counterplay, but with Yrden there's not too much you can do other than spread your boosts between the two rows – though even that doesn't work if your opponent has access to movement. Personally, I feel this made R3 rather boring, as too many of the plays didn't actually matter all that much in the end. Last couple of cards played were exciting, sure, but at the cost of like the other sixteen turns.
Wondering how other people felt about it, though. Did you enjoy those dynamics? Think the Open was more interesting for it? Do they hope this trend continues in future tournaments?
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/gwent/comments/xux3al/how_did_people_feel_about_yrdenigni_at_the_open_3/
