Discussion:
How to save VtES?
(too old to reply)
Stefan Ferenci
2006-06-26 18:54:00 UTC
Permalink
First of all i dont want this to degenerate into a flame war, so please
refrain from posting insulting answers to this post, if you dont agree
fine, just explain your point of view without beeing an ass!

Admittingly, the header is kind of catchy but there is sadly some truth
in it.
Of course there will be a lot of you out there who will simply deny the
obvious truth that vtes is losing players and sales are declining, but
nevertheless it happens.

just look at the number of players attending tournaments: over the
last to year in most areas the numbers have been declining. the most
obvious beeing Budapest with an unthinkable low number of attendees at
this years qualifier (24 compared to around 80 in 2005)
go to your local retailer and ask him about orders on the last few
sets. Our local retailer (who not only supplies most of austria, but
also large parts of the czech republic, hungary and slovakia) just told
me that his preorders for the new set are down an amazing 66% (while
still having awesome prices) compared to NoR, even though the new set
is by far larger than NoR.

I wondered why this happened and talked to a lot of players what they
considered reasons or why they left. The mass of players stoped playing
because they simply did not recieve enough value for there money (NO i
nor they think that vtes is to expensive). i am not talking about the
hardcore players who are financially willing or able to simple order a
few boxes of a new set and get what they need in a sufficient
quantities and dont care about the rest. i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didn´t really get cards that they could need or trade.
The sets in retrospective:

CE: good base set that was a good starting point for newbies, no wonder
its sold out.
Anarchs: great hopes big disappointment, introducing a new mechanic
(anarchism) but with to few good cards to make it worth playing, there
is no benefit for barony compared to princehood or archbishopness
(sorry for my bad english), the cards are not good enough to make the
big investment (gamewise) worth enough. i agree anarchs got a few good
cards the last few sets but to few to late (people dont want to wait
years for there cards to become playyable). and still they the are not
really playable tournamentwise. anarchs had horrible rares and bad
starters
Black hand: Another set same mistakes. new mechanic, not enough vamps,
not enough good cards,
2 or 3 new decks types at best, horrible rares (crusade anyone) still
the decent new vamps and the very playable starters rescued this set.

Gehenna: new mechanic that took up most rare slots without beeing
overly playable. the events create an unnessary rabdomness to vtes,
killing alot of decks, without adaequate countermeasures
introduction of group 4 indies giving group 3/4 the very playable
numbers of 4 vamps per clan!!!!!!!, !!!
(with the promise that the next set will include plenty indies to make
up for it, giving players cards that are not playable for a few months)
addendum: even almost 2 years and 3 sets later group3/4 for indies only
include 12 vamps, way to few to make them very competitive. adding
insult to injury the diszispread of a lot of the new vamps is rather
odd.

KMW: new mechanic way to cornercase to even consider playing it (i know
your great cock deck norm) taking up a lot of rare slots, horrible
starters (playwise) overall very dissappointing.

LoB: the biggest mistake WW made which cost them most. mixing to
different sets that dont match, reprinting commons as rares, reprinting
old cards but in such a high rarity that the on average you would need
to buy 5 booster boxes to get 10 reprint commons, creating 4 new clans
which are not only bad design wise (defense seems neglectable in
Africa) but with only 11 members totally unplayble at a tourney level(
i am aware of matt´s deck that made the finals at templecon)
adding again insult to injury we are still missing the lost Osebo (see
what happens if you are defenseless in africa) but what angered players
most: one had to invest an high amount of money to get a playable deck
out of LoB, what could have been a great set getting players into the
game turn out to be a major turnoff

NoR: i would like Nor if not for the interaction with the gehenna
events, what could have been a great small set turned out just to be
another major blow for an already declining game.



so what about the future: WW anounced a major drive to get new players
in this game. but 1 base set will not be enough, even if this set is
flawless (the dangers are there: crappy reprints will missing key
cards, will we see group 5?) the next set has to build on this one.
every new player has to get cards in this next set that he can use, so
it again should focus on sabbat. a new black hand set could be a
possibility (WW could even included and black hand assamite starter).
it is imperative in order to keep the new players in the game that they
can use 90% of the new cards if the only own the 3rd edition set, if
they again get a set that can only be played if you own plenty of old
cards, or cannot be played at all, they will leave vtes pretty soon.

stefan
Omael
2006-06-26 19:26:42 UTC
Permalink
Maybe some of the problem would be solved with more fiction and maybe
someway to reflect better the storyline results. I have problems with
players leaving the game, but overall this is regular from all tcgs
right now, so the answer could be getting more players in the game.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
First of all i dont want this to degenerate into a flame war, so please
refrain from posting insulting answers to this post, if you dont agree
fine, just explain your point of view without beeing an ass!
Admittingly, the header is kind of catchy but there is sadly some truth
in it.
Of course there will be a lot of you out there who will simply deny the
obvious truth that vtes is losing players and sales are declining, but
nevertheless it happens.
just look at the number of players attending tournaments: over the
last to year in most areas the numbers have been declining. the most
obvious beeing Budapest with an unthinkable low number of attendees at
this years qualifier (24 compared to around 80 in 2005)
go to your local retailer and ask him about orders on the last few
sets. Our local retailer (who not only supplies most of austria, but
also large parts of the czech republic, hungary and slovakia) just told
me that his preorders for the new set are down an amazing 66% (while
still having awesome prices) compared to NoR, even though the new set
is by far larger than NoR.
I wondered why this happened and talked to a lot of players what they
considered reasons or why they left. The mass of players stoped playing
because they simply did not recieve enough value for there money (NO i
nor they think that vtes is to expensive). i am not talking about the
hardcore players who are financially willing or able to simple order a
few boxes of a new set and get what they need in a sufficient
quantities and dont care about the rest. i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didn´t really get cards that they could need or trade.
CE: good base set that was a good starting point for newbies, no wonder
its sold out.
Anarchs: great hopes big disappointment, introducing a new mechanic
(anarchism) but with to few good cards to make it worth playing, there
is no benefit for barony compared to princehood or archbishopness
(sorry for my bad english), the cards are not good enough to make the
big investment (gamewise) worth enough. i agree anarchs got a few good
cards the last few sets but to few to late (people dont want to wait
years for there cards to become playyable). and still they the are not
really playable tournamentwise. anarchs had horrible rares and bad
starters
Black hand: Another set same mistakes. new mechanic, not enough vamps,
not enough good cards,
2 or 3 new decks types at best, horrible rares (crusade anyone) still
the decent new vamps and the very playable starters rescued this set.
Gehenna: new mechanic that took up most rare slots without beeing
overly playable. the events create an unnessary rabdomness to vtes,
killing alot of decks, without adaequate countermeasures
introduction of group 4 indies giving group 3/4 the very playable
numbers of 4 vamps per clan!!!!!!!, !!!
(with the promise that the next set will include plenty indies to make
up for it, giving players cards that are not playable for a few months)
addendum: even almost 2 years and 3 sets later group3/4 for indies only
include 12 vamps, way to few to make them very competitive. adding
insult to injury the diszispread of a lot of the new vamps is rather
odd.
KMW: new mechanic way to cornercase to even consider playing it (i know
your great cock deck norm) taking up a lot of rare slots, horrible
starters (playwise) overall very dissappointing.
LoB: the biggest mistake WW made which cost them most. mixing to
different sets that dont match, reprinting commons as rares, reprinting
old cards but in such a high rarity that the on average you would need
to buy 5 booster boxes to get 10 reprint commons, creating 4 new clans
which are not only bad design wise (defense seems neglectable in
Africa) but with only 11 members totally unplayble at a tourney level(
i am aware of matt´s deck that made the finals at templecon)
adding again insult to injury we are still missing the lost Osebo (see
what happens if you are defenseless in africa) but what angered players
most: one had to invest an high amount of money to get a playable deck
out of LoB, what could have been a great set getting players into the
game turn out to be a major turnoff
NoR: i would like Nor if not for the interaction with the gehenna
events, what could have been a great small set turned out just to be
another major blow for an already declining game.
so what about the future: WW anounced a major drive to get new players
in this game. but 1 base set will not be enough, even if this set is
flawless (the dangers are there: crappy reprints will missing key
cards, will we see group 5?) the next set has to build on this one.
every new player has to get cards in this next set that he can use, so
it again should focus on sabbat. a new black hand set could be a
possibility (WW could even included and black hand assamite starter).
it is imperative in order to keep the new players in the game that they
can use 90% of the new cards if the only own the 3rd edition set, if
they again get a set that can only be played if you own plenty of old
cards, or cannot be played at all, they will leave vtes pretty soon.
stefan
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-26 19:29:25 UTC
Permalink
<snip thoughtful post>

<add colourful insults just to upset poster. i'm BAAAAD!>

i suggest

[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards legal.
Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la Duffin
draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i disagree
about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage people from
playing cards, ever].

[2] Wholesale bannings for Constructed. Provisional list:

Meddling of Semsith
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
Direct Intervention
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning expansion
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Protect Thine Own
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
Baltimore Purge
Spirit Marionette
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]

[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.

<dons ablative skin>
Kevin Walsh
2006-06-26 20:31:26 UTC
Permalink
I live in a pretty limited environment, but I'm intrigued by the number
of cards on that list that don't see play.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Meddling of Semsith
I have no real opinion on Meddling, other than that it's not very good.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
As someone who has two decks that use Gehenna cards, I might be
expected to disagree, but I certainly think that Fueled by Heart's
Blood, Restricted Vitae, Blood Weakens, and The Slow Withering are good
cards with proactive uses that are just as legitimate as, say,
Dragonbound. Nightmares Beyond Nightmares is a perfectly reasonable
defence against weenie/ally swarms, as is, to a lesser extent, Thirst.
Absimiliard's Army and The New Inquisition are too weak to be worth
complaining about, and Conquest of Humanity is at least as fair as
Arika.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning expansion
Maybe I should play MoM in my Imbued deck, but it seems like it's just
a somewhat better
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
which is not worth playing in any deck I've ever seen.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Sudden Reversal
Sudden is a perfectly fine card. Sure, it's annoying when a card gets
Suddened, but if it consistently messes up your whole strategy, then
your strategy can't be that good. And any deck out there that plays no
Masters other than Sudden is giving up a lot of flexibility.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
They're annoying, but I'm not sure I'd bother banning them.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Protect Thine Own
In agreement here. I can't believe it hasn't been banned yet.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
I wouldn't object to Freak Drive being made once per turn (if the Una
deck is that big a problem). I really don't see the value of making
only its superior version once per turn, as all that does is make the
OBF FOR guys even more powerful, since they can guarantee not being
blocked.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Border Skirmish
You've seen someone play Border Skirmish?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Any card that allows big vampires to do funky stuff also allows Arika
to do funky stuff.
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-26 22:02:30 UTC
Permalink
<snip a bit. Sigh a bit>
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Border Skirmish
You've seen someone play Border Skirmish?
Yes. Ben Peal. i won the particular game in question, but BOY is Ben a
good player/deck constructor, and EXTRA BOY did he convince me that
Border Skirmish is a BAAAD card.
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Any card that allows big vampires to do funky stuff also allows Arika
to do funky stuff.
Right, but Arika is [too?] good already. Making other big vampires
better is good in this context, surely? Hell, limit it to big vampires
who are less than 11-cap, if you like! Or think of better
pump-the-big-but-useless-guys texts!
f***@aol.com
2006-06-27 05:53:49 UTC
Permalink
I agree so strongly with almost everything you've said here, Kevin,
that I had to reply.
Post by Kevin Walsh
I live in a pretty limited environment, but I'm intrigued by the number
of cards on that list that don't see play.
Right. Personally, I don't see why we should ban any cards that aren't
seeing play. It seems redundant.
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
which is not worth playing in any deck I've ever seen.
--My Tremere deck used 2 Pentex Subversion specifically because
Goratrix and Howler (or any other better-than-me combat/intercepter)
would ruin my game.

--Darby Keeney's PRE weenies play Pentex for your first blocker, and
also Anarch Troublemaker. The turn he's going to kill you, he uses the
Troublemaker and then Pentex'es another dude, making you 3 blockers
shorter.

I don't think Pentex is very prevalent, though, and I don't see how
Pentex ruins games. If someone's only vampire gets Pentex'ed, usually
one of their cross-table allies can be convinced to burn the thing.
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Sudden Reversal
Sudden is a perfectly fine card. Sure, it's annoying when a card gets
Suddened, but if it consistently messes up your whole strategy, then
your strategy can't be that good. And any deck out there that plays no
Masters other than Sudden is giving up a lot of flexibility.
I still haven't built my Synesios/Parthenon/Sudden based deck, but
until I see it win consistently, I will have to say that Sudden's not a
threat to the game.
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
They're annoying, but I'm not sure I'd bother banning them.
Seconded.

Temptation and Hostile were already scaled down and I think it was
sufficient.
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Protect Thine Own
In agreement here. I can't believe it hasn't been banned yet.
In Ancient Hearts, where PTO comes from, some cards had text which said
"Non Camarilla". When Sabbat came out, the vampires became
functionally "independent" instead, but the cards which referenced them
didn't reflect the change.

If PTO is restored to its original intention, as a hoser for
independent clans, it won't see much serious play and the problem will
disappear.
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
I wouldn't object to Freak Drive being made once per turn (if the Una
deck is that big a problem). I really don't see the value of making
only its superior version once per turn, as all that does is make the
OBF FOR guys even more powerful, since they can guarantee not being
blocked.
I wouldn't object to Freak Drive being made once per turn (if it didn't
upset a large portion of players).
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Border Skirmish
You've seen someone play Border Skirmish?
It's very disruptive, but I've never built the deck, since Border
Skirmish doesn't help me gain pool or do damage, and can be blocked by
the now-extremely-prevalent "one intercept".
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Any card that allows big vampires to do funky stuff also allows Arika
to do funky stuff.
Yeah, big vampires don't need encouragement; midcaps do.

-- Brian
FC
2006-06-27 07:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
I wouldn't object to Freak Drive being made once per turn (if the Una
deck is that big a problem). I really don't see the value of making
only its superior version once per turn, as all that does is make the
OBF FOR guys even more powerful, since they can guarantee not being
blocked.
It is not so much the Una deck as the design decision to print Una in
the first place. That tells me to not even bother trying to "save"
anthing. The game will meet whatever fate it deserves I am sure.

Just my two cents

Frede
tobiasopdenbr...@notsocoldmail.com
2006-06-27 07:44:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin Walsh
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
which is not worth playing in any deck I've ever seen.
68 Tournament Winning decks (per TWDA) disagree with you.

I do as well. It's a hammer, both for the already illustrated lunge,
but for wall decks as well.
Orpheus
2006-06-26 21:59:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<snip thoughtful post>
<add colourful insults just to upset poster. i'm BAAAAD!>
Can I too ?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards legal.
Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la Duffin
draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i disagree
about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage people from
playing cards, ever].
It might interest some players, but most of my playgroups are found of
constructed. This wouldn't interest me at all, for instance.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[2] Wholesale bannings for Constructed.
I'll assume this isn't a practical joke and answer seriously.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Meddling of Semsith
I really don't see the necessity. Don't even find the place to include one
in my vote decks anymore.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
You keep the ones I like so it could be ok. But that's a big ban list ! And
what about the indies wanting to make the Cammies fall ?! What about the
decks who play just a few weenie hosers ? I think the problem is more in
excessive number of Gehennas than in their individual effects. Maybe find
some side effect from having X Gehenna in play, or a limit by player,
or...something ?! But banning too many cards can't be good, and based on
what ?!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Direct Intervention
I hate the card. But it needs an... intervention. Like an errata or
something. Not a ban from tournaments (which would mean a ban, period).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning expansion
I vote for the second option. MoM are useful for lots of interesting ally
decks, that haven't been disruptive, not even with Unmasking. NoR isn't a
Vampire expansion and it could be perfectly justified that it would be
banned from competitive play. And it would be one less incentive to play
mass gehenna, hence you wouldn't need to ban those !! Probably the only
"ban" I would strongly second.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Are you serious about those ? It means a whole different game ! Why ban
Graverob and not Temptation or Mind Rape or Spirit Marionette ? Where do we
stop ? And without Suddens nothing stops the Palla, Week, or even heavy
bloating, the games will either be very fast or never-ending !!!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Protect Thine Own
I'm s strong advocate of errating that one because it's too disruptive. A
ban could be the other solution.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
Baltimore Purge
Spirit Marionette
Here we are...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow stealing
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?). The ones that don't fit this are in the Harbingers
strategy, which you obviously dislike (but then so is Feline Saboteur, not
included).

But do you really think these cards are the reasons why players stop playing
? I don't think so. I tend to think more on the lines of "the winning decks
are always the same". Which would make the "dangerous" cards Parity Shift,
Second Trad (and therefore the Princes and Justicards who can play them),
PTO of course, and the superiority of the Inner Circle over any
non-camarilla fatties anywhere.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Whatever. Giving big vamps more options is fine for the ones, the vast
majority, who don't do enough. But do Arika, Alexandra, Stanislava, Enkidu
or even Saulot need more than they can already do ? Will we see more
second-stringers like Menele, Basilia, Masika, or even third-stringers like
(argh it hurts to say it) Augustus, Eze the Loser Prince or troglodytia ?!
Nah, just more Arikas and co...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<dons ablative skin>
Gonna need it lol.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-26 22:38:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<snip thoughtful post>
<add colourful insults just to upset poster. i'm BAAAAD!>
Can I too ?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards legal.
Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la Duffin
draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i disagree
about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage people from
playing cards, ever].
It might interest some players, but most of my playgroups are found of
constructed. This wouldn't interest me at all, for instance.
Noted, but you still play. Stefan's question is how to save VTES, which
means some combination of attracting back the PO'd old players and
attracting new ones, so what YOU think about it is almost irrelevant.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[2] Wholesale bannings for Constructed.
I'll assume this isn't a practical joke and answer seriously.
TOTALLY serious. Just not cast in stone.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Meddling of Semsith
I really don't see the necessity. Don't even find the place to include one
in my vote decks anymore.
Can't believe you're serious about this, unless you're not serious
about winning!
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
You keep the ones I like so it could be ok. But that's a big ban list ! And
what about the indies wanting to make the Cammies fall ?! What about the
decks who play just a few weenie hosers ? I think the problem is more in
excessive number of Gehennas than in their individual effects. Maybe find
some side effect from having X Gehenna in play, or a limit by player,
or...something ?! But banning too many cards can't be good, and based on
what ?!
Based on the fact that there are too many bad effects coming from
Gehenna events. i do not WANT to ban cards as a matter of policy, far
from it! i've been a consistent opponent of bannings in the past. But
the situation has changed, and so have my views. What happens to your
views when the situation changes?
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Direct Intervention
I hate the card. But it needs an... intervention. Like an errata or
something. Not a ban from tournaments (which would mean a ban, period).
No, it needs to be banned. It is a Magic card [nay, hiss, Yu-Gi-Oh!
card], and it has no place in Jyhad.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning expansion
I vote for the second option. MoM are useful for lots of interesting ally
decks, that haven't been disruptive, not even with Unmasking. NoR isn't a
Vampire expansion and it could be perfectly justified that it would be
banned from competitive play. And it would be one less incentive to play
mass gehenna, hence you wouldn't need to ban those !! Probably the only
"ban" I would strongly second.
i vote for the first, but do not think we are in strong disagreement
here.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Are you serious about those ? It means a whole different game ! Why ban
Graverob and not Temptation or Mind Rape or Spirit Marionette ? Where do we
stop ? And without Suddens nothing stops the Palla, Week, or even heavy
bloating, the games will either be very fast or never-ending !!!
Totally serious. Vampiric effects whereby NOT ONLY do you lose BUT ALSO
i gain ruin ALL games. Another of my favourites, Axis and Allies
miniatures, has just taken its first step down this slippery slope with
the [spit!] Resourceful Hero.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Protect Thine Own
I'm s strong advocate of errating that one because it's too disruptive. A
ban could be the other solution.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
Baltimore Purge
Spirit Marionette
Here we are...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow stealing
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?).
Yes, you're right. Mind Rape should also be on the list.

The ones that don't fit this are in the Harbingers
Post by Orpheus
strategy, which you obviously dislike (but then so is Feline Saboteur, not
included).
Not so bothered by Feline Saboteur or Dirty little secrets or Raptor. i
think those are valid and explorable strategies. Slaughterhouse is a
crappy card, IMO.
Post by Orpheus
But do you really think these cards are the reasons why players stop playing
? I don't think so. I tend to think more on the lines of "the winning decks
are always the same". Which would make the "dangerous" cards Parity Shift,
Second Trad (and therefore the Princes and Justicards who can play them),
PTO of course, and the superiority of the Inner Circle over any
non-camarilla fatties anywhere.
;-) this is an environment i don't recognise. So why don't people just
blood brothers rush all your prince/justicar decks to death in your
environment? Or intercept them to death with the Ahrimanes, Ravnos or
Tzimisce?
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Whatever. Giving big vamps more options is fine for the ones, the vast
majority, who don't do enough. But do Arika, Alexandra, Stanislava, Enkidu
or even Saulot need more than they can already do ? Will we see more
second-stringers like Menele, Basilia, Masika, or even third-stringers like
(argh it hurts to say it) Augustus, Eze the Loser Prince or troglodytia ?!
Nah, just more Arikas and co...
See, that's just cheeky, but i'll forgive you because you are FRRRENCH,
and CIVILISED. But i'll remind you that Stefan is not a court jester
like you or me but a GREAT player, organiser and Prince, and a
long-time stalwart of the VTES scene. Don't you see that if HE thinks
there is a problem, then there probably is? Don't you think that MAYBE
we owe it to the community to address his issues in a constructive way?
i'm sure you do, and that what you MEANT to say was "interesting idea,
leggy, but maybe restrict the new card to a window from, say, 8-cap to
10-cap".
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<dons ablative skin>
Gonna need it lol.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.
Echo
Orpheus
2006-06-27 12:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards legal.
Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la Duffin
draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i disagree
about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage people from
playing cards, ever].
It might interest some players, but most of my playgroups are found of
constructed. This wouldn't interest me at all, for instance.
Noted, but you still play. Stefan's question is how to save VTES, which
means some combination of attracting back the PO'd old players and
attracting new ones, so what YOU think about it is almost irrelevant.
Well, says you pal. You seem pretty wound up about all this, but it
shouldn't let you ruin your "vue d'ensemble". I might not agree with all
yours propositions, but I'm on your side too, you know ! Should I remind you
that I stepped down from my Prince position 2 years ago ? That I didn't buy
any NoR ? That G4 / G5 is a big, disgusting deal to me ? I'm on the verge on
quitting the buying, and playing might not be far behind. So consider me a
"masterwork in peril" if you wish. ;-)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[2] Wholesale bannings for Constructed.
Meddling of Semsith
I really don't see the necessity. Don't even find the place to include one
in my vote decks anymore.
Can't believe you're serious about this, unless you're not serious
about winning!
Lol. I am, and that's why I'd rather have a 7-cards hand and one more
offensive vote in my library. YMMV but please don't consider others idiots
if they make different choices from yours.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
You keep the ones I like so it could be ok. But that's a big ban list ! And
what about the indies wanting to make the Cammies fall ?! What about the
decks who play just a few weenie hosers ? I think the problem is more in
excessive number of Gehennas than in their individual effects. Maybe find
some side effect from having X Gehenna in play, or a limit by player,
or...something ?! But banning too many cards can't be good, and based on
what ?!
Based on the fact that there are too many bad effects coming from
Gehenna events. i do not WANT to ban cards as a matter of policy, far
from it! i've been a consistent opponent of bannings in the past. But
the situation has changed, and so have my views. What happens to your
views when the situation changes?
As any sensible guy, I adapt myself to the situation. As a matter of facts,
I still don't see the need to ban Gehennas because most decks will never use
a really bothersome number. But Imbued do, and it's them that have nothing
to do with VTES games !!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Direct Intervention
I hate the card. But it needs an... intervention. Like an errata or
something. Not a ban from tournaments (which would mean a ban, period).
No, it needs to be banned. It is a Magic card [nay, hiss, Yu-Gi-Oh!
card], and it has no place in Jyhad.
I do hate it. My hate list comprise, unlike yours, only "shut up" cards :
cards against which you can do nothing if you're not lucky enough to have
the right deck (or not even that). So DI is of course ugly : you plan all
your "killing turn", for instance, and your last "killcard" is Directed,
while nothing else could have stopped you (if you were good enough and lucky
enough). It's : "do not kill, die". Bleah !
PTO is ugly too, "forcing you" to play Cammies (I TOTALLY agree with the
suggestion of putting it back to "independent vampires" instead of
Non-Camarilla, which was one of my suggestions ; still be a bitch but will
never see tournament play again). Kiss of Râ, while less disruptive, is an
incentive to play For or "shut up", as is Rötschrek ("play Psyche or die,
communist scum !"). Oh, and No Secrets From the Magaji is so powerful it
ruins whole strategies all by itself, it's even worse than Trophy: Domain
and doesn't require the awful setup that one does !
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning expansion
I vote for the second option. MoM are useful for lots of interesting ally
decks, that haven't been disruptive, not even with Unmasking. NoR isn't a
Vampire expansion and it could be perfectly justified that it would be
banned from competitive play. And it would be one less incentive to play
mass gehenna, hence you wouldn't need to ban those !! Probably the only
"ban" I would strongly second.
i vote for the first, but do not think we are in strong disagreement
here.
Are we not ? I have played Shambling Hordes decks often enough, and a few
other allies (Rock Cats, I confess), nearly all of them require Memories to
be at least half-effective. Of course War Ghouls could possibly do without,
but then it is they who are possibly "broken", not all the rest of the gang.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Are you serious about those ? It means a whole different game ! Why ban
Graverob and not Temptation or Mind Rape or Spirit Marionette ? Where do we
stop ? And without Suddens nothing stops the Palla, Week, or even heavy
bloating, the games will either be very fast or never-ending !!!
Totally serious. Vampiric effects whereby NOT ONLY do you lose BUT ALSO
i gain ruin ALL games. Another of my favourites, Axis and Allies
miniatures, has just taken its first step down this slippery slope with
the [spit!] Resourceful Hero.
Ok, let's see :

- Pentex is a bitch, sure. But it costs 2 pool ; is Unique ; if really
unbalancing, any of your allies can go try to burn it. A good card
certainly, but not that easy to play. I say let's keep it.

- Sudden is the only safegard against many "too good to be true" Masters.
Once a Week of Nightmares is on the table everybody trembles. I like Suddens
against Minion Tap / Voter Caps combos, which are nigh unstoppable without
them ! Unlike DI, it won't take you too much by surprise : you know in your
Master Phase that you'll have to change your strategy, and won't, for
instance, tap yourself to death in hope to gain 6 pool just to see your last
"vital" killing card vanish up in smoke.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Are Una decks really winning anything in another part of the world ? Because
I've never seen one which did. And the NRA goes a long way to prevent untap
abuse. Except equipping with different things, the most dangerous most Freak
Drivers can do is a bleed + a vote (quite enough if we're talking Inner
Circle), and 1 FR is enough for that. Not to mention that the most dangerous
vamps often also have access to Forced March !! I'd rather see another
option for untapping those without For (a Cel / Obf card for instance) than
restrict FD.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
(did a little editing for clarity purposes here)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The ones that don't fit this are in the Harbingers
Post by Orpheus
strategy, which you obviously dislike (but then so is Feline Saboteur, not
included).
Not so bothered by Feline Saboteur or Dirty little secrets or Raptor. i
think those are valid and explorable strategies. Slaughterhouse is a
crappy card, IMO.
Well, "this is good, this is bad". Great arguments mate. Why would
Slaughterhouse (burn 2 cards for each SH you tap) be bad and FS (burn 1 from
hand and 4 from library), Dirty Little Secrets (burn 1 card for each pool
lost) or Raptor (discard 1 for each Raptor and do not replace until end of
combat) be good ??? All 4 can be abused the same way (not to mention be
combined, especially the last 3) !! I'm aware that Border Skirmish hurts all
methuselahs, although it seldom sees play. I'm also aware that milling most
of the time has 1 big effect : you grand'prey wins !! Ok. That's why there
is a Vote that makes it a winning strategy. You'll acquire Table Hate (TM)
pretty fast anyway, and that's not good (although you can survive it, as
Imbued can). But if you think the whole Milling thing is bad, I really don't
see why you include some cards and exclude others. Just on the basis that
some are actions and others are Masters ???
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Baltimore Purge
Table Hate (TM) guaranteed, very hard to play effectively. But disruptive if
used badly, and hard to use well, sure.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Spirit Marionette
Here we are...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
There are many Nasty Combos (TM) in that game. You know the worst ?
Revelations / bleed for 6 in stealth... Been there for a long time too.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow stealing
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?).
Yes, you're right. Mind Rape should also be on the list.
Hum, I see. And what about Temptations ? Corruption / Free States Rant ?

It looks to me like you're disliking so many aspects of this game that I
wonder if it's really the game you like anymore. Me, I would be rather glad
that different strategies exist, and that stealing vamps (permanently or
temporarily), as bothersome as it can be, offers alternatives from bleeding,
voting or rushing. I fail to see how it's worse to be Mind Raped than
Banished (ok, PTO is broken), torporized / burned, or simply reduced to 0
pool with votes and / or bleed. Ok, in the last case you still have your
vamps when you die, great !!

Not to mention that all the tools available to counter stealth bleed / vote
are also available against Spirit Marionette, Mind Rape etc (intercept, and
I'm not talking DI because it's brokenness doesn't make other cards
non-broken).

If you dislike that much vampire-stealing and that it's starting to become a
problem / trend in your playgroup, play Diamond Thunderbolt ! You will
surprise everyone, and can even start playing Sonja Blue... ;-)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
But do you really think these cards are the reasons why players stop playing
? I don't think so. I tend to think more on the lines of "the winning decks
are always the same". Which would make the "dangerous" cards Parity Shift,
Second Trad (and therefore the Princes and Justicards who can play them),
PTO of course, and the superiority of the Inner Circle over any
non-camarilla fatties anywhere.
;-) this is an environment i don't recognise.
So I guess this is a joke.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
So why don't people just
blood brothers rush all your prince/justicar decks to death in your
environment? Or intercept them to death with the Ahrimanes, Ravnos or
Tzimisce?
THEY DO !! lol. As they could rush/block Matthias or the Baltimore Purgers
!!!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Whatever. Giving big vamps more options is fine for the ones, the vast
majority, who don't do enough. But do Arika, Alexandra, Stanislava, Enkidu
or even Saulot need more than they can already do ? Will we see more
second-stringers like Menele, Basilia, Masika, or even third-stringers like
(argh it hurts to say it) Augustus, Eze the Loser Prince or troglodytia ?!
Nah, just more Arikas and co...
See, that's just cheeky, but i'll forgive you because you are FRRRENCH,
Am I ? So much italian necroblood in my veins...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
and CIVILISED.
LOL. You definitely never met me ! ;-)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
But i'll remind you that Stefan is not a court jester
like you or me
Are we ? You and I both know how to play this game, even if we're not in the
same court as Stefan.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
but a GREAT player, organiser and Prince, and a
Should I remind you, without any vanity, that I started the organised game
from scratch in my city, now a bastion of the game in France ? Just to say
that I think I have a right to speak about the organised game too (as a
matter of facts anyone with a brain has that right, but as you seem to put a
hierarchy in validity of expression...).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
long-time stalwart of the VTES scene. Don't you see that if HE thinks
there is a problem, then there probably is?
I'm very surprised. I thought I had made myself clear, maybe you didn't read
my whole post ? Or my answer to Stefan ? I do think there is a problem, see
? I just don't like your "solutions", is all. And here I thought we were
discussing in a constructive, "civilised" manner. I expected as much from an
englishman who often visits France ;-) but I really think you're a little
nervous on the subject. Just catch a deep breath and see who's with you on
that subject, ok ? And even if I wasn't, it doesn't make me your enemy, nor
an idiot, nor a buffoon nont entitled to an opinion. If we're clear on that
the discussion can continue. Are we ?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Don't you think that MAYBE
we owe it to the community to address his issues in a constructive way?
i'm sure you do,
Then why ask ?

and that what you MEANT to say was "interesting idea,
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
leggy, but maybe restrict the new card to a window from, say, 8-cap to
10-cap".
As a matter of facts, yes : I was addressing your proposal, which I didn't
like a bit, but if you had said "I think that some big vampires deserve a
little extra something to make them playable, let's make proposals", I would
have agreed of course !! Let's see some Don Cruez on the tables !!! I made a
few propositions (never know which one's the right english word, proposal or
proposition ?) over the years, I can make them again in an appropriate
thread if you want to start one. But there are in this game a few very good,
too good vampires, and new alternatives for the not-so-good would have to be
carefully thought-out if we don't want to give even more advantages to the
others !

Possible restrictions (for 9-11 caps) :

- non-Camarilla vampires (let's face it, Cammies are still the best)
- vampires without Fortitude
- vampires without a bleed modifier (or only +1 bleed for an 11-Cap, say)
- vampires without a title (or a bleed modifier ?)
- vampires without a special text

Any or all of these would allow for good, new cards which would help the
most unplayed vampires (usually 9-caps rather than 10s...).

That constructive enough for ya buddy ?

--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-27 21:57:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards
legal.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la Duffin
draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i disagree
about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage people from
playing cards, ever].
It might interest some players, but most of my playgroups are found of
constructed. This wouldn't interest me at all, for instance.
Noted, but you still play. Stefan's question is how to save VTES, which
means some combination of attracting back the PO'd old players and
attracting new ones, so what YOU think about it is almost irrelevant.
Well, says you pal. You seem pretty wound up about all this, but it
shouldn't let you ruin your "vue d'ensemble". I might not agree with all
yours propositions, but I'm on your side too, you know ! Should I remind you
that I stepped down from my Prince position 2 years ago ? That I didn't buy
any NoR ? That G4 / G5 is a big, disgusting deal to me ? I'm on the verge on
quitting the buying, and playing might not be far behind. So consider me a
"masterwork in peril" if you wish. ;-)
i didn't know, or had forgotten, all that. So thanks for the
clarification!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[2] Wholesale bannings for Constructed.
Meddling of Semsith
I really don't see the necessity. Don't even find the place to include
one
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
in my vote decks anymore.
Can't believe you're serious about this, unless you're not serious
about winning!
Lol. I am, and that's why I'd rather have a 7-cards hand and one more
offensive vote in my library. YMMV but please don't consider others idiots
if they make different choices from yours.
Alright.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
You keep the ones I like so it could be ok. But that's a big ban list !
And
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
what about the indies wanting to make the Cammies fall ?! What about the
decks who play just a few weenie hosers ? I think the problem is more in
excessive number of Gehennas than in their individual effects. Maybe
find
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
some side effect from having X Gehenna in play, or a limit by player,
or...something ?! But banning too many cards can't be good, and based on
what ?!
Based on the fact that there are too many bad effects coming from
Gehenna events. i do not WANT to ban cards as a matter of policy, far
from it! i've been a consistent opponent of bannings in the past. But
the situation has changed, and so have my views. What happens to your
views when the situation changes?
As any sensible guy, I adapt myself to the situation. As a matter of facts,
I still don't see the need to ban Gehennas because most decks will never use
a really bothersome number. But Imbued do, and it's them that have nothing
to do with VTES games !!
Multi-Gehenna events decks based around Afifa and allies were VERY bad
even before the Imbued.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Direct Intervention
I hate the card. But it needs an... intervention. Like an errata or
something. Not a ban from tournaments (which would mean a ban, period).
No, it needs to be banned. It is a Magic card [nay, hiss, Yu-Gi-Oh!
card], and it has no place in Jyhad.
cards against which you can do nothing if you're not lucky enough to have
the right deck (or not even that). So DI is of course ugly : you plan all
your "killing turn", for instance, and your last "killcard" is Directed,
while nothing else could have stopped you (if you were good enough and lucky
enough). It's : "do not kill, die". Bleah !
PTO is ugly too, "forcing you" to play Cammies (I TOTALLY agree with the
suggestion of putting it back to "independent vampires" instead of
Non-Camarilla, which was one of my suggestions ; still be a bitch but will
never see tournament play again). Kiss of Râ, while less disruptive, is an
incentive to play For or "shut up", as is Rötschrek ("play Psyche or die,
communist scum !"). Oh, and No Secrets From the Magaji is so powerful it
ruins whole strategies all by itself, it's even worse than Trophy: Domain
and doesn't require the awful setup that one does !
But you see, i think my list also only includes shut up cards. So let
us agree that we both hate shut up cars and now work on defining what
cards really are, and are not, shut up cards.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning
expansion
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
I vote for the second option. MoM are useful for lots of interesting
ally
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
decks, that haven't been disruptive, not even with Unmasking. NoR isn't
a
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Vampire expansion and it could be perfectly justified that it would be
banned from competitive play. And it would be one less incentive to play
mass gehenna, hence you wouldn't need to ban those !! Probably the only
"ban" I would strongly second.
i vote for the first, but do not think we are in strong disagreement
here.
Are we not ? I have played Shambling Hordes decks often enough, and a few
other allies (Rock Cats, I confess), nearly all of them require Memories to
be at least half-effective. Of course War Ghouls could possibly do without,
but then it is they who are possibly "broken", not all the rest of the gang.
i've never found the need to play Memories in an Allies deck, but i
think it is too clumsy a card for boosting allies.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Are you serious about those ? It means a whole different game ! Why ban
Graverob and not Temptation or Mind Rape or Spirit Marionette ? Where do
we
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
stop ? And without Suddens nothing stops the Palla, Week, or even heavy
bloating, the games will either be very fast or never-ending !!!
Totally serious. Vampiric effects whereby NOT ONLY do you lose BUT ALSO
i gain ruin ALL games. Another of my favourites, Axis and Allies
miniatures, has just taken its first step down this slippery slope with
the [spit!] Resourceful Hero.
- Pentex is a bitch, sure. But it costs 2 pool ; is Unique ; if really
unbalancing, any of your allies can go try to burn it. A good card
certainly, but not that easy to play. I say let's keep it.
It's a shut up card. Let's ban it.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
- Sudden is the only safegard against many "too good to be true" Masters.
Once a Week of Nightmares is on the table everybody trembles. I like Suddens
against Minion Tap / Voter Caps combos, which are nigh unstoppable without
them ! Unlike DI, it won't take you too much by surprise : you know in your
Master Phase that you'll have to change your strategy, and won't, for
instance, tap yourself to death in hope to gain 6 pool just to see your last
"vital" killing card vanish up in smoke.
Sudden's main, and worst effect, is exactly the one you mention,
militating against all big vampire decks.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Are Una decks really winning anything in another part of the world ? Because
I've never seen one which did. And the NRA goes a long way to prevent untap
abuse. Except equipping with different things, the most dangerous most Freak
Drivers can do is a bleed + a vote (quite enough if we're talking Inner
Circle), and 1 FR is enough for that. Not to mention that the most dangerous
vamps often also have access to Forced March !! I'd rather see another
option for untapping those without For (a Cel / Obf card for instance) than
restrict FD.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
(did a little editing for clarity purposes here)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The ones that don't fit this are in the Harbingers
Post by Orpheus
strategy, which you obviously dislike (but then so is Feline Saboteur,
not
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
included).
Not so bothered by Feline Saboteur or Dirty little secrets or Raptor. i
think those are valid and explorable strategies. Slaughterhouse is a
crappy card, IMO.
Well, "this is good, this is bad". Great arguments mate. Why would
Slaughterhouse (burn 2 cards for each SH you tap) be bad and FS (burn 1 from
hand and 4 from library), Dirty Little Secrets (burn 1 card for each pool
lost) or Raptor (discard 1 for each Raptor and do not replace until end of
combat) be good ??? All 4 can be abused the same way (not to mention be
combined, especially the last 3) !!
Because you can use your slaughterhouses every turn. Because they are
permanents.

I'm aware that Border Skirmish hurts all
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
methuselahs, although it seldom sees play. I'm also aware that milling most
of the time has 1 big effect : you grand'prey wins !! Ok. That's why there
is a Vote that makes it a winning strategy. You'll acquire Table Hate (TM)
pretty fast anyway, and that's not good (although you can survive it, as
Imbued can). But if you think the whole Milling thing is bad, I really don't
see why you include some cards and exclude others. Just on the basis that
some are actions and others are Masters ???
Slaughterhouses are permanents, the others are not.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Baltimore Purge
Table Hate (TM) guaranteed, very hard to play effectively. But disruptive if
used badly, and hard to use well, sure.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Spirit Marionette
Here we are...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
There are many Nasty Combos (TM) in that game. You know the worst ?
Revelations / bleed for 6 in stealth... Been there for a long time too.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow
stealing
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?).
Yes, you're right. Mind Rape should also be on the list.
Hum, I see. And what about Temptations ? Corruption / Free States Rant ?
Nothing like as bad.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It looks to me like you're disliking so many aspects of this game that I
wonder if it's really the game you like anymore.
Well Dah! That's why we're having this discussion, isn't it?

Me, I would be rather glad
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
that different strategies exist, and that stealing vamps (permanently or
temporarily), as bothersome as it can be, offers alternatives from bleeding,
voting or rushing. I fail to see how it's worse to be Mind Raped than
Banished (ok, PTO is broken), torporized / burned, or simply reduced to 0
pool with votes and / or bleed. Ok, in the last case you still have your
vamps when you die, great !!
It IS worse if your vampire [a] gets killed and then [b] turns up on
the other guy's side than if it only [a] gets killed.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Not to mention that all the tools available to counter stealth bleed / vote
are also available against Spirit Marionette, Mind Rape etc (intercept, and
I'm not talking DI because it's brokenness doesn't make other cards
non-broken).
If you dislike that much vampire-stealing and that it's starting to become a
problem / trend in your playgroup, play Diamond Thunderbolt !
Magic bullet

You will
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
surprise everyone, and can even start playing Sonja Blue... ;-)
Only possible excuse for playing Diamond thunderbolt
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
But do you really think these cards are the reasons why players stop
playing
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
? I don't think so. I tend to think more on the lines of "the winning
decks
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
are always the same". Which would make the "dangerous" cards Parity
Shift,
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Second Trad (and therefore the Princes and Justicards who can play
them),
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
PTO of course, and the superiority of the Inner Circle over any
non-camarilla fatties anywhere.
;-) this is an environment i don't recognise.
So I guess this is a joke.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
So why don't people just
blood brothers rush all your prince/justicar decks to death in your
environment? Or intercept them to death with the Ahrimanes, Ravnos or
Tzimisce?
THEY DO !! lol. As they could rush/block Matthias or the Baltimore Purgers
!!!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
[3] New burnable-by-action master card[s] allowing big vampires to do
extra funky stuff, eg untap by paying a blood, pay blood for extra
bleed, or take an unblockable-by-vampires action and go to torpor
afterwards. Special rule for constructed: Banned cards on list above
may legally be played as proxies for new funky big-vampire-encouraging
master card.
Whatever. Giving big vamps more options is fine for the ones, the vast
majority, who don't do enough. But do Arika, Alexandra, Stanislava,
Enkidu
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
or even Saulot need more than they can already do ? Will we see more
second-stringers like Menele, Basilia, Masika, or even third-stringers
like
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
(argh it hurts to say it) Augustus, Eze the Loser Prince or troglodytia
?!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Nah, just more Arikas and co...
See, that's just cheeky, but i'll forgive you because you are FRRRENCH,
Am I ? So much italian necroblood in my veins...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
and CIVILISED.
LOL. You definitely never met me ! ;-)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
But i'll remind you that Stefan is not a court jester
like you or me
Are we ? You and I both know how to play this game, even if we're not in the
same court as Stefan.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
but a GREAT player, organiser and Prince, and a
Should I remind you, without any vanity, that I started the organised game
from scratch in my city, now a bastion of the game in France ? Just to say
that I think I have a right to speak about the organised game too (as a
matter of facts anyone with a brain has that right, but as you seem to put a
hierarchy in validity of expression...).
No, that was a misunderstanding about your current relation to the
game. i thought you were being complacent and not seeing a problem. Now
i understand that this is not the case.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
long-time stalwart of the VTES scene. Don't you see that if HE thinks
there is a problem, then there probably is?
I'm very surprised. I thought I had made myself clear, maybe you didn't read
my whole post ? Or my answer to Stefan ? I do think there is a problem, see
? I just don't like your "solutions", is all. And here I thought we were
discussing in a constructive, "civilised" manner. I expected as much from an
englishman
Scotsman

who often visits France ;-) but I really think you're a little
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
nervous on the subject. Just catch a deep breath and see who's with you on
that subject, ok ? And even if I wasn't, it doesn't make me your enemy, nor
an idiot, nor a buffoon nont entitled to an opinion. If we're clear on that
the discussion can continue. Are we ?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Don't you think that MAYBE
we owe it to the community to address his issues in a constructive way?
i'm sure you do,
Then why ask ?
Because, sorry, but i did not see what in your original posts could be
construed as constructive. This reply is a different matter, however.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
and that what you MEANT to say was "interesting idea,
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
leggy, but maybe restrict the new card to a window from, say, 8-cap to
10-cap".
As a matter of facts, yes : I was addressing your proposal, which I didn't
like a bit, but if you had said "I think that some big vampires deserve a
little extra something to make them playable, let's make proposals", I would
have agreed of course !! Let's see some Don Cruez on the tables !!! I made a
few propositions (never know which one's the right english word, proposal or
proposition ?) over the years, I can make them again in an appropriate
thread if you want to start one. But there are in this game a few very good,
too good vampires, and new alternatives for the not-so-good would have to be
carefully thought-out if we don't want to give even more advantages to the
others !
Alright, so you agree with the principle but not the substance. Do you
think it is a good idea to make banned cars legal proxies for new
game-fixing cards? i ask because that was the essence of my proposal,
or possibly proposition.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
- non-Camarilla vampires (let's face it, Cammies are still the best)
- vampires without Fortitude
- vampires without a bleed modifier (or only +1 bleed for an 11-Cap, say)
- vampires without a title (or a bleed modifier ?)
- vampires without a special text
Any or all of these would allow for good, new cards which would help the
most unplayed vampires (usually 9-caps rather than 10s...).
That constructive enough for ya buddy ?
--
Orpheus
Well now, i did not mean to upset you though it's obvious that i have.
i now understand from your post that you

[a] agree that there's a problem, and

[b] don't like my suggested solutions to the problem. In particular [i]
you don't agree that a new draft format has any possible merit at all,
[ii] you agree that we need to ban some cards but not all the ones on
my list, and maybe some that are not on my list, [iii] you agree that
unpopular big vampires need help.

Please correct me if i still misunderstand you.

i did not understand all that from your first posts, so now we have
made progress.
Orpheus
2006-06-27 22:57:17 UTC
Permalink
(snip stuff where we understand each other) ;-)
Post by Orpheus
I still don't see the need to ban Gehennas because most decks will never use
a really bothersome number. But Imbued do, and it's them that have nothing
to do with VTES games !!
Multi-Gehenna events decks based around Afifa and allies were VERY bad
even before the Imbued.

I must confess I never saw any of those. I did see some setite weenie /
events. But anyway, I think most players agree that mass Gehenna can be
disruptive, certainly more than was intended, I think some sort of solution
has to be studied. Ban or "last one in effect" do not seem satisfying to me
though.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Direct Intervention
I hate the card. But it needs an... intervention. Like an errata or
something. Not a ban from tournaments (which would mean a ban, period).
No, it needs to be banned. It is a Magic card [nay, hiss, Yu-Gi-Oh!
card], and it has no place in Jyhad.
(...)
Post by Orpheus
But you see, i think my list also only includes shut up cards. So let
us agree that we both hate shut up cars and now work on defining what
cards really are, and are not, shut up cards.

lol. Ok !
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning
expansion
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
I vote for the second option. MoM are useful for lots of interesting
ally
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
decks, that haven't been disruptive, not even with Unmasking. NoR isn't
a
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Vampire expansion and it could be perfectly justified that it would be
banned from competitive play. And it would be one less incentive to play
mass gehenna, hence you wouldn't need to ban those !! Probably the only
"ban" I would strongly second.
i vote for the first, but do not think we are in strong disagreement
here.
Are we not ? I have played Shambling Hordes decks often enough, and a few
other allies (Rock Cats, I confess), nearly all of them require Memories to
be at least half-effective. Of course War Ghouls could possibly do without,
but then it is they who are possibly "broken", not all the rest of the gang.
i've never found the need to play Memories in an Allies deck, but i
think it is too clumsy a card for boosting allies.

I don't understand what you mean. I don't know who's clumsy, the rushing
ally, or the Brujah with Memories of Mortality who suddenly cannot hurt your
little nice zombie... :D
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Are you serious about those ? It means a whole different game ! Why ban
Graverob and not Temptation or Mind Rape or Spirit Marionette ? Where do
we
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
stop ? And without Suddens nothing stops the Palla, Week, or even heavy
bloating, the games will either be very fast or never-ending !!!
Totally serious. Vampiric effects whereby NOT ONLY do you lose BUT ALSO
i gain ruin ALL games. Another of my favourites, Axis and Allies
miniatures, has just taken its first step down this slippery slope with
the [spit!] Resourceful Hero.
- Pentex is a bitch, sure. But it costs 2 pool ; is Unique ; if really
unbalancing, any of your allies can go try to burn it. A good card
certainly, but not that easy to play. I say let's keep it.
It's a shut up card. Let's ban it.
lol. I wouldn't care, really, I don't even like the card. But the "shut up"
is quite reversable (not like "go to torpor if you block me / get blocked"
or "burn dirty non-camarilla vampire !"), and it does cost 2 meager pools !
Post by Orpheus
- Sudden is the only safegard against many "too good to be true" Masters.
Once a Week of Nightmares is on the table everybody trembles. I like Suddens
against Minion Tap / Voter Caps combos, which are nigh unstoppable without
them ! Unlike DI, it won't take you too much by surprise : you know in your
Master Phase that you'll have to change your strategy, and won't, for
instance, tap yourself to death in hope to gain 6 pool just to see your last
"vital" killing card vanish up in smoke.
Sudden's main, and worst effect, is exactly the one you mention,
militating against all big vampire decks.

Some big vamp decks certainly have trouble surviving. It is not, though, the
case of big vamps who can Voter Cap and / or deflect !! I guess I don't have
to remind you that AAA TGB and Arika and Friends are still 2 of the
decktypes dominating (lol) the tournament scene !! The trouble lies more
with the "other" big vamps. I'd like to be able to play Lasombra votes
without Pre and have a reasonnable chance of winning...
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Are Una decks really winning anything in another part of the world ? Because
I've never seen one which did. And the NRA goes a long way to prevent untap
abuse. Except equipping with different things, the most dangerous most Freak
Drivers can do is a bleed + a vote (quite enough if we're talking Inner
Circle), and 1 FR is enough for that. Not to mention that the most dangerous
vamps often also have access to Forced March !! I'd rather see another
option for untapping those without For (a Cel / Obf card for instance) than
restrict FD.
So, what about Una ?
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
(did a little editing for clarity purposes here)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The ones that don't fit this are in the Harbingers
Post by Orpheus
strategy, which you obviously dislike (but then so is Feline Saboteur,
not
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
included).
Not so bothered by Feline Saboteur or Dirty little secrets or Raptor. i
think those are valid and explorable strategies. Slaughterhouse is a
crappy card, IMO.
Well, "this is good, this is bad". Great arguments mate. Why would
Slaughterhouse (burn 2 cards for each SH you tap) be bad and FS (burn 1 from
hand and 4 from library), Dirty Little Secrets (burn 1 card for each pool
lost) or Raptor (discard 1 for each Raptor and do not replace until end of
combat) be good ??? All 4 can be abused the same way (not to mention be
combined, especially the last 3) !!
Because you can use your slaughterhouses every turn. Because they are
permanents.

So ? Raptors are permanents (sure, burn them...). And a well-tuned deck will
be able to use hte cards it needs every turn. Which is most used in weenie /
bleed decks : Laptop Computer or Computer Hacking ? Both are good, one is
transient...
Post by Orpheus
I'm aware that Border Skirmish hurts all
methuselahs, although it seldom sees play. I'm also aware that milling most
of the time has 1 big effect : you grand'prey wins !! Ok. That's why there
is a Vote that makes it a winning strategy. You'll acquire Table Hate (TM)
pretty fast anyway, and that's not good (although you can survive it, as
Imbued can). But if you think the whole Milling thing is bad, I really don't
see why you include some cards and exclude others. Just on the basis that
some are actions and others are Masters ???
Slaughterhouses are permanents, the others are not.
See above. You also mentionned that Ben reached a strong effect with Border
Skirmish, which is transient.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Baltimore Purge
Table Hate (TM) guaranteed, very hard to play effectively. But disruptive if
used badly, and hard to use well, sure.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Spirit Marionette
Here we are...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
There are many Nasty Combos (TM) in that game. You know the worst ?
Revelations / bleed for 6 in stealth... Been there for a long time too.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow
stealing
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?).
Yes, you're right. Mind Rape should also be on the list.
Hum, I see. And what about Temptations ? Corruption / Free States Rant ?
Nothing like as bad.
Let me disagree. I've had many games ruined lately by these types of decks,
and they didn't always win but certainly made me (when I was predator or
prey) lose, meaning their grand-prey or grand-pred usually sweeps ; and when
such a deck wins it's ugly anyway because you lose all your ressources, not
very fun. But part of the game. Not funnier than Spirit Marionette, lemme
tell you ! And more stealth available...
Post by Orpheus
It looks to me like you're disliking so many aspects of this game that I
wonder if it's really the game you like anymore.
Well Dah! That's why we're having this discussion, isn't it?
There is a difference for me between being demotivated while liking most of
the aspects of the game (although maybe not some commercial choices, or
recent novelties, for example), and disliking a whole lot of core game
mechanisms. I wasn't interested in NoR, I've a few cards I would ban. But
some of the cards you're talking about exist since Jyhad (Sudden Reversal),
some mechanisms like vampire stealing have been a part of the game for a
long time. I can understand standing against milling (relatively new) and
mass gehenna (recent and judged by most as disruptive), but you're asking
for a lot of changes, some of which many players (and game designers) would
disagree with. It looks to me like you might be farther away from the game
than many of us already. :-(
Post by Orpheus
Me, I would be rather glad
that different strategies exist, and that stealing vamps (permanently or
temporarily), as bothersome as it can be, offers alternatives from bleeding,
voting or rushing. I fail to see how it's worse to be Mind Raped than
Banished (ok, PTO is broken), torporized / burned, or simply reduced to 0
pool with votes and / or bleed. Ok, in the last case you still have your
vamps when you die, great !!
It IS worse if your vampire [a] gets killed and then [b] turns up on
the other guy's side than if it only [a] gets killed.

So you're also against Daemonic Possession ?
Post by Orpheus
Not to mention that all the tools available to counter stealth bleed / vote
are also available against Spirit Marionette, Mind Rape etc (intercept, and
I'm not talking DI because it's brokenness doesn't make other cards
non-broken).
If you dislike that much vampire-stealing and that it's starting to become a
problem / trend in your playgroup, play Diamond Thunderbolt !
Magic bullet
Sure. But it works against something you dislike much, so why not ?
Post by Orpheus
You will
surprise everyone, and can even start playing Sonja Blue... ;-)
Only possible excuse for playing Diamond thunderbolt
lol. Not even that in my book... Wish I could make a playable deck with her,
loved the books so much !!

(snip some more "better understanding" stuff)
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
long-time stalwart of the VTES scene. Don't you see that if HE thinks
there is a problem, then there probably is?
I'm very surprised. I thought I had made myself clear, maybe you didn't read
my whole post ? Or my answer to Stefan ? I do think there is a problem, see
? I just don't like your "solutions", is all. And here I thought we were
discussing in a constructive, "civilised" manner. I expected as much from an
englishman
Scotsman
Thought so but doesn't your Who's Who say you reside in England ?
Post by Orpheus
Alright, so you agree with the principle but not the substance. Do you
think it is a good idea to make banned cars legal proxies for new
game-fixing cards? i ask because that was the essence of my proposal,
or possibly proposition.

Didn't see that, guess I skipped the lines. No, I think it's a bad idea
because there are already too many problems for new and not-so-new players
remembering the cards and knowing which ones are errated and how ! For a
newbie the changes in layout are a nightmare ("see, that icon means pool
cost and that one blood cost ; except that before it was one icon but up or
down, and...). There are too many complications, even an errata is not
something to take slightly (and we know for sure LSJ doesn't lol) so a card
being a proxy for another in serious games should never be condoned IMO.
Post by Orpheus
- non-Camarilla vampires (let's face it, Cammies are still the best)
- vampires without Fortitude
- vampires without a bleed modifier (or only +1 bleed for an 11-Cap, say)
- vampires without a title (or a bleed modifier ?)
- vampires without a special text
Any or all of these would allow for good, new cards which would help the
most unplayed vampires (usually 9-caps rather than 10s...).
That constructive enough for ya buddy ?
--
Orpheus
Well now, i did not mean to upset you though it's obvious that i have.
A little. But don't worry, I know you're a nice guy. Now I also know you
shouldn't upset a scotsman.;-) And you know southern guys are touchy. B)
Post by Orpheus
i now understand from your post that you
[a] agree that there's a problem, and
[b] don't like my suggested solutions to the problem. In particular
[i] you don't agree that a new draft format has any possible merit at all,
[ii] you agree that we need to ban some cards but not all the ones on
my list, and maybe some that are not on my list,
Post by Orpheus
[iii] you agree that unpopular big vampires need help.
Please correct me if i still misunderstand you.
lol, that's a good sum-up. To develop slightly :

[i] Not that I don't think some players would appreciate a new draft format,
but I do think at least in the playgroups I know it wouldn't change a thing.
[ii] yes, and I don't think the cards are the only issue here (as stated by
different people in this thread) and therefore that a ban list, as big and
extensive as it could be, would suffice to "save the game".
[iii] Absolutely ! Menele for President !!
Post by Orpheus
i did not understand all that from your first posts, so now we have
made progress.

:-) Well, sorry if my initial post wasn't clear enough, I thought it was (or
maybe you needed to know who was behind it). I sort of played the devil's
advocate, not meaning I didn't agree there was a problem, just not being
convinced by some of the proposed solutions.

But I'm glad to see that, as Stefan said, we can all discuss this as adults.
And yes, I do think there has been some progress over this thread, I just
sincerely hope LSJ or someone reads all this and notes the interesting
things.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-28 10:51:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
(snip stuff where we understand each other) ;-)
Post by Orpheus
I still don't see the need to ban Gehennas because most decks will never
use
Post by Orpheus
a really bothersome number. But Imbued do, and it's them that have nothing
to do with VTES games !!
Multi-Gehenna events decks based around Afifa and allies were VERY bad
even before the Imbued.
I must confess I never saw any of those. I did see some setite weenie /
events. But anyway, I think most players agree that mass Gehenna can be
disruptive, certainly more than was intended, I think some sort of solution
has to be studied. Ban or "last one in effect" do not seem satisfying to me
though.
Righto, so we agree about the problem but not, yet, about what to do to
solve it.
<snip happy care-bear style agreement>
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning
expansion
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
I vote for the second option. MoM are useful for lots of interesting
ally
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
decks, that haven't been disruptive, not even with Unmasking. NoR
isn't
Post by Orpheus
a
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Vampire expansion and it could be perfectly justified that it would be
banned from competitive play. And it would be one less incentive to
play
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
mass gehenna, hence you wouldn't need to ban those !! Probably the
only
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
"ban" I would strongly second.
i vote for the first, but do not think we are in strong disagreement
here.
Are we not ? I have played Shambling Hordes decks often enough, and a few
other allies (Rock Cats, I confess), nearly all of them require Memories
to
Post by Orpheus
be at least half-effective. Of course War Ghouls could possibly do
without,
Post by Orpheus
but then it is they who are possibly "broken", not all the rest of the
gang.
Post by Orpheus
i've never found the need to play Memories in an Allies deck, but i
think it is too clumsy a card for boosting allies.
I don't understand what you mean. I don't know who's clumsy, the rushing
ally, or the Brujah with Memories of Mortality who suddenly cannot hurt your
little nice zombie... :D
i'd be happy with Memories if it made vampires pay a higher cost to do
stuff against allies. As it stands i think its effect is too much.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Sudden Reversal
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
Are you serious about those ? It means a whole different game ! Why
ban
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Graverob and not Temptation or Mind Rape or Spirit Marionette ? Where
do
Post by Orpheus
we
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
stop ? And without Suddens nothing stops the Palla, Week, or even
heavy
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
bloating, the games will either be very fast or never-ending !!!
Totally serious. Vampiric effects whereby NOT ONLY do you lose BUT ALSO
i gain ruin ALL games. Another of my favourites, Axis and Allies
miniatures, has just taken its first step down this slippery slope with
the [spit!] Resourceful Hero.
- Pentex is a bitch, sure. But it costs 2 pool ; is Unique ; if really
unbalancing, any of your allies can go try to burn it. A good card
certainly, but not that easy to play. I say let's keep it.
It's a shut up card. Let's ban it.
lol. I wouldn't care, really, I don't even like the card. But the "shut up"
is quite reversable (not like "go to torpor if you block me / get blocked"
or "burn dirty non-camarilla vampire !"), and it does cost 2 meager pools !
Post by Orpheus
- Sudden is the only safegard against many "too good to be true" Masters.
Once a Week of Nightmares is on the table everybody trembles. I like
Suddens
Post by Orpheus
against Minion Tap / Voter Caps combos, which are nigh unstoppable without
them ! Unlike DI, it won't take you too much by surprise : you know in
your
Post by Orpheus
Master Phase that you'll have to change your strategy, and won't, for
instance, tap yourself to death in hope to gain 6 pool just to see your
last
Post by Orpheus
"vital" killing card vanish up in smoke.
Sudden's main, and worst effect, is exactly the one you mention,
militating against all big vampire decks.
Some big vamp decks certainly have trouble surviving. It is not, though, the
case of big vamps who can Voter Cap and / or deflect !! I guess I don't have
to remind you that AAA TGB and Arika and Friends are still 2 of the
decktypes dominating (lol) the tournament scene !! The trouble lies more
with the "other" big vamps. I'd like to be able to play Lasombra votes
without Pre and have a reasonnable chance of winning...
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
Are Una decks really winning anything in another part of the world ?
Because
Post by Orpheus
I've never seen one which did. And the NRA goes a long way to prevent
untap
Post by Orpheus
abuse. Except equipping with different things, the most dangerous most
Freak
Post by Orpheus
Drivers can do is a bleed + a vote (quite enough if we're talking Inner
Circle), and 1 FR is enough for that. Not to mention that the most
dangerous
Post by Orpheus
vamps often also have access to Forced March !! I'd rather see another
option for untapping those without For (a Cel / Obf card for instance)
than
Post by Orpheus
restrict FD.
So, what about Una ?
i didn't answer the question because i do not know the answer. For why
i put Freak Drive on the list, see below.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Slaughterhouse
Border Skirmish
(did a little editing for clarity purposes here)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The ones that don't fit this are in the Harbingers
Post by Orpheus
strategy, which you obviously dislike (but then so is Feline Saboteur,
not
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
included).
Not so bothered by Feline Saboteur or Dirty little secrets or Raptor. i
think those are valid and explorable strategies. Slaughterhouse is a
crappy card, IMO.
Well, "this is good, this is bad". Great arguments mate. Why would
Slaughterhouse (burn 2 cards for each SH you tap) be bad and FS (burn 1
from
Post by Orpheus
hand and 4 from library), Dirty Little Secrets (burn 1 card for each pool
lost) or Raptor (discard 1 for each Raptor and do not replace until end of
combat) be good ??? All 4 can be abused the same way (not to mention be
combined, especially the last 3) !!
Because you can use your slaughterhouses every turn. Because they are
permanents.
So ? Raptors are permanents (sure, burn them...).
But you need to get into combat to use your raptors. So the set up is
much more difficult. Also, as you say, you can burn raptors.

And a well-tuned deck will
Post by Orpheus
be able to use hte cards it needs every turn. Which is most used in weenie /
bleed decks : Laptop Computer or Computer Hacking ? Both are good, one is
transient...
Post by Orpheus
I'm aware that Border Skirmish hurts all
methuselahs, although it seldom sees play. I'm also aware that milling
most
Post by Orpheus
of the time has 1 big effect : you grand'prey wins !! Ok. That's why there
is a Vote that makes it a winning strategy. You'll acquire Table Hate (TM)
pretty fast anyway, and that's not good (although you can survive it, as
Imbued can). But if you think the whole Milling thing is bad, I really
don't
Post by Orpheus
see why you include some cards and exclude others. Just on the basis that
some are actions and others are Masters ???
Slaughterhouses are permanents, the others are not.
See above. You also mentionned that Ben reached a strong effect with Border
Skirmish, which is transient.
Yes, but that's a different argument. Slaughterhouse is bad because it
is a permanent works-every-turn drain on your prey's library. It's
neither unique nor burnable. Border Skirmish is bad because it degrades
the playing environment for all players except its perpetrator -
similar, in fact, to the effect of events.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Baltimore Purge
Table Hate (TM) guaranteed, very hard to play effectively. But disruptive
if
Post by Orpheus
used badly, and hard to use well, sure.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Spirit Marionette
Here we are...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one
that
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
There are many Nasty Combos (TM) in that game. You know the worst ?
Revelations / bleed for 6 in stealth... Been there for a long time too.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow
stealing
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?).
Yes, you're right. Mind Rape should also be on the list.
Hum, I see. And what about Temptations ? Corruption / Free States Rant ?
Nothing like as bad.
Let me disagree. I've had many games ruined lately by these types of decks,
and they didn't always win but certainly made me (when I was predator or
prey) lose, meaning their grand-prey or grand-pred usually sweeps ; and when
such a deck wins it's ugly anyway because you lose all your ressources, not
very fun. But part of the game. Not funnier than Spirit Marionette, lemme
tell you ! And more stealth available...
OK, noted. But i think you are looking in my post for something which i
never intended to be part of it, namely a logically-consistent critique
of cards and strategies in the Jyhad game. To return to the topic,
Stefan is trawling for suggestions about how to get the game out of the
hole it is currently in. It seems to some posters that the game is not
in a hole. Others, like you and me, think it is in a hole but disagree
about how we should get it out, or perhaps even whether it is possibe
to get it out without it stopping being the game it should be. It's in
that context that my post should be read, i suggest. i take as a
starting point that we need to get old players back into the game
and/or get new players interested in it, for the game to flourish.
This, in fact, is true whether you think the game is in a hole or not.
My suggestions were that we need to take a deep breath and acknowledge
that there are serious problems with the constructed form of the game.
The solution to these problems i'm sorry to say will almost certainly
mean mass bannings and a long hard look at future rules team policy.
There will also be a cost to any reform, there always is. People will
resent having their expensive cards banned, and VTES/Jhyad's reputation
as a game with very few banned cards will be damaged. To ameliorate
these costs i suggested [i] that the banned cards should be allowed to
act as legal proxies for new expensive powerful cards that boost
underutilised strategies - cards similar to the ones you proposed in a
separate thread: and [ii] that a new limited form of the game be
developed, in which ALL cards from ALL expansion would be legal,
INCLUDING ALL THE CURRENTLY BANNED ONES. To make this form of the game
work it's essential that the libraries and crypts be kept rather small
so that it is cheap and so that effective decks can be built.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
It looks to me like you're disliking so many aspects of this game that I
wonder if it's really the game you like anymore.
Well Dah! That's why we're having this discussion, isn't it?
There is a difference for me between being demotivated while liking most of
the aspects of the game (although maybe not some commercial choices, or
recent novelties, for example), and disliking a whole lot of core game
mechanisms. I wasn't interested in NoR, I've a few cards I would ban. But
some of the cards you're talking about exist since Jyhad (Sudden Reversal),
some mechanisms like vampire stealing have been a part of the game for a
long time. I can understand standing against milling (relatively new) and
mass gehenna (recent and judged by most as disruptive), but you're asking
for a lot of changes, some of which many players (and game designers) would
disagree with. It looks to me like you might be farther away from the game
than many of us already. :-(
There's a difference between what i personally think/like and what i
think needs to be done to get the game back on track. i'm even [gulp!]
prepared to add liquidating the groups to the list of Things To Be
Done. It's like when your political party has been out of power for a
while and you need to adjust your programme to get more voters to back
you. In the 1980s the British Labour Party had to get used to
"Compromising with the Electorate". i think in Jyhad we will have to
get used to "Compromising with the Players."
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Me, I would be rather glad
that different strategies exist, and that stealing vamps (permanently or
temporarily), as bothersome as it can be, offers alternatives from
bleeding,
Post by Orpheus
voting or rushing. I fail to see how it's worse to be Mind Raped than
Banished (ok, PTO is broken), torporized / burned, or simply reduced to 0
pool with votes and / or bleed. Ok, in the last case you still have your
vamps when you die, great !!
It IS worse if your vampire [a] gets killed and then [b] turns up on
the other guy's side than if it only [a] gets killed.
So you're also against Daemonic Possession ?
Never seen it played, so no. i refer you back to the point that you
mustn't look for a logical critique in my post. i'm picking on the
cards which piss people off out of the game. My motivation is to try to
attract at least some of them back into the game.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Not to mention that all the tools available to counter stealth bleed /
vote
Post by Orpheus
are also available against Spirit Marionette, Mind Rape etc (intercept,
and
Post by Orpheus
I'm not talking DI because it's brokenness doesn't make other cards
non-broken).
If you dislike that much vampire-stealing and that it's starting to become
a
Post by Orpheus
problem / trend in your playgroup, play Diamond Thunderbolt !
Magic bullet
Sure. But it works against something you dislike much, so why not ?
Derek! Hit him for me!
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
You will
surprise everyone, and can even start playing Sonja Blue... ;-)
Only possible excuse for playing Diamond thunderbolt
lol. Not even that in my book... Wish I could make a playable deck with her,
loved the books so much !!
(snip some more "better understanding" stuff)
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
long-time stalwart of the VTES scene. Don't you see that if HE thinks
there is a problem, then there probably is?
I'm very surprised. I thought I had made myself clear, maybe you didn't
read
Post by Orpheus
my whole post ? Or my answer to Stefan ? I do think there is a problem,
see
Post by Orpheus
? I just don't like your "solutions", is all. And here I thought we were
discussing in a constructive, "civilised" manner. I expected as much from
an
Post by Orpheus
englishman
Scotsman
Thought so but doesn't your Who's Who say you reside in England ?
Yes, i live in England and i like and admire the English. But i am not
English. Not offended by being called English, far from it, just
thought i would own up to the facts.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Alright, so you agree with the principle but not the substance. Do you
think it is a good idea to make banned cars legal proxies for new
game-fixing cards? i ask because that was the essence of my proposal,
or possibly proposition.
Didn't see that, guess I skipped the lines. No, I think it's a bad idea
because there are already too many problems for new and not-so-new players
remembering the cards and knowing which ones are errated and how ! For a
newbie the changes in layout are a nightmare ("see, that icon means pool
cost and that one blood cost ; except that before it was one icon but up or
down, and...). There are too many complications, even an errata is not
something to take slightly (and we know for sure LSJ doesn't lol) so a card
being a proxy for another in serious games should never be condoned IMO.
OK, but from what i wrote above do you now agree that it's a possible
fix for the problem that people are going to be REALLY cross that so
many of the cards they've bought are going to be banned? Not perfect,
sure, but a nice downloadable set of card-sized inserts would sooth at
least some ruffled capes, i think.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
- non-Camarilla vampires (let's face it, Cammies are still the best)
- vampires without Fortitude
- vampires without a bleed modifier (or only +1 bleed for an 11-Cap, say)
- vampires without a title (or a bleed modifier ?)
- vampires without a special text
Any or all of these would allow for good, new cards which would help the
most unplayed vampires (usually 9-caps rather than 10s...).
That constructive enough for ya buddy ?
--
Orpheus
Well now, i did not mean to upset you though it's obvious that i have.
A little. But don't worry, I know you're a nice guy. Now I also know you
shouldn't upset a scotsman.;-)
i'm not upset, but thank you for your concern.

And you know southern guys are touchy. B)
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
i now understand from your post that you
[a] agree that there's a problem, and
[b] don't like my suggested solutions to the problem. In particular
[i] you don't agree that a new draft format has any possible merit at all,
[ii] you agree that we need to ban some cards but not all the ones on
my list, and maybe some that are not on my list,
Post by Orpheus
[iii] you agree that unpopular big vampires need help.
Please correct me if i still misunderstand you.
[i] Not that I don't think some players would appreciate a new draft format,
but I do think at least in the playgroups I know it wouldn't change a thing.
[ii] yes, and I don't think the cards are the only issue here (as stated by
different people in this thread) and therefore that a ban list, as big and
extensive as it could be, would suffice to "save the game".
[iii] Absolutely ! Menele for President !!
Post by Orpheus
i did not understand all that from your first posts, so now we have
made progress.
:-) Well, sorry if my initial post wasn't clear enough, I thought it was (or
maybe you needed to know who was behind it). I sort of played the devil's
advocate, not meaning I didn't agree there was a problem, just not being
convinced by some of the proposed solutions.
But I'm glad to see that, as Stefan said, we can all discuss this as adults.
And yes, I do think there has been some progress over this thread, I just
sincerely hope LSJ or someone reads all this and notes the interesting
things.
--
Orpheus
Cool.
Orpheus
2006-06-28 22:28:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i've never found the need to play Memories in an Allies deck, but i
think it is too clumsy a card for boosting allies.
I don't understand what you mean. I don't know who's clumsy, the rushing
ally, or the Brujah with Memories of Mortality who suddenly cannot hurt your
little nice zombie... :D
i'd be happy with Memories if it made vampires pay a higher cost to do
stuff against allies. As it stands i think its effect is too much.
It might be, but very few ally decks still cut the deal. So it musn't be so
bothersome. And you know what LSJ says : "If something isn't broken it
doesn't need fixing"...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
So, what about Una ?
i didn't answer the question because i do not know the answer. For why
i put Freak Drive on the list, see below.
Ok.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Why would
Slaughterhouse (burn 2 cards for each SH you tap) be bad and FS (burn 1
from
hand and 4 from library), Dirty Little Secrets (burn 1 card for each pool
lost) or Raptor (discard 1 for each Raptor and do not replace until end of
combat) be good ??? All 4 can be abused the same way (not to mention be
combined, especially the last 3) !!
Because you can use your slaughterhouses every turn. Because they are
permanents.
So ? Raptors are permanents (sure, burn them...).
But you need to get into combat to use your raptors. So the set up is
much more difficult. Also, as you say, you can burn raptors.
Allow me to disagree. Some vamps with Ani have inherent rush abilities. One
of the most dreaded, Enkidu, also untaps after recruiting. Not that I think
Enkidu + Raptor is better than without, but it is very bothersome (and we're
not talking efficiency anyway : how often do Slaughterhouses win you the
game ?). To kill Raptors you need specific conditions you're unlikely to be
able to use against someone who uses Animalism (and therefore can master
Range and forbid use of weapons).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
I'm aware that Border Skirmish hurts all
methuselahs, although it seldom sees play. I'm also aware that milling
most
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
of the time has 1 big effect : you grand'prey wins !! Ok. That's why there
is a Vote that makes it a winning strategy. You'll acquire Table Hate (TM)
pretty fast anyway, and that's not good (although you can survive it, as
Imbued can). But if you think the whole Milling thing is bad, I really
don't
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
see why you include some cards and exclude others. Just on the basis that
some are actions and others are Masters ???
Slaughterhouses are permanents, the others are not.
See above. You also mentionned that Ben reached a strong effect with Border
Skirmish, which is transient.
Yes, but that's a different argument. Slaughterhouse is bad because it
is a permanent works-every-turn drain on your prey's library. It's
neither unique nor burnable.
It is burnable or even stealable by many means, a number of which we can see
in many decks (Disputed Territory, Dominate Kine...).

Unique, it would be useless.

And a good player who wants to win will use them sparingly. As a matter of
facts, a good player will seldom include any even if he plays Harbingers for
some reason !!
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Border Skirmish is bad because it degrades
the playing environment for all players except its perpetrator -
similar, in fact, to the effect of events.
Events degrade for everyone, except that the player can plan to some extent
and be able to use that to better effect. Of course, if he plays Imbued he
isn't affected.

I have never, ever seen Border Skirmish used, and consider it a very bad
card, so I really can't say anything more on the subject. I also consider
that if it can be good in some very rare hands, it won't see enough play to
ever justify considering an errata - except of course if people read that
Ben Peal made a killer deck with it and want to try, but then it will be
your fault !! ;-) As a matter of facts I'm pretty sure that Ben made a quite
average deck, but played it as a master player and won because of that,
period.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
All the cards you're citing are either very strong and / or allow
stealing
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
of vamps. They're not the only ones (why Spirit Marionette and not the
dreaded Mind Rape ?).
Yes, you're right. Mind Rape should also be on the list.
Hum, I see. And what about Temptations ? Corruption / Free States Rant ?
Nothing like as bad.
Let me disagree. I've had many games ruined lately by these types of decks,
and they didn't always win but certainly made me (when I was predator or
prey) lose, meaning their grand-prey or grand-pred usually sweeps ; and when
such a deck wins it's ugly anyway because you lose all your ressources, not
very fun. But part of the game. Not funnier than Spirit Marionette, lemme
tell you ! And more stealth available...
OK, noted. But i think you are looking in my post for something which i
never intended to be part of it, namely a logically-consistent critique
of cards and strategies in the Jyhad game.
Yes I was.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
To return to the topic,
Stefan is trawling for suggestions about how to get the game out of the
hole it is currently in. It seems to some posters that the game is not
in a hole.
Yes.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Others, like you and me, think it is in a hole but disagree
about how we should get it out, or perhaps even whether it is possibe
to get it out without it stopping being the game it should be.
I think our divergence of opinions goes deeper than that : we disagree about
the reasons why it's in a hole, or even the type of hole that it's in. This
is why we have different ideas about "saving it". If a doctor thinks his
patient has illness A while another thinks he he sick from B, they will of
course prescribe different treatments. Let's hope the patient choses the
right one, or both if he is very ill. ;-)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It's in
that context that my post should be read, i suggest. i take as a
starting point that we need to get old players back into the game
and/or get new players interested in it, for the game to flourish.
Starting point accepted. It does mean we still somehow love this game, and I
think that's a fact (if not, we wouldn't be spending time here trying to
help it get, in our opinion, better).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
This, in fact, is true whether you think the game is in a hole or not.
My suggestions were that we need to take a deep breath and acknowledge
that there are serious problems with the constructed form of the game.
There are some. As I stated, I find maybe more problems in the
organisational and in the commercial (releases, frequency, type, planning
and quality of) parts. But as you don't seem to share that opinion, let's
talk about the problems in the cards, if any.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The solution to these problems i'm sorry to say will almost certainly
mean mass bannings and a long hard look at future rules team policy.
I do not think personnaly that there is such a need. Nor do, apparently,
many other players. And even less so the concept team. For me, having
expansions with lots of useless crap, or cornercase stuff that will maybe be
of some use some day in the future, but that requires newbies to learn new
rules with each new set : THAT's a biiiiig problem. Stefan states that in
his initial post and I strongly agree. Wallpapers might be worse than
powercards in some aspects.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
There will also be a cost to any reform, there always is. People will
resent having their expensive cards banned, and VTES/Jhyad's reputation
as a game with very few banned cards will be damaged.
Yes. But I believe it won't happen. Nor would I wish it so (although, as I
mentionned, I would like the use of non-vampire crypts to be restricted to
some sorts of tournaments, at least not the big competitions).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
To ameliorate
these costs i suggested [i] that the banned cards should be allowed to
act as legal proxies for new expensive powerful cards that boost
underutilised strategies - cards similar to the ones you proposed in a
As I said, too much bother, including for old players, unbearable for new
ones.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
and [ii] that a new limited form of the game be
developed, in which ALL cards from ALL expansion would be legal,
INCLUDING ALL THE CURRENTLY BANNED ONES.
Return to Innocence anyone ? Let see, Arika makes a few Revelations followed
by Freak Drives, unblockable Return, prey 1 dead. Rescue from torpor, rinse,
repeat. Niiiiice ! The idea would be nice, but the results would be ugly
(and who possesses all these cards anymore anyway ? Old players ? Sure...).
I had the idea of a fun tournament where you play all cards by card text,
not by errata, but then it would be very marginal and special for oldbies...
I really can't see your idea applied to sane effect. Sorry.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
There's a difference between what i personally think/like and what i
think needs to be done to get the game back on track. i'm even [gulp!]
prepared to add liquidating the groups to the list of Things To Be
Done.
That would be fun. I still think Grouping isn't as necessary as is
pretended, or that some other ways of mixing them should be allowed (like
"pick any 2", or "choose an even and an odd grouping"), which I guess could
be a way to go. Or maybe a number of vamps from each groups, if a rule is
really needed. I think the reason motivating such a change would be an
incentive for old players to buy "just a few" boosts, or a random expansion,
when they have made clear they won't collect new groups. For example, let's
say i WON'T collect G5 and so forth (which is what I intend to do as of now,
we'll see if the sets make me change my mind). But let's say I'm tempted to
get some new cards 2 years from now, in an expansion which appeals to me.
WIth the current grouping politics, I will have a very small crypt to choose
from, and probably very few valid strategies. If I can mix these vamps with
some I already have (let's say from G1 to G3), then I might be more tempted
to buy these cards because I can actually put them to some use. I will
probably buy 0 card if I know I won't be able to play my G6 because I won't
get any G5 or G5. So I'm actually giving WW a hint of how to make us buy
some more stuff in the future, see...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It's like when your political party has been out of power for a
while and you need to adjust your programme to get more voters to back
you. In the 1980s the British Labour Party had to get used to
"Compromising with the Electorate". i think in Jyhad we will have to
get used to "Compromising with the Players."
Lol. While the playerbase is large and very divided, some things are more or
less a consensus (banning PTO, for example, reaches a vast majority ; fixing
mass Gehenna might also).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It IS worse if your vampire [a] gets killed and then [b] turns up on
the other guy's side than if it only [a] gets killed.
So you're also against Daemonic Possession ?
Never seen it played, so no.
Well, it requires more setup than Graverob, as you must burn the vamp and
get it back in the same turn, so for a Clan with Dom it's really an inferior
choice (or should be used for other combinations). But other than that it's
the same...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i refer you back to the point that you
mustn't look for a logical critique in my post.
I'm afraid I will be at a loss for words if I can't argue logically, even
with a somewhat subjective logic.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i'm picking on the
cards which piss people off out of the game. My motivation is to try to
attract at least some of them back into the game.
I'm sure it is. But I'm not sure there are so many people out there pissed
by the same things as you. Can you tell us more about what several other
players told you, maybe, and less of your personnal feelings (not saying
this in a mean way, just that if you're the only one to want some changes
they will never be done !) ?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Magic bullet
Sure. But it works against something you dislike much, so why not ?
Derek! Hit him for me!
Derek Ray ? Well, him or whoever, and what army ? I'm a sicilian
necromancer, you know... B)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Alright, so you agree with the principle but not the substance. Do you
think it is a good idea to make banned cars legal proxies for new
game-fixing cards? i ask because that was the essence of my proposal,
or possibly proposition.
Didn't see that, guess I skipped the lines. No, I think it's a bad idea
because there are already too many problems for new and not-so-new players
remembering the cards and knowing which ones are errated and how ! For a
newbie the changes in layout are a nightmare ("see, that icon means pool
cost and that one blood cost ; except that before it was one icon but up or
down, and...). There are too many complications, even an errata is not
something to take slightly (and we know for sure LSJ doesn't lol) so a card
being a proxy for another in serious games should never be condoned IMO.
OK, but from what i wrote above do you now agree that it's a possible
fix for the problem that people are going to be REALLY cross that so
many of the cards they've bought are going to be banned? Not perfect,
sure, but a nice downloadable set of card-sized inserts would sooth at
least some ruffled capes, i think.
I think such a big ban will NEVER happen, mostly because most players and
conceptors won't see the use for it. If cards are banned, I do not think
that they should be replaced by proxies, they are banned, period. Now, if WW
allowed for downloadable cards usable in sleeves they wouldn't sell any
anymore, right ? And it could cause arguments in tournaments if they're not
well-cut and can be identified in some way... No, a bad idea overall.
Really.

I think now we should let the thread follow its due course, or maybe restart
a part of it where different people state what they think is currently wrong
with the game (which some have begun to do) before we try to agree on what
to do. But my opinion really is that even if some cards are bad for the
game, it isn't the main reason why players leave, nor is mass-ban the
solution.

Cheers from the Grave,
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".

The Drummer, in Planetary.
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-29 17:25:33 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Why would
Slaughterhouse (burn 2 cards for each SH you tap) be bad and FS (burn
1
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
from
hand and 4 from library), Dirty Little Secrets (burn 1 card for each
pool
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
lost) or Raptor (discard 1 for each Raptor and do not replace until
end of
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
combat) be good ??? All 4 can be abused the same way (not to mention
be
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
combined, especially the last 3) !!
Because you can use your slaughterhouses every turn. Because they are
permanents.
So ? Raptors are permanents (sure, burn them...).
But you need to get into combat to use your raptors. So the set up is
much more difficult. Also, as you say, you can burn raptors.
Allow me to disagree. Some vamps with Ani have inherent rush abilities. One
of the most dreaded, Enkidu, also untaps after recruiting. Not that I think
Enkidu + Raptor is better than without, but it is very bothersome (and we're
not talking efficiency anyway : how often do Slaughterhouses win you the
game ?). To kill Raptors you need specific conditions you're unlikely to be
able to use against someone who uses Animalism (and therefore can master
Range and forbid use of weapons).
Body of Sun. Lids. Gates. Stunt cycles. Mayaparisatya. Weather control.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
I'm aware that Border Skirmish hurts all
methuselahs, although it seldom sees play. I'm also aware that milling
most
Post by Orpheus
of the time has 1 big effect : you grand'prey wins !! Ok. That's why
there
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
is a Vote that makes it a winning strategy. You'll acquire Table Hate
(TM)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
pretty fast anyway, and that's not good (although you can survive it,
as
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Imbued can). But if you think the whole Milling thing is bad, I really
don't
Post by Orpheus
see why you include some cards and exclude others. Just on the basis
that
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
some are actions and others are Masters ???
Slaughterhouses are permanents, the others are not.
See above. You also mentionned that Ben reached a strong effect with
Border
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Skirmish, which is transient.
Yes, but that's a different argument. Slaughterhouse is bad because it
is a permanent works-every-turn drain on your prey's library. It's
neither unique nor burnable.
It is burnable or even stealable by many means, a number of which we can see
in many decks (Disputed Territory, Dominate Kine...).
You're right, for some reason i though it wasn't a location.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Unique, it would be useless.
No it wouldn't. It would be less useful.

<snip>
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It's in
that context that my post should be read, i suggest. i take as a
starting point that we need to get old players back into the game
and/or get new players interested in it, for the game to flourish.
Starting point accepted. It does mean we still somehow love this game, and I
think that's a fact (if not, we wouldn't be spending time here trying to
help it get, in our opinion, better).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
This, in fact, is true whether you think the game is in a hole or not.
My suggestions were that we need to take a deep breath and acknowledge
that there are serious problems with the constructed form of the game.
There are some. As I stated, I find maybe more problems in the
organisational and in the commercial (releases, frequency, type, planning
and quality of) parts. But as you don't seem to share that opinion, let's
talk about the problems in the cards, if any.
Actually i am not sure that that IS a productive line of discussion. It
seems to me that one either thinks broadly like you, that the way
forward is better organisational and commercial decisions [the basic
game itself being alright], or one thinks broadly like me, that the
main problem is the way the basic game itself has gone. If nothing else
this discussion has firmed up for me that fundamental division.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The solution to these problems i'm sorry to say will almost certainly
mean mass bannings and a long hard look at future rules team policy.
I do not think personnaly that there is such a need. Nor do, apparently,
many other players.
Well, yeah, and many think like me. So what?
Post by x***@gmx.de
And even less so the concept team.
How do you know that?

For me, having
Post by x***@gmx.de
expansions with lots of useless crap, or cornercase stuff that will maybe be
of some use some day in the future, but that requires newbies to learn new
rules with each new set : THAT's a biiiiig problem. Stefan states that in
his initial post and I strongly agree. Wallpapers might be worse than
powercards in some aspects.
Sure.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
There will also be a cost to any reform, there always is. People will
resent having their expensive cards banned, and VTES/Jhyad's reputation
as a game with very few banned cards will be damaged.
Yes. But I believe it won't happen. Nor would I wish it so (although, as I
mentionned, I would like the use of non-vampire crypts to be restricted to
some sorts of tournaments, at least not the big competitions).
It has happened in the past.

<snip>>
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
and [ii] that a new limited form of the game be
developed, in which ALL cards from ALL expansion would be legal,
INCLUDING ALL THE CURRENTLY BANNED ONES.
Return to Innocence anyone ? Let see, Arika makes a few Revelations followed
by Freak Drives, unblockable Return, prey 1 dead. Rescue from torpor, rinse,
repeat. Niiiiice ! The idea would be nice, but the results would be ugly
(and who possesses all these cards anymore anyway ? Old players ? Sure...).
I had the idea of a fun tournament where you play all cards by card text,
not by errata, but then it would be very marginal and special for oldbies...
I really can't see your idea applied to sane effect. Sorry.
So, you DO understand that by "limited" i mean you sit down with some
buddies and open up a bunch of boosters, building a deck from what you
get? You DO see that if the number of boosters is low the chance of
getting one of the combos that caused <banned card x> to be banned from
constructed play is so low as to be negligible? And you are aware that
it is still possible to buy Ancient Hearts boosters for the original
price in at least some stores?
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
There's a difference between what i personally think/like and what i
think needs to be done to get the game back on track. i'm even [gulp!]
prepared to add liquidating the groups to the list of Things To Be
Done.
That would be fun. I still think Grouping isn't as necessary as is
pretended, or that some other ways of mixing them should be allowed (like
"pick any 2", or "choose an even and an odd grouping"), which I guess could
be a way to go. Or maybe a number of vamps from each groups, if a rule is
really needed. I think the reason motivating such a change would be an
incentive for old players to buy "just a few" boosts, or a random expansion,
when they have made clear they won't collect new groups. For example, let's
say i WON'T collect G5 and so forth (which is what I intend to do as of now,
we'll see if the sets make me change my mind). But let's say I'm tempted to
get some new cards 2 years from now, in an expansion which appeals to me.
WIth the current grouping politics, I will have a very small crypt to choose
from, and probably very few valid strategies. If I can mix these vamps with
some I already have (let's say from G1 to G3), then I might be more tempted
to buy these cards because I can actually put them to some use. I will
probably buy 0 card if I know I won't be able to play my G6 because I won't
get any G5 or G5. So I'm actually giving WW a hint of how to make us buy
some more stuff in the future, see...
i think all of that is pretty reasonable.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It's like when your political party has been out of power for a
while and you need to adjust your programme to get more voters to back
you. In the 1980s the British Labour Party had to get used to
"Compromising with the Electorate". i think in Jyhad we will have to
get used to "Compromising with the Players."
Lol. While the playerbase is large and very divided, some things are more or
less a consensus (banning PTO, for example, reaches a vast majority ; fixing
mass Gehenna might also).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
It IS worse if your vampire [a] gets killed and then [b] turns up on
the other guy's side than if it only [a] gets killed.
So you're also against Daemonic Possession ?
Never seen it played, so no.
Well, it requires more setup than Graverob, as you must burn the vamp and
get it back in the same turn, so for a Clan with Dom it's really an inferior
choice (or should be used for other combinations). But other than that it's
the same...
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i refer you back to the point that you
mustn't look for a logical critique in my post.
I'm afraid I will be at a loss for words if I can't argue logically, even
with a somewhat subjective logic.
No, you can argue logically. What you are missing is that i am not
saying card x should be banned because it is demonstrable from first
principles that it is a bad card. What i am saying is that pragmatic
experience SHOWS it to be a bad card, and therefore it should be
banned. Maybe this is the difference betwen the French and the English
way of arguing. i'm reminded of the possibly apocryphal story of a
British diplomat explaining a piece of foreigh policy to his French
counterpart, and the latter remarking when he had done "That may be all
very well in practice, but how will it work out in theory?"
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i'm picking on the
cards which piss people off out of the game. My motivation is to try to
attract at least some of them back into the game.
I'm sure it is. But I'm not sure there are so many people out there pissed
by the same things as you.
Maybe you're right. We won't know unless we talk about the subject
openly, will we? And i think it's also worth restating that if we want
to get people BACK, we will almost certainly have to reach OUTSIDE this
newsgroup. The people who are happy with the way the game is, or is
going, are OBVIOUSLY going to be overrepresented in this group,
wouldn't you agree?

Can you tell us more about what several other
Post by x***@gmx.de
players told you, maybe, and less of your personnal feelings
Well no, i can't. To be honest i am not sure what this question means
and i'm not sure if you're aware that the way it is phrased is somewhat
unfortunate, to say the least. But my job in a debate is not to say The
Vast Majority of Players think <x> because to do so would mark me out
as one of the, fortunately small, band of insufferable conceited
self-appointed jyhad "elite". What i CAN do is say what i think, and
why i think it, in as clear a manner as possible. Of course it's "only"
my opinion but at least i am not pretending that it is an emanation
from some other Fount of Wisdom. Hating people who do argue in the
latter way is one of the reasons why i always use a lower-case "i" for
the first person singular.

(not saying
Post by x***@gmx.de
this in a mean way,
Actually you were, probably without meaning to

just that if you're the only one to want some changes
Post by x***@gmx.de
they will never be done !) ?
Well i'm obviously not the only one to want some changes, just by
looking at this thread and the EXPLOSION of similar themes over the
past month you can tell that.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Magic bullet
Sure. But it works against something you dislike much, so why not ?
Derek! Hit him for me!
Derek Ray ? Well, him or whoever, and what army ? I'm a sicilian
necromancer, you know... B)
The point, as i'm sure you understand, is that Magic bullets are not a
good solution to game-breaking cards/strategies, for reasons long ago
demonstrated by Derek Ray and James Coupe, amongst others, to the
satisfaction of most of us.
<snip>
Post by x***@gmx.de
my opinion really is that even if some cards are bad for the
game, it isn't the main reason why players leave, nor is mass-ban the
solution.
Excellently clearly put. My opinion is the exact opposite of the above.
So there is no further point in us arguing over this, since if you
reject the idea that the fundamental problem is that there are many bad
cards that need banned then OF COURSE you are going to disagree with
mass banning and all its corollaries.

"Is it because I is Black?"
"No, it's because I is a pronoun."
Orpheus
2006-06-30 00:43:33 UTC
Permalink
Hello again ! ;-)
Post by Orpheus
To kill Raptors you need specific conditions you're unlikely to be
Post by Orpheus
able to use against someone who uses Animalism (and therefore can master
Range and forbid use of weapons).
Body of Sun. Lids. Gates. Stunt cycles. Mayaparisatya. Weather control.
Ranging from "Magic Bullets" to perfectly good cards that you'd rather play
on the minion hosting the Raptors more often than not...
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
It's in
that context that my post should be read, i suggest. i take as a
starting point that we need to get old players back into the game
and/or get new players interested in it, for the game to flourish.
Starting point accepted. It does mean we still somehow love this game, and I
think that's a fact (if not, we wouldn't be spending time here trying to
help it get, in our opinion, better).
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
This, in fact, is true whether you think the game is in a hole or not.
My suggestions were that we need to take a deep breath and acknowledge
that there are serious problems with the constructed form of the game.
There are some. As I stated, I find maybe more problems in the
organisational and in the commercial (releases, frequency, type, planning
and quality of) parts. But as you don't seem to share that opinion, let's
talk about the problems in the cards, if any.
Actually i am not sure that that IS a productive line of discussion. It
seems to me that one either thinks broadly like you, that the way
forward is better organisational and commercial decisions [the basic
game itself being alright], or one thinks broadly like me, that the
main problem is the way the basic game itself has gone. If nothing else
this discussion has firmed up for me that fundamental division.
Ok.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
The solution to these problems i'm sorry to say will almost certainly
mean mass bannings and a long hard look at future rules team policy.
I do not think personnaly that there is such a need. Nor do, apparently,
many other players.
Well, yeah, and many think like me. So what?
So even when a vast majority of players require a ban it doesn't suffice.
When a great part of them doesn't even understand why there should be talk
about banning, it's not likely to happen.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
And even less so the concept team.
How do you know that?
LSJ's favourite (actually, second favourite after : "correct") : "Something
which isn't broken doesn't need to be fixed". And you saw which cards he
finally considered bad for the game, and what was required to show him that
? PTO is currently on top of the "most hated single card in the game" list,
and it's still here. Maybe mass Gehenna abuse will be found catastrophic for
the game and some rule will be made (like : requires 1 vamp controlled per
Gehenna when you put then in play ?) but I seriously doubt that all your
list would even make it to the "examination room". Of course I may be wrong,
maybe the man should state his opinion - or lack thereof - right here.
Post by Orpheus
For me, having
Post by Orpheus
expansions with lots of useless crap, or cornercase stuff that will maybe be
of some use some day in the future, but that requires newbies to learn new
rules with each new set : THAT's a biiiiig problem. Stefan states that in
his initial post and I strongly agree. Wallpapers might be worse than
powercards in some aspects.
Sure.
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
There will also be a cost to any reform, there always is. People will
resent having their expensive cards banned, and VTES/Jhyad's reputation
as a game with very few banned cards will be damaged.
Yes. But I believe it won't happen. Nor would I wish it so (although, as I
mentionned, I would like the use of non-vampire crypts to be restricted to
some sorts of tournaments, at least not the big competitions).
It has happened in the past.
Mass banning ? To my knowledge, 8 cards are currently banned. Over a
lifespan of 11 years, not really a lot right ? And you really think the 20+
list you made has any chances of passing ? Well, I don't.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
and [ii] that a new limited form of the game be
developed, in which ALL cards from ALL expansion would be legal,
INCLUDING ALL THE CURRENTLY BANNED ONES.
Return to Innocence anyone ? Let see, Arika makes a few Revelations followed
by Freak Drives, unblockable Return, prey 1 dead. Rescue from torpor, rinse,
repeat. Niiiiice ! The idea would be nice, but the results would be ugly
(and who possesses all these cards anymore anyway ? Old players ? Sure...).
I had the idea of a fun tournament where you play all cards by card text,
not by errata, but then it would be very marginal and special for oldbies...
I really can't see your idea applied to sane effect. Sorry.
So, you DO understand that by "limited" i mean you sit down with some
buddies and open up a bunch of boosters, building a deck from what you
get? You DO see that if the number of boosters is low the chance of
getting one of the combos that caused <banned card x> to be banned from
constructed play is so low as to be negligible? And you are aware that
it is still possible to buy Ancient Hearts boosters for the original
price in at least some stores?
Really ? They're not available here. So I didn't get what you meant in fact.
Well, could be fun then, but very, very marginal. As such I don't think it
would have any impact at all on players leaving the game or not.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i refer you back to the point that you
mustn't look for a logical critique in my post.
I'm afraid I will be at a loss for words if I can't argue logically, even
with a somewhat subjective logic.
No, you can argue logically. What you are missing is that i am not
saying card x should be banned because it is demonstrable from first
principles that it is a bad card. What i am saying is that pragmatic
experience SHOWS it to be a bad card, and therefore it should be
banned. Maybe this is the difference betwen the French and the English
way of arguing. i'm reminded of the possibly apocryphal story of a
British diplomat explaining a piece of foreigh policy to his French
counterpart, and the latter remarking when he had done "That may be all
very well in practice, but how will it work out in theory?"
LOOOOOL. Of course it gives right to the english, so it's a stupid joke. ;-)

But how does a texan react ? Because to my knowledge, he will say that it
doesn't matter if a card is bad, or if you're sure it is, because it doesn't
disrupt the game in any way that disturbs him.

There are many, many bad cards in this game. Most have no impact at all on
the game, some may cause unbalance. In the wrong hands, Conservative
Agitation is a very bad and unbalancing card. In the right hands, you say
even Border Shittish can hurt. So, you practical experience is all well and
fine, but the theory doesn't hold up. ;-)
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
i'm picking on the
cards which piss people off out of the game. My motivation is to try to
attract at least some of them back into the game.
I'm sure it is. But I'm not sure there are so many people out there pissed
by the same things as you.
Maybe you're right. We won't know unless we talk about the subject
openly, will we? And i think it's also worth restating that if we want
to get people BACK, we will almost certainly have to reach OUTSIDE this
newsgroup. The people who are happy with the way the game is, or is
going, are OBVIOUSLY going to be overrepresented in this group,
wouldn't you agree?
Not necessarily, as this group is often accused of harboring all the
whiners. But at least there is a vast majority of active and still somewhat
motivated people, sure.

"Outside", tonight, I even met two players who really enjoyed NoR (and know
about a few more). Personnaly I think not only it's pure shit but above the
rest it's not made to be mixed with core VTES (if only for all the cards
affecting vampires and to which they are immune, sometimes against all
logic, just because the card texts were never intended for something else
than vampires). So I guess we'll hear everything and its opposite. But sure,
ask around, and let us know what the people you know think of all this !
Post by Orpheus
Can you tell us more about what several other
Post by Orpheus
players told you, maybe, and less of your personnal feelings
Well no, i can't. To be honest i am not sure what this question means
and i'm not sure if you're aware that the way it is phrased is somewhat
unfortunate, to say the least.
You mean, like, vexating ? Sorry, I was afraid so, but didn't find any
better formulation. Not my native language, you know... I just meant to say
I wanted to know if your playgroup shared these opinions or if they were
isolated.
Post by Orpheus
But my job in a debate is not to say The
Vast Majority of Players think <x> because to do so would mark me out
as one of the, fortunately small, band of insufferable conceited
self-appointed jyhad "elite". What i CAN do is say what i think, and
why i think it, in as clear a manner as possible. Of course it's "only"
my opinion but at least i am not pretending that it is an emanation
from some other Fount of Wisdom. Hating people who do argue in the
latter way is one of the reasons why i always use a lower-case "i" for
the first person singular.
Of course, we're all entitled to opinions, and mine often differ from the
majority !!! The only reason why I mention this is because I think that the
WW staff won't take into account isolated rants, but might get the message
if lots of players express their problems, worries, disgusts etc. As a
matter of fact it's what we're all doing here, we might not agree about what
the problem is and how to solve it, but many stated they thought there was a
problem, and that's a first step towards finding solutions (if WW accepts to
aknowledge that).
Post by Orpheus
(not saying
Post by Orpheus
this in a mean way,
Actually you were, probably without meaning to
Yes, so I again present my apologies on that account.
Post by Orpheus
just that if you're the only one to want some changes
Post by Orpheus
they will never be done !) ?
Well i'm obviously not the only one to want some changes, just by
looking at this thread and the EXPLOSION of similar themes over the
past month you can tell that.
Absolutely, people want changes. I'm talking about the particular changes
you're proposing, as most of them (except "do something about Imbued / mass
Gehenna") I've never read before in this Newsgroup or elsewhere.
Post by Orpheus
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Magic bullet
Sure. But it works against something you dislike much, so why not ?
Derek! Hit him for me!
Derek Ray ? Well, him or whoever, and what army ? I'm a sicilian
necromancer, you know... B)
The point, as i'm sure you understand, is that Magic bullets are not a
good solution to game-breaking cards/strategies, for reasons long ago
demonstrated by Derek Ray and James Coupe, amongst others, to the
satisfaction of most of us.
Of course. But players are beginning to be so afraid, say, of Gehenna, that
some are considering making decks purposedly including anti-gehenna tactics,
and therefore making some choices they wouldn't have (like playing Black
Hand, or whatever) ; this happened when many allies began to be played and
Entrancement (useful but especially in that case) and co were very trendy.
If some cards bother the players too mcuh they will include the available
solutions, if these are at least a little viable (ok, Diamond Thunderbolt
isn't...).
Post by Orpheus
<snip>
Post by Orpheus
my opinion really is that even if some cards are bad for the
game, it isn't the main reason why players leave, nor is mass-ban the
solution.
Excellently clearly put.
Well I should have began with that then ! lol. So we discover that clarity
is an achivement, not an evidence... ;-)
Post by Orpheus
My opinion is the exact opposite of the above.
Fine. :-)
Post by Orpheus
So there is no further point in us arguing over this, since if you
reject the idea that the fundamental problem is that there are many bad
cards that need banned then OF COURSE you are going to disagree with
mass banning and all its corollaries.
"Is it because I is Black?"
"No, it's because I is a pronoun."
Ok. But the people who had the patience to read all this will now know there
are, at least, two different "schools" that find there are troubles with the
game, and that propose varied solutions. Food for the thoughts, and that's
never bad !

Seeya m8

P.S. : if you go to Corse this year, a very good friend and player will
probably be there, feel free to contact me.
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".

The Drummer, in Planetary.
bluedevil
2006-06-27 14:05:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Meddling of Semsith
I really don't see the necessity. Don't even find the place to include one
in my vote decks anymore.
Can't believe you're serious about this, unless you're not serious
about winning!
I think the effect of having a minus one hand size really isn't getting
the attention it deserves, in terms of the cost you incur by playing
the card. I know it's been mentioned, but almost as an aside which
doesn't truly factor into the analysis. Likewise with the Gehenna
events.
bluedevil
2006-06-27 14:08:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
;-) this is an environment i don't recognise. So why don't people just
blood brothers rush all your prince/justicar decks to death in your
environment? Or intercept them to death with the Ahrimanes, Ravnos or
Tzimisce?
Because, generally, stealth beats intercept and combat defense trumps
combat. Individual games may vary, of course.
atomweaver
2006-06-27 02:21:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<snip thoughtful post>
<add colourful insults just to upset poster. i'm BAAAAD!>
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards
legal. Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la
Duffin draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i
disagree about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage
people from playing cards, ever].
Meddling of Semsith
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;

Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.

*shrug* Just a thought...

DaveZ
Atom Weaver
sutekh_23
2006-06-27 02:34:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by atomweaver
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.
*shrug* Just a thought...
Thats not such a bad idea IMHO, would provide distict limits to events
without totally screwing them up. Of course events would have to be
playable more than once to balance it back a bit or allow X amount of
events to be active at any one time (maybe another master card?),
otherwise the imbued decks that only use unmasking and edge explosion
get screwed over for no good reason.
f***@aol.com
2006-06-27 06:49:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by atomweaver
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.
I think that some events exist specifically to temper a terrible
strategy, for example Nightmares Upon Nightmares exists to screw
weenies. If a weenie deck could just play a Gehenna event and NUN
would go away, I think that would defeat the purpose of ever having
printed NUN in the first place.

I think that _IF_ a fix is needed, then it should be that each player
chooses, say, 3 or 4 of their own events and those are in effect.

However, I also think that a fix isn't needed.

-- Brian
atomweaver
2006-06-29 15:52:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@aol.com
Post by atomweaver
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name.
"Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes
of fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to
deal with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a
weight of multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave
them individually playable.
I think that some events exist specifically to temper a terrible
strategy, for example Nightmares Upon Nightmares exists to screw
weenies. If a weenie deck could just play a Gehenna event and NUN
would go away, I think that would defeat the purpose of ever having
printed NUN in the first place.
Hi Brian,

They couldn't. I think you might not be quite catching what I was going
for... "Only the most recently event text, by event type (Gehenna) *by
player*", meaning that each player's active event is not superceded by
another player fielding an event... each player has their own event
stack(s), if you will, with the topmost event's card text applying. So
they player looking to field the weenie-hoser could do so, and the
weenie deck's event play couldn't affect it.

I think I know what you're thinking; that I wanted events to work
something like Global Enchantments in M:tG. That wasn't what I wanted
to imply.

DaveZ
Atom Weaver
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-27 10:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by atomweaver
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<snip thoughtful post>
<add colourful insults just to upset poster. i'm BAAAAD!>
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards
legal. Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la
Duffin draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i
disagree about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage
people from playing cards, ever].
Meddling of Semsith
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.
*shrug* Just a thought...
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Now *THAT* is a good idea! Brilliant, in fact!
Orpheus
2006-06-27 12:15:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by atomweaver
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
<snip thoughtful post>
<add colourful insults just to upset poster. i'm BAAAAD!>
i suggest
[1] New limited format, based on four-eight sealed boosters [less is
better, i think. The whole point is to draw in/enthuse new players and
reinvigorate old ones]. 20ish minimum library size, 4ish minimum crypt
size. Draft or not, doesn't matter. No grouping rules. All cards
legal. Undue influence a la Duffin draft. Rejuvenate library also a la
Duffin draft, maybe have to pay a pool to do so. Anklebiter and i
disagree about this last point [he thinks we should not discourage
people from playing cards, ever].
Meddling of Semsith
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.
*shrug* Just a thought...
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Now *THAT* is a good idea! Brilliant, in fact!
The idea is good, but Brian's arguments are quite sensible. Not to mention
that if the whole goal of playing the events is, say, to make both Camarilla
and Sabbat fall, you could conceivably want to keep these 2 in game, but
only 1 could very well be useless (you want votes, right), not to mention
king-making (who will you choose to keep the titles if they're both allies,
or both not ?).

Another issue : the biggest problem sometimes comes from a single Gehenna
but powered with many others. Thirst is bad for weenies, but Thirst with 7
Gehennas in play is bad, period !! Even if we just let the effects of that
one event, it will disrupt all. So that "solution" doesn't solve all, far
from it.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
atomweaver
2006-06-29 16:16:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Now *THAT* is a good idea! Brilliant, in fact!
The idea is good, but Brian's arguments are quite sensible. Not to
mention that if the whole goal of playing the events is, say, to make
both Camarilla and Sabbat fall, you could conceivably want to keep
these 2 in game, but only 1 could very well be useless (you want
votes, right), not to mention king-making (who will you choose to keep
the titles if they're both allies, or both not ?).
I freely admit that this makes some previously interesting, non-
degenerate uses for Events somewhat less viable (Indy vote decks would need
to pick which sect should Fall. Example you chose is not so big an issue,
IMO. Most times, you want the Cammy vote deck to lose his titles, and the
proposed change still leaves you with the choice of who will Fall).
Tactics can change favorably, though. Consider that an Event-laden player
could consider repealing his own Events through Black Hand Ritual, to
change the table by making a previously inactive event active again...
that could make for some interesting game play. But I think this change
might only shift what choices need to be made, or make those choices a bit
more challenging to decide, rather than eliminating the choice altogether.
Post by Orpheus
Another issue : the biggest problem sometimes comes from a single
Gehenna but powered with many others. Thirst is bad for weenies, but
Thirst with 7 Gehennas in play is bad, period !! Even if we just let
the effects of that one event, it will disrupt all. So that "solution"
doesn't solve all, far from it.
Right, very few solutions will solve every problem. I'm not out to squelch
the Events entirely, either. If someone wants to field eight events to get
the big Thirst effect, be my guest... I think you'd agree though, if there
is a problem with a _specific_ card's effect, its better resolved by
directly addressing the card in question.

I think another distinction I need to make is that, while I don't object to
individual cards being complex, the trend with the additional mechanics of
Events and the Imbued is to add a prodigious amount of _active_ card text
to the table. In a game I played against John Bell a coupld of weeks ago,
he had 27 unique cards (events, powers, conviction, equipment) fielded with
four Imbued by turn 5. I've fielded lots of cards before (weenie hordes),
but by comparison, the sheer CPA-style accounting needed to accomodate the
effect of these cards seriously eats into my "fun factor", and I'm a fairly
efficient tracker of table information...

DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Mike Perlman
2006-06-27 12:45:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by atomweaver
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.
I remember fiddling with similar concepts; I had events replacing
another, either one for the table or one for each player. The 'gotcha'
was the uniqueness aspect of the events (one played per game). I felt
that aspect was central to the event concept, and removing it would
force the really strong cards to either wallpaper status or total
gamewreckers, depending on whether or not the event count requirements
were retained.

I ended up with a 'tilt' concept, where the most recently played 'tilt'
property applies to the table, burning other tilts in play -- the
mechanic lends itself to more transient effects (+1 bleed for a chosen
minion/clan/methuselah, gain a pool for successful bleed/block/rush,
discipline X costs an extra blood, etc.) than those listed for events,
so I saw 'removal' as the only proper treatment for events.

Leaving the cards in play, and only applying the most recent events,
would be an improvement. Would that treatment include the replacement
texts?
atomweaver
2006-06-29 16:21:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Perlman
Leaving the cards in play, and only applying the most recent events,
would be an improvement. Would that treatment include the replacement
texts?
Hey, Mike!!!

I would think it should, an inactive card should be wholly inactive. If
you're not gaining the benefits of the effect the event provides, you
shouldn't have to suffer its drawback, either. That would probably squelch
the Event mechanic a little over-much...

Hmmm... you might run in to a little difficulty tracking which Events
have had their replace clauses fulfilled, in the event that Black Hand
Ritual self-repealing becomes prevalent. That would be something to watch
for when choosing to play an Event-heavy deck under this change. *shrug*

DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Salem
2006-06-29 22:50:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by atomweaver
I've got a possible fix to Events to throw around;
Only the most recently played Event text applies, by event type, by
player (ie most recent Gehenna event, most recent Government event, etc.
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable.
*shrug* Just a thought...
Conceptually, I quite like it. But I think it might mess up Wormwood a
bit too much (ie: you'd need other people to be playing events for it to
be useful, and who ever sees Becoming of Ennoia played, which also
requires other people to be playing events?), and it'd need some
addressing of the 'do-not-replace' issue for the 'inactive' events....

But conceptually: neat!
--
salem
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
James Coupe
2006-06-30 23:10:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Salem
Post by atomweaver
Unspecified generic events are unique types, by card name. "Inactive"
events would still apply towards total event counts for the purposes of
fielding Fall of the Camarilla, etc.) No one event is too much to deal
with, but Gehenna events become crushing to the table under a weight of
multitude ...so take away their multitudinosity, but leave them
individually playable. *shrug* Just a thought...
Conceptually, I quite like it. But I think it might mess up Wormwood a
bit too much (ie: you'd need other people to be playing events for it
to be useful, and who ever sees Becoming of Ennoia played, which also
requires other people to be playing events?), and it'd need some
addressing of the 'do-not-replace' issue for the 'inactive' events....
But conceptually: neat!
Not that I've thought through the implications of the overall effect too
much, but simply on implementation here, if you're making significant
changes...

* When you put Event cards in play, you put Events of the same type in a
pile, with the card name of the previous one(s) still showing.
(A bit like how players put Discipline cards under the vampire
they're on, with the new discipline and / or capacity showing.)

* The top-most Event card in a pile is active. The previous cards are
still in play (if anything were to trigger off an Event card
being in play) and still have their traits (such as Gehenna or
Government), but the effect is ended. This has the fringe
benefit of making it easy to see which Gehenna events have
already been played, since you don't burninate old ones. Assume
that Do Not Replace clauses terminate at this point, say.

* Wormwood now says: "When you put a new Gehenna event in play, you may
choose to place that Event under Wormwood and remove a counter.
(That Event is inactive.)" Reshuffle existing text
appropriately.

* If a card (such as Black Hand Ritual) burns a card and it was the top-
most card, the next one down becomes active again. Argue over
how that affects do not replace clauses, or not.


To repeat, I'm not endorsing or rebuking the suggested idea in
principle, as I haven't thought it through sufficiently.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Salem
2006-07-01 00:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Coupe
Post by Salem
But conceptually: neat!
Not that I've thought through the implications of the overall effect too
much, but simply on implementation here, if you're making significant
changes...
* When you put Event cards in play, you put Events of the same type in a
pile, with the card name of the previous one(s) still showing.
(A bit like how players put Discipline cards under the vampire
they're on, with the new discipline and / or capacity showing.)
* The top-most Event card in a pile is active. The previous cards are
still in play (if anything were to trigger off an Event card
being in play) and still have their traits (such as Gehenna or
Government), but the effect is ended. This has the fringe
benefit of making it easy to see which Gehenna events have
already been played, since you don't burninate old ones. Assume
that Do Not Replace clauses terminate at this point, say.
* Wormwood now says: "When you put a new Gehenna event in play, you may
choose to place that Event under Wormwood and remove a counter.
(That Event is inactive.)" Reshuffle existing text
appropriately.
* If a card (such as Black Hand Ritual) burns a card and it was the top-
most card, the next one down becomes active again. Argue over
how that affects do not replace clauses, or not.
To repeat, I'm not endorsing or rebuking the suggested idea in
principle, as I haven't thought it through sufficiently.
That's pretty much exactly how i was imagining it might work (except for
wormwood, which seems a reasonably elegant fix).

My thoughts for the do-not-replace (DNR) would be, once an event becomes
inactive (or "dormant", or some other word that hopefully wouldn't get
players who've been playing since Jyhad putting them in their
uncontrolled region), it's DNR is ended permanently, even if it later
becomes reactivated.


Although, after putting in the bit about inactive, maybe that's what you
could do.

You may only have one ready event of a type in play.
When you play an event of a type you already have in play, you must move
the new event OR the event in play to your uncontrolled region (but
face-up).
Events in your uncontrolled region have their DNR clauses ended, and
their texts have no effect. They still count as played and in-play for
the purposes of other cards' text.
If at any point you do not have a ready event of a type in play, but do
have one or more in your uncontrolled region, you must move one of those
events to the ready region.


Although, as James says, this is all based on the premise that events
actually do need to be reigned back. Also something I myself am unsure
about.
--
salem
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/
(replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)
James Coupe
2006-07-01 14:55:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Salem
Although, as James says, this is all based on the premise that events
actually do need to be reigned back. Also something I myself am unsure
about.
That's not my own personal problem.

There are a number of events I'd like to see reigned back. The problem
here is that a blanket rule application may affect the events I'd like
to see remain in the game, and remain competitive choices for deck-
building, so that players think over the implications of a given deck
design.

Let us assume that I am relatively happy with both Anthelios, The Red
Star, and Rise of the Nephtali. (I tend to think Anthelios is a bit too
good, but not disruptive.)

Now, let us also assume that a given Setite vote deck, or a Domi-Ravnos
Hall of Hades Court vote deck, or an Assamite Alamut deck, or whatever
the other Independents might do, is seriously considering putting both
Anthelios and RotN in the deck.

Both of these cards offer positive empowerment for the deck they're in,
tempered by offering possibilities to other vampires. Many existing
master cards do something similar - you'll be able to get better use out
of them, hopefully, because you've planned to, but the downside is that
other people might be able to get something good out of them too. For
example, Anarch Troublemaker is something you might make good use of -
but other people get it too. The Coven is a similar card.


I'm not sure I want to prevent people making effective use of both Rise
of the Nephtali and Anthelios at once. I like people being offered
meaningful deck decisions - should I play one of each, should I play two
of one? It's why, in part, if I were designing V:TES way back in 1994
with knowledge of the future, I'd downgrade Blood Doll. Not because
it's broken, just because it thrusts itself forward as "ME ME ME ME ME
ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME."

I'm worried that a "One Event of a given type at a given time", however
it's implemented, would effectively reduce the choice of Event in much
the same way that your choice of master cards is still, after all this
time, dominated by Minion Tap, Blood Doll and Tribute to the Master.
Not that new cards have been bad (Tribute being a good example of a good
card sneaking in a later set than Jyhad/V:TES), it's just that those
cards are so persuasive when making decisions about what to include for
such a limited resource.

So if you end up with one Event being in play at a time, will most decks
using Gehenna Events to empower themselves (rather than screw the whole
table) just default to 3 copies of Anthelios, and not branch out into
other good Gehenna cards? It would be an unusual deck that would put
one out for a bit, only to replace it later.

For the "screw with the table" events, this isn't such a bad thing -
particularly where they have "Must have two Gehenna events in play
already" type requirements. They screw with the table, then upgrade the
amount they're screwing with it until they get it just right.

I just don't really want to downgrade and simplify choices about
positive events being used in non-confusing, non-aggravating, non-
abusive ways.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
James Coupe
2006-07-01 12:44:27 UTC
Permalink
Thinking about this, some comments in no particular order; I've
reshuffled some of the points to be next to each other, though.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Most Gehenna Event cards [not the Unmasking, Anthelios, Rise of the
Nephthali, Dragonbound]
EITHER Memories of Mortality OR the whole Nights of Reckoning expansion
If the Events go, I'm not sure the Imbued are capable of anything quite
so egregious that there are huge problems with them and MoM both
existing at the same time. We don't seem to be having many screams of
"OMG THE IMBUED ARE SO BROKEN" from players where non-Gehenna Imbued
decks have been put together, at least.

I'd also tend to favour a fix to MoM, rather than wholesale banning. If
the playing Methuselah has an Imbued, bring it in tapped and make it
wait a turn (only functions when untapped). Or if there are any Imbued
in play, give it an alternative burn clause. That sort of thing.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Direct Intervention
Sudden Reversal
While arguments about Direct Intervention have raged ever since it was
printed, I think that Sudden Reversal is a necessary part of the game
given that it's well targeted at just master cards.

Removing too many ways of interfering with other people's strategies
turns the game into multi-player Solitaire - see who sorts out their
combo first. SR is a good way of interfering, without being overboard.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Pentex Subversion
Being unique, I don't view this as too bad. I also think we don't
particularly want to encourage single-vampire strategies (as opposed to
Star vampire, with hoard of fans)
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Temptation of Greater Power, Graverobbing and Hostile Takeover
ToGP and HT have both been nuked, to the point that I don't have too
much of a problem with them. I think you'd also have to ban From A
Sinking Ship, which is unfortunate. ToGP is still powerful, but you
can't afford to build a whole deck around it (like used to be done) due
to its once per game cycle.

Graverobbing I don't like, but not because of the card. I don't like it
because it's part of Dominate, and I think Dominate is too powerful and,
if we were in 1994 with a crystal ball, I'd downsize Dominate's power in
huge, huge ways. I'm not sure it's worthy of a ban, however.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Protect Thine Own
So many things have been said about this card, for and against, that I
won't add anything here.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Freak Drive, or else make Freak Drive at superior once/turn
The fix to once per turn seems potentially reasonable, given Forced
March's text, though you might also want to look at Truth of a Thousand
Lies, potentially. Assuming there is a problem, is the problem the
current incarnation of NRA (e.g. not limiting "enter combat" actions, as
a type), specific vampires (e.g. Una, or Hesha in some incarnations), or
the cards?
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Slaughterhouse
I don't like the milling strategies, but that's mostly because of
Brinksmanship. I don't like entirely arbitrary elements being added to
a game which penalise someone for something which isn't a consideration
under any other circumstances - such as penalising people for playing
small decks or fast moving decks.

If Slaughterhouse were a problem, however, one fix springs to mind - one
per unique Harbinger in play, burn the excess at the beginning of your
turn - so you could play an extra one(s) and have them in play for a
turn, then get them burned during your next untap phase.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Border Skirmish
Whilst I take your point further down the thread about this affecting
everyone, I don't see it as being a problem. That is, in a purely
theoretic sense, it affects everyone in much the same way as some of the
more unhelpful Gehenna Events.

However, I can't motivate myself to care about it in the same way that I
can't motivate myself to want to change Screw the Masquerade or
Camarilla Threat, because I think the negative effect is so small
generally that I don't care.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Spirit Marionette
Malkavian Dementia [not sure i have the name right here - the one that
takes over malkavians and makes a VERY nasty combo with Derange]
My main thought here is that I'm surprised about the inclusion of these
two cards but not, for example, Mind Rape.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
John Flournoy
2006-06-26 19:54:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Admittingly, the header is kind of catchy but there is sadly some truth
in it.
Of course there will be a lot of you out there who will simply deny the
obvious truth that vtes is losing players and sales are declining, but
nevertheless it happens.
just look at the number of players attending tournaments: over the
last to year in most areas the numbers have been declining. the most
obvious beeing Budapest with an unthinkable low number of attendees at
this years qualifier (24 compared to around 80 in 2005)
Some numbers as a counter argument in North America, just looking at
this year's qualifiers (I'll ignore a couple of regions that rarely get
above a dozen players regardless):

Great Lakes: 39->61
NorthEast 33->39
Montreal 23->27
East Central 17->25
Atlantic 43->37

It's also worth noting that increased demand in the US has led to
adding qualifiers that weren't held in the previous year (like a 27-man
in Texas.)

So, by 'most areas' you mean '...of Europe', presumably? Seems like in
the US the numbers are either holding roughly steady or increasing this
year..
Post by Stefan Ferenci
stefan
-John Flournoy
Stefan Ferenci
2006-06-26 20:23:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Flournoy
Great Lakes: 39->61
does not count you are adding the numbers of 2 tourneys
Post by John Flournoy
East Central 17->25
this one had 50 in 04
Post by John Flournoy
Atlantic 43->37
So, by 'most areas' you mean '...of Europe', presumably? Seems like in
the US the numbers are either holding roughly steady or increasing this
year..
-John Flournoy
beeing european i naturally have more data for europe

stefan
Matthew T. Morgan
2006-06-26 20:35:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Post by John Flournoy
East Central 17->25
this one had 50 in 04
You guys should just drop this event from this whole argument. There were
factors contributing to the massive fluctuations in the attendance of the
EC qualifier in Northfield, New Jersey that don't have anything to do with
the vitality of vtes.

In 2004, the event was hyped early and often. 50 players showed up.

In 2005, there was a fairly good-sized snowstorm on the day of the
qualifier. Nothing to write home about, IMO. 17 players "braved" the
weather (which was really no big deal).

This year, the event was not at all well-publicized. There were a couple
threads on this group about that. Apparently some players wanted to
attend, but didn't know about the event until it was too late. 25 of us
got the memo in time.

Matt Morgan
John Flournoy
2006-06-26 21:05:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Post by John Flournoy
Great Lakes: 39->61
does not count you are adding the numbers of 2 tourneys
Fine. Looking at one tournament: 39->45.

Plus enough demand that a second qualifier tournament in the same
region was held that had an additional 21 players that weren't at the
first regional - in fact, the two tournaments held close geographically
had almost zero overlap of players (something like 4 total.)

Whether you look at one tournament or two in this region, more players
went both to qualifiers and to a single qualifier in this region than
had the year before.

It's also worth noting that there really isn't any area in the US where
playgroups have been dramatically vanishing (as seems to be the case in
Europe) - even if one given tournament is comparatively small here,
there's usually an extenuating circumstance and in general the numbers
for a given area here have been consistent over time.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
beeing european i naturally have more data for europe
Understandable - I'm just pointing out that saying 'most places are
declining' is a little bit of a flawed argument when you're only using
data from (part of) a single continental area.

That doesn't invalidate the fact that the tournament environment you
are most familiar with has been dropping significantly, nor your
guesses as to why - just pointing out that different areas have not all
been experiencing the same change.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
stefan
Ankur Gupta
2006-06-26 20:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Stefan, a few comments. Nothing personal as an attack against you, but I
think you're judging things in far too much of an "Arika or lose" sort of
way. It's a flaw of a lot of players who've been playing for a while.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Anarchs: great hopes big disappointment, introducing a new mechanic
(anarchism) but with to few good cards to make it worth playing, there
is no benefit for barony compared to princehood or archbishopness (sorry
for my bad english), the cards are not good enough to make the big
investment (gamewise) worth enough. i agree anarchs got a few good cards
the last few sets but to few to late (people dont want to wait years for
there cards to become playyable). and still they the are not really
playable tournamentwise. anarchs had horrible rares and bad starters
The "wait to play" anarchs argument doesn't really make any sense now,
though. Anarchs do plenty well and are definitely capable of manifesting
winning strategies. I don't really feel that most players have given them
a fair shake. It requires a paradigm shift on the part of players to see
the strength of the mechanic.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Black hand: Another set same mistakes. new mechanic, not enough vamps,
not enough good cards, 2 or 3 new decks types at best, horrible rares
(crusade anyone) still the decent new vamps and the very playable
starters rescued this set.
In my opinion, BH brought the single strongest and most playable set since
Camarilla. The tools available to BH vampires are strong and ubiquitous.
They are worth going BH, for many different archetypes. I think you've
horribly under-estimated them. The BH set, if I recall had 2-4 crusades.
Not particularly stellar, but I didn't mind 2-4 crusade slots. Sabbat
vampires have a means to become BH and hunt at the same time. BH vampires
fight well, bleed well, and block well. They have other tricks available
to them to untap. Marijava Thuggees are extremely strong. I don't see your
argument.

If your argument is based on "comparison to Arika and friends" or
"!Malkavian S/B", then your arguments can be generalized to almost all
decks everywhere. If not, then I'd venture to say that your arguments are
just spot-on wrong.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Gehenna: new mechanic that took up most rare slots without beeing overly
playable. the events create an unnessary rabdomness to vtes, killing
Gehenna events were plenty playable and, in small doses, quite interesting
to play with (and against). Gehenna events are plagued by the "abusive"
uses. Peppering these into decks can really make a positive difference!
However, I'll concede that these events are destabilizing in large
numbers, and especially so considering NoR.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
addendum: even almost 2 years and 3 sets later group3/4 for indies only
include 12 vamps, way to few to make them very competitive. adding
insult to injury the diszispread of a lot of the new vamps is rather
odd.
I find group 3/4 Indies quite competitive. Some decks are quite dangerous.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
KMW: new mechanic way to cornercase to even consider playing it (i know
your great cock deck norm) taking up a lot of rare slots, horrible
starters (playwise) overall very dissappointing.
The real problem here is that they didn't somehow make the cards/vampires
from FN available that people would want to play with the cards in this
set. To me, this was the biggest failure of KMW.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
to buy 5 booster boxes to get 10 reprint commons, creating 4 new clans
which are not only bad design wise (defense seems neglectable in
Africa) but with only 11 members totally unplayble at a tourney level(
If I recall correctly, all *four* of the new clans have made strong
appearances in the tournament scene. In the GLQ with 40-some-odd people,
for instance, Ishtarri and Akunanse did remarkably well. (6th and final
table, respectively.) Guruhi has no shortage of strong appearances, as it
epitomizes vote/bloat/beat. I haven't heard of wins with Osebo, but
there's a very nice deck here in Lafayette that does well at blocking
itself to victory.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
adding again insult to injury we are still missing the lost Osebo (see
what happens if you are defenseless in africa) but what angered players
most: one had to invest an high amount of money to get a playable deck
out of LoB, what could have been a great set getting players into the
game turn out to be a major turnoff
Playable deck in LoB: buy starter. Augment with cards you already own.
Total cost is $10. Total fun: Priceless.

For added oomph, buy another of the same starter. Or, sprinkle in some
booster purchases if you wish. I saw a guy nearly win a constructed
tournament with an unmodified Guruhi starter deck.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
NoR: i would like Nor if not for the interaction with the gehenna
events, what could have been a great small set turned out just to be
another major blow for an already declining game.
NoR isn't a good set, in my opinion. Here, I agree with you.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
so what about the future: WW anounced a major drive to get new players
in this game. but 1 base set will not be enough, even if this set is
flawless (the dangers are there: crappy reprints will missing key cards,
will we see group 5?) the next set has to build on this one.
1 base set + all the stuff currently in print should be enough. The next
set is free to do whatever it wants, as this is a base set designed to
provide basic cards. Who knows what WW will do after that? Why speculate
about something a year in advance?
Post by Stefan Ferenci
every new player has to get cards in this next set that he can use, so
it again should focus on sabbat. a new black hand set could be a
possibility (WW could even included and black hand assamite starter).
True, but the current BH set is quite good by itself. It's playable with
the group 4 vampires that will probably be in the Sabbat base set. What's
the problem?
Post by Stefan Ferenci
it is imperative in order to keep the new players in the game that they
can use 90% of the new cards if the only own the 3rd edition set, if
they again get a set that can only be played if you own plenty of old
cards, or cannot be played at all, they will leave vtes pretty soon.
With group 4 vampires in the new Sabbat base set, all sets currently in
print will have the correct grouping. They will range from groups 3 to 5.
I'm not seeing the problem. 3rd edition is intended to be a base set,
usable with many sets of cards. I'm not seeing the problem. The game has
strong strategies, that force old players to think fresh and are still
accessible to new players. I'm not seeing the problem.

What's the problem?

Ankur Gupta
Prince of West Lafayette
Orpheus
2006-06-26 21:39:12 UTC
Permalink
(weird, why don't I get > brackets when I answer messages ? respond in
private anyone who has an idea, I'll put them manually...)
Post by Stefan Ferenci
First of all i dont want this to degenerate into a flame war, so please
refrain from posting insulting answers to this post, if you dont agree
fine, just explain your point of view without beeing an ass!

YEEAAAAH, let's RANT !! B-]
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Admittingly, the header is kind of catchy but there is sadly some truth
in it. Of course there will be a lot of you out there who will simply deny
the
obvious truth that vtes is losing players and sales are declining, but
nevertheless it happens.

(snip)

I wouldn't know about that. But I know how my feeling towards the game has
evolved, and how it has led me to buy less and less, and that I'm not the
only one. So maybe I can answer your post based on these personnal
experiences, not statistics.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
I wondered why this happened and talked to a lot of players what they
considered reasons or why they left. The mass of players stoped playing
because they simply did not recieve enough value for there money (NO i
nor they think that vtes is to expensive).

Well, I do think that it's becoming more and more *costly*, if not expensive
: the frequency of expansions, the number of boxes needed to get "all the
good cards" will do that.
I'm surprised that you start with CE. Does it mean that everything before
that was nifty ? I guess it was, at that... Sabbat War, Final Nights,
Bloodlines were all fine (despite a few problems we'll talk about later).
Post by Stefan Ferenci
CE: good base set that was a good starting point for newbies, no wonder
its sold out.

Agreed. Although its weakness was obviously on the crypt side for the
players who got their G2 from the starters and missed some very important
combinations with G1 (Anson with the Tores for example). But it probably
didn't phase the new players, and the old ones had their old vamps and got
new ones, all was fine.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Anarchs: great hopes big disappointment, introducing a new mechanic
(anarchism) but with to few good cards to make it worth playing, there
is no benefit for barony compared to princehood or archbishopness
(sorry for my bad english), the cards are not good enough to make the
big investment (gamewise) worth enough. i agree anarchs got a few good
cards the last few sets but to few to late (people dont want to wait
years for there cards to become playyable). and still they the are not
really playable tournamentwise. anarchs had horrible rares and bad
starters

Totally right of course. And having tried the online VTES, believe me it's
very frustrating to have access to Anarchs without the cards that make them
interesting to play and even remotely competitive : Undue Influence, Gear
Up, Powerbase : LA come to mind.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Black hand: Another set same mistakes. new mechanic, not enough vamps,
not enough good cards,
2 or 3 new decks types at best, horrible rares (crusade anyone)

Sure ! But then this was a trouble with Sabbat War, one of the reasons why I
stopped buying more at a time when I needed some cards from it : between the
Crusades and the clan hosers, I got sick and tired of getting the same crap
all over. And still Sabbat War sold. Guess there were lots of good new cards
and reprints in it then.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
still
the decent new vamps and the very playable starters rescued this set.

Ok. Yes, the BH mechanics are nearly never used, hopefully 3rd Edition will
help them with a few good cards + vamps ; if it doesn't, then that specific
sub-sect is likely to fall into the oblivion it currently deserves (newbie :
"- What does this Black Hand thing mean ?" oldbie : "- Never mind, it's
totally useless, you have other things to learn young Padawan")
Post by Stefan Ferenci
Gehenna: new mechanic that took up most rare slots without beeing
overly playable.

There I must disagree. Some of them are very playable. And some are even
useful on their own. But they are an exception, yes. I'm thinking :
Unmasking, Rise of the Nephtali, Dragonbound, and... uh... Ok, these ! (and
of course the metabroken Anthelios, but it doesn't count as it was a promo).

And of course making the Camarilla and Sabbat fall is a very calculated way
for indies or laibon to help with their votes, but the setup it requires is
so complicated it has few chances to succeed, so I would place them in the
"cornercase" category rather than "random brokenness".
Post by Stefan Ferenci
the events create an unnessary rabdomness to vtes,
killing alot of decks, without adaequate countermeasures

It shouldn't be the case, and isn't the case in most decks including a few
Gehennas. But it is with Mass Gehenna, a strategy that wasn't very viable
except for some weird Temptation decks maybe, and now sadly with Imbued.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
introduction of group 4 indies giving group 3/4 the very playable
numbers of 4 vamps per clan!!!!!!!, !!!

That was UGLY !!
Post by Stefan Ferenci
(with the promise that the next set will include plenty indies to make
up for it, giving players cards that are not playable for a few months)
addendum: even almost 2 years and 3 sets later group3/4 for indies only
include 12 vamps, way to few to make them very competitive. adding
insult to injury the diszispread of a lot of the new vamps is rather
odd.

Agreed, although some are already effectively playable at this point. But
it's far from satisfying yet, and I'd guess the main reason why we play
those new vamps are more to avoid contesting with the "good" ones and
because we're tired of the same old faces rather than because they're more
efficient (which wouldn't be good) or offer many new possibilities (which
would be good). This being said, the new Ravnos do offer new possibilities,
which has the downside of not letting them be as good as the G2 for the
"main" clan strategy because there are so few of them. Same could be said of
the Giovanni, who gain the For strategy, but could use more bleeders or,
dare I say it, voters ? The Assamites also gained new possibilities stemming
from cards and from 1 vamp (guess who ?). And the setites... What ?
Point is : many new niceties, but not nearly enough guys to make efficient
and varied strategies. And before we have 24 of each, we'll have to wait...
How long again ?!? No, I'm not asking for closer expansions, just for better
spread of vamps in each ! Trouble is : in AH, DS, and therefore (even more
so) in FN, the core of the vamps was from the 4 indie clans. In Gehenna we
got so many from the other clans that the indies were scorned !! Bleah.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
KMW: new mechanic way to cornercase to even consider playing it (i know
your great cock deck norm) taking up a lot of rare slots, horrible
starters (playwise) overall very dissappointing.

Ok. You're of course totally right about the stupid Red List cards (although
the mechanism can have its interests to tune down good vamps, but then...
talk about that later). But this expansion also had GREAT commons. And
that's a very good thing. When I have the choice about the boosts I win
(when I do) in tournaments, I pick them from one of the last 2 expansions,
so that's a good sign.
Post by Stefan Ferenci
LoB: the biggest mistake WW made which cost them most. mixing to
different sets that dont match, reprinting commons as rares, reprinting
old cards but in such a high rarity that the on average you would need
to buy 5 booster boxes to get 10 reprint commons, creating 4 new clans
which are not only bad design wise (defense seems neglectable in
Africa) but with only 11 members totally unplayble at a tourney level(
i am aware of mattŽs deck that made the finals at templecon)
adding again insult to injury we are still missing the lost Osebo (see
what happens if you are defenseless in africa) but what angered players
most: one had to invest an high amount of money to get a playable deck
out of LoB, what could have been a great set getting players into the
game turn out to be a major turnoff

Ok. With that one too there were great commons, maybe even better than in
KMW. But that's a part of the problem : with so many cards, the commons are
as rare as... Rares !! So it's a pain in the butt getting all you want,
especially if you don't intend to totally ignore some clans. Bummer...

Now the 4 Laibon clans are not as bad as you make them, but certainly
they're not as competitive as most of the others, and certainly the number
of vamps hurts them a lot !!!
Post by Stefan Ferenci
NoR: i would like Nor if not for the interaction with the gehenna
events, what could have been a great small set turned out just to be
another major blow for an already declining game.

I wouldn't have liked it anyway. But let me tell you, it feels weird going
into a store and seeing something weird with VTES marked on it, and
wondering what it is, and... It's NoR ! The "new" expansion. I didn't buy
any, nor will I, and it's a sign that something's wrong...
Post by Stefan Ferenci
so what about the future: WW anounced a major drive to get new players
in this game. but 1 base set will not be enough, even if this set is
flawless (the dangers are there: crappy reprints will missing key
cards, will we see group 5?) the next set has to build on this one.
every new player has to get cards in this next set that he can use, so
it again should focus on sabbat. a new black hand set could be a
possibility (WW could even included and black hand assamite starter).
it is imperative in order to keep the new players in the game that they
can use 90% of the new cards if the only own the 3rd edition set, if
they again get a set that can only be played if you own plenty of old
cards, or cannot be played at all, they will leave vtes pretty soon.

Now we have another problem. Old players have enough cards to play a
lifetime already. Will they want more Disarms ? More Majesty ? More
Telepathic Counter ? Maybe some of them. Most won't. More G4 vamps ? Maybe.
G5 ? even less. So why buy this new set ? Because you have money to waste ?
I wish I did. Because you wanna show support ? Erm, WW made it clear that
our fun was their business, not a caritative association. For the few new
cards ? I personnaly think I might buy a few boosts (no starter probably)
and get the rest from ebay. Oh BTW Stefan, the starters have already been
announced and they're not Assamites of course.

So this new set could appeal more to new players than old ones. And that's
the real trouble : VTES isn't Magic, one more time ! There is a core of very
faithful players, have been for years, while Magic gets new players when old
ones drop out. I don't know what is gonna happen to get new players into the
game, but I have the feeling that it can't happen as fast as the coming
expansions need to sell. So it could mean bad omens, yes. Or not.

And one last thing you didn't mention but that I dislike : a LOT of G4 vamps
seem on one side overpowered, and on another side with such a big weakness
they're almost unplayable ! Examples ? Sonja Blue, Jacob the Glitch, Hector
Trelaine, Mustapha the Heir etc !! What use to us are vampires so powerful
they need to be tuned out to the point of uselessness (sometimes depending
on context) ?! Is that the only solution WW found to produce new vamps
without creating a dire sensation of deja-vu ?

Let's wait and see what WW has in store (pun intended) for us, but I'm not
very optimistic either. I think the safest way might be to think more in
terms of satisfying the player base and less of increasing the benefits at
all costs. If they chose to go that way maybe they can take some advice from
your rant... Or what follows !
--
Orpheus
-------------------
"- You got married ?
- Yes.
- Why ?
- Why do people get married ?
- Passive aggressive neurosis."

Matt Murdock and Natasha Romanovna
a***@hotmail.com
2006-06-26 22:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Some simple answers:

- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).

- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.

- Start focusing new sets on renewing the game without DESTROYING it
(Ex. no events that shuts down all constructive play, most old skewl
decks and destroys table balance, and no new concepts that resemble
Magic the Gathering more than VtES - yes, I think of NoR, with most of
the time going to shuffle your deck and makes the table almost
impossible to overlook with 4-5 minions packing 5-6 cards each.)

- Make good starters, ie make ALL starters in a set balanced against
eachother.

- Print R1´s and maybe boxtops (It sells boosters).

- Print a Inconnu-set with kewl cards based on Golconda-stuff (and some
infernal-stuff).

- Print kewl (yet balanced) cards that makes it worth to play
previously seldom seen cards. With this I mean for example cards for
high-cap vamps without fortitude and funtions like "this card become
better if you have super-shitty rare X in play".

- Print a whole set that focuses on politics.

- Print alternate-art cards as promos.

- Make sure that cards arrive in time so that pre-release events in all
parts of the world can be held as pre-release events instead of
post-release events.

- Hire me as creative consultant and my pal Erik Torstensson as head of
playtesters.

There is no end to the possibilities!
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-26 22:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
You ARE having a long-necked African mammal here, right? Border
Skirmish is an AWESOMELY table-screwing card and TOTALLY playable, as,
erm, about four other people can verify. Ban the bugger, before other
people stumble in the footsteps of the Great Peal!!!!!!!

<snip other, erm, strange stuff>
FC
2006-06-27 07:54:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
You ARE having a long-necked African mammal here, right? Border
Skirmish is an AWESOMELY table-screwing card and TOTALLY playable, as,
erm, about four other people can verify. Ban the bugger, before other
people stumble in the footsteps of the Great Peal!!!!!!!
<snip other, erm, strange stuff>
I take that you don't like milling strategies

I can see that. I'd like to add Anthelios recursion decks to the list of
things-that-should-not-be if i may :)

Frede
A.J.Behrends
2006-06-27 09:33:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
You ARE having a long-necked African mammal here, right? Border
Skirmish is an AWESOMELY table-screwing card and TOTALLY playable, as,
erm, about four other people can verify. Ban the bugger, before other
people stumble in the footsteps of the Great Peal!!!!!!!
This statement makes me curious.

In which way is Border Skirmish table-screwing while you defend
Raptor as non-screwing strategy?
(think you stated this, but I'm too lazy to verify)

Which setup makes you think this?

IMO the 7 Raptor setup (maybe combined with Earth Meld/Psyche)
is game-screwing. Much higher "milling-rate" than BS.

-Alf
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-27 10:30:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by A.J.Behrends
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
You ARE having a long-necked African mammal here, right? Border
Skirmish is an AWESOMELY table-screwing card and TOTALLY playable, as,
erm, about four other people can verify. Ban the bugger, before other
people stumble in the footsteps of the Great Peal!!!!!!!
This statement makes me curious.
In which way is Border Skirmish table-screwing while you defend
Raptor as non-screwing strategy?
(think you stated this, but I'm too lazy to verify)
Which setup makes you think this?
IMO the 7 Raptor setup (maybe combined with Earth Meld/Psyche)
is game-screwing. Much higher "milling-rate" than BS.
-Alf
It's directed against one opponent, whereas Border skirmish affects
everyone. BS is an environment-degrading card, if you like.

i don't actually object to the milling strategy as such - i just think
Slaughterhouse is too powerful an adjunct to such a strategy. Unique
slaughterhouse might be tolerable, i suppose.
r***@gmail.com
2006-06-27 12:33:04 UTC
Permalink
This is all IMO - the first draft was just an IMO, IMO, IMHO fest, so
I've editied to one statement before I get going with unqualified
assertions of truth :)

Personally I think the comments of the original poster about the
usability of the various sets are about right.

Particularly regarding the useability of the G4 independants and the
insufficient deployment of the cards using the new mechanics as they
are introduced.

I also think NoR is a particularly poor idea from both the conceptual
(non vampires in crypt) and practical points of view. (in essence its a
case of "fancy playing this deck archetype? buy this set. Don't?
NOTHING for you in this set." waste of a release for my money, hence
its not getting any of my money)

NoR would have been FAR better implemented as a new "class" of allies
recruited in the same vein, possibly with a "Master: put an ally into
play from your hand" card to facilitate heavier use.

Events have needed fixing for a while now. Post NoR more so. I have no
doubt that event fuelled imbued will be tuned to being (very) powerful
in time. This is a clear cut case, for me, of a poor decision being
taken with no regard to the implications given another, previous poor
decision. Giving a catastrophically bad compound outcome.

My master plan for fixing events?

Change the base rules:
"Any vampire with a capacity above X can take a (D) action to burn an
Event card in play, if the action is successful send the acting vampire
to torpor"
Pick a sensible X (4 maybe? 6? not sure)

Errata Emergency Preperations to:
"Master Out-Of-Turn (costs 1 pool) Burn an Event card as it is played,
or untap a ready vampire you control"
(note no longer played in your minion phase, just an alternate to Wake
- meaning useable in many, many decks, also BOTH uses cost 1 pool,
finally not limited to gehenna events.)

AND/OR:
Errata Misdirection:
"Master (costs 1 pool) Burn an event card in play or tap a ready
minon".

That would leave all events playable, but the event player needs to be
prepared to offer at least token defense if they rely on them,
meanwhile you don't need to prepare a specific narrow defense for
events, but that defense isn't too cheap, and hence knee-jerky, either.


Overall, for the general good of the game, new set releases need to
cease and desist with the insistance that every new set MUST have new
Clan/Discipline/Sect/Mechanic or if possible 2 or 3 of that list. There
is a severe, bordering exponential, bloat of complexity with each new
release. This is a barrier to entry for new players unless they only
play with new players, and also a disincentive to casual play.

This is speaking as a casual player in the process of trying to teach
new players who are thinking of joining our casual group - we have 1
potential new player left out of 4 after 3 games, and we DID make
specifically new-player-friendly decks. The reason the other 3 aren't
continuing? Too much to learn for a hobby/game. we limited the decks to
light stealth+intercept (max +2 of either, balanced opportunities
across decks), combat (balanced: no majesty or immortal grapple type
stuff, just undead strength/skin of rock levels of cards, no agg damage
etc) and bleed (more bleed than bloat to keep the games reasonably
short)
Orpheus
2006-06-27 12:57:17 UTC
Permalink
(snip)
Post by r***@gmail.com
I also think NoR is a particularly poor idea from both the conceptual
(non vampires in crypt) and practical points of view. (in essence its a
case of "fancy playing this deck archetype? buy this set. Don't?
NOTHING for you in this set." waste of a release for my money, hence
its not getting any of my money)
NoR would have been FAR better implemented as a new "class" of allies
recruited in the same vein, possibly with a "Master: put an ally into
play from your hand" card to facilitate heavier use.
Not sure it would have been the good solution, but looks like a lot of
people agree that NoR is too far from VTES "core" to be included safely in
tournaments.
Post by r***@gmail.com
My master plan for fixing events?
"Any vampire with a capacity above X can take a (D) action to burn an
Event card in play, if the action is successful send the acting vampire
to torpor"
Pick a sensible X (4 maybe? 6? not sure)
No, we'd never see an event in game again.
Post by r***@gmail.com
"Master Out-Of-Turn (costs 1 pool) Burn an Event card as it is played,
or untap a ready vampire you control"
(note no longer played in your minion phase, just an alternate to Wake
- meaning useable in many, many decks, also BOTH uses cost 1 pool,
finally not limited to gehenna events.)
Don't forget EP is limited to 8+ vamps, and requires 2 Gehennas in play.
Maybe that's the part that could be errated (sort of counter-intuitive,
burning other gehennas while you require some...).
Post by r***@gmail.com
"Master (costs 1 pool) Burn an event card in play or tap a ready
minon".
Interesting.

I guess more event-burning cards will be seen as time goes. Maybe in 3rd Ed
? Fact is, as of now, they're not flexible enough to include (Not To Be
could... be, but "as it is played" doesn't cut it).
Post by r***@gmail.com
Overall, for the general good of the game, new set releases need to
cease and desist with the insistance that every new set MUST have new
Clan/Discipline/Sect/Mechanic or if possible 2 or 3 of that list. There
is a severe, bordering exponential, bloat of complexity with each new
release. This is a barrier to entry for new players unless they only
play with new players, and also a disincentive to casual play.
I'm surprised it hasn't been mentionned before in this thread. You're
totally on point here ! Yes, that's starting to be a big obstacle for
newbies, and also for oldbies who stopped the game and would like to restart
it ! I made an "oldbies initiation" game lately with some of my decks (not
made on purpose, I thought "they knew how to play, it's gonna be easy") and
found out how bothersome it was to explain all the new mechanisms (I had
some laibon, Bloodlines, slave gargoyles, lucky I hadn't brought any Anarch
deck, etc.).
Post by r***@gmail.com
This is speaking as a casual player in the process of trying to teach
new players who are thinking of joining our casual group - we have 1
potential new player left out of 4 after 3 games, and we DID make
specifically new-player-friendly decks. The reason the other 3 aren't
continuing? Too much to learn for a hobby/game. we limited the decks to
light stealth+intercept (max +2 of either, balanced opportunities
across decks), combat (balanced: no majesty or immortal grapple type
stuff, just undead strength/skin of rock levels of cards, no agg damage
etc) and bleed (more bleed than bloat to keep the games reasonably
short)
Maybe those restrictions were bad ? Newbies need to succeed in stealth bleed
sometimes ! ;-)

But seriously, thank you for addressing that part of the problem in this
specific thread (although it has been done repeatedly in other threads
these last months).
--
Orpheus
-------------------
"- You got married ?
- Yes.
- Why ?
- Why do people get married ?
- Passive aggressive neurosis."

Matt Murdock and Natasha Romanovna
r***@gmail.com
2006-06-27 13:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by r***@gmail.com
"Any vampire with a capacity above X can take a (D) action to burn an
Event card in play, if the action is successful send the acting vampire
to torpor"
Pick a sensible X (4 maybe? 6? not sure)
No, we'd never see an event in game again.
Yes, actually I find that an entirely acceptable proposition. So my
idea is certainly somewhat biased.
Post by Orpheus
Post by r***@gmail.com
"Master Out-Of-Turn (costs 1 pool) Burn an Event card as it is played,
or untap a ready vampire you control"
(note no longer played in your minion phase, just an alternate to Wake
- meaning useable in many, many decks, also BOTH uses cost 1 pool,
finally not limited to gehenna events.)
Don't forget EP is limited to 8+ vamps, and requires 2 Gehennas in play.
Maybe that's the part that could be errated (sort of counter-intuitive,
burning other gehennas while you require some...).
Those restrictions were specifically what I was removing, to make the
(changed) card more generally playable and less of a narrow defense.
Post by Orpheus
I guess more event-burning cards will be seen as time goes. Maybe in 3rd Ed
? Fact is, as of now, they're not flexible enough to include (Not To Be
could... be, but "as it is played" doesn't cut it).
Any card which ONLY counters events is too narrow. To paraphrase
another poster in another thread, it is requiring you to load up silver
bullets to defend against this single possible offence. (in a situation
where silver bullets hurt the "werewolf", but nothing else, so its kind
of a bad analogy actually...)
Post by Orpheus
Maybe those restrictions were bad ? Newbies need to succeed in stealth bleed
sometimes ! ;-)
I should clarify: balanced access to stealth and bleed doesn't mean
equal sized dollops of stealth and bleed in every deck. In general
there was more stealth than bleed available; in order to keep the game
heading to a resolution, much like the less bloat than bleed decision.

Each deck also had access to bounce, since thats a fairly simple
concept to pick up, and puts a smile on everyone's face when the bleed
goes round the table.

In all, our decisions on deck construction worked really pretty well
(games took under an hour each), and the session was fun. The problem
was the huge amount of "what does _this_ mean?" (anarch, black hand,
all but 3 or 4 disciplines, group number, etc) which was countered with
brief discussions and a "it doesn't affect this game though". But you
could see the look on people's faces: "there's a vast pit of complexity
opening up before me, do I want to step over the edge?!? no..."

Oh, and a throw away: the one who kept going? he is a WW LARP player...
Orpheus
2006-06-27 14:33:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by r***@gmail.com
"Any vampire with a capacity above X can take a (D) action to burn an
Event card in play, if the action is successful send the acting vampire
to torpor"
Pick a sensible X (4 maybe? 6? not sure)
No, we'd never see an event in game again.
Yes, actually I find that an entirely acceptable proposition. So my
idea is certainly somewhat biased.
Lol. Might be. Some events are perfectly acceptable and have a positive
effect for the decks playing them other than screwing the table around (list
already made in this thread).
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Orpheus
Post by r***@gmail.com
"Master Out-Of-Turn (costs 1 pool) Burn an Event card as it is played,
or untap a ready vampire you control"
(note no longer played in your minion phase, just an alternate to Wake
- meaning useable in many, many decks, also BOTH uses cost 1 pool,
finally not limited to gehenna events.)
Don't forget EP is limited to 8+ vamps, and requires 2 Gehennas in play.
Maybe that's the part that could be errated (sort of counter-intuitive,
burning other gehennas while you require some...).
Those restrictions were specifically what I was removing, to make the
(changed) card more generally playable and less of a narrow defense.
Ok. I'd keep the 8+, or at least 7+, as it was a tentative to give big vamps
without access to Freak Drive a way to untap. But the 2 Gehennas sort of
screw that.
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Orpheus
I guess more event-burning cards will be seen as time goes. Maybe in 3rd Ed
? Fact is, as of now, they're not flexible enough to include (Not To Be
could... be, but "as it is played" doesn't cut it).
Any card which ONLY counters events is too narrow.
Yes. Or which give bad alternative, as that Black Hand card (could be nice
if you didn't untap *younger* Black Hands) !!

(...)
Post by r***@gmail.com
Oh, and a throw away: the one who kept going? he is a WW LARP player...
What a surprise !! :-(
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
i***@gmail.com
2006-06-27 21:20:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Not sure it would have been the good solution, but looks like a lot of
people agree that NoR is too far from VTES "core" to be included safely in
tournaments.
Except for those people who bought the cards expecting to be able to
play them.

John Eno
Orpheus
2006-06-27 22:12:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@gmail.com
Post by Orpheus
Not sure it would have been the good solution, but looks like a lot of
people agree that NoR is too far from VTES "core" to be included safely in
tournaments.
Except for those people who bought the cards expecting to be able to
play them.
Except them, of course. Then they must have been disappointed with how the
set and the general reactions of other players turned out ? Well, anyway
they can play them in private games. I wouldn't be talking of a "ban this
set" thing, just "do not admit it in tournament. For a card it's the same,
for a set I don't think so.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
i***@gmail.com
2006-06-27 22:50:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by i***@gmail.com
Except for those people who bought the cards expecting to be able to
play them.
Except them, of course. Then they must have been disappointed with how the
set and the general reactions of other players turned out ?
Not so far as I know. I can only speak for myself, but I really like
the set, and I'm glad I bought it. I think that a lot of other players'
negative reactions have been silly (ohmygodskyisfalling) and
unwarranted (the imbued ruin all my games even though it's those cards
from Gehenna which are actually ruining some of my games). But I don't
really care all that much, aside from rolling my eyes a lot.
Post by Orpheus
Well, anyway
they can play them in private games.
I've never seen a playgroup that doesn't play by tournament rules,
particularly a public group that isn't playing in someone's basement.
So banning a card (or set, in this case) from tournaments is
effectively banning it from play. It would be simply ridiculous to do
that to an entire set, particularly given how new the set is.
Post by Orpheus
I wouldn't be talking of a "ban this
set" thing, just "do not admit it in tournament. For a card it's the same,
for a set I don't think so.
You're objectively wrong. Banning a card from tournaments and not
admitting a card in tournaments are the same; banning a set from
tournaments and not admitting a set in tournaments are the same.

John Eno
Graham Smith
2006-06-28 08:39:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@gmail.com
Not so far as I know. I can only speak for myself, but I really like
the set, and I'm glad I bought it.
I'm going to jump in the middle here and agree with John. I thought
the NoR set was an interesting addition to the game and has rekindled
my interest in VTES a LOT. I would go as far to say that personally
NoR has saved VTES for me and I'm getting the same enjoyment from the
game that I got when I first started playing with Final Nights
starters.

Graham.

PS My Imbued decks do not feature large amounts of events, just Tthe
Unmasking and maybe Edge Explosion.
Orpheus
2006-06-28 12:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@gmail.com
Except for those people who bought the cards expecting to be able to
play them.
Ok, so it seems like some people actually LIKE NoR !! lol

So let me be more precise in my assertions : I think that NoR makes for a
totally different game, and not only because you play hunters ! Different
game mechanisms, and possibly mass events, longer games because of the
numerous cards on minions, etc. So I'd advocate not authorizing that
extension at least for championships and qualifier events, because it could
totally screw a good player, just for "being there". It's hard enough to
plan for a metagame, but NoR is something too different and hazardous for
something very official. I imagine very good players (can only imagine them
you know ;-) being very, very upset because the presence of a Hunter
crosstable screws totally his plans.

I think there should be a choice whether to make tournaments with "vampires
only" or the whole WoD (soon in a theater near you), and restrict big events
to Vamp crypts only.

Why ? Well, some players obviously are happy with NoR. But as you can see
many, many others think it's a big problem, and I can see that in friendly
games too ("You're playing Imbued ? Bummeeeeeer !"). To the point where
players actually might be disgusted from the game, at least where Imbued are
there, or oust them crosstable, or oust themselves. And I'm not only talking
bad players either !

So this is about getting more people in and less out, right ? Restricted
tournaments might be a way to go, then. Nothing about "banning" actually.
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".

The Drummer, in Planetary.
x***@gmx.de
2006-06-29 06:47:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Ok, so it seems like some people actually LIKE NoR !! lol
I think there is one thing we can agree on:

If you are an older VTES player (by years of playing and real), if you
are unflexible and want the game to stay like it was before and if you
like whining in public, you will probably use this newsgroup more often
than players, who like the actual trend of VTES.

(I saw one hunter deck in a tournament. The player played very fast,
had not to discuss any vote with other players, didnt needed times for
things like Ravnos Carnival or the special of some vampires. Afterwards
the other players whined, how the hunters take to long time. That was
really a selffullfilling prophecie.)

Frank
Orpheus
2006-06-29 09:46:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by Orpheus
Ok, so it seems like some people actually LIKE NoR !! lol
If you are an older VTES player (by years of playing and real), if you
are unflexible and want the game to stay like it was before and if you
like whining in public, you will probably use this newsgroup more often
than players, who like the actual trend of VTES.
No. If you want to whine, you'll come to this forum. But you will also
express yourself if you feel there's a need for improvement (or just ideas,
suggestions) and want to help with the evolution of your game.

I don't want to hear "older players need to whine" as a Truth. Older players
will tend to be more critical, sure, and it might be sometimes because the
initial enthusiasm wore off, or because they are rigid, but please also give
them credit for having dug the game enough to have some profound thoughts
and / or questionnings about it.
Post by x***@gmx.de
(I saw one hunter deck in a tournament. The player played very fast,
had not to discuss any vote with other players, didnt needed times for
things like Ravnos Carnival or the special of some vampires. Afterwards
the other players whined, how the hunters take to long time. That was
really a selffullfilling prophecie.)
I understand, you're then right about that specific game. And I also guess
he didn't play mass Gehenna, didn't have tons of cards on him, and didn't
unbalance the whole table ? Lucky you !!

I'll give you one more reason why I think Imbued shouldn't be allowed in
championship tournaments. Some things concern ALL vampires in the game.
Aggravated damage is one of them. There are ways to counter it, there are
already allies who don't fear them, but all in all there is always a way, a
moment where your aggropocks (or 2R aggrav, or whatever) will make a
difference. Well, I saw a few games where a player whose entire deck relied
on the perfectly viable tactics of aggropocks had an Imbued prey. His deck
was rendered, let's say, 75% ineffective (because he was a good player, had
a plan B etc). Still, the table was totally unbalanced from that point on.
"Just cause".

Every tactic has its counter-tactic, every deck has its anti-deck. But when
there are at least a minimum of vampires in the crypt, it's still the same
game. With Imbued, it's another game, let's call it WoD, and hope it will
get more (and hopefully better) expansions and variants, and that WoD
tournaments will allow all sorts of crypts including vampires and Imbued.
But I'd rather play VTES right now.
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".

The Drummer, in Planetary.
Derek Ray
2006-06-29 11:58:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by x***@gmx.de
If you are an older VTES player (by years of playing and real), if you
are unflexible and want the game to stay like it was before and if you
like whining in public, you will probably use this newsgroup more often
than players, who like the actual trend of VTES.
I don't want to hear "older players need to whine" as a Truth.
Yes, this is a misstatement.
Post by Orpheus
Every tactic has its counter-tactic, every deck has its anti-deck. But when
there are at least a minimum of vampires in the crypt, it's still the same
game. With Imbued, it's another game, let's call it WoD, and hope it will
get more (and hopefully better) expansions and variants, and that WoD
tournaments will allow all sorts of crypts including vampires and Imbued.
But I'd rather play VTES right now.
However, aren't you just proving his point right here? Clearly, you
want the game to stay the way it was with no major changes... and the
Imbued are certainly a major change. Perhaps having the game stay the
way it was (long, lots of table talk) is not the best way to gain new
players, nor the best way to 'save' V:TES.

Then again, I don't think anyone has successfully proven that V:TES
needs saving. What was it Oscar said in the "Wanna sell NoR?" thread...
they've sold through 80% of their Nights of Reckoning stock already?
SOMEONE must like it, huh?

But then, I'm just one of those old farts who likes to start from a
nice, solid premise, I guess.

- --
Derek

insert clever quotation here
FC
2006-06-30 12:19:44 UTC
Permalink
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Post by Orpheus
Post by x***@gmx.de
If you are an older VTES player (by years of playing and real), if you
are unflexible and want the game to stay like it was before and if you
like whining in public, you will probably use this newsgroup more often
than players, who like the actual trend of VTES.
I don't want to hear "older players need to whine" as a Truth.
Yes, this is a misstatement.
*shrug*. We may whine but thats because we are right and nobody can see
it ;)
Post by Orpheus
Every tactic has its counter-tactic, every deck has its anti-deck. But when
there are at least a minimum of vampires in the crypt, it's still the same
game. With Imbued, it's another game, let's call it WoD, and hope it will
get more (and hopefully better) expansions and variants, and that WoD
tournaments will allow all sorts of crypts including vampires and Imbued.
But I'd rather play VTES right now.
However, aren't you just proving his point right here? Clearly, you
want the game to stay the way it was with no major changes... and the
Imbued are certainly a major change. Perhaps having the game stay the
way it was (long, lots of table talk) is not the best way to gain new
players, nor the best way to 'save' V:TES.
Then again, I don't think anyone has successfully proven that V:TES
needs saving. What was it Oscar said in the "Wanna sell NoR?" thread...
they've sold through 80% of their Nights of Reckoning stock already?
SOMEONE must like it, huh?
Depends on how big their stock was. Maybe they predicted it would not be
a big seller. I am sure WW considers such things when deciding how much
to print.

Frede
Robert Goudie
2006-06-30 15:28:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by FC
Post by Derek Ray
Then again, I don't think anyone has successfully proven that V:TES
needs saving. What was it Oscar said in the "Wanna sell NoR?" thread...
they've sold through 80% of their Nights of Reckoning stock already?
SOMEONE must like it, huh?
Depends on how big their stock was.
Well I think it's safe to assume that when they chose the number of
boxes to print that they didn't base that number on people *disliking*
the set. Selling out of NoR may not prove that V:TES is super-healthy
but NoR sales certainly can't be used to show that V:TES needs saving
and it seems likely that it means that sales aren't deteriorating.
Post by FC
Maybe they predicted it would not be a big seller. I am sure WW considers such
things when deciding how much to print.
I suspect they printed fewer boxes bases on the content of NoR and the
number of boxes that you'd need to buy to get a full set. Selling out
will mean that it met expecations--can't see how that is anything but
good. In any event, I don't think they said "this expansion's gonna
suck so lets print less." :)

-Robert
Orpheus
2006-07-01 22:53:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Goudie
Post by FC
Post by FC
Maybe they predicted it would not be a big seller. I am sure WW considers such
things when deciding how much to print.
I suspect they printed fewer boxes bases on the content of NoR and the
number of boxes that you'd need to buy to get a full set. Selling out
will mean that it met expecations--can't see how that is anything but
good. In any event, I don't think they said "this expansion's gonna
suck so lets print less." :)
-Robert
They might have thought "this is a small expansion, and one that won't
concern all players, let's print less".

But of course, we'll never know unless printing numbers for each expansions
are officially revealed.
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".

The Drummer, in Planetary.
x***@gmx.de
2006-06-29 18:06:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Well, I saw a few games where a player whose entire deck relied
on the perfectly viable tactics of aggropocks had an Imbued prey.
It is very simple. With imbued this tactic is no longer viable. It is
not different from playing Rotschreck - after Abombwe, Sires Index
Finger etc. New cards will change the game - you can adapt your decks
or you can want to ban the cards or the whole set. IMO it is the nature
of CCGs that the game changes with new expansions. So i really have no
problems with NoR.

Since NoR i have seen a Tshimisce Wall deck that used many Serenade the
Kami and was successful.

(I still think that warghouls are ten times worse than Imbued in
combat.)

Frank
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-29 19:20:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by Orpheus
Well, I saw a few games where a player whose entire deck relied
on the perfectly viable tactics of aggropocks had an Imbued prey.
It is very simple. With imbued this tactic is no longer viable. It is
not different from playing Rotschreck - after Abombwe, Sires Index
Finger etc. New cards will change the game - you can adapt your decks
or you can want to ban the cards or the whole set. IMO it is the nature
of CCGs that the game changes with new expansions. So i really have no
problems with NoR.
Me either. i like the Imbued, they rock, and importantly for me, they
are not vampires. i hate vampires. However, i think the Imbued combo
unduly strongly with some of the Gehenna events.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Since NoR i have seen a Tshimisce Wall deck that used many Serenade the
Kami and was successful.
(I still think that warghouls are ten times worse than Imbued in
combat.)
Agree with that, too. Ban the Tzimisce. i'm actually semi-serious about
that, and certainly think it would be better for the game to ban the
Tzimisce than to ban the imbued.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Frank
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-29 19:31:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
Post by Orpheus
Ok, so it seems like some people actually LIKE NoR !! lol
If you are an older VTES player (by years of playing and real), if you
are unflexible and want the game to stay like it was before and if you
like whining in public,
Hey! i resemble that remark!

you will probably use this newsgroup more often
Post by x***@gmx.de
than players, who like the actual trend of VTES.
You might, if you still cared enough to read the NG and to moan about a
game you don't play any more. Most of the old pissed-off guys and gals
really have just totally pissed off, however. This is not a problem
provided they get replaced.
Post by x***@gmx.de
(I saw one hunter deck in a tournament. The player played very fast,
had not to discuss any vote with other players, didnt needed times for
things like Ravnos Carnival or the special of some vampires. Afterwards
the other players whined, how the hunters take to long time. That was
really a selffullfilling prophecie.)
i'm not sure i understand you here. All the Imbued decks i have seen
really DO take a long time because they have to acquire their
convictions and answer all sorts of questions about the new tech they
bring to the table. Often there is also the "What does that Genhenna
event do, again?" phase to go through as well. i'm sure that as the
Imbued bed in people will get used to them and playing them will speed
up, but i do think some of the Gehenna events overpower the Imbued and
that those events ought to be nuked.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Frank
i***@gmail.com
2006-06-27 22:53:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Well, anyway
they can play them in private games. I wouldn't be talking of a "ban this
set" thing, just "do not admit it in tournament.
Additionally, I would not have purchased the set if it had been printed
as "not legal for tournaments." I bet that almost no one else would,
either. For White Wolf to decide to ban a set after it's been printed
(which I very much doubt they will do) would be a gesture of incredibly
bad faith.

John Eno
witness1
2006-06-28 00:35:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by i***@gmail.com
Post by Orpheus
Not sure it would have been the good solution, but looks like a lot of
people agree that NoR is too far from VTES "core" to be included safely
in
Post by i***@gmail.com
Post by Orpheus
tournaments.
Except for those people who bought the cards expecting to be able to
play them.
Except them, of course. Then they must have been disappointed with how the
set and the general reactions of other players turned out ? Well, anyway
they can play them in private games. I wouldn't be talking of a "ban this
set" thing, just "do not admit it in tournament. For a card it's the same,
for a set I don't think so.
Complain about effects in the game that stop you from playing your
cards. Solution: disallow others from playing their cards.

Great way to save V:tES, guys.

Witness1
-ItE
Huruem
2006-06-28 06:03:12 UTC
Permalink
I totally with witness1. Can't you see the paradox here? trying to save
a game by banning a part of it?
And all the cards mentionned are so debatable that I don't think it's
worth talking about it I think, isn't it the job of the playtesters?
As for the sets in itself. Can't you see how good were the starters of
LOB for new players? Damn ! I never had a Giant's blood before that set
!

As mentionned before, the main part of the problem is the problem of
the integration of the new players, and not the cards in itself. We
have the chance in Paris, to see lots of new players frequently, and I,
as a Prince of the suburb, have tried to bring a few. But even if I'm
fairly new in the game, as I've started to play VTES only a few years
ago (just before Gehenna) I could see a clear gap between new players
and old players, not in terms of physical age, but in terms of level of
playing, which is fairly obvious, but in a five players game, most the
good players playing to win see the new players as a pain in the ass.

So it creates a clear gap, the good players don't want to play with new
players, and the integration just stops.

I can't see any clear solution to that problem. But I think that's the
key problem (even if once again, I don't feel like there is such a loss
in terms of sales and players, maybe we should ask LSJ about it, if he
can admit such a thing.).
Orpheus
2006-06-26 22:22:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.

Actually that makes us buy MORE boosters to get the good cards we need, just
in the long run we get sick and tired of it, so we buy LESS new expansions.
See what I mean ?

I agree on about all the rest. Except of course :

"- Hire me as creative consultant and my pal Erik Torstensson as head of
playtesters."

Me and my dreaded necrocat Lya would make a much better job of it. But I'm
sure you guys are fine, in the non-necromancing category.
;-)

--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
a***@hotmail.com
2006-06-27 18:19:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.
Actually that makes us buy MORE boosters to get the good cards we need, just
in the long run we get sick and tired of it, so we buy LESS new expansions.
See what I mean ?
Nah, not really. Explain. I don´t mean to print rares you need 20+ of
to use.
Orpheus
2006-06-27 22:09:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.
Actually that makes us buy MORE boosters to get the good cards we need, just
in the long run we get sick and tired of it, so we buy LESS new expansions.
See what I mean ?
Nah, not really. Explain. I donŽt mean to print rares you need 20+ of
to use.

What I mean is simply this : if you need, say, 6 of each good Rare, and that
the rest is crappy rares, you'll buy enough to get your cards no matter
what.

On the other hand, you won't research the crappy Rares, so it's not really a
good way of thinking. You might be right after all. ;-)
--
Orpheus
-------------------
"- You got married ?
- Yes.
- Why ?
- Why do people get married ?
- Passive aggressive neurosis."

Matt Murdock and Natasha Romanovna
a***@hotmail.com
2006-06-28 08:28:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
What I mean is simply this : if you need, say, 6 of each good Rare, and that
the rest is crappy rares, you'll buy enough to get your cards no matter
what.
On the other hand, you won't research the crappy Rares, so it's not really a
good way of thinking. You might be right after all. ;-)
The rares should all be good and playable. If lets say 50 % of the
rares are power-rares you would need 6+ of to focus a deck around
(Derange, Shadow-step for example), the other 50 % should NOT be
wallpaper that you get pissed off by drawing (like Up Yours, Immense
Size and Twisting the Knife). Hell, even Crusades are more fun to draw
out of a booster than Up Yours! I mean fun, semi-power, clanspecific,
maybe unique stuff like Gather or Ritual Challenge.
tobinator
2006-06-27 05:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.
<snip>
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print kewl (yet balanced) cards that makes it worth to play
previously seldom seen cards. With this I mean for example cards for
high-cap vamps without fortitude and funtions like "this card become
better if you have super-shitty rare X in play".
The line between these two statements seems to be uniquely dependent on
your point of view. While I agree that many of the cards you name are
cornercase (not MBM, IMHO) I think a "kewl" card of the type you
describe would upset me more than another Border Skirmish (which I'm
not ready to agree is unplayable) because it would suffer from an even
finer cornercase.

I think the limitations of WW's development budget (just a hunch) plays
more of a role in what many perceive as "unplayable" cards. To compare,
MTG has mountains of cash for development and I still hear for MTGers
that there are wallpaper cards in every set.

While many points in Stefan's post and the subsequent discussion are
valid I think there's something else going on. I consider myself to be
an original CCGer. I played MTG, VTES, and Netrunner (if you remember
and PLAYED that one you're in this group too). There was a bubble in
CCG market where EVERY mythos, tv show, movie, etc. was getting a game.
Countless are gone. VTES is still around. It's changing yes. I don't
share Stefan's opinion. I think VTES is healthy. Could it be healthier?
Yes, so could I. But from all the passion that I have seen in the
players I have encountered I don't think it's time to "call the
ambulance." The reason so many of us want to is because we remember the
countless "bodies" of CCGs past laying by the roadside. A tendency, I
believe, of being a CCGer for so long.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print a whole set that focuses on politics.
Cool idea...I almost never play pol decks...I'm intrigued...
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print alternate-art cards as promos.
Always good. I love the few cards that have gotten the treatment...
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Make sure that cards arrive in time so that pre-release events in all
parts of the world can be held as pre-release events instead of
post-release events.
Tight timelines are the bane of many.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Hire me as creative consultant and my pal Erik Torstensson as head of
playtesters.
No comment. :)
Post by a***@hotmail.com
There is no end to the possibilities!
My $.02.

-tpl
a***@hotmail.com
2006-06-27 08:21:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by tobinator
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.
<snip>
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print kewl (yet balanced) cards that makes it worth to play
previously seldom seen cards. With this I mean for example cards for
high-cap vamps without fortitude and funtions like "this card become
better if you have super-shitty rare X in play".
The line between these two statements seems to be uniquely dependent on
your point of view. While I agree that many of the cards you name are
cornercase (not MBM, IMHO) I think a "kewl" card of the type you
describe would upset me more than another Border Skirmish (which I'm
not ready to agree is unplayable) because it would suffer from an even
finer cornercase.
Not necessarily my point of view. Cards that are never seen in any
decks - like Up Yours! - should not be reprinted. Immense Size should
never have been printed, as anyone with the slightest knowledge in VtES
agree that it is baaaaad.

I have never seen Border Skirmish in play EVER. This means that even
the newest of newbies regonize it as baaaaad. Neither has I seen in in
any deck posted on the net. Nuff said.

And about the second thing: Consider a vampire with "Olle gains one
blood each untap if The Spawning Pool is in play.", or other synnergy
effects that make seldom-played cards more playable. Wouldn´t that be
nice?
Post by tobinator
I think the limitations of WW's development budget (just a hunch) plays
more of a role in what many perceive as "unplayable" cards. To compare,
MTG has mountains of cash for development and I still hear for MTGers
that there are wallpaper cards in every set.
It is not impossible for WW to post suggestions on new cards/sets in
forums for polls/to hear comments. That is free of charge.
Post by tobinator
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print a whole set that focuses on politics.
Cool idea...I almost never play pol decks...I'm intrigued...
Is this irony? All political decks I see focus on the same boring stuff
- mainly KRC and sometimes Free States Rant. There are plenty of twists
that can be made.
Post by tobinator
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print alternate-art cards as promos.
Always good. I love the few cards that have gotten the treatment...
Are there any?
x***@gmx.de
2006-06-27 10:24:46 UTC
Permalink
What a weird discussion!

Everyone can tell many cards he wants to ban. Or errata. Yes, i would
also like, if DI costs one pool. But what does that have to do with an
declining interest in VTES.

And having a problem but giving the wrong answer (Arrika is obviously
to strong, but you want to ban PTO; Gehenna mass can be a problem, but
you want to ban NoR), will not help the game in any way.

If we want to talk serious about card banning, we first have to adress,
what we want to reach with that banning. Talking about cards we dont
like will not help in any way.

But why are you so sure, that the problem of the VTES playing groups is
in the cards. After seeing triple A after triple A in every tournament
i dont believe that the new cards are the problem.

Some problems i noticed (and it is only my view, because i cannot check
the whole scene):

- VTES players are to old. Most of us started in the 1990th. We arent
really attractive to younger players.

- Those old VTES players arent as enthustiastic and flexible like
younger players would be. Instead of having fantastic ideas whining is
better. I see it by myself. Instead of making compromises with game
stores i prefer to play at my home.

- VTES players are to good. The tournament game has reached a level
that is difficult for new players. They lose - and they lose often. The
gap between good and new players goes bigger every time. Maybe a simple
draft system, that would give some other environment for newbies would
help in that situation.

- The years of NO support from WOTC are still a burden. We have many
groups that play with house rules and cannot be integrated into the
VTES scene.

- VTES has no support in an existing RPG. With the end of V:TM the
people who come from the RPG to the CCG will decline. The last
interested persons i met came from the computer game, that was the last
offshoot from V:TM.

To sum it up. I think VTES as a game has more problems in the social
structure of the VTES players than in some good or bad cards.

(I said it before, people dont leave the game because of some rares in
LOB, they leave the game because of private problems or interests and
than give WW the fault.)

Frank
a***@hotmail.com
2006-06-27 11:32:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
What a weird discussion!
Everyone can tell many cards he wants to ban. Or errata. Yes, i would
also like, if DI costs one pool. But what does that have to do with an
declining interest in VTES.
I was talking about what new cards to make/reprint, not any bannings or
errata. To increase the number of cards sold.
Orpheus
2006-06-27 12:45:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
What a weird discussion!
Yes.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Everyone can tell many cards he wants to ban. Or errata. Yes, i would
also like, if DI costs one pool. But what does that have to do with an
declining interest in VTES.
I'd guess Legbiter made it clear that for him those cards are what take
players away from VTES, assertions with which I strongly disagree. I don't
think it was the point of Stefan, who seemed to only have a problem with
Gehennas (for their randomness).
Post by x***@gmx.de
And having a problem but giving the wrong answer (Arrika is obviously
to strong, but you want to ban PTO;
Arika is too strong ; PTO is disruptive not matter what IC plays it (Sheldon
burns your main vamp and its player dies because Sheldon is no good ; you're
still screwed).
Post by x***@gmx.de
Gehenna mass can be a problem, but
you want to ban NoR), will not help the game in any way.
Gehenna mass was seldom used before NoR. And NoR is a problem to many
players for reasons stated in other threads. Also, forbidding it would be
understandable because it's not really the "same game" (you could for
instance in the tournament rules forbid non-vampires in crypt, and later on
with more expansions including non-vamps you could make mixed worlds
tournies - if you really want that stuff).
Post by x***@gmx.de
If we want to talk serious about card banning, we first have to adress,
what we want to reach with that banning. Talking about cards we dont
like will not help in any way.
Agreed.
Post by x***@gmx.de
But why are you so sure, that the problem of the VTES playing groups is
in the cards. After seeing triple A after triple A in every tournament
i dont believe that the new cards are the problem.
Although some cards obviously are problematic to many players (BAN PTO !!),
I stated also that the "it's always the same decks that win" thing is a
bigger problem for me.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Some problems i noticed (and it is only my view, because i cannot check
- VTES players are to old. Most of us started in the 1990th. We arent
really attractive to younger players.
Speak for yourself, I'm a very attractive 30+ guy ! ;-)
Post by x***@gmx.de
- Those old VTES players arent as enthustiastic and flexible like
younger players would be. Instead of having fantastic ideas whining is
better. I see it by myself. Instead of making compromises with game
stores i prefer to play at my home.
There are new players too, but they're more mature than Magic players, which
is good. Many drop from Magic and go to VTES. Many players / organisers are
great enthusiasts. But it's not the same public as Magic, and that's a fact.
So we should deal with it.
Post by x***@gmx.de
- VTES players are to good. The tournament game has reached a level
that is difficult for new players. They lose - and they lose often. The
gap between good and new players goes bigger every time. Maybe a simple
draft system, that would give some other environment for newbies would
help in that situation.
I disagree. I've seen in the recent years newbies who, with much practice
and a good coaching, quickly raised to tournament level !

And the players coming from other CCGs also learn faster (at least the
card-pushing thing).

Anyway VTES is a game dealing with people, and as such maturity in
relationships will also be a factor in winning, so once more it's a fact,
not something that we could change if we wanted to. And I rather like it as
it is. Which is why keeping old players is so important to this game, when
others can deal with disgusting the old ones and getting new ones.
Post by x***@gmx.de
- The years of NO support from WOTC are still a burden. We have many
groups that play with house rules and cannot be integrated into the
VTES scene.
That depends totally on the motivation of organisers. In Marseille when I
started out as a Prince NO ONE was playing official rules. We were 3 willing
to try them, found 2 new players, I became Prince, my first event had 20
players, and a few year later 35+ showed at tournaments and mostly EVERYONE
played official rules. So it's a lot of work, you're right about that, but
it's feasible. Oh, the role of the supporting games stores can also be
essential towards that role so the Prince has to reach agreements with them
(if players play houserules all day long in the shops it won't make things
easier). Usually promo cards are a good way to incorporate players into
tournaments (see below).
Post by x***@gmx.de
- VTES has no support in an existing RPG. With the end of V:TM the
people who come from the RPG to the CCG will decline. The last
interested persons i met came from the computer game, that was the last
offshoot from V:TM.
Interesting. Many of us came from the RPG or LRPG, so I think you're
probably very right here !!!
Unluckily I don't see what can be done from now on ??
Post by x***@gmx.de
To sum it up. I think VTES as a game has more problems in the social
structure of the VTES players than in some good or bad cards.
Let me add a few :

- the promo cards, as I said, are good. The promo packs going through shops
is therefore very bad !! Why ? Well, in France we haven't seen any of the
new promos for a long time now. Reason : the shops ordered a lot of the old
ones "to be on the safe side" and now we have to wait until they "cycle" !!
:-( I heard it's the same in other countries (Switzerland ?). And anyway the
tournament packs for money can't be good. Cards we can buy from shops at
special rates. Promos we NEED to get players into tournies, or even into
play. See, I'm going to a Heroclix New Guy night on friday, and we'll all
get a promo Spider-Man. It's an incentive for old players to motivate new
ones, and for new players to try the game ("and you'll get a nice exclusive
figure too"). THAT should be done with VTES, instead of paying promo packs.

- And you wanna know another reason why younger players (like it or not)
don't come more to the game in Europe ? Easy : the cards are in english only
!! So they stick to games that have been translated (Magic, Lot5R etc). I
said it then and say it again : whatever the WW sales department said at the
time, not going for a translation when it was possible / easy (when CE came
out) was a big mistake in long-term planning. Maybe it could be rectified
soon after 3rd ed ? If WW wants to seel cards in the long term I think it
would be a very smart thing to do. And I'm talking about France, where some
people actually speak english, just imagine Spain ! ;-)

Maybe the game *can* be saved ? But is WW aware there is a problem ? And are
they willing to hear our solutions ?

Hope so.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.

Echo
Stefan Ferenci
2006-06-27 19:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Post by x***@gmx.de
What a weird discussion!
Yes.
Post by x***@gmx.de
Everyone can tell many cards he wants to ban. Or errata. Yes, i would
also like, if DI costs one pool. But what does that have to do with an
declining interest in VTES.
I'd guess Legbiter made it clear that for him those cards are what take
players away from VTES, assertions with which I strongly disagree. I don't
think it was the point of Stefan, who seemed to only have a problem with
Gehennas (for their randomness).
Hope so.
--
Orpheus
seems i didn´t make my point, i really liked gehenna the whole event
idea could have been a great addition to the game. i played and gehenna
mass event deck and managed to reach the nac last chance qualifier
final with it (sleazy ideas appeal to sleazy guys)
it´s just the combination of NoR and gehenna that makes playing
gehenna events way to easy.
my points are:
1) this game is freaking hard to enter. a new base set should help
here, but my main point (as the whole idea of this post is the desire
to get new players in the game) is that in order for a base set to be
successefull at least the next expansion should mainly focus on the
cards introduced in the base set. if a new player buys into 3rd edition
and really likes the game there is a big chance that he will be
frustrated if he buys the next expansion and finds that 50% of the
cards he gets require him to have e.g. LoB he will be frustrated. but
just as an example (i freaking don´t care what the theme of the next
expansion is)if the new sets focuses on black hand giving the new
player a lot of cards that he can include in the decks he build with
3rd edition, while also giving him new options decent black hand cards
and enough bh vamps, and maybe even introducing a new clan (just for
the choosen theme) like BH assamites, he will most likely get more
addicted to this awesome game. so as important as the new base set and
demo drive is for this game the design and theme of the next set is
equally important.
2) WW makes the big mistake to introduce new clans and mechanics
without making them fully playable while still leaving enough room for
future improvement, the anarch theme was not playable on a competitive
level with the anarch set alone and i still think it needs further
enhancement( e.g. the whole politics of the anarchs), same applies for
BH, Red List(trophy), and of course Laibon. Why introduce a new clan
with only 11 vamps per clan that is simply stupid (sorry) it just makes
no sense at all, i truly think the number should have been at least 15.
same applies for the introducing of the group 4 indies. a group of 4 is
a slap in the face!!!

thanks guys for having a grown up disscussion, i really do appreciate

stefan
x***@gmx.de
2006-06-28 09:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Stefan Ferenci wrote:
... if a new player buys into 3rd edition
Post by Stefan Ferenci
and really likes the game there is a big chance that he will be
frustrated if he buys the next expansion and finds that 50% of the
cards he gets require him to have e.g. LoB he will be frustrated. but
just as an example ...
Stefan,
you are really right. The design of the starter and the boosters is not
very newbie-friendly. It would really be better if the boosters of an
edition would fit with their starters. So no Independent clans in an
Anathema expansion. In addition it would be good, if WW would write on
the starters which expansions are a good addition to this starter.
Something like "To expand your setite deck use Final Nights and Kindred
Most Wanted boosters.".

But you would have the problem, that it is much easier for older
players to ignore some expansions (like it is possible with NoR).

Frank
Azel
2006-06-28 22:20:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
... if a new player buys into 3rd edition
Post by Stefan Ferenci
and really likes the game there is a big chance that he will be
frustrated if he buys the next expansion and finds that 50% of the
cards he gets require him to have e.g. LoB he will be frustrated. but
just as an example ...
Stefan,
you are really right. The design of the starter and the boosters is not
very newbie-friendly. It would really be better if the boosters of an
edition would fit with their starters. So no Independent clans in an
Anathema expansion. In addition it would be good, if WW would write on
the starters which expansions are a good addition to this starter.
Something like "To expand your setite deck use Final Nights and Kindred
Most Wanted boosters.".
now that's a really good idea. it's cheap -- just more text on the box
-- and it encourages more sales of previous material. in fact, encourage
pre-cons too. things like "if you liked this Follower of Set pre-con,
you should try {FN, KMW} Follower of Set pre-constructed deck. These
pre-cons contain useful cards that are otherwise hard to find outside of
trading with friends." or whatever....

what really makes this game challenging is that there's around, what is
it now, 27-28 disciplines floating around, a pseudo discipline, oodles
of specialized terms, etc. etc. etc. it's naturally unwieldy, in
particular to new players. that's where suggestions like what you said
makes perfect sense. this way a new player knows what to ask/look for if
he's interested in a particular pre-constructed. this actually allows
new playgroups to arise without absolutely necessitating a veteran nearby.
Post by x***@gmx.de
But you would have the problem, that it is much easier for older
players to ignore some expansions (like it is possible with NoR).
Frank
Kevin Walsh
2006-06-30 18:04:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ferenci
seems i didn´t make my point, i really liked gehenna the whole event
idea could have been a great addition to the game. i played and gehenna
mass event deck and managed to reach the nac last chance qualifier
final with it (sleazy ideas appeal to sleazy guys)
it´s just the combination of NoR and gehenna that makes playing
gehenna events way to easy.
It is and it isn't. Suppose you're playing a mass Gehenna deck with
Vampires and you have Restricted Vitae, Slow Withering and Blood
Weakens knocking your hand size to 4. The answer is simple: you Blood
Doll someone down to 0 so they're forced to hunt, and you send someone
disposable off for some diablerie. Problem solved. An Imbued deck
doesn't have those options, and is thus forced to play the Visit
lottery.

Kevin Walsh
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
2006-06-28 13:16:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
What a weird discussion!
(snip)
Post by x***@gmx.de
- VTES players are to old. Most of us started in the 1990th. We arent
really attractive to younger players.
- Those old VTES players arent as enthustiastic and flexible like
younger players would be. Instead of having fantastic ideas whining is
better. I see it by myself. Instead of making compromises with game
stores i prefer to play at my home.
- VTES players are to good. The tournament game has reached a level
that is difficult for new players. They lose - and they lose often. The
gap between good and new players goes bigger every time. Maybe a simple
draft system, that would give some other environment for newbies would
help in that situation.
- VTES has no support in an existing RPG. With the end of V:TM the
people who come from the RPG to the CCG will decline. The last
interested persons i met came from the computer game, that was the last
offshoot from V:TM.
To sum it up. I think VTES as a game has more problems in the social
structure of the VTES players than in some good or bad cards.
Frank
Agreed with all of the comments above.

V:tES had far outstreched the usual CCG "lifespan". That's not to say
it can't go on, but it does mean it needs to aim for a new public. At
some point, older players will find any reason - acceptable or not - to
feel like it's time to quit, no matter what has been done in each set.

I suppose that's one of the reasons why the new base set gets
pre-release events more focused on demo'ing than on sealed tourneys.
And that's why I'll be there demo'ing even if I don't intend to keep on
buying cards anymore. Let the new players take it over.

Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-29 22:20:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by x***@gmx.de
What a weird discussion!
Everyone can tell many cards he wants to ban. Or errata. Yes, i would
also like, if DI costs one pool. But what does that have to do with an
declining interest in VTES.
And having a problem but giving the wrong answer (Arrika is obviously
to strong, but you want to ban PTO; Gehenna mass can be a problem, but
you want to ban NoR), will not help the game in any way.
If we want to talk serious about card banning, we first have to adress,
what we want to reach with that banning. Talking about cards we dont
like will not help in any way.
Although i think this particular post is the most astute and insightful
contribution to the topic i have yet seen, i respectfully disagree with
this particular point. IMO talking about cards we don't
like helps because it contributes to the list of things that might be
fixed to bring back those old players who still contribute to the
group. Whether or not the game of pandering to that particular
not-guaranteed-to-come-back group is worth the candle of pissing off
those existing players for whom the particular card in question
presents no problem, is another matter.
Post by x***@gmx.de
But why are you so sure, that the problem of the VTES playing groups is
in the cards. After seeing triple A after triple A in every tournament
i dont believe that the new cards are the problem.
Some problems i noticed (and it is only my view, because i cannot check
- VTES players are to old. Most of us started in the 1990th. We arent
really attractive to younger players.
Quite right. Furthermore, the old players only have value in that [1]
they are rich, and buy cards, and [2] they teach/enthuse new players.
If either of these criteria does not obtain, then they have no value
for the future of the game. It does not follow that we should
deliberately drive them out of the game, that would be silly Maoist
infantile leftist crap.
Post by x***@gmx.de
- Those old VTES players arent as enthustiastic and flexible like
younger players would be. Instead of having fantastic ideas whining is
better. I see it by myself. Instead of making compromises with game
stores i prefer to play at my home.
Yep.
Post by x***@gmx.de
- VTES players are to good. The tournament game has reached a level
that is difficult for new players. They lose - and they lose often. The
gap between good and new players goes bigger every time. Maybe a simple
draft system, that would give some other environment for newbies would
help in that situation.
Too good, or too much of a self-perpetuating closed-shop? Do you in
your playgroups/tourneys see the characters whose great claim to fame
is that they would have won the tourney/game except for great player x,
when it is obvious to everyone else that the character in question was
the tool that great [but increasingly vain and complacent] player x
used to execute their wicked design?
Post by x***@gmx.de
- The years of NO support from WOTC are still a burden. We have many
groups that play with house rules and cannot be integrated into the
VTES scene.
This is ok provided they buy cards and like the game, or am i missing
something?
Post by x***@gmx.de
- VTES has no support in an existing RPG. With the end of V:TM the
people who come from the RPG to the CCG will decline. The last
interested persons i met came from the computer game, that was the last
offshoot from V:TM.
Right, but there is an incredibly good new fixed version of VtM called,
erm, something, which is just BEGGING to have a CCG designed around it,
no? A CCG with a new uncommon card allowing one to, erm, unturn a
card-playing resource, call it a vampire for the sake of argument, but
ONLY if the vampire in question has THAUMATURGY ;-)
Post by x***@gmx.de
To sum it up. I think VTES as a game has more problems in the social
structure of the VTES players than in some good or bad cards.
(I said it before, people dont leave the game because of some rares in
LOB, they leave the game because of private problems or interests and
than give WW the fault.)
Frank
This is DEFINITELY a very fine post, and makes the point that dynamism
is a part of the game. But dynamism will only keep this game going if
the old players fade out at a rate at least not greater than the rate
at which new players come in. i hope, but do not believe, that this
happy conjunction of rates is the current situation.
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-29 23:29:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Furthermore, the old players only have value in that [1]
they are rich, and buy cards, and [2] they teach/enthuse new players.
If either of these criteria does not obtain, then they have no value
for the future of the game. It does not follow that we should
deliberately drive them out of the game, that would be silly Maoist
infantile leftist crap.
True.
But we should note that so far both old players and new ones have been
taken into consideration a lot - no set rotation, no major changes
unless it's really warranted, no unnecessary escalation of power for
any clan or strategy etc.
That's very nice, but at some point the game needs to aim for new
audiences strongly (ideally not adopting any of the practices just
mentioned, of course). Check librarian's statistics about the CCG
market.
A VERY good point about a very good post, which i will echo. What's
required, it seems to me, is that the game at least preserve and, MUCH
better, improve, its market share. This does not just mean players. It
means buyers x amount of money they spend.

That doesn't necessarily mean it'll drive out a good portion of
the fanbase, but it does mean that each new set will offer
"opportunities" (in the sense that each new design decision is liable
to piss someone) for the older ones to leave.
Not to mention that I doubt most players will be playing it at, say, 60
years old (pause for anyone to jump in and say "What? Of course I
will!"). Most will quit way before that. If the game doesn't attract
new people to replace them...
;-) i'm 48. It seems to me that all the old players who are still
actually playing took the decision to marry a gamer [Atomweaver,
Matthew Green, David and Robyn Tatu [to one another, but it still
counts]]. Mostly, as Frank implied, people meet their soul partner
between the ages of 20-40 and the non-gamer-shacking-up-with guys/gals
then realise that it's a choice between blissful hours of early-morning
*** followed by cooked breakfast, or the card-flopping thang. Mostly
they make the right choice.

But all that anecdotal stuff is only to reinforce the fundamental point
you make. This game gets new players prepared to spend money on it, or
it goes under.
Myself and my greying hair, we're content to not spend money with VTES
anymore and teach it to new players. Whatever happens from now on
doesn't bother me.
What, not at all? i would like to see people still enjoying this
beautiful game and the fine intellectual community around it for many
years to come, for the same reasons that i encourage everyone who will
stay still for long enough to read Marcel Proust [up until the 7th or
so book. Then you can skip right on to the last one, IMO].
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Right, but there is an incredibly good new fixed version of VtM called,
erm, something, which is just BEGGING to have a CCG designed around it,
no? A CCG with a new uncommon card allowing one to, erm, unturn a
card-playing resource, call it a vampire for the sake of argument, but
ONLY if the vampire in question has THAUMATURGY ;-)
Heh :)
http://community.livejournal.com/whitewolf_lj/#item20796
First post, called Dark Influences.
No CCG, just CG. Still in early stages of development.
Kewl! Good work!
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
2006-06-30 00:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
;-) i'm 48. It seems to me that all the old players who are still
actually playing took the decision to marry a gamer [Atomweaver,
Matthew Green, David and Robyn Tatu [to one another, but it still
counts]]. Mostly, as Frank implied, people meet their soul partner
between the ages of 20-40 and the non-gamer-shacking-up-with guys/gals
then realise that it's a choice between blissful hours of early-morning
*** followed by cooked breakfast, or the card-flopping thang. Mostly
they make the right choice.
Very true, specially if you include the
"non-gamer-who's-actually-supportive" category in the middle of it.
My wife even tried to persuade me not to sell part of my collection!
But that's because she concluded I'd quit the game soon. It's not the
case. I just got rid of what I don't play, such as a few vampires from
some clans and their Rares and so on.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
But all that anecdotal stuff is only to reinforce the fundamental point
you make.
What, anecdotal stuff is always fun ;)
I'm 32, by the way, but I suspect it's already an age where real-life
stuff gets in the way. Unfortunately.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
What, not at all? i would like to see people still enjoying this
beautiful game and the fine intellectual community
*Beep!*
I love the game and the fine intellectual company - when I find them.
But this also anedoctal. All in all, I wouldn't dare to deny this game
has a more mature fanbase than any other CCG yadda yadda yadda.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
around it for many
years to come, for the same reasons that i encourage everyone who will
stay still for long enough to read Marcel Proust [up until the 7th or
so book. Then you can skip right on to the last one, IMO].
I'll pass it, thanks :) But I see your point. Only stupid people think
that playing a game after a certain age denotes immaturity.
It just happens that sometimes you learn not to bother *too* much with
something that is nothing more than a hobby, no matter how cool it is.
That's when "real life" comes in and blurs issues. Myself and my
greying hair, we will stick to the fun aspects only, such as playing
when time allows or debating in this forum. To each its own, I guess.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
http://community.livejournal.com/whitewolf_lj/#item20796
First post, called Dark Influences.
No CCG, just CG. Still in early stages of development.
Kewl! Good work!
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
2006-06-29 23:10:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Furthermore, the old players only have value in that [1]
they are rich, and buy cards, and [2] they teach/enthuse new players.
If either of these criteria does not obtain, then they have no value
for the future of the game. It does not follow that we should
deliberately drive them out of the game, that would be silly Maoist
infantile leftist crap.
True.
But we should note that so far both old players and new ones have been
taken into consideration a lot - no set rotation, no major changes
unless it's really warranted, no unnecessary escalation of power for
any clan or strategy etc.
That's very nice, but at some point the game needs to aim for new
audiences strongly (ideally not adopting any of the practices just
mentioned, of course). Check librarian's statistics about the CCG
market. That doesn't necessarily mean it'll drive out a good portion of
the fanbase, but it does mean that each new set will offer
"opportunities" (in the sense that each new design decision is liable
to piss someone) for the older ones to leave.
Not to mention that I doubt most players will be playing it at, say, 60
years old (pause for anyone to jump in and say "What? Of course I
will!"). Most will quit way before that. If the game doesn't attract
new people to replace them...

Myself and my greying hair, we're content to not spend money with VTES
anymore and teach it to new players. Whatever happens from now on
doesn't bother me.
Post by l***@mailandnews.com
Right, but there is an incredibly good new fixed version of VtM called,
erm, something, which is just BEGGING to have a CCG designed around it,
no? A CCG with a new uncommon card allowing one to, erm, unturn a
card-playing resource, call it a vampire for the sake of argument, but
ONLY if the vampire in question has THAUMATURGY ;-)
Heh :)

About that, check this:
http://community.livejournal.com/whitewolf_lj/#item20796
First post, called Dark Influences.

No CCG, just CG. Still in early stages of development.

Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
zkopiosy
2006-07-03 17:55:05 UTC
Permalink
Banning cards is what is making people leaving a ccg...
I left Magic for that....
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by tobinator
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Stop printing unplayable cards (ex. Border Skirmish).
- Stop printing unplayable/cornercase rares (ex. Immense Size, Masai
Blood Milk etc.) and not reprint the worst rares from SW (ex. Up Yours,
Twisting the knife etc.). In this way people WILL BUY MORE BOOSTERS.
<snip>
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print kewl (yet balanced) cards that makes it worth to play
previously seldom seen cards. With this I mean for example cards for
high-cap vamps without fortitude and funtions like "this card become
better if you have super-shitty rare X in play".
The line between these two statements seems to be uniquely dependent on
your point of view. While I agree that many of the cards you name are
cornercase (not MBM, IMHO) I think a "kewl" card of the type you
describe would upset me more than another Border Skirmish (which I'm
not ready to agree is unplayable) because it would suffer from an even
finer cornercase.
Not necessarily my point of view. Cards that are never seen in any
decks - like Up Yours! - should not be reprinted. Immense Size should
never have been printed, as anyone with the slightest knowledge in VtES
agree that it is baaaaad.
I have never seen Border Skirmish in play EVER. This means that even
the newest of newbies regonize it as baaaaad. Neither has I seen in in
any deck posted on the net. Nuff said.
And about the second thing: Consider a vampire with "Olle gains one
blood each untap if The Spawning Pool is in play.", or other synnergy
effects that make seldom-played cards more playable. Wouldn´t that be
nice?
Post by tobinator
I think the limitations of WW's development budget (just a hunch) plays
more of a role in what many perceive as "unplayable" cards. To compare,
MTG has mountains of cash for development and I still hear for MTGers
that there are wallpaper cards in every set.
It is not impossible for WW to post suggestions on new cards/sets in
forums for polls/to hear comments. That is free of charge.
Post by tobinator
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print a whole set that focuses on politics.
Cool idea...I almost never play pol decks...I'm intrigued...
Is this irony? All political decks I see focus on the same boring stuff
- mainly KRC and sometimes Free States Rant. There are plenty of twists
that can be made.
Post by tobinator
Post by a***@hotmail.com
- Print alternate-art cards as promos.
Always good. I love the few cards that have gotten the treatment...
Are there any?
i***@hotmail.com
2006-06-27 11:33:19 UTC
Permalink
I just wanna say that here in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro at most) we have
the exact same feeling about this.

Itamar G. Jr.
V:EKN Prince of Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Post by Stefan Ferenci
First of all i dont want this to degenerate into a flame war, so please
refrain from posting insulting answers to this post, if you dont agree
fine, just explain your point of view without beeing an ass!
Admittingly, the header is kind of catchy but there is sadly some truth
in it.
Of course there will be a lot of you out there who will simply deny the
obvious truth that vtes is losing players and sales are declining, but
nevertheless it happens.
just look at the number of players attending tournaments: over the
last to year in most areas the numbers have been declining. the most
obvious beeing Budapest with an unthinkable low number of attendees at
this years qualifier (24 compared to around 80 in 2005)
go to your local retailer and ask him about orders on the last few
sets. Our local retailer (who not only supplies most of austria, but
also large parts of the czech republic, hungary and slovakia) just told
me that his preorders for the new set are down an amazing 66% (while
still having awesome prices) compared to NoR, even though the new set
is by far larger than NoR.
I wondered why this happened and talked to a lot of players what they
considered reasons or why they left. The mass of players stoped playing
because they simply did not recieve enough value for there money (NO i
nor they think that vtes is to expensive). i am not talking about the
hardcore players who are financially willing or able to simple order a
few boxes of a new set and get what they need in a sufficient
quantities and dont care about the rest. i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didn´t really get cards that they could need or trade.
CE: good base set that was a good starting point for newbies, no wonder
its sold out.
Anarchs: great hopes big disappointment, introducing a new mechanic
(anarchism) but with to few good cards to make it worth playing, there
is no benefit for barony compared to princehood or archbishopness
(sorry for my bad english), the cards are not good enough to make the
big investment (gamewise) worth enough. i agree anarchs got a few good
cards the last few sets but to few to late (people dont want to wait
years for there cards to become playyable). and still they the are not
really playable tournamentwise. anarchs had horrible rares and bad
starters
Black hand: Another set same mistakes. new mechanic, not enough vamps,
not enough good cards,
2 or 3 new decks types at best, horrible rares (crusade anyone) still
the decent new vamps and the very playable starters rescued this set.
Gehenna: new mechanic that took up most rare slots without beeing
overly playable. the events create an unnessary rabdomness to vtes,
killing alot of decks, without adaequate countermeasures
introduction of group 4 indies giving group 3/4 the very playable
numbers of 4 vamps per clan!!!!!!!, !!!
(with the promise that the next set will include plenty indies to make
up for it, giving players cards that are not playable for a few months)
addendum: even almost 2 years and 3 sets later group3/4 for indies only
include 12 vamps, way to few to make them very competitive. adding
insult to injury the diszispread of a lot of the new vamps is rather
odd.
KMW: new mechanic way to cornercase to even consider playing it (i know
your great cock deck norm) taking up a lot of rare slots, horrible
starters (playwise) overall very dissappointing.
LoB: the biggest mistake WW made which cost them most. mixing to
different sets that dont match, reprinting commons as rares, reprinting
old cards but in such a high rarity that the on average you would need
to buy 5 booster boxes to get 10 reprint commons, creating 4 new clans
which are not only bad design wise (defense seems neglectable in
Africa) but with only 11 members totally unplayble at a tourney level(
i am aware of matt´s deck that made the finals at templecon)
adding again insult to injury we are still missing the lost Osebo (see
what happens if you are defenseless in africa) but what angered players
most: one had to invest an high amount of money to get a playable deck
out of LoB, what could have been a great set getting players into the
game turn out to be a major turnoff
NoR: i would like Nor if not for the interaction with the gehenna
events, what could have been a great small set turned out just to be
another major blow for an already declining game.
so what about the future: WW anounced a major drive to get new players
in this game. but 1 base set will not be enough, even if this set is
flawless (the dangers are there: crappy reprints will missing key
cards, will we see group 5?) the next set has to build on this one.
every new player has to get cards in this next set that he can use, so
it again should focus on sabbat. a new black hand set could be a
possibility (WW could even included and black hand assamite starter).
it is imperative in order to keep the new players in the game that they
can use 90% of the new cards if the only own the 3rd edition set, if
they again get a set that can only be played if you own plenty of old
cards, or cannot be played at all, they will leave vtes pretty soon.
stefan
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
2006-06-28 13:08:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by i***@hotmail.com
I just wanna say that here in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro at most) we have
the exact same feeling about this.
Itamar G. Jr.
V:EKN Prince of Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Just so the rest of the V:tES community are aware, Rio is also our
"Europe" - in the sense that's the place where the "Arika or nothing"
mindset still prevails.

No, I'm not suggesting anything. Seriously. :)

Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Post by i***@hotmail.com
Post by Stefan Ferenci
First of all i dont want this to degenerate into a flame war, so please
refrain from posting insulting answers to this post, if you dont agree
fine, just explain your point of view without beeing an ass!
Admittingly, the header is kind of catchy but there is sadly some truth
in it.
Of course there will be a lot of you out there who will simply deny the
obvious truth that vtes is losing players and sales are declining, but
nevertheless it happens.
just look at the number of players attending tournaments: over the
last to year in most areas the numbers have been declining. the most
obvious beeing Budapest with an unthinkable low number of attendees at
this years qualifier (24 compared to around 80 in 2005)
go to your local retailer and ask him about orders on the last few
sets. Our local retailer (who not only supplies most of austria, but
also large parts of the czech republic, hungary and slovakia) just told
me that his preorders for the new set are down an amazing 66% (while
still having awesome prices) compared to NoR, even though the new set
is by far larger than NoR.
I wondered why this happened and talked to a lot of players what they
considered reasons or why they left. The mass of players stoped playing
because they simply did not recieve enough value for there money (NO i
nor they think that vtes is to expensive). i am not talking about the
hardcore players who are financially willing or able to simple order a
few boxes of a new set and get what they need in a sufficient
quantities and dont care about the rest. i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didn´t really get cards that they could need or trade.
CE: good base set that was a good starting point for newbies, no wonder
its sold out.
Anarchs: great hopes big disappointment, introducing a new mechanic
(anarchism) but with to few good cards to make it worth playing, there
is no benefit for barony compared to princehood or archbishopness
(sorry for my bad english), the cards are not good enough to make the
big investment (gamewise) worth enough. i agree anarchs got a few good
cards the last few sets but to few to late (people dont want to wait
years for there cards to become playyable). and still they the are not
really playable tournamentwise. anarchs had horrible rares and bad
starters
Black hand: Another set same mistakes. new mechanic, not enough vamps,
not enough good cards,
2 or 3 new decks types at best, horrible rares (crusade anyone) still
the decent new vamps and the very playable starters rescued this set.
Gehenna: new mechanic that took up most rare slots without beeing
overly playable. the events create an unnessary rabdomness to vtes,
killing alot of decks, without adaequate countermeasures
introduction of group 4 indies giving group 3/4 the very playable
numbers of 4 vamps per clan!!!!!!!, !!!
(with the promise that the next set will include plenty indies to make
up for it, giving players cards that are not playable for a few months)
addendum: even almost 2 years and 3 sets later group3/4 for indies only
include 12 vamps, way to few to make them very competitive. adding
insult to injury the diszispread of a lot of the new vamps is rather
odd.
KMW: new mechanic way to cornercase to even consider playing it (i know
your great cock deck norm) taking up a lot of rare slots, horrible
starters (playwise) overall very dissappointing.
LoB: the biggest mistake WW made which cost them most. mixing to
different sets that dont match, reprinting commons as rares, reprinting
old cards but in such a high rarity that the on average you would need
to buy 5 booster boxes to get 10 reprint commons, creating 4 new clans
which are not only bad design wise (defense seems neglectable in
Africa) but with only 11 members totally unplayble at a tourney level(
i am aware of matt´s deck that made the finals at templecon)
adding again insult to injury we are still missing the lost Osebo (see
what happens if you are defenseless in africa) but what angered players
most: one had to invest an high amount of money to get a playable deck
out of LoB, what could have been a great set getting players into the
game turn out to be a major turnoff
NoR: i would like Nor if not for the interaction with the gehenna
events, what could have been a great small set turned out just to be
another major blow for an already declining game.
so what about the future: WW anounced a major drive to get new players
in this game. but 1 base set will not be enough, even if this set is
flawless (the dangers are there: crappy reprints will missing key
cards, will we see group 5?) the next set has to build on this one.
every new player has to get cards in this next set that he can use, so
it again should focus on sabbat. a new black hand set could be a
possibility (WW could even included and black hand assamite starter).
it is imperative in order to keep the new players in the game that they
can use 90% of the new cards if the only own the 3rd edition set, if
they again get a set that can only be played if you own plenty of old
cards, or cannot be played at all, they will leave vtes pretty soon.
stefan
Mike Perlman
2006-06-27 11:48:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ferenci
i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didn´t really get cards that they could need or trade.
This really sounds like a combination of oversupply of mechanics, and
mixed directions for the sets, where newer players are tired of waiting
for most of their cards to be useful for construction.

I'm assuming an expansion still contains some number of reprints, some
cards that address established constructs, some cards which address new
constructs, and some cards which open up future considerations. This
would cause a majority of cards to be useless to a player growing
his/her collection a few boosters at a time.
Johannes Walch
2006-06-27 14:58:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Perlman
Post by Stefan Ferenci
i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didn´t really get cards that they could need or trade.
This really sounds like a combination of oversupply of mechanics, and
mixed directions for the sets, where newer players are tired of waiting
for most of their cards to be useful for construction.
One problem is that each expansion the (game) design is conducted only
with in-game balance in mind. BUT, expansions should be designed with
sales in mind. There should be a long-term strategy in developing the
expansions. I don´t think something like this exists or it is done very
badly.

Second problem is playtesting. There are only very few playtesters left
and they don´t seem to represent the V:TES community very well. How else
could the NoR expansion pass the playtesting while it´s obviously quite
problematic (see tons of other threads) or something as broken as
Tupdogs make the set. But my point is not only unbalanced cards but more
the "feeling" for the player community. Playtesters don´t seem to have
that or at least don´t cover the majority of the rest of the V:TES
community.

--
johannes walch
Orpheus
2006-06-27 15:44:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johannes Walch
Second problem is playtesting. There are only very few playtesters left
and they donŽt seem to represent the V:TES community very well. How else
could the NoR expansion pass the playtesting while itŽs obviously quite
problematic (see tons of other threads) or something as broken as
Tupdogs make the set. But my point is not only unbalanced cards but more
the "feeling" for the player community. Playtesters donŽt seem to have
that or at least donŽt cover the majority of the rest of the V:TES
community.
Well, I never had a chance to paytest - although I volunteered for it
repeatedly at my greatest hour of motivation - but from what I heard some
people playtesting complained about the lack of difference their opinions
made. Maybe some playtesters can tell us right here how they felt about
hteir role and usefulness ?

Or maybe they don't care and they just love rushing gargoyles ? ;-)
--
Orpheus
-------------------
"- You got married ?
- Yes.
- Why ?
- Why do people get married ?
- Passive aggressive neurosis."

Matt Murdock and Natasha Romanovna
John Flournoy
2006-06-27 16:25:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Well, I never had a chance to paytest - although I volunteered for it
repeatedly at my greatest hour of motivation - but from what I heard some
people playtesting complained about the lack of difference their opinions
made. Maybe some playtesters can tell us right here how they felt about
hteir role and usefulness ?
It is quite likely that anyone who playtested Tupdogs would still be
under an NDA for that work, judging by past comments people have made
about the length of previous NDAs. (and no, I didn't playtest them).
Post by Orpheus
Or maybe they don't care and they just love rushing gargoyles ? ;-)
I love rushing gargoyles! Oh, wait, you mean _playing with_ rushing
gargoyles, not actually rushing them... :P
Post by Orpheus
Orpheus
-John Flournoy
Robert Goudie
2006-06-27 19:20:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Orpheus
Well, I never had a chance to paytest - although I volunteered for it
repeatedly at my greatest hour of motivation - but from what I heard some
people playtesting complained about the lack of difference their opinions
made.
Wouldn't that be what you'd expect? Playtester A complains that card X
is too powerful. Playtester B complains that card X is wallpaper.
Playtesters C, D, E, etc. are somewhere inbetween. Designer LSJ takes
comments from groups A through Z and makes a decision.

Sounds like it would be difficult to be a playtester and NOT come away
feeling like your heartfelt opinions weren't acted on.

-Robert
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
2006-06-28 13:44:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Goudie
Post by Orpheus
Well, I never had a chance to paytest - although I volunteered for it
repeatedly at my greatest hour of motivation - but from what I heard some
people playtesting complained about the lack of difference their opinions
made.
Wouldn't that be what you'd expect? Playtester A complains that card X
is too powerful. Playtester B complains that card X is wallpaper.
Playtesters C, D, E, etc. are somewhere inbetween. Designer LSJ takes
comments from groups A through Z and makes a decision.
Sounds like it would be difficult to be a playtester and NOT come away
feeling like your heartfelt opinions weren't acted on.
-Robert
That, and even with months of playtesting time it is very difficult to
catch all the factors involved - specially where interaction with older
cards are concerned.

I'm sure most playtesters can spare an anedocte or two about how they
though card X or new strategy seemed too weak/strong during playtest
but once the set got out with card X/new strategy unchanged/changed,
they realized why it had been done so.

That's why there are plenty of playtesters instead of just a couple of
groups. In the example provided by Robert, probably Playtester A found
a few combinations of card X with other card(s) that made X too useful,
while Playtester B didn't had that combo idea and Playtesters C through
E made a bunch of games trying to counter card X and succeeded enough
times to conclude it's not that powerful. And so on.

Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Joshua Duffin
2006-06-27 16:25:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johannes Walch
Post by Mike Perlman
Post by Stefan Ferenci
i am talking about players
buying just a few boosters everry month or two, the last few sets just
left them with a nagging feeling that after opening boosters that they
didnŽt really get cards that they could need or trade.
This really sounds like a combination of oversupply of mechanics, and
mixed directions for the sets, where newer players are tired of waiting
for most of their cards to be useful for construction.
One problem is that each expansion the (game) design is conducted only
with in-game balance in mind. BUT, expansions should be designed with
sales in mind. There should be a long-term strategy in developing the
expansions. I donŽt think something like this exists or it is done very
badly.
Sure. Everyone's an armchair game designer/marketer/company owner, I
suppose, but it does seem like this could be better. :-)
Post by Johannes Walch
Second problem is playtesting. There are only very few playtesters left
and they donŽt seem to represent the V:TES community very well. How else
could the NoR expansion pass the playtesting while itŽs obviously quite
problematic (see tons of other threads) or something as broken as Tupdogs
make the set. But my point is not only unbalanced cards but more the
"feeling" for the player community. Playtesters donŽt seem to have that or
at least donŽt cover the majority of the rest of the V:TES community.
In my experience, playtesting (as Rehlow mentioned) does not generally
include any input into the feel of the game (or representation of the player
community). I can't talk about Nights of Reckoning since it's not been very
long since playtest for that set, but overall, a VTES set appears to be what
it is, and playtesting may get some cards to be less broken or more
playable, but it doesn't seem to have too much effect on the theme of a set.

The 18 months are almost but not quite up for Legacies of Blood
playtesting... maybe Tupdog testers can weigh in when that date rolls
around? (Around mid-August, I think. :-)


Josh

kind of likes nights of reckoning
but kind of doesn't like gehenna events
Robert Goudie
2006-06-27 19:04:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johannes Walch
Second problem is playtesting. There are only very few playtesters left
I assume you have some knowledge of this. As far as I can tell this
could, at most, mean that of the playtesters you've known about in the
past, few are still playtesting. On the whole, there could be as many
or more playtesters now as in the past.
Post by Johannes Walch
and they don´t seem to represent the V:TES community very well.
How else could the NoR expansion pass the playtesting while it´s obviously quite
problematic (see tons of other threads) or something as broken as
Tupdogs make the set.
I think there are ways that playtesters could still represent the
community well and Tupdogs and NoR come into existence.
Post by Johannes Walch
But my point is not only unbalanced cards but more
the "feeling" for the player community. Playtesters don´t seem to have
that or at least don´t cover the majority of the rest of the V:TES
community.
However, if you are right, the problem could be caused by playtesters
who could represent the community well but are not willing or able to
playtest. Playtesting is tons of hard work. Of course, you could also
view that as a failure of WW to reward playtesters and make it worth
their time and effort.

-Robert
James Coupe
2006-06-30 23:25:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Goudie
However, if you are right, the problem could be caused by playtesters
who could represent the community well but are not willing or able to
playtest. Playtesting is tons of hard work. Of course, you could also
view that as a failure of WW to reward playtesters and make it worth
their time and effort.
That depends.

You could have one set of playtesters being asked to break cards in real
play, because they have the time, energy and ability to break cards and
provide real feedback.

This does not, out of necessity, preclude having a second set of
"playtesters" who are given card lists and asked to come up with the
most batshit ideas they can, and create deck concepts that break them as
hard as possible. This could include people who lack the time to do
real breaking, but still have valuable contributions to be made.


Whoever is co-ordinating feedback can cross-fertilise information
between the two groups, where appropriate. ("Mike Ooi is suggesting
stupid things with LSJ's Underpants and Winchester Mansion. Can y'all
try your best to abuse it? And Peter Bakija has sketched out this new
rush strategy, that he thinks is really hard to defend against because
of Bondage Equipment Made From Oscar's Fallen Locks. See what you can
do against it?")


Comments made by testers from previous sets have generally indicated
they get very little feedback between groups. IMO, this is unhelpful
because it means the players can't bounce ideas off each other - which
is where some of the most screwed up ideas have come from, over time.

If White Wolf can create a Princes forum on the website, it doesn't seem
to be impossible to create a similar "Stupid Playtest Ideas and
Feedback" forum, to facilitate better testing and discussions.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Mike Perlman
2006-06-28 07:57:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Johannes Walch
One problem is that each expansion the (game) design is conducted only
with in-game balance in mind. BUT, expansions should be designed with
sales in mind. There should be a long-term strategy in developing the
expansions. I don´t think something like this exists or it is done very
badly.
I don't understand what you're saying here, other than possibly that WW
should implement expansion blocks as W:OTC has. How are the two
concepts, game balance and sales strategy, mutually exclusive? And how
is game balance, over however many expansions since Sabbat War and
however many prior rulings, not a long-term strategy?
Post by Johannes Walch
How else
could the NoR expansion pass the playtesting while it´s obviously quite
problematic (see tons of other threads) or something as broken as
Tupdogs make the set. But my point is not only unbalanced cards but more
the "feeling" for the player community. Playtesters don´t seem to have
that or at least don´t cover the majority of the rest of the V:TES
community.
Playtesting and the relative merits of rules (cards or not) don't
impact Stefan's core issue (booster dilution), and I consider them to
be separate issues. However, the categorization of testing as a
problem contradicts your first stated problem.

Testing faults imply design faults that have either gone unadressed or
were addressed incorrectly. This applies to just about any kind of
testing/design relationship. In this case, you're descibing
playtesting as a problem for allowing new rules/cards to unbalance the
game, immediately after describing a narrow focus on game balance as a
problem. I think if the designers were that concerned enough with game
balance, neither Gehenna events nor Tupdogs would exist as printed.
librarian
2006-06-29 22:11:20 UTC
Permalink
To put some points in perspective, I thought I would give some sales
percentages from my own game store.

Here are my percentage of gross of CCGs for the last few years:

1999: 39.5% (yellow rat made up 35.3% of that)
2000: 27.9% (pokemon downslope)
2001: 19.9%
2002: 23.3% (hello, yu-gi-oh)
2003: 20.5%
2004: 13.6%
2005: 9.5%
2006 (through April): 9.64%

As you can see, as a category, CCG's have taken some serious hits
recently. So the decline in a player base for all CCGs, including
VTES, has been felt across the board. It is a credit to LSJ and the
rest of the WW Team that they have kept the fan base interested enough
to keep this game alive, when so many others have died off (Lord of the
Rings CCG? Star Wars CCG?, Highlander? I can go on for literally
hundreds and hundreds more).

As many have stated elsewhere in this thread, the main reasons
specifically why VTES is seeing declining populace are twofold:

1) Greying clientele. As people get older, they don't have as much
time to devote to this hobby. This is also a strength, because those
who do stay, usually are quite loyal. I.e., they don't flit around to
a bunch of different games - it's VTES or nothing. But an older
population means that children, home payments, serious job, socializing
with non/vtes friends (what, those exist?) eats into serious VTES time.

2) Complexity of the game. This is an acknowledged challenge. It is
also one of the strengths of this game. And where one poster in this
thread said that he introed to 4 players, and only one stuck with it -
that's a darn good percentage! I would say that most folks aren't
prepared for a game of this complexity, compounded with it's "CCG"
style of collecting/trading/constructing. So you have to winnow out
those who aren't willing to commit.

Many of the suggestions on this thread are really good, I hope Oscar
and Scott take them to the right people. I especially like the mention
of "If you buy this, you should also buy this" concept.

best -

chris

(Banning? That's a high school in the LA Unified School district...)
l***@mailandnews.com
2006-06-29 22:26:16 UTC
Permalink
<snip fine and fact-based contribution>
Post by librarian
(Banning? That's a high school in the LA Unified School district...)
Transforming, then. Your old only-useful-for-crappy-abusive-deck card
breaks out of its pupal skin to become a beautiful new butterfly of
new-deck-empowering wonderfulness. Is transforming a place in the good
ol' US of A?
Hamdamcwa
2006-07-02 09:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stefan Ferenci
First of all i dont want this to degenerate into a flame war, so please
refrain from posting insulting answers to this post, if you dont agree
fine, just explain your point of view without beeing an ass!
<SNIP>

This post seems to have degenerated into the usual "Let's ban some
cards"-type thread, which is really ironic since this is the no.1
reason we have trouble getting players to show to events and playing
the game in the first place - that people pick up cards on ebay or from
friends, and suddenly find them almost unusable due to errata! Yeah,
sure , they were broken or whatever, but people do like to be able to
use what they have without looking at a website and finding out if
they're still good.

Anyway, in the spirit of Stefan's orignal point, how do you save V:TES?
Simple... Bring Back V:TM. As soon as WW stopped producing the
suppliments and novels to compliment the game, it became less relevant.


If you were trying to coax a new player into the game, which of the
following statements sounds more appealing:

1) V:TES is based on Vampire: The Masquerade, a tabletop RPG that has
been running for over 15 years.

2) V:TES is based on Vampire: The Masquerade, a tabletop RPG that got
replaced about 2 years ago by That Other Vampire Game that's currently
in your local retailers "Bargain Bin".

As soon as the reference material for Vampire dried up, it became much
MUCH harder to get new players hooked in. Considering all the errata
they have to absorb, all the new rules they have to be aware of, and
all the rare cards they have to get to be competitive, it's much easier
just to go play, oooh I dunno, Magic.

Most players came in via playing, or having friends that play(ed) the
RPG. When the RPG shut up stall, we lost the most valuable advert we
could get.

The thing you have to remember is that people have "real life stuff"
that means sooner or later they move on and stop playing. Also, if it
looks like no-one is playing, then people lose interest themselves. I
have seen whole playgroups fall over like ('scuse the pun) a house of
cards because one player moved out of the area. So, the only way to
ensure people are still playing is to get new people in.

I think the original strategy went something like this:

Kid A is a keen player of Pokemon / Yugi Oh / Dual Masters /
Insert-card-game-of-the-month-here. He gives up all his allowance to
get the cards. He reaches 14 -15 years old and realises that it's a bit
chlidish and wants a new challenge. At this point, there should be big
adverts all over the local store saying "SICK OF PLAYING YUGI-OH (etc)?
PLAY A KEWL GAME WHERE YOU CONTROL SUPER POWERED VAMPIRES!!!" He buys a
few cards, and the rest sells itself.

Thing is, I am pretty sure this is not happening in my area, let alone
around the world. Why? probably a load of reasons:

1) The local retailer is not stocking display boxes of the boosters,
since anyone playing the game locally is "hardcore" - they just come in
and buy stock by the box. There is no "left overs" so, nothing to
display. I used to know a guy who was the biggest buyer of V:TES cards
in the UK from Esdevium (the biggest importer). He had no shop, and
just sold them to people direct at a massive discount by the box. On
paper, there was an active retailer. In practice, just an outlet to
sell to those who were already "in".

2) The local retailer doesn't stock V:TES since there is not enough
demand for it.

3) Kid A cannot find anyone to explain the rules to him since the store
is in an area without a Prince

4) The local store has just closed down due to market forces (i.e. not
selling enough stuff).

So, a potential new player could have a world of pain just trying to
find the cards. Of course, buying them online is easier, but if that's
the case, how do you sit someone down and teach them to play? There is
an online tutorial, but it is a little out of date. The new online game
is OK, but tricky to learn with if you don't already know what you are
doing.

With the "3rd Edition" not too far away, we just have to hope that WW
don't do their usual job of completely ballsing up this sort of thing.
Remember how many players walked at the release of CE just 'coz the
cards looked different and people weren't consulted? Does anyone want
ANOTHER grouping arguement? This is possibly the most dangerous time
for V:TES, since on the whole, people HATE wholesale change. If the
exisiting fanbase walk, then they might never be replaced.

What I'd like to see:

1) A new range of novels and suppliments for V:TM - "After Gehenna".
What if it was all a great illusion? What if Lucita wakes up to find
Cain in the shower and it was a dream all along? Bring it Back. Who
cares! Just get them written!

2) A whole website devoted to teaching V:TES, linked into a retail
outlet list or online sales function. The WW site looks scrappy and it
should be coming from WW since they stand to profit from it.

3) Better incentives for Princes to organise play. The big drive in
conjunction with V:TES V3 seems a good start. How about free product if
you hold X tournaments per year? How about free product if your yearly
attendance average is above X? Reward the people that actually work for
it.

These aren't really going to work in part, it's all or nothing.
However, since WW are pretty unlikely to bring back V:TM, I'll just
slip back to torpor.

Cheers
DH
MathiasTCK
2006-07-04 00:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hamdamcwa
Anyway, in the spirit of Stefan's orignal point, how do you save V:TES?
Simple... Bring Back V:TM. As soon as WW stopped producing the
suppliments and novels to compliment the game, it became less relevant.
This is true, and a good idea, but difficult to do. I see 2 basic ways
to go about it. Either Whitewolf sells the rights to the old game to
some other company (or they spin off another company who would own
those rights). Or they need a gimmick.

Lots of gimmicks are possible. They coudl switch to post Gehenna, but
it's an unexpected Gehenna. They could rewind time back to some
earlier point in VtM or Dark Ages.

Do they still print DarkAges? They could just promote the hell out of
that game. There is no reason they couldn't print a Darkages
supplement. Let it be a bunch of Dark Ages vampires, that got sent to
Torpor during event X, then wake up in the modern nights.

-Matt Kanninen

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...