EC is over =)

36 messages from 17 participants · 24 September 2001 – 27 September 2001
original thread on Google Groups

Reyda#

24 September 2001, 01:59

Okay gentlemen, this is reyda from paris ! i just want to be the first one to post my impressions reagarding the European Championship. It was a very large event, the organisation was very nice, there was people from all over europe. Nice ! We could also see two or three girls playing, which is quite nice. A real brujah from hungary also came and of course played a rush deck. I was very happy to aplay against all this people, i tried to speak english and i met new friends, certainly. But i keep thinking all those people were very bad to me because they didn't help me go to the finals, even if i'm a cool guy that helps people in need with crapy votes. Bah... better luck next time =) now for the serious part of the post !!! For your information, the finalists were : 1 englishman -Barney Baker with gangrel rush/traditions with lovely Katarina and unruled Angus (who didn't hit the table actually) 1 belgian -Luk de Ron with a Pieterzoon/Emerson vote and bleed (and potence) deck 1 hungarian -Attila with a hostile -Queen Ann takeover bloat deck. 1 german - what's his name ? he may be Frank, the prince of frankfurt. He played a Dementation deck with lotsa deranges, spying missions, stealthy Vasantasena and chic, smart and lovely Korah 1 other belgian (small country, great players) - Oliver (steven ?) with a presence and leavy dominate vote / bleed bouncing deck. I think he played small cap only (weenie). there was no french in this final. We did that on purpose so no one can talk about colllusion ;)) There was a lot of suspense and the deranges certainly changed heavily the dynamic of the table by removing those annoying prince titles : no more 5th and 2nd trad, no more parity shifts. First to die : Queen ann. Then Oliver (steven?), Barney and Luk. The winner is This German Prince Whose Name I Cannot Remember. so i feel ridiculous. If someone can post his name, he will win my gratitude. So hurry up, i'll give my gratitude to the first only. reyda (a bit tired)

Stone#

24 September 2001, 06:12

"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> a écrit dans le message news: 9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net... (snip) > For your information, the finalists were : > 1 englishman -Barney Baker with gangrel rush/traditions with lovely Katarina > and unruled Angus (who didn't hit the table actually) > 1 belgian -Luk de Ron with a Pieterzoon/Emerson vote and bleed (and potence) > deck 1VP. > 1 hungarian -Attila with a hostile -Queen Ann takeover bloat deck. Attila Sipos. > 1 german - what's his name ? he may be Frank, the prince of frankfurt. He > played a Dementation deck with lotsa deranges, spying missions, stealthy > Vasantasena and chic, smart and lovely Korah Joscha Duell (typo maybe...from the list of registered players). 4 VP. > 1 other belgian (small country, great players) - Oliver (steven ?) with a > presence and leavy dominate vote / bleed bouncing deck. I think he played > small cap only (weenie). Stephan Monnoijer. > > there was no french in this final. We did that on purpose so no one can talk > about colllusion ;)) > Darn. Our secret plot is discovered. ;-) > There was a lot of suspense and the deranges certainly changed heavily the > dynamic of the table by removing those annoying prince titles : no more 5th > and 2nd trad, no more parity shifts. > > First to die : Queen ann. Then Oliver (steven?), Barney and Luk. > > The winner is This German Prince Whose Name I Cannot Remember. > so i feel ridiculous. If someone can post his name, he will win my > gratitude. So hurry up, i'll give my gratitude to the first only. > > reyda > (a bit tired) I'm so tired too that I won't even check those info...raging headache too. We'll get a more official report once everyone has taken a little rest. Thanks to everyone for coming. Stone

Halcyan 2#

24 September 2001, 06:37

>> 1 hungarian -Attila with a hostile -Queen Ann takeover bloat deck. > >Attila Sipos. Any relationship to Petru Sipos, the 7-cap Ravnos with Serpentis? =) Halcyan 2

arwall#

24 September 2001, 09:52

JC#

24 September 2001, 10:28

"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:<9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net>... (snip) > A real brujah from hungary also came and of course played a rush deck. respect !! (snip) > For your information, the finalists were : > 1 englishman -Barney Baker with gangrel rush/traditions with lovely Katarina > and unruled Angus (who didn't hit the table actually) aaaaaaaah !! we don't often see combat decks in finals in Paris, which is a shame congrats Mr. Baker !! any chance of a deck-list ?? (snip) JC

Reyda#

24 September 2001, 11:01

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message news: 20010924003705...@mb-mv.aol.com... > >> 1 hungarian -Attila with a hostile -Queen Ann takeover bloat deck. > > > >Attila Sipos. > > Any relationship to Petru Sipos, the 7-cap Ravnos with Serpentis? =) > Not any chance. You can't compare those 2 haircuts. =)

David#

24 September 2001, 11:53

halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote in message news:<20010924003705...@mb-mv.aol.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Hum, i don't really think so ;) Well, the week end was really nice, a lot (100 !!) of good players from all europa. Beside the finals they were also some side events which were very fun and allows players not qualified for the EC to play too. I think there were 3 side events tournaments : - War Zone, for combat decks only, with about 15 players, one from Italy, two from Hungary (including the Prince of Budapest, Gábor Balázs, who finished second), and I think all other were french (but i may have missed someone, in such case i apologize). - Sealed Deck (8 players fot what I remember) - Team Play (team of two players, I don't know the number of participants :( ) Nice organization too :) congratulations to all the members of the organization and judges !!! See u next year ;) David

legbiter#

24 September 2001, 13:34

"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:<9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net>... > Okay gentlemen, > this is reyda from paris ! > i just want to be the first one to post my impressions reagarding the > European Championship. > > It was a very large event, > the organisation was very nice, Indeed! Great venue, VERY smoothly run despite over 100 players - mucho kudos to the organisers! > there was people from all over europe. Nice ! > We could also see two or three girls playing, which is quite nice. > A real brujah from hungary also came and of course played a rush deck. > I was very happy to aplay against all this people, i tried to speak english > and i met new friends, certainly. And you spoke english very well, and were VERY hospitable to the Britpack [ourselves, Barney and Pierre]. We are very grateful, and look forward to repaying your hospitality at the earliest opportunity. > But i keep thinking all those people were very bad to me because they didn't > help me go to the finals, even if i'm a cool guy that helps people in need > with crapy votes. Horrid, HORRID other players for not letting you win more. Smack, smack, smackety smack on the hands. > Bah... better luck next time =) > > now for the serious part of the post !!! > > For your information, the finalists were : > 1 englishman -Barney Baker with gangrel rush/traditions with lovely Katarina > and unruled Angus (who didn't hit the table actually) > 1 belgian -Luk de Ron with a Pieterzoon/Emerson vote and bleed (and potence) > deck > 1 hungarian -Attila with a hostile -Queen Ann takeover bloat deck. > 1 german - what's his name ? he may be Frank, the prince of frankfurt. He > played a Dementation deck with lotsa deranges, spying missions, stealthy > Vasantasena and chic, smart and lovely Korah > 1 other belgian (small country, great players) - Oliver (steven ?) with a > presence and leavy dominate vote / bleed bouncing deck. I think he played > small cap only (weenie). > > there was no french in this final. We did that on purpose so no one can talk > about colllusion ;)) Ummm ... Ok .... > > There was a lot of suspense and the deranges certainly changed heavily the > dynamic of the table by removing those annoying prince titles : no more 5th > and 2nd trad, no more parity shifts. > > First to die : Queen ann. Then Oliver (steven?), Barney and Luk. > > The winner is This German Prince Whose Name I Cannot Remember. Congratulations to him! > so i feel ridiculous. If someone can post his name, he will win my > gratitude. So hurry up, i'll give my gratitude to the first only. > > reyda > (a bit tired) A very interesting tournament, and here are my impressions to follow on from Reyda's. This was far and away the biggest tournament i have ever attended and as Reyda says the organisation was exemplary, reflecting at least a year of planning and really very smooth. Best of all, when glitches occurred they were solved quickly, efficiently and creatively. i hope Stephen Lavrut and his coterie will post a "how we did the 2001 Euros" here or on their website so that we can all learn from their success. Masterly stuff. i personally failed to qualify with big fat zeros in all three rounds, and i'm really not sure why. Admittedly i built a new and not-very-me pot/dom deck but when we tested it out against Barney's weenie dominate swarm, Pierre's weenie potence combatters and Michael's Ventrue on the boat it did brilliantly, sweeping the table and looking pretty ominous. Then in the euro itself the deck just choked and died. i can't, however, pretend to be THAT disappointed, because it left me free to participate in the sealed-deck event which is, as any fule kno, the format i like best. And i qualified for the final in that [playing Giovanni, increasingly a favourite clan of mine - 6VP from 3 games], but alas had to give up my place because the final started at the time when we had to leave to catch the ferry [Michael having school commitments the next day]. Next time we will have to accept that we come back on monday. i second Reyda's point about meeting all the cool people. Paolo Pasqualini is going to post something which i will agree with, so here i will just say hi! i got to meet Damnans who looks JUST like El Greco and is, in fact, a painter too. He showed me some of his oil paintings which are truly lovely - i particularly liked the picture of Ur Shulgi [a real person, a ziggurat-builder, in fact], the picture of the forgotten female pharoah, and the one of four roman emperors [Augustus, Caracalla, Vespasian and somebody else - Nero, maybe? - help, Ines!] in modern dress. He and i and some of the other S European players had a fun friendly which unfortunately i had to leave because the next round was starting - Damnans was playing his Baali which are rather jolly and i feel a bit ashamed of Pentex subverting one vampire and torporising others which meant that the deck didn't really get to show what it could do. Ben Swainbank from the Other Portsmouth in the Other hampshire won my heart forever by praising the !Gangrel fiction. Others touched me more than they can know by playing clones of my decks, in pretty much every case MUCH better than the originals - you know who you are, and thanks to you all! And there were lots of other old friends and new, really a great experience. Now i want to air the only serious problem which AFAIK arose during the tournament, and i want to explain my impressions of what the problem was, and how it was solved. This happened during the second round of the qualifiers when Barney was my predator, Hans from germany was upstream of him, and the other players were two French guys whose names i did not catch but the one who was my prey was playing a stealthy vote and bleed deck, and his prey was playing a very nice !Nosferatu rush deck with Cailean in it. i got going quite early in this and was on the way to ousting my prey. Barney was slower but he was bloating just fine and, in fact, building up to Hostile takeovers which he needed, because the table was vote-locked. Cometh the hour, cometh the takeover. Whom to target? Well, Barney's deck is votes and bleed with obf, dom and pre but it's a tad feeble against combat, so Cailean looked AWFULLY tempting, despite the fact that he belonged to Barney's technical ally. A lesser player might have laid off for that reason, but Barney realised that in fact going for Cailean would set him up perfectly for a table sweep, since it would give Cailean's current owner a mountain of pool which would wall his predator and myself up completely while he Wreaked his Evil Will with us. So, a-bidding on Cailean he would go. Naturally, cailean's owner protested - why me? Barney explained why, and we all saw the wisdom of it. Then he bid 9. Cailean's current owner was on 8 pool. A new question arose: can the owner BID more than the amount of pool he has, given that he will only PAY half of it? We didn't know, and called a judge to give us a ruling. Instead of giving us the ruling, this judge asked barney, why are you targetting cailean? Barney explained why. Then, AMAZINGLY, the judge said "But you should not target your ally - you should target your prey." i'm afraid that at this point i lost my temper completely and didn't regain it until MUCH later in the day. i saw, and see, this as a complete misunderstanding of the role of the judge, which IMO is to explain and enforce the rules and not, EVER, to tell people how to play their decks. Actually things got worse before they got better since [rightly or wrongly] i got the impression from my discussions with tournament officials that they were concerned that Barney and i might be colluding, so i began to feel personally insulted as well as just upset about what i saw as an overstepping of the judgemental mark [ironically, the first concrete effect of the dispute was that in my rage i made a very bad strategic error by influencing out a fourth or maybe fifth vampire which i couldn't afford, thus giving Barney a free VP, near enough - couldn't have done it better if i HAD been colluding, to be honest!]. In the end Stephen, Kemel and i found that we could not agree about the propriety of the situation - perhaps in part because they were not themselves aware of the exact course of events [of COURSE the judge has the right to be proactive in detecting and correcting infractions of the rules, which was one valid point i felt they certainly made. Here, however, i felt we were dealing with something falling about half way between coaching and insolence - a different matter]. i'm afraid the whole thing created a bad atmosphere and all the British players and some of the Spanish players began to feel picked on, resenting, for example, the uneven way in which the tournament language was being enforced [the Germans and Italians maintained a Steely Calm throughout]. Pierre who was doing almost as badly as me started to sit at michael's table whenever he could to bolster him against this. Anyway the REAL low point took place after Barney had been ousted in the final by a combination of cross-table stuff involving French players. By this time Reyda had wisely spirited me away to a very decent little Bistro called 108 which put me very much back in spirits; Pierre stayed behind to help Barney with linguistic matters. i recommend the grilled gilt-head bream, and DO eat the skin, washed down with a delightfully fruity Petit Chablis. When we came back we found Pierre and Barney engaged in a Full and Frank exchange of views with the tourney officials, and we joined in for a bit. Then it was off to drown our sorrows and this we effectively did, so much so that i started falling asleep over Munchkin, and So to Bed. What a transformation the next day! The judges had obviously consulted and taken practical action designed to restore relations. Now they were low-key, proactive only when absolutely necessary [but firm and clear whatever the situation]. Not everyone can be James Coupe but the Paris judges approached as nearly as is possible to the Great Man's standards on this second day - terrific stuff, and much appreciated by all the [formerly aggrieved] players. Cynically, you will say that i felt better about day 2 because i was winning, but you are wrong - smackety, smack, smack AGAIN on the handies. It really was different, and good show to the organisers for, as i say, quickly and creatively assessing and solving the problem. Alright, that's the end of the tourney politics bit and just to conclude, a few words about the sealed deck where i felt the standard of play was amazingly high and some really creative and clever bits of play were to be observed. Clav, you may take a bow here, if you wish! And talking of Clav, i was very interested in the game we played in together to observe at first hand the Culture of the Table-Split a la francais. Wisely, Clav offered his Setite prey 2 VP if he would lay off him while he, Clav, did me in. Setite guy did not accept the offer, reasoning correctly that he would be able to kill Clav, but incorrectly thinking he could get me too. Little did he know the Combat Power of the Giovanni, as it turned out. In the last heat i was more successful in table-splitting with my Assamite predator [classic two combat decks at each others throats stuff, but no round 2 deal here - by the time we got to it, Assamite guy was so weak he had no real choice]. This pissed off Setite guy no end and i really felt for him, the more so because he had been the victim in the cross-table takeover of Cailean which i described above. Anyway the judge [Kemel] and the Ravnos player leapt in to explain the legality, nay, NECESSITY of table deals in VTES, and so on with play. Actually Setite guy almost got his prey anyway, but just couldn't top-deck the one extra stealth he needed. i could, of course, have gone back on the deal and swept, but i've changed my mind about the Giovanni since UK Gencon [where i DID break a deal, cos i was role-playing] and now find that Omerta is strong amongst the spaghetti-sucking corpse-fucking but Tragically Noble in an Old Roman kinda way Crimbos. 2 to me, 2 to Assamite guy and i hope that he or my German Brother in Organised Crime won the final, nothing personal to anyone else, just that i like those clans a lot. O, and there were lots of prizes - 10 boosters and a WW book just for being a finalist! Esmerelda was in one of the boosters. No, you can't have her.

jeroen rombouts#

24 September 2001, 13:51

"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net... > > For your information, the finalists were : > 1 englishman -Barney Baker with gangrel rush/traditions with lovely Katarina > and unruled Angus (who didn't hit the table actually) > 1 belgian -Luk de Ron with a Pieterzoon/Emerson vote and bleed (and potence) > deck Luk's deck was actually a bleed deck with a lot of Hostile Takeover for additional masterphase bleeds. > 1 hungarian -Attila with a hostile -Queen Ann takeover bloat deck. > 1 german - what's his name ? he may be Frank, the prince of frankfurt. He > played a Dementation deck with lotsa deranges, spying missions, stealthy > Vasantasena and chic, smart and lovely Korah Can you believe it? A !malk deck winning the EC. > 1 other belgian (small country, great players) - Oliver (steven ?) (Psst, Reyda: Stephan) Yeah, Belgian V:TES players rule! The smallest country of those present and with 10 people qualified! with a > presence and leavy dominate vote / bleed bouncing deck. I think he played > small cap only (weenie). > Presence weenie and the 3 lawyers of Crowley, Nash & Bridges <...> > The winner is This German Prince Whose Name I Cannot Remember. > so i feel ridiculous. If someone can post his name, he will win my > gratitude. So hurry up, i'll give my gratitude to the first only. As an aside: THINGS I'VE LEARNED ON THE EC 1) Never put a Coven in a deck you've never tested. You'll have to wait till the game is over to get it back. 2) Bloat decks who don't put pressure on their prey shouldn't be allowed. Making a deck that's almost garanteed to get 1.5 VP is never going to make it to the finals. It just destablises the table in favour of their prey. 3) Never quit smoking 4 days before a big tournament. I was very edgy the whole time and almost too hoarse to speak. 4)(one for the math geeks to work out) deck: 76 cards, 7 Third tradition, 3 Embrace The chance of drawing only 1 Third tradition or Embrace out of 40 cards is higher (ie, happened in 2 (two!!) consequtive rounds of the prelims) than drawing 5-6 baby vamps and no Psychic Veil (4 in the deck); this happened in the other prelim. Statistics suck! But there's a Dutch saying that says: 'Bad luck in games means good luck in love' 5) Another thing I've learned: Dutch sayings are a load of bullshit. :-( Jeroen

LSJ#

24 September 2001, 14:16

legbiter wrote: > [...] > was bloating just fine and, in fact, building up to Hostile takeovers > [...] [Naming Cailean] > he bid 9. Cailean's current owner was on 8 pool. A new question arose: > can the owner BID more than the amount of pool he has, given that he > will only PAY half of it? We didn't know, and called a judge to give Yes. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Reyda#

24 September 2001, 14:17

"jeroen rombouts" <jeroen....@pandora.be> a écrit dans le message news: r7Fr7.67809$6x5.15...@afrodite.telenet-ops.be... > > "Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net... (snip - thanks for the info though =) ) > As an aside: THINGS I'VE LEARNED ON THE EC > > 1) Never put a Coven in a deck you've never tested. You'll have to wait > till the game is over to get it back. very funny, and so true =) > 2) Bloat decks who don't put pressure on their prey shouldn't be allowed. > Making a deck that's almost garanteed to get 1.5 VP is never going to make > it to the finals. It just destablises the table in favour of their prey. Yes. I gain pool with Minion Tap / 5th and let other people do the job for me. Then i Play hostile takeover. We need more 5th traditions hosers !!! Queen Ann? 5th tradition and Forgotten Labyrinth are just WAY TOO UNBALANCED. I saw people gain 18 pool in two turns. If you can block the 5th at +3 Stealth, then you are playing an intercept deck (tzimisce or toreador). Odds are you don't have fortitude so you will EAT a KISS OF RA. I'm not paranoid, i really saw Queen Ann on all the tables. Don't tell me blood clots is enough ! my next deck will pack Slaugthering the herd and/or Seeds of corruption. It's the only weapon i guess... > 3) Never quit smoking 4 days before a big tournament. I was very edgy the > whole time and almost too hoarse to speak. hey i thought it was your real voice =) > 4)(one for the math geeks to work out) (snip maths) Maths never work ! I put 3 Lucita in my deck and she *never* showed up in my opening crypt in the three rounds !!! > But there's a Dutch saying that says: 'Bad luck in games means good luck in > love' we have the same saying in france =) > 5) Another thing I've learned: Dutch sayings are a load of bullshit. :-( sorry it doesn't work for you ;) > Jeroen reyda. See you Jeroen =)

Stone#

24 September 2001, 14:47

"Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:<9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net>... (snip) > The winner is This German Prince Whose Name I Cannot Remember. Joscha Duell. dunno if he's prince, though. > so i feel ridiculous. If someone can post his name, he will win my > gratitude. I won it. Muhaha!! So hurry up, i'll give my gratitude to the first only. I want you to write a full report on the EC, as soon as possible, in order to get a decent thread for comments. This will be the token of your gratitude. I will not accept any other display of gratitude. Do not insist ;-) Stone

klav#

24 September 2001, 14:54

> - Sealed Deck (8 players fot what I remember) 13 players. There was a table with 2 assamites deck. In the 3rd round, I (Ravnos) had one as a prey, the other as a predator. Guess what ? I died !

Stone#

24 September 2001, 14:57

arw...@my-deja.Com (arwall) wrote in message news:<3c559fa7.01092...@posting.google.com>... > "Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:<9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net>... > > Okay gentlemen, > > this is reyda from paris ! > > i just want to be the first one to post my impressions reagarding the > > European Championship. > > > > It was a very large event, > > yeah; over 100 players the first day. the largest tournament ever > played in v:tes. > > > the organisation was very nice, > > there was people from all over europe. Nice ! > > and the judges were pretty good too. thanks for that...though I think we f***ed up a ruling decision about lunatic Eruption. After the EC, it came up among the different ramblings: A vampire controlled by Meth A plays Lunatic Eruption on vamp controlled by Meth B. A 3rd vampire controlled by Meth C takes an action to burn LE. The card text says: Any minion may burn this card as an action. There was no (D) symbol and we said the action was undirected... After giving it more thought: 1/LE is a minion card on vamp, so it is controlled by B. 2/C's vamp is taking an action whose target is controlled by B 3/Therefore the action is directed at B. Same thin when another Meth send a vamp to rescue a vampire in torpor, after all... Correct? (LSJ?) Stone

LSJ#

24 September 2001, 15:01

Stone wrote: > thanks for that...though I think we f***ed up a ruling decision about > lunatic Eruption. After the EC, it came up among the different > ramblings: > > A vampire controlled by Meth A plays Lunatic Eruption on vamp > controlled by Meth B. A 3rd vampire controlled by Meth C takes an > action to burn LE. The card text says: > Any minion may burn this card as an action. > There was no (D) symbol and we said the action was undirected... > > After giving it more thought: > 1/LE is a minion card on vamp, so it is controlled by B. > 2/C's vamp is taking an action whose target is controlled by B > 3/Therefore the action is directed at B. Same thin when another Meth > send a vamp to rescue a vampire in torpor, after all... > > Correct? (LSJ?) Correct. [ quoted text not captured ]

legbiter#

24 September 2001, 15:18

<snip> > > - Sealed Deck (8 players fot what I remember) > 17. Shoulda been 16, but by accident a 17th player was registered. With typical Gallic flair this was solved by breaking out an extra deck [Assamites] and improvising the following rule: on the 5-player table with 2 Assamite decks, Assamite vampires and clan-specific uniques would not contest. i thought that was pure dead brilliant, and made for some extra-interesting games.

Andrew S. Davidson#

24 September 2001, 15:30

On 24 Sep 2001 04:34:00 -0700, legbiter wrote: >In the end Stephen Kemel and i found that we could not agree >about the propriety of the situation And who was Stephen Kemel - the judge? It's not clear from your account what the outcome of this barney was? Was Cailean taken over or not? If not, what happened instead? Andrew

James Coupe#

24 September 2001, 16:18

In message <9on8l5$51h$1...@neon.noos.net>, Reyda <re...@noos.fr> writes >Yes. I gain pool with Minion Tap / 5th and let other people do the job for >me. Then i Play hostile takeover. We need more 5th traditions hosers !!! (Taking the situation as it currently stands, rather than arguing for/against potential cards for later.) Intercept Eagle's Sight, if it's being done as a directed action Banishment Combat (Imperial Decree, anyone? :-) ) (and this, of course, covers many deck possibilities) Pentex Subversion Command of the Harpies Derange Reality Corruption decks (which don't care about pool, short term) Direct Intervention (the stalwart of any counter-tactic deck) Blood Clots (exceptionally useful for the Assamites, who don't have fierce pool destruction capability) Sudden Reversal (targeted against the Minion Taps) Total Insanity, superior (requires large vampires but a deck with a Total Insanity bias will want large vampires) Lunatic Eruption Free States Rant/Society of Leopold (if you can get the titled vampire in range of it) Deal making Table moving (Dramatic Upheaval, Kindred Restructure; combine with table-talk to find out if anyone can have a good go at the Fifth Tradition deck) Draba/Veiled Sight (to get rid of the Queen Anne/Forgotten Labyrinth type situations) Smiling Jack (to combat pool/blood gain) Parity Shift (they end up in perfect range) -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D When all the world seemed to sleep, why, why did you go? EBD690ECD7A1F Was it me? Was it you? B457CA213D7E6 Questions in a world of blue. 68C3695D623D5D

Halcyan 2#

24 September 2001, 20:25

>17. Shoulda been 16, but by accident a 17th player was registered. >With typical Gallic flair this was solved by breaking out an extra >deck [Assamites] and improvising the following rule: on the 5-player >table with 2 Assamite decks, Assamite vampires and clan-specific >uniques would not contest. i thought that was pure dead brilliant, and >made for some extra-interesting games. > Which is okay as long as they possibly make exceptions to Market Square and/or Path of Blood. Having *two* Paths of Blood out might make things a bit easy. And if the two are allies, it might be pretty sucky for everyone else if there are two Market Square in play (since each can be used to give *any* Assamite +1 intercept)... Halcyan 2

legbiter#

24 September 2001, 20:42

Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:<05B0D960FAB25FA4.0F37F584...@lp.airnews.net>... > On 24 Sep 2001 04:34:00 -0700, legbiter wrote: > > >In the end Stephen Kemel and i found that we could not agree > >about the propriety of the situation > > And who was Stephen Kemel - the judge? Two people - Stephen lavrut Prince of Paris and Kemel who was helping him. i've certainly misspelt a lot of names here but did i REALLY leave out the comma above? bah. > > It's not clear from your account what the outcome of this barney was? > Was Cailean taken over or not? If not, what happened instead? Yes, taken over, and barney [baker] then minion tapped him and went on to sweep the table. > > Andrew

skippy#

24 September 2001, 20:45

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20010924142540...@mb-cg.aol.com... > > Which is okay as long as they possibly make exceptions to Market Square and/or > Path of Blood. Having *two* Paths of Blood out might make things a bit easy. > And if the two are allies, it might be pretty sucky for everyone else if there > are two Market Square in play (since each can be used to give *any* Assamite +1 > intercept)... any assamite you control that is http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/Cardlist_M.html#Market_Square Oscar Garza Prince of College Station The Crazy Aggie

Halcyan 2#

24 September 2001, 22:33

>> Which is okay as long as they possibly make exceptions to Market Square >and/or >> Path of Blood. Having *two* Paths of Blood out might make things a bit >easy. >> And if the two are allies, it might be pretty sucky for everyone else if >there >> are two Market Square in play (since each can be used to give *any* >Assamite +1 >> intercept)... > >any assamite you control that is >http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/Cardlist_M.html#Market_Square That'll teach me. I could have *sworn* it was *any* Assamite (what was it in Ancient Hearts?). Anyway, that'll teach me to read card text. And people I know have been playing it the other way so... I'm a little confused. Was this a sealed-deck or constructed tournament? Halcyan 2

jeroen rombouts#

25 September 2001, 01:06

"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:itOoW0Q2...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... > In message <9on8l5$51h$1...@neon.noos.net>, Reyda <re...@noos.fr> writes > >Yes. I gain pool with Minion Tap / 5th and let other people do the job for > >me. Then i Play hostile takeover. We need more 5th traditions hosers !!! > > (Taking the situation as it currently stands, rather than arguing > for/against potential cards for later.) > <snip list> I know you can do a lot of things to prevent 5th/ minion tap/Golconda (altough not reliably, except for derange) The point I was trying to make was about decks who do (almost) nothing but bloat. And I think Reyda agreed with that. A deck that only survives doesn't hurt his prey enough. This gives that prey too much time to build up / go for all-out offense. Jeroen

Dimple#

25 September 2001, 09:59

legb...@my-deja.com (legbiter) wrote in message news:<68f2e9f8.01092...@posting.google.com>... > Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> wrote in message news:<05B0D960FAB25FA4.0F37F584...@lp.airnews.net>... > > On 24 Sep 2001 04:34:00 -0700, legbiter wrote: > > > > >In the end Stephen Kemel and i found that we could not agree > > >about the propriety of the situation > > > > And who was Stephen Kemel - the judge? > > Two people - Stephen lavrut Prince of Paris and Kemel who was helping > him. i've certainly misspelt a lot of names here but did i REALLY > leave out the comma above? bah. It was KAmel, not Kemel, primogen Ventrue (sethite ?) of Paris Dimple.

klav#

25 September 2001, 11:02

[snip] > Alright, that's the end of the tourney politics bit and just to > conclude, a few words about the sealed deck where i felt the standard > of play was amazingly high and some really creative and clever bits of > play were to be observed. Clav, you may take a bow here, if you wish! > And talking of Clav, i was very interested in the game we played in > together to observe at first hand the Culture of the Table-Split a la > francais. Wisely, Clav offered his Setite prey 2 VP if he would lay > off him while he, Clav, did me in. Setite guy did not accept the > offer, reasoning correctly that he would be able to kill Clav, but > incorrectly thinking he could get me too. Little did he know the > Combat Power of the Giovanni, as it turned out. yah. You know, I knew I was dead ! he Stealthed-bleed a lot (I reduced twice his stealth to 0, he managed to bleed anyway). But I knew also he would not be able to kill you anyway, that's why I offer the deal. Nothing to loose, 1VP would have been the best I can reach at that moment. I don't know why, I am always true but nobody believe me ! Maybe I've been cursed like Cassandra ! > 2 to me, 2 to > Assamite guy and i hope that he or my German Brother in Organised > Crime won the final, nothing personal to anyone else, just that i like > those clans a lot. well, the qualified ravnos had to go back too, so I played the final. I swept the table. The assamite was my predator and he succeded in stopping the setite from bleeding too much, thanks to the market square. I sensoried Regina soon and bled a lot with the force of will. Wanting the edje to diablorie my vampires , the setite tried and failed in bleeding and went to torpor. With 3 then 5 ravnos, I killed him and then the assamamite. O, and there were lots of prizes - 10 boosters and > a WW book just for being a finalist! Esmerelda was in one of the > boosters. No, you can't have her. yah, good stuff in the booster (Esmeralda, disarm :;)) ... I was very pleased to play with you, James, and Michael was nice to play with too !

legbiter#

25 September 2001, 14:17

kl...@multimania.com (klav) wrote in message news:<eb361496.0109...@posting.google.com>... > > - Sealed Deck (8 players fot what I remember) > > 13 players. O yes, sorry i was mistaken to say there were 17. i knew it was a prime number, though. There was a table with 2 assamites deck. In the 3rd round, > I (Ravnos) had one as a prey, the other as a predator. > Guess what ? I died ! Right, but in fact you very sportingly ousted yourself when in a hopeless position to give Michael easier access to the other Assamite. And sorry for mispelling Klav in another post in this thread, and while i'm busy correcting i'll just add that it was, of course, your Setite PREDATOR [not prey] to whom you unsuccessfully proposed the table-splitting deal.

Stone#

25 September 2001, 14:25

legb...@my-deja.com (legbiter) wrote in message news:<68f2e9f8.01092...@posting.google.com>... (snip) . Then, AMAZINGLY, > the judge said "But you should not target your ally - you should > target your prey." i'm afraid that at this point i lost my temper > completely and didn't regain it until MUCH later in the day. i saw, > and see, this as a complete misunderstanding of the role of the judge, > which IMO is to explain and enforce the rules and not, EVER, to tell > people how to play their decks. Actually things got worse before they Note : this follow-up to your message might be inaccurate, since I wasn't there, but Stéphane and Kamel still lack decent internet access, and I'm afraid their answers would much be delayed. As you pointed out, there were exactly 100 persons on the first day (and 114 on the second day), with 4 zones of 25 players. Even with one judge per zone, it was extremely difficult to follow each and every game, so additional judges were required. The problem were: -some of us lacked experience as a judge, either ruling-wise or tournament-judging wise, or both. -Two of the most experienced judges (Stéphane, Head Judge, and Kamel) were also heavily involved with the organization and therefore could not devote as much time as they wanted to judgment issues. Running the EC took them a HUGE amount of work. -we lacked time to "train" every judge to handle VP split situations. The Head Juge (Stéphane) was called to resolve the situation, and his decision was : The "action" is legal, so he let Barney proceed with the Hostile Takeover. So if you agree with the decision taken by the Head Juge, I don't see any problem. I think the heated debate began because the *way* in (with?) which he inquired has been perceived as unwanted interference/insulting behaviour/whatever. But he certainly he was not telling (in his mind) how a player should play. The problem was IMO related to communication and language issues, nothing less, nothing more. > got better since [rightly or wrongly] i got the impression from my > discussions with tournament officials that they were concerned that > Barney and i might be colluding, so i began to feel personally > insulted as well as just upset about what i saw as an overstepping of > the judgemental mark Alluding to our conversation? I wish you told me that before, as I never thought my attempt to explain his behaviour actually resulted in insulting you. What I meant is simply that judges need to assess the situation. This includes asking questions. As a side note, the duty of the judge is not exactly the best thing to get popular. Sometimes judges must tell players things which piss them off (like "no, you can't play Hostile Takeover because your only Ventrue is in torpor"-it happened in the finals and some players were overly surprised of our "rulings"). This includes telling a player about a would-be suspicion of collusion. This does not mean a judge is insulting a player. Or do you think otherwise? The VEKN tournament rules state that if a spectator thinks a rule has been broken, he should go and tell a judge. Obviously, the judges themselves have the duty to inspect a table, on their own initiative, in order to check that everyone respects the rules. For example, we have checked many decks in order to see if they were legal. The concerned players saw no offence in this AFAIK. But if I understand you, you would have taken this for suspicion ... Perhaps you're too suspicious toward the Judges ;) [ironically, the first concrete effect of the > dispute was that in my rage i made a very bad strategic error by > influencing out a fourth or maybe fifth vampire which i couldn't > afford, thus giving Barney a free VP, near enough - couldn't have done > it better if i HAD been colluding, to be honest!]. In the end Stephen, > Kemel that's Kamel. and i found that we could not agree about the propriety of the > situation - perhaps in part because they were not themselves aware of > the exact course of events [of COURSE the judge has the right to be > proactive in detecting and correcting infractions of the rules, which > was one valid point i felt they certainly made. Here, however, i felt > we were dealing with something falling about half way between coaching > and insolence - a different matter]. i'm afraid the whole thing > created a bad atmosphere and all the British players and some of the > Spanish players began to feel picked on, resenting, for example, the > uneven way in which the tournament language was being enforced [the > Germans and Italians maintained a Steely Calm throughout]. Now I'm feeling personnally insulted. Again, the place was divided in 4 zones. I think you can only speak for your zone. In my zone, each time I heard two players talking in french while a 3rd, non-french speaking Meth was taking his turn, I stopped their conversation and told them to speak in english at all times. Same when I was hearing spectators talking to a player, even if it was about which sandwich should they buy. Hell, even when a french player asked me a rule question, I told him to say it in english. At any rate, even if no 'Hostile Takeover' incident had occured, players should have asked the Head Judge if they felt a rule was not being enforced. Stéphane said to everyone english was the official language and that it was the only language allowed during a game. How can we know that the tournament language was enforced in a "uneven way" if we're not told? At any rate, after having Stéphane on the phone, there has not been any problem related to language on the different zones. I would like to hear from the so-called spanish players themselves if there was any problem. Perhaps the Germans and Italians maintained a "Steely Calm" throughout simply because there was no problem AT ALL. Pierre who > was doing almost as badly as me started to sit at michael's table > whenever he could to bolster him against this. > > Anyway the REAL low point took place after Barney had been ousted in > the final by a combination of cross-table stuff involving French > players. As you say below, you did not watch the rest of the final of the 1st day. As I'm not fluent in english, I'm not sure about what you mean by "real low point". I was the Head Judge for that final. If you imply that I let 2 french players getting away with collusion, I'm taking this as personal offense. And the thought is making me more than pissed off. The game state at the table was something like this IIRC (I don't have the names of the players at hand, sorry): Barney-> Yann (winnie animalism with intercept, Carrion Crows+Aid From Bats, plus War Ghouls and Garou) -> Malk deck -> Ventrue vote -> mid-winnie dominate bleed . The cross-table "stuff" was this: Barney's grand-predator contested his ventrue 7-cap prince, with Barney at low pool already. One turn before that, the Ventrue had Dramatic Upheavaled with hmm Yann. Barney gave the Ventrue a KRCG via disputed territory in exchange for later vote support. The ventrue broke the deal by calling a Kine or Conservative agitation and damaging Barney, and then contested Barney's prince. As far as legal play is concerned, the arguments of the grand-predator were VALID. He did not have any other prince and his deck was filled with votes. Helping his prey killing Barney would provide his prey a victory point, yes, but giving him vote lock. After that, several things happened: -the ventrue forgot to play for his contest and was therefore required to yield. -Barney got ousted. -Yann nuked the table with his War Ghouls. Stone

Maschenka#

25 September 2001, 14:59

jml...@yahoo.fr (Stone) wrote in message news:<be4ae9c.01092...@posting.google.com>... > "Reyda" <re...@noos.fr> wrote in message news:<9oltdi$aog$1...@neon.noos.net>... > > (snip) > > > The winner is This German Prince Whose Name I Cannot Remember. > > Joscha Duell. dunno if he's prince, though. No he is not the Prince of Frankfurt altough he is living in this domain. I will email Joscha and tell him to post his deck on the newsgroup. Andreas Nusser Prince of Heidelberg

legbiter#

25 September 2001, 15:43

kl...@multimania.com (klav) wrote in message news:<eb361496.01092...@posting.google.com>... > [snip] > > Alright, that's the end of the tourney politics bit and just to > > conclude, a few words about the sealed deck where i felt the standard > > of play was amazingly high and some really creative and clever bits of > > play were to be observed. Clav, you may take a bow here, if you wish! > > And talking of Clav, i was very interested in the game we played in > > together to observe at first hand the Culture of the Table-Split a la > > francais. Wisely, Clav offered his Setite prey 2 VP if he would lay > > off him while he, Clav, did me in. Setite guy did not accept the > > offer, reasoning correctly that he would be able to kill Clav, but > > incorrectly thinking he could get me too. Little did he know the > > Combat Power of the Giovanni, as it turned out. > > yah. You know, I knew I was dead ! he Stealthed-bleed a lot (I > reduced twice his stealth to 0, he managed to bleed anyway). But I > knew also he would not be able to kill you anyway, that's why I offer > the deal. Nothing to loose, 1VP would have been the best I can reach > at that moment. Indeed, i thought it was a classic example of when and how to deal, and i was VERY surprised when Setite guy [who i liked a lot, and thought was a good player] didn't take you up on it. He was, of course, your predator at that point, not your prey as i wrongly said in the original post. I don't know why, I am always true but nobody believe > me ! Maybe I've been cursed like Cassandra ! Hehehe ... you wanna come to Portsmouth, matey, where Rob and i will teach you the Art of using your facile boyish charm to make people do whatever your evil heart desires .... ;) > > > > 2 to me, 2 to > > Assamite guy and i hope that he or my German Brother in Organised > > Crime won the final, nothing personal to anyone else, just that i like > > those clans a lot. > > well, the qualified ravnos had to go back too, so I played the final. > I swept the table. O that's WONDERFUL, well done indeed. i didn't realise you were in the final otherwise, of course, i would have rooted for you! The assamite was my predator and he succeded in > stopping the setite from bleeding too much, thanks to the market > square. I sensoried Regina soon and bled a lot with the force of > will. Wanting the edje to diablorie my vampires , the setite tried and > failed in bleeding and went to torpor. With 3 then 5 ravnos, I killed > him and then the assamamite. > > O, and there were lots of prizes - 10 boosters and > > a WW book just for being a finalist! Esmerelda was in one of the > > boosters. No, you can't have her. > > yah, good stuff in the booster (Esmeralda, disarm :;)) ... > I was very pleased to play with you, James, and Michael was nice to > play with too ! Likewise! i thought it was very sporting of you to oust yourself in Michael's favour in the third heat. It's funny how you just KNOW what people are like from their newsgroup postings, and i very much look forward to giving you the opportunity of REVENGE.

James Coupe#

25 September 2001, 15:58

In message <68f2e9f8.01092...@posting.google.com>, legbiter <legb...@my-deja.com> writes >Hehehe ... you wanna come to Portsmouth, matey, where Rob and i will >teach you the Art of using your facile boyish charm to make people do >whatever your evil heart desires .... ;) Crikey. rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad.x-rated should probably be formed. [ quoted text not captured ]

legbiter#

25 September 2001, 21:55

"Stone" <mc_judg...@yajoo.fr> wrote in message news:<9opsrn$2g3g$1...@io.uvsq.fr>... [ quoted text not captured ] See below. > > I think the heated debate began because the *way* in (with?) which he > inquired has been perceived as unwanted interference/insulting > behaviour/whatever. But he certainly he was not telling (in his mind) how a > player should play. The problem was IMO related to communication and > language issues, nothing less, nothing more. i think this is a fair summary. i certainly hope so. > > > got better since [rightly or wrongly] i got the impression from my > > discussions with tournament officials that they were concerned that > > Barney and i might be colluding, so i began to feel personally > > insulted as well as just upset about what i saw as an overstepping of > > the judgemental mark > > Alluding to our conversation? Indeed no. i thought you tried to calm me down very reasonably. And i did enjoy your joke about how i shoud play my deck! I wish you told me that before, as I never > thought my attempt to explain his behaviour actually resulted in insulting > you. What I meant is simply that judges need to assess the situation. This > includes asking questions. Fair, but moot for this debate, since i explicitly DO NOT think you AT ALL culpable by omission or commission in this matter. > > As a side note, the duty of the judge is not exactly the best thing to get > popular. Sometimes judges must tell players things which piss them off (like > "no, you can't play Hostile Takeover because your only Ventrue is in > torpor"-it happened in the finals and some players were overly surprised of > our "rulings"). This includes telling a player about a would-be suspicion of > collusion. All too true! i think a certain detachment from the game could help here, though. Would i, or barney, have paid 100s of GBP just to go to Paris to let each other win? > > This does not mean a judge is insulting a player. Or do you think otherwise? By itself, without context, it does not. And in fact, i don't think a player's FEELINGS should be a major consideration when judgements are made, even when they are MY feelings. All i was doing was reporting my subjective impressions of the situation as it developed. > > The VEKN tournament rules state that if a spectator thinks a rule has been > broken, he should go and tell a judge. Obviously, the judges themselves have > the duty to inspect a table, on their own initiative, in order to check that > everyone respects the rules. For example, we have checked many decks in > order to see if they were legal. The concerned players saw no offence in > this AFAIK. But if I understand you, you would have taken this for suspicion No, you understand incorrectly. A judge ALWAYS has the right to INSPECT one's deck. S/he NEVER [IMO] has the right to tell one how to PLAY it. > ... > Perhaps you're too suspicious toward the Judges ;) Perhaps you're too suspicious towards the players ;) > > [ironically, the first concrete effect of the > > dispute was that in my rage i made a very bad strategic error by > > influencing out a fourth or maybe fifth vampire which i couldn't > > afford, thus giving Barney a free VP, near enough - couldn't have done > > it better if i HAD been colluding, to be honest!]. In the end Stephen, > > Kemel > > that's Kamel. Yes, sorry, and Stephane, not Stephen, i think. At least i can spell Pierre right. > > and i found that we could not agree about the propriety of the > > situation - perhaps in part because they were not themselves aware of > > the exact course of events [of COURSE the judge has the right to be > > proactive in detecting and correcting infractions of the rules, which > > was one valid point i felt they certainly made. Here, however, i felt > > we were dealing with something falling about half way between coaching > > and insolence - a different matter]. i'm afraid the whole thing > > created a bad atmosphere and all the British players and some of the > > Spanish players began to feel picked on, resenting, for example, the > > uneven way in which the tournament language was being enforced [the > > Germans and Italians maintained a Steely Calm throughout]. > > Now I'm feeling personnally insulted. > Again, the place was divided in 4 zones. I think you can only speak for your > zone. No, it was the between-zones thing, i think. i didn't here any complaints at all about how things went in your zone [i re-emphasise the UNEVEN word in the above quote]. In my zone, each time I heard two players talking in french while a > 3rd, non-french speaking Meth was taking his turn, I stopped their > conversation and told them to speak in english at all times. Same when I was > hearing spectators talking to a player, even if it was about which sandwich > should they buy. Hell, even when a french player asked me a rule question, I > told him to say it in english. i know. In my zone it was different. That's what i meant about resentment over the UNEVEN way in which the official language was being enforced. This is NOT your fault, old chap, as you and i VERY WELL KNOW. Why are you being so prickly? i was trying to be conciliatory - you wait until you see what the other Pierre thinks about all this! > At any rate, even if no 'Hostile Takeover' incident had occured, players > should have asked the Head Judge if they felt a rule was not being enforced. > Stéphane said to everyone english was the official language and that it was > the only language allowed during a game. > How can we know that the tournament language was enforced in a "uneven way" > if we're not told? Well of course you can't. And up until this unfortunate business it didn't matter. Afterwards people's sensitivities were heightened and then it did. But to complain at this point would have been difficult because it would have looked like pouring extra petrol on troubled flames. > At any rate, after having Stéphane on the phone, there has not been any > problem related to language on the different zones. I would like to hear > from the so-called spanish players themselves if there was any problem. > Perhaps the Germans and Italians maintained a "Steely Calm" throughout > simply because there was no problem AT ALL. Perhaps. <ducks in anticipation of more flying petrol> > > Pierre who > > was doing almost as badly as me started to sit at michael's table > > whenever he could to bolster him against this. > > > > Anyway the REAL low point took place after Barney had been ousted in > > the final by a combination of cross-table stuff involving French > > players. > > As you say below, you did not watch the rest of the final of the 1st day. As > I'm not fluent in english, I'm not sure about what you mean by "real low > point". I was the Head Judge for that final. If you imply that I let 2 > french players getting away with collusion, I'm taking this as personal > offense. And the thought is making me more than pissed off. Ah. VERY revealing, and i think the heart of our little trans-manche spat. COLLUSION IS NOT THE SAME AS CROSS-TABLE STUFF. CROSS-TABLE STUFF IS NOT THE SAME AS COLLUSION. O, and i'm very sorry if you are feeling insulted. i like you, and i think you are a fair judge. This does not mean i like all french judges, nor that i think they are all fair. Enough of the logic chopping already. > > The game state at the table was something like this IIRC (I don't have the > names of the players at hand, sorry): > Barney-> Yann (winnie animalism with intercept, Carrion Crows+Aid From Bats, > plus War Ghouls and Garou) -> Malk deck -> Ventrue vote -> mid-winnie > dominate bleed . > > The cross-table "stuff" was this: > Barney's grand-predator contested his ventrue 7-cap prince, with Barney at > low pool already. One turn before that, the Ventrue had Dramatic Upheavaled > with hmm Yann. Barney gave the Ventrue a KRCG via disputed territory in > exchange for later vote support. The ventrue broke the deal by calling a > Kine or Conservative agitation and damaging Barney, and then contested > Barney's prince. > > As far as legal play is concerned, the arguments of the grand-predator were > VALID. He did not have any other prince and his deck was filled with votes. > Helping his prey killing Barney would provide his prey a victory point, yes, > but giving him vote lock. Like i said, cross-table does not equal illegal or unfair. The facts are, and i said no more than this, that after barney went out there was a [heated] discussion outside at which you were not present because you were still busy judging. > > After that, several things happened: > -the ventrue forgot to play for his contest and was therefore required to > yield. > -Barney got ousted. > -Yann nuked the table with his War Ghouls. > > Stone War Ghouls ... tasty war ghouls ... and congrats to Yann!

Stone#

26 September 2001, 01:03

"legbiter" <legb...@my-deja.com> a écrit dans le message news: 68f2e9f8.01092...@posting.google.com... > "Stone" <mc_judg...@yajoo.fr> wrote in message news:<9opsrn$2g3g$1...@io.uvsq.fr>... (snip) > > Alluding to our conversation? > > Indeed no. i thought you tried to calm me down very reasonably. And i > did enjoy your joke about how i shoud play my deck! ah. ok. It's a relief then, because when I read your post I was thinking "what the f..."...Forget it. (snip) > > > > As a side note, the duty of the judge is not exactly the best thing to get > > popular. Sometimes judges must tell players things which piss them off (like > > "no, you can't play Hostile Takeover because your only Ventrue is in > > torpor"-it happened in the finals and some players were overly surprised of > > our "rulings"). This includes telling a player about a would-be suspicion of > > collusion. > > All too true! i think a certain detachment from the game could help > here, though. Would i, or barney, have paid 100s of GBP just to go to > Paris to let each other win? GBP?? What is that? Gold Booster Packs? > > > > This does not mean a judge is insulting a player. Or do you think otherwise? > > By itself, without context, it does not. And in fact, i don't think a > player's FEELINGS should be a major consideration when judgements are > made, even when they are MY feelings. All i was doing was reporting my > subjective impressions of the situation as it developed. I believe this is true also, Judges should be Robocop-like. I hated some of the decisions I had to make, at both finals for example when a player jumped to his master phase, forgetting in the process he was engaged in a contest, and I had to make him yield. However, I remember the prime objective should be players to have fun. Which is why I explained the context of the VEKN tournament rules when I inspected player's decks (maybe not every time), because sometimes people would stare at me with blank eyes, not knowing about the jyhad/VtES backs rules. We even had to give a warning to a 9-11 year old kid who had 18 Jyhad-backed cards in his deck. Well, being robocop-like would have been giving him game loss, but oh well... > > > > The VEKN tournament rules state that if a spectator thinks a rule has been > > broken, he should go and tell a judge. Obviously, the judges themselves have > > the duty to inspect a table, on their own initiative, in order to check that > > everyone respects the rules. For example, we have checked many decks in > > order to see if they were legal. The concerned players saw no offence in > > this AFAIK. But if I understand you, you would have taken this for suspicion > > No, you understand incorrectly. A judge ALWAYS has the right to > INSPECT one's deck. S/he NEVER [IMO] has the right to tell one how to > PLAY it. Well, in the case of VP split deal, I'm afraid yes the Judge has the right to tell one how to play it, or more precisely the right to forbid such play move. Maybe it's only a question of rhethoric or something. For example, at a 4-player table (maybe it was initially 5 players), I had to assess a situation where David (no last name available sorry again for not having the files at hand) was in real rough shape (2 vampires, low blood and pool, incoming Shambling Nukes from predator), who wanted to split 2/2 (VPs) with his prey B (playing mid-weenie dominate). It was obvious the deal would maximise David's VPs and that without any deal, David would make zero VP. What was real tricky was whether B had the potential to make more than 2 VP *without* the deal, that is, to assess whether the deal was hindering B in gaining more than 2 VP, and therefore hindering B to win the table (grammar must be awful, feel free to correct it). I said that without the deal, the situation could go right for B ; it could also go wrong. But IMO it was impossible to be certain that B couldn't win the table all by himself. Oddly, the question of a possible 3/1 VP split didn't come up, but I think it was because we were too busy brainstorming over the 2/2 split. In the end, I told the deal could not be done because it was not legal. Therefore the players had to play in another way. It's fairly easy to tell a player he can't play 2nd Tradition because his Prince is Deranged. It's much, much more difficult to tell a player he can't ally with his predator for a VP split because this prevents him from winning the table. But if the deal is illegal, the Judge not only has the right but also the duty of correcting the situation. Note that I had to judge another VP-split issue, in which the deal was made legal because the situation was absolutely obvious. And in other tables, what was fairly easy to judge was when time was running out and people were agreeing to withdraw in order to get 1 VP each instead of 0.5VP each. (snip) > > that's Kamel. > > Yes, sorry, and Stephane, not Stephen, i think. At least i can spell > Pierre right. Spell it Stone. :) (snip) > i know. In my zone it was different. That's what i meant about > resentment over the UNEVEN way in which the official language was > being enforced. This is NOT your fault, old chap, as you and i VERY > WELL KNOW. Why are you being so prickly? i was trying to be > conciliatory - you wait until you see what the other Pierre thinks > about all this! I was outraged when I read the 'low point' thing about the final, so I was genuinely puzzled as to what I should "very well know". If it is a misunderstanding, please forget it. Of course, I am certainly susceptible over potential negative feedback related to judgment issues. Many of us busted our a**es over the rulings, and sometimes I wonder if there was a single day in which I wasn't rambling about VP split with LSJ by private e-mail. I take the opportunity to thank him for enlightening me on these issues. As a whole, the organizing crew took its job very, very seriously. Yesterday I realized we could have offered a special prize to someone for "best fair play". The prizes arrived real late (on saturday afternoon, actually, so the distribution was improvised). A shame we didn't think about it at the moment, but we were so exhausted...I guess "pushing the limits" would fit. :) As for "the other Pierre", he's free to voice his opinions...He can't be completely evil, since I got my first Crimson Sentinel from him a few years ago, at a time when I thought I would never get one and so I held the card like the Holy Grail ;) > > > Anyway the REAL low point took place after Barney had been ousted in > > > the final by a combination of cross-table stuff involving French > > > players. > > > > As you say below, you did not watch the rest of the final of the 1st day. As > > I'm not fluent in english, I'm not sure about what you mean by "real low > > point". I was the Head Judge for that final. If you imply that I let 2 > > french players getting away with collusion, I'm taking this as personal > > offense. And the thought is making me more than pissed off. > > Ah. VERY revealing, and i think the heart of our little trans-manche > spat. COLLUSION IS NOT THE SAME AS CROSS-TABLE STUFF. CROSS-TABLE > STUFF IS NOT THE SAME AS COLLUSION. geez, no need to shout ;) we all agree on that... again, if it's a misunderstanding, forget it. > > O, and i'm very sorry if you are feeling insulted. i like you, and i > think you are a fair judge. This does not mean i like all french > judges, nor that i think they are all fair. Enough of the logic > chopping already. ok, thanks. There is only one grey area left, see below.. (snip account of the 1st day final) > > Like i said, cross-table does not equal illegal or unfair. The facts > are, and i said no more than this, that after barney went out there > was a [heated] discussion outside at which you were not present > because you were still busy judging. Hmm...discussion about what? Why was it so heated since the cross-table KRC+Contest was both legal and fair? or should it remain private? > > > > After that, several things happened: > > -the ventrue forgot to play for his contest and was therefore required to > > yield. > > -Barney got ousted. > > -Yann nuked the table with his War Ghouls. > > > > Stone > > War Ghouls ... tasty war ghouls ... and congrats to Yann! Yup...His combat was only Carrion Crows+Aid from bats, but there wasn't so much combat in this tourney environment, so it proved incredibly effective. At the EC final, Joscha Duell's Derange sent 2nd Trad., 5th Trad, Hostile Takeovers to hell. Both players probably guessed what the "EC metagame" would be like, and constructed their decks accordingly. They deserve a damn good credit. Stone

Damnans#

26 September 2001, 13:32

legb...@my-deja.com (legbiter) wrote in message news:<68f2e9f8.01092...@posting.google.com>... > i second Reyda's point about meeting all the cool people. Paolo > Pasqualini is going to post something which i will agree with, so here > i will just say hi! i got to meet Damnans who looks JUST like El Greco > and is, in fact, a painter too. He showed me some of his oil paintings > which are truly lovely - i particularly liked the picture of Ur Shulgi > [a real person, a ziggurat-builder, in fact] Yes, he was king of the sumerian city of Ur. >, the picture of the > forgotten female pharoah, and the one of four roman emperors > [Augustus, Caracalla, Vespasian and somebody else - Nero, maybe? - > help, Ines!] in modern dress. The fourth emperor was Hadrian (from Hispania). > He and i and some of the other S > European players had a fun friendly which unfortunately i had to leave > because the next round was starting - Damnans was playing his Baali > which are rather jolly and i feel a bit ashamed of Pentex subverting > one vampire and torporising others which meant that the deck didn't > really get to show what it could do. Yes... what a pitty!. Maybe next time you will pay the prize for confronting the forces of Evil :)) Greetings, and a pleasure to meet you. Damnans

legbiter#

26 September 2001, 13:33

<snip> > > GBP?? What is that? Gold Booster Packs? Great Britain Pounds, a soon-to-be-antiquated currency. [ quoted text not captured ] i do sympathise with you about the VP splitting rules and i accept that these new rules DO imply that the judge could, in some circumstances, TELL you how to play your deck. That is why i, and others, DEEPLY dislike the new rule. And i'm sorry to say that the day someone tries to do this to me is the day i quit tourney Jyhad. But this is not an argument between you and me - the rules exist, and the judges have to explain and enforce them - and i think this creates an explosive and eventually intolerable situation for both judges and players. Personally, i think that this law should be quietly ignored. > > (snip) > > > > that's Kamel. > > > > Yes, sorry, and Stephane, not Stephen, i think. At least i can spell > > Pierre right. > > Spell it Stone. :) > > (snip) > > > i know. In my zone it was different. That's what i meant about > > resentment over the UNEVEN way in which the official language was > > being enforced. This is NOT your fault, old chap, as you and i VERY > > WELL KNOW. Why are you being so prickly? i was trying to be > > conciliatory - you wait until you see what the other Pierre thinks > > about all this! > > I was outraged when I read the 'low point' thing about the final, so I was > genuinely puzzled as to what I should "very well know". If it is a > misunderstanding, please forget it. i can't remember whether it was you or Reyda or both who said this, but somebody remarked wisely that the dispute we had was basically because of one individual's attitude and it was not about the judging generally. However, as Pierre points out in his post in a different thread, there WAS a feeling that a certain unnecessarily micromanagerial flavour permeated the judging ethos, a sense that the judges didn't trust the players. i understand why this happened, of course - the thread we had after Watford meant that you guys were under scrutiny and really HAD to make sure that the VEKN rules were enforced. [ quoted text not captured ] Not shouting, just emphasising the rather important point that at least one of your fellow judges didn't seem to understand. > we all agree on that... > again, if it's a misunderstanding, forget it. It IS a misunderstanding but let's just be absolutely clear about what i was saying; just after the final Pierre, Barney and i had a long argument with several people including Kamel. This argument covered a lot of ground including issues of judging and sensitivity, and was a low point in relations between the British players and the tourney officials. After that it got better. > > > > > O, and i'm very sorry if you are feeling insulted. i like you, and i > > think you are a fair judge. This does not mean i like all french > > judges, nor that i think they are all fair. Enough of the logic > > chopping already. > > ok, thanks. There is only one grey area left, see below.. > > (snip account of the 1st day final) > > > > > Like i said, cross-table does not equal illegal or unfair. The facts > > are, and i said no more than this, that after barney went out there > > was a [heated] discussion outside at which you were not present > > because you were still busy judging. > > Hmm...discussion about what? Why was it so heated since the cross-table > KRC+Contest was both legal and fair? or should it remain private? Since i came in late to the argument and was anxious that it be curtailed since i wanted Beer and Sarah wanted to rest her foot, i'll let Pierre or Kamel field that one. <snip>

arwall#

27 September 2001, 11:17

kl...@multimania.com (klav) wrote in message news:<eb361496.01092...@posting.google.com>... > > well, the qualified ravnos had to go back too, so I played the final. > I swept the table. yes i had to go back to grenoble but as i can see the ravnos were successful in proving their superiority in this sealed deck tournament. bravo Klav. > O, and there were lots of prizes - 10 boosters and > > a WW book just for being a finalist! Esmerelda was in one of the > > boosters. No, you can't have her. > > yah, good stuff in the booster (Esmeralda, disarm :;)) ... > I was very pleased to play with you, James, and Michael was nice to > play with too ! i was pleased too to play with the legendary usenet-hero Legbiter and his son anklebiter ( hey michael :remenber lazar diablerizing al-ashrad !!) david

- Baron2ni -#

27 September 2001, 12:37

legb...@my-deja.com (legbiter) wrote in message //snip// > > yah. You know, I knew I was dead ! he Stealthed-bleed a lot (I > > reduced twice his stealth to 0, he managed to bleed anyway). But I > > knew also he would not be able to kill you anyway, that's why I offer > > the deal. Nothing to loose, 1VP would have been the best I can reach > > at that moment. > > Indeed, i thought it was a classic example of when and how to deal, > and i was VERY surprised when Setite guy [who i liked a lot, and > thought was a good player] didn't take you up on it. He was, of > course, your predator at that point, not your prey as i wrongly said > in the original post. Actually you was a little low on pool, so I took my chance to oust the world famous Legbiter ! And so I discovered why he's so famous... :-S But It was a real pleasure to meet you, your son, the unholy sidesliper and Barney "Number 1" Baker ! > I don't know why, I am always true but nobody believe > > me ! Maybe I've been cursed like Cassandra ! > > Hehehe ... you wanna come to Portsmouth, matey, where Rob and i will > teach you the Art of using your facile boyish charm to make people do > whatever your evil heart desires .... ;) Are french players now allowed to learn Jedi Mind Tricks(TM) ?!! Woohoo ! :-> bye Baron 2ni (for non-french speakers : 2 = two = 'deux' in french 2ni = deux-ni = denis...oh, wait ! It's my name ! hmm. sorry)