Behold! The 1vp deck!

Deck Name : The 1VP deck Description : The first ever deck designed to get one and exactly one vp in a given game. Goal of the deck is tu succesfully withdraw. Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 ------------------------------------------------------------ 12x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 Library [60 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Master [48] 1x Minion Tap 2x Secure Haven 43x Slaughterhouse, The 2x Specialization Reaction [12] 5x Deflection 1x Enhanced Senses 3x Obedience 1x Quicken Sight 2x Eagle Sight

[ quoted text not captured ] pssst: withdrawing only gives .5 VP nowadays ;) And the concept is not new. Used to be able to have 90 The Covenant in a deck :-)

Jeroen <joen...@hotmail.com> wrote: > pssst: withdrawing only gives .5 VP nowadays ;) > And the concept is not new. Used to be able to have 90 The Covenant in > a deck :-) You can still do stuff like that: March Halcyon and 60 Freak Drives ("please don't block my 61 hunts!") Dimple and 60 Nosferatu Putrescence ("please block me!") Smudge and 60 Zip Guns ("really, please block me!") ...

[ quoted text not captured ] Awwww, shucks. I forgot it's only 0,5. Well I guess it's a 0,5 vp deck then...

[ quoted text not captured ] > then...- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven - > More to the point: ditch deflection and all intercept. You need wakes - redirections and obediences: you can't get into combat, nor lose blood or pool.

On Jun 28, 3:02 pm, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] Deck Name : The 0,5 VP deck Author : Description : Using Mouse and Nosferatu Putrescence to deplete your library. Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 2 max: 10 average: 6 ------------------------------------------------------------ 6x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 6x Mouse 2 ani Nosferatu:3 Library [60 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Combat [53] 53x Nosferatu Putrescence Reaction [7] 3x Deflection 1x Enhanced Senses 2x Obedience 1x Quicken Sight How about this? What do you guys think, could it work?

[ quoted text not captured ] Well the intercept is there for when somebody rushes you at stealth, so you can catch him and play obedience. Why ditch deflections?? Helena doesn't pay for dominate reaction cards.

[ quoted text not captured ] Why block? You can play obedience before the combat starts from a rush. >Why ditch deflections?? > Helena doesn't pay for dominate reaction cards I missed the ADV-part in her name....

[ quoted text not captured ] You don't need to block in order to play Obedience. You only need to be "about to enter combat with an acting younger vampire." witness1

jak...@gmail.com wrote: > Well the intercept is there for when somebody rushes you at stealth, > so you can catch him and play obedience. Why ditch deflections?? > Helena doesn't pay for dominate reaction cards. You might consider Kindred Coercion. Helena can change the votes of an infinite number of vampires for free.

On Jun 28, 4:01 pm, Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] O, wonderful, I wasn't even aware of such a card. Then I guess the intercept really is useless (no need to block KRC or whatever) 0,5vp deck - version 1.5 Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 ------------------------------------------------------------ 12x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 Library [60 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Master [49] 1x Minion Tap 2x Secure Haven 44x Slaughterhouse, The 2x Specialization Reaction [11] 5x Deflection 3x Obedience 3x Kindred Coercion

In article <Btadnb5bmKD7LB7b...@comcast.com>, Jozxyqk <jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: > You can still do stuff like that: > March Halcyon and 60 Freak Drives ("please don't block my 61 hunts!") I have been developing this deck for *years*! And sadly, it took a hit with the .5VP for withdrawl rule. I think the best version of the deck was: 6x March Halcyon (1) for 6x Isabel de Leon (3) AUS 54x Freak Drive 2x Telepathic Counter 2x My Enemy's Enemy 2x Wake T1: Get out March T2: Hunt 55 times. Hope you don't get blocked and torporized. Get out Isabel. T3: Declare intention to withdraw. Hope that no one can Rush you. Cancel/bounce bleeds. Hope no one calls a vote that does you damage. T4: You withdraw! Woo! Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html

In article <1183038137.1...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, jak...@gmail.com wrote: > What do you guys think, could it work? How does Mouse get in a fight? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183040137.7...@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, jak...@gmail.com wrote: > 0,5vp deck - version 1.5 > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > 12x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 > > Library [60 cards] > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Master [49] > 1x Minion Tap > 2x Secure Haven > 44x Slaughterhouse, The > 2x Specialization > > Reaction [11] > 5x Deflection > 3x Obedience > 3x Kindred Coercion It'll take too long to get rid of the Slaughterhouses--you only ditch, uh, 6 around the table (including your discard phase). So it will take 7 turns to empty the deck. Maybe a bit faster if you luck into the Specialization. You'll be dead by then. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jun 28, 4:30 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183038137.107499.177...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > > What do you guys think, could it work? > > How does Mouse get in a fight? > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html I dunno, she bleeds and gets blocked? She gets rushed? She blocks someone? Could also add some Haven Uncovered's or Bum's Rush but I don't think getting her into a fight is that big of a problem. It's not like people know you're playing a withdraw deck when they see Mouse hit the table.

On Jun 28, 4:29 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <Btadnb5bmKD7LB7bnZ2dnUVZ_u3in...@comcast.com>, > > Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: > > You can still do stuff like that: > > March Halcyon and 60 Freak Drives ("please don't block my 61 hunts!") > > I have been developing this deck for *years*! And sadly, it took a hit > with the .5VP for withdrawl rule. I think the best version of the deck > was: > > 6x March Halcyon (1) for > 6x Isabel de Leon (3) AUS > > 54x Freak Drive > 2x Telepathic Counter > 2x My Enemy's Enemy > 2x Wake > > T1: Get out March > T2: Hunt 55 times. Hope you don't get blocked and torporized. Get out > Isabel. > T3: Declare intention to withdraw. Hope that no one can Rush you. > Cancel/bounce bleeds. Hope no one calls a vote that does you damage. > T4: You withdraw! Woo! > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html I like my version better. Deals with Rush, deals with votes and deals with bleeds more reliably. The depletion of the library is the hard part, still haven't decided what to go with (freak drive - hunt, burn option cards + specialization, Mouse + nosferatu putrescence, etc)

On Jun 28, 10:29 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <Btadnb5bmKD7LB7bnZ2dnUVZ_u3in...@comcast.com>, > > Jozxyqk <jfeue...@eecs.tufts.edu> wrote: > > You can still do stuff like that: > > March Halcyon and 60 Freak Drives ("please don't block my 61 hunts!") > > I have been developing this deck for *years*! And sadly, it took a hit > with the .5VP for withdrawl rule. I think the best version of the deck > was: > > 6x March Halcyon (1) for > 6x Isabel de Leon (3) AUS > > 54x Freak Drive > 2x Telepathic Counter > 2x My Enemy's Enemy > 2x Wake > > T1: Get out March > T2: Hunt 55 times. Hope you don't get blocked and torporized. Get out > Isabel. > T3: Declare intention to withdraw. Hope that no one can Rush you. > Cancel/bounce bleeds. Hope no one calls a vote that does you damage. > T4: You withdraw! Woo! 12x Hugo (4) POT pre vic 1x Waste Management Operation 1x Haven Uncovered 1x Bum's Rush 2x Trap 35x D'habi Revenant 20x Corrupt Construction Bring up Hugo, burning/discarding Dhabi Revenants every turn. (6 cards per round moved) Play Corrupt Constructions (up to 8 additional cards per round moved) - run out of deck around turn 4 Use Waste Management Operation to recycle Haven Uncovered and/or Trap. Kill any minion that stops your withdraw attempt. witness1

On Jun 28, 4:33 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183040137.756761.303...@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > > 0,5vp deck - version 1.5 > > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > 12x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 > > > Library [60 cards] > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Master [49] > > 1x Minion Tap > > 2x Secure Haven > > 44x Slaughterhouse, The > > 2x Specialization > > > Reaction [11] > > 5x Deflection > > 3x Obedience > > 3x Kindred Coercion > > It'll take too long to get rid of the Slaughterhouses--you only ditch, > uh, 6 around the table (including your discard phase). > > So it will take 7 turns to empty the deck. Maybe a bit faster if you > luck into the Specialization. > > You'll be dead by then. > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html Not necceseraly. You've only spent 10 pool on Helena, plus maybe gained a few from Specialization. Also there are 11 reaction cards, so some of them have to be used before the attempt to withdraw. At first I was thinking about getting Helena out only when most of the library is already depleted and having only 7 reactions. I was particuraly worried about getting rushed while working on my library. But I figured getting Helena out as soon as possible and adding Secure Haven a bit more reactions might be a better option. Also notice the single Minion Tap. I seriously don't think that I'll die before depleting my library.

[ quoted text not captured ] Replace 4-6 Slaughterhouses with Deal With the Devil. witness1

[ quoted text not captured ] Er, that should be: run out of deck around turn 5-6. witness1

[ quoted text not captured ] Wow. Cool! I'm truly inspired. Between you and all the other great concoctions in this thread, I've been able to combine them all and come up with this deck that does exactly the same but much more efficiently! I present to you: Crypt [0 vampires] Capacity min: 0 max: 0 average: 0 ------------------------------------------------------------ Library [0 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Wanna guess who will have the most fun playing our kickass decks in that casual tonight? If you dont want to play, just dont. B

[ quoted text not captured ] Me. > If you dont want to play, just dont. > B If you don't want to participate in amusing thought exercises, just don't. witness1

[ quoted text not captured ] I am not saying deck of this type is fun to play (but might be :)). It's fun for me to try to think about pulling something like that off and thinking about how it can be done.

[ quoted text not captured ] O!!!! Deal with the Devil, this gave me an idea. Deck Name : The 0,5 VP deck Description : Well this version obviously sucks, but, still, Deal with the Devil is just too cool. Deplete your library using multiple Deal with Devil's per turn. Then hope you have some reactions left in your last hand when trying to withdraw. Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 ------------------------------------------------------------ 12x Huitzilopochtli 10 AUS DAI DOM OBF POT PRE Baali:2 Library [60 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Master [30] 12x Deal with the Devil 5x Minion Tap 10x Parthenon, The 3x Specialization Reaction [30] 8x Obedience 8x Redirection 7x Telepathic Counter 7x Wake with Evening's Freshness Needs lot of tuning, haven't really thought about the ratios, but I guess more reactions, less masters?

In article <1183043968.8...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Bram Vink <jja....@hccnet.nl> wrote: > Wanna guess who will have the most fun playing our kickass decks in > that casual tonight? > > If you dont want to play, just dont. (you realize that this is all just a goofy thought experiment, and isn't, ya know, worth being snarky about, right?) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183042889....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, witness1 <jwnew...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > 12x Hugo (4) POT pre vic > > 1x Waste Management Operation > 1x Haven Uncovered > 1x Bum's Rush > 2x Trap > 35x D'habi Revenant > 20x Corrupt Construction > > Bring up Hugo, burning/discarding Dhabi Revenants every turn. (6 cards > per round moved) > Play Corrupt Constructions (up to 8 additional cards per round moved) > - run out of deck around turn 4 > Use Waste Management Operation to recycle Haven Uncovered and/or Trap. > Kill any minion that stops your withdraw attempt. > > witness1 Ooh! Sweet! If Corrupt Construction takes damage, do you not get to withdraw? (I think if any of your minions get into combat or take damage, you are hosed). But I like the mechanism. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jun 28, 2:34 pm, jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > Deck Name : The 1VP deck > Description : > The first ever deck designed to get one and exactly one vp in a given > game. > Goal of the deck is tu succesfully withdraw. > > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > 12x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 > > Library [60 cards] > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Master [48] > 1x Minion Tap > 2x Secure Haven > 43x Slaughterhouse, The > 2x Specialization > > Reaction [12] > 5x Deflection > 1x Enhanced Senses > 3x Obedience > 1x Quicken Sight > 2x Eagle Sight The decks that cannot win a game are illegal for sanctioned tournament play, since it is not playing to win :-) -- Damnans http://www.almadrava.net/damnans http://www.vtes.net http://es.groups.yahoo.com/group/vteshispania/

In article <1183042506.9...@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, jak...@gmail.com wrote: > I like my version better. Deals with Rush, deals with votes and deals > with bleeds more reliably. Which one? The Helena (?) one? Yeah, probably deals with most threats better, but doesn't get going for a while, and can't declare attempt to withdraw till it is probably too late--you have to get out a 10 cap first (3 turns minimum), and then get rid of the deck. By which time, your predator and/or prey can probably prevent the withdrawl pretty easily. The March Halcyon trick works 'cause you always can act on your second turn and it is unlikely that someone will prevent you from depleting your deck on T2 (unless, say, your predator influences out like, David Morgan, the Scourge who uses his inherrent +1 intercept to block March and then Undead Strengths her into torpor...). So you can attempt to withdraw on T3 and only have to deal with the threats available to your predator (and maybe prey) on T3, which usually isn't *that* much. With the big vampire deck, you have to try and withdraw on, like, T6 or so, which will be *much* harder. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183042223....@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, jak...@gmail.com wrote: > I dunno, she bleeds and gets blocked? She gets rushed? She blocks > someone? > Could also add some Haven Uncovered's or Bum's Rush but I don't think > getting her into a fight is that big of a problem. > It's not like people know you're playing a withdraw deck when they see > Mouse hit the table. Too dependant on your enemies to do what you want them to. Mouse has trouble intercepting anything, you are unlikely to have a Rush/Haven in your hand early, and it is very possible that he'll not get blocked a lot. I mean, someone might block Mouse, but if not, you are useless. I mean, like, more so than the design indicates :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183042915.5...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, jak...@gmail.com wrote: > I seriously don't think that > I'll die before depleting my library. I didn't mean dead in terms of ousted, I meant dead in terms of not having the ability to withdraw anymore. By the time you get out Helena and then deplete your deck, your predator and prey will be set up and have multiple minions to do stuff with. So the likelyhood of pulling of a withdrawl is minimal. Especially if you had to use any of your defensive tech earlier on (it only takes four bleeds of 5 to get ousted, mind you...). It is possible, but unlikely, to work. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183045714.3...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, jak...@gmail.com wrote: > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > 12x Huitzilopochtli 10 AUS DAI DOM OBF POT PRE Baali:2 > > > Library [60 cards] > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Master [30] > 12x Deal with the Devil > 5x Minion Tap > 10x Parthenon, The > 3x Specialization > > Reaction [30] > 8x Obedience > 8x Redirection > 7x Telepathic Counter > 7x Wake with Evening's Freshness > > Needs lot of tuning, haven't really thought about the ratios, but I > guess more reactions, less masters? If you are gonna use Deal with the Devil, you might as well use Liquidation instead (does mostly the same thing, but also gives you 3 pool...) [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jun 28, 6:08 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183045714.386529.114...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > > > > jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > 12x Huitzilopochtli 10 AUS DAI DOM OBF POT PRE Baali:2 > > > Library [60 cards] > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Master [30] > > 12x Deal with the Devil > > 5x Minion Tap > > 10x Parthenon, The > > 3x Specialization > > > Reaction [30] > > 8x Obedience > > 8x Redirection > > 7x Telepathic Counter > > 7x Wake with Evening's Freshness > > > Needs lot of tuning, haven't really thought about the ratios, but I > > guess more reactions, less masters? > > If you are gonna use Deal with the Devil, you might as well use > Liquidation instead (does mostly the same thing, but also gives you 3 > pool...) > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html Ooo, coolio. Liquidation is sooo much better in this case, since it also kind of allows you to customize your hand not just hope you have some reactions left after you're done burning your library. This deck just got less useless! Also - 1 Minion Tap and + 1 Barrens, allowing you to discard those useless masters a bit faster. Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 ------------------------------------------------------------ 12x Huitzilopochtli 10 AUS DAI DOM OBF POT PRE Baali:2 Library [60 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Master [30] 12x Liquidation 4x Minion Tap 10x Parthenon, The 3x Specialization 1x Barrens [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jun 28, 6:07 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183042915.579976.134...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > > I seriously don't think that > > I'll die before depleting my library. > > I didn't mean dead in terms of ousted, I meant dead in terms of not > having the ability to withdraw anymore. By the time you get out Helena > and then deplete your deck, your predator and prey will be set up and > have multiple minions to do stuff with. So the likelyhood of pulling of > a withdrawl is minimal. Especially if you had to use any of your > defensive tech earlier on (it only takes four bleeds of 5 to get ousted, > mind you...). It is possible, but unlikely, to work. > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html Not probably, but surely deals with most threats better :) I mean a single KRC or a single rush stops Isabel, but it sure doesn't stop Helena from getting her rightful 0,5 vp. And as for the pred and prey, well, I kinda assume prey doesn't really care about me withdrawing and is happy I've done nothing to him (maybe I've even deflected somewhere else to someone who for example doesn't have dom or AUS, it's not like this kind of deck is trying to oust his prey :P) And the pred, well, I just hope he doesn't have a billion minions, and my hand should like something like - 3 deflect, 2 obedience, 2 Kindred Coerction, allowing me to hopefully shut down his minions trying to stop me from withdrawing. Was also thinking about adding an Elder Library allowing me to have one more deflect at the end on my hand, but discarded the idea as adding too many moving parts. The depletion library part - well I don't know, I like Mouse + Nosferatu Putriscence and some rushes better than the pander hunting 50 times, but that's not the main part of the deck. Helena can also be paired with the pander freak driving, not much difference. Each design has its flaws, freak driver can be blocked, Mouse might not get blocked or might not block anyone or I might not draw any rushes.

In article <1183046340.3...@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Damnans <damna...@ono.com> wrote: > The decks that cannot win a game are illegal for sanctioned tournament > play, since it is not playing to win :-) Holy crap. It is a silly thought experiment. No one is suggesting that it is a good idea in general to play a deck that exists just to withdraw. You'd rather we be arguing about dealmaking? [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] The deck certainly CAN win a game - it's capable of bleeding with Helena 30 or so times - or however many times is needed to oust a table. Arguably almost any legally constructed deck is capable of winning a game - the three exceptions that come to mind would involve combinations of Martin Frankel, slave Gargoyles without masters, and Aabt Kindred without Nefertiti, etc etc, along with a lack of means to damage pool through non-bleed methods. > Damnans -John Flournoy

On Jun 28, 11:56 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183042889.450577.52...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > witness1 <jwnewqu...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > 12x Hugo (4) POT pre vic > > > 1x Waste Management Operation > > 1x Haven Uncovered > > 1x Bum's Rush > > 2x Trap > > 35x D'habi Revenant > > 20x Corrupt Construction > > > Bring up Hugo, burning/discarding Dhabi Revenants every turn. (6 cards > > per round moved) > > Play Corrupt Constructions (up to 8 additional cards per round moved) > > - run out of deck around turn 4 > > Use Waste Management Operation to recycle Haven Uncovered and/or Trap. > > Kill any minion that stops your withdraw attempt. > > > witness1 > > Ooh! Sweet! If Corrupt Construction takes damage, do you not get to > withdraw? (I think if any of your minions get into combat or take > damage, you are hosed). But I like the mechanism. Oh I'd totally fail to withdraw until the other players let me or I kill all their minions. I just think I have a reasonable chance at one or the other working. Plus my deck can stop both the March Halcyon version (by rushing her) and the Helena version (Obedience can't be played on allies) from withdrawing before I do. Moral VPs and all that. witness1

On Jun 28, 6:37 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183046340.382634.266...@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > Damnans <damnansv...@ono.com> wrote: > > The decks that cannot win a game are illegal for sanctioned tournament > > play, since it is not playing to win :-) > > Holy crap. It is a silly thought experiment. Hence my smiley :-P > No one is suggesting that it is a good idea in general to play a deck that exists just to withdraw. > > You'd rather we be arguing about dealmaking? Dealmaking is quite clear already. Play to win. So it is not worth arguing about >:-) [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] When Hell freezes :-) > it's capable of bleeding with Helena 30 or so times - or however many times is needed to oust a > table. Yeah, yeah :-P > Arguably almost any legally constructed deck is capable of winning a > game - the three exceptions that come to mind would involve > combinations of Martin Frankel, slave Gargoyles without masters, and > Aabt Kindred without Nefertiti, etc etc, along with a lack of means to > damage pool through non-bleed methods. And many other silly decks not conceived to win. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jun 28, 8:34 am, jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > Deck Name : The 1VP deck > Description : > The first ever deck designed to get one and exactly one vp in a given > game. > Goal of the deck is tu succesfully withdraw. > > Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 10 max: 10 average: 10 > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > 12x Helena Adv 10 AUS CEL DOM dai obf pre tha Toreador:3 > > Library [60 cards] > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Master [48] > 1x Minion Tap > 2x Secure Haven > 43x Slaughterhouse, The > 2x Specialization > > Reaction [12] > 5x Deflection > 1x Enhanced Senses > 3x Obedience > 1x Quicken Sight > 2x Eagle Sight this is not Playing.The.Game try again :) oscar

[ quoted text not captured ] I would switch out at least 2 of the Minion Taps and 2 Liquidations for 2 each of Zillah's Valley and Info Highway. Your game will be much better/shorter if you have Helena up by turn 2. best - chris > Reaction [30] > 8x Obedience > 8x Redirection > 7x Telepathic Counter > 7x Wake with Evening's Freshness > -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auct...@superfuncards.com

In article <1183051242.0...@k29g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, OrgPlay <org...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > this is not Playing.The.Game > > try again :) Aaagagahahahahahahahahahah! [ quoted text not captured ]

On 28 jun, 17:54, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183043968.822152.249...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > > > Wanna guess who will have the most fun playing our kickass decks in > > that casual tonight? > > > If you dont want to play, just dont. > > (you realize that this is all just a goofy thought experiment, and > isn't, ya know, worth being snarky about, right?) > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html Lol. Forgive my attempt at sarcasm. Try Rabbat. 74 freakdrives, 10 aaron's feeding razor, 5 learjet, 1 force of will. Hunt for approximately 65 pool. then proceed to burn rabbat and withdraw. if your prey denies you your withdraw, wait till timeout to get your coveted .5 points. Cheers B

[ quoted text not captured ] Nice idea, but the deck will fail to withdraw horribly :) What stops your predator from bleeding you? Maybe some Dummy corportions to have at least the slightest chance to withdraw? And a deck which will get 0,5 vp by by timing out is just waaaaay too easy to build.

On Jun 28, 7:45 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] > aucti...@superfuncards.com Oh, I am actually using Huitzilopochtli for the version which burns the library using master phases. And yes, I guess adding Info Highway and Zillahs Valleyt for the Minion Taps could help. Still not sure if pochtli can actually pull it off :) But still, 3 Liquidations per turn looks like fun. On the other hand, new and improved minimalistic version of 'Helena gets 0,5 vp' Deck Name : The 0,5 VP deck Author : Description : This time the freak driving pander burns the library in one turn, leaving only 6 reactions for Helena. Crypt [12 vampires] Capacity min: 1 max: 10 average: 5.5 ------------------------------------------------------------ 6x Helena 10 AUS CEL DOM obf pre tha Toreador:3 6x March Halcyon 1 for Pander:2 Library [60 cards] ------------------------------------------------------------ Action Modifier [54] 54x Freak Drive Reaction [6] 2x Deflection 2x Kindred Coercion 2x Obedience

[ quoted text not captured ] Should of course be Helene Adv. Is there an edit button? because I couldn't find one.

In article <1183056912.4...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Bram Vink <jja....@hccnet.nl> wrote: > Forgive my attempt at sarcasm. > Try Rabbat. 74 freakdrives, 10 aaron's feeding razor, 5 learjet, 1 > force of will. Heh. But then you get shut down when you end up with a hand of 7 Aaaron's Feeding Razor... [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jun 29, 1:07 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183056912.457201.227...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > Bram Vink <jja.v...@hccnet.nl> wrote: > > > Forgive my attempt at sarcasm. > > Try Rabbat. 74 freakdrives, 10 aaron's feeding razor, 5 learjet, 1 > > force of will. > > Heh. But then you get shut down when you end up with a hand of 7 > Aaaron's Feeding Razor... Wrong. Learjet helps him deal with hand jam. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183073592.8...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Damnans <damna...@ono.com> wrote: > Wrong. Learjet helps him deal with hand jam. Man. You guys have a pretty serious ability to choke the fun out of a silly yet moderately interesting discussion. And he can still get a hand full of Feeding Razors... [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:20:42 -0700, OrgPlay <org...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] yeah only 5 deflections that's not enough for a real deck :)

[ quoted text not captured ] > easy to build.- Hide quoted text - Having around 80 pool should stop him from preventing you to withdraw. The above should be predator. It will be massively in your predators advantage to let you withdraw. Cheers, B

On Jun 29, 2:19 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <1183073592.800421.285...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > Damnans <damnansv...@ono.com> wrote: > > Wrong. Learjet helps him deal with hand jam. > > Man. You guys have a pretty serious ability to choke the fun out of a > silly yet moderately interesting discussion. I offer a deck in the same vein of this discussion. It might be more effective though, sure. > And he can still get a hand full of Feeding Razors... > > Peter D Bakija > p...@lightlink.comhttp://www.lightlink.com/pdb6/vtes.html It's been a long time since I did the whole chance-determination thing but if I'm not mistaken the chance of drawing 8 aaron's before drawing 1 learjet is basically just the chance of not drawing a learjet 8 times. Since freakdrives cycle freely i'm not counting them. I believe this chance is: (1-(5/16))*(1-(5/15))*(1-(5/14))*(1-(5/13))*...(1- (5/8)) That's like.. half a percent or so. But fine. if you wanna be absolutely sure you can withdraw, use 6 feeding razors. Cheers, B

Here is the best withdraw deck i can think of. Take out Beast, rush your predators vampire and burn him with tons of damage and your entire deck in the process. Then attempt to withdraw. Hope your predator only takes one mid/high cap before The beast can get the job done. Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 28, Max: 28, Avg: 7) ------------------------------------------- 12 Beast ani cel OBF POT 7 Nosferatu Antitribu Library: (90 cards) ------------------- Combat (90 cards) 1 Immortal Grapple 1 Drawing Out the Beast 1 Burning Wrath 87 Increased Strength

[ quoted text not captured ] how do you burn rabbat? she can't play force of will...

[ quoted text not captured ] errr? why not go down to 60 cards? I'm sure 57 Increased strenght will work just fine.

[ quoted text not captured ] Since you still have spaces left in your 7, I'd suggest doubling up on the first three, in case one of them gets canceled.

[ quoted text not captured ] Oh, and a Dummy Corporation in case your predator has a second minion. Probably swap out one of the DotB for a second (in case the first Dummy Corp gets Washed).

[ quoted text not captured ] > how do you burn rabbat? she can't play force of will...- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ehm good catch. make that a daring the dawn.

In article <1183115721.1...@k29g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, RedVenom <redv...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 28, Max: 28, Avg: 7) > ------------------------------------------- > 12 Beast ani cel OBF POT 7 Nosferatu > Antitribu > > Library: (90 cards) > ------------------- > Combat (90 cards) > 1 Immortal Grapple > 1 Drawing Out the Beast > 1 Burning Wrath > 87 Increased Strength Ooh--that is a nice one. Although the timing might not work that well: T1: Influence T2: Influence out Beast T3: Whack predators vampire, 'cause they don't have fortitude T4: Announce attempt to withdraw T5: Fail to withdraw as your predator had 2 vampires in play... Maybe turn one of the Increased into a Dummy Corp? [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <1183105108.0...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, Bram Vink <jja....@hccnet.nl> wrote: > I offer a deck in the same vein of this discussion. It might be more > effective though, sure. Nah--the deck was awsome. It was the "Wrong." comment that was no fun. > It's been a long time since I did the whole chance-determination thing > but if I'm not mistaken the chance of drawing 8 aaron's before drawing > 1 learjet is basically just the chance of not drawing a learjet 8 > times. Since freakdrives cycle freely i'm not counting them. I believe > this chance is: (1-(5/16))*(1-(5/15))*(1-(5/14))*(1-(5/13))*...(1- > (5/8)) Oh, it is a *small* chance, but possible. So probably better with the 6 Feeding Razors. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <uo6hi.27398$YL5....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Since you still have spaces left in your 7, I'd suggest doubling up on the > first > three, in case one of them gets canceled. Can't you not play a second Immortal Grapple or Drawing out the Beast if they get DIed, due to the only 1 per round text? That being the case, go with: 1x Dummy Corp 1x Immortal Grapple 1x Drawing out the Beast 2x Burning Wrath 1x Flash (ya know, just in case...) 54x Increased Strength [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > In article <uo6hi.27398$YL5....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> Since you still have spaces left in your 7, I'd suggest doubling up on the >> first >> three, in case one of them gets canceled. > > Can't you not play a second Immortal Grapple or Drawing out the Beast if > they get DIed, due to the only 1 per round text? > > That being the case, go with: > > 1x Dummy Corp > 1x Immortal Grapple > 1x Drawing out the Beast > 2x Burning Wrath > 1x Flash (ya know, just in case...) > 54x Increased Strength Sure, OK. But you can still double the Dummy Corp. And you can still double Flash as well without any added risk.

[ quoted text not captured ] Cool idea. Could also work with Una multirushing all of pred's vampires (equipping with everything before of course) Probably less reliable though.

In article <Zb7hi.27400$YL5....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Sure, OK. But you can still double the Dummy Corp. Yeah, double Dummy Corp is a good plan. > And you can still double Flash as well without any added risk. You probably won't need it, though. I was figuring it was handy in case your opponent Skin of Steeled the first Burning Wrath and then, uh, also pressed to end against the IG. Through the Drawing out the Beast. Hmm. Strike that. Maybe a Blur? [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > In article <Zb7hi.27400$YL5....@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> Sure, OK. But you can still double the Dummy Corp. > > Yeah, double Dummy Corp is a good plan. > >> And you can still double Flash as well without any added risk. > > You probably won't need it, though. I was figuring it was handy in case > your opponent Skin of Steeled the first Burning Wrath and then, uh, also > pressed to end against the IG. Through the Drawing out the Beast. Hmm. > Strike that. Maybe a Blur? Well, since you can't effectively double up on DotB, I was using the second Flash as additional insurance against long range if the DotB gets canceled. Blur still won't help against Steel, so I don't think that offers anything.

On 29 jun, 15:41, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Peter D Bakija wrote: > > In article <Zb7hi.27400$YL5.1...@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>, > > LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > >> Sure, OK. But you can still double the Dummy Corp. > > > Yeah, double Dummy Corp is a good plan. > > >> And you can still double Flash as well without any added risk. > > > You probably won't need it, though. I was figuring it was handy in case > > your opponent Skin of Steeled the first Burning Wrath and then, uh, also > > pressed to end against the IG. Through the Drawing out the Beast. Hmm. > > Strike that. Maybe a Blur? > > Well, since you can't effectively double up on DotB, I was using the second > Flash as additional insurance against long range if the DotB gets canceled. > > Blur still won't help against Steel, so I don't think that offers anything. Trap?

In article <ZZ7hi.7322$Rw1....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Well, since you can't effectively double up on DotB, I was using the second > Flash as additional insurance against long range if the DotB gets canceled. Ah, yes, good point. So maybe: 2x Dummy Corp 1x IG 1x DoTB 2x Burning Wrath 2x Flash 52x Increased Strength But then there is a mathematical chance of stalling (Rush, play Increased and DoTB until your hand is full of 2x Dummy Corp, 1xIG, 2x BW, 2xFlash and still have a deck full of Increased. Or at least with some Increased, and if you vaporize your foe, you have to Rush someone again on the next turn to deplete the deck). So I'd suspect that 1 Flash is probably sufficient, unless they can cancel the DoTB *and* manuver twice. That would be sad... > Blur still won't help against Steel, so I don't think that offers anything. Also true. But *totally* schools the Superior Mettle :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > In article <ZZ7hi.7322$Rw1....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> Well, since you can't effectively double up on DotB, I was using the second >> Flash as additional insurance against long range if the DotB gets canceled. > > Ah, yes, good point. So maybe: > > 2x Dummy Corp > 1x IG > 1x DoTB > 2x Burning Wrath > 2x Flash > 52x Increased Strength > > But then there is a mathematical chance of stalling (Rush, play > Increased and DoTB until your hand is full of 2x Dummy Corp, 1xIG, 2x > BW, 2xFlash and still have a deck full of Increased. Or at least with > some Increased, and if you vaporize your foe, you have to Rush someone > again on the next turn to deplete the deck). So I'd suspect that 1 Flash > is probably sufficient, unless they can cancel the DoTB *and* manuver > twice. That would be sad... Why are you doubling the Wrath?

In article <Yk8hi.7324$Rw1...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Why are you doubling the Wrath? In case the first one gets cancelled, and gives a bit of back up in case of Fortitude--if they prevent the first one, you can press and try it again. [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija wrote: > In article <Yk8hi.7324$Rw1...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, > LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > >> Why are you doubling the Wrath? > > In case the first one gets cancelled, and gives a bit of back up in case > of Fortitude--if they prevent the first one, you can press and try it > again. Geh, of course. That's where I started a while ago. Anyway, yeah, you could "stall" with all the Increased Strengths at the bottom of the deck. But even that isn't a true stall -- you just Grapple on the first round and save the Wrath for the second round (and hope for no S:CE or Dodge).

In article <NT8hi.7328$Rw1....@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > Geh, of course. That's where I started a while ago. And ya know, I figure, if your plan is to hit someone for 112(?) aggrivated damage, you really want it to stick :-) > Anyway, yeah, you could "stall" with all the Increased Strengths at the > bottom > of the deck. But even that isn't a true stall -- you just Grapple on the > first > round and save the Wrath for the second round (and hope for no S:CE or > Dodge). True, true. This deck can only be awsome :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] You aren't factoring in Murphy's Law here. If there is a chance it can happen it will. best - chris -- Super Fun Cards http://stores.ebay.com/superfuncards/ auct...@superfuncards.com

[ quoted text not captured ] Nice, if you go 3rd - 5th, you will have Beast up by turn 2, withdrawing on turn 3. However, if your pred is playing weenies, you go up flames, esp if they get out 3-4 vamps in that time. Best position is probably 3rd, so your pred only gets a total of 10 transfers before Beast can act. Minor difference, but could be the edge needed to get that . . . . half VP! [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] > aucti...@superfuncards.com- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Now consider your chances with a weenie !tremere and a couple of tupdogs!

Howdy, On Jun 28, 5:34 am, jaku...@gmail.com wrote: > Deck Name : The 1VP deck > Description : > The first ever deck designed to get one and exactly one vp in a given > game. > Goal of the deck is tu succesfully withdraw. > 3x Obedience Can you use Obedience during your withdrawal attempt (and not fail to withdraw)? The old text made it clear you could - the new text I'm not so sure about: Obedience Only usable when this reacting vampire is about to enter combat with an acting younger vampire. dom: Untap the acting vampire, do not tap this reacting vampire, and end the current action (and combat). The acting vampire cannot attempt the same action this turn. Obedience used to 'cancel' the action and never reach combat. Now it seems to 'end' both the action and combat - which makes it sound like you've actually been in combat, which, if true, voids withdrawal. Alex

Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote: > Bram Vink <jja....@hccnet.nl> wrote: >> It's been a long time since I did the whole chance-determination >> thing but if I'm not mistaken the chance of drawing 8 aaron's before >> drawing 1 learjet is basically just the chance of not drawing a >> learjet 8 times. Since freakdrives cycle freely i'm not counting >> them. I believe this chance is: >> (1-(5/16))*(1-(5/15))*(1-(5/14))*(1-(5/13))*...(1- (5/8)) > > Oh, it is a *small* chance, but possible. So probably > better with the 6 Feeding Razors. No, it is better if one understands that 0.5% is absolutely positively *nothing* to concern one's self about. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier

In article <abkhi.9538$oh3....@newsfe03.phx>, "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > No, it is better if one understands that 0.5% is absolutely positively > *nothing* to concern one's self about. If I'm building a deck this stupid, I'm gonna worry about it. And make sure there is zero chance of it not working. At least due to the card selections :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] I don't think it's necessary, if you explain it to your predator. He can let you have the 0.5 VP, or he can try and work through your poolbag for 23, while his next prey will be tooling up and having a free run. That negotiation should only take 20 seconds, but you could drag it out to 45 minutes if you pushed it. <G> Morgan Vening

Morgan Vening wrote: > That negotiation should only take 20 seconds, but you could drag it > out to 45 minutes if you pushed it. <G> If you _earnestly_ pushed it. :) -- salem (replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote: > In article <abkhi.9538$oh3....@newsfe03.phx>, > "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > >> No, it is better if one understands that 0.5% is absolutely >> positively *nothing* to concern one's self about. > > If I'm building a deck this stupid, I'm gonna worry about it. And make > sure there is zero chance of it not working. At least due to the card > selections :-) As long as you acknowledge that the exercise in futility of building a "1/2vp" deck comes with certain responsibilities, such as maximizing your chances of getting the 1/2vp by not acting even more silly by even *discussing* a 0.5% chance of *anything*, then I have nothing further to say. Learn how math interacts with the real world, and act accordingly, I say. ;D [ quoted text not captured ]

On Jul 1, 3:30 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote: > As long as you acknowledge that the exercise in futility of building a > "1/2vp" deck comes with certain responsibilities, such as maximizing your > chances of getting the 1/2vp by not acting even more silly by even > *discussing* a 0.5% chance of *anything*, then I have nothing further to > say. It is a rough road to travel. > Learn how math interacts with the real world, and act accordingly, I say. > ;D Hey man--if I can defeat even really small numbers, I'm half way to victory! (So you still want me to mail the root beer, huh? Don't wanna drink it in Ohio? Heck--I could bring the 4 pack, and if you like it, I could then get another one to mail to you as a collector pack or something :-) -Peter

Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote: > (So you still want me to mail the root beer, huh? Don't wanna drink it > in Ohio? Heck--I could bring the 4 pack, and if you like it, I could > then get another one to mail to you as a collector pack or > something :-) okokok I will drink it in Ohio :) Kevin M. [ quoted text not captured ]