Rulings

Are the restricted cards still limited to 2 per deck? Someone tried feeding me some bull about the number being raised to 6 and that there was a 6 card limit on everything else too..... -- =========================================================== == "The fact that life sucks is no big deal. What == == does suck is that you can't do anything about it" == ===========================================================

In article <4e1in3$m...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, L. Scott Johnson <sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu> wrote: >cr...@Ra.MsState.Edu (Charles Richard Robb) writes: > >>Are the restricted cards still limited to 2 per deck? Someone tried feeding me >>some bull about the number being raised to 6 and that there was a 6 card limit on everything else too..... > >Yes, the limit on restricted cards has been raised to 6 per each. >There is no limit on the non-restricted cards. What I don't understand about the new tournament rules is the happiness with which the NCL camp received the increase in the limit on the Restricted cards. I didn't think the DC tourney rules used the much-touted "Golden Tenets" (no repeat actions, no vote pushing). Assuming they don't (esp. since the Golden Tenet about vote pushing expressly breaks the new V:TES rules on voting), how are they limiting degenerate decks? A 6 card limit is not a limit at all (most NL decks I have seen rely on maybe 7 or 8 copies of the "main" cards in the deck...big difference). I'd rather use NL rules with a limited list (or NL with the Golden Tenets) than no limits at all. Wierd how NCL proponents seem to be so prejudiced against CL that they are willing to let the game remain broken in tournaments to avoid a card limit... If I'm wrong about the DC using the "Golden Tenets", please let me know. I am not really trempted to play a broken game in a tournament. -Elfholme -- ****************************************************************************** This bit of wisdom has been brought to you by: Mark Havener Lord of elfh...@netcom.com Wood Elf King (and Jyhad player extraordinaire!) ******************************************************************************

sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) writes: >"Jonathan G. Sushinsky" <jona...@cesar.umd.edu> writes: >>What are the new V:TES rules for voting. I remember vote pushing as >>being limited by the rules in the first place. I think (not sure >>this is just how I have played)that the Jyhad rules limited vote pushing >>by not allowing you to replace "thrown in votes" until the political >>action was completed. > >>For example I have 4 KRCs in my hand and no other political cards. I >>call KRC that is not blocked. That card is replaced, but I don't get >>another political card. So the most votes I can then throw in are my >>other three KRCs, since they cannot be replaced immediately. > >>In this situation vote pushing is limited to eight votes at the most >>(if you don't count action modifiers and reactions:Bewitching Oration, >>Dread Gaze) and I don't know anyone who would want to have a hand with >>just political cards so in practice vote pushing is limited. > >Well, 9 or 10 actually, depending on how big your hand size is (Elder >Library and Cassandra), but in general, eight is right. Could you not also tap your Fragment of the Book of Nod and come up with a couple more? (That's my favorite trick for replacing combat cards that otherwise couldn't be replaced until the end of combat.) Fred

cr...@Ra.MsState.Edu (Charles Richard Robb) writes: >Are the restricted cards still limited to 2 per deck? Someone tried feeding me >some bull about the number being raised to 6 and that there was a 6 card limit on everything else too..... Yes, the limit on restricted cards has been raised to 6 per each. There is no limit on the non-restricted cards. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | These opinions are mine and http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | are subject to card text. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

"Jonathan G. Sushinsky" <jona...@cesar.umd.edu> writes: >>>Restricted cards. I didn't think the DC tourney rules used the >>>much-touted "Golden Tenets" (no repeat actions, no vote pushing). Assuming >>>they don't (esp. since the Golden Tenet about vote pushing expressly >>>breaks the new V:TES rules on voting), how are they limiting degenerate >What are the new V:TES rules for voting. I remember vote pushing as >being limited by the rules in the first place. I think (not sure >this is just how I have played)that the Jyhad rules limited vote pushing >by not allowing you to replace "thrown in votes" until the political >action was completed. >For example I have 4 KRCs in my hand and no other political cards. I >call KRC that is not blocked. That card is replaced, but I don't get >another political card. So the most votes I can then throw in are my >other three KRCs, since they cannot be replaced immediately. >In this situation vote pushing is limited to eight votes at the most >(if you don't count action modifiers and reactions:Bewitching Oration, >Dread Gaze) and I don't know anyone who would want to have a hand with >just political cards so in practice vote pushing is limited. Well, 9 or 10 actually, depending on how big your hand size is (Elder Library and Cassandra), but in general, eight is right. This is the only 'limit' to vote pushing in the VtES rules (which mirror the official interpretation of the Jyhad rules). The original rules can be read as 'only only PA may be used to gain a vote per Meth. per referendum' - the official interpretation says that the rules had typos, when it is clear that at least someone writing the rules was under some other impression. [ quoted text not captured ]

elfh...@netcom.com (Mark Havener) wrote: >What I don't understand about the new tournament rules is the happiness >with which the NCL camp received the increase in the limit on the >Restricted cards. I didn't think the DC tourney rules used the >much-touted "Golden Tenets" (no repeat actions, no vote pushing). Assuming >they don't (esp. since the Golden Tenet about vote pushing expressly >breaks the new V:TES rules on voting), how are they limiting degenerate >decks? A 6 card limit is not a limit at all (most NL decks I have seen >rely on maybe 7 or 8 copies of the "main" cards in the deck...big >difference). I'd rather use NL rules with a limited list (or NL >with the Golden Tenets) than no limits >at all. Wierd how NCL proponents seem to be so prejudiced against CL >that they are willing to let the game remain broken in tournaments to >avoid a card limit... Peace Mark, Personally, I expect to see degenerate decks to continue to be a problem in tourneys until the DC takes some steps like "GT". The only way that the DC will institute any changes in the tourney rules is by someone showing them how they are broken. It's an evolving process. After someone shows the DC that 6 isn't very limiting, they change to something else. It isn't prejudice. I've seen this whole thing before (w Tt$), so I know that it'll just repeat what happened before. >If I'm wrong about the DC using the "Golden Tenets", please let me know. >I am not really trempted to play a broken game in a tournament. No, they aren't, TTBOMK. Nil carborundum illigitimi, James R. McClure Jr. The OS/2 Apostle <insert disclaimer here>

>>Restricted cards. I didn't think the DC tourney rules used the >>much-touted "Golden Tenets" (no repeat actions, no vote pushing). Assuming >>they don't (esp. since the Golden Tenet about vote pushing expressly >>breaks the new V:TES rules on voting), how are they limiting degenerate What are the new V:TES rules for voting. I remember vote pushing as being limited by the rules in the first place. I think (not sure this is just how I have played)that the Jyhad rules limited vote pushing by not allowing you to replace "thrown in votes" until the political action was completed. For example I have 4 KRCs in my hand and no other political cards. I call KRC that is not blocked. That card is replaced, but I don't get another political card. So the most votes I can then throw in are my other three KRCs, since they cannot be replaced immediately. In this situation vote pushing is limited to eight votes at the most (if you don't count action modifiers and reactions:Bewitching Oration, Dread Gaze) and I don't know anyone who would want to have a hand with just political cards so in practice vote pushing is limited. Anyway I don't have a rule book handy at the moment so this could just be a rule that my group made up and I never thought to challenge. Any thoughts or corrections are always welcome. jon

Mark Havener <elfh...@netcom.com> wrote: >What I don't understand about the new tournament rules is the happiness >with which the NCL camp received the increase in the limit on the >Restricted cards. I didn't think the DC tourney rules used the >much-touted "Golden Tenets" (no repeat actions, no vote pushing). Assuming >they don't (esp. since the Golden Tenet about vote pushing expressly >breaks the new V:TES rules on voting), how are they limiting degenerate >decks? A 6 card limit is not a limit at all... Well, the 2 limit was definitely over-restrictive, so the 6 may have been an overeaction. We basically felt it was better to risk setting the limit to high, than to risk setting it too low *again.* Side note, since you bring up the voting rules: Has anybody tried keeping vote pushing unlimited, but not replacing cards played during a vote until end of turn? That idea bubbled up here the other day, but I thought I'd ask if anyone's tried it before we kick it around here. Tom Wylie rec.games.trading-cards.* Network Representative for aa...@cats.ucsc.edu Wizards of the Coast, Inc.

aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote: >Side note, since you bring up the voting rules: Has anybody tried keeping >vote pushing unlimited, but not replacing cards played during a vote until >end of turn? That idea bubbled up here the other day, but I thought I'd >ask if anyone's tried it before we kick it around here. No, but it sounds like a great idea. We'll try it soon. TJH

In article <4e4ipv$f...@darkstar.UCSC.EDU>, aa...@cats.ucsc.edu (Thomas R Wylie) wrote: > Side note, since you bring up the voting rules: Has anybody tried keeping > vote pushing unlimited, but not replacing cards played during a vote until > end of turn? That idea bubbled up here the other day, but I thought I'd > ask if anyone's tried it before we kick it around here. Give it a shot. I'll see if we what happens around here when we play it like that (The Weenie Vote Push deck will be the most interesting case). "I can send and receive e-mail even over the Internet"-aol commercial @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$ # Adrian Sullivan sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu Spoutingly yours 8^) # $ GAT/CS/O/WS R+++* tv&--- b++(+++)&+ t X++&-- 5->? e+*>++++ PS+&-+ @ # PE&++&- C(+++)$ UX+>+++$ N++(+) K+>++++ w---$>? M++$ r(+) y*+? 3.1# @#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$@#$

elfh...@netcom.com (Mark Havener) wrote: >What I don't understand about the new tournament rules is the happiness >with which the NCL camp received the increase in the limit on the >Restricted cards. I didn't think the DC tourney rules used the >much-touted "Golden Tenets" (no repeat actions, no vote pushing). Assuming >they don't (esp. since the Golden Tenet about vote pushing expressly >breaks the new V:TES rules on voting), how are they limiting degenerate >decks? A 6 card limit is not a limit at all (most NL decks I have seen >rely on maybe 7 or 8 copies of the "main" cards in the deck...big >difference). I'd rather use NL rules with a limited list (or NL >with the Golden Tenets) than no limits >at all. Wierd how NCL proponents seem to be so prejudiced against CL >that they are willing to let the game remain broken in tournaments to >avoid a card limit... As someone else said in a response to this post, one reason is that no one wants to go round and round about this again. Another one, IMHO, is that people just don't care. Personally, I don't believe that my play group is going to adopt the tourney rules. I also think that if a tourney was held here, there is a good chance that it would either be 4cl (the last ones were) or the house rules of whatever person is running it. I know for a fact that my group plays with at least one rule that isn't VTES standard. That might even mess me up if I go to a tourney that isn't using it. Face it, there will most likely never be a "pro VTES tournament" like WotC is doing for M$G. Aound here, I can maybe enter 2 tourneys all year, with a both being at conventions. And thats if I don't want to do other things. -CT -- Charles T. Schwope | Every man is a spark in the darkness. By the aka CT | time he is noticed, he is gone forever, a sch...@infrared.csc.ti.com | retinal afterimage that fades, and is obscured c-sc...@ti.com | by newer, brighter lights.

Okay, for those of you who missed this the first time it ws posted, here is my Brujah Cel/Pot Rush deck. It's based (though it's been modified to suit my taste) on a deck posted by James McClure (thanks James). It works pretty well for me, and though this started as an experiment, I've found that I really like playing this deck: Crypt (All Brujah): Constanza Vinti Donal O'Connor Rake Bianca Anvil Black Cat Volker Yuri Uma Dre Lupo Angel Nik -------------- 13 Vamps (my personal choice for vamp number); average capacity--4.5 (I have separated the cards in the Library by rarity, because that's how James' was divided up; I believe I have all the rarities right) Rares ----- 2 Immortal Grapples 2 Fists of Death (just traded for 2 more, and thinking about putting them in) Fragment of the Book of Nod Giant's Blood The Knights The Slashers Sengir Dagger 4 Pulled Fangs 13 Rares (Auspicious?) Uncommons --------- 4 Torn Signposts 3 Second Traditions 4 Tastes of Vitae 3 Bloodhunts 2 Sport Bikes 2 Bastard Swords 2 Archon Investigations (just the threat of these slows down the bleeding...) Major Boon Mob Connections Warzone Hunting Ground KRCG News Radio 2 Malk Dementia Information Highway 27 Uncommons Commons ------- 4 Haven Uncovered 4 Bum's Rush 2 Trap Elder Intervention 4 Wakes w/Evening Freshness 2 Lucky Blow 2 Short Term Investment 3 Blood Doll Potence Celerity 4 Undead Strength 2 Burning Wrath 4 Acrobatics 4 Blur 4 Sideslip 2 Nimble Feet 2 Vampiric Speed 4 Flash 50 Commons 90 Cards Total With 4 different (all reasonably-priced) Princes in the Crypt, the deck is reasonably certain to be able to use all of the Prince-specific cards in the Library (Bloodhunts, 2nd Traditions), though it can win without getting any of the Princes out. The Princes also help in PA's, of course. With an average of (approx.) 4.5 capacity in the Crypt, the number of vamps out is similar to other (non-weenie-horde) decks. Comments are welcome. [ quoted text not captured ]

Deck presentation revamped for ease of read. COMBAT > 2 Immortal Grapples > 2 Fists of Death (just traded for 2 more, and thinking about putting them in) > 4 Pulled Fangs > 4 Torn Signposts > 4 Tastes of Vitae > 4 Undead Strength > 2 Burning Wrath > 4 Acrobatics > 4 Blur > 4 Sideslip > 2 Nimble Feet > 2 Vampiric Speed > 4 Flash > 2 Trap > 2 Lucky Blow 46 in combat cards REACTION/INTERCEPT/BLEED STOP > 3 Second Traditions > Elder Intervention > 4 Wakes w/Evening Freshness > 2 Sport Bikes > 2 Archon Investigations (just the threat of these slows down the bleeding...) > Major Boon > KRCG News Radio Average "Good" intercept: not quite 2. This makes the deck useful against non-stealth decks, but... (spectre of S&B) COMBAT Helpers > 4 Haven Uncovered > 4 Bum's Rush > 3 Bloodhunts > Mob Connections 11 Cards to get into combat (3 Reliable) With the Fragment of Nod (below), you ought to be able to get the into-combat cards to your hand. This is not too reliable, though (~12%). If no prince comes out, this drops to an awful ~8%. > Constanza Vinti 8 Prince Donal O'Connor 8 Prince > Rake 6 Prince Bianca > Anvil Black Cat > Volker 5 Prince Yuri > Uma Dre > Lupo Angel > Nik 13 Vamps (my personal choice for vamp number); average capacity--4.5 Assuming you go fourth, you will be on the third turn before a prince reliably comes up, and the fourth turn before you can use bloodhunts. BLOOD HELPERS > 2 Short Term Investment > 3 Blood Doll > Giant's Blood > Warzone Hunting Ground Good choices. SPEED and EFFICIENCY > Fragment of the Book of Nod > Potence > Celerity > The Knights > The Slashers > Sengir Dagger > 2 Bastard Swords > 2 Malk Dementia > Information Highway Again, good choices except for the Knights/Slashers/Swords. They are slow to equip and either not much use for blocking a Sneaking Vampire, cost pool, and your highly intensive combat deck doesn't need 1 more damage. Another Sengir Dagger for instant torpor is much better. Add a Barrens to get rid of hand jam. More blood suckers (Dolls, Taps, whatever) and generic intercept (elder intervention will make this better). > 90 Cards Total > > With 4 different (all reasonably-priced) Princes in the Crypt, the deck > is reasonably certain to be able to use all of the Prince-specific cards > in the Library (Bloodhunts, 2nd Traditions), though it can win without > getting any of the Princes out. The Princes also help in PA's, of > course. With an average of (approx.) 4.5 capacity in the Crypt, the > number of vamps out is similar to other (non-weenie-horde) decks. > Comments are welcome. I think you'd have a bit of trouble against a MS&B predator. Though you may hold them off, I think you'd have a lot of difficulty in getting a VP as well. I don't think you particularly need more combat cards, but some of the drops I suggested might be best not replaced, to increase overall tightness. Replies welcome by email or post... [ quoted text not captured ]

Okay, one more note on the 4CL Cel/Pot Rush deck that I have been experimenting with (yes, the experiment continues! ;) ). To date, the deck is 6 wins out of 8 games (in 3 of those games, including one tonight, I was the only one who got VPs). The deck has been played in games of from 3 to 6 players, in two different groups (mostly my usual Tuesday night group though). All clans (including the two new ones) have been represented in at least one game (played against a Giovani deck tonight...TB...yuck! ;) ). The players have included the "core" members of my Tuesday group, as well as "walk-ins", and of course, the members of another group, so a wide variety of players has also been represented. I'd consider myself a fairly good deck builder/player, but most of my regular group is just as good, so there's not a real advantage there. The deck is just good! And very fun to play too! I used to have a lot of fun with my "Anson and (Brujah) Friends" deck, but this deck is just as fun. It's as effective, if not more so, than my other deck. It's become the main deck I play (started out as an experiment growing out of a "CL/NCL discussion, but it's too fun now...I've always loved Brujah, of course...). I have to admit, I wasn't *sure* if Cel/Pot Rush was valid under 4CL, but after trying out this deck (a modification of a NL deck posted by James McClure), I am convinced that it IS a viable deckbuilding strategy. And a pretty fun one too... I have included the deck I am using at the bottom of this post, just in case anyone missed the post AND re-post. Since no one commented on the re-post... -Elfholme In article <elfholmeD...@netcom.com>, Mark Havener <elfh...@netcom.com> wrote: >Okay, for those of you who missed this the first time it ws posted, here >is my Brujah Cel/Pot Rush deck. It's based (though it's been modified to >suit my taste) on a deck posted by James McClure (thanks James). It >works pretty well for me, and though this started as an experiment, I've >found that I really like playing this deck: > >Crypt (All Brujah): > >Constanza Vinti >Donal O'Connor >Rake >Bianca >Anvil >Black Cat >Volker >Yuri >Uma >Dre >Lupo >Angel >Nik >-------------- >13 Vamps (my personal choice for vamp number); average capacity--4.5 > >(I have separated the cards in the Library by rarity, because that's how >James' was divided up; I believe I have all the rarities right) > >Rares >----- >2 Immortal Grapples >2 Fists of Death (just traded for 2 more, and thinking about putting them in) >Fragment of the Book of Nod >Giant's Blood >The Knights >The Slashers >Sengir Dagger >4 Pulled Fangs > >13 Rares (Auspicious?) > > >Uncommons >--------- >4 Torn Signposts >3 Second Traditions >4 Tastes of Vitae >3 Bloodhunts >2 Sport Bikes >2 Bastard Swords >2 Archon Investigations (just the threat of these slows down the bleeding...) >Major Boon >Mob Connections >Warzone Hunting Ground >KRCG News Radio >2 Malk Dementia >Information Highway > >27 Uncommons > > >Commons >------- >4 Haven Uncovered >4 Bum's Rush >2 Trap >Elder Intervention >4 Wakes w/Evening Freshness >2 Lucky Blow >2 Short Term Investment >3 Blood Doll >Potence >Celerity >4 Undead Strength >2 Burning Wrath >4 Acrobatics >4 Blur >4 Sideslip >2 Nimble Feet >2 Vampiric Speed >4 Flash > >50 Commons > >90 Cards Total > >With 4 different (all reasonably-priced) Princes in the Crypt, the deck >is reasonably certain to be able to use all of the Prince-specific cards >in the Library (Bloodhunts, 2nd Traditions), though it can win without >getting any of the Princes out. The Princes also help in PA's, of >course. With an average of (approx.) 4.5 capacity in the Crypt, the >number of vamps out is similar to other (non-weenie-horde) decks. >Comments are welcome. > [ quoted text not captured ]

Looks good! It's good to see that this deck design works ok under 4CL, now you can play a closer approximation to real Jyhad :) I was looking at this deck trying to think of how it was different than a similar deck under NL, to try and get a better feel for how the two games differ. First, I'd put in more Bum's Rush and Haven Uncovered - mostly Bum's Rush. This deck doesn't have much intercept, and I'd rather take a bleed from it than get into a fight, so its main means means of getting into combat are 4 BR, 4HU, and 3 Bloodhunt (votes from a Prince/Justicar, not particularly reliable). Enough combats for keeping your predator at bay and messing up your prey, but not much more than that. This makes me think that this deck is somewhat less effective than it's NL brother would be - no great surprise there, that's a given by all parties in this debate. However, it is still a "viable" deck, as Mark has proven by winning with it. A question, though - what do you do to get in combat if the other guys decide they don't want to block you? I could see this grinding to a halt, and might suggest adding some things that make people come after you - Powerbases, racks, blood puppy, Smiling Jack. Put in some Rampages, so they have to choose between a coveted location and staying out of a fight. The other difference I notices was the use of rares. I'm constructing a similar NL deck, and don't have many (I've got : Pulled fangs, Giant's Blood, Knights) of the rares needed by Mark's deck. However, I am comfortable with most of the less rare (and expensive) replacement cards - Loyal Street Bump, Stake, potence common strikes. (speaking of which, I went to r.g.t-c.misc today looking for trades, and there isn't much Jyhad action going on. My trade post looks pretty lonely after killfiling non-Jyhad posts). Anyway, congrats on solving a long standing puzzle. -- Alec Habig, Indiana University High Energy Astrophysics aha...@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu http://www.astro.indiana.edu/home/ahabig/ Ban the Bomb: Make the world safe for conventional warfare!

In article <4fg8jb$1...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, Alec Habig <aha...@bigbang.astro.indiana.edu> wrote: >Looks good! It's good to see that this deck design works ok under 4CL, now you >can play a closer approximation to real Jyhad :) Heh heh...joke taken in teh spirit it was intended. ;) >I was looking at this deck trying to think of how it was different than a >similar deck under NL, to try and get a better feel for how the two games >differ. It's based (changed quite a bit, but still based) on a NL Rush deck posted by James McClure (thanks James). His deck is on at least one WWW site (don't remember the URL...) as well as being previously posted to this group, so you can find it that way. >First, I'd put in more Bum's Rush and Haven Uncovered - mostly Bum's Rush. >This deck doesn't have much intercept, and I'd rather take a bleed from it than >get into a fight, so its main means means of getting into combat are 4 BR, 4HU, >and 3 Bloodhunt (votes from a Prince/Justicar, not particularly reliable). Just a (minor?) point here--Bloodhunt is an action, not a vote, and it's pretty reliable, given my deck's crypt. It's a little slower than BR/HC, but if I get it on the vamp, he can't get it off. And if he blocks the action, so much the better... >Enough combats for keeping your predator at bay and messing up your prey, but >not much more than that. The rushes have proven pretty reliable so far...in fact, if I was building the deck in NL, the number of Rushes in it would probably not increase. Every time I use one, I manage to cycle pretty fast, so I get another, get into combat, cycle... >This makes me think that this deck is somewhat less effective than it's NL >brother would be - no great surprise there, that's a given by all parties in >this debate. However, it is still a "viable" deck, as Mark has proven by >winning with it. It's quite possible that it is less effective than a NL deck...to find this out I'd have to take the deck and play it in a NL environment, then take a NL deck (like James') and play it in the same environment. Like you pointed out, though, the challenge was to see if it was "viable", and it is! >A question, though - what do you do to get in combat if the >other guys decide they don't want to block you? I could see this grinding to a >halt, and might suggest adding some things that make people come after you - >Powerbases, racks, blood puppy, Smiling Jack. Put in some Rampages, so they >have to choose between a coveted location and staying out of a fight. The problem with putting things in that they want to remove is that I have very little intercept--so any opposing deck with Obf. makes those added cards just wasted space. I have considered it, but as I mentioned above, the Rushes have proven pretty reliable. If I get a hand jam, that is what the Fragment is for (I've considered putting another Fragment in, but then I'd have to take out another non-HU master card...and the Fragment hasn't proven to be advantageous often enough to motivate me to do that. Half the time I don't even use it...) >The other difference I notices was the use of rares. I'm constructing a >similar NL deck, and don't have many (I've got : Pulled fangs, Giant's Blood, >Knights) of the rares needed by Mark's deck. However, I am comfortable with >most of the less rare (and expensive) replacement cards - Loyal Street Bump, >Stake, potence common strikes. Yep, some of the rares could be replaced with other things (especially the Gangs), so I don't really see this as a problem. I think I could build the deck with the same C/U/R ratio that James used, and it wouldn't suffer too much. In fact, I have more FoD, for example, and just chose not to use them... >(speaking of which, I went to r.g.t-c.misc today looking for trades, and there >isn't much Jyhad action going on. My trade post looks pretty lonely after >killfiling non-Jyhad posts). I think most of us who have been in the game a while are probably pretty happy with what's in our collections. Send me your wants/haves, though, and I'll see what I have/want. >Anyway, congrats on solving a long standing puzzle. Thanks! I was beginning to wonder if anyone was seeing the posts I was sending... [ quoted text not captured ]