Repetitive Decks

In hopes of prompting a discussion that will illuminate some areas of other discussions.... In the recent discussions about weenie decks, many people have complained that they are "boring" and/or repetitive because each weenie vampire bleeds every turn. IMNSHO, this is a sign that these people are unused to playing *really* competitive decks. Quite simply, the very structure of Jyhad favors decks which, when they play a given card, generally draw the same or a very similar card as a replacement. A deck with a wide variety of cards so that you can *potentially* deal with any given situation will lose 90% of the time to a deck which consistently creates one situation and takes advantage of it. Examples: 1) A rush deck creates many, many, combats and has cards in the deck which allow it to consistantly destroy its opponents, which are carefully picked so that their death swings the balance of power towards the rush deck. A deck with light combat will inevitably find that it doesn't have the combat cards it needs when it needs them and that they jam its hand at other times. 2) A vote deck calls many, many votes and has other cards which grant votes, so that any given vote will pass or fail based upon whether on not it would be to the vote decks advantage. Decks with light vote power tend to be unable to pass their votes and in the situations when they do have vote control, they rarely draw enough useful votes to be threatening. 3) Cryptic Mission decks have enough CMs to drain opposing vamps completely dry, then either slay them with SoL or just render them useless. A tremere deck with just a couple of CMs will find them a waste most of the time. As far as defenses go, it is far more effective to either 1) Be able to stop any sort of action, regardless of type -or- 2) Not care what your opponent has in mind Intercept decks block anything and everything. Rush decks and CM decks prevent vampires from doing anything. MT/5th decks gain so much pool that it doesn't matter what other people are doing to them. Other points will likely be brought up if this thread continues. The best decks, regardless of concept, do the same things over and over. This is simply a natural result of people building decks that are designed to win given the rules set. People who want huge variety might prefer playing VtM. -- Steve Wampler swam...@clarityconnect.com “And then the clouds parted and God said, I hate you, Alfalfa.” -Alfalfa, The Little Rascals

Steve Wampler wrote: > > In hopes of prompting a discussion that will illuminate some areas of > other discussions.... > > In the recent discussions about weenie decks, many people have > complained that they are "boring" and/or repetitive because each weenie > vampire bleeds every turn. IMNSHO, this is a sign that these people are > unused to playing *really* competitive decks. > > Quite simply, the very structure of Jyhad favors decks which, when they > play a given card, generally draw the same or a very similar card as a > replacement. > {snip} > > The best decks, regardless of concept, do the same things over and > over. This is simply a natural result of people building decks that are > designed to win given the rules set. People who want huge variety might > prefer playing VtM. > Having avoided the newsgroup due to the sheer lack of anything useful to say, I'm afraid I can't add very much to the discussion, except for the *mother* of all repetitive decks... the "Recycling Aurora" deck. Thus, to the point of this post: to introduce to the "Recycling Aurora" deck all those who have not yet made it's aquaintance. Basically, your crypt consists of as many Aurora Van Brande as you can lay your grubby little hands on. In JOL, that means approximately a 100-card crypt. Aurora equips the Soul Gem, and a Camarilla Vitae Slave, then bleeds with either GtU or FoW, adding in Threats or Conditioning (as blood permits), and a Daring the Dawn. She then turns to extremely crispy toast. Enter Aurora Van Brande #2 (or 3 or 4 or...), untapped, full of blood, and still holding the Soul Gem, get another Vitae Slave, lather, rinse, repeat. If the deck gets a lucky draw, it's sweep the table in a turn time. Granted, it's rather unlikely, but I think it at least draws a nice counter-argument to the "repetitive decks are boring" thing, dontcha think? 8) -Chris Berger Prince of my parents' basement (at least for the summer)

(TO REPLY VIA E-MAIL, STRIP 'XYXYX' FROM THE ADDRESS) Arkayn <ber...@cco.caltech.edu> writes: >Having avoided the newsgroup due to the sheer lack of anything useful to >say, I'm afraid I can't add very much to the discussion, except for the >*mother* of all repetitive decks... the "Recycling Aurora" deck. Thus, >to the point of this post: to introduce to the "Recycling Aurora" deck >all those who have not yet made it's aquaintance. Basically, your crypt >consists of as many Aurora Van Brande as you can lay your grubby little >hands on. In JOL, that means approximately a 100-card crypt. Aurora >equips the Soul Gem, and a Camarilla Vitae Slave, then bleeds with >either GtU or FoW, adding in Threats or Conditioning (as blood permits), >and a Daring the Dawn. She then turns to extremely crispy toast. Enter >Aurora Van Brande #2 (or 3 or 4 or...), untapped, full of blood, and >still holding the Soul Gem, get another Vitae Slave, lather, rinse, >repeat. If the deck gets a lucky draw, it's sweep the table in a turn >time. Granted, it's rather unlikely, but I think it at least draws a >nice counter-argument to the "repetitive decks are boring" thing, >dontcha think? 8) Sure. But does this really work? The only flaw I can think of is the question of whether Aurora w/ CVS counts as one generation older for purposes of the Soul Gem of Etrius. (And of course, finding enough Soul Gems and CVS's to to make the deck work. I'm not sure the number of Aurora's is necessarily your only problem, here.) Fred

Frederick Scott wrote: > Arkayn <ber...@cco.caltech.edu> writes: > >[snip] Basically, your crypt > >consists of as many Aurora Van Brande as you can lay your grubby little > >hands on. In JOL, that means approximately a 100-card crypt. Aurora > >equips the Soul Gem, and a Camarilla Vitae Slave, then bleeds with > >either GtU or FoW, adding in Threats or Conditioning (as blood permits), > >and a Daring the Dawn. She then turns to extremely crispy toast. Enter > >Aurora Van Brande #2 (or 3 or 4 or...), untapped, full of blood, and > >still holding the Soul Gem, get another Vitae Slave, lather, rinse, > >repeat. [snip] > > Sure. But does this really work? The only flaw I can think of is the > question of whether Aurora w/ CVS counts as one generation older for > purposes of the Soul Gem of Etrius. Aurora with a Camarilla Vitae Slave is a 7 capacity vampire (Aurora's 6 plus CVS's "increase her capacity by 1"). The next Aurora in the crypt is a 6. A 7 capacity vampire is older than a 6 capacity vampire [1.5.2] This applies for all purposes, including Soul Gem. -- LSJ (vte...@wizards.com) V:TES Net.Rep for Wizards of the Coast. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.wizards.com/VTES/rules.asp

> In the recent discussions about weenie decks, many people have > complained that they are "boring" and/or repetitive because each weenie > vampire bleeds every turn. IMNSHO, this is a sign that these people are > unused to playing *really* competitive decks. Personally, I could care less if the deck was boring or repetitive. As you say, many of my decks are that way as well. My issues with something like WT&B lie more with the other 3 points that Steve uses to describe 'cheese'. Sorrow --- I don't want to be alone | I hurt, therefore I am anymore |-------------------------------- I don't want to be anyone | "What are you looking at...? anymore | you never seen anyone try to I don't need a reason to kill myself | commit suicide before?" - Anon ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorrow wrote: >>Personally, I could care less if the deck was boring or repetitive. As you say, many of my decks are that way as well. My issues with something like WT&B lie more with the other 3 points that Steve uses to describe 'cheese'.>> Interesting. As I'm not really paying attention to the discussion between Steve and Robert ( not to say it isn't interesting, just that it is real long and seems to make reference to a great deal of locality), I'm not entirely clear on what thos other three points are. You are saying that, in your view, a completely repetetive, "boring" deck is not "cheesy". Good, good, good. That I can work with. What are the other three points on the "4 point plan for cheesieness"? Peter D Bakija PD...@aol.com "Isn't it strange, G'Kar? When we first met, I had no power and all the choices I could ever want. Now I have all the power I could ever want, and no choice at all." -Londo

> Interesting. As I'm not really paying attention to the discussion between Steve > and Robert ( not to say it isn't interesting, just that it is real long and > seems to make reference to a great deal of locality), I'm not entirely clear on > what thos other three points are. Steve and Robert were just using local decks in their respective examples for their arguments. Other than that, it's been pretty much on topic. > You are saying that, in your view, a completely repetetive, "boring" deck is > not "cheesy". Who cares if it's repetetive. It has to be to get what it needs done. > Good, good, good. That I can work with. What are the other three > points on the "4 point plan for cheesieness"? Steve's full list is: 1) Boring and mindless (basically the same) 2) Shortens game drastically 3) Ruins the game (game environment) 4) Difficult to stop (requires certain deck type, etc..) And my criterion for 'cheese' is 2-4, with not as much emphesis on 2. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <7ql575$a...@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>, Frederick Scott <fre...@netcom.com> wrote: [snip] >Sure. But does this really work? The only flaw I can think of is the >question of whether Aurora w/ CVS counts as one generation older for >purposes of the Soul Gem of Etrius. (And of course, finding enough >Soul Gems and CVS's to to make the deck work. I'm not sure the number >of Aurora's is necessarily your only problem, here.) Or if you ever end up in torpor. A rush deck will clean you up, and a deck with even light intercept will screw you. You can't get the Vitae Slave and the Soul Gem on the same action -- and you need them both. -- /\ Jasper Phillips /VVVVVVVVVVVVVV|~"~"~"~"~"~"----------........____ jaz j^^^^^^^^^^^^^\/"~"~"~"~-----------........._____ ~"~--. * http://www.engr.orst.edu/~philljas/ "~"~'--`

> > Who cares if it's repetetive. It has to be to get what it needs done. > On the other hand, I like to get fun from my deck design as well as from the play emvironment. I may be in the minority here, but perhaps rampant wild reactionary competition is less fun than getting off a cool effect in a game a few times. It's true that a deck that does the same action all the time will win if that action is effective (Bleed, stealth, votes whatever) on the other hand it woud suck for me to play and know that for three 80minute plus games I'd be doing the same thing over and over and over. I'd rather play solitaire quite frankly. There are no Jyhad tournaments in the area, but I also play deciphers Star Trek game, and having had my fill of tourney wins with Rogue Borg, and AU dump, and Ressican Flute decks (Three archetypes considered cheesy in that they win with virtually no opponent interaction) and to be blunt I'd rather come middle of the pack with no theme and let a newbie get the confidence by winning a few tourneys by cheese, but still enjoy myself. I guess I know I can do it, so I have nothing to prove. > > Good, good, good. That I can work with. What are the other three > > points on the "4 point plan for cheesieness"? > > Steve's full list is: > > 1) Boring and mindless (basically the same) > 2) Shortens game drastically > 3) Ruins the game (game environment) > 4) Difficult to stop (requires certain deck type, etc..) > > And my criterion for 'cheese' is 2-4, with not as much emphesis > on 2. > actually my only 2 criterion are 1 and 3, assuming that it wins consistently. It can be easy to stop cheese and still be cheesy. ANyway my 2c worth Hulaciex

> Or if you ever end up in torpor. A rush deck will clean you up, > and a deck with even light intercept will screw you. You can't > get the Vitae Slave and the Soul Gem on the same action -- > and you need them both. Torpor is a problem because then people just leave you there. You can always contest with yourself but this slows you down too much. The theory, I believe, is as follows: Turn 1 -up to 4 transfers to Aurora1 Turn 2 -up to 4 transfers to Aurora1 to bring her out -Any remaining transfers to Aurora2 in case you are screwed. Turn 3 Equip Aurora1 with Soul Gem of Etrius. Freak Drive or not as you like to manage the hand. -transfer to Aurora2 until she has two blood as needed. Turn 4 Equip with a Camarilla Vitae Slave (Costs two blood) Add a Shroud of night as needed - +2 Stealth - Costs one blood Freak Drive (Costs one blood) Mind Rape (inferior) Bleed with +2 bleed (Costs two blood) With Conditioning + bleed (costs one blood) With Shroud of night as needed to continue burning blood and managing the hand. Add Daring the Dawn taking two agg and burning at the end of the action. Aurora5 comes out - repeat from beginning of turn 4 until the hand jams with something you don't want. - Blood management CVS 2 Freak Drive 1 Mind Rape 2 Conditioning 1 Shroud of Night 1 Aurora has a 6 cap and all of those cards cost a total of 7 so you cannot play all of those cards. The Shroud is the issue. You might need the stealth, you might not. Therefore, I would reccomend: QTY Card 14 Camarilla Vitae Slave 14 Freak Drive 14 Mind Rape 14 Conditioning 14 Daring the Dawn 7 Shadow Play 7 Soul Gem 6 Deal with the Devil --------------------------- 90 TOTAL and about 20 Aurora's just to be sure you have enough. More than 18 is technically unnecessary since you will only burn 14 yourself and have four in the initial crypt, ending you with one full Aurora at the end of your library. Just my 2 pool. Thanks Stu -Your Friendly Neighborhood Camarilla Scholar Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Steve Wampler wrote: > In the recent discussions about weenie decks, many people have > complained that they are "boring" and/or repetitive because each weenie > vampire bleeds every turn. IMNSHO, this is a sign that these people are > unused to playing *really* competitive decks. Not ALL "weenie" decks bleed. Sometimes they're a rush/combat... heh heh heh. > Other points will likely be brought up if this thread continues. Like my Malkavian Deck. It uses Malkavian Seven Miseries for voters, Mariel and the Elysium with a good amount of Combat/Equipment cards to handle heated battles (I've come to fear the words: "My Wynn Deck") and the rest is WwE'sF, Night Moves, and Deflections/Telepathic Misdirections for bleeders. Basically, it's just a good all around deck with those wacky Malkavian cards (Madness of the Bard) thrown in for fun, and it does quite well. > The best decks, regardless of concept, do the same things over and > over. Those are the worst decks. The best decks are those that entertain the most. Political Allies with Flame Throwers, 15 Blood Capacity Smudge, Renagade Garous with 2 Chainsaws, and Uriah Winters with a Talbolt's Chainsaw. -T!mmy, Malkavian Clan Monk/Scout/Sage Hobbit