rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad

How to expand the strategy of Library Destruction

25 messages from 14 participants · 09 February 2005 – 21 February 2005
original thread on Google Groups

Screaming Vermillian

Library destruction ousting mechanic in this game, as has been discussed over and over and over again, is a bit rough. At the very least it makes for an interesting thought process, in other ways it riles hatred in players quicker than the thought of grouping library cards. :) Most of us believe that it was implimented badly or akwardly. For those that believe such, what direction could library destruction take in making decks more playable? Here are some examples of ways library destruction alternatives could go that I'd like to see in the future: Stressing the Dam Master. Unique. Choose a methuselah and put this card into play. If a card would go into the choosen methuselah's ashheap, put it on this card instead. Burn this card during your untap phase. The choosen methuselah burns a pool for every card in excess of ten on this card when this card is burned. Sermon of Nihilism Master. *requires some clan* Unique. Put a counter on this card each time you successfully bleed your prey. Each time you bleed your prey, burn X cards from the top of their library, where X is the number of counters on this card. Any methuselah may take a D action to burn up to 2 coutners from this card. Similar thoughts?

LSJ

"Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > Most of us believe that it was implimented badly or akwardly. "Most" of whom? -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. V:TES homepage: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/ Though effective, appear to be ineffective -- Sun Tzu

press

not really similar ones... library milling is a hard-to-win strategy, but it´s fun and can be well implemented in a number of ways. the most succesful one i had up to now was anarchizing the harbingers of skulls. slaughterhouses (at least 3 of them); Egothha and Agaitas and Border Skirmishes all the way. that would count for as much time as you can keep yourself protected from bleedds (protected resources help a lot!)...but i tell you, it´s quite a slow game most of the time... Agaitas will get cards from your prey´s library, and since you´re anarch, there´s a good chance you can use them (i pack my anarch decks with various skill cards for that effect) and the deck can be quite small, since nec will allow you to fetch everything you need back...

Screaming Vermillian

LSJ wrote: > "Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > Most of us believe that it was implimented badly or akwardly. > > "Most" of whom? My apologies for the hyperbole. You can update the above post with the more sensitive-to-the-feelings-of-the-game-designer-and-vocal-minority-that-believe-deck-destruction-is-good with the following: Some of us believe it was implimented badly and or akwardly, and most of us believe that it has much room for improvement. (side note: There's probably two or three people at least on the thread Library Destruction that think my initial statement is borderline valid enough, like, perhaps, Joshua Duffin, frederick Scott, Colin Goodman, Flux, Robert Goudie and Talonz, who just hates it apparently...). ~SV "Tough" ain't an answer to that - unless you're taking the role of a Marine drill sargent. (Heh! "NOBODY SAID JYHAD WAS SUPPOSED TO BE *FUN*, MAGGOTS! JUST *PLAY* IT!!!") -Frederick Scott

Screaming Vermillian

press wrote: > not really similar ones... > > library milling is a hard-to-win strategy, but it´s fun and can be > well implemented in a number of ways. the most succesful one i had up > to now was anarchizing the harbingers of skulls. > > slaughterhouses (at least 3 of them); Egothha and Agaitas and Border > Skirmishes all the way. Border Skirmish makes me laugh. At best it says "I lose one X, you loose one X" When X here is something you need to nuke like 20+ of, it ain't that great, bud. Though opinions may differ. :) And you still lack an ousting mechanic, unless its "I play Dia De Los Muertos, HoS dude plays Brinkmanship with Daring the Dawn and hopes to GAWD no one throws a delaying tactics..." which is fun when you get it to happen, but is one of those corner case victories that happen once in every 15 games... > and the deck can be quite small, since nec will allow you to fetch > everything you need back... Could be good, though a cardless fetch would be better (sargon fragment. Giovanni guy, foget his name...) ~SV

LSJ

"Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1107979562.2...@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > LSJ wrote: > > "Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > Most of us believe that it was implimented badly or akwardly. > > > > "Most" of whom? > > My apologies for the hyperbole. You can update the above post with the > more > sensitive-to-the-feelings-of-the-game-designer-and-vocal-minority-that-believe-deck-destruction-is-good > with the following: Ah. Those that have differing opinions are the "vocal minority" while those that agree are "most". Thanks for clarifying your source, at any rate. Always helpful to know how to handle incoming data. [ quoted text not captured ]

Papipo

> And you still lack an ousting mechanic, unless its "I play Dia De Los > Muertos, HoS dude plays Brinkmanship with Daring the Dawn and hopes to > GAWD no one throws a delaying tactics..." which is fun when you get it > to happen, but is one of those corner case victories that happen once > in every 15 games... > Cardinal Benedictions + Telpathic Vote Countings

Joshua Duffin

"Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1107979829.4...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > And you still lack an ousting mechanic, unless its "I play Dia De Los > Muertos, HoS dude plays Brinkmanship with Daring the Dawn and hopes to > GAWD no one throws a delaying tactics..." which is fun when you get it > to happen, but is one of those corner case victories that happen once > in every 15 games... You can't Delaying Tactics a vote that's passing automatically. "During the referendum" effects aren't allowed. You do have to hope that your Dia de los Muertos doesn't get Suddenly Reversed though. And that the Daring the Dawn doesn't get Directly Intervened. But those aren't all that likely either. And you can include other vote-passing measures of some kind, like Telepathic Vote Counting and Cardinal Benedictions. Josh has seen it happen

LSJ

"Joshua Duffin" <jtdu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:36va21F...@individual.net... [ quoted text not captured ] And watch out for those pesky +1 intercept allies. :-) [ quoted text not captured ]

press

Screaming Vermillian wrote: > Border Skirmish makes me laugh. At best it says "I lose one X, you > loose one X" When X here is something you need to nuke like 20+ of, it > ain't that great, bud. Though opinions may differ. :) Well, i know i laugh a lot when playing this deck, so we might have a bit in common here... :D and really, you don´t need 20+ of anything once you have NEC. > And you still lack an ousting mechanic, unless its "I play Dia De Los > Muertos, HoS dude plays Brinkmanship with Daring the Dawn and hopes to > GAWD no one throws a delaying tactics..." which is fun when you get it > to happen, but is one of those corner case victories that happen once > in every 15 games... > did I ever say the deck is competitive? no...indeed it lacks forward pressure. but then with AUS you can get pulse of the canaille in your vamps; legendary vampire is a bit cornercase but usually helps; and as soon as your adversaries don´t have many cards left to play, they´ll be unable to block every single action you take. and if they try, it´s unlikely they´ll be able to do that with enough intercept to get all your minions. that´s when anarch railroad, spectral divination and call of the hungry dead are great. see??? all things can be managed to work, given enought thinking into it, without trying too hard for a Magic-al solution > Could be good, though a cardless fetch would be better (sargon > fragment. Giovanni guy, foget his name...) Pochtli. he can be used, indeed...as Carlotta can also. but i´m a freak for pure-clan decks. and yes, they may be freely added to the crypt, if you think it´ll help you. i don´t think they´re all that good in this particular deck, no sir.

Orpheus

> Could be good, though a cardless fetch would be better (sargon fragment. Giovanni guy, foget his name...) Giovanni GIRL, you machist !! Carlotta to be precise. Has an included Sargon at +1 stealth. Pochtli has a sup Summon Soul included. ------------ Orpheus, Necromonger

Screaming Vermillian

LSJ wrote: > "Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1107979562.2...@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > > > LSJ wrote: > > > "Screaming Vermillian" <vermil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > Most of us believe that it was implimented badly or akwardly. > > > > > > "Most" of whom? > > > > My apologies for the hyperbole. You can update the above post with the > > more > > sensitive-to-the-feelings-of-the-game-designer-and-vocal-minority-that-believe-deck-destruction-is-good > > with the following: > > Ah. Those that have differing opinions are the "vocal minority" while > those that agree are "most". And you get to be the 'sensitive game designer', sure. Really, LSJ. Quit taking VTES so seriously. :) > Thanks for clarifying your source, at any rate. Always helpful > to know how to handle incoming data. *files thread under 'psycho VTES complainer rant droppings'* ~SV Just trying to get people to talk about library destruction, its merits, short comings and hilarious attempts and wish-list.

vol...@yahoo.com

>Border Skirmish makes me laugh. At best it says "I lose one X, you >loose one X" When X here is something you need to nuke like 20+ of, it >ain't that great, bud. Though opinions may differ. :) Well, except that it makes EVERY Methusaleh lose one card. Perhaps you're right that it's not that great for deck burning. But think about combining it with Jan Pieterzoon, Aggressive Tactics and Meddling of Semsith. Border Skirmish is really best for hand burn, not deck burn. Eric Simon Prince of Chicago

jeff...@pacbell.net

[ quoted text not captured ] What is hand burn if not deck burn? I agree that a permanent such as Slaughterhouse is better for targetted library destruction, but Border Skirmish eliminates up to 4 cards from the table's combined library resources where Slaughterhouse is only 2 at a time. Border Skirmish also is terribly disruptive to the table. This might slow players down just enough to where they can't get the ousts they need. Of course, there are two edges to any random sword, but in general the disruption is conducive to your ultimate goal. Jeff

Daneel

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 15:19:43 -0500, LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> My apologies for the hyperbole. You can update the above post with the >> more >> sensitive-to-the-feelings-of-the-game-designer-and-vocal-minority-that-believe-deck-destruction-is-good >> with the following: > > Ah. Those that have differing opinions are the "vocal minority" while > those that agree are "most". > > Thanks for clarifying your source, at any rate. Always helpful > to know how to handle incoming data. Nevertheless, even an arbitrary statement can be true. Being arbitrary hinders debate (not much an issue I guess), but that alone does not make it untrue. Just unsupported. I hate deck destruction. ;) Well, not really. I hated it at first time, but then I mostly just prevent the 64 and/or withdraw for the +1 VP. I'm in my "resilient defence" period... ;) So better phrased, I don't like deck destruction, but I don't really like AR or PTO either (basically, stuff that kill somebody else's game more than helping the player to VPs). -- Bye, Daneel

take...@yahoo.com

Hi, I agree. Discarding it's not a winning strategy. I made a Harbinger with a lot of slaughterhouse, intercept and fortittud. It was very fun, but never won. It had been transformed to a wall with more fortittud, sniper rifle, ivory bow, with presses and torment of soul. This deck almost always win. Dr. Enrique Montaño V:EKN Brujah Prince of Tlaxcala [ quoted text not captured ]

Screaming Vermillian

[ quoted text not captured ] Yeah, hand denial is another under developed area, but lets discuss that later in a thread entitled 'hand destruction' perhaps. ;)

Darky

Screaming Vermillian wrote: > Stressing the Dam > Master. Unique. > Choose a methuselah and put this card into play. If a card would go > into the choosen methuselah's ashheap, put it on this card instead. > Burn this card during your untap phase. The choosen methuselah burns a > pool for every card in excess of ten on this card when this card is > burned. What a ridiculous card. Think about this for some time, then decide it's balanced or not. > Sermon of Nihilism > Master. *requires some clan* Unique. > Put a counter on this card each time you successfully bleed your prey. > Each time you bleed your prey, burn X cards from the top of their > library, where X is the number of counters on this card. Any methuselah > may take a D action to burn up to 2 coutners from this card. > > Similar thoughts? Same as above. -Bram Vink

Darky

Screaming Vermillian wrote: > Stressing the Dam > Master. Unique. > Choose a methuselah and put this card into play. If a card would go > into the choosen methuselah's ashheap, put it on this card instead. > Burn this card during your untap phase. The choosen methuselah burns a > pool for every card in excess of ten on this card when this card is > burned. What a ridiculous card. Think about this for some time, then decide it's balanced or not. > Sermon of Nihilism > Master. *requires some clan* Unique. > Put a counter on this card each time you successfully bleed your prey. > Each time you bleed your prey, burn X cards from the top of their > library, where X is the number of counters on this card. Any methuselah > may take a D action to burn up to 2 coutners from this card. > > Similar thoughts? Same as above, to a lesser degree. -Bram Vink

Anthony.T...@gmail.com

>> Ah. Those that have differing opinions are the "vocal minority" while >> those that agree are "most". > And you get to be the 'sensitive game designer', sure. Really, LSJ. > Quit taking VTES so seriously. :) No, please don't start taking V;tES less seriously. I'd really much rather like the designer of this game carried on taking V:tES seriously for as long as possible, thanks :O)

Screaming Vermillian

Darky wrote: > Screaming Vermillian wrote: > > > Stressing the Dam > > Master. Unique. > > Choose a methuselah and put this card into play. If a card would go > > into the choosen methuselah's ashheap, put it on this card instead. > > Burn this card during your untap phase. The choosen methuselah burns > a > > pool for every card in excess of ten on this card when this card is > > burned. > > What a ridiculous card. Think about this for some time, then decide > it's balanced or not. No. I really didn't think about it too much. I just thought of trying to relate deck destruction to your normal ousting mechanic = pool loss. I'm not here to critique exact power levels or anything, just to discuss where things could go. As for the power level of the card, it probably shouldn't be ANY methuselah, and should probably be your prey. The exact number or cards lost and the number of pool burned should be carefully analyzed and then changed, naturally. Furthermore, perhaps it should be an action for certain clan or discipline. This realy isn't the point though. What are your feeling of associating pool with library (similar too, but no where near the same as, please god, the prophecies card). > > Sermon of Nihilism > > Master. *requires some clan* Unique. > > Put a counter on this card each time you successfully bleed your > prey. > > Each time you bleed your prey, burn X cards from the top of their > > library, where X is the number of counters on this card. Any > methuselah > > may take a D action to burn up to 2 coutners from this card. > > > > Similar thoughts? > > Same as above. Ditto. (some one isn't thinking, are they?)

Anthony.T...@gmail.com

Screaming Vermillian wrote: > Darky wrote: > > Screaming Vermillian wrote: > > > > > Stressing the Dam > > > Master. Unique. > > > Choose a methuselah and put this card into play. If a card would go > > > into the choosen methuselah's ashheap, put it on this card instead. > > > Burn this card during your untap phase. The choosen methuselah > burns > > a > > > pool for every card in excess of ten on this card when this card is > > > burned. > > > > What a ridiculous card. Think about this for some time, then decide > > it's balanced or not. > > No. I really didn't think about it too much. Well, maybe you should have done so before posting such cards/topics, just a thought :O) It would save time for everyone who feels compelled to point out the crap/broken/pointless nature of the cards. > I just thought of trying > to relate deck destruction to your normal ousting mechanic = pool loss. > I'm not here to critique exact power levels or anything, just to > discuss where things could go. Surely the whole point of the deck depletion strategy is that is *doesn't* relate to the standard ousting mechanic of pool depletion. If we're going to discuss where deck destruction techniques can go, in any meaningfull way, then we should build on the things that are core to the strategy. > As for the power level of the card, it probably shouldn't be ANY > methuselah, and should probably be your prey. The exact number or cards > lost and the number of pool burned should be carefully analyzed and > then changed, naturally. Furthermore, perhaps it should be an action > for certain clan or discipline. This realy isn't the point though. > > What are your feeling of associating pool with library (similar too, > but no where near the same as, please god, the prophecies card). If you mean what do i think about giving milling decks access to *balanced* cards that give pool loss for succesfull milling, I think there is no point as they would never be used, why waste time/cards reducing pool when you can be doing more milling. That applies for master or action cards, as ther are alwaysd more relevant things for the miller to do that faff around with action cards that hit pool, IMO.

Frederick Scott

<Anthony.T...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1108052246.2...@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > Screaming Vermillian wrote: >> Darky wrote: >> > What a ridiculous card. Think about this for some time, then decide >> > it's balanced or not. >> >> No. I really didn't think about it too much. > > Well, maybe you should have done so before posting such cards/topics, > just a thought :O) It would save time for everyone who feels compelled > to point out the crap/broken/pointless nature of the cards. I suppose it always saves time and trouble for perspective respondents if a poster would think about their stuff before posting it. But that's difficult, exhasting, and - as Kevin Mergen and Colin McGuigan recently agreed on another thread - that would be an enourmous break from longstanding Usenet tradition. Anyway, when discussing propsed cards, it's not really important to put too much thought into presenting a balanced card. It's nice if the proposal is relatively balanced ahead of time but unworth lots of discussion if it isn't. The reason is that balancing a card is usually the easy part. When I propose a card, I try to remember to throw in the comment, "Balance to taste." or the equivalent to convey the thought that the card may be too powerful or too weak in its current form. But if common sense and/or playtesting determine otherwise, it's easy to just add or subtract cost, requirements, and minor features to the card without really changing what the card does in essence. The harder parts of designing new cards is more trying to determine what you're attempting to accomplish, proposing a card that would accomplish it without having undesirable side-effects, and figuring out whether the end result really _is_ balanced or not. Fred

Screaming Vermillian

Anthony.T...@gmail.com wrote: > Screaming Vermillian wrote: > > Darky wrote: > > > Screaming Vermillian wrote: > > No. I really didn't think about it too much. > > Well, maybe you should have done so before posting such cards/topics, > just a thought :O) It would save time for everyone who feels compelled > to point out the crap/broken/pointless nature of the cards. Heheh. OK, you can point out how X theoretical card posted for this matter is broken/weak, if you ALSO post alternatives or your thoughts on how to expand the idea of deck destruction. Or you can just do whatever the hell you want to do anyhow. :) > > I just thought of trying > > to relate deck destruction to your normal ousting mechanic = pool > loss. > > I'm not here to critique exact power levels or anything, just to > > discuss where things could go. > > Surely the whole point of the deck depletion strategy is that is > *doesn't* relate to the standard ousting mechanic of pool depletion. If > we're going to discuss where deck destruction techniques can go, in any > meaningfull way, then we should build on the things that are core to > the strategy. Well, I don't know. Is it SURE? There were complaint(s) about how library desctruction is unassociated with the normal ousting mechanic, and that it doesn't have any success in ousting until it absolutly cripples the deck, and until then, its doing nothing. So I thought to myself "Hey! Why not have something happen in the mean time? Why don't you slowly suck their pool away as well, while we're at it?". > > As for the power level of the card, it probably shouldn't be ANY > > methuselah, and should probably be your prey. The exact number or > cards > > lost and the number of pool burned should be carefully analyzed and > > then changed, naturally. Furthermore, perhaps it should be an action > > for certain clan or discipline. This realy isn't the point though. > > > > What are your feeling of associating pool with library (similar too, > > but no where near the same as, please god, the prophecies card). > > If you mean what do i think about giving milling decks access to > *balanced* cards that give pool loss for succesfull milling, I think > there is no point as they would never be used, why waste time/cards > reducing pool when you can be doing more milling. That applies for > master or action cards, as ther are alwaysd more relevant things for > the miller to do that faff around with action cards that hit pool, IMO. Ok. But we still need to get interaction between the miller and the to-be-milled, perhaps. (that was one of the complaints about the thingy...). Maybe some stuff that would let the milled get cards back, or use cards in ashheap for good (or sorry, use for evil)? Allow miller access to benefits for good progress in milling?

Chris Shorb

Cock Robin, 7 Raptors, with Harrod passing the Brinksmanship with Animal Magnetism. You could also use Cailean and Ellison Humboldt to help pass that Brinksmanship (and do raptor recruiting too). If only Cock and Sheldon could be used at the same time, you could give Sheldon the Raptors and have him use Eagle's Sight... Once you have 7 Raptors, you basically block everything your prey does undirected. best - chris Screaming Vermillian wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] -- chris shorb