Anti-Tupdog deck challenge (in 1 player verses 1 player single combat)

Hello, A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to long). Now this deck also has to be a viable deck in a normal game as well (does NOT have an insane amount of damage prevention, can protect itself against a predator, can put pressure on its prey, tournament legal, etc...) AND be able to hold off a Tupdog swarm the moment your vampires get out of the uncontrolled region (so Secure Haven is NOT the solution, nor are Sniper rifle decks, or anything that takes time to set up). My solution was to develop a Ravnos-Bleed Deck (AUS CHI FOR) built around a Freak Driving Hazimel: his abilities are included below: As far as I understand the rules, a Tupdog cannot rush him (because they don't have the two blood to burn to attempt the D-action to rush him in the first place). Is that correct, have the confusing and constantly modified rules for this game killed this idea as a viable counter to 30 rampaging Tupdogs? Any assistance (or advice) on this would be appreciated! Hazimel [Gehenna:U] Cardtype: Vampire Clan: Ravnos Group: 4 Capacity: 11 Discipline: dem ANI AUS CHI FOR POT Independent: Hazimel has 2 votes (titled). Non-Ravnos vampires must burn 2 blood to attempt a (D) action that targets Hazimel or a card or counter on him. +1 bleed.

Xibex wrote: > Hello, > > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). > > Now this deck also has to be a viable deck in a normal game as well > (does NOT have an insane amount of damage prevention, can protect > itself against a predator, can put pressure on its prey, tournament > legal, etc...) AND be able to hold off a Tupdog swarm the moment your > vampires get out of the uncontrolled region (so Secure Haven is NOT the > solution, nor are Sniper rifle decks, or anything that takes time to > set up). > > My solution was to develop a Ravnos-Bleed Deck (AUS CHI FOR) built > around a Freak Driving Hazimel: his abilities are included below: > > As far as I understand the rules, a Tupdog cannot rush him (because > they don't have the two blood to burn to attempt the D-action to rush > him in the first place). Is that correct, have the confusing and > constantly modified rules for this game killed this idea as a viable > counter to 30 rampaging Tupdogs? #1. I'd suggest Cailean. Unless he has a ridiculous number of Stone Quills, he won't be able to torpor you. You may want to include some Crows/Sewer Lid + Taste to get blood back. And there have been tournament viable decks based on Cailean before. #2. Salubri might work as well. Pack plenty of Anesthetic Touch and you'll be fine. (For other decks, you can justify the copious amounts of Anesthetic Touch by combining it with Vitae Block or Potence). #3. Kiasyd stealth bleed could be effective. Fae Contortion is ridiculously good even without the Reflex option. I'd go with Group 2/3 so you can use Julia Prima and bleed the Tupdog player out. Also, all yoy need to do is have enough combat defense for one turn and then have someone with MYT use Goblinism for a Secure Haven.

Additional generic options: Regardless of what deck you're playing, toss in a couple of Tension in the Ranks. Tension makes Tupdog players cry. There are also lots of Events you can use that help hamper the Tupdog: Absimilliard's Army creates chump blockers. One library card ghoul is a good trade for a 1 pool Tupdog. Blood Weakens will limit the Tupdog player to only one or two effective combats per turn (cause then he's out of cards). Nightmares Upon Nightmares has a similar effect. Either he taps his minions, or discards cards (and is down in hand size for the turn). The Slow Withering makes it difficult for the Tupdog to play his combat cards effectively. And Veil of Darkness might cancel some key cards as well. Recalled to the Founder may limit his Tupdog swarm to 2 per turn (until he brings out a third !Tremere and sacks one with cap > 5).

A pile of fortitude prevent or Flesh of Marble combined with Tension in the Ranks could do it. Put down or steal the !Tre and the Tupdogs can't rush. So if you were to play FOR PRE prevent/Banishment or PTO, all you have to do is vote the !tre away, and do Pool damage with KRC's.

Xibex wrote: > Hello, > > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). > > Now this deck also has to be a viable deck in a normal game as well > (does NOT have an insane amount of damage prevention, can protect > itself against a predator, can put pressure on its prey, tournament > legal, etc...) AND be able to hold off a Tupdog swarm the moment your > vampires get out of the uncontrolled region (so Secure Haven is NOT the > solution, nor are Sniper rifle decks, or anything that takes time to > set up). > > My solution was to develop a Ravnos-Bleed Deck (AUS CHI FOR) built > around a Freak Driving Hazimel: his abilities are included below: > > As far as I understand the rules, a Tupdog cannot rush him (because > they don't have the two blood to burn to attempt the D-action to rush > him in the first place). Is that correct, have the confusing and > constantly modified rules for this game killed this idea as a viable > counter to 30 rampaging Tupdogs? > > Any assistance (or advice) on this would be appreciated! Hehe. Here's another idea: How about you create your *own* Tupdog deck? Heh. Tupdog vs. Tupdog. The only difference (and what will give you the upper hand) is that you include Reindoctrination in your deck. Steal his Tupdogs to kill his other Tupdogs, and get you your own Tupdog crypt cards! ;)

Except Reindoctrination does not fit the second requirement of the challenge (that it be viable on a table that doesn't have a Tupdog swarm on the table). Most non-Tupdog tables, that card will be sitting in your hand until your discard phase.

1) Any of the Grapple hosers, most effective would be Anasthetic Touch, but there are a couple of others from KMW that would at least create a potential window to play S:CE. AT is by far the better option in this vein. 2) Trump Tupdog. He's got a lot of manuevers to keep it close? Then set range or deny maneuvering to close. Cailean sets range automatically, Selective Silence works, Terror Frenzy at either level will ruin Tupdogs day. 3) Building upon the above Selective Silence -- Tension, Selective Silence, Shadow Feint, and Blood Sweat. I doubt Tupdog is packing any S:CE, so this combo means Tupdog is taking and resolving 3 unpreventable damage and going to torpor before his Stone Quills goes off. Tension tags him when he goes down, and again when he burns at the end of the minion phase. Do that twice or three times, and the Tupdog deck will likely stop rushing you. And it's all Assamite tech that works well against most combat defense, so just add some rush and some forward motion, and you've got your challenge answered. You may want to consider Infernal Pursuits for flush tech to help facilitate the combo.

[ quoted text not captured ] Actually, Reindoctrination moves a Gargoyle to the ready region, and untaps them. So if you play it on your own guy, it can be an untapping card that happens to do free moving from torpor (gets around Carver's too, i think, as it's not a rescue action). -- salem http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/ (replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

Kelly wrote: >Tension tags him when he goes down, and again when he burns at the >end of the minion phase. Negatory. Tension only triggers when READY minions go to torpor or are burned. So he'll only be hit once by Tension, so you may as well not bother trying to put the Tup down. Just survive it. [ quoted text not captured ]

I'm fairly sure my Thrown Junk deck would waste that Tupdog deck. I have yet to meet a deck that trumped the combat module of it. And it has won a tournament, as well as Derek Ray's version(s) did.

[ quoted text not captured ] The thing is, there's no point in wasting Tupdogs. Sure, you can outmaneuver them, but unless you just need to cycle, your Thrown Junk is wasted on them. They're gonna burn anyway, putting them in torpor is nearly useless. So, I find that decks with no (or little) stealth have a hard time dealing with a Tupdog prey (though Tension does help). And decks without a ton of combat defense have trouble dealing with a Tupdog predator. Not to mention the little buggers have access to just about everything they need to be combat monsters (recyclable maneuvers, IG, Disarm, agg damage, prevention if they want it, maneuver/presses that can be cycled if unneeded, Pounce, etc.). And on top of that, they can get up to +2 transient intercept with Patrol and Scry the Hearthstone. Tupdog tech is pretty strong. Certainly not unbeatable, but a 1 cap vamp with VIS POT + flight, built-in rush, and cost-reducing special... that's quite nice, even if it *does* only last a turn.

Mind numb is a very good card, often played, and a great and peacefull solution against Tupdog. (D) Put this card on any untapped vampire. Tap that vampire; he or she does not untap during his or her controller's untap phase. Burn this card during your next untap phase. As above, with +1 stealth. "Xibex" <Lee.Z...@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:1137636229.9...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

"Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:1137675721....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ] Well, the whole point is that you can outmaneuver them *AND* cycle the junk while playing your deck the way you should play it. Ie - play 8 combat cards per turn. And Tension in the Ranks is REALLY REALLY gonna hurt him, just as Aranthebes. Even if they outmaneuver you, you can still dodge or just play sideslip at superior and prevent the aggro. You're immune to their rushes and you can just block two per turn. If he's your predator he will run out of pool fast (don't forget that each Tupdog costs you a pool). As a prey, well can't imagine a better prey for a Thrown Junk deck than that tbh...

Xibex wrote: > Hello, > > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). Hmm, perhaps, Tension in the Ranks and Obedience? Any 2-cap can shut down a Tupdog. Or, perhaps Mind Rape his vampires. XZ

Standard Tremere deck with a hint of fortitude. Muaziz + The Name Forgotten --> 2 stealth action to kill Tupdog deck ;)

Too bad Tupdogs are not unique. Mooooove along, nothing to see here...

Fouez wrote: > Too bad Tupdogs are not unique. Mooooove along, nothing to see here... > Too bad that you are able to play more than one obedience each turn... /M

Xibex <Lee.Z...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). Justine (or any vampire with Atonement) + Sniper Rifle? (With some blood-recovery like the Rack and whatnot...)

[ quoted text not captured ] Fouez was attempting to reply to his own post about Name Forgotten (but, of course, without quoting context and by replying to the wrong post, it's easy to get the wrong idea).

[ quoted text not captured ] Even with some copies of Reindoctrination, your deck should still be good enough to do well against other non-Tupdog players. And then the Reindoctrinations will really shine when up against another Tupdog player. In addition, Reindoctrination can be used as an extra untap. Say you torpor Arika with your last untapped Tupdog (preventing her damage with Stonestrength). Now you can play Reindoctrination to untap your Tupdog and send him off on one last mission of diablerie. Sure you won't get that extra crypt card, but it's worth it to keep Arika out of the game.

[ quoted text not captured ] Ahh - Woops... So much for my arrogance. Mooooove along, nothing to see here... :) /M

Izaak wrote: > "Chris Berger" <ark...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message > news:1137675721....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Well, the whole point is that you can outmaneuver them *AND* cycle the junk > while playing your deck the way you should play it. Ie - play 8 combat cards > per turn. And Tension in the Ranks is REALLY REALLY gonna hurt him, just as > Aranthebes. > I don't think it's a given that you can outmaneuver them with a Thrown Junk deck, unless it uses Set Range cards. Roll is a brilliant card for Gargoyles, since you can keep it if you need it or leave it in the ashheap if you don't. With a good Thrown Junk deck, you will *usually* outmaneuver them. But what happens when you do? You waste them into torpor which has 0 net effect (other than preventing them from rushing you next turn, assuming this was a block combat). On the other hand, they have access to Roll, Swoop, Circle, and Crawling Chamber. So, sometimes, they will outmaneuver you, and your 6 cap CEL/POT monster will be in trouble. Especially if they get their entire combo and Immortal Grapple, Raking Talons, Pounce on you. I'm not saying it's likely to happen every combat. But the fact that they can wield some devastating combat in addition to not caring if they lose their Tupdogs makes Tupdog Tech pretty strong. And while Tension *is* nice - costing him 2 pool per Dog rather than 1 pool, it's not the be-all-end-all. Other nice toys for combat decks, like Dragonbound, Fame, and Carver's are less effective against Tupdogs (by varying degrees) than they are against other decks. > Even if they outmaneuver you, you can still dodge or just play sideslip at > superior and prevent the aggro. You're immune to their rushes and you can > just block two per turn. If he's your predator he will run out of pool fast > (don't forget that each Tupdog costs you a pool). > You can't dodge if he IG's and you can't prevent all of the aggro with CEL if he plays Pounce. And yes, I know I'm talking about a lot of cards. The ideal combo to defeat your POT/CEL deck is Raking Talons, Roll, Swoop, Crawling Chamber (though he may not need all 3... if he *does* have the Chamber and doesn't think he'll need it, he can play it at superior), IG, Pounce. With the possible addition of Stonestrength and/or Disarm. Usual scenario is probably 2 maneuvers + IG, and 1 to 3 other cards. Approximately a 5 card combo, though the combo will work in parts, assuming you don't have all of the cards *you* need. Even if you win 3 combats out of 4, you're usually out more pool worth of vamps than the Tupdog player is.

Hello All, I was the one who put up the challenge (thought it would be fun) and the deck is extremely powerful in a 2 player game. (Almost unbeatable... but that is why the challenge is up... for ideas to beat it and then they actually have to build it and play it) The challenge is: "So I put the challenge out there. Build a deck and challenge me in a 2 player game. The deck you build must be able to play a normal game, tourney legal and can oust it's prey and survive it's predator. Like a regular deck. You must be able to oust me." About the Tupdog deck. It has 30 tupdogs, and 10 trem-antis. Master are just fames, blood dolls and effective managements. Intercept is patrols. It has 60 combat cards out of 90... so pretty brutal. Tons of raking talons, immortal grapples, pounces, stone quills, manuevers, etc. The tupdog deck can gain a lot of pool, (trem hunt and use the blood dolls, block them and you fight a tupdog instead and then the treme hunt later.) they can bleed good (trem with the conditionings and also 4 trems with 1 point each is also good) and the deck is brutal in combat - specializing in sending almost all vamps to torpor. Secure havens, big bleed, vote, weenie, strike combat ends, combat - close or long decks all won't work or lose it's effectiveness quickly. You can only have so many prevent damage cards before you run out... with an onslaught of 4 tupdogs a turn. The tremere come out so quickly... and several of them. Some of the ideas so far... Aranthebes kills the bleed aspect of the tupdog deck, but the fame and conditionings kinda counter it. I could add pentex and Seeds of corruption to the deck, but that is not how I would normally play it, so I wouldn't add them just for a 2 player game or to counter Hazimel. (But adding them would make it more powerful in a 2 player game!) With secure haven decks... (pentex would work so nicely) but by the time it takes you wait to build 3 or more guys and bring them out at once... I would have bleed half your pool out. (In a few turns I can start bleeding for 7+ each turn) plus if you did have 1 guy survive to put on the secure have the next turn, I could simply bleed you out, hope that my rampage is in my hand or that you run out of +2 stealth. Danny's 1 agg first strike Assimite deck is not a bad idea, but does he have enough? What about range? But might have a shot. Troy's old school malkavian bleed also has a good shot. But I think both would give the tupdog deck a run for it's money... but the tupdogs would reign supreme. Hazimel... Maybe give it a challenge... but I doubt it... he's way too big and slow... yes his ability is a nice counter to the bum's rush. Wennie Aranthebes deck... fame would end that deck... who needs bleed ... haha. Tension in the ranks... see this card every game and never see it long enough... I cycle cards SOOO quickly, that I always have 2 masters and that cards helps me discard... so ... please keep putting it in the deck, your helping me...lol. So that is so far. I read your replies... pretty good. In a 2 player game, I should always have 3-4 tupdogs a turn and will rush and almost always kill any vamp out. If no vamps... then they bleed for 1 (yes a big waste) but it lowers your pool. In a normal game i would NEVER bleed with the tupdogs, but in a 2 player game, I need to drain the other guys pool qickly and kill all his vamps. It can always switch from bleed mode to gain pool mode. A bleed - if you have any surviving vamps... you may get off a couple bleeds before you fall to 4 tup dogs a turn rushing you. Then it game over. I know in a multiplayer game it is far less effective. Basicly kill all preys vamps to bleed him out and kill all of predator vamps except something to defend himself. (I want him around for me later) I want to tone this deck to try it in tourneys... I know 2 player games are very different from 5 player games, but i was thinking the deck is kinda broken in a 2 player environment.

On 19 Jan 2006 06:18:04 -0800, "Fouez" <fo...@aei.ca> wrote: >Standard Tremere deck with a hint of fortitude. Muaziz + The Name >Forgotten --> 2 stealth action to kill Tupdog deck ;) How so? The Name Forgotten can't be played on TupDog. -- Name Forgotten, The Type: Action Requires: Thaumaturgy [tha] (D) Put this card on a ready _UNIQUE_ vampire. If the vampire with this card is burned, he or she is removed from the game instead, and all Methuselahs remove all other vampires with the same name in their crypts, uncontrolled regions and ash heaps from the game as well (shuffle all crypts afterward). [THA] As above, but this action is at +1 stealth. -- Emphasis mine. A query on TNF. I have Frederick the Weak in play. My predator puts TNF on my Frederick the Weak. My prey contests Frederick the Weak, andd I cannot afford to contest him, how does TNF work? Is it considered burning? Morgan Vening

Doesn't it seem as though this challenge is a bit on the pointless side, except as an amusing thought experiment? It strikes me as unreasonable that the anti-Tupdog deck has to be playable in normal games and the Tupdog deck does not (and my guess is that it probably isn't). Brutal rush, especially based on weenies, is very powerful in a 1v1 game because with only one opponent it truly is possible to torporize every vampire that hits the table. In a standard multiplayer game that's much harder to do because you have multiple opponents, and you have to worry about cross-table rescues. The expense of replacing the Tupdogs every turn is likely to catch up with you long before you can claim a table win. Also, it still generally infuriates me that people keep looking at Tupdog and seeing trick decks with enormous crypts. Has anyone tried putting 4-6 of them in a 12 card !Tremere slave deck with Pugfar, indy gargoyles and reindoctrination? It seems like that's probably the best use for them, but I guess it's just not trixxxxy enough for some of the retired M:tG players out there.

1 - Atonement + sniper rifle is pretty good. But hope the 5 cap has alot of damage prevention to stay alive and was able to survive 4 tupdogs a turn, to be able to not only get an atonement off but get the sniper rifle. (Consealed weapon is good here) 2 - Thrown junk deck...interesting... what is in it, what does it do? I never care if the tupdogs go to torpor... as long as they don't burn... hurts losing the effect manag ability... (I only amaranth big guys with the deck) 3 - Taste of vitae... what? taste 1 blood... kinda useless. What ever floats your boat. hehe. 4 - The name forgotten. Tupdog not unique. 5 - Event cards... OUCH! These really do hurt the deck. ** 6 - Vote decks... how can you vote with no minions? 7 - Hazimel deck... seeds of corruption or pentex cancel him... other than that... to big and slow. 8 - You can try to kill the trem... but they come out so quickly... can you take out 3-4 before the tupdogs eat you? 9 - Dodge ... strike combat ends... one word... immortal grapple. 10 - Alpha glint... ouch. not fair! ** 11 - mind numb.. kinda useless.. slows a couple tupdogs temporily. not really effective. 12 - Tension in the ranks... doesn't really hurt since I can discard 2 masters to get rid of it pretty easily. So far, stealth combat to take out trem... but assuming your guys can survive the tupdog onslaught and can take out a few trem too. Event hurts, but need alot to make sure you got the right ones... Do people own enough? Atonement + sniper rifle nice... but again, can you survive long enough to get it to work? 1 pentex... good night. have enough damage prevention from 3R? So far pretty good ideas... I still haven't seen a solid deck to take them out. Is there one? Plus my friends have to have the cards to actually build the deck. hehe.

Actually the deck is based on a 4 player game and hasn't lost yet. It is very good at keeping balance to the table and ousting. The deck is playable... storyline tourney legal playable deck that I'm hoping can win. The idea anyways... hehe. the challenge is to see if a deck can beat it in a 2 player game cause I thought it broken. To keep the other decks tourney legal is so some originallity comes from this... how lame would be a deck with 20 bleed and 50 rolling with the punches. Would someone actually play that? Play it in a tourney? This tupdog deck is good in a multiplayer game but brutal in 2 player game. It's the fun of the challenge.

It isn't an invincible deck. All the games I've played so far... I've been pretty lucky. Playing the table also helps and fear also helps. I've never tried the deck in a 2 player game... maybe it would suck. But I doubt it. I'm using my normal multiplayer tupdog deck to challenge any other deck in a 2 player game. I'm not modifying it or adding counter cards... playing it as is. So it is only fair the other decks are the same... if not then alot of decks with insane amount of damage prevention would beat it. pretty easy. [ quoted text not captured ]

Finally a good deck. Hazimel multi-action bleed deck. (only he comes up) Never block any tremere or tupdogs, have lots of stealth and bleed. I can't rush him. lots of sudden reversals to prevent the pentex. (only have 1 in deck) the immortal to cancel most of my bleeds. BUT... Seeds would kill him... tremere adds seeds of corruption and then tupdogs bum-rush him. But since i'm not altering the deck to counter hazimel... i think he would have me. My only hope is that gaining up to 5 pool a turn with hunting/blood dolls, I can delay long enough to actually catch him by blocking. But without playing combat cards... i would be screwed. I count on cycling for combat. So that is one good deck and can be played in normals games... he would actually bring other minions to help his cause... just not against the tupdogs. This is just my opinion but we'll see when we actually play. - Deck idea from the guy who started this thread... jerk. ;)

hazimel with alpha glint... now seeds useless. you can add event cards for over kill. lol. yeah, this deck would kill it. doh! thought it was invincible in 2 player game... i guess not. any other decks you think can beat it?

"Mavrix" <mic...@mholmberg.com> wrote in message news:1137700994.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... [ quoted text not captured ] I still think Thrown Junk can do it as it runs on 60 combat cards as well, has access to permanent maneuvers (Zip Gun) and doesn't pay a pool for each rush. Needing a 5-card combo and enough maneuvers to get close to my minions is kinda sketchy and you will *quite* likely jam on grapples. You spend your turns rushing the !Tremere (and if Tupdogs block that means one less action for the tupdog player) plus you can diablerize and slow down his crypt. I expect any CEL gun deck beating the crap out of it as well. Sure, it's a nice 1-trick deck, but that 1 pool per rush thing (we're talking 2-3 pool per turn) is REALLY gonna wear you down on any normal table. I really don't see this win tournaments.

[ quoted text not captured ] Hasn't lost yet? How many games have you played it (could be 0--though I doubt you're being that cynical...), and what other decks were at the table? Were they decent decks played by decent players? Was there much combat defense at all? Did the other players ever do anything to slow your win (like cross-table rescuing, con booning eachother, etc.)? Also, while 20 bleed cards and 50 RwtP is an excessive count, one could build a potentially very good deck along such lines. Go with dom for weenies, bleed and deflect like mad, and use fortitude both for combat offense and defense (presses, traps, Dawn Operation). Getting away from hyperbole, that actually sounds like a deck I might play. Is it storyline legal? I seem to remember the count being 20 Tupdogs and 10 !Tremere, which is not storyline legal at all. In a 30 card crypt, you can only have 7 off clan vampires. I can't imagine a deck like this being very reliable with a huge crypt and only 25% !Tremere.

Correcting myself here: I think the actual figure for the crypt was 30 and 10, which is Storyline legal. I crunched the numbers, and this ratio gives you about a 30% chance to not draw any !Tremere in the opening 4 vampires. Granted you can then send out the Tupdogs to cycle through your crypt, but you're sacrificing pool and setup time to get to your !Tremere. The longer it takes, the more screwed you're going to be since you can't take any directed actions and you're likely to jam on the 60 combat cards without the ability to rush. I can see how a trick deck like this could catch people by surprise and win a game or two, but I'm really not convinced that's viable as a serious strategy.

"CthuluKitty" <vtana...@riseup.net> wrote in message news:1137713145....@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> Actually the deck is based on a 4 player game and hasn't lost yet. ... > Hasn't lost yet? ... Another quoting nicety that would be very helpful: include the name or e-mail address or whatever the reference is to the previous poster who's words you're quoting. This thread has gotten very long and Outlook Express (likely among others) is not very good at displaying thread chains. So in a situation like this, it becomes a real pain in the ass to track down the message you're responding to without the author's name. Fred

<echia...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1137637696.7...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Additional generic options: > > > Regardless of what deck you're playing, toss in a couple of Tension in > the Ranks. Tension makes Tupdog players cry. > > There are also lots of Events you can use that help hamper the Tupdog: > > > Absimilliard's Army creates chump blockers. One library card ghoul is a > good trade for a 1 pool Tupdog. > > Blood Weakens will limit the Tupdog player to only one or two effective > combats per turn (cause then he's out of cards). Huh? Even with BW in play, you replace at the end of each action. It does ruin the normal cycling during an action, but you start every action with a full hand, so I don't see the logic. (Other than BW being a reasonably good card against any card-intensive combat.) > Nightmares Upon > Nightmares has a similar effect. Either he taps his minions, or > discards cards (and is down in hand size for the turn). He's only down hand size until his master phase. Again, it would still hurt, but he'd have a normal hand size by the time his minion phase starts. > The Slow > Withering makes it difficult for the Tupdog to play his combat cards > effectively. And Veil of Darkness might cancel some key cards as well. > Given Tupdog's one measly blood, this one would hurt. (Although his Raking Talons are still good, since it's a clan card.) > Recalled to the Founder may limit his Tupdog swarm to 2 per turn (until > he brings out a third !Tremere and sacks one with cap > 5). > Or he pays 4 pool for 4 Tupdogs and gets 3 rushes. Depending on the pressure behind him, this might be a reasonable bargain. - Pat

Wow, a lot of replys. It's a new deck... so it has won about 10 games. (3-5 player games... a good test period against all types of decks) Weapon decks don't fair very well at all... I have too many manuvers... so the "throw deck" wouldn't be much of a challenge... bah! hehe. (Personal jab) The deck isn't a trick deck, not sure why you guys say that. It has offence, defence, bleed, pool gain, bumrush up or down stream... it has it all baby. As for the players I play with you say aren't very good... I would pit them against your skills anyday and bet they would kick CthuluKitty's play groups ass anyday. Hehe. 50% of the decks we play are combat, 20% bleed, 20%vote and 10% other in our play groups. A good mix. Paying 1 pool for a tupdog that can pretty much send any vamp to torpor... I'd say is a good investment. I'm guessing many of you aren't very good players or don't know how to work the table or need more experience... I'm such an ass. lol. Come on... tension in the ranks sounds like a great counter, but play testing... it's useless. It's not an impossible deck in 3-6 player games, but i can oust my prey and grandprey fairly easliy... but i do tend to run out of steam when I get to the 4th player. (That's why in a 4 player game it's still pretty good) Maybe I'm just lucky i haven't played against a counter deck (not many at all)... but them the breaks. hehe.

[ quoted text not captured ] It's not really a "trick" deck, any more than a deck with 12 Ventrue in it is a trick deck. Just because it uses a lot of one vampire (since they're non-unique, it's just like using a lot of several different vampires with the same clan and similar disciplines), and a non-standard deck size doesn't make it a trick deck. If it was using Tupdogs to Call the Great Beast, then yeah, that would be a trick deck. A large crypt with lots of Tupdogs is obviously (one of) the way(s) that Tupdogs were meant to be played. Anything else is, as far as I've seen so far, suboptimal. Even if you want to use them as more of a sideshow, there's only one other !Tre Slave Gargoyle, so if you want to regularly be able to play all those VIS and Flight cards in your deck, you're going to have to play with either a lot of Pugfars or a lot of Tupdogs. Even if you draw no !Tre in your opening crypt, a Tupdog deck should probably have some Effective Managements in it, plus you could pay for a new vamp, or you could bring out one Dog as a chump blocker (assuming you have less than 4 transfers).

Well let me be an ass as well then... "Mavrix" <mic...@mholmberg.com> wrote in message news:1137727955.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Wow, a lot of replys. It's a new deck... so it has won about 10 games. > (3-5 player games... a good test period against all types of decks) > Weapon decks don't fair very well at all... Gun decks would waste your tupdogs fair and quare. It's basically your 20 maneuvers vs his permanent maneuver on guns +20 multi-use celerity (flash, pursuit) manuevers. If not, the player with the gun deck is inexperienced, really. > I have too many manuvers... > so the "throw deck" wouldn't be much of a challenge... bah! See gun deck. How can you have more maneuvers then a deck that has permanent maneuvers in the form of zip guns PLUS the generic celerity maneuvers the gun deck has. And then it can prevent one damage or dodge in case you DO have more maneuvers. You assume you have pounce, raking talons, grapple AND enough maneuvers in every combat. Not gonna happen. Once the thrown junk has the zip gun you're in trouble. Which will be the first combat you're in btw. If you DO have the combination in, say, two combats in a row you're gonna jam on non-combat, as much as every other combat deck that runs on lots of cards, but needs an exceptional amount in two given combats in a row. How do you move the 30 non-combat cards with one !Tremere? > hehe. > (Personal jab) The deck isn't a trick deck, not sure why you guys say > that. It has offence, defence, bleed, pool gain, bumrush up or down > stream... it has it all baby. It is a trick deck. It has tupdogs, tupdogs and tupdogs. A decklist would be nice tho, so we can make further comments. >As for the players I play with you say > aren't very good... I would pit them against your skills anyday and bet > they would kick CthuluKitty's play groups ass anyday. Great place to post such a statement as the best players in the world are using the group on a daily basis. Yeh we all suck. > Hehe. 50% of the > decks we play are combat, 20% bleed, 20%vote and 10% other in our play > groups. A good mix. Paying 1 pool for a tupdog that can pretty much > send any vamp to torpor... I'd say is a good investment. You're assuming every rush torps someone. It won't. You don't ALWAYS have a grapple. You don't ALWAYS have raking talons and you certainly won't have both in 3 combats per round. Well, you could have both, but then you can't have enough maneuvers, stone quills etc etc. And people DO play prevention and maneuvers you know...And then there's crosstable rescue that is bound to start happening from, say, round 2 which is totally gonna slow you down while you have to keep up paying 3 pool per turn to get minions out. >I'm guessing > many of you aren't very good players or don't know how to work the > table or need more experience... You're guessing wrong. I'd say that if I'd use the deck in MY playgroup, I'd end up much like a weenie presence deck does on a friendly table like that - 1 VP and angry faces for playing a deck like that. >I'm such an ass. lol. Come on... > tension in the ranks sounds like a great counter, but play testing... > it's useless. So payin 2 pool per action is not a problem? Wow what an Utopian playgroup do you have. Do you, like, ever get bled or voted against? >It's not an impossible deck in 3-6 player games, but i > can oust my prey and grandprey fairly easliy... but i do tend to run > out of steam when I get to the 4th player. (That's why in a 4 player > game it's still pretty good) Maybe I'm just lucky i haven't played > against a counter deck (not many at all)... but them the breaks. hehe. You mean, kinda like weenie kine, weenie presence or weenie compuer hacking rolls over pretty much any prey it can get and then proceeds to get ousted due to lack of steam and get away from the table with 1VP three rounds in a row. Meanwhile he gives his original predator a free table win and ruins the game for his original prey. Sure, it's a deck like that.

Xibex wrote: > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). 2nd Tradition + heavy Obedience decks would have a reasonable chance against it. Chances are the Tup player won't even draw his blood dolls if he's not cycling his combat. I'm also fond of my Volker 2nd Tradition/Atonement/Sniper Rifle combo versus weenie-heavy environments. Moncada + heavy damage prevention would be unpleasant for him, since it costs him a pool each time he trie to rush the Thumb. Note that it doesn't matter how fast he gets his Tups out--his real limiting factor is how quick he can get his !Tre out. A funny possibility is a weenie Derange deck. Get one or more weenie Malk/!Malk out and Derange his !Tremere as they come out, before his Tupdogs can take (D) actions. Then block his attempts to un-Derange them. He'll have fun hunting with them Tupdogs. Combat decks usually do well in 2-person environments, so it's unsurprising that a strong combat deck is such a threat one-on-one. Of course, there's always counters. Caliean's been mentioned, and he's a great choice. Good luck getting Seeds of Corruption through unblocked. Strong deck, though, making the most of the Tupdogs' efficiency. > (so Secure Haven is NOT the > solution, nor are Sniper rifle decks, or anything that takes time to > set up). Sniper + Concealed. Easy peasy. > My solution was to develop a Ravnos-Bleed Deck (AUS CHI FOR) built > around a Freak Driving Hazimel: his abilities are included below: So he Pentex Subverts Hazzie. Better pack lots of Suddens. Same for the Caliean deck, though Cal can always block rushes against weenies you bring out later, who can in turn un-Pentex him.

Izaak wrote: > Well let me be an ass as well then... No need to. Do what needs to be done with elegance and style: ;-) > "Mavrix" <mic...@mholmberg.com> wrote in message > > I have too many manuvers... > > so the "throw deck" wouldn't be much of a challenge... bah! > > See gun deck. How can you have more maneuvers then a deck that has permanent > maneuvers in the form of zip guns PLUS the generic celerity maneuvers the > gun deck has. That's one of the main reasons I didn't bother to post in this thread yet. Once the debate about a deck's effectiveness deranges into a full-blown "I have more maneuvers/presses/whatever than you" (as opposed to "discipline X usually provides more maneuvers/presses than Y so it can twart Y", as you point out), it's obvious that it turned into a "my dad, oops, dick, ooops, deck is bigger than yours". Once in that stage, no amount of statistical data or rationale will suffice, and it's better to wait the masturbating participants to achieve their solitary orgasms and then see if they come back to their senses after some minutes - erm, I mean posts ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist :D That said, it reminds me of a situation I've seen once. A guy in here was so proud of his Toreador Aching Beauty deck, because it could cope with bleeds via 25 Telepathic Counters and with most combat thanks to 20 Majesties, that he went about to say how the deck could only be beaten by Immortal Grapple/Thoughts Betrayed users or decks with more than 20 Psyche!. It utterly stopped a Tariq Eats the World deck once due to the sheer number of S:CE, true, and did very well in two tournaments just after that. But not very much later, he faced a Gio card-recursion deck with only 6 Conditionings and 8 Deflections as prey. What happened? By the time the Toreador deck was stablished (extra master phase actions and all minions with at least two Aching Beauties each), the Gio player already had a VP and a stack of Deflections on hand, not to mention two more minions than the Toreador deck. The Gio proceeded to wipe the table and, when the two decks were face to face, it was enough for the Gio deck to keep using Carlotta to bring back the Governs/Conditionings to force the Toreador player to use 2-3 TCs per bleed, and of course, half of these bleed attempts got through. The Gio won the bleed race solely because the Toreador deck was so focused that couldn't even block a 1-stealth action by Carlotta or a bleed with a single Spectral Divination at inferior. Now anyone can jump on here and say "but this deck X I'm talking about has this or that or those", and miss the important lesson of the story altogether: card numbers is an important strategic part of the game, but they just raise the stakes, and that's all. VTES has more than enough deckbuilding and gameplay variables to turn any of these card numbers against you, either if you use more than enough (like, 25 S:CE) or less than most people would for that deck archetype (say, 6 bounce cards in a Dominate bleed deck that does not bloat). So there's not much point in debating card numbers in a deck besides metagame considerations or general amount based on what a given discipline can provide. Even the Toreador player above noticed this to some extent, and his decks, while usually still very focused, are not *that* do-one-thing-99%-of-the-time anymore. best, Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

1 - Gun decks, if you have perm range (sniper rifle for example) it does make my job harder but not impossible. Again cards like like the tension in the ranks (2 pool? You mean 1 pool. Tension usually never hits, I usually always have 2 master cards or can easily hold 2, 14 masters cards in the deck help..hehe) or gun decks sound like good ideas, but in a practical game are not as effective as you would think. 2 - Combat cards, I may not get the entire combo off each combat but the deck doesn't need to, just a couple pieces seems to do the trick. I cycle so fast, that i do get most of it off. I have around 15 raking talons, 15 stone, 10 immortals, 10 pounce - so yeah... I always have the combat cards I need. 3 - The players must suck, hehe, that was just a jab at CthuluKitty. If you get offended... toughen up. 4 - Weenie decks, I've tested it against a couple... bleed and vote and they are very easy to burn or send to torpor, with 3-4 of them going down a turn, I don't see how a weenie deck could survive. Gotta love the tupdog bumrush, plus the tupdogs come out alot faster than weenie deck vamps. 5 - Atonement/Sniper Rifle is an awesome idea to screw the deck, then you limit my combat. Great idea. Hazimel with alpha glint is another great idea that hoses my deck. Lots of suddens hurt the deck plus... event cards....*shudder* really hurt it. 6 - Most gun decks really don't work, I usually kill the vamps before they can setup, plus i can get 3 manuvers per combat, stone, rolls, swoop... (so they need to play 4 manuvers to my 3... good luck on them having that with 3-4 guys in 1 turn. granted i may not have all my needed manuvers, but 2 of the 4 will.) plus most gun decks are weak on damage prevention. plus immortals shut them down fast. 7 - We play all kinds of decks here... some annoying like this one, some hard core tourney ones and fun themed decks. VTES is good with the variety. This was just a small challenge I thought would be fun... some good ideas came out of it, let's see them build the decks to beat it. I think my friend posting here was for some ideas for you guys to help him, I just posted to tell you how the deck worked and to give you more info on the deck, so your ideas are more focused. Stuff like 6 posting using tension in the ranks... it's pretty much useless, so now that you know... new ideas can come. I think they did. So thanks for all your ideas, I sure he'll appreciate them all... except for the "my play group must suck" post..lol.

> No need to. Do what needs to be done with elegance and style: > ;-) :-) >> "Mavrix" <mic...@mholmberg.com> wrote in message >> > I have too many manuvers... >> > so the "throw deck" wouldn't be much of a challenge... bah! >> >> See gun deck. How can you have more maneuvers then a deck that has >> permanent >> maneuvers in the form of zip guns PLUS the generic celerity maneuvers the >> gun deck has. > > That's one of the main reasons I didn't bother to post in this thread > yet. Yeh well that's kinda true, but the OP specifically states to challenge us, nublets, to create a deck that could beat the Tupdog trickbox and also be tournament viable. Several alternatives have been given but stating that neither work and then calling 'us' inexperienced is fairly stupid to do no? >Once in that stage, > no amount of statistical data or rationale will suffice, and it's > better to wait the masturbating participants to achieve their solitary > orgasms and then see if they come back to their senses after some > minutes - erm, I mean posts ;-) qft. > Now anyone can jump on here and say "but this deck X I'm talking about > has this or that or those", and miss the important lesson of the story > altogether: card numbers is an important strategic part of the game, > but they just raise the stakes, and that's all. VTES has more than > enough deckbuilding and gameplay variables to turn any of these card > numbers against you, either if you use more than enough (like, 25 S:CE) > or less than most people would for that deck archetype (say, 6 bounce > cards in a Dominate bleed deck that does not bloat). So there's not > much point in debating card numbers in a deck besides metagame > considerations or general amount based on what a given discipline can > provide. Even the Toreador player above noticed this to some extent, > and his decks, while usually still very focused, are not *that* > do-one-thing-99%-of-the-time anymore. No such thing as unbeatable in VTES so far. Most good decks at 90% commons. That's part of the game's beauty IMO.

Most gun decks don't have perm manuvers... that is why they tend to have problems, plus they usually need time to setup, were the tupdogs hit hard and fast. The gun decks will always need to play more manuvers than I, and the chances he has enough for 3-4 straight combats is unlikely, unless he has zip or sniper gun. But most gun decks I've seen don't, and you won't have time to get ir goggles or anything like that. The deck wears out the person with swarms... that's what I love about it. >>No such thing as unbeatable in VTES so far. Most good decks at 90% commons. That's part of the game's beauty IMO.<<. Exactly. But I thought this deck came close in a 2 player game. Hehe. As soon as I seen the tupdog card when the new set came out, I thought I'll build the best possible tupdog deck... and it took awhile to collect 30 of them, but I think this is the best tupdog deck that can be made with the current cards. Just my opinion though. ;)

A four player table isn't much better than a two player table if you're talking about why your combat deck is so hard to top. Combat decks can force their predator or prey to deal with them. That in turn frees up your grand prey in a 4 player game who can directly put more pressure on your prey, lessening your burden and completing the loop. As a result, I doubt it's as good test environment for a deck as a five player game will be.

news:1137778473.7...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Most gun decks don't have perm manuvers... that is why they tend to .44? > have problems, plus they usually need time to setup, were the tupdogs > hit hard and fast. Concealed Weapon? Like bring out minion(s), get in combat, conceal out a .44 and have fun? Loads of setup yes. In fact I think it's less setup than getting out a !tremere and then get 3 or 4 Tupdogs in your crypt.... >The gun decks will always need to play more manuvers. No you need equal amounts since the gundeck will have a free maneuver from the gun. Gundeck also plays flash/pursuit so won't handjam on them and is likely to pack more than other decks. Then again, what do I know; I only won tournaments with both aus/CEL guns and thrown junk so I clearly have no clue about card ratios in those decks. Granted I didn't meet Tupdogs, but weenie kine and weenie presence is fairly common in tournies... > than I, and the chances he has enough for 3-4 straight combats is > unlikely, unless he has zip or sniper gun. But most gun decks I've seen > don't, and you won't have time to get ir goggles or anything like that. Goggles?? Wtf are you doing playing goggles in a gun deck?? Ack why am I doing this in the first place =/

Howdy, Mavrix wrote: > Most gun decks don't have perm manuvers... that is why they tend to > have problems, plus they usually need time to setup, were the tupdogs > hit hard and fast. The gun decks will always need to play more manuvers > than I, and the chances he has enough for 3-4 straight combats is > unlikely, unless he has zip or sniper gun. But most gun decks I've seen > don't, and you won't have time to get ir goggles or anything like that. > The deck wears out the person with swarms... that's what I love about > it. What on earth are you talking about? What sort of guns do you see people making 'gun' decks with? The most common choice is the .44 Magnum, which has a built-in maneuver. Other popular choices include the Saturday Night Special (built-in maneuver) and, for intercepty decks, the Sniper Rifle (set range). I guess the Beretta may be making its way into some decks these days, but even it grants permanent maneuvers in quantity. Furthermore, it is very common to see the .44/SNS paired with CEL, which enables the use of Psyche! to generate even more maneuvers by restarting combat, as well as Pursuit (or more rarely Flash) for additional maneuvers. The usual 'setup' such a deck needs is a gun and possibly a Concealed Weapon. With Specialization tech, both tend to be pretty easily acquired these days. Still, with sufficient copies of Roll and Crawling Chamber in your deck, Tupdog may be able to regularly outmaneuver the gun deck. But the gun deck, if it is smart, is going to simply blow away your !Tremere on its turn, when you have no Tupdog in play, stopping the rush of Tupdogs cold. Or do you plan on blowing away every potential gunner the second it hits the table? If so, good luck, 'cause you are going to lose the maneuver duel sometimes, and cel/CEL vampires only cost a little more than Tupdogs. And who uses IR Goggles in a gun deck? Wonderin', Alex

Izaak wrote: > > No need to. Do what needs to be done with elegance and style: > > ;-) > > :-) > > >> "Mavrix" <mic...@mholmberg.com> wrote in message > >> > I have too many manuvers... > >> > so the "throw deck" wouldn't be much of a challenge... bah! > >> > >> See gun deck. How can you have more maneuvers then a deck that has > >> permanent > >> maneuvers in the form of zip guns PLUS the generic celerity maneuvers the > >> gun deck has. > > > > That's one of the main reasons I didn't bother to post in this thread > > yet. > > Yeh well that's kinda true, but the OP specifically states to challenge us, > nublets, to create a deck that could beat the Tupdog trickbox and also be > tournament viable. > Several alternatives have been given but stating that neither work and then > calling 'us' inexperienced is fairly stupid to do no? Pretty much what I think. The challenge itself is fine, the topic derail to a "I have more maneuvers than you! I'm a bad ass!" is what worries me. Note that I made a special distinction on how you tried to address the issue focusing on the fact that celerity maneuvers are usually multi-purpose and plentiful (i.e. the discipline is theoretically a better source for maneuvers, so it should beat other disciplines in that regard), which is a obviously a serious point to address, so don't worry about me joking. > >Once in that stage, > > no amount of statistical data or rationale will suffice, and it's > > better to wait the masturbating participants to achieve their solitary > > orgasms and then see if they come back to their senses after some > > minutes - erm, I mean posts ;-) > > qft. Hm, don't know if I get it. But nevermind. > > Now anyone can jump on here and say "but this deck X I'm talking about > > has this or that or those", and miss the important lesson of the story > > altogether: card numbers is an important strategic part of the game, > > but they just raise the stakes, and that's all. VTES has more than > > enough deckbuilding and gameplay variables to turn any of these card > > numbers against you, either if you use more than enough (like, 25 S:CE) > > or less than most people would for that deck archetype (say, 6 bounce > > cards in a Dominate bleed deck that does not bloat). So there's not > > much point in debating card numbers in a deck besides metagame > > considerations or general amount based on what a given discipline can > > provide. Even the Toreador player above noticed this to some extent, > > and his decks, while usually still very focused, are not *that* > > do-one-thing-99%-of-the-time anymore. > > No such thing as unbeatable in VTES so far. Most good decks at 90% commons. > That's part of the game's beauty IMO. Sure. The story is to further that notion into another topic: usually (note I mean *usually*), by focusing your deck, you raise your stakes on one end (offensive for bleedy decks, defensive on wall decks and so on) but you widen the range of countermeasures or archetypes that can cripple you. Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

Mavrix wrote: > Wow, a lot of replys. It's a new deck... so it has won about 10 games. > (3-5 player games... a good test period against all types of decks) > Weapon decks don't fair very well at all... I have too many manuvers... > so the "throw deck" wouldn't be much of a challenge... bah! hehe. Note that you lose Roll if you play it and the Tuppy goes to torpor. You probably already knew that, but it does cut down on the number of maneuvers you're claiming to always have. > (Personal jab) The deck isn't a trick deck, not sure why you guys say > that. It has offence, defence, bleed, pool gain, bumrush up or down > stream... it has it all baby. I consider the deck a trick deck because it relies on exploiting a very unusual game mechanic repeatedly throughout the game. Chris Berger's point that 30 Tupdogs is no trickier than 12 Ventrue is just wrong IMO. It would be similar to saying that 20 Soul Gems is no trickier than 20 KRCs. >As for the players I play with you say > aren't very good... I would pit them against your skills anyday and bet > they would kick CthuluKitty's play groups ass anyday. Hehe. 50% of the > decks we play are combat, 20% bleed, 20%vote and 10% other in our play > groups. I didn't say they were bad. I asked a series of pointed questions, a few of which you have answered and the rest of which you haven't. On the other hand, you've now repeatedly suggested that my playgroup is bad (perhaps a joke; it's hard to tell). If you or members of your playgroup would like to come to Massachusetts, we'd be happy to play. In the absence of that happening, any arguments about who has better players is an exercise in mysticism. You've said that the deck has won 10 games with no losses. It's my general impression that win ratios like that are almost unheard of in Jyhad unless you're either way better at the game than your opponents, or you've found a way to break your local metagame. It sounds like you've probably done the latter. In good time, people will adjust to this style of play and it will probably cease to seem uber-powerful. It might not even be good at all. There's a thread from a while back about a tricky Una deck with 50+ Freak Drives. It might be worth checking that out.

CthuluKitty wrote: > I consider the deck a trick deck because it relies on exploiting a very > unusual game mechanic repeatedly throughout the game. Chris Berger's > point that 30 Tupdogs is no trickier than 12 Ventrue is just wrong IMO. > It would be similar to saying that 20 Soul Gems is no trickier than 20 > KRCs. While I'd never deny you the opportunity to call something a trick deck if you want, I'm kinda with Chris on this one--I'm not so much seeing where the "trick" is in this deck you are calling a trick deck. From description, it looks like a rush deck that focuses on a small set of skills that comes from being able to use a lot of the same vampire (i.e. Tupdog). It doesn't do anything particulalrly "tricky" in the sense that I understand something being "tricky" (i.e. this deck does *not* seem to be rocking a rhyme that is right on time...). It gets out vampires and attacks you with them. It doesn't use the Tupdog mechanic to do anything particularly interesting (other than get out more Tupdogs). The deck doesn't seem to do anything tricky; it seems to rush folks (or bleed and get blocked?) and then have a lot of combat and torporize them. It doesn't seem any trickier than, say, a deck of all 2 and 3 caps with Potence and a bunch of Effective Management, Bum's Rush, Increased Strength, and Thrown Gate that sits down in an environment ruled by old school Malkavian S+B decks. I'm guessing just like you are that this deck is doing well as the result of it taking advantage of the local metagame, but I'd never call it a "trick deck" in the way that I would, like, Turbo Baron or something. -Peter

"Mavrix" <mic...@mholmberg.com> writes: > I'm guessing many of you aren't very good players or don't know how to work > the table or need more experience... I'm such an ass. lol. Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. :-) Here is a combat module for you. It is tournament viable, effective against many many decks, and will utterly destroy your Tupdogs. It requires superior animalism to be devastating (against non-Tupdogs), but even inferior animalism can use this combo to defend itself. Like if your minion just hit the ready region and has not yet recieved a skill card. X Terror Frenzy X Carrion Crows X+Y Aid From Bats Z Taste of Vitae Where Z < X, unless you never run into S:CE. Y > 0, because you might also want to kill bigger minions than mere Tupdogs. I'd also advice using a lot of Gangrel, Ravnos and other fortitude-packing minions, so you can add Soak and/or Skin of Steel to counter long-range hitback, such as the occasional Stone Quills. Or you could build a Tzimisce deck and replace Tastes with Inner Essence. Less effective against hitback, but more effective in paying the cost of Terror Frenzies, even if your opponent uses S:CE or prevents everything. Or you could build an evil, evil weenie animalism deck, that could intercept, rush and swarm everybody to death. Thank you again for your kind and humble words of encouragement. Rarely do we see such exquisite manners and admirable attitude in a person. Don't hesitate to visit our newsgroup again, if you ever feel the need to have your sorry ass handed to you. >:-) -- hg@ "If you can't offend part of your audience, iki.fi there is no point in being an artist at all." -Hakim Bey

Wow! I make this posting not expecting much, and come back to see that there have been over 40 responses (and its not the same five people yelling at each other)! Anyways, after reading the massive numbers of suggestions on how to put the smackdown on a Tupdog swarm deck, I just wanted to comment on some of the misconceptions that some people have on its effectiveness against other archetypes (based on the experiences of our "moderately skilled" playgroup. Myth #1: Concealed Weapon + .44 magnum + lots of flash and pursuit will vaporize a Tupdog deck. Experience: The free maneuver from the gun is cancelled out by Roll (especially since it will always go back into the Tupdog's hand if he needs it after combat and he's still ready), so you need the second maneuver to have a chance. Also, the Tupdog player will not (normally) rush you unless HE has the second maneuver. So, you all are correct in that a CEL gun deck does force the Tupdogs to play cautiously but you need to remember that with Raking Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (though the extra agg damage is nice, but not necessary) the tupdogs only need to get to close range once to send your mid-cap gunner to torpor and their next action in most cases is a diablerie. The sniper rifle is great, but unless you've got Atonement you will NOT have enough wakes to block all of the rushes (and assuming you'll have both when you need it right at the start of the game is wishful thinking, or lucky drawing but not something I'd want to rest my hopes on). So the gunner deck vs Tupdogs is kind of like SDI vs an ICBM swarm. Even if you intercept 80 - 90% of their attacks successfully, the ones that do get through will devastate you. Myth #2: That Tupdog decks burn through too much pool. Experience: While it's true that the constant recruitment of plenty of Tupdogs is a steady drain on your resources, the !tremere that are in the ready region (usually 3 - 4 by the middle of the game) aren't there to bleed (usually). There main purpose is to hunt without consequence (since blocking them means you're fighting a Tupdog slave) and then diverting all that free blood to their pool. The Tremere antitribu aren't in the crypt just to make it storyline legal and let the Tupdogs rush, they perform a valuable supporting role in helping to "fund" the Tupdog assault". Even events like Restricted Vitae don't slow the blood machine down (much) because all the !tremere are 3 and 2 caps and the card cycling that goes with a Tupdog deck means that it always has a couple of master cards in hand (which provides the blood dolls and effective managements to bring out more Tupdogs. Which brings me to myth #3. Myth #3: That Tension in the Ranks nukes the Tupdog strategy. Experience: Yeah, we thought that too (and it seems like a great idea in theory). In practice, it lets Mr. Tupdog discard two master cards that were occupying slots that could be used for more combat. In one five player game (which the Tupdog player lost after getting two ousts and nearly depleting his library) we played 3 Tension in the Ranks over the course of the game and he cancelled them all out by throwing away Master Cards. I think one of them ended up lasting an entire turn around the table, the rest didn't so the cumulative pool damage was marginal. Myth #4: It's all about the damage prevention stupid! Experience: Damage prevention works great, as long as you can prevent 3 agg damage with one card. Heavy FOR decks do seriously slow the Tupdog torporing machine, especially when he has to put his attention towards his predator and prey as well as any potential cross table threats. However, if a Tupdog's assault fails, its no big deal since they were going to burn anyways. If a Tupdog assault gets through then they're a good chance you won't be playing with that vampire again for the remainder of the game (diablerists!). Now, I'm not saying that this deck is "broken", because it's not nor is it impossible to defeat (because it isn't, Mavix just doesn't like to recall the times when we overpowered his swarm and ousted him, though it took a combined effort in every case). Or the time my cel/for anarch magnum deck with Diversion and Groundfighting kept plunking Tupdogs into Torpor while Kyoto Shinsegawa kept hunting off of the ready ones to prevent them from being able to rush during their minion phase... Or the time that the Salubri antitribu kept on throwing Kerries at his Tupdogs for 3 aggravated ranged damage (burning them in combat) and shutting the recruitment machine down cold. Or the time we all just kept bouncing our bleeds to him (unfair, but it kept our minions alive and allowed us to play a "normal" game after he was ousted to the living room). Also, for those of you who would rather avoid combat althogether, ending combat before range also works wonders because at least you nullified the rush action AND made him discard another Raking Talons. If a Tupdog hits you for 3 normal damage, who cares! It's just that this deck is a monster when it focuses all of its combat fury onto a single opponent because (eventually) one of them will get through and when that happens you just want to cry (a bit =) because your forces have been left in tatters.

Oh shit, hehe. I did lose 2 games... my bad. Not enough vp's. Hehe. Shit, 8 wins and 2 loses. Ok... I feel sheepish. Baaaa. I also made another mistake saying weapon decks without prem manuver.. doh! I meant to keep it long.... like sniper rifle... again my bad. Blonde day I guess. lol. Sorry for the misinformation. You don't like my attitude... tuff luck. Gotta love newsgroups. Yes, Xibex is the nice one of the group. hehe. And the guy with the Thrown junk deck... I bet your deck is good, but I don't see it beating the tupdog deck... in a 2 player game. Only way to tell is to play, but that most likely won't happen... ever. ;) Well, this was fun boys. Have fun, chow.

Mavrix wrote: > a turn rushing you. Then it game over. I know in a multiplayer game it > is far less effective. Basicly kill all preys vamps to bleed him out > and kill all of predator vamps except something to defend himself. (I > want him around for me later) I want to tone this deck to try it in > tourneys... I know 2 player games are very different from 5 player > games, but i was thinking the deck is kinda broken in a 2 player > environment. Especially when you artificially hobble its competition by demanding that the opposing deck be one that IS viable in a 4- or 5-player environment, but admit freely that your own deck would not be. A true comparison would have equal restrictions for each deck. I suspect it wouldn't be anywhere near as tricky to create an anti-Tupdog deck with that particular restriction removed. -- Derek insert clever quotation here

<snip post> That I didn't think of that. Doh! Terror Frenzy at superior TOTALLY rapes the Tupdog deck. And I'm even working on getting a Guruhi ANI/pre deck tournament competitive that packs several copies of that card o.0 Absolutely gorgeous idea.

[ quoted text not captured ] Well how about Yong-Sun (Adv) - doesn't need to be merged. As the predator of a tupdog deck his bleeding will just get bigger and bigger. He has the OBF to both stealth past and play Spying Mission if redirected. He can use aus to play revelations at minor to discard cards that might be offensive (Archon Investigation). With aus he can well use Crocodiles Tongue to drain the blood from those !Tremere to reduce the telepathic misdirection (THA gives perfect clarity). And the use of Disengage to simply cancel the Immortal Grapples (using OBF for dodges or what have you thus bypassing Pounce and torporing the tupdog in the process). He also has ANI to play Terror Frenzy if you really want to. Another angle is to obviously go with the ever increasing bleed, but combine with Chiram's Hold. Since he can't get rid of the Hold until his discard phase, you make the Grapple or Pounce or whatever cost 1 blood to play. Naturally there is Secure Haven, with Secret Passages as backups. That will at least slow down the Tupdogs till they draw a harrass or even better stop them even being transferred out until they're ready to fight because Yong-Sun gets massive bleeds. However if you use the normal version he can burn crypt cards for himself, thus perhaps destroying the tupdogs. Just some thoughts. D

Xibex wrote: > Hello, > > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). > > Now this deck also has to be a viable deck in a normal game as well > (does NOT have an insane amount of damage prevention, can protect > itself against a predator, can put pressure on its prey, tournament > legal, etc...) AND be able to hold off a Tupdog swarm the moment your > vampires get out of the uncontrolled region (so Secure Haven is NOT the > solution, nor are Sniper rifle decks, or anything that takes time to > set up). > > My solution was to develop a Ravnos-Bleed Deck (AUS CHI FOR) built > around a Freak Driving Hazimel: his abilities are included below: > > As far as I understand the rules, a Tupdog cannot rush him (because > they don't have the two blood to burn to attempt the D-action to rush > him in the first place). Is that correct, have the confusing and > constantly modified rules for this game killed this idea as a viable > counter to 30 rampaging Tupdogs? > > Any assistance (or advice) on this would be appreciated! > > Hazimel [Gehenna:U] > Cardtype: Vampire > > Clan: Ravnos > > Group: 4 > > Capacity: 11 > > Discipline: dem ANI AUS CHI FOR POT > > Independent: Hazimel has 2 votes (titled). Non-Ravnos vampires must > burn 2 blood to attempt a (D) action that targets Hazimel or a card or > counter on him. +1 bleed.

>>Especially when you artificially hobble its competition by demanding >>that the opposing deck be one that IS viable in a 4- or 5-player >>environment, but admit freely that your own deck would not be. The tupdog deck is designed for a 3-5 player game, not a 2 player game. I can design it for a 2 player game and add more pentex and other cards to make it alot more powerful, but since it is designed for a 3-5 player game, I would not add those cards. The restriction is was to show for a tourney quality deck, it's super powerful in a 2 player environment, but hasn't been played in one... yet. (I'm not a shitty player, I've won most of the tourney's in my area... so I know how to build a tourney deck. With 30+ players, I think I'm not bad. No modesty... hehe.) Wow, this has turned into who's dick is bigger. lol. The deck is just as good as any other multiplayer tourney deck (not better or worse, just different) but that has nothing to do with it, the challenge was if there was another tourney deck to beat it in a two player game. Dumb challenge I know, but fun. A lot of ideas and pissing matches going on... so fun.

I'd hate to say this but you sound more like a five year old who needs attention and is way too overeager to show off than a good player ... Oh wait, I didn't hate to say that.

"quetzalcoatl" <da...@vega.id.au> wrote in message news:1137862391.3...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Well how about Yong-Sun (Adv) - doesn't need to be merged. As the > predator of a tupdog deck his bleeding will just get bigger and bigger. > He has the OBF to both stealth past and play Spying Mission if > redirected. He can use aus to play revelations at minor to discard > cards that might be offensive (Archon Investigation). With aus he can > well use Crocodiles Tongue to drain the blood from those !Tremere to > reduce the telepathic misdirection (THA gives perfect clarity). ??? Confusion. Chaos. Pandamonium. Accidently cutting a short fart... Could you clarify this last bit? I more or less understand the part about Crocodile's Tongue*** reducing someone's blood. But what does Telepathic Misdirection have to do with Perfect Clarity exactly (keeping in mind that Perfect Clarity only affects Dominate and Presence reactions, not Auspex reactions)? Fred *** - Interesting Fact: There are actually *seven* different cards in this game with the word, 'tongue' in the title. It's all getting a bit kinky if you ask me!

What I meant is that Tremere/!Tremere have access to 2 redirection abilities: Auspex and Dominate. Out of the pack, Yong can cancel the Dominate with Perfect Clarity. The Auspex defence needs to be cancelled out and that was what Crocodile's Tongue is for - reducing blood on the Tupdogs and/or on the main blood gaining/hunting !Tremere. Of course you could use Slow Withering but that will affect Yong-Sun as well. Skill carding him to superior Auspex might be a better choice so that Crocodile's Tongue forces a !Tremere to block and pay 2 blood to allow blocking and then a stealth card. It would drain their "bloat" engine pretty well. D

[ quoted text not captured ] #1 ANI + FOR deck. Add in PRO and you have even more options. Terror Frenzy. Rolling with the Punches. Alpha Glint. + ANI/PRO combat. #2 Cailean with Stunt Cycles. #3 Horrid Reality + Illusions deck #4 Matthias Steal & Bleed/Burn deck #5 Dragos + Animalism Master Cheers James

[ quoted text not captured ] "Opposing vampire burns an additional blood when playing combat cards this combat." Umm, how does this rape them? They burn an additional blood when playing that first combat card. Then they are empty, and ignore all 'burn blood effects'. Terror Frenzy doesn't increase the cost of combat cards. Wave of Lethargy does (well, maneuvers and presses, and strikes at superior). That would hurt a lot. But at least their prevent/disarms/etc would still be free. -- salem http://users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/vtes/ (replace 'hotmail' with 'yahoo' to email)

[ quoted text not captured ] Who sounds too overeager? There is no context in this post. [ quoted text not captured ]

>> That I didn't think of that. >> Doh! >> >> Terror Frenzy at superior TOTALLY rapes the Tupdog deck. And I'm even >> working on getting a Guruhi ANI/pre deck tournament competitive that >> packs several copies of that card o.0 > > "Opposing vampire burns an additional blood when playing combat cards this > combat." > > Umm, how does this rape them? They burn an additional blood when playing > that first combat card. Then they are empty, and ignore all 'burn blood > effects'. Terror Frenzy doesn't increase the cost of combat cards. Meh I though it did. Ok, that won't work. Terror Frenzy at inferior with aid from bats is annoying tho. Another thing that was pointed out that the roll-tech, while good, only works when you're still ready after combat (ie can't get it back from the graveyard if you get torped). You can't do a handstrike and aggrevate it after playing Stone Quills for a maneuver, so in effect the TupDog machine is running on a mere 10 maneuvers (ie the 10 rolls) which I'm pretty sure a lot of decks can easily handle. I can imagine the following situation: Tupdog enters combat with a CEL minion that has a .44 (or conceals one out). Cel minion plays pursuit to go to long Tupdog plays roll Cel minion uses .44 to go to long Tupdog plays Stone Quills to get back to short Now three things can happen: 1) Tupdog doesn't play Grapple. Cel minions shoots and torps tupdog, Tupdog deals 3 damage to cel minion. Roll stays in the ashpile. Tupdog lost two out of 20 maneuver cards, cel minion lost 1. 2) Tupdog does play Grapple. Since both minions comitted to a strike they can't use under grapple, nothing happens. Tupdog presses from Grapple and assuming the cel minion doesn't press against with flash, nimble feet or Phsyche! a second round occurs. 3) As above, but the CEL minion has an additional strike and Torps Tupdog in the first round. The Roll is gone. Two things can happen 1) Tupdog doesn't have another grapple. Combat defaults to close, tupdog strikes with pounce, cel minion dodges, tupdog goes to torpor. Roll is gone. If Tupdog doesn't strike with pounce, cel minion prevents 1 damage with superior sideslip and torps tupdog. Roll is gone. 2) Tupdog has another grapple. Unless he ALSO has a pounce (the opposing minion can just prevent 1 and Torp Tupdog) the CEL minion is in trouble. From where I stand this are pretty bad odds for Mr. Tupdog, as you count on a) Tupdog having Stone Quills, Roll, Raking Talons, two Grapples and a Pounce in hand and b) The cel minion having only 1 maneuver in hand and no additional strike cards I'm sure Tupdog can totally wipe out certain fatty decks or one-star decks. In that respect it's not different from a weenie presence or a weenie kine deck. Ie, nothing special and nothing to be proud of. I don't see it beat up any deck that runs on celerity or decks with permanent prevention (guardian angel, flak jacket, stuff like that). Gun decks or thrown junk? Not a chance. I'm more than willing to deckbot it out some time...

Hello,hell of a funny discussion, this. Anyone give any thought AT ALL to the fact the bloody little snotty gargoyle is a "slave"? Hence, all of this beautifull discussion is simply answered by Tupdog deck is beaten by a multitude of other decks, foremost the ones that do the "oops there goes your warlock" thingie.. Also: not a signle deck is unbeatable. And almost all decks can be beaten by almost every other type of deck Or didn't we all remember this is VTES and not some other.. blast, made that remark about the other game after all.thought I got rid of that one.. just my 0.5 Euros /jo

Salem <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> writes: > Izaak wrote: > > <snip post> > > That I didn't think of that. > > Doh! > > Terror Frenzy at superior TOTALLY rapes the Tupdog deck. And I'm even > > working on getting a Guruhi ANI/pre deck tournament competitive that packs > > several copies of that card o.0 > > "Opposing vampire burns an additional blood when playing combat cards this > combat." > > Umm, how does this rape them? They burn an additional blood when playing that > first combat card. Then they are empty, and ignore all 'burn blood > effects'. It doesn't. Terror Frenzy at *inferior* + a single solitary maneuver rapes Tupdogs. Can't maneuver to close, can't press to continue. [ quoted text not captured ]

Wolflord wrote: > Hello,hell of a funny discussion, this. > Anyone give any thought AT ALL to the fact the bloody little snotty > gargoyle is a "slave"? Uh,,, yeah. About three days ago I wrote: >A pile of fortitude prevent or Flesh of Marble combined with Tension in >the Ranks could do it. >Put down or steal the !Tre and the Tupdogs can't rush. >So if you were to play FOR PRE prevent/Banishment or PTO, all you have >to do is vote the !tre away, and do Pool damage with KRC's.

Wolflord wrote: > Hello,hell of a funny discussion, this. > Anyone give any thought AT ALL to the fact the bloody little snotty > gargoyle is a "slave"? Well, yes. Several of us, actually. > Hence, all of this beautifull discussion is simply answered by > Tupdog deck is beaten by a multitude of other decks, foremost the ones > that do the "oops there goes your warlock" thingie.. You don't even have to burn the !Tremere to shut the deck down. The Tups aren't much for rescuing. And I though of a much funnier angle, which I really think deserves more comment than it got: Emmit Svenson wrote: > Note that it doesn't matter how fast he gets his Tups out--his real > limiting factor is how quick he can get his !Tre out. A funny > possibility is a weenie Derange deck. Get one or more weenie Malk/!Malk > out and Derange his !Tremere as they come out, before his Tupdogs can > take (D) actions. Then block his attempts to un-Derange them. He'll > have fun hunting with them Tupdogs. The best part is the slave Tups can't even jump you after you block their former master trying to move a Derange to them, since you're not blocking an !Tremere.

[ quoted text not captured ] Other fun trick to do against it is the Setite Multi-Corruption deck. I'll assume the Tupdog deck will influence out the !Trem first and then a couple of Tupdogs at once. The Setite deck influences out at least two weenies at the same time. Anyway, once the Setite deck realizes it has a Tupdog deck in front of him, it will start rolling even with 1 weenie out (instead of the usual "influence out 4 minions first"). Corruption on Tupdog. Steal it. It will burn on your influence phase. New Setite on the uncontrolled region. Bleed with Legal Manipulations. Tupdog will probably block it. Steal Tupdog with Venenation (or Mask at superior to get the bleed through). Same as above. And the thing goes. The Tupdog deck will have to take its time, bring a bunch of Tupdogs (to influence out at least 4 at once) and until then the Setite deck (with the help of the stolen Tupdogs effective management effect) will have plenty of time to bleed the Tupdog deck out or influence even more weenies, which compensates for the occasional rush the Tupdog deck will be able to pull. AND the deck is reasonable effective at tourneys (because it's a weenie deck at the worst angle). Fabio "Sooner" Macedo

Howdy, > A particularly skilled (and sometimes infuriating... =) VTES player in > our local playgroup has challenged us to develop a deck that can > counter a Tupdog swarm in a 2 player game that uses plenty of Raking > Talons + Immortal Grapple + Pounce (with enough maneuvers to make sure > combat stays at close and some Stone Quills for the times it goes to > long). Here's an anti-Tupdog (predator) idea, though it's not really useable in a one-on-one: don't bring out any minions. Sure, the Tupdogs can bleed you - once, for one pool each. And they cost, what, one pool each? And yeah, the !Tremere can bleed too, but they cost pool as well. Meanwhile, the Tupdog player has a predator of his own, who will presumably either be occupying some of the Tupdog actions or else doing something even worse... Seems like Tupdog will be dying quicker than you. Hope that helps, Alex