(Report) Bookstore Cup Hungary

This is a non official tournament made by a little bookstore in Budapest, called " The Bookstore " The decks of the finalist will be post later. 2005.01.29. Position, Name, GW, Vp, Final Vp 1 Robert Kocsis 2 9 4 2 Tamas Csepregi 2 10 1 3 Balazs Szemes 2 10 0 4 Istvan Mecseri 2 9 0 5 Norbert Broda 2 9 0 6 Zsolt Varga 2 9 7 Zoltan Varga Bp 2 9 8 Balazs Kuno Kiss 2 8.5 9 Attila Sipos 2 8 10 Sandor Kiss 2 7 10 Gabor Veress 2 7 12 Arnold Farkas 2 6.5 13 Balazs Kozo 2 6 14 Csaba Szilasi 2 5.5 15 Lajos Szekely 1 7 16 Gyongyi Tunde Hidegfoldi 1 7 17 Mate Andrassy 1 5 18 Peter Forray 1 4.5 19 Jovan Pavlovic 1 4.5 20 Gergo Gyarmati 1 4 20 Peter Talmacsi 1 4 22 Gabor Endler 1 4 23 Rudolf Edlmayer 1 4 24 Zoltan Simon 1 4 24 Gabor Balazs 1 4 26 Norbert Hajdu 1 3.5 27 Tibor Holhos 1 2 28 Attila Suhajda 0 4 29 Csaba Marton 0 4 30 Daniel Vigh 0 3 31 Peter Botos 0 3 32 Milan Horvath 0 2.5 33 Gabor Zsenyei 0 2.5 34 Jozsef Gal 0 2 35 Balazs Csabai 0 2 35 Zoltan Komora 0 2 35 David Wittmann 0 2 38 Zsolt Bagdany 0 2 39 Balazs Pahi 0 1.5 40 Daniel Hadik-Barkoczy 0 1.5 40 Tamas Szilardi 0 1.5 42 Norbert Radi 0 1.5 43 Robert Steinhauser 0 1 44 Viktor Janvari 0 1 44 Attila Ferencz 0 1 46 Balazs Palfi 0 1 47 Martin Major 0 1 47 Matyas Bodor 0 1 47 Balazs Szabo 0 1 47 Aron Peter 0 1 51 Jozsef Kuminka 0 1 51 Gyula Grof 0 1 51 Tibor Spada 0 1 51 Csaba Greguss 0 1 55 Adam Horvath 0 1 55 Adam Nemes 0 1 55 Peter Korsos 0 1 58 Peter Nemeth 0 0.5 59 Ferenc Bagjos 0 0 59 Gergo Ede 0 0 59 Laszlo Koti 0 0 62 Viktor Barat 0 0 63 Attila Korsos 0 0 63 Krisztian Maurer 0 0 63 Janos Major 0 0 63 Peter Vadasz 0 0 63 Andras Rudolf 0 0 63 Zsolt Olah 0 0 69 Zsolt Cziráki 0 0 69 Attila Csizi 0 0 69 Bela Somogyi 0 0 69 Gyula Erdos 0 0 69 Miklos Varga 0 0 69 Zita Darvas 0 0 75 Tamas Hencsey 0 0 75 Zsolt Toth 0 0 75 Matyas Kiraly 0 0 Thamas Camarilla Tzimisce Archon

tHamas wrote: >This is a non official tournament made by >a little bookstore in Budapest, called " The Bookstore " You got 75 players to show up for a non-official tournament and then you crammed them into a little bookstore? Impressive and brutal. Jay

Jay wrote: >You got 75 players to show up for a non-official tournament >and then you crammed them into a little bookstore? >Impressive and brutal. And what made it non official? Were there funny house rules or something? Just curious. -Peter

tHamas wrote: > This is a non official tournament made by a little bookstore in > Budapest, called " The Bookstore " > > > > The decks of the finalist will be post later. i am still pretty pissed that it was told that foreigner are not welcome (we were told that we are not allowed to attend) (though zsolt was there so it seems that if some non hungarians showed up, they were allowed to play thank god) it was very sad (usually 4-10 austrians show up in budapest) stefan

Jay Kristoff wrote: > You got 75 players to show up for a non-official tournament > and then you crammed them into a little bookstore? > Impressive and brutal. I wasn't kidding when I said that Budapest rules. They also get 30+ people for their weekly casual games, held at a good Italian restaurant. I've got the money secured for the EC this year. \,,/ - Ben Peal fu...@mindstorm.com

Stefan Ferenci wrote: >...though zso­lt was there so it seems that if some non hungarians showed up... Better than that, there were 5 Zsolts! :) - Ben Peal fu...@mindstorm.com

[ quoted text not captured ] Kind of. We had these "funny prizes" for different feats, like largest attempted bleed, largest attempted damage strike in combat, most number of locations controlled at once (go Harbingers), highest stealth on a successful action, highest intercept on a successful block, etc. Plus, we also had a special "sunovabitch" prize (taken, of course, by our regular PTO-monger, who burned a total of 14 vampires with his Arika & co. deck). There was also a concept prize (taken by the deck "The Mafia" featuring all sorts of lowlives like Giovanni, Ravnos and some riff-ruff Caitiff). Btw the event wasn't exactly held *at* the bookstore, it was sponsored *by* it. ;) It was held at our local "Rack". -- Bye, Daneel

Daneel wrote: > We had these "funny prizes" for different feats, like largest attempted > bleed, largest attempted damage strike in combat, most number of > locations controlled at once (go Harbingers), highest stealth on a > successful action, highest intercept on a successful block, etc. Plus, > we also had a special "sunovabitch" prize (taken, of course, by our > regular PTO-monger, who burned a total of 14 vampires with his Arika & > co. deck). There was also a concept prize (taken by the deck "The Mafia" > featuring all sorts of lowlives like Giovanni, Ravnos and some riff-ruff > Caitiff). I don't know if this sort of thing would make a tournament unofficial/unsanctioned, assuming all the other rules were obeyed, as they don't actually have anny effect on game play (other than, like, people paying attention to this sort of thing in games). Peter D Bakija pd...@lightlink.com http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6 "How does this end?" "In fire." Emperor Turhan and Kosh

Peter D Bakija wrote: > Daneel wrote: > > > We had these "funny prizes" for different feats, like largest attempted > > bleed, largest attempted damage strike in combat, most number of > > locations controlled at once (go Harbingers), highest stealth on a > > successful action, highest intercept on a successful block, etc. Plus, > > we also had a special "sunovabitch" prize (taken, of course, by our > > regular PTO-monger, who burned a total of 14 vampires with his Arika & > > co. deck). There was also a concept prize (taken by the deck "The Mafia" > > featuring all sorts of lowlives like Giovanni, Ravnos and some riff-ruff > > Caitiff). > > I don't know if this sort of thing would make a tournament > unofficial/unsanctioned, assuming all the other rules were obeyed, as they > don't actually have anny effect on game play (other than, like, people > paying attention to this sort of thing in games). I can easily see situations where a player would intentionally violate the "play to win" doctrine just to win a side prize. Jeff

jeff_kuta wrote: > I can easily see situations where a player would intentionally violate > the "play to win" doctrine just to win a side prize. Yeah, I suppose that is possible, but do such, like, wacky door prizes invalidate sanctioning? [ quoted text not captured ]

2nd place. Deck Name: Ugly Princes Created By: Csepregi Tamás 1 Selma the Repugnant ani for OBF POT 8 Nosferatu 4 Nikolaus Vermeulen ani for obf POT 7 Nosferatu 1 Murat ser OBF POT 7 Nosferatu 1 Agrippina pot OBF 4 Nosferatu 1 Dimple obf 2 Nosferatu 1 Duck obf pot 3 Nosferatu 1 Regilio aus obf 3 Nosferatu 1 Daliyah obf PRO 4 Nosferatu 1 Sammy ani obf pot 4 Nosferatu Library: (90 cards) ------------------- Master (16 cards) 1 Slum Hunting Ground 2 Labyrinth, The 6 Blood Doll 1 Direct Intervention 2 Perfectionist 4 Obfuscate Action (6 cards) 4 Third Tradition: Progeny, The 2 Embrace, The Action Modifier (27 cards) 4 Lost in Crowds 4 Faceless Night 4 Cloak the Gathering 4 Spying Mission 3 Forgotten Labyrinth 6 Cryptic Rider 2 Change of Target Political Action (30 cards) 1 Disputed Territory 4 Nosferatu Justicar 11 Kine Resources Contested 2 Parity Shift 6 Consanguineous Boon 1 Praxis Seizure: Atlanta 1 Praxis Seizure: Houston 1 Praxis Seizure: Miami 1 Praxis Seizure: London 1 Praxis Seizure: Stockholm 1 Praxis Seizure: Dallas Combat (11 cards) 6 Fake Out 5 Dodge

4th place Deck Name: Monarchs - KK edition Created By: Mecséri István Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 29, Max: 44, Avg: 9,66 --------------------------------------------- 1 Basil obf 1 Pander 2 Maris Streck ani dem dom AUS OBF 9 Malkavian 1 Yong-Sun aus ANI OBF POT THA 10 Nosferatu Antitribu 1 Lucinde Alastor obf pot tha DOM FOR PRE 10 Ventrue 1 Etrius pro AUS DOM OBF THA 11 Tremere 3 Arika aus cel DOM FOR OBF PRE 11 Ventrue 3 Leandro cel dom AUS OBF PRE 11 Malkavian Library: (90 cards) ------------------- Master (20 cards) 6 Minion Tap 1 Giant`s Blood 1 Elysium: The Arboretum 1 Ventrue Headquarters 4 Zillah`s Valley 3 Information Highway 1 Protected Resources 2 Dreams of the Sphinx 1 Metro Underground Action Modifier (29 cards) 1 Kiss of Ra, The 1 Mask of a Thousand Faces 6 Lost in Crowds 5 Forgotten Labyrinth 2 Spying Mission 2 Cloak the Gathering 3 Elder Impersonation 1 Domain of Evernight 1 Faceless Night 5 Voter Captivation 2 Awe Political Action (16 cards) 2 Kine Resources Contested 3 Banishment 6 Protect Thine Own 2 Parity Shift 1 Ancient Influence 1 Political Stranglehold 1 Reins of Power Reaction (13 cards) 5 Wake with Evening`s Freshness 4 Deflection 2 Redirection 2 Obedience Combat (8 cards) 8 Majesty Equipment (2 cards) 1 Sargon Fragment, The 1 Ivory Bow Combo (2 cards) 2 Swallowed by the Night

3rd place Deck name: aus-tha tremere - (!) tremere alliance By: Szemes Balázs Crypt (12): Group 1-2 2 Hannigan AUS THA (dom) 5 !Tre 2 Aisling Sturbridge AUS THA (dom) 5 Tre 2 Blythe Candeleria aus THA 3 Tre 1 Magdalena Shaefer THA 2 Caitiff 1 Heinrich Schlempt tha 2 !Tre 1 Ignatius aus tha (dom) 4 Tre 1 Richard Tauber, Ayelea's Puppet AUS tha 4 !Tre 1 Dr. John Casey aus tha 3 Tre 1 Roreca Quaid tha 2 Tre Library (90) Master (22) 2 Auspex 2 Thaumaturgy 1 Infernal Pact 1 Arcane Library 1 Academic HG 1 University HG 1 Tribute to the Master 5 Blood doll 1 Chantry 1 Tremere Convocation 2 Sudden Reversal 1 KRCG News Radio 2 Powerbase: Mexico City 1 Archon Investigation Action (2) 2 Atonement Retainer (1) 1 Mr. Winthrop Ally (2) 2 Nephandus Reaction (35) 1 Fast Rection 5 Enhanced senses 5 Eagle's sight 4 Precognition 5 Spirit's touch 4 Telepathic Misdirection 4 Telepathic Counter 1 My enemy's enemy 6 Forced Awakening Combat (28) 5 Walk of Flame 8 Theft of Vitae 8 Apportation 2 Soul Burn 2 Blood Fury 3 Telephatic Tracking

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 19:21:39 -0500, Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> wrote: > jeff_kuta wrote: > >> I can easily see situations where a player would intentionally violate >> the "play to win" doctrine just to win a side prize. > > Yeah, I suppose that is possible, but do such, like, wacky door prizes > invalidate sanctioning? Well, sanctioning has very little effect on the tournament AFAIK except for the fact that player ratings are updated (of which we keep very little track of, honestly). Technically though it may change the tournament atmosphere. I've seen people play decks that aimed at collecting one of the prizes. In doing so their decks may not have been sufficiently optimizted with respect to actually ousting, winning and such. Of course it's quite hard to tell as I don't know every Hungarian player, and lots of new faces show up at these tournaments - someone might've just been a n00bie anyway. As for the rules - I dunno. They may or may not have a restriction on prizing, I guess it's a yes (I presume that prizes must support achievement with respect to winning, like you can't (ad absurdum) do a tournament where the finalists get nothing, the non-finalists get a booster and those with 0 VPs get two boosters). -- Bye, Daneel

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 19:17:02 +0100, Stefan Ferenci <nos...@thankyou.com> wrote: > i am still pretty pissed that it was told that foreigner are not welcome > (we were told that we are not allowed to attend) (though zsolt was there > so it seems that if some non hungarians showed up, they were allowed to > play thank god) > > it was very sad (usually 4-10 austrians show up in budapest) Well, Zsolt is kind of a border-line case, him being fluent in Hungarian... ;) Anyway, I'm in no way affiliated with the Bookstore or its owners, but I think that the restriction on the participation was due to the fact that the Bookstore considers this event to be a form of advertising. They invest in providing a tournament with remarkable prizes, attracting players to it whom may later end up visiting the Bookstore regularly. In this sense a local player is far more likely to do so than a foreigner... I know that other events (even those supported by the Bookstore) are open to foreigners as well, but this event was heavily sponsored. It helps newbies integrate into the regular gaming community, and it also promotes the Bookstore. I'm sure noone at the Bookstore has anything against foreigners, it's just that they are immensely less likely to become regulars at the shop... -- Bye, Daneel

> > Anyway, I'm in no way affiliated with the Bookstore or its owners, but I > think that the restriction on the participation was due to the fact that > the Bookstore considers this event to be a form of advertising. They > invest in providing a tournament with remarkable prizes, attracting > players to it whom may later end up visiting the Bookstore regularly. In > this sense a local player is far more likely to do so than a foreigner... But more foreigners still equates more business. I know the first thing I do when I visit a new game store is buy $5 of V:tES. 'Tis a far better thing to invite foreigners than to alienate them. I know I would think twice about going to a game store that allowed that sort of discrimination.

> Technically though it may change the tournament atmosphere. I've seen > people play decks that aimed at collecting one of the prizes. In doing > so their decks may not have been sufficiently optimizted with respect > to actually ousting, winning and such. Of course it's quite hard to > tell as I don't know every Hungarian player, and lots of new faces show > up at these tournaments - someone might've just been a n00bie anyway. > Playing a nonoptimized deck is perfectly fine. But many of the awards listed require you to choose to act in a certain manner playing your deck (ludicrous stealht/intercept, ludicrous damage, etc.) that may conflict with Play-to-Win.

Daneel wrote: >Well, sanctioning has very little effect on the tournament A­FAIK except > for the fact that player ratings are updated (of which we ­keep very > little track of, honestly). Well, yeah, and if you don't so much feel like dealing with that, then there isn't really a need to be sanctioned, really. >Technically though it may change the tournament atmosphere. ­I've seen > people play decks that aimed at collecting one of the priz­es. In doing > so their decks may not have been sufficiently optimizted w­ith respect > to actually ousting, winning and such. But there really isn't any difference between this and, like, just playing with a questionable deck, which people do all the time. >As for the rules - I dunno. They may or may not have a restr­iction on > prizing, I guess it's a yes (I presume that prizes must su­pport > achievement with respect to winning, like you can't (ad ab­surdum) do a > tournament where the finalists get nothing, the non-finali­sts get a > booster and those with 0 VPs get two boosters). I don't think the sanctioning rules have any say on prizes at all. But I could be wrong. -Peter

<pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in message news:1107443596.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > >As for the rules - I dunno. They may or may not have a restr虹ction on > > prizing, I guess it's a yes (I presume that prizes must su計port > > achievement with respect to winning, like you can't (ad ab貞urdum) do a > > tournament where the finalists get nothing, the non-finali貞ts get a > > booster and those with 0 VPs get two boosters). > > I don't think the sanctioning rules have any say on prizes at all. But > I could be wrong. There's a conflict of interest there, but so long as the VEKN rules are followed (including the sportsmanship rule, whereby everyone plays to win, where win is defined by the rules of the game and not by the side prizes). The conflict of interest will probably result in the conclusion that it is better to run unsanctioned, but that would be up to the organizer and the judge, and how much effort they want to put into policing the games. -- 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

[ quoted text not captured ] i think this against the spirit of vtes and the vekn. btw it is listed in the official ww event calendar and nowhere is it stated that it is not sanctioned, but i hope its not because it was not open for everyone stefan

"Stefan Ferenci" <nos...@thankyou.com> wrote in message news:42025166$0$12384$3b21...@usenet.univie.ac.at... > btw it is listed in the official ww event calendar and nowhere is it > stated that it is not sanctioned, but i hope its not because it was not > open for everyone Non-open events are covered in VEKN 9.8. If a tournament doesn't follow VEKN rules, then it isn't sanctioned, correct. [ quoted text not captured ]

"Daneel" <dan...@eposta.hu> wrote in message news:opsll5qh...@news.chello.hu... > On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 19:21:39 -0500, Peter D Bakija <pd...@lightlink.com> > wrote: > >> jeff_kuta wrote: >> >>> I can easily see situations where a player would intentionally violate >>> the "play to win" doctrine just to win a side prize. >> >> Yeah, I suppose that is possible, but do such, like, wacky door prizes >> invalidate sanctioning? > > Technically though it may change the tournament atmosphere. I've seen > people play decks that aimed at collecting one of the prizes. In doing > so their decks may not have been sufficiently optimizted with respect > to actually ousting, winning and such. ... > As for the rules - I dunno. They may or may not have a restriction on > prizing, I guess it's a yes... I think the argument against using incentives like that would be pretty apparent: they're out-of-game considerations, similar in nature to (for instance) one player making a deal with another player to give him a rare card in exchange for allowing himself to be ousted. Of course, I realize the point is completely different and no one's trying to do anything evil but out-of-game considerations are out-of-game considerations, even when the tournament organizers are involved. Of course, whether small or gag prizes would make much difference in the real world is another matter. I just know I'd be a bit annoyed if my game position took a hit only because someone was trying to earn a gag prize for some chuckles. (Just my attitude about such things, I guess.) Fred

"Gregory Stuart Pettigrew" <ethe...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net> wrote in message news:2005020310...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net... [ quoted text not captured ] Actually, I don't see the difference between deckbuilding and the game-time playing of the cards: both are activities in which you're expected to try to win. You do get broad latitude about which style you choose in pursuit of that goal (and the same can be said of card play here, too), but either way, winning is expected to be the goal. So speaking of "optimized" vs. "non-optimized" decks in this context makes no sense. Every deck should "optimized" to win - in the manner of style in which the player intends it to win and to the best of the player's abilities given his available resources. With all these caveats, no one usually questions another player's deckbuilding choices. But I think it's still wrong (at least in standard tournaments) to build a deck geared towards earning some alternate prize in lieu of building one geared to winning games and winning the tournament. Fred