http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted" list.
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Please visit VTESville daily! http://vtesville.myminicity.com/
On Jul 8, 7:22 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
> Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted" list.
Not that I don't think Villein needs to be reprinted, but this isn't a
sign that Villein needs to be reprinted. It is a sign that people are
insane. You can get a whole box of KoT for not much more than that bid
is.
-Peter
[ quoted text not captured ]
However, you will likely only get 1-2 Villeins in that box. So if all
you want is Villeins, $50 is *reasonable*.
That said, reprints please. Even after reprinted, this will probably be
a $5 card for a long time...
best -
chris
> > Not that I don't think Villein needs to be reprinted, but this isn't a
> > sign that Villein needs to be reprinted. It is a sign that people are
> > insane. You can get a whole box of KoT for not much more than that bid
> > is.
>
> However, you will likely only get 1-2 Villeins in that box. So if all
> you want is Villeins, $50 is *reasonable*.
The average number of Villein in a box is 0.72.
[ quoted text not captured ]
If the distribution of uncommons were completely random, each box
would have about a 48.5% chance of *not* containing any Villein. If
the distribution were completely 'flat', each box would have a 28%
chance of not containing any Villein. The true probability is
somewhere in between, but clearly if your explicit goal is to get
Villein, buying a box of boosters is much more wasteful (not to
mention riskier) than that crazy auction.
First of all sorry for my "ugly" english.
My friend and me bought 4 KoT boxes a week ago.
We found 1 villein in 4 boxes....so "apparently" 25$ for a villein is
a right price if you need only the villein :). Why buy a kot box for
75€ if i need only 1 or 2 copyes of an uncommon card and i'm not sure
to find a copy of that uncommon in a box?
But the real problem, in my hown opinion is the number of common cards
for box.
In a box you find "only" 2 copyes for common cards (my group of play
opened about 15 boxes of kot and we notice this common card
distribution).
So if i need, for example, 12 "deep Song" (another 2/3$ common card) i
MUST buy 6 boxes. Ok, i can exchange common for common, but every vtes
player wants the "deep song" and the new kot commons and uncommons
cards, and it's not simple to exchange deep song for other commons.
Same for the uncommon, and the villain is the more valuable among the
new uncommons. Here it is why "villein" (a card very similar to the
minion tap) worth 25$ . We need a new booster packaging to avoid this
problem (3 more common a 1 more uncommon for booster).
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Jul 9, 3:57 am, Fumo Indiretto <cascon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why buy a kot box for
> 75€ if i need only 1 or 2 copyes of an uncommon card and i'm not sure
> to find a copy of that uncommon in a box?
'Cause then you have a whole lot of cards to swap for Villeins? Wanna
get some Villeins? Swap some Enkil Cogs or Monastery of Shadows. I bet
you'll get some Villeins.
-Peter
> But the real problem, in my hown opinion is the number of common cards
> for box.
> In a box you find "only" 2 copyes for common cards (my group of play
> opened about 15 boxes of kot and we notice this common card
> distribution).
> So if i need, for example, 12 "deep Song" (another 2/3$ common card) i
> MUST buy 6 boxes.
I bought 3 boxes and got a total of 4 Deep Song, so you can't even
count on 2 per box.
So to get a "good" uncommon i must give a hard to find rare (enkil
cog) or a good rare (monastery of shadows) . Cog and Monastery are
RARE cards that every one are loocking for. In my opinion it's not a
fine trade. Are you sure you'll get cards like Enkil or Monastery in
a box? I'm not so sure.
In a box of kot you can find a lot of "justicar" cards (in my last box
i find 3 justicar political action) and "funny but useless" cards. So
among 36 rares almost 10 are useless, and other are funny and only a
little part of the rare are good cards. Do you think "vtes isn't magic
who need a lot of rare cards to play "?. You are right. But you need a
lot of GOOD common cards (and with a box you'll find only 2 copyes of
each common cards....if you are lucky) and a lot of GOOD uncommon, and
just a few rare cards to have a good deck to play. So if i need 10 or
more copyes of the "deep song" common (for example) i need to buy 5 or
more boxes (5*75=375€). I'll have about 5 villein (5*25$=125$=about
90€) and 10 deep songs (10*3$=30$=about 22€) a bunch of useless common
cards other common useful but printed from the Jyhad edition untill
now (blur, undead strenght, ecc. ecc.) and let me say about 150€ of
very good, and rare, cards. It has not sense to buy 5 boxes. To avoid
this problem we MUST have 1 more uncommon card and 3 more common cards
per booster and a smaller "large set" or it will be more attractive to
buy single cards instead of boosters. I don't care about the rare but
i care about common and uncommon who are the heart of the game. Just a
question ....do you have a couple of villein for trading? :)
Costanzo
[ quoted text not captured ]
Fumo Indiretto schrieb:
> But you need a
> lot of GOOD common cards (and with a box you'll find only 2 copyes of
> each common cards....if you are lucky) and a lot of GOOD uncommon, and
> just a few rare cards to have a good deck to play. So if i need 10 or
> more copyes of the "deep song" common (for example) i need to buy 5 or> more boxes (5*75=375�). I'll have about 5 villein (5*25$=125$=about
> 90�) and 10 deep songs (10*3$=30$=about 22�) a bunch of useless common> cards other common useful but printed from the Jyhad edition untill> now (blur, undead strenght, ecc. ecc.) and let me say about 150� of> very good, and rare, cards. It has not sense to buy 5 boxes.
Obviously the single card sellers make a profit out of buying boxes and
selling the singles. Therefore it must be more profitable (in general)
to buy boxes. Probably it is not good to buy boxes if you are in a "I
want this card 10x right now" situation, but else .. yes. Still I would
also like some changes.
> To avoid
> this problem we MUST have 1 more uncommon card and 3 more common cards
> per booster and a smaller "large set"
There could be different levels of common and uncommon. New cards with
good play value (i.e Deep Song, Villein) could be twice on the
common/uncommon sheet. And instead you could dump some REALLY useless
cards that are easily available for trade if anybody should ever want them.
On Jul 9, 11:19 am, Fumo Indiretto <cascon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So to get a "good" uncommon i must give a hard to find rare (enkil
> cog) or a good rare (monastery of shadows) .
As opposed to paying $50.00+ for two of them? Sure. That strikes me as
far more sane--buy a box of KoT. Swap some good rares for Villeins.
You have some Villeins and a lot of other good stuff too.
Listen. I'm not saying that Villein should not be reprinted. Clearly,
the next starter set should come with 2 in each deck. But the
economics of spending $50.00 on two Villeins when you can get a whole
box of KoT for $63.00, where you are likely to get a Villein, and then
will have plenty of stuff to swap off for Villeins (How many Villeins
you think you can get for an Enkil Cog?), is clearly insane.
Yes. I know some people don't like swapping. And some people would
rather pay $50.00 for two Villeins rather than $63.00 for a whole box
of boosters and then try and turn it into some Villeins. But in an
economic sense, it is still insane.
> Cog and Monastery are
> RARE cards that every one are loocking for. In my opinion it's not a
> fine trade. Are you sure you'll get cards like Enkil or Monastery in
> a box? I'm not so sure.
You'll probably get at least one of them. If you can't turn either of
those into 2 Villeins, I just don't know what to tell you.
> In a box of kot you can find a lot of "justicar" cards (in my last box
> i find 3 justicar political action) and "funny but useless" cards. So
> among 36 rares almost 10 are useless, and other are funny and only a
> little part of the rare are good cards.
Sure. But in a box of boosters, you'll get at least 18 good rares
(even good reprints--Mind Rape, Soul Gem, Charisma, Heart, whatever).
Turn some into Villeins. Can't be that difficult.
> Do you think "vtes isn't magic
> who need a lot of rare cards to play "?. You are right. But you need a
> lot of GOOD common cards (and with a box you'll find only 2 copyes of
> each common cards....if you are lucky) and a lot of GOOD uncommon, and
> just a few rare cards to have a good deck to play.>>
Yes. Sure. But that isn't the issue I'm discussing here. I'm
discussing the economic insanity that is paying $50.00+ for 2x
Villeins.
> Just a
> question ....do you have a couple of villein for trading? :)
Sure. Send me an Enkil Cog.
-Peter
>
> > Cog and Monastery are
> > RARE cards that every one are loocking for. In my opinion it's not a
> > fine trade. Are you sure you'll get cards like Enkil or Monastery in
> > a box? I'm not so sure.> You'll probably get at least one of them. If you can't turn either of
> those into 2 Villeins, I just don't know what to tell you.
There's about a 41% chance that a box will contain neither a Cog nor a
Monastery...
Personally, I would not trade 2 Villeins for either of those cards
because I will soon, or at least eventually, have enough Cogs, I
probably already have enough Monasteries (is that really considered a
great card?), but unless it's in some starters it will be *years*
before I have enough Villeins. Ditto Deep Song.
> Sure. But in a box of boosters, you'll get at least 18 good rares
> (even good reprints--Mind Rape, Soul Gem, Charisma, Heart, whatever).
> Turn some into Villeins. Can't be that difficult.
I think it *can* be that difficult. Villein is a staple and belongs
in many, many decks. People don't let go of hard-to-get staples very
easily, not even for harder-to-get cards that, while strong, are not
staples. Would I trade 2 Deep Songs for a Mind Rape? No, not unless
I had a way to then exchange that Mind Rape for more than 2 Deep
Songs.
On Jul 9, 2:44 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote:
> Would I trade 2 Deep Songs for a Mind Rape? No, not unless
> I had a way to then exchange that Mind Rape for more than 2 Deep
> Songs.
Seriously? If you're willing to trade via mail, drop me a line and
I'll get you some Deep Songs for some Mind Rapes.
John Eno
On Jul 9, 2:44 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote:
> There's about a 41% chance that a box will contain neither a Cog nor a
> Monastery...
Sure. But you are *likely* to get one or the other in a given box, for
example.
> Personally, I would not trade 2 Villeins for either of those cards
> because I will soon, or at least eventually, have enough Cogs, I
> probably already have enough Monasteries (is that really considered a
> great card?), but unless it's in some starters it will be *years*
> before I have enough Villeins. Ditto Deep Song.
Really? I have a reasonable number of Villeins currently from opening
some boosters (I may have opened a little more than a box worth so far
between getting a couple half boxes and a draft tournament). And
almost more Deep Songs than I need. And as it seems likely that
Villein will get reprinted in the next starter set in the fall (see:
Vessel), it seems likely you'll have more Villeins than you need in
much less than years.
> I think it *can* be that difficult. Villein is a staple and belongs
> in many, many decks. People don't let go of hard-to-get staples very
> easily, not even for harder-to-get cards that, while strong, are not
> staples. Would I trade 2 Deep Songs for a Mind Rape? No, not unless
> I had a way to then exchange that Mind Rape for more than 2 Deep
> Songs.
I'm gonna go with John on this one. Really? You won't trade a Mind
Rape for 2 Deep Songs? I have, like, a dozen Deep Songs without even
trying that hard. If I needed Mind Rapes, I'd trade 2 Deep Songs for
one in a second.
-Peter
librarian wrote:
> Peter D Bakija wrote:>> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
>>> Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted"
>>> list.>>
>> Not that I don't think Villein needs to be reprinted, but this isn't
>> a sign that Villein needs to be reprinted. It is a sign that people
>> are insane. You can get a whole box of KoT for not much more than
>> that bid is.>
> However, you will likely only get 1-2 Villeins in that box. So if all
> you want is Villeins, $50 is *reasonable*.
Villein is an uncommon, not a common. So, you get less than one
of them per box. So, a Villein is worth more than a box of KoT.
(Perhaps you're thinking of the Ashur discussion, since it's a common?)
> That said, reprints please. Even after reprinted, this will probably
> be a $5 card for a long time...
Until it is reprinted, Villein should never be worth less than $25.
It is *amazingly* powerful. It is the new Heart of Cheating.
[ quoted text not captured ]
Johannes Walch wrote:
> Fumo Indiretto schrieb:>
> > To avoid>> this problem we MUST have 1 more uncommon card and 3 more common cards
>> per booster and a smaller "large set">
> There could be different levels of common and uncommon. New cards with
> good play value (i.e Deep Song, Villein) could be twice on the
> common/uncommon sheet. And instead you could dump some REALLY useless
> cards that are easily available for trade if anybody should ever want them.
I feel like this has been said before, but it bears repeating. If there
must be reprint sets, *please* print new cards twice as frequently on
the sheet as old cards.
best -
chris
On Jul 9, 5:35 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
> I feel like this has been said before, but it bears repeating. If there
> must be reprint sets, *please* print new cards twice as frequently on
> the sheet as old cards.
While this is certainly (at least for my money) a really good idea
(i.e. make all the new cards C2/U2/R2 or whatever), it does make for
building a base set difficult. Yeah, it gets more of the new cards in
circulation, but, for example, KoT has 17 new Commons in the
(presumably) 100 cards on the common sheet. If you make all the new
commons C2, that is 17 fewer other commons in the set. Which is a
pretty big chunk of cards to vaporize, given that you, as the designer
of the set, trying to get as many base/building block/essential cards
into the set as you can.
-Peter
> > Would I trade 2 Deep Songs for a Mind Rape? No, not unless
> > I had a way to then exchange that Mind Rape for more than 2 Deep
> > Songs.
>
> Seriously? If you're willing to trade via mail, drop me a line and
> I'll get you some Deep Songs for some Mind Rapes.
>
> John Eno
Thanks for the offer, but I was saying that I wouldn't trade 2 Deep
Songs for a Mind Rape (because Mind Rape was one of the examples
offered of a tradeable reprint rare), not that I was looking to trade
a Mind Rape for 2 Deep Songs.
("I wouldn't trade X for Y" isn't equivalent to "I would trade Y for
X.")
[ quoted text not captured ]
I think it's pretty clear that you can lose 17 base cards. Bang Nakh?
(I know, finally not reprinted in KoT).
best -
chris
[ quoted text not captured ]> chris- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
*continues stapling the Bang Nakh's he got from Alastor Starters in
KMW to the wall* If I ever run out, I know where to get more...
On Jul 9, 7:10 pm, Malone <kffos...@indiana.edu> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the offer, but I was saying that I wouldn't trade 2 Deep
> Songs for a Mind Rape (because Mind Rape was one of the examples
> offered of a tradeable reprint rare), not that I was looking to trade
> a Mind Rape for 2 Deep Songs.
>
> ("I wouldn't trade X for Y" isn't equivalent to "I would trade Y for
> X.")
>
Umm... how so?
Aren't you saying that 2 Deep Songs are worth more to you than 1 Mind
Rape? I mean, Mind Rape sucks, so maybe you're just thinking about it
in utility terms, but even if that's the case... assume that you
could hold out and request 3 Deep Songs, or maybe 2 Deep Songs and an
Ashur Tablet from John Eno... If that's the case, then you'd have to
say that you *would*, in fact, trade 2 Deep Songs for the Mind Rape
from someone else that you would be able to trade to John for a bit
more... =)
[ quoted text not captured ]
No offense Peter, but I'm PRETTY sure that you could find 17 cards
that made it onto the list for KoT and vaporize them quite easily.
Yes building a base set is important, but it is just as important to
keep the largest segment of your business model customers happy.
For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting exactly ONE
Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely unhappy and will not
be
buying any more boxes of KoT. I'll pick up whatever new cards and
vamps I need to fill out my collection and deck needs from secondary
market sources.
-Asif Chaudhry
p.s. a cursory look at the KoT commons list reveals the following
cards that I would have been happy to NOT get more copies of, and
which I don't feel add THAT much to a new player that they wouldn't
rather have more of the new cards (either for themselves OR to trade
to older players for SCADS of stuff if nothing else! - that is
something that is over looked when people emphasize C(ollectible)CG
and not T(rading)Card Game):
Approximation of Loyalty
Aura of Invincibility
Bang Nakh
Chain of Command
Cooler
Finding the Path
Forgery
The Haunting
Meat Hook
That's half way to 17 without trying to hard.....
OldFan wrote:
> For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
> exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
> unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.
Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
IT'S A HUGE SET PEOPLE
YOU HAVE TO BUY MULTIPLE BOXES OR ELSE YOU'LL BE UNHAPPY
DO THE MATHS AND STOP WHINING
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Jul 9, 2:14 pm, "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> librarian wrote:
> > Peter D Bakija wrote:
> >> "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> >>>http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
> >>> Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted"
> >>> list.
>
> >> Not that I don't think Villein needs to be reprinted, but this isn't
> >> a sign that Villein needs to be reprinted. It is a sign that people
> >> are insane. You can get a whole box of KoT for not much more than
> >> that bid is.
>
> > However, you will likely only get 1-2 Villeins in that box. So if all
> > you want is Villeins, $50 is *reasonable*.
>
> Villein is an uncommon, not a common. So, you get less than one
> of them per box. So, a Villein is worth more than a box of KoT.
> (Perhaps you're thinking of the Ashur discussion, since it's a common?)
>
> > That said, reprints please. Even after reprinted, this will probably
> > be a $5 card for a long time...
>
> Until it is reprinted, Villein should never be worth less than $25.
> It is *amazingly* powerful. It is the new Heart of Cheating.
But if you know (or think it likely) that it's going to get reprinted,
you could just wait a little longer and get 2 for $10 in a starter
(hopefully!) It's really a very useful Master card.
Ira
On Jul 10, 5:30 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> OldFan wrote:
> > For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
> > exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
> > unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.
>
> Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
>
> IT'S A HUGE SET PEOPLE
>
> YOU HAVE TO BUY MULTIPLE BOXES OR ELSE YOU'LL BE UNHAPPY
>
> DO THE MATHS AND STOP WHINING
The size of the Sabbat War and Final Nights sets was comparable to
that of Keepers of Tradition, and you got more copies of each common
card in one booster box of those old sets than in Keepers of
Tradition.
--
Damnans
http://www.almadrava.net/damnanshttp://www.vtes.nethttp://es.groups.yahoo.com/group/vteshispania/http://iuturna.sorcery.net (IRC channel: #vtes)
On Jul 10, 5:30 am, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> OldFan wrote:
> > For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
> > exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
> > unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.
>
> Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
What self fulfilling prophecy? He is stating his response to something
which has already happened, not something which will happen in the
future. Maybe you should find out what the term self fulfilling
prophecy really means?
>
> IT'S A HUGE SET PEOPLE
>
> YOU HAVE TO BUY MULTIPLE BOXES OR ELSE YOU'LL BE UNHAPPY
>
> DO THE MATHS AND STOP WHINING
Action (4)
1x Chain of Command
1x Enrage
1x Forgery
1x Sleep of Reason
Action Modifier (4)
1x Approximation of Loyalty
1x Aura of Invincibility
1x Into Thin Air
1x Sleep Unseen
Equipment (4)
1x Bang Nakh -- Tiger's Claws
1x Beretta 9mm
1x Desert Eagle
1x Meat Hook
Master (2)
1x King's Rising
1x Special Report
Political Action (2)
1x Diversity
1x Finding the Path
Reaction (1)
1x Keep it Simple
You want these or rather extra Deep Song/Ashur Tablets/Taunt the caged
beast/Torrent/Wrong and crosswise...?
And if your response is seriously to shout at people pointing out that
these very nice new cards are in a huge set, and thus they are forced
to pay 75 euros for a chance at 1 villein and 1-2 deep song, well
that's not really a useful response is it now?
Damnans wrote:
> The size of the Sabbat War and Final Nights sets was comparable to
> that of Keepers of Tradition, and you got more copies of each common
> card in one booster box of those old sets than in Keepers of
> Tradition.
Not true.
SW was comparable to KoT in size, but:
SW had 100 commons and 6 commons in a pack and 36 packs per box.
KoT had 100 commons and 7 commons in a pack and 36 packs per box.
You get roughly the same number of copies of each common from a box of KoT than
SW, but KoT comes out slightly ahead in that aspect (but SW makes up for it in
the number of copies of each uncommon per box).
FN was not comparable to KoT. FN had only 54 commons (and the same per-booster
count as KoT).
On Jul 10, 12:47 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> Damnans wrote:> SW was comparable to KoT in size, but:
> SW had 100 commons and 6 commons in a pack and 36 packs per box.
> KoT had 100 commons and 7 commons in a pack and 36 packs per box.
Dude, those boosters packs make Sabbat look positively
anorexic..... ;)
106 and 107 commons each? wow....
Kevin M. schrieb:
> OldFan wrote:>> For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
>> exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
>> unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.>
> Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
>
> IT'S A HUGE SET PEOPLE
>
> YOU HAVE TO BUY MULTIPLE BOXES OR ELSE YOU'LL BE UNHAPPY
>
> DO THE MATHS AND STOP WHINING
Are you my lobbyist now Kevin?
:)
On Jul 9, 10:39 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No offense Peter, but I'm PRETTY sure that you could find 17 cards
> that made it onto the list for KoT and vaporize them quite easily.
To be fair, I'm sure everyone can find 17 (or 30 or whatever) cards to
remove from the set for being unnecessary. But from the POV of someone
designing the set, you need the set to:
A) Act as a base set, giving new players all the stuff they need.
B) Work as a good draft set, as people like draft tournaments.
C) Get all the stuff that needs reprinting reprinted.
D) give reasonable access to the new cards.
Yes, for my money, it would have been better if all the Bang Nakhs and
Forgeries were more Deep Songs and Eyes of Argus. But if you remove
those 17 commons, and remove 17 uncommons and 17 rares from the set to
double up all the new cards, that is a pretty big chunk of cards
removed from the set. They could done a laser guided C2 (or whatever)
and just had a few of the new cards doubled up, but then you have
everyone complaining about how "useless new card X got to be a C2
while incredibly important new card Y was stuck as a C1..." There
isn't really a way to win here, from the POV of someone trying to make
this set work on all levels that it needs to work.
I mean, it could have been a set that consisted of 17 new commons, 17
new uncommons, 17 new rares, and 100 new vampires. That would have
been awesome. For me. But virtually useless for newer players. And
virtually useless for drafting.
> Yes building a base set is important, but it is just as important to
> keep the largest segment of your business model customers happy.
Sure. But you have to weigh all the needs at once. Which isn't, I'd
imagine, easy.
> For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting exactly ONE
> Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely unhappy and will not
> be
> buying any more boxes of KoT. I'll pick up whatever new cards and
> vamps I need to fill out my collection and deck needs from secondary
> market sources.
It's just randomosity. I got 2x Deep Song in half a box. It happens.
Didn't you also get, like, 2x Enkil Cog in 1.5 boxes?
> Approximation of Loyalty
> Aura of Invincibility
> Bang Nakh
> Chain of Command
> Cooler
> Finding the Path
> Forgery
> The Haunting
> Meat Hook
Sure. But these (well, at least many of them) are cards that are good
for draft. And useful for newer players--Bang Nakh, for example, isn't
a bad card in limited play and when you are learning the game. And if
you didn't get in when LotN was out? You don't have any.
-Peter
Peter D Bakija wrote:
> On Jul 9, 10:39 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:>> No offense Peter, but I'm PRETTY sure that you could find 17 cards
>> that made it onto the list for KoT and vaporize them quite easily.>
> To be fair, I'm sure everyone can find 17 (or 30 or whatever) cards to
> remove from the set for being unnecessary. But from the POV of someone
> designing the set, you need the set to:
>
> A) Act as a base set, giving new players all the stuff they need.
>
> B) Work as a good draft set, as people like draft tournaments.
>
> C) Get all the stuff that needs reprinting reprinted.
>
> D) give reasonable access to the new cards.
>
>
I would prioritize them differently:
D
A
B
C
best -
chris
On Jul 10, 10:51 am, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
> I would prioritize them differently:
>
> D
> A
> B
> C
Oh, heh, I wasn't prioritizing them. Just indicating that they all
were factors that needed to be taken into account.
-Peter
On Jul 10, 9:46 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote:
> On Jul 9, 10:39 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > No offense Peter, but I'm PRETTY sure that you could find 17 cards
> > that made it onto the list for KoT and vaporize them quite easily.
>
> To be fair, I'm sure everyone can find 17 (or 30 or whatever) cards to
> remove from the set for being unnecessary. But from the POV of someone
> designing the set, you need the set to:
>
> A) Act as a base set, giving new players all the stuff they need.
Understood - but giving them cards that are either a.) corner case/not
used very often/not great staples or b.) cards that ARE useful, but
have been printed in enough quantity before that they are EASILY
obtainable from either local players, or from secondary markets for
$0.10 a card, just doesn't make sense to me.
Seriously - Meat Hook? Why not reprint bastard sword and pump action
shotgun while you are at it?
> B) Work as a good draft set, as people like draft tournaments.
Oddly enough, the new cards work pretty damn good in draft too.
> C) Get all the stuff that needs reprinting reprinted.
You mean like cards so that new players don't feel disadvantaged for
not having played the game since 1994 and/or having a huge wallet for
the secondary market? Like reprinting Deflection? And Govern the
Unaligned? And Parity Shift? And Con Boon? And Disarm?
And......oh.....
Looking at KoT, you can see a VERY clear bias from the design team to
print alternatives to the most commonly used cards (Armor of Vitality
vs. Skin of Steel or Rolling with the Punches, Resist Earth grasp vs.
Flash, Diversity as pool gain vote instead of Con Boon or Parity
Shift, Murmur vs Deflection, Public Trust vs Enchant Kindred and etc -
I could go on but hope this sample is sufficient to make the point).
Unfortunately, in most cases, players would rather have the
'better' (I will concede that better may be subjective in this case -
players vary) older card rather than the 'newer' card that IF they
wanted it they could easily trade for, or buy a box of LoTN/SoC/etc,
OR buy for $0.10 each from Lasombra or ebay.
> D) give reasonable access to the new cards.
I don't consider getting 1 copy of a common (COMMON) new card in a
$107.64 MSRP box of boosters to be "reasonable". Again, this is
entirely subjective, and my point of view. Don't even get me started
on the rares and uncommons.
> Yes, for my money, it would have been better if all the Bang Nakhs and
> Forgeries were more Deep Songs and Eyes of Argus. But if you remove
> those 17 commons, and remove 17 uncommons and 17 rares from the set to
> double up all the new cards, that is a pretty big chunk of cards
> removed from the set.
No offense Peter, but just because I didn't go through the list of
uncommons and rares wasn't because it was hard to find 17 cards there
that could be replaced. It was to avoid sounding excessively
pedantic.
Suffice to say, after going through my KoT boosters, there were plenty
of uncommons and rares that I was displeased enough (and were
sufficiently corner case, or not "critical" to a base set) to get that
could easily have been replaced with new cards.
>They could done a laser guided C2 (or whatever)
> and just had a few of the new cards doubled up, but then you have
> everyone complaining about how "useless new card X got to be a C2
> while incredibly important new card Y was stuck as a C1..." There
> isn't really a way to win here, from the POV of someone trying to make
> this set work on all levels that it needs to work.
Pleasing everyone is clearly impossible - I acknowledge this point.
My point is - if you are going to design cards that are really good
for multiple deck types (i.e. powerful staple cards that you would
want to have multiples of in a single deck, and would want to have in
multiple decks), THEN, printing them in limited quantity just is super
annoying.
Seriously - if you have some Deep Song you can send my way, I'll be
HAPPY to take them - but I suspect that I will just receive deafening
silence on that one, as I have from the rest of team Ithaca, because
we ALL want to get more Deep Songs to use in some deck or another.
And more Villeins. And more Perfect Paragons. etc....
> I mean, it could have been a set that consisted of 17 new commons, 17
> new uncommons, 17 new rares, and 100 new vampires. That would have
> been awesome. For me. But virtually useless for newer players. And
> virtually useless for drafting.
Come on Peter - that's a specious argument and you know it. No one
is asking WW to print sets of all new cards ALL the time. However, if
they could print the brand new cards TWICE on the 100 card sheets,
that would go a long way in making things more palatable. Hell,
printing it only once on the sheet would have been fine if it was not
a 300 card set!
The big thing is - in Vtes, there are typically no card limits. So
while normally printing more of these desirable cards would reduce
their desirability for other games that have 4-5 card per deck limits,
it has much less impact in Vtes, where, players want 6-10 Eyes of
Argus for their ONE auspex block deck. And they'll want 3-5 of them
to throw in as replacement Wakes into decks that have AUSpex vamps.
So that is MORE copies they will want and be willing to trade for.
And don't get me started on Deep Song - animalism bleed action OR rush
action? Like you couldn't put 12-15 of those in a single deck and be
happy while playing weenie animalism bruise/bleed? And I pulled ONE
in 1.5 boxes? Really?
Even if I got poor distribution, say I got 3 in 1.5 boxes. I'd still
have to buy 6 boxes at that rate to get 12 Deep Song - and that just
strikes me as wrong.
So while I can understand the business model for WW of "Build a base
set, while putting in JUST ENOUGH new super cool stuff to get the
masses of established players to buy boxes upon boxes of cards" like
Kevin M suggests, as a person living in a crappy economic environment
who can't afford to buy a case of KoT, it kind of stinks.
> > Yes building a base set is important, but it is just as important to
> > keep the largest segment of your business model customers happy.
>
> Sure. But you have to weigh all the needs at once. Which isn't, I'd
> imagine, easy.
Oh, I totally agree - like I said, trying to please everyone is
well nigh impossible. And I realize that I'm sitting in the "cheap
seats" over here in Internet land throwing my critiques of the set
distribution out there.
But, if enough people posit the same complaint and the same possible
solution, then who knows? Maybe next time there is a new base set (in
3-4 years?), they'll consider double printing the new cards? After
all, while advertising a brand new 300 card base set is eye catching
for the gaming mag adverts, I don't think listing a new 249 card base
set would be that much worse. Heck, the advertising guys could write
"Huge new, almost 250 card set!).
Of course, Murphy's law states that if they do this, a whole bunch of
us will complain about getting extra copies of some crappy new card
"Another Agate Talisman!! When this could have been a very draftable
Bang Nakh! OMG - WTF! ") :-)
> > For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting exactly ONE
> > Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely unhappy and will not
> > be
> > buying any more boxes of KoT. I'll pick up whatever new cards and
> > vamps I need to fill out my collection and deck needs from secondary
> > market sources.
>
> It's just randomosity. I got 2x Deep Song in half a box. It happens.
> Didn't you also get, like, 2x Enkil Cog in 1.5 boxes?
No, I got a single Enkil Cog in 1.5 boxes. And while I did do well in
my rare pull from those boxes as you well know, I STILL have yet to
pull a Monastery of Shadows of my own. Or a Ponticulus. Or a
Nocturn Theater. But hey, I've got plenty of Justicar votes!!
Yippee!
> > Approximation of Loyalty
> > Aura of Invincibility
> > Bang Nakh
> > Chain of Command
> > Cooler
> > Finding the Path
> > Forgery
> > The Haunting
> > Meat Hook
>
> Sure. But these (well, at least many of them) are cards that are good
> for draft. And useful for newer players--Bang Nakh, for example, isn't
> a bad card in limited play and when you are learning the game. And if
> you didn't get in when LotN was out? You don't have any.
>
> -Peter
Sorry Peter, but that just does NOT fly. New players don't (or
extremely RARELY) just buy starters and boosters and 'show up to
play'. They are usually recruited by the older players (example: Greg
bringing his 2 friends over from the magic room last Friday to try out
Vtes).
So, the "new players need these cards for draft/playing" argument is
just silly. The usual sequence for new players goes something like:
"So hey does anyone have some Bang Nakhs? I'd like to make a fighty
deck?"
(Peter, John, Asif and others all chime in at once): "Sure!!! Please
send me an email and remind me to bring the extras next week - I've
got enough Bang Nakh to wall paper a small Condo!".
"So hey, does anyone have some Horseshoes and a couple of Villein?"
(cue cricket noises.....)
--------------------------------------------
HELL - when John recruited me to play, he gave me like 2 1000 count
boxes of cards worth of stuff and sat down for an afternoon and helped
me build my very first deck (a bad Beast antiNos combat/bleed deck -
and I griped because Immortal grapple was impossible to find and super
expensive at the time. Now, thanks to Giovanni LoTN starters and
Brujah KoT starters, I've got PLENTY of grapples), and then you
brought in the several 1000 count boxes of stuff to loot, and then
Andrew brought his several 5000 count boxes for me and the other newbs
to paw through. And even though I started buying boxes of cards there
after, I still got lots of help AND cards from the older players when
trying to build decks.
So please stop with the "base set/new players need or want them"
argument. New players don't exist in a vacuum - they are created
around and by existing player groups, and many of these groups have
players who scooped up $20 booster boxes of Jyhad back in the 90's
like there was no tomorrow. Getting card help from people is NOT
difficult, and a lack of that help in no way justifies things like
Meat Hook being reprinted. Again. For the fifth time.
-Asif Chaudhry
On Jul 9, 11:30 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> OldFan wrote:
> > For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
> > exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
> > unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.
>
> Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
Hmmmm......(cue Inigo Montoya voice)......I do not think that means
what you think it means?
> IT'S A HUGE SET PEOPLE
>
> YOU HAVE TO BUY MULTIPLE BOXES OR ELSE YOU'LL BE UNHAPPY
Sorry - 2.5 boxes plus a booster draft or 2 is my definition of
multiple. Your definition of multiple appears to be 2.5 CASES.
Different worlds, you and I.
> DO THE MATHS AND STOP WHINING
My whining does not stem from an inability to do math. It stems from
a desire to hopefully CHANGE the math in the future.
And considering you have the following in your signature:
> "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
..... I find you complaining about us "PEOPLE" not being Content or
Complacent to be stupendously hilarious.
You have your passions, like Rapid Thought formats. We "PEOPLE" have
our passion, like discussing the sub-optimal distribution of new cards
in boxes that we are spending our hard earned cash on.
Different strokes for different blokes. (Or bloke-ettes - sorry
Robyn! :-) ).
Here's a novel idea - how about, if you don't like this discussion,
you don't READ this discussion or participate any more? Saves our
eyes from reading your all caps posts, and saves your blood pressure.
Sounds like a Win-Win to me! :-D
-Asif Chaudhry
On Jul 10, 12:08 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No offense Peter, but just because I didn't go through the list of
> uncommons and rares wasn't because it was hard to find 17 cards there
> that could be replaced. It was to avoid sounding excessively
> pedantic.
I didn't say you couldn't find cards to replace. I said everyone could
easily find cards to replace. But if you take 17 cards out of each
rarity to double up the new ones, you lose 51 cards from the set.
Which isn't an insignificant chunk. Especially if you are a designer
and are trying to fit as many cards into the set as you can.
> Come on Peter - that's a specious argument and you know it.
It isn't an argument. It was just a statement. The new set *could*
have been just all the new cards and nothing else. But that wouldn't
have done what the set was hoped to do (be a robust base set that
allowed for new people to get in to the game with). Maybe there is a
viable mid ground (i.e. have some of the new cards doubled up). Or
maybe just flat making all the new cards doubled up is the way to go.
But I don't think it is as easy a decision to make as people seem to
want it to be.
> Sorry Peter, but that just does NOT fly. New players don't (or
> extremely RARELY) just buy starters and boosters and 'show up to
> play'. They are usually recruited by the older players (example: Greg
> bringing his 2 friends over from the magic room last Friday to try out
> Vtes).
And yet I constantly hear from people here that:
A) They don't like/don't want to trade.
B) They don't want to rely on people giving cards to new players.
Yeah. This strikes me as crazy too. And yet I hear these statements
all the time in discussions like this.
> So, the "new players need these cards for draft/playing" argument is
> just silly.
Apparently not. As one of the factors that drives what cards end up in
a given set is "can new players use these cards, and are they useful
in draft play".
> So please stop with the "base set/new players need or want them"
> argument.
And yet, it is something that the designers *have* to consider when
designing a set. So I could stop using that argument. But that won't
make it any less valid a factor that needs to be considered.
Do I need more Meat Hooks? No. But at a certain point, I did, so one
can assume that some people do need more meat hooks. And drafting a
Meat Hook in limited play is often a totally good pull.
-Peter
Peter D Bakija wrote:
> On Jul 10, 12:08 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:>> No offense Peter, but just because I didn't go through the list of
>> uncommons and rares wasn't because it was hard to find 17 cards there
>> that could be replaced. It was to avoid sounding excessively
>> pedantic.>
> I didn't say you couldn't find cards to replace. I said everyone could
> easily find cards to replace. But if you take 17 cards out of each
> rarity to double up the new ones, you lose 51 cards from the set.
> Which isn't an insignificant chunk. Especially if you are a designer
> and are trying to fit as many cards into the set as you can.
>
>
I don't take that as a given aspect of design intent.
best -
chris
On Jul 10, 12:40 pm, librarian <aucti...@superfuncards.com> wrote:
> I don't take that as a given aspect of design intent.
Well, it kind of seems like it was design intent. Otherwise, printing
all the new cards as C2/U2/R2 is a great idea. The only reason (that I
can think of, other than "Huh. We didn't think of that...") for not
doing this is to maximize the number of different cards in the set.
They could have printed all the new cards as C2/U2/R2s. which would
have meant 51 fewer cards in the set (might be 50--I think there are
only 16 new rares, actually). Or, they could have made half as many
new cards, and doubled them up (so there were twice as many of 25 new
cards, give or take). Or they could have done what they did. I know
lots of people think that the first option (50 fewer reprints and
twice as many of the new cards) is the way they should have gone
(including me--I would have been happier with this, myself). But there
has to be a reason that they didn't. Other than "It didn't occur to
us".
-Peter
OldFan wrote:
> Looking at KoT, you can see a VERY clear bias from the design team to
> print alternatives to the most commonly used cards (Armor of Vitality
> vs. Skin of Steel or Rolling with the Punches, Resist Earth grasp vs.
> Flash, Diversity as pool gain vote instead of Con Boon or Parity
> Shift, Murmur vs Deflection, Public Trust vs Enchant Kindred and etc -
> I could go on but hope this sample is sufficient to make the point).
That point has already been addressed.
Cards intended to be reprinted but which had only WotC-era art had to be
substituted out or get new art. Cards that had ready "close" alternatives were
swapped out. Cards that didn't got new art (or were dropped altogether).
The cards you mention (Skin of Steel, Rolling with the Punches, Flash, Con Boon,
Parity Shift, Deflection, and Enchant Kindred) had alternatives, as you note.
On Jul 10, 12:26 pm, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 12:08 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > No offense Peter, but just because I didn't go through the list of
> > uncommons and rares wasn't because it was hard to find 17 cards there
> > that could be replaced. It was to avoid sounding excessively
> > pedantic.
>
> I didn't say you couldn't find cards to replace. I said everyone could
> easily find cards to replace. But if you take 17 cards out of each
> rarity to double up the new ones, you lose 51 cards from the set.
> Which isn't an insignificant chunk. Especially if you are a designer
> and are trying to fit as many cards into the set as you can.
Peter, I'm not saying that taking more than 1/6th of the set out and
replacing it with double prints is "insignificant".
What I am saying is that it was "doable" and in my obviously biased
opinion, it should have been done.
Because I consider it a dual disservice to both the old time players
(who would rather have more of the great new cards) AND to the new
players (who could have taken these great new cards and turned around
and traded them for cards like Bang Nakh that they need). And I'm
willing to bet that most people on this list would gladly trade a Bang
Nakh, a Diversity, a Meat Hook AND an Aura of Invincibility to a
newbie for 1 Deep Song and 1 Eyes of Argus.
So again - I think the potential to trade cards was minimized when
construction of this base set was considered.
> > Come on Peter - that's a specious argument and you know it.
>
> It isn't an argument. It was just a statement. The new set *could*
> have been just all the new cards and nothing else. But that wouldn't
> have done what the set was hoped to do (be a robust base set that
> allowed for new people to get in to the game with). Maybe there is a
> viable mid ground (i.e. have some of the new cards doubled up).
Obviously, I'd love to see this happen - I don't really see Agate
Talisman needing to be doubled up, but to be fair, most of the new
cards are pretty darn cool.
> But I don't think it is as easy a decision to make as people seem to
> want it to be.
I disagree - and I'll just leave it at that.
> And yet I constantly hear from people here that:
>
> A) They don't like/don't want to trade.
> B) They don't want to rely on people giving cards to new players.
>
> Yeah. This strikes me as crazy too. And yet I hear these statements
> all the time in discussions like this.
I suppose there are people who don't want to trade. But I know that
for every person you show me that doesn't like to trade, I can
probably show you 1 who does.
And on the giving cards to new players thing, I can probably show you
2 for your every 1.
Maybe the discussion group and general community is different - after
all, I wouldn't pay $25 for a Villein either and think that's nuts,
but I don't think you can use the Internet group as a valid sample
size of the Vtes community. There are a particular type of people on
here that don't necessarily cover the whole vtes community.
> > So, the "new players need these cards for draft/playing" argument is
> > just silly.
>
> Apparently not. As one of the factors that drives what cards end up in
> a given set is "can new players use these cards, and are they useful
> in draft play".
Peter, I didn't know you were part of the design team and privy to all
their internal memos. :-D
Seriously, while a new player CAN use a Forgery and it would be good
in limited play, the newer cards would have been just as good to have.
Perhaps (PERHAPS) the draft experience would be not quite as good with
a smaller card pool (249 vs 300 cards). But in the grand scheme, I
think this would be not as important.
> > So please stop with the "base set/new players need or want them"
> > argument.
>
> And yet, it is something that the designers *have* to consider when
> designing a set. So I could stop using that argument. But that won't
> make it any less valid a factor that needs to be considered.
Yes, they have to consider it. I am not asking them NOT to.
All I'm saying is that they should also consider (more - since
obviously they DID consider it) how getting only 1-2 copies of a new
common (COMMON) per box is helpful.
Especially when the design team has shown a concerted effort over the
last few sets to make other disciplines as good as Dominate.
After all, what is the use of printing a card like Deep Song, or
Torrent, if they are so bloody hard to buy??
When I can take a fistful of dominate common cards from Jyhad like
Govern/Deflection/Conditioning/Bonding, which got printed like dirt,
slap together a deck with some vamps, and just WIN more than 50% of
the games I am in? How wretchedly boring is that?
I certainly appreciate their efforts to diversify the number of
disciplines and deck types that can be made competitive and even "tier
1". However, I feel those efforts get horribly blunted by poor
distribution and printing efforts in the KoT boxes.
Will it get rectified in the future? I hope so - in fact, it could be
part of their market strategy, to put great cards in the starters to
help push up starter box sales. And the next set could have Eyes and
Deep Song and other new cards in the starters.
But right now - it feels kinda crappy that guys with tons of
disposable income to use on Ebay can have more fun at the game because
they can build more diverse decks that are competitive, while I feel
that in order to approach tier 1, I need to use dominate somehow,
because I can't get enough of the new cards that have been
specifically designed to help make other disciplines other than
dominate "good".
And before you turn this last part on it's head - I'm not saying I'm
not having fun now. It's just that I'd like to have more opportunity
to mess around with Deep Song and Torrent and Touch of Clarity, etc,
than I do now. And I feel buying more than 2.5 boxes of KoT is a
fairly good faith effort to support White Wolf and attempt to get new
cards to play with. Instead, I got scads of Forgery and Bang Nakh,
and very small numbers of the other new cards.
-Asif Chaudhry
On Jul 10, 3:20 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What I am saying is that it was "doable" and in my obviously biased
> opinion, it should have been done.
Sure. And I'm saying there is probably a reason that they didn't do
that, other than "we forgot".
-Peter
On Jul 10, 12:18 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 9, 11:30 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>
> > OldFan wrote:
> > > For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
> > > exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
> > > unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.
>
> > Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
>
> Hmmmm......(cue Inigo Montoya voice)......I do not think that means
> what you think it means?
Oh, it does here. A self-fullfilling prophecy is one that makes
itself true. If you're going to buy 1.5 boxes of KoT to check it out
first and then choose to not buy any more because you don't get very
many of even common cards... well, the nature of the KoT distribution
guarantees that you'd never be happy and thus never buy any more.
There was never any real chance for a different outcome... given the
premise you were never going to buy more cards because you were
setting yourself up for failure. You should have just bought your 1.5
boxes and accepted that you were going to get screwed from the
start... or even just complained without buying any.
Brent Ross
Brent Ross
OldFan wrote:
> Here's a novel idea - how about, if you don't like this discussion,
> you don't READ this discussion or participate any more? Saves our
> eyes from reading your all caps posts, and saves your blood pressure.
> Sounds like a Win-Win to me! :-D
Here's a novel idea -- how about you block my posts if you don't
like reading them? Or, buy more KoT boxes and be quiet. :-D
[ quoted text not captured ]
Blooded Sand wrote:
> And if your response is seriously to shout at people pointing out that
> these very nice new cards are in a huge set, and thus they are forced
> to pay 75 euros for a chance at 1 villein and 1-2 deep song, well
> that's not really a useful response is it now?
If they're too stupid to see what rarity the cards they want are, and
then they open too few boxes to get the amount of those cards they
want, and then they bitch... well, then maybe yelling at them will shock
their brain back to reality and they will learn maths.
I've been yelled at once in a while, and once in a while it's worked. ;)
[ quoted text not captured ]
On Jul 10, 9:46 am, Peter D Bakija <p...@lightlink.com> wrote:
> To be fair, I'm sure everyone can find 17 (or 30 or whatever) cards to
> remove from the set for being unnecessary. But from the POV of someone
> designing the set, you need the set to:
>
> A) Act as a base set, giving new players all the stuff they need.
>
> B) Work as a good draft set, as people like draft tournaments.
>
> C) Get all the stuff that needs reprinting reprinted.
>
> D) give reasonable access to the new cards.
>
> Yes, for my money, it would have been better if all the Bang Nakhs and
> Forgeries were more Deep Songs and Eyes of Argus. But if you remove
> those 17 commons, and remove 17 uncommons and 17 rares from the set to
> double up all the new cards, that is a pretty big chunk of cards
> removed from the set. They could done a laser guided C2 (or whatever)
> and just had a few of the new cards doubled up, but then you have
> everyone complaining about how "useless new card X got to be a C2
> while incredibly important new card Y was stuck as a C1..." There
> isn't really a way to win here, from the POV of someone trying to make
> this set work on all levels that it needs to work.
Solution: Extend the size of the boosters for base sets.
This problem didn't exist in Jyhad or Sabbat Edition even though they
had more than 400 cards. They had enough slots in their boosters that
a box was going to get you 3-5 of each common. This is about the only
way I can see to really deal with this problem short of offloading the
reprinting of a good number of cards into the midsized nonbase booster
sets (eg. instead of 150 new cards, we'd only get 100 new cards and 50
reprints) or doing base sets that only feature a subset of a sect at a
time (which would really slow down the cycle... but moving Gangrel out
of Camarilla sets and into Independent sets would have allowed for
this Camarilla set to be slightly smaller, which might have allowed
for some new cards in KoT to be C2).
Brent Ross
Brent Ross
[ quoted text not captured ]
I agree there is some reason, and your reason is plausible. I just hope
that that isn't the reason, because I don't feel like it's a good one.
Incidentally, some folks have railed against the non-reprinting of key
Jyhad era cards in this thread. Remember that the reason Parity Shift
and Deflection haven't been reprinted has to do with artwork and rights
issues. (which may be why Diversity instead of ConBoon was reprinted etc).
That doesn't address why the new cards aren't C2U2R2.
best -
chris
best -
chris
On Jul 10, 5:31 pm, bwross <bwr...@mail.com> wrote:
> Solution: Extend the size of the boosters for base sets.
>
> This problem didn't exist in Jyhad or Sabbat Edition even though they
> had more than 400 cards. They had enough slots in their boosters that
> a box was going to get you 3-5 of each common.
The simple way of saying this is that there were more than 11 cards
per booster, and therefore more cards per pack (was it 19 in Jyhad?).
But increasing the number of cards per booster will be of little
consolation if the increase the price of the boosters. It really
comes down to how much you are paying per card.
Another point of comparison is that when we original bought the Jyhad
set, we were buying all new cards. When old players buy KoT, they are
buying 25% new cards, most of the remainder being stuff they don't
need. Effectively, its fewer "cards you want" for the money.
The real solution, for standalone sets, is a better mix of new cards
and reprints that older players might actually need more of.
bwross <bwr...@mail.com> wrote:
>This problem didn't exist in Jyhad or Sabbat Edition even though they
>had more than 400 cards. They had enough slots in their boosters that
>a box was going to get you 3-5 of each common. This is about the only
>way I can see to really deal with this problem short of offloading the
>reprinting of a good number of cards into the midsized nonbase booster
>sets (eg. instead of 150 new cards, we'd only get 100 new cards and 50
>reprints) or doing base sets that only feature a subset of a sect at a
>time (which would really slow down the cycle... but moving Gangrel out
>of Camarilla sets and into Independent sets would have allowed for
>this Camarilla set to be slightly smaller, which might have allowed
>for some new cards in KoT to be C2).
I think there's something to be said for a slightly larger booster size
in sets that have 4 levels of rarity - say, 7C/4U/3V/1R. However, I
have no idea how having two different setups would affect White Wolf's
costs, although since they presumably have to make some changes to cope
with 4 rarities anyway, it may not be much.
Another alternative would be to make the preconstructed starters a bit
less playable and a bit more of an obvious reprint vehicle. Example:
here's the action modifier section of the Keepers of Tradition Malkavian
starter. http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/malkavian_precon_kot.htm
Action Modifier [23]
3x Change of Target
6x Eyes of Chaos
6x Into Thin Air
4x Spying Mission
4x Veil the Legions
Action Modifier/Combat [2]
2x Deny
Okay, let's turn that into:
Action Modifier+Action Modifier/Combat [25]
2x Change of Target
4x Eyes of Chaos
2x Deny
2x Mind Tricks
3x Into Thin Air
2x Faceless Night
3x Spying Mission
2x Cloak the Gathering
2x Mask of a Thousand Faces
1x Elder Impersonation
2x Veil the Legions
So you can wedge in more reprints that people can get *reasonably*
easily - but they might need to buy three or four of a starter to get
enough to use well - and so might think about dropping one or two of
those cards from the set, or not. Tweak the exact cards to taste, of
course.
Alternatively, new cards in base sets might feature more prominently in
starters.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
On Jul 10, 5:09 pm, bwross <bwr...@mail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 12:18 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 9, 11:30 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
>
> > > OldFan wrote:
> > > > For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
> > > > exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
> > > > unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.
>
> > > Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
>
> > Hmmmm......(cue Inigo Montoya voice)......I do not think that means
> > what you think it means?
>
> Oh, it does here.
Actually, it doesn't.
Why?
Because I did NOT prophesize (sp?) anything in the first place.....
(cue silence and "well duh" faces).
The sequence for me was:
1.) Buy 1.5 boxes of KoT
2.) Observe that the distribution is sufficiently below optimal
statistical spread to result in getting even fewer new cards than
statistics would dictate
(example - in a box of 36 boosters having 216 commons, I could
statistically expect 2 of each common, plus 16 triples. Instead, I
got 1's and 4's of some cards, and not in the good way. Getting 4
Coolers and only 1 Eyes of Argus, or 4 Forgery and only 1 Deep Song,
makes for an unhappy customer).
3.) Be sufficiently dismayed by the gross numbers of 'dross/already
have plenty of ' cards that I decide to save my money for the
secondary card market.
See? No prophecies here - just an unhappy customer who decided to
voice his $0.02.
<snip remaining blather>.
-Asif Chaudhry
On Jul 10, 7:11 pm, John Whelan <jwjbwhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The real solution, for standalone sets, is a better mix of new cards
> and reprints that older players might actually need more of.
Since I've been a nattering nabob of negativity in this thread so far,
let me say that I was tickled pink by some of the wonderful reprints
that were chosen for this set. Things like:
Alastor
Bowl of Convergence
Charisma
The Embrace
Gather
Heart of the City
Jake Washington
Heart of Nizchetus
Magazine
Magic of the Smith
Mind Rape
Ossian
Powerbase Montreal (fixed in the Ventrue starter!)
The Unmasking
were great! These cards were fine consolation prizes in a booster
that didn't have a new rare.
-Asif Chaudhry
On Jul 12, 12:00 am, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 5:09 pm, bwross <bwr...@mail.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 10, 12:18 pm, OldFan <Asif.I.Chaud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 9, 11:30 pm, "Kevin M." <youw...@imaspammer.org> wrote:
> > > > Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
>
> > > Hmmmm......(cue Inigo Montoya voice)......I do not think that means
> > > what you think it means?
>
> > Oh, it does here.
>
> Actually, it doesn't.
>
> Why?
>
> Because I did NOT prophesize (sp?) anything in the first place.....
>
> (cue silence and "well duh" faces).
You don't need the explicit word "prophecy"... implied prophecy,
prediction, or even just association is all part of the modern usage
of the phrase[1]. You bought 1.5 boxes of KoT distributed cards, and
received exactly what you asked for, but weren't happy with that
because you apparently expected something different[2]. Well, if you
buy something thinking that it's gold when it's really crap, you'll
never be happy with it... and that's a self-fulfilling prophecy. The
"well duh" faces are looking at you and your 1.5 boxes of golden
turds.
The fact that you're unhappy with what you bought shouldn't even enter
into your decisions here... you should not buy more cards for the
reason of the distribution of those new cards, not the ones in hand.
This is similar to the sunken costs fallacy. The decision to buy more
should be solely based on what you'd be getting (which would almost
certainly be a lot of drek). Now that you have 1.5 boxes in hand, you
should have most of the vampires[3], so your evaluation of the value
of a new box will be lower (which is the only real effect past boxes
will have)... and if that's substantially lower than the price of a
box, you shouldn't buy. But to say that you're not buying more
because you only received 1 of certain new cards and 4 of certain old
ones is a mistake... you should say that you'll not be buying more
because even getting the expected number of the cards you're
interested in isn't worth it.
Brent Ross
[1] But if you want an explicit "phophecy" of sorts, I'll just point
out that me (and other people) have said before that the distributions
of these base sets are not really encouraging, and that exactly what
you've described will happen. You've fulfilled that prophecy... which
is not surprising because it contains all the elements needed to do so
within itself.
[2] You always need to expect some outliers as you can never
reasonably expect perfect flatness. Besides, there are only 5 common
slots in a KoT booster. That's 180 commons in a box, for an expected
value of 1.8. Meaning that getting some 1s was very definitely in the
cards.
[3] The only reason to buy any boosters of these massive base sets at
all, IMHO. Buy just enough to get what you think is suitable coverage
and then trade/buy/wait for reprints on everything else, seems to be a
very reasonable strategy. You've slipped into it, but for the wrong
reasons.
I did, I was still unhappy.
Getting 2 reprints to each new card sort of sucks.
Ok, not sort of, it just plains sucks.
Raille
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:aBy5m.35763$Qk7....@newsfe22.iad...
> OldFan wrote:>> For my money, after opening 1.5 boxes of KoT, and getting
>> exactly ONE Deep Song and ONE Eyes of Argus, I am extremely
>> unhappy and will not be buying any more boxes of KoT.>> Nice to see your self-fulfilling prophecy here. Congratulations.
>> IT'S A HUGE SET PEOPLE
>
> YOU HAVE TO BUY MULTIPLE BOXES OR ELSE YOU'LL BE UNHAPPY
>> DO THE MATHS AND STOP WHINING
>
>
>[ quoted text not captured ]
On Jul 12, 2:26 am, bwross <bwr...@mail.com> wrote:
<snip more blather about prophecies & trying to appear really smart>
Okay, so I miscounted the number of commons in a booster - fair point.
So, out of 180 commons in a box, getting 1's of some is possible -
fair point.
Does that make getting 1 of a new card and 4 of an old card even MORE
irritating? Yes.
1.) Did I know that all the cards were C1/U1/R1? Actually - NO.
Unlike some people who live on this newsgroup, and the gaming industry
in general, I don't pay super close attention to that stuff. I saw
posts with spoiler cards and what not, sure, but no explicit lists of
what the print rarity was. I am sure if I (or Brent since he seems to
have super tons of time on his hands to pontificate about prophecies)
were to do a google search, someone, someWHERE, probably posted the
distribution rarity for the card sheets. Suffice to say, I didn't pay
attention to that before - I certainly do NOW.
2.) Did I suffer from the mistaken assumption that the new cards would
possibly (POSSIBLY) be c2/u2/r2, because well, they are brand new
never before seen cards, and the designers have shown a deliberate
intent with the progession of each set to provide more exciting and
viable options to winning games of Vtes besides using lots of
Dominate? YES - after all, in my (obviously silly and fairy-land
world view), it makes no sense to make new cards to compete against
Dominate and allow newer players to not feel the lack of such cards,
and THEN make them so blasted difficult/expensive to actually get.
3.) Thus, having pointed out the 1.) and 2.) facts above, I did NOT
commit a prophecy (self-fulfilling or otherwise). QED.
What I DID do, was commit the "cardinal" sin of making an assumption
about the possible distribution of new cards in the base set, one I
plan to avoid doing in the future.
-Asif Chaudhry (guy who has only been playing since 3rd edition)
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:OS95m.17125$wE4....@newsfe02.iad...
> http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
> Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted" list.
I don't know why this thread needs to go on and on. There's not too
much to be said about it except (at the risk of a "me, too" post):
Um, yes.
Fred
Frederick Scott wrote:
> "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>> http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
>> Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted" list.>
> I don't know why this thread needs to go on and on.
It did end 3 days ago, you know. :)
[ quoted text not captured ]
"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message
news:rTK6m.4977$mc4....@newsfe07.iad...
> Frederick Scott wrote:>> "Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote:>>> http://cgi.ebay.com/Jyhad-VTES-2x-Villein-KoT_W0QQitemZ330341260275
>>> Ok, I think this officially goes on the "Needs to be reprinted" list.>>
>> I don't know why this thread needs to go on and on.>
> It did end 3 days ago, you know. :)
Oops. Did I say "needs". Meant to say "needed". :-P
Honestly, I just logged in today for the first time in a while and I am
terrifically date challenged.
Fred