(No) Parity Shift

No parity in Sabbat and Camarilla ? I'm playing a Lasombra vote deck, and it works, except that my Ventrue / !Ventrue opponent has the same votes as me, and can also play Parity shift, which may well be the most powerful vote ever (it won the game for him and his ally...) !! As Sabbat War didn't offer any equivalence that I know, wouldn't it be necessary in the forthcoming Camarilla edition to make this vote available to Sabbat and Independent vampires, by changing the text from "Called by any Prince or Justicar" (which is anyway obsolete as no Inner Circle can call it...) to : "Called by any vampire with at least 2 Votes" ?? -- Orpheus http://cypheranima.free.fr news://news.zoo-logique.org/VTES-francophone audio...@yahoogroups.com

In message <9qh2dj$g8p$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >As Sabbat War didn't offer any equivalence that I know, wouldn't it be >necessary in the forthcoming Camarilla edition to make this vote available >to Sabbat and Independent vampires, by changing the text from "Called by any >Prince or Justicar" (which is anyway obsolete as no Inner Circle can call >it...) I fear you mis-understand the term "obsolete". A number of cards were created in Dark Sovereigns (where the Inner Circle were introduced) which *still* only refer to Prince or Justicar. For instance, Judgement: Camarilla Segregation. It was clearly a design decision to limit these cards in this fashion. However, the Rules/Design Team did alter the card older "Bloodhunt" to take into account the Inner Circle. Had they wanted to, they could have done similar for Parity Shift. They did not. It seems clear that it was a design decision not to. > to : "Called by any vampire with at least 2 Votes" ?? Some cards are limited to some sects for a certain amount of flavour and power for that sect, or that clan, or that generation range or whatever. It also provides a certain amount of costing, especially for cross- discipline/cross-clan decks. A cross-clan deck will, certainly, have more flexibility - but that comes with the price of limiting their reliability. On the other side, your Lasombra deck can have lots of Cardinals - one per big vampire. My Ventrue deck can only have one Justicar out. This gives you a far greater capacity for title based votes than me, since you can still call Crusades (equivalent to my Praxis Seizures). And my Ventrue can't vote on your Cardinal Benedictions, whereas I need things like Closed Session to create the same situation (which needs a title on the acting vampire already). Also note that your Lasombra vampires will have, quite often, a far more powerful discipline selection than an equivalent Camarilla vampire, due to the Sabbat costing disparities between it and earlier sets. Tatiana Romanova, for instance, is quite weak, in the grand scheme of things. Your archbishops, also, can attempt to take away my titles. My Ventrue deck can only take away the titles of Camarilla vampires (Command of the Harpies requires a Camarilla vampire). Your Lasombra deck can take away the titles of Sabbat vampires in a similar fashion (Excommunication). However, it can also take away the titles of my Princes (Blood Siege), with the added bonus that it then gets a Diocese of its own, creating a large swing of 4 votes (I lose 2, you gain 2). (Of course, a Lasombra deck can also use Political Struggle to achieve similar ends. This bears less direct pressure on the current situation, which is more to do with sect rather than clan.) I can do things you can't; you can do things I can't. Examine, assimilate and utilise the differences. Attempting to merely replicate a "standard" Camarilla Parity Shift oriented deck with Lasombra isn't going to work, they're a different clan with different sect and clan and discipline oriented abilities. And, indeed, very, very good at what they do. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D And if it's all right, I'd kind've like to be your lover EBD690ECD7A1F 'Cause when you're with me I can't help but be B457CA213D7E6 So desperately, uncontrollably happy 68C3695D623D5D

> I fear you mis-understand the term "obsolete". No no, I speak english too... :-) But you're right, I wasn't sure if any of these had been updated, so now I know it's a choice. > However, the Rules/Design Team did alter the card older "Bloodhunt" to > take into account the Inner Circle. Had they wanted to, they could have > done similar for Parity Shift. They did not. It seems clear that it > was a design decision not to. Ok. > > to : "Called by any vampire with at least 2 Votes" ?? > > Some cards are limited to some sects for a certain amount of flavour and > power for that sect, or that clan, or that generation range or whatever. > It also provides a certain amount of costing, especially for cross- > discipline/cross-clan decks. A cross-clan deck will, certainly, have > more flexibility - but that comes with the price of limiting their > reliability. Yes, it would. But then, a Camarilla deck only can still play all the interesting "you lose blood" votes, and Parity Shift is certainly the most lethal of all. You have made very brilliantly you point : the Sabbat, as of now, have more possibilities to gain votes. But consider these facts : - The Camarilla supplement goes out next year, and there may be new votes that will do the same as the new SW or FN cards - The Sabbat have lots, lots less titled vampires to begin with ! The Lasombra are the best titled, but under 8 you have nothing except one lousy Bishop !!! And all our 9 are only Archbishops, while some Camarilla clans have Princes that cost 5... So, it's kind of normal to compensate. Also, we have no Inner Circle, nor anybody with 4 votes (except the !Gangrel Priscus, but it's here innate ability). > Also note that your Lasombra vampires will have, quite often, a far more > powerful discipline selection than an equivalent Camarilla vampire, due > to the Sabbat costing disparities between it and earlier sets. Tatiana > Romanova, for instance, is quite weak, in the grand scheme of things. I'm sorry to say once again that the Lasombra have one of the lousiest crypt ever. The "big vampires" are good, but the small ones are not ! I won't go over that again (it was a thread last month), but just consider that the first Lasombra to have even one Superior discipline costs 4, the first to have 2 costs 6, and all the Lasombra with the 3 disciplines in superior cost 9 ; what is the smallest one in Ventrue ? I know one which has FOR, PRE and DOM, and 1 title, for 7 !! So, the discipline thing doesn't always work... > I can do things you can't; you can do things I can't. Examine, > assimilate and utilise the differences. You are right, even if a little aggressive, in your assertions. But differences shouldn't be inegalities. I'm just saying that this Camarilla vote has no equivalent whatsoever in Sabbat, not to mention independants (but that seems more or less normal, as they're not known for voting a lot...). Attempting to merely replicate > a "standard" Camarilla Parity Shift oriented deck with Lasombra isn't > going to work, they're a different clan with different sect and clan and > discipline oriented abilities. And, indeed, very, very good at what > they do. Yes, they can be... But still ! Parity Shift [Jyhad, V:TES] Cardtype: Political Action Political Card-Worth 1 Vote. Called by any prince or justicar at +1 stealth. Choose a Methuselah who has more blood in his or her pool than you do. {Allocate X of that pool <between any of> the other remaining Methuselahs (including you), where X is the number of Methuselahs in the game}. Successful <referendum> means the chosen Methuselah loses {that pool, and it is allocated as you announced}. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <9qhbke$smb$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >> I fear you mis-understand the term "obsolete". > >No no, I speak english too... :-) But you're right, I wasn't sure if any of >these had been updated, so now I know it's a choice. Things which are updated by text can be found in the on-line card text files on the White Wolf web-site. And something which hasn't been updated isn't necessarily obsolete. Something being obsolete or obsolescent requires far more than just not being updated. >> > to : "Called by any vampire with at least 2 Votes" ?? >> >> Some cards are limited to some sects for a certain amount of flavour and >> power for that sect, or that clan, or that generation range or whatever. >> It also provides a certain amount of costing, especially for cross- >> discipline/cross-clan decks. A cross-clan deck will, certainly, have >> more flexibility - but that comes with the price of limiting their >> reliability. > >Yes, it would. But then, a Camarilla deck only can still play all the >interesting "you lose blood" votes, and Parity Shift is certainly the most >lethal of all. Parity Shift is "lethal" in a number of circumstances. If nothing else, you need less pool than your opponent. This places you in an extremely nasty danger zone if they're low, especially if they've done something like hold back a Delaying Tactics in defence which is far from unheard of. You've just taken yourself down to, say, 6 pool via whatever method, to try and snag your prey who's on 7. You're now on 6 pool when you had been planning to be on 11 (+5) with a prey on 2 (-5). Also note that Parity Shift is, of course, limited by the number of Methuselahs in the game, like Conservative Agitation; it becomes progressively weaker, which can severely hamper you in the late game. That any weenie vampires you create or influence may not be able to call it will also seriously limit your choices. You cannot base a deck around using it the whole time, whereas you *can* make such a decision with Conservative Agitation or Kine Resources Contested - they function with all vampires and don't have requirements dependent on other Methuselahs (though ConAg depowers slowly). Parity Shift is far from the be all and end all of votes. >You have made very brilliantly you point : the Sabbat, as of now, have more >possibilities to gain votes. But consider these facts : > >- The Camarilla supplement goes out next year, and there may be new votes >that will do the same as the new SW or FN cards This seems to have no relevance to the point regarding Cardinals. The Camarilla have a specific set of titles. LSJ has specifically stated that (whilst he is responsible for the game in the manner he is) no Camarilla vampires will be created with titles that function like Independent titles (votes simply stated by card text e.g. Ezmerelda). It seems extremely unlikely that a new title worth 3 votes is going to be created which is not unique. White Wolf are clearly interested in a consistent back-story, so far as is possible. Creating people as powerful as Justicars without limitations within the Camarilla has no precedent in the World of Darkness. In terms of vote actions, again, this has little to no relevance regarding the generation of titles. However, again, Sabbat War, Final Nights, Bloodlines and the Camarilla base set are all being designed by the same group of people - White Wolf and LSJ in chief. Were the sets being designed by one group of people, then another group of people, then a third group of people, it seems more likely that such duplicates may be created - a new group of designers take a different tack on the process. A consistent set of designers with focused goals for the game are less likely to be prone to such mutability. Also note National Guard Support and Reinforcements, which merely require titled vampires. Such could have been done for any number of other cards, had it been so wanted. >- The Sabbat have lots, lots less titled vampires to begin with ! This all depends on how you view their focus. The Ventrue are, of course, extremely good voters. They, between them, have 11 titled vampires. The Brujah have 12. They're both designed to be excellent voters. The Brujah, of course, are somewhat hampered by the lack of Presence on the Eurobrujah, which is extremely useful for such a deck. The Eurobrujah make up 3 of their 4 Princes (Donal, Constanza, Volker), and have 6 Primogen. The Lasombra have a very different time from the Ventrue. The Ventrue are supposed to be diplomats par excellence. The Lasombra are somewhat different. They have only 7 voters, it is true, but this from a smaller selection of vampires total. 3 Archbishops, 2 Cardinals and Gratiano (the 2 vote Priscus) make for an extremely powerful potential crypt. Clearly, by design, the Lasombra are not, however, intended to be the same clan as the Ventrue, just in a Sabbat version. Potence and Obtenebration both provide formidable combat presence. Political Struggle capitalises on this. The Lasombra, unlike the Ventrue, can capitalise on their version of Archon, Templar, (which provides an inherent rush action, though it does not provide the nicety of diablerie freedom as in Archon). Utilising Potence, they can assemble an extremely nasty vote and bruise deck which, executed well, is a fearsome deck type. I've seen the Brujah execute such before now. The ability to attack and destroy an opposing vampire in such a fashion is a powerful ability indeed. So, you're being voted down by a Ventrue vote deck. Political Struggle a vampire and get its votes, or simply rush the vampire and destroy them as best you can. You have options the Ventrue simply don't have available to them in that manner. You also have Power Structure available to you, which is again a significant ability. Unlike Ventrue Headquarters, this isn't a location - useful for defence. People don't complain that the Ventrue are betters voters than the Gangrel. The two clans have a completely different focus. The Lasombra have a significant voting presence, but it is far from their only ability. They can bleed, too, though the Ventrue are better for amassing bleed. They can fight, which the Ventrue can't. If you're looking at a Lasombra deck and saying "I can't vote like the Ventrue can" you've realised a fundamental point of Jyhad. If you look at it and continue to say "I can't vote like the Ventrue but I'm going to try anyway" you've rather missed the point. >The >Lasombra are the best titled, but under 8 you have nothing except one lousy >Bishop !!! And all our 9 are only Archbishops, while some Camarilla clans >have Princes that cost 5... So, it's kind of normal to compensate. Also, we >have no Inner Circle, nor anybody with 4 votes (except the !Gangrel Priscus, >but it's here innate ability). You do, of course, have Regent available as a master card option. This suits the Lasombra well, who are quite capable of taking on other vampires. Or combine it with Secure Haven or San Nicolas. >> Also note that your Lasombra vampires will have, quite often, a far more >> powerful discipline selection than an equivalent Camarilla vampire, due >> to the Sabbat costing disparities between it and earlier sets. Tatiana >> Romanova, for instance, is quite weak, in the grand scheme of things. > >I'm sorry to say once again that the Lasombra have one of the lousiest crypt >ever. The vampires, individually, are pretty much all *good* however. The only vampire I don't really care for is Ramiro. Gratiano probably ranks as my favourite vampire from the entire Sabbat set. (See my Message-ID, for instance.) And again, you're missing the point that they're not supposed to be able to compete with a Ventrue vote deck on equal terms, but rather on their *own* terms. >The "big vampires" are good, but the small ones are not ! Aaron, Cameron and Ignatio are all standard costings. (Ramiro I've already noted I don't particularly care for. It's not that he's a bad vampire, I would merely have preferred the original Sabbat designers to pick something closer to, say, Gloria Giovanni - maybe OBT pot, or something.) Guido is fine, if you're going for something based round OBT dom - which is perfectly sensible. Talley, Lisette and Aurora are three good vampires. Talley is absolutely outstanding. And then you hit the "big vampires", where I'd tend to agree they really are quite good indeed. So you have maybe two iffy small vampires (depending on what you choose to build), 3 standard ones, and 3 good mid-range - more than enough to build a deck with. >I won't go >over that again (it was a thread last month), but just consider that the >first Lasombra to have even one Superior discipline costs 4, the first to >have 2 costs 6, and all the Lasombra with the 3 disciplines in superior cost >9 ; what is the smallest one in Ventrue ? This is certainly true. However, it's not entirely on target, really. Political Struggle is an excellent choice and ignores disciplines totally. Power Structure won't care either. Some extremely powerful Lasombra decks have been constructed with swarm creation. Use someone big like Gratiano or someone (I'm tempted to go for Francisco Domingo for his discipline selection and bleed, as well as the title which is not a Camarilla praxis) to create weenie vampires with Creation Rites. Stuff in some Embrace to allow them to create some as well. You can also use Tribute here as serious blood/pool gain for bringing out more vampires. The small vampires can contribute to a war of attrition via bleed. Dropping either Obtenebration (for stealth) or Dominate (for bleed0 is going to be useful. And every vampire you create gives you another vote with Power Structure. You can either use that to pass title granting votes to them (perfectly good), or to force through key votes if you go for a deck with more elements of something else in them. (Making the voting issue a competent side-line, so you can get a key Banishment passed, utilising the extra vampires for more pressure is perfectly viable as a deck.) Would you play a Ventrue vote deck like this? It seems unlikely. But would you play a Toreador vote deck like a Ventrue vote deck? That also seems unlikely. Or a Brujah vote deck? They're all different decks. Sure, you can't do all the same things with all of them. You can mix and match if you choose to, casting your net wide but watering down your deck, or you can focus on their particular assets. >I know one which has FOR, PRE and >DOM, and 1 title, for 7 !! So, the discipline thing doesn't always work... It's not *just* disciplines, of course. Talley's aus and +1 intercept are terribly useful, used properly. Depending on how you choose to play a deck, you may well prefer Gratiano's +1 bleed and 2 Prisci votes in preference to POT. Aurora's Fortitude is really rather useful too, combined with Lucita. And Matt Green's Lucita/Gratiano Free States Rant deck is certainly fun and powerful. >> I can do things you can't; you can do things I can't. Examine, >> assimilate and utilise the differences. > >You are right, even if a little aggressive, in your assertions. But >differences shouldn't be inegalities. You haven't demonstrated that they are. You appear to be successfully demonstrating, however, that sects and clans should be played differently, depending on what they can do. >I'm just saying that this Camarilla >vote has no equivalent whatsoever in Sabbat, And how is this relevant? There are lots of things that some people can do that others can't. Does that fact that Tzimisce can use Haven Affinity (a card which has no equivalent whatsoever) create inequality? No - it just gives them something that's theirs, whereas other people have things that are theirs. > not to mention independants >(but that seems more or less normal, as they're not known for voting a >lot...). This suggests that you've never seen a Setite Presence oriented vote deck work well. They can be excellent. Free States Rant is giving them some terribly useful and interesting things to do, combined with Temptation and its ilk. > Attempting to merely replicate >> a "standard" Camarilla Parity Shift oriented deck with Lasombra isn't >> going to work, they're a different clan with different sect and clan and >> discipline oriented abilities. And, indeed, very, very good at what >> they do. > >Yes, they can be... But still ! So they're a good clan. You're just trying to play them as though they were Ventrue. I'm afraid that isn't going to work. <snip - unused and uncommented upon card text> Sure. Shall I cite the text of a Lasombra only card or a Sabbat only card in order to try and prove something? <note - please snip sigs when you're note commenting on them> [ quoted text not captured ]

Hello James. I think you missed my whole point : I never SAID or even intended to say I wanted to do a Ventrue deck with Lasombra, or anything like it. Of course, each clan does unique things. We're not talking Clans here, only sects. And, of course, the Sabbat and Camarilla both have advantages and inconvenients that the others don't have. I just feel that a vote like this one, or its Sabbat equivalent, would be necessary for game balance, and that's it. Yes, it has its limitations, but no less than Tranfer of Power or Tithings, or what have you. The only point of that thread was to launch an idea for the WW people who read it here, not to argue onece more on which clan is weakest or can do whatever. Anyway, I'm going to bleed you online on JOL, and not with Lasombra. ;-) Yours from the heart of Darkness, -- Orpheus http://cypheranima.free.fr news://news.zoo-logique.org/VTES-francophone audio...@yahoogroups.com "James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> a écrit dans le message news: T9akSNTE...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk... [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<T9akSNTE...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... You're (both) missing the greater point here. The Camarilla titles are not even remotely balanced compared to the Sabbat ones. Princes have the traditions and parity shift. Exactly which Sabbat (or even independant) vote can consistently mean a 10 point shift in pool? How, other than by a one-time master, do the Sabbat vampires fill themselves -and each other- up to capacity? Where is there ultra-high utility untap with intercept? Justicars in general have all the prince cards, plus a few other votes, and their titles can't be contested by an archbishop. Inner Circle Members only get 1 really great vote, but OMFG, does this card ruke. That pesky archbishop a problem? Spider Killer looking threatening? Eh. Just burn it and be done with it. It doesn't even cost anything. Just pass a vote, which is relatively easy with ICMs out. While there is some ok Sabbat only stuff, nothing really compares to what the camarilla can do with 5th/MT, 2nd, PS, and PTO.

>The Lasombra have a very different time from the Ventrue. The Ventrue >are supposed to be diplomats par excellence. The Lasombra are somewhat >different. They have only 7 voters, it is true, but this from a smaller >selection of vampires total. 3 Archbishops, 2 Cardinals and Gratiano >(the 2 vote Priscus) make for an extremely powerful potential crypt. I definitely agree. And even if you don't want to use Lasombra fatties. Just get a bunch of Lasombra weenies (say 3). If each weenie places a Political Struggle on Mr. Ventrue Justicar and then you get into combat with him and use Arms of the Abyss + Entombment (extremely effective) then you've instantly got 9 votes! You really gotta abuse those Political Struggles! >You do, of course, have Regent available as a master card option. This >suits the Lasombra well, who are quite capable of taking on other >vampires. Or combine it with Secure Haven or San Nicolas. Yup. And don't forget the horrible abuse that it known as Gratiano + Regent (and an optional Secure Haven). There's pretty much 7 votes for you! Halcyan 2

In message <9qhmfn$e44$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >I think you missed my whole point : I never SAID or even intended to say I >wanted to do a Ventrue deck with Lasombra, or anything like it. Of course, >each clan does unique things. We're not talking Clans here, only sects. And, >of course, the Sabbat and Camarilla both have advantages and inconvenients >that the others don't have. Yup. That's how games work. >I just feel that a vote like this one, or its >Sabbat equivalent, would be necessary for game balance, and that's it. Games don't get changed or designed based on feelings. If you can present a well-detailed, well-argued case, you'll stand a far better chance. Saying "Well, I think it should be like this just because" doesn't really cut it. The Sabbat aren't *supposed* to be good at capitalising on everything in voting. They can amass raw power and influence, but can't refine it into channels. That's why they get lots of other things to do. >The only point of that thread was to launch an idea for the WW people who >read it here, not to argue onece more on which clan is weakest or can do >whatever. You have the unfortunate problem, however, that by virtue of giving such a card to the Sabbat you will, again, shift the balance of the clans. The point is that the Lasombra are a well established, well balanced clan as they currently stand. By giving the Sabbat a copy of Parity Shift, you *significantly* empower the Lasombra to a degree they don't need. Attempting to go off into "Well, I'm just addressing the sect" doesn't help matters any; the specifics will still have the same ramifications whether you care to address them or not. ************************************************************************ <HUGE SNIP OF MY *ENTIRE* POST> Please, if you are going to post to Usenet, learn how to post. If you are not responding to a point, snip it. And your text goes *under* my text. ************************************************************************ [ quoted text not captured ]

> Justicars in general have all the prince cards, plus a few other > votes, and their titles can't be contested by an archbishop. > > Inner Circle Members only get 1 really great vote, but OMFG, does this > card ruke. That pesky archbishop a problem? Spider Killer looking > threatening? Eh. Just burn it and be done with it. It doesn't even > cost anything. You're wrong, it costs a whole blood! :) > Just pass a vote, which is relatively easy with ICMs > out. > > While there is some ok Sabbat only stuff, nothing really compares to > what the camarilla can do with 5th/MT, 2nd, PS, and PTO. Another powercard is Judgement: Camarilla Segregation. There's also a few other real good cards: Kindred Restructure, Anathema and Archon. The problem as stated isn't that the Camarilla have powerful cards at their hand, it's that the Sabbat hardly has none themselves! Almost all the cards that requires Archbishops etc are quite bad in comparison, except the ones giving the Sabbat more votes. But what are they going to do with the votes when there's hardly any interesting votes to call? There's only the tedious KRC/Conservative Ag. Domain Challenge and Ancilla Empowerment really if you want to do any harm through votes. And these all clans can call so why play Lasombra when you can play Ventrue to call them and also have access to all other goodies? Roger

> - The Camarilla supplement goes out next year, and there may be new votes > that will do the same as the new SW or FN cards One very important fact -- flavor. The Camarilla should always have an advantage in the political arena -- that's what the Camarilla is, a politically sound sect. The Sabbat is more a religion than a political body, and a fanatic religion, at that. Their sect-only cards are more suited for groups, and the Lasombra can out-fight the Ventrue hands-down. Oh, and their votes are more likely to hit the table, since Obtenebration is a fantastic support discipline. Fanboy

Here are my answers to different mails from this thread ; hope it's not too long to scroll... > You're (both) missing the greater point here. Right. So what is the point ? That a Sabbat vote deck isn't viable when opposed to a good Camarilla one ? It may well be true. That's the problem. > The Camarilla titles are not even remotely balanced compared to the > Sabbat ones. > > Princes have the traditions and parity shift. Exactly which Sabbat > (or even independant) vote can consistently mean a 10 point shift in > pool? How, other than by a one-time master, do the Sabbat vampires > fill themselves -and each other- up to capacity? Where is there > ultra-high utility untap with intercept? > > Justicars in general have all the prince cards, plus a few other > votes, and their titles can't be contested by an archbishop. > > Inner Circle Members only get 1 really great vote, but OMFG, does this > card ruke. That pesky archbishop a problem? Spider Killer looking > threatening? Eh. Just burn it and be done with it. It doesn't even > cost anything. Just pass a vote, which is relatively easy with ICMs > out. > > While there is some ok Sabbat only stuff, nothing really compares to > what the camarilla can do with 5th/MT, 2nd, PS, and PTO. No, nothing, and that was my whole point. But James doesn't want to understand this and makes it personal. I don't. > Another powercard is Judgement: Camarilla Segregation. > There's also a few other real good cards: > Kindred Restructure, Anathema and Archon. Yes. > The problem as stated isn't that the Camarilla have powerful > cards at their > hand, it's that the Sabbat hardly has none themselves! Almost > all the cards > that requires Archbishops etc are quite bad in comparison, > except the ones > giving the Sabbat more votes. But what are they going to do > with the votes > when there's hardly any interesting votes to call? My point exactly. I play Lasombra because I like this clan feeling-wise, not to mention that I began the game with Sabbat War and lack most of the Camarilla cards ; but should I try to play votes when it doesn't seem to be able to win (well, at least it's fun to play, but...) ? > There's only the tedious > KRC/Conservative Ag. Domain Challenge and Ancilla > Empowerment really if you want to do any harm through votes. Don't forget Transfer of Power and, Conservative Agitation, and, if you can place it, Tithings ; but most of these can B played by any vampire... > And these all clans can call so why play > Lasombra when you can play Ventrue to call them and also > have access to all > other goodies? For fun ? But it's the whole question I'm asking here : do the conceptors at WW (and I know Lasombra loves to play Lasombra ;-) , even with votes) intend the Sabbat to be able to play a true voting deck, or would it just be a little "plus" in mostly discipline-based decks ? > The Camarilla should always have an advantage in the political > arena -- that's what the Camarilla is, a politically sound sect. > The Sabbat is more a religion than a political body, and a > fanatic religion, at > that. Yes, it's totally true in background terms. But what about the strategy game ? > Their sect-only cards are more suited for groups, Examples ? > and the Lasombra can out-fight the Ventrue hands-down. Sorry, but not true. This has been debated in other recent threads, but I'll just say once more that Pot alone can nothing against For, and sure, Obt is a nice addition but that's all, it doesn't win the thing for you. Or if it does, it sucks your vampires down (no IG with Entombments, so it's Thoughts / Entomb / Decapitate, for 7 by a Lasombra with 9 Cap ? Sure...). > Oh, and their votes > are more likely to hit the table, since Obtenebration is a > fantastic support discipline. That is true. But then, the Brujah will rely on a fear strategy (intercept me and PAY !), some Ventrue have Obfuscate, not to mention what you can do with Marijava Ghouls or Creepshow Casino, etc... And the Toreador ? A little (costly) stealth from Celerity, and, well... No, you're right, Obt makes it easier to pass votes, but then, the whole point is : what's the use if it doesn't make you win ? But not only the votes are inferior (compare 3rd tradition and Creation Rites, for instance...). If only the Sabbat were really better in disciplines ! But they're not always. Who cares ? Sabbat rules !! ;-)

> I'm sorry to say once again that the Lasombra have one of the lousiest crypt > ever. The "big vampires" are good, but the small ones are not ! I won't go > over that again (it was a thread last month), but just consider that the > first Lasombra to have even one Superior discipline costs 4, the first to > have 2 costs 6, and all the Lasombra with the 3 disciplines in superior cost > 9 ; what is the smallest one in Ventrue ? I know one which has FOR, PRE and > DOM, and 1 title, for 7 !! So, the discipline thing doesn't always work... Looking at the 3-cap situation for the Lasombra, do you really want a 3 with DOM, POT or even OBT? The first two I can dismiss out of hand and a three cap who can arms of the abyss/entomb right out of the box, shadowtwin superior... gee any of that seems like it might need some balancing. Obt is a GOOD discipline. As for the fatties, you've got DOM and stealth, getting out that crypt for cheap shouldn't be that big a deal. My sample vote/bleed deck crypt for the Lasombra: Angelica -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT Alvaro -ArchB 9 dom OBT Gustav -Pri 8 DOM obt Francisco -ArchB 9 DOM OBT Aurora -none 6 OBT dom Ambrosio -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT Quentin -Bishop 9 DOM obt GREAT SPECIAL Gratiano -Super-Pri 9 DOM OBT Ayelea -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT Talley -none 6 OBT dom Antonio -ArchB 9 DOM OBT Guido -none 5 OBT dom Those arent all Lasombra, but they all have the right disciplines, and almost all the big ones can goven out the littler ones. About the little Lasombra, I'm finding them to be among my favorite vampires in the last few months. Although there aren't as many of them as any clan with anti-'s, there are 8 6-caps and below, only two of which have no obt, those that don't having dom/pot on a three (I love Cameron, gee wonder why), and DOM/POT/pro on a 6-cap bishop. I love Lisette even more. You also can get help from Sela and Mitchell the head hunter on the obt/pot angle. Gerard has obt/dom and there are three other little to mid range vamps with obt. that's not a bad range of vampires to choose from to stretch out the disciplines. Besides the Lasombra have only been in three expansions. Cameron

Hello. > Looking at the 3-cap situation for the Lasombra, do you really want a > 3 with DOM, POT or even OBT? The first two I can dismiss out of hand > and a three cap who can arms of the abyss/entomb right out of the box, > shadowtwin superior... gee any of that seems like it might need some > balancing. I won't go over that again, but some good suggestions of Lasombra of 4 or 5 with 1 or 2 sup, or 7 with the three of them, have already been made by various people in a precedent thread. > Obt is a GOOD discipline. Yes, it is. And I like it if only for fun anyway. :-) As for the fatties, you've got > DOM and stealth, getting out that crypt for cheap shouldn't be that > big a deal. Yeah, Govern et all, sure. But well... > My sample vote/bleed deck crypt for the Lasombra: > Angelica -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT > Alvaro -ArchB 9 dom OBT > Gustav -Pri 8 DOM obt > Francisco -ArchB 9 DOM OBT > Aurora -none 6 OBT dom > Ambrosio -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT > Quentin -Bishop 9 DOM obt GREAT SPECIAL > Gratiano -Super-Pri 9 DOM OBT > Ayelea -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT > Talley -none 6 OBT dom > Antonio -ArchB 9 DOM OBT > Guido -none 5 OBT dom Well, these vampires look pretty expensive to me for what you do with them, but it's just my 3-penny worth ; furthermore, we usually play CL, so if a vampire isn't worth his exact cost in disciplines / specials, he's a waste. Only these 2 disciplines ? So, what, bleed / stealth / vote with just a pint of entombment ? Could U post your deck so that I could have a better idea of how you employ such a crypt ? > Those arent all Lasombra, but they all have the right disciplines, and > almost all the big ones can goven out the littler ones. > > About the little Lasombra, I'm finding them to be among my favorite > vampires in the last few months. Although there aren't as many of > them as any clan with anti-'s, there are 8 6-caps and below, only two > of which have no obt, those that don't having dom/pot on a three (I > love Cameron, gee wonder why), and DOM/POT/pro on a 6-cap bishop. I > love Lisette even more. I don't, she doesn't have THE important discipline, and playing Lasombra / fight with a POT only vampire just doesn't do it. Same could go for Cameron (I much, much prefer Ignacio !!) but he's not too expensive, and he's your darling so let's say he's great. ;-) You also can get help from Sela and Mitchell > the head hunter on the obt/pot angle. Yeah, Sela is a great bitch, and if you play PRE too she's the greatest ! And Mitchell can sure do stuff. Gerard has obt/dom and there are > three other little to mid range vamps with obt. that's not a bad > range of vampires to choose from to stretch out the disciplines. > Besides the Lasombra have only been in three expansions. Yeah. But don't make me say what I didn't say : I'm not (anymore) complaining about the Lasombra, sure, I wish there were more good small vampires among them, but I think the Bloodlines Kyasid may well give us that ; and anyway I'm finding many different ways to make that clan work, even in CL, which is more than I can say for Giovanni until now (I just WISH I could play a crypt as good as the Giovanni's with a combo as good as the Lasombra's !! But one can't have it all, can he ?). Yours in the face of darkness, Orpheus

In message <9qipi8$j4q$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >Here are my answers to different mails from this thread ; hope it's not too >> Inner Circle Members only get 1 really great vote, but OMFG, does this >> card ruke. That pesky archbishop a problem? Spider Killer looking >> threatening? Eh. Just burn it and be done with it. It doesn't even >> cost anything. Just pass a vote, which is relatively easy with ICMs >> out. >> >> While there is some ok Sabbat only stuff, nothing really compares to >> what the camarilla can do with 5th/MT, 2nd, PS, and PTO. > >No, nothing, and that was my whole point. But James doesn't want to >understand this and makes it personal. I don't. I would suggest you're entirely wrong in this assertion; James understands many things. Attempting to tell James what he understands and making assumptions based thereupon is unlikely to help you ascertain James' point of view on something. (James has no problems with referring to himself in the third person, he does it regularly.) James may well believe that an argument about Parity Shift which, when challenged, then turns to "Ah, but this isn't about Parity Shift, it's about this other thing really, I just didn't say that and expect other people to read my mind, they just don't understand" is losing its way and would do well to remind itself what it's trying to argue for. There may be a larger problem in the relative power levels. However, when we take sect wide views of power levels, we also have to take note of the specifics, too. Compared to the Ventrue and Brujah (two of the strongest Camarilla voters), the Lasombra are a different kettle of fish. Taking 2nd Tradition for the sake of argument. How much intercept do the Ventrue have access to? Aside from the standard disciplineless stuff available to all (newspapers, bikes, angels etc.), they have Powerbase: Berlin, which is rarely used. None of their disciplines are favoured with intercept. Similarly, the Brujah have access to similar amounts of intercept, with no real discipline based alternatives. 2nd Tradition, therefore, provides a significant boost to them, for the cost of princes. (Of course, in the case of blocking bleed actions, the Ventrue also have access to bleed bounce - something which both the Lasombra and Tzimisce referred to below also do, but which the Brujah generally lack.) The Lasombra already have access to not insignificant amount of intercept, relatively speaking. Darksight effectively allows permanent intercept to be played transiently, as well as Eyes of the Night. The Sabbat now has access to Eternal Vigilance, which provides something the Camarilla don't have. In an environment where intercept can be light, Eternal Vigilance may well be entirely preferable to 2nd Tradition - one card does the work of 5 or 6 wakes (which may include 2nd Tradition). That the Lasombra can already muster 2 intercept of their own (Obtenebration) would mean that providing them with access to a 2nd Tradition duplicate would significantly empower them. If they are approximately balanced as they stand now, this would quite likely knock game balance out by some way. Also compare the Tzimisce, who are *without doubt* the clan with the best access to intercept in the game - Animalism permanents combined with Animalism untap transients and Auspex transients is extremely powerful, in the context of intercept. Add Eternal Vigilance to the mix and you have an extremely potent set of intercept. Do they need even more intercept? Such demonstrates that the Lasombra and Tzimisce voters are in a somewhat different situation already to the Brujah and Ventrue voters; by extension, this gives us the basic idea that was is appropriate for them may well be inappropriate for the Sabbat, and vice-versa. If we compare back to, say, the Toreador, we have a somewhat more even footing to compare and contrast with. The Toreador are good intercepters, better than the Lasombra but not as good as the Tzimisce, based purely on their clan and discipline abilities. They do have 2nd Tradition available to them. Such might lead us to believe that arguments above regarding the Ventrue and Brujah are interesting but don't entirely hold water. However, let us recall that Jyhad is a game of many parts. Examining intercept is all well and good, but we also have to remember what occurs *when* we intercept one. The Ventrue can do very little to other vampires; Pulled Fangs was disempowered some years ago, King of the Mountain is possible but apparent and not cheap, the Island of the Yiaros has some limited value. They can, however, defend themselves excellently. Fortitude and Presence are both loaded with various forms of combat defence - dodges, damage prevention, combat ends - along with some useful side effects - untaps, minor damage. The Brujah, by contrast, excel in offensive combat. However, they have no source of real combat defence other than sacrificing their combat offence. That is, in order to defend themselves, they must retreat to effects like Strike: Dodge. Sideslip provides one small way out of this. In order to use their own dodges, they must allow other combatants to do so as well - they cannot play Immortal Grapple, which is often necessary. They can do significant damage to other vampires, but in contrast to the Ventrue, the Toreador, the Lasombra and the Tzimisce, they lack bleed bounce in any form, thus being able to hit back is extremely useful. The Toreador lie between mixed extremes. They cannot defend themselves as well as the Ventrue can - Auspex and Celerity, though they may try, are no substitute for Fortitude (nor should they be, of course). However, they cannot advance in combat to the extremes of the Brujah - their celerity is useful, but needs to be combined with something. The usual object of desire here is a gun, but these can be difficult and expensive to obtain, relative to a transient potence strike card which requires no pool and no equipping time. Their Sabbat brethren, of course, have the Art of Pain available to them - 3 damage Blurred is far from insignificant. By contrast, the Tzimisce can do some really rather excellent combative tricks. Carrion Crows, Song of Serenity, Blood of Acid, Horrid Form, Skin Trap, Breath of the Dragon, Chiropteran Marauder, Body Arsenal, Path of Metamorphosis, Inner Essence and Telepathic Tracking provide some extremely scary offensive options. Tzimisce intercept decks *already* do extremely well. Lasombra have fewer intercept possibilities than the Toreador and lack the Celerity of the Brujah for combat offence support. They manage to slot somewhere in between the two of them on both levels. Again, relative to the Brujah, they have bleed bounce which is far from insignificant. 2nd Tradition is an excellent card, don't get me wrong, very useful indeed. However, if we are, as you suggest, to look at it on a sect based level we have to look at how it will impact numerous aspects of that sect. Adding 2nd Tradition to the Sabbat... do we *really* want to have Meshenka managing the best intercept in the game and cheap offensive combat with defence possible too, even if not brilliant. Looking at things at this sort of level allows us to see the inherent problems with working at a sect-wide level - that it's a blanket tool, which needs to be carefully judged. Some areas will come up to balance, some won't be touched and others will be shifted above the balance in that area. There may, indeed, be a case for "filling up the corners" somewhat. However, merely adding such cards to the Sabbat (because they're "obsolete" to use your terminology regarding Praxis Seizure) isn't going to help matters any. If the Sabbat are less powerful, simply duplicating the Camarilla options isn't going to solve problems - it's going to give them all the options they already have, all the options the Camarilla have and one hell of a headache for people wanting to play a balanced game. Fifth Tradition, of course, is different. Unlike 2nd Tradition, Fifth Tradition has very few alternatives. 2nd Tradition duplicates some facets of the game already available to everyone (wake, disciplineless intercept) means that a lack of it isn't chronic. (Annoying, perhaps.) Fifth Tradition is only really mirrored by Giant's Blood and Festivo dello Estinto, and neither of these really work in the same way. (Though underestimating the potential utility of Festive dello Estinto would be foolish.) Fifth Tradition, as I have previously argued on this group, has part of its power based firmly in the fact that it's not duplicable. It's certainly a good card, and it's certainly doing well on an effect:cost ratio level. There's no other real middle ground between Fifth and a basic hunting action, though. Filling in a gap would not be an entirely bad idea, especially if it worked in a way that big non-titled Camarilla vampires could appreciate - we all appreciate that big vampires are not entirely the easiest thing to play. Since the whole Fifth/Minion Tap combo allows you to avoid putting all your eggs in one basket, it works extremely well with large vampires. If we look at The Fourth Tradition, it's certainly not an entirely bad card. It would be more powerful if Govern the Unaligned and Scouting Mission didn't provide similar and intermediary effects, and other minor pool generators (Art Scam, Voter Captivation and so on) exist. Having a middle ground between the base "hunt for 1/bleed for 1" effect and Fifth's effect would not be a bad thing. But in the area of 2nd Tradition, there is already a lot of middle ground. Giving people another 2nd Tradition isn't going to help matters. >> The problem as stated isn't that the Camarilla have powerful >> cards at their >> hand, it's that the Sabbat hardly has none themselves! Almost > all the >cards >> that requires Archbishops etc are quite bad in comparison, >> except the ones >> giving the Sabbat more votes. But what are they going to do >> with the votes >> when there's hardly any interesting votes to call? > >My point exactly. (Note: This is not the point you started out with, which was that the Sabbat did not have Parity Shift. This is not the same as having "hardly any interesting votes to call".) For some value of "interesting votes". Archon (Camarilla only) is replaced by Templar, both of which are similarly useful cards. Anathema is gone, of course, as are a number of Camarilla oriented votes (Command of the Harpies) which have equivalents. Kindred Restructure can be substituted with Dramatic Upheaval - not *as* good but still very good. The First Tradition is not available to them, but is rarely played, being complex and extremely difficult to judge. But let's look at the other votes still available to them. Banishment is certainly interesting. Kine Resources Contested is one of the best cards in the game. Conservative Agitation also has its place. Sabbat Inquisitor - you vote to give a vampire +1 bleed, if nothing else! Reinforcements is available to many, and very good it is too. Rabble Razing is as effective against weenies when played by the Sabbat as it is played by anyone else. Political Stranglehold - powerful, useful, interesting. A well-timed Political Flux can either give you a huge margin over what you should have or annul someone else's. National Guard Support is potentially excellent bleed defence, especially if you're not going for a bleed deck element at all. (And bruise and vote will still hit *someone*). Consanguineous Boon and Autarkis Persecution are solid pool gain, as ever. Honor the Elders is extremely useful. Playing a fat Lasombra vote deck? Here, have three free pool to your uncontrolled region. Disputed Territory mucks around other decks - steal that Heidelberg, stop their blood flow. Blood Siege! Now *there's* an interesting vote if ever I saw one. What other card in the game can generate a permanent 4 vote swing, denying a deck access to the Traditions its put in? Are these cards not interesting? Also consider the fact that votes do not always have to be used by you. One of the most powerful factors of Legacy of Pander in its previous mis-printed incarnation was not the fact that you could pass your own votes but that you could shut down other people's votes. Investiture and Cardinal Benediction can be passed excluding Camarilla vampires very easily, no extra cards needed. You can dominate Bloodhunts and demand that they play Closed Session just to get basic votes passed because you can generate a large number of votes, if you're so inclined. You can then use them for your own votes, too. Of course, there are no interesting votes that the Sabbat can call. Oh no. >I play Lasombra because I like this clan feeling-wise, not >to mention that I began the game with Sabbat War and lack most of the >Camarilla cards ; but should I try to play votes when it doesn't seem to be >able to win (well, at least it's fun to play, but...) ? Sure, you're welcome to try it. Lots of fun ideas can come out of "Hey, let's see if I can..." and then sticking together a deck with a number of moving parts. The out-of-turn Malkavian Rotschreck deck is one such deck. Can the Lasombra play votes? Sure. Can they do it as a pure tactic? That's less obvious. The Gangrel, say, are not the world's most obvious voters. Sure, they can muster a prince or two if they have to, but you wouldn't say they suck just because they can't pass votes. It's not their role to. If you realise that the Lasombra are good voters without being superb at it, and capitalise on what the Lasombra actually *are* rather than what you would *like* them to be, you can have a blast. Have a look at, say: "Tournament Winning Deck: Praxis Seizure: College Station (4vps in final round) July 14th, 2001 by Jeffrey Thompson" on <URL:http://www.thelasomb ra.com/decks/twd.htm> A very good deck, combining a number of factors previously outlined. A powerful vote deck that goes a different way to your standard Camarilla vote deck, creating weenies, "wasting" actions on bringing out other vampires with Scouting Mission and Govern (which can, of course, should you so wish be used as bleed cards if they turn up in the late game). Or: "Crusade: Seattle, Continental Championship Seattle Qualifier, Winning Deck by Jeffrey Thompson March 2001" Again, this takes a different tack, mixing and matching Presence in their as well to provide an unexpected twist. Or: "Michael Eichler's Winning Deck Portsmouth December 2000, Lasombra on the Presidental Lawn (Sabbat War variant), Crypt [avg = 6.31]" A deck with voting power, sure, but mixed in with bleed bounce, with bleed, with combat and so on. Again, very different from how you'd play a similarly themed Camarilla deck - perhaps closest to a Brujah deck. >> There's only the tedious >> KRC/Conservative Ag. Domain Challenge and Ancilla >> Empowerment really if you >want to do any harm through votes. > >Don't forget Transfer of Power and, Conservative Agitation, and, if you can >place it, Tithings ; but most of these can B played by any vampire... And don't forget, of course, that causing harm through votes isn't the only thing you can do. And also recall that the only "damage" vote that they lack is Parity Shift. Whoop-di-do. >> And these all clans can call so why play >> Lasombra when you can play Ventrue to call them and also >> have access to all >> other goodies? > >For fun ? Or for the fact that you're playing a different deck. If you can play a Lasombra vote deck in the same way as a Ventrue vote deck, you've built the wrong deck for one or the other. >But it's the whole question I'm asking here : do the conceptors at >WW (and I know Lasombra loves to play Lasombra ;-) , even with votes) intend >the Sabbat to be able to play a true voting deck, or would it just be a >little "plus" in mostly discipline-based decks ? For some values of "true", the Sabbat already can. However, the Sabbat were not designed to be a hugely powerful influential political force. That's why they have other options available to them - for instance, why the !Toreador have Art of Pain instead of anything else. >> The Camarilla should always have an advantage in the political > arena >-- that's what the Camarilla is, a politically sound sect. >> The Sabbat is more a religion than a political body, and a >> fanatic religion, at >> that. > >Yes, it's totally true in background terms. But what about the strategy game >? In terms of the strategy game, the Sabbat are doing pretty well at the moment, if you know how to play them well. That they have been compensated in other areas (though opinion may differ as to whether it was enough or not) would suggest that just giving them the same options voting-wise is going to mean that the other options will seriously empower them on top of that. >> Their sect-only cards are more suited for groups, > >Examples ? Blood Feast - works better with lots of vampires. In terms of pool generation, this has potential use as an alternative to Fifth/MT. Festivo dello Estinto - to get the maximum use, you probably want to have a lot of vampires out to use it all there and then. Shock Troops - generates those groups, potentially. Difficult to use well. The Sabbat is very much based around the idea of a pack mentality. >> and the Lasombra can out-fight the Ventrue hands-down. > >Sorry, but not true. Stop and think about this one. Are you saying that the Ventrue are better at fighting than the Lasombra? >This has been debated in other recent threads, but I'll >just say once more that Pot alone can nothing against For, I believe you have confused "out-fight" with general combat ability. The Ventrue can defend themselves, certainly. They cannot *fight* however. >No, you're right, Obt makes it easier to pass votes, but then, the whole >point is : what's the use if it doesn't make you win ? If you play the deck well, you can win. You can call a vote and make sure it gets called. You may have a slightly harder time passing it initially, because your set-up may take a little longer. Them's the breaks, as they say. No-one is good at everything. If the Lasombra had stealth, combat ability, bleed and unstoppable votes, crikey. >But not only the votes are inferior (compare 3rd tradition and Creation >Rites, for instance...). Happy to, though do recall they're not votes. For a potentially wider range of titles (Archbishop, Priscus and Cardinal, as opposed to just Prince or Justicar) you are limited by being able to place less blood on them. Is this necessarily inferior? You'd need to make a convincing argument, because of the fact that the cards are different. [ quoted text not captured ]

Howdy, > Yup. And don't forget the horrible abuse that it known as Gratiano + Regent > (and an optional Secure Haven). There's pretty much 7 votes for you! Can you do that? I would think that when he becomes a Cardinal (via Regent) he stops being a Priscus and thus cannot vote in the Prisci sub-referendum. Or does his special card text still give him one vote there? Alex

[ quoted text not captured ] His special still applies (card text). -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

> > > Yup. And don't forget the horrible abuse that it known as Gratiano + Regent > > > (and an optional Secure Haven). There's pretty much 7 votes for you! And with a Legendary Vampire, that guy bleeds at 4 (beware the Archons !) and votes at 9... Yes, Secure Heaven it is !!!

> There may be a larger problem in the relative power levels. However, > when we take sect wide views of power levels, we also have to take note > of the specifics, too. Ok, James, now you've developped a quite interesting analysis here - if quite long also. I suggest we both cut the aggressive crap and get on to the stuff itself. On second tradition : > The Lasombra already have access to not insignificant amount of > intercept, relatively speaking. Darksight effectively allows permanent > intercept to be played transiently, as well as Eyes of the Night. The > Sabbat now has access to Eternal Vigilance, which provides something the > Camarilla don't have. In an environment where intercept can be light, > Eternal Vigilance may well be entirely preferable to 2nd Tradition - one > card does the work of 5 or 6 wakes (which may include 2nd Tradition). > That the Lasombra can already muster 2 intercept of their own > (Obtenebration) would mean that providing them with access to a 2nd > Tradition duplicate would significantly empower them. If they are > approximately balanced as they stand now, this would quite likely knock > game balance out by some way. > > Also compare the Tzimisce, who are *without doubt* the clan with the > best access to intercept in the game - Animalism permanents combined > with Animalism untap transients and Auspex transients is extremely > powerful, in the context of intercept. Add Eternal Vigilance to the mix > and you have an extremely potent set of intercept. Do they need even > more intercept? I think you're right when asserting that Lasombra and, of course, the Tsimisce, don't need any more intercept than they already have. Now, 2nd trad still is a very good card, if only because you untap and intercept : rat(='s warning and Elder Intervention rolled up into one for no blood is enormous ! Eternal vigilance is a pretty good but very costly card : one action and one blood to equip, one more blood each time you untap. But then, it does what it has to do in Sabbat clans, point taken. > Such demonstrates that the Lasombra and Tzimisce voters are in a > somewhat different situation already to the Brujah and Ventrue voters; I don't really see the direct correlation between untap / intercept and voters ; concerning stealth, of course, it's another matter. > by extension, this gives us the basic idea that was is appropriate for > them may well be inappropriate for the Sabbat, and vice-versa. If we > compare back to, say, the Toreador, we have a somewhat more even footing > to compare and contrast with. The Toreador are good intercepters, > better than the Lasombra but not as good as the Tzimisce, based purely > on their clan and discipline abilities. They do have 2nd Tradition > available to them. Such might lead us to believe that arguments above > regarding the Ventrue and Brujah are interesting but don't entirely hold > water. (zip : comparison between Toré / Ventrue / Brujah in combat) > By contrast, the Tzimisce can do some really rather excellent combative > tricks. Carrion Crows, Song of Serenity, Blood of Acid, Horrid Form, > Skin Trap, Breath of the Dragon, Chiropteran Marauder, Body Arsenal, > Path of Metamorphosis, Inner Essence and Telepathic Tracking provide > some extremely scary offensive options. Tzimisce intercept decks > *already* do extremely well. Yes, they're very efficient ; they have nothing for resisting, though (quite fortunately, because a Tsim FOR or CEL deck would be a horror...). > Lasombra have fewer intercept possibilities than the Toreador and lack > the Celerity of the Brujah for combat offence support. They manage to > slot somewhere in between the two of them on both levels. Again, > relative to the Brujah, they have bleed bounce which is far from > insignificant. Right. Not a clan which can or must rely on combat, but it can be useful all the same. > 2nd Tradition is an excellent card, don't get me wrong, very useful > indeed. However, if we are, as you suggest, to look at it on a sect > based level we have to look at how it will impact numerous aspects of > that sect. Adding 2nd Tradition to the Sabbat... do we *really* want to > have Meshenka managing the best intercept in the game and cheap > offensive combat with defence possible too, even if not brilliant. No we don't, and you'll remember I wasn't talking about that tradition. But, just for fun, can you name one Sabbat non discipline card as potent - on other plans - as this one ? > Looking at things at this sort of level allows us to see the inherent > problems with working at a sect-wide level - that it's a blanket tool, Blaket of night ? ;-) > which needs to be carefully judged. Some areas will come up to balance, > some won't be touched and others will be shifted above the balance in > that area. > There may, indeed, be a case for "filling up the corners" somewhat. > However, merely adding such cards to the Sabbat (because they're > "obsolete" to use your terminology regarding Praxis Seizure) I spoke of obsolete concerning the absence of Inner Circles at the time when the card came out, this is out of subject. My point now is only that such a card (and a few others) makes all the voting difference between the 2 sects. isn't going > to help matters any. If the Sabbat are less powerful, simply > duplicating the Camarilla options isn't going to solve problems - it's > going to give them all the options they already have, all the options > the Camarilla have and one hell of a headache for people wanting to play > a balanced game. No, of course ; but then if these very powerful cards are not duplicated for Sabbat, there should at least be some other cards that really compensate the balance. And I'll remind you another question related to the first : can Sabbat really rely efficiently on votes, compared to one of the 3 Camarilla *voting* clans ? > Fifth Tradition, of course, is different. Unlike 2nd Tradition, Fifth > Tradition has very few alternatives. 2nd Tradition duplicates some > facets of the game already available to everyone (wake, disciplineless > intercept) means that a lack of it isn't chronic. (Annoying, perhaps.) > Fifth Tradition is only really mirrored by Giant's Blood and Festivo > dello Estinto, and neither of these really work in the same way. > (Though underestimating the potential utility of Festive dello Estinto > would be foolish.) Very interesting in some situations, but very risky card too. One has to chose wether to play it in order to come back at full cap in blood (in which case you'd better have some good stealth or be fearsome even at one blood), or to take the stealth away in order to hurt opponents (but now you have strained vitae supply, much better for that...). > Fifth Tradition, as I have previously argued on this group, has part of > its power based firmly in the fact that it's not duplicable. It's > certainly a good card, and it's certainly doing well on an effect:cost > ratio level. There's no other real middle ground between Fifth and a > basic hunting action, though. Filling in a gap would not be an entirely > bad idea, especially if it worked in a way that big non-titled Camarilla > vampires could appreciate - we all appreciate that big vampires are not > entirely the easiest thing to play. Since the whole Fifth/Minion Tap > combo allows you to avoid putting all your eggs in one basket, it works > extremely well with large vampires. So are you suggesting a Sabbat equivalent of the 5th ? > > (Note: This is not the point you started out with, which was that the > Sabbat did not have Parity Shift. This is not the same as having > "hardly any interesting votes to call".) Right, but during the discussion it appeared that there were some other really good "Camarilla only" votes I didn't even know of (having started with SW) ; Sabbat still has some pretty good votes, but it takes us back to the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? > For some value of "interesting votes". Archon (Camarilla only) is > replaced by Templar, both of which are similarly useful cards. Yes. > Anathema is gone, of course, as are a number of Camarilla oriented votes > (Command of the Harpies) which have equivalents. Kindred Restructure > can be substituted with Dramatic Upheaval - not *as* good but still very > good. Not only is it not as good, but Cama vamps can use both. The First Tradition is not available to them, but is rarely > played, being complex and extremely difficult to judge. > But let's look at the other votes still available to them. Banishment > is certainly interesting. Kine Resources Contested is one of the best > cards in the game. Conservative Agitation also has its place. Sabbat > Inquisitor - you vote to give a vampire +1 bleed, if nothing else! > Reinforcements is available to many, and very good it is too. Rabble > Razing is as effective against weenies when played by the Sabbat as it > is played by anyone else. Political Stranglehold - powerful, useful, > interesting. A well-timed Political Flux can either give you a huge > margin over what you should have or annul someone else's. National > Guard Support is potentially excellent bleed defence, especially if > you're not going for a bleed deck element at all. (And bruise and vote > will still hit *someone*). Consanguineous Boon and Autarkis Persecution > are solid pool gain, as ever. Honor the Elders is extremely useful. > Playing a fat Lasombra vote deck? Here, have three free pool to your > uncontrolled region. Disputed Territory mucks around other decks - > steal that Heidelberg, stop their blood flow. Blood Siege! Now > *there's* an interesting vote if ever I saw one. What other card in the > game can generate a permanent 4 vote swing, denying a deck access to the > Traditions its put in? > Are these cards not interesting? Yes, they are ; but you'll note that most of them (except Sabbat Inquisitor which does the same as some equipements or retainers, ans Blood Siege which hase no *direct effect*, as it only allows you to gain votes over your opponent) are available for both sects ; and no vote I know is Sabbat only and as good as PS, PtO etc. > Also consider the fact that votes do not always have to be used by you. > One of the most powerful factors of Legacy of Pander in its previous > mis-printed incarnation was not the fact that you could pass your own > votes but that you could shut down other people's votes. Investiture > and Cardinal Benediction can be passed excluding Camarilla vampires very > easily, no extra cards needed. Yes, pretty useful ; pretty hard requisites too, though. > You can dominate Bloodhunts and demand > that they play Closed Session just to get basic votes passed because you > can generate a large number of votes, if you're so inclined. You can > then use them for your own votes, too. Of course, there are no > interesting votes that the Sabbat can call. Oh no. Ok for the bloodhunt. But were we not talking about Sabbat vote CARDS ? > >I play Lasombra because I like this clan feeling-wise, not > >to mention that I began the game with Sabbat War and lack most of the > >Camarilla cards ; but should I try to play votes when it doesn't seem to be > >able to win (well, at least it's fun to play, but...) ? > > Sure, you're welcome to try it. Lots of fun ideas can come out of "Hey, > let's see if I can..." and then sticking together a deck with a number > of moving parts. The out-of-turn Malkavian Rotschreck deck is one such > deck. > > Can the Lasombra play votes? Sure. Can they do it as a pure tactic? > That's less obvious. The Gangrel, say, are not the world's most obvious > voters. Sure, they can muster a prince or two if they have to, but you > wouldn't say they suck just because they can't pass votes. It's not > their role to. If you realise that the Lasombra are good voters without > being superb at it, and capitalise on what the Lasombra actually *are* > rather than what you would *like* them to be, you can have a blast. But we've already established that they were no superb fighters, no superb stealthers, and too expensive for mass-bleeding, so... what IS their main tactic ? > Have a look at, say: I will look at the decks you mentionned (the one with the links at least). But you know, playing CL / no deck limit, we can't rely on just one or 2 good cards like redirections, so it's a pretty different tactics. >> There's only the tedious > >> KRC/Conservative Ag. Domain Challenge and Ancilla > >> Empowerment really if you > >want to do any harm through votes. > > > >Don't forget Transfer of Power and, Conservative Agitation, and, if you can > >place it, Tithings ; but most of these can B played by any vampire... > > And don't forget, of course, that causing harm through votes isn't the > only thing you can do. And also recall that the only "damage" vote that > they lack is Parity Shift. Whoop-di-do. But what a "damage" ! :-) > >> And these all clans can call so why play > >> Lasombra when you can play Ventrue to call them and also > >> have access to all > >> other goodies? > > > >For fun ? > > Or for the fact that you're playing a different deck. If you can play a > Lasombra vote deck in the same way as a Ventrue vote deck, you've built > the wrong deck for one or the other. > > >But it's the whole question I'm asking here : do the conceptors at > >WW (and I know Lasombra loves to play Lasombra ;-) , even with votes) intend > >the Sabbat to be able to play a true voting deck, or would it just be a > >little "plus" in mostly discipline-based decks ? > > For some values of "true", the Sabbat already can. What do you mean by that ? [ quoted text not captured ] I'm saying that with Pot only, and even some additionals if U want, you're no match against For, even if the opponent just does 1 damage (but then you can B trapped, he can have a weapon, etc.) ; the only card that really makes the difference would B Entomb, which unfortunately doesn't work with IG (you'll say it's better that way, and maybe it is ; but it's still not that easy to use efficiently against real combat decks, or even decks with some dodge). > >This has been debated in other recent threads, but I'll > >just say once more that Pot alone can nothing against For, > > I believe you have confused "out-fight" with general combat ability. > The Ventrue can defend themselves, certainly. They cannot *fight* > however. All right, sorry for the little language subtleties, I'm not english > >No, you're right, Obt makes it easier to pass votes, but then, the whole > >point is : what's the use if it doesn't make you win ? > > If you play the deck well, you can win. You can call a vote and make > sure it gets called. You may have a slightly harder time passing it > initially, because your set-up may take a little longer. Them's the > breaks, as they say. No-one is good at everything. If the Lasombra had > stealth, combat ability, bleed and unstoppable votes, crikey. > > >But not only the votes are inferior (compare 3rd tradition and Creation > >Rites, for instance...). > > Happy to, though do recall they're not votes. For a potentially wider > range of titles (Archbishop, Priscus and Cardinal, as opposed to just > Prince or Justicar) Yes, but will we go again over how many small Princes are available ? you are limited by being able to place less blood on > them. > > Is this necessarily inferior? You'd need to make a convincing argument, > because of the fact that the cards are different. Oh, let's just say I've seen both working, and one turn spent hunting when you're a 1 Cap weenie can litteraly change the game. Just compare 3 CR to 3 Third vampires, it makes for 3 more potential actions (or bleed) ! Until the next interesting argument, Orpheus

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:<9qkil6$bmn$1...@wanadoo.fr>... > But we've already established that [the Lasombra] were not superb fighters, > no superb stealthers, and too expensive for mass-bleeding, so... what IS > their main tactic ? You know, I'm only following these threads in expectation of the moment when The Lasombra will swoop in to kick ass and take names.

Note, I did some order changing for my own sake. >Could U post your deck so that I could have a better idea of > how you employ such a crypt ? > > My sample vote/bleed deck crypt for the Lasombra: Angelica -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT POT cel obf (remove master hand jam) Alvaro -ArchB 9 dom OBT POT pre (blood for abstain) +1 bleed Gustav -Pri 8 DOM obt AUS for (remove titles) +1 bleed Francisco -ArchB 9 DOM OBT POT PRE pro (burn for +1 bleed) Aurora -none 6 OBT dom for pot Ambrosio -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT POT PRE for aus (lots 'o good stuff) Quentin -Bishop 9 DOM obt AUS FOR cel (cancel votes) Gratiano -Super-Pri 9 DOM OBT pot obf +1 bleed Ayelea -Cardinal 10 DOM OBT AUS THA pre (take a !Tremere) Talley -none 6 OBT dom POT aus (+1 int to take one for the team) Antonio -ArchB 9 DOM OBT POT tha (untap after vote!!!!) Guido -none 5 OBT dom Deck: Cameron's Big Lasombra Weenies Masters: (21) 6 Minion Tap 1 Festivo dello Estinto 5 Zillah's Valley 3 The Path of Night 1 Legendary Vampire 1 PB:Madrid 1 Political HG 1 Giants Blood 1 Sudden Reversal 1 Elysian Fields Actions: (34) 14 Govern the Unaligned 1 Palatial Estate 1 Arson 4 Conservative Agitation 5 Kine Resources Contested 3 Crusades (Miami, Philly, Mexico City) (the Miami should be a Toronto) 1 Ancient Influence 1 Political Stranglehold 3 Consanguineous Boon 1 Anarchist Uprising Reactions: (10) 4 WwEF 6 Deflection Action Mod's: (10) 9 Shadow Play 1 Shroud of Night Combat: (15) 5 Arms of the Abyss 4 Shadow Body 4 Entombment 2 Burning Wrath Notes: It plays slow, especially at first. Get out the biggest DOM vampire, use Zillah's to help, goven out an army, and then bleed away. Call votes to keep your prey off balance, especially if they pack deflections. Use stealth sparingly, and don't be afraid to just toss the mastercards. I change up the combat and stealth ratios and types to mess with the heads of my playgroup. I suggest everyone else do it too (just not to me). > > and DOM/POT/pro on a 6-cap bishop. I > > love Lisette even more. > > I don't, she doesn't have THE important discipline, and playing Lasombra / > fight with a POT only vampire just doesn't do it. Same could go for Cameron > (I much, much prefer Ignacio !!) but he's not too expensive, and he's your > darling so let's say he's great. ;-) well, I'll post that deck some other time. Cameron

On 17 Oct 2001 15:12:49 -0700, emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] *snort* Any moment now. =) However, to answer Orpheus' question: their main tactic is being good at EVERYTHING, in few enough cards that you can cram it all into one deck. They can't bleed better than the Malkavians, they just have to bleed for more than your defenses. They can't fight better than the Brujah, but your Ventrue aren't going to be able to tell the difference. And they can't stealth better than the Nossies, but you'll still need dedicated intercept to catch them if they want to be sneaky. -- Derek

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:<9qkil6$bmn$1...@wanadoo.fr>... > > But we've already established that they were no superb fighters, no superb > stealthers, and too expensive for mass-bleeding, so... what IS their main > tactic ? > I'm not sure how it was established that they can't fight. That seems a bit like saying the Brujah can't fight. They have a costless dodge with additional strike, a costless maneuver (granted, not as good as Flash), can deal hand damage at long range, if they can't manage to keep it close and the opponent doesn't S:CE (many decks have taken it as enough to simply maneuver to long versus the potence deck and have cut down a little on the density of S:CE). OBT is not *quite* the combat discipline that CEL is, but it's not bad either. Dominate is a better discipline than Presence for everything but voting and S:CE, and the Lasombra have Power Structure for votes, and OBT for S:CE. Overall, I really don't see the perceived weakness of the Lasombra compared to the Brujah. They're not the fighters that Nossies are, they're not the voters than Ventrue are, and they're not the stealth bleeders that the Malkavs are. But they seem to approximately match the Brujah in all categories, and are better then them at stealth bleed. Lasombra play as a somewhat toolboxy deck. You can play a focused deck with them, but their strenghts are varied, and it's hard to take advantage of them all. I haven't read the whole thread yet, but it seems like maybe you want the Lasombra to be able to do politics on par with Ventrue, but the Sabbat is not a political sect. Presence is a Camarilla Discipline (in my personal WOD campaigns, the !Tor have aus/cel/vic, and the !Bru have cel/obt/pot), as political maneuverings and kindred society games are just not a part of the Sabbat. You are not voted into power, you wrest that power in a bloody takeover. That said, I *do* think there should be better Sabbat only cards that are more combat oriented. We have a few already, but a lot of them are too weak, compared to the Camarilla equivalent. I took out the Blood Feasts and War Party from my Lasombra deck, not because I couldn't play them, but just because they were never ever useful and were just clogging up my hand. I don't think that better vote cards are the way to go, though.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2001, James Coupe wrote: > In message <9qipi8$j4q$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> > writes > >Here are my answers to different mails from this thread ; hope it's not too > >> Inner Circle Members only get 1 really great vote, but OMFG, does this > >> card ruke. That pesky archbishop a problem? Spider Killer looking > >> threatening? Eh. Just burn it and be done with it. It doesn't even > >> cost anything. Just pass a vote, which is relatively easy with ICMs > >> out. > >> > >> While there is some ok Sabbat only stuff, nothing really compares to > >> what the camarilla can do with 5th/MT, 2nd, PS, and PTO. > > > >No, nothing, and that was my whole point. But James doesn't want to > >understand this and makes it personal. I don't. > > I would suggest you're entirely wrong in this assertion; James > understands many things. Attempting to tell James what he understands > and making assumptions based thereupon is unlikely to help you ascertain > James' point of view on something. (James has no problems with > referring to himself in the third person, he does it regularly.) James > may well believe that an argument about Parity Shift which, when > challenged, then turns to "Ah, but this isn't about Parity Shift, it's > about this other thing really, I just didn't say that and expect other > people to read my mind, they just don't understand" is losing its way > and would do well to remind itself what it's trying to argue for. [major snippage] well, i must say, james has really done wonders with that post. It was one of the most cohesive little essays on the relative differences between sects that i have read. Normally i just get bored after a few paragraphs, especially if what i am reading agrees with my own opinion, but this was compelling stuff. It even made me want to build a shock troops/blood feast/tribute to the master deck, using !vent. well done james. you're my hero. O:) salem.

> > I will look at the decks you mentionned (the one with the links at least). > But you know, playing CL / no deck limit, we can't rely on just one or 2 > good cards like redirections, so it's a pretty different tactics. Are you telling us that you, although you started with SW, which rule-booklet explicitly states that the game is played *without* cardlimits, you adopted a CL? SW *alone* is correctly balanced under NL, as it was designed that way. I can see your problem now: with no deck limit and a CL (is it 4 of each?) you *have* to put *every* damaging vote possible in your deck. And because Parity Shift is not available to Sabbat clans, you think they are less powerful than the Camarilla clans, in regards to voting power. Play NL, with a maximum deck-size of 90 cards, and you'll see that the Sabbat don't *need* PS. Always keep in mind that the game was/is designed under NL, and playing with a CL houserule may make certain cards appear stronger than they really are... Carl

I'll answer to both Derk, Chris and Carl here. > >You know, I'm only following these threads in expectation of the > >moment when The Lasombra will swoop in to kick ass and take names. > > *snort* Any moment now. =) LOL Don't misunderstand me : I think that deck can work, they're good enough at many things, I just want to establish if they can be focused one 1 thing or if they must stay "the deck that does it all if just a little". > However, to answer Orpheus' question: their main tactic is being good > at EVERYTHING, in few enough cards that you can cram it all into one > deck. That seems to answer it... :-) > They can't bleed better than the Malkavians, they just have to bleed for > more than your defenses. What do you mean "more than your defenses" ? More stealth than your intercept ? They can't fight better than the Brujah, but > your Ventrue aren't going to be able to tell the difference. Except the only thing they will feel with their For and our scarce additionals is Entombment. And they > can't stealth better than the Nossies, but you'll still need dedicated > intercept to catch them if they want to be sneaky. Or maybe just a Guardian Angel / Sport Bike or a KRCG... But I get your point. So, you would make a deck with a little of everything, no real focus ? > I'm not sure how it was established that they can't fight. That seems a bit like saying the Brujah can't fight. They have a costless dodge with additional strike, a costless maneuver (granted, not as good as Flash), can deal hand damage at long range, if they can't manage to keep it close and the opponent doesn't S:CE (many decks have taken it as enough to simply maneuver to long versus the potence deck and have cut down a little on the density of S:CE). Yes, because of the IG abuse, of course... Ranged Lasombra combat seems nice, but then the only really terrible strike is Entombment, and you must be at close, but with no IG... > OBT is not *quite* the combat discipline that CEL is, but it's not bad either. It's a good complement, I'll grant you that. No match for a real fighting deck, though... > Dominate is a better discipline than Presence for everything but voting and S:CE, and the Lasombra have Power Structure for votes, and OBT for S:CE. Overall, I really don't see the perceived weakness of the Lasombra compared to the Brujah. They're not the fighters that Nossies are, they're not the voters than Ventrue are, and they're not the stealth bleeders that the Malkavs are. Right. > But they seem to approximately match the Brujah in all categories, and are better then them at stealth bleed. ??? You underestimate our Brujah fellows !! Ok, for stealth bleed they're just not there, but they can additionate a whole lot more than with just Arms or Metamorphosis, and dodge, manoeuver, etc ; Cel is a very good combat discipline, especially in conjonction with Pot ; and let's not forget that they have access to a whole lot of Camarilla traditions... > Lasombra play as a somewhat toolboxy deck. You can play a focused deck with them, but their strenghts are varied, and it's hard to take advantage of them all. Yes, so what is your opinion : focus, and on what, or stay in the multi-strategy, as they seem to do many things well but none better than the best...? > I haven't read the whole thread yet, but it seems like maybe you want the Lasombra to be able to do politics on par with Ventrue, It was one of the main questions, yes. > but the Sabbat is not a political sect. Presence is a Camarilla Discipline (in my personal WOD campaigns, the !Tor have aus/cel/vic, and the !Bruhave cel/obt/pot), as political maneuverings and kindred society games are just not a part of the Sabbat.You are not voted into power, you wrest that power in a bloody takeover. Interesting but contestable PoV. In the WoD, most of the Sabbat don't care about politics / influence, but the Lasombra (and to some extent the Tsimisce) sure do, as is well shown in some supplements and in the Clan Novels (well, the Lasombra seem to be no match for the conniving Ventrues, but still pretty efficient strategists). So I guess what I would like in the game is to see them be able to do more hampering votes, like maybe they can't use them as the Camarilla to attack as much directly (so no Parity Shift), but they can use their votes to help with another strategy (either stealth or combat, I guess more of the second...). > That said, I *do* think there should be better Sabbat only cards that are more combat oriented. We have a few already, but a lot of them are too weak, compared to the Camarilla equivalent. I took out the Blood Feasts and War Party from my Lasombra deck, not because I couldn't play them, but just because they were never ever useful and were just clogging up my hand. Yes, lots of Sabbat Rares are like that, Blood of the Sabbat included IMO : good and nice cards, but just not good enough to put them in a working deck. > I don't think that better vote cards are the way to go, though. So what about what I just suggested : better combat-oriented votes ? (Carl now :) > Are you telling us that you, although you started with SW, which rule-booklet explicitly states that the game is played *without* cardlimits, you adopted a CL? Yes, as do most of the people here in Marseille : I started with friends who'd been playing for a loooooong time, and I love this way of playing. > SW *alone* is correctly balanced under NL, as it was designed that way. I don't think it changes anything : if it's not balanced against Camarilla in CL, it won't be in NCL. Only a few clans / strategies can be more efficient in NCL, for example if they want to play stealth while having just one or 2 stealth cards (yes, like the Lasombra). But I think it better shows what clans are really made for / good at, as you can't abuse of anything. On the other hand, you can really play 3-4 disciplines in one deck, instead of the usual 2-3 I see in most 90 NCL decks. . > I can see your problem now: with no deck limit and a CL (is it 4 of each?) Most of the people here play 4, we play 3. > you *have* to put *every* damaging vote possible in your deck. And because Parity Shift is not available to Sabbat clans, you think they are less powerful than the Camarilla clans, in regards to voting power. It does participate to the problem, yes, but just imagine this, with official rules : - a Sabbat deck and a Camarilla (or mixed) deck, both voting ; - the same number of "damaging" votes in each - one has PS, Conservative Agitation, and Kindred Coertion, plus Transfer of Power, Domain etc. ; the other has access to the same votes except the most lethal of all (PS), and has only.. Tithing !! (to my knowledge) to compensate. So when one wants to steal some pool he does the already very good Transfer of Power, and the other one does Parity Shift. The only thing ToP has is that it can B called by any vampire, while PS requires a Prince (not too hard to find...). You then take 1 from every other player who has more pool than you, included your allies ("peace, friends !"), and if only one has more pool than you you gain one, period. Your opponent does PS and can take 5 pool from his prey or another player, and either take 5 or save an ally for a while either to corrupt him or for strategical purposes. Who do you think will end up winning the game with an "agressive" vote deck ? > Play NL, with a maximum deck-size of 90 cards, and you'll see that the Sabbat don't *need* PS. I've tried it too, it's a very interesting way of playing also, but not the only way. I hope I've demonstrated that a good card is a good card, no matter the limit. > Always keep in mind that the game was/is designed under NL, >and playing with a CL houserule may make certain cards appear stronger than they really are... Yes, it can be true, but the opposite also can. ANd I must say, in CL you must also include not-so-devastating cards, because you'll have a limited amount of, let's say, IG or Burning Wrath, so you'll have to find other ways to kill your opponent. I think if so many people have played CL for so a long time, it's because the game works pretty well like this too. Now, I'll agree that some cards are better in one or the other version of the game, but then this is not a perfect game, as no trading card game can be, and some cards are really better than some others anyway, so... Oh, BtW, I'll mention here that, contrary to general belief, Malkav decks are not that much stronger in CL, considering that there are still enough light intercept / Rush cards to stop them ; I've played !Brujah with Obt and stopped a Malk deck nearly every time !! And they can only have a limited amount of Psychic Veils or other such very, very good cards Yours, [ quoted text not captured ]

"...the Sabbat is not a political sect..." At the risk of being arsey-roleplay guy here, the Sabbat is JUST as political as the Camarilla. But given that this forum is about CCG's I'll shut up now :-) Iain. Prince of Milton Keynes

> > SW *alone* is correctly balanced under NL, as it was designed that way. > > I don't think it changes anything : if it's not balanced against Camarilla > in CL, it won't be in NCL. Only a few clans / strategies can be more > efficient in NCL, for example if they want to play stealth while having just > one or 2 stealth cards (yes, like the Lasombra). But I think it better shows > what clans are really made for / good at, as you can't abuse of anything. On > the other hand, you can really play 3-4 disciplines in one deck, instead of > the usual 2-3 I see in most 90 NCL decks. Under NL, the "no action modifier twice" rule has a greater impact on deck-construction. Loading up on 2 different stealth cards won't make me happy, when I'm clogging my hand with duplicates of them. > > > I can see your problem now: with no deck limit and a CL (is it 4 of each?) > > Most of the people here play 4, we play 3. A 3CL is like almost pure-randomness. You can never rely on certain cards/combos, especially when you go *over* 90 cards deck-size! > > > you *have* to put *every* damaging vote possible in your deck. And because > Parity Shift is not available to Sabbat clans, you think they are less > powerful than the Camarilla clans, in regards to voting power. > > It does participate to the problem, yes, but just imagine this, with > official rules : > > - a Sabbat deck and a Camarilla (or mixed) deck, both voting ; > - the same number of "damaging" votes in each > - one has PS, Conservative Agitation, and Kindred Coertion, plus Transfer of > Power, Domain etc. ; the other has access to the same votes except the most > lethal of all (PS), and has only.. Tithing !! (to my knowledge) to > compensate. So when one wants to steal some pool he does the already very > good Transfer of Power, and the other one does Parity Shift. The only thing > ToP has is that it can B called by any vampire, while PS requires a Prince > (not too hard to find...). You then take 1 from every other player who has > more pool than you, included your allies ("peace, friends !"), and if only > one has more pool than you you gain one, period. Your opponent does PS and > can take 5 pool from his prey or another player, and either take 5 or save > an ally for a while either to corrupt him or for strategical purposes. Erm, I would like to point out that PS can only target players with *more* pool than you. You cannot pull this stunt off indefinitely, at some time you are the one with the most pool on the table, you know. And: if only one player has more pool than you, and that one isn't your prey, do you still play PS on him? Better have KRC, and play with Voter Captivation, or one or two Cons.Boons, or Ancient Influence... > Who > do you think will end up winning the game with an "agressive" vote deck ? The weenies with lots of PRE and KRCs. :) Bewitchin Oration+Awe+Voter Captivation is a nice combo that doesn't need any princes. And the Lasombra shouldn't play with Transfer of Power of Tithings. Just a lot of Domain Challenges, KRCs and Conservative Agitations. Coupled with the Lasombras votes on the table you get things done. If the others try to vote you down, bleed like hell. It's just as easy as that: if you rely too strong on one strategy, you get screwed rather likely. > > > Play NL, with a maximum deck-size of 90 cards, and you'll see that the > Sabbat don't *need* PS. > > I've tried it too, it's a very interesting way of playing also, but not the > only way. I hope I've demonstrated that a good card is a good card, no > matter the limit. I played under a 4CL for 4 years or so. Eventually we switched to NL, because it is more balanced, and I can go for very creative decks. We had over 40 players in our group, and we were really competitive, so I can say the change was really for the better. > > > Always keep in mind that the game was/is designed under NL, >and playing > with a CL houserule may make certain cards appear stronger than they really > are... > > Yes, it can be true, but the opposite also can. ANd I must say, in CL you > must also include not-so-devastating cards, because you'll have a limited > amount of, let's say, IG or Burning Wrath, so you'll have to find other ways > to kill your opponent. I think if so many people have played CL for so a > long time, it's because the game works pretty well like this too. Now, I'll > agree that some cards are better in one or the other version of the game, > but then this is not a perfect game, as no trading card game can be, and > some cards are really better than some others anyway, so... Well, VTES is probably the best balanced CCG out there, and it really works good with NL. All the overpowered cards have been errataed and some reprinted, and the game gets gradually better. LSJ is doing a great job, btw. Limiting yourself to a CL makes you miss the "whole picture". Please note: CL is a nice houserule, but the game is a lot better when played as designed, i.e. NL. Also, you get the added bonus that you don't have to adapt when going to a tournament... :) > > Oh, BtW, I'll mention here that, contrary to general belief, Malkav decks > are not that much stronger in CL, considering that there are still enough > light intercept / Rush cards to stop them ; I've played !Brujah with Obt and > stopped a Malk deck nearly every time !! And they can only have a limited > amount of Psychic Veils or other such very, very good cards *Sigh* 4 Cloak the Gatherin, 4 Lost in Crowds, 4 Faceless Night, 4 Spying Missions, 4 Mask of 1000 Faces, 4 Elder Impersonation, 4 Forgotten Labyrinth. What else do you need? Those are 28 Stealth cards, more than enough to let your casual Sport Bike behind. Brujah, Gangrel, Ventrue, Noferatu don't even stand a chance against this mass of stealth. Now add to that 4 Bondings, 4 Conditionings, 4 Threats, 4 Govern the Unaligned, 4 Scouting Mission, 4 Foreshadowing Destruction, 4 Dominate Kine, 4 Command of the Beast and you have a lot more bleeding power than a Deflector can stand. (4 Deflections, 4 Redirections, 4 Telepathic Counter, 4 Telepathic Misderection (but they tap you and cost 1 blood...)). See the problem? Psychic Veil is just a gimmick in this case. Carl

In message <e7883b0c.01101...@posting.google.com>, Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> writes >Psychic Veil is just a gimmick in this case. Psychic Veil often is. It's good but it's not *that* good. [ quoted text not captured ]

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<xv4M2FRM...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > There may be a larger problem in the relative power levels. However, > when we take sect wide views of power levels, we also have to take note > of the specifics, too. > Compared to the Ventrue and Brujah (two of the strongest Camarilla > voters), the Lasombra are a different kettle of fish. I don't think anyone here is arguing for a Sabbat version of protect thine own. Being different is fine. Being different and incapable of competitive play is another thing entirely. > Taking 2nd Tradition for the sake of argument. How much intercept do > the Ventrue have access to? Aside from the standard disciplineless > stuff available to all (newspapers, bikes, angels etc.), they have > Powerbase: Berlin, which is rarely used. None of their disciplines are > favoured with intercept. Similarly, the Brujah have access to similar > amounts of intercept, with no real discipline based alternatives. 2nd > Tradition, therefore, provides a significant boost to them, for the cost > of princes. (Of course, in the case of blocking bleed actions, the > Ventrue also have access to bleed bounce - something which both the > Lasombra and Tzimisce referred to below also do, but which the Brujah > generally lack.) No one cares that there are a dozen or however many Ventrue without aus or ani that aren't princes/justicars. There are plenty of *bad* ventrue that no one will ever put in a serious deck, and that doesn't have anything to do with the power of 2nd trad, or the intercept capabilities of clan ventrue (or any Camarilla clan). > The Lasombra already have access to not insignificant amount of > intercept, relatively speaking. Darksight effectively allows permanent > intercept to be played transiently, as well as Eyes of the Night. The > Sabbat now has access to Eternal Vigilance, which provides something the > Camarilla don't have. In an environment where intercept can be light, > Eternal Vigilance may well be entirely preferable to 2nd Tradition - one > card does the work of 5 or 6 wakes (which may include 2nd Tradition). > That the Lasombra can already muster 2 intercept of their own > (Obtenebration) would mean that providing them with access to a 2nd > Tradition duplicate would significantly empower them. If they are > approximately balanced as they stand now, this would quite likely knock > game balance out by some way. Eternal Vigilance, while a nice card, needs a bit more *omf* to be on a level with 2nd trad. > Also compare the Tzimisce, who are *without doubt* the clan with the > best access to intercept in the game - Animalism permanents combined > with Animalism untap transients and Auspex transients is extremely > powerful, in the context of intercept. Add Eternal Vigilance to the mix > and you have an extremely potent set of intercept. Do they need even > more intercept? The have the most intercept in the game, but then again who cares if they can use bad intercept cards? I'd much rather have 2nd trad and a permanent (be it a r. spy or a bike/paper), or a 2nd trad and aus cards, than most of what the Tzimisce will use. > For some value of "interesting votes". Archon (Camarilla only) is > replaced by Templar, both of which are similarly useful cards. Templar isn't even close. No blood payment for blocking and no immunity to blodd hunts. > But let's look at the other votes still available to them. Banishment > is certainly interesting. Banishment is not unique to the Sabbat. > Kine Resources Contested is one of the best > cards in the game. KRC is not unique to the Sabbat. > Conservative Agitation also has its place. ConAg is not unique to the Sabbat. > Sabbat Inquisitor - you vote to give a vampire +1 bleed, if nothing else! Generally that is all you're doing. However I find that you're better off bleeding or voting as opposed to both at once (the usefulness of Govern in a vote deck being the exception). > Reinforcements is available to many, and very good it is too. Reinforcements is not unique to the Sabbat. > Rabble Razing is as effective against weenies when played by the Sabbat as it > is played by anyone else. Rabble Razing is not unique to the Sabbat. > Political Stranglehold - powerful, useful, interesting. Political Stranglehold is not unique to the Sabbat. > A well-timed Political Flux can either give you a huge > margin over what you should have or annul someone else's. Political Flux is not unique to the Sabbat. > National Guard Support is potentially excellent bleed defence, especially if > you're not going for a bleed deck element at all. Yes, but only b/c there aren't enough ProRes and AIs to go around. Also: National Guard Support is not unique to the Sabbat. > Consanguineous Boon and Autarkis Persecution > are solid pool gain, as ever. > Honor the Elders is extremely useful. > Disputed Territory mucks around other decks - > steal that Heidelberg, stop their blood flow. More non-Sabbat votes. Yippie! > Blood Siege! Now > *there's* an interesting vote if ever I saw one. What other card in the > game can generate a permanent 4 vote swing, Protect Thine Own on that Gangrel Pricus with an extra vote. Forfeit the title and her head. Also, since any vampire can burn blood for votes, the Camarilla are in a better position because they're more likely to be near capacity thanks to 5th trad. The card has a decent chance of being a dead draw. > Are these cards not interesting? Only templar, s. inquisitor, investiture, CB, and blood siege were unique to the Sabbat. Of those: Templar has a Camarilla equivalent that is more or less directly superior. S. Inquisitor is weak. Blood Siege, while a nice card, is the only one that really even stands out, though CB gets honorable mention. > Also consider the fact that votes do not always have to be used by you. > One of the most powerful factors of Legacy of Pander in its previous > mis-printed incarnation was not the fact that you could pass your own > votes but that you could shut down other people's votes. This is still one of the few great Sabbat votes. > Investiture and Cardinal Benediction can be passed > excluding Camarilla vampires very > easily, no extra cards needed. The 2nd investiture (or 1st if you already have a cardinal) is usually pointless. CB helps, provided there are no othere Sabbat or Independant voters around. However without access to 5th/MT it is difficult to bring out the same # of high caps as the Camarilla. > Have a look at, say: > > "Tournament Winning Deck: Praxis Seizure: College Station (4vps in final > round) July 14th, 2001 by Jeffrey Thompson" on <URL:http://www.thelasomb > ra.com/decks/twd.htm> Laf: 4 Eternal Vigilance (should have been anything else, I discarded them all every game) Apparently I'm not the only one who thought these weren't quite good enough. The 'balance' between the Sabbat and the Camarilla is that the Sabbat tend to have better disciplines, while the Camarilla have more useful sect specific cards. The problem with that is that you get vampires like Arika, Lucian, etc. which will have the disciplines that you want and get the great camarilla stuff too. You only have to play the best vampires for your goal; the substandard ones don't matter.

James with >>, Orpheus with > > > isn't going > > to help matters any. If the Sabbat are less powerful, simply > > duplicating the Camarilla options isn't going to solve problems - it's > > going to give them all the options they already have, all the options > > the Camarilla have and one hell of a headache for people wanting to play > > a balanced game. > > No, of course ; but then if these very powerful cards are not duplicated for > Sabbat, there should at least be some other cards that really compensate the > balance. And I'll remind you another question related to the first : can > Sabbat really rely efficiently on votes, compared to one of the 3 Camarilla > *voting* clans ? Absolutely. I have won two tournaments this year, and been in the finals at two others with Lasombra vote decks. I have also been in the finals of a tournament with a Tzimisce vote deck. Lasombra Vote Tournament Winner http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#collegestation Lasombra Presence Vote Tournament Winner http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#seattlecc Lasombra Creation Vote Two finals (both events had 65+ players) http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/boc.htm Tzimisce Vote Finals in Los Angeles http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/tzivote.htm > > > (Note: This is not the point you started out with, which was that the > > Sabbat did not have Parity Shift. This is not the same as having > > "hardly any interesting votes to call".) > > Right, but during the discussion it appeared that there were some other > really good "Camarilla only" votes I didn't even know of (having started > with SW) ; Sabbat still has some pretty good votes, but it takes us back to > the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? Yes. > Yes, they are ; but you'll note that most of them (except Sabbat Inquisitor > which does the same as some equipements or retainers, ans Blood Siege which > hase no *direct effect*, as it only allows you to gain votes over your > opponent) You are distinctly and clearly mistaken. If you opponent is in any way relying on the title you are REMOVING with Blood Siege (ie play traditions, defend against votes, pass votes) you can and will cripple him with any passing Blood Siege. <snip> > But we've already established that they were no superb fighters, no superb > stealthers, and too expensive for mass-bleeding, so... what IS their main > tactic ? Winning. You have not in any way established any of the claims you make in the above paragraph. Care to back them up? > > Have a look at, say: > > I will look at the decks you mentionned (the one with the links at least). > But you know, playing CL / no deck limit, we can't rely on just one or 2 > good cards like redirections, so it's a pretty different tactics. So, you are arguing that because you have crippled the game, you have to improve the Sabbat votes / sect? Sounds like you need to pass that crack pipe over here, I could use a good hit. :> Redirection is a crappy version of Deflection, to call it a good card is to mistake it for something else. >But it's the whole question I'm asking here : do the conceptors at >WW (and I know Lasombra loves to play Lasombra ;-) , even with votes) >intend the Sabbat to be able to play a true voting deck, or would it just >be a little "plus" in mostly discipline-based decks ? I will not speak for White Wolf. Any Sabbat clan can play a successful and tournament winning vote deck. It takes more thought, more skill in play, and playing by the real rules of the game. > > Stop and think about this one. Are you saying that the Ventrue are > > better at fighting than the Lasombra? > > I'm saying that with Pot only, and even some additionals if U want, you're > no match against For, even if the opponent just does 1 damage (but then you > can B trapped, he can have a weapon, etc.) ; the only card that really makes > the difference would B Entomb, which unfortunately doesn't work with IG > (you'll say it's better that way, and maybe it is ; but it's still not that > easy to use efficiently against real combat decks, or even decks with some > dodge). If you are using Potence by itself to fight using the Lasombra, you are seriously handicaping yourself. If you are only using Entombment, without Arms of the Abyss, you are dumb. I would gladly put my Lasombra combat decks up against your Fortitude based Ventrue decks, even against your Majesty based Ventrue decks. The Lasombra can fight very well. If they haven't been seen to be that way in your area, I'm sorry I haven't been able to make it over yet. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com http://www.TheLasombra.com/VEKN/lasombra/ -- Posted from rr-163-54-196.atl.mediaone.net [24.163.54.196] via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"The Lasombra" <thela...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message news: d4ca3ebc763a2d041ef...@mygate.mailgate.org... > James with >>, Orpheus with > > > > > isn't going > > > to help matters any. If the Sabbat are less powerful, simply > > > duplicating the Camarilla options isn't going to solve problems - it's > > > going to give them all the options they already have, all the options > > > the Camarilla have and one hell of a headache for people wanting to play > > > a balanced game. > > > > No, of course ; but then if these very powerful cards are not duplicated for > > Sabbat, there should at least be some other cards that really compensate the > > balance. And I'll remind you another question related to the first : can > > Sabbat really rely efficiently on votes, compared to one of the 3 Camarilla > > *voting* clans ? > > Absolutely. > > I have won two tournaments this year, and been in the finals at two > others with Lasombra vote decks. I have also been in the finals of > a tournament with a Tzimisce vote deck. Yes, I have seen your decks. I have but one question : was there any real good Camarilla vote deck opposed to you on these tournaments ? If so, what made you win and them lose ? > > > > (Note: This is not the point you started out with, which was that the > > > Sabbat did not have Parity Shift. This is not the same as having > > > "hardly any interesting votes to call".) > > > > Right, but during the discussion it appeared that there were some other > > really good "Camarilla only" votes I didn't even know of (having started > > with SW) ; Sabbat still has some pretty good votes, but it takes us back to > > the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? > > Yes. Would you care to develop ? :-) > > Yes, they are ; but you'll note that most of them (except Sabbat Inquisitor > > which does the same as some equipements or retainers, ans Blood Siege which > > hase no *direct effect*, as it only allows you to gain votes over your > > opponent) > > You are distinctly and clearly mistaken. > > If you opponent is in any way relying on the title you are REMOVING > with Blood Siege (ie play traditions, defend against votes, pass votes) > you can and will cripple him with any passing Blood Siege. Yes, IF he does. But I get your point. > > But we've already established that they were no superb fighters, no superb > > stealthers, and too expensive for mass-bleeding, so... what IS their main > > tactic ? > > Winning. LOL Very funny answer, but I'm afraid winning is a goal, not a tactic. So, as you're one of the expert Lasombra tacticians (this is not derisional, everyone knows this is the case), would you, once more, care to develop (globally, like if we don't have the time to analyse all your decks...) ? > You have not in any way established any of the claims you make in > the above paragraph. Care to back them up? Well, I would, but it seems to me that it's been done many times in this thread, including the very good comparing analysis that James did just B4 the thread changed its name... > > > Have a look at, say: > > > > I will look at the decks you mentionned (the one with the links at least). > > But you know, playing CL / no deck limit, we can't rely on just one or 2 > > good cards like redirections, so it's a pretty different tactics. > > So, you are arguing that because you have crippled the game, you have > to improve the Sabbat votes / sect? No, I'm sorry to say that we haven't "crippled the game" ; I have to agree, though, that it is a different game, with different implications and where some cards or clans change in value or strategy. It is also very interesting, and I personnaly intend to play both ways, as if playing two different games. But I can see in this thread and others that even people playing by the official rules agree with me on the voting thing (read Shaun's mail two lines after yours, I found it quite interesting, as he has more playing / voting experience than me, and in yours ways, but I agreed fully with his arguments). > Sounds like you need to pass that crack pipe over here, I could use a good hit. > :> Smoke over, man ; MariJAVA ghoul, uh ? Why, she's a dancer ? ;-) And you're the one who said that SW had sold like crack cocaïne... Hum, see something of a pattern emerging there ? Tell us all about it, Lasombra ! :-[ > Redirection is a crappy version of Deflection, to call it a good card > is to mistake it for something else. I was speaking of redirections, not Redirections : I meant all the cards that redirect, no matter the specifics. But tell me something : isn't it you who created "In the Presence of Lasombra", with 6 Redirections and no Deflections ? I tried a variant of that deck (with your rules), but with lots of differences (not necessarily improvements), one of which was replace the Redirections with Deflections... > >But it's the whole question I'm asking here : do the conceptors at > >WW (and I know Lasombra loves to play Lasombra ;-) , even with votes) > >intend the Sabbat to be able to play a true voting deck, or would it just > >be a little "plus" in mostly discipline-based decks ? > > I will not speak for White Wolf. Doesn't a wolf bark ? Or is that Black Dog ? ;-) > Any Sabbat clan can play a successful and tournament winning vote deck. > It takes more thought, more skill in play, and playing by the real > rules of the game. Ok, maybe by our rules it is impossible. But I think that even by yours, at equal thought / skill / choice of cards, Camarilla wins. Please prove me wrong. > > > Stop and think about this one. Are you saying that the Ventrue are > > > better at fighting than the Lasombra? > > > > I'm saying that with Pot only, and even some additionals if U want, you're > > no match against For, even if the opponent just does 1 damage (but then you > > can B trapped, he can have a weapon, etc.) ; the only card that really makes > > the difference would B Entomb, which unfortunately doesn't work with IG > > (you'll say it's better that way, and maybe it is ; but it's still not that > > easy to use efficiently against real combat decks, or even decks with some > > dodge). > > If you are using Potence by itself to fight using the Lasombra, you > are seriously handicaping yourself. I'm not. > If you are only using Entombment, > without Arms of the Abyss, you are dumb. I'm not either. I would gladly put my Lasombra > combat decks up against your Fortitude based Ventrue decks, even against > your Majesty based Ventrue decks. Maybe one day... > The Lasombra can fight very well. If they haven't been seen to be > that way in your area, I'm sorry I haven't been able to make it over yet. You'll be welcome to come over, ô great Lasombra ! But I'm waiting to see you up against some For / Pot decks, or Cel / Pot, and I think Ani / Pot can B at least as effective as Obt / Pot (with Rare cards, granted, but Scorpion Sting is not...). > Carpe noctem. Yes, Rest in Peace too, my dead friend... Orpheus [ quoted text not captured ]

"Carl Pilhatsch" <carl.pi...@chello.at> a écrit dans le message news: e7883b0c.01101...@posting.google.com... > > > SW *alone* is correctly balanced under NL, as it was designed that way. > > > > I don't think it changes anything : if it's not balanced against Camarilla > > in CL, it won't be in NCL. Only a few clans / strategies can be more > > efficient in NCL, for example if they want to play stealth while having just > > one or 2 stealth cards (yes, like the Lasombra). But I think it better shows > > what clans are really made for / good at, as you can't abuse of anything. On > > the other hand, you can really play 3-4 disciplines in one deck, instead of > > the usual 2-3 I see in most 90 NCL decks. > > Under NL, the "no action modifier twice" rule has a greater impact on > deck-construction. Loading up on 2 different stealth cards won't make > me happy, when I'm clogging my hand with duplicates of them. Yes, but the end effect is the same, as we you won't want to have too many duplicates, and we can't... > > > I can see your problem now: with no deck limit and a CL (is it 4 of each?) > > > > Most of the people here play 4, we play 3. > > A 3CL is like almost pure-randomness. You can never rely on certain > cards/combos, especially when you go *over* 90 cards deck-size! It's not randomness : if you really want all the same combos, you can still make a small deck ! But, yes, you are right, it changes the strategy a whole lot : you cannot rely on just a few good cards, and / or hope that 2 otherwise not-so-terrible cards will be in your hand at the same time for your lethallissima combo ! So your whole deck has to be well balanced. You think it differently, is all. (snip-snap, I'm beginning to understand how it works... :) > Erm, I would like to point out that PS can only target players with > *more* pool than you. You cannot pull this stunt off indefinitely, at > some time you are the one with the most pool on the table, you know. > And: if only one player has more pool than you, and that one isn't > your prey, do you still play PS on him? Better have KRC, and play with > Voter Captivation, or one or two Cons.Boons, or Ancient Influence... On tonight's game, my friend who plays Ventrue (both sects) has once more ousted his prey (thus winning) by playing PS ; of course, not being an idiot, he put out another vampire just B4 that, in order to have less pool than his prey ; there were only 3 players left in the game, but still it makes a sudden difference of 6 pool between him and his prey, not to mention one more vampire out to bleed... No, I definitely don't think any vote you mentioned is better. Voter Captivation ? Yes, of course !! And it is even better with PS !!! > > Who > > do you think will end up winning the game with an "agressive" vote deck ? > > The weenies with lots of PRE and KRCs. :) Bewitchin Oration+Awe+Voter > Captivation is a nice combo that doesn't need any princes. LOL. Yes. > And the Lasombra shouldn't play with Transfer of Power of Tithings. > Just a lot of Domain Challenges, KRCs and Conservative Agitations. Would you care to say why ? Ok, I tried Tithings (a Sabbat only vote), and I must agree that it is way to hard to pass, much harder than PS or ToP. But why not play ToP ??? > Coupled with the Lasombras votes on the table you get things done. If > the others try to vote you down, bleed like hell. It's just as easy as > that: if you rely too strong on one strategy, you get screwed rather > likely. So you suggest to play both stealth / bleed and votes with Lasombra ? In my experience (still relatively small, if I'm discussing here it's not to prove a point I'm sure of but in order to understnad better the game mechanics and thus improve my game), you can't do both effectively : you have to decide if its VOTES + bleed or BLEED + votes ; which would you, or the other readers, recommend, and why ? > > > Play NL, with a maximum deck-size of 90 cards, and you'll see that the > > Sabbat don't *need* PS. I do too, and as soon as the Camarilla goes out I'll make a killing Ventrue deck, especially now that the Daughters seem to be made for giving more stealth to voting decks (or less intercept on already +1stealth actions, which has the same effects...). > > I've tried it too, it's a very interesting way of playing also, but not the > > only way. I hope I've demonstrated that a good card is a good card, no > > matter the limit. > > I played under a 4CL for 4 years or so. Eventually we switched to NL, > because it is more balanced, and I can go for very creative decks. We > had over 40 players in our group, and we were really competitive, so I > can say the change was really for the better. No ! You can say that you THINK it's better. I know some other people who agree with you, and respect that opinion, but it can be just that : an opinion. (snoop) > > but then this is not a perfect game, as no trading card game can be, and > > some cards are really better than some others anyway, so... > > Well, VTES is probably the best balanced CCG out there, and it really > works good with NL. All the overpowered cards have been errataed and > some reprinted, and the game gets gradually better. LSJ is doing a > great job, btw. Thanks LSJ ! :-) The erratas work no matter the game format : Thoughts betrayed, for instance, was terrrrrible and now is a good-but-a-little-expensive card. Maybe one of these days we'll see a "damage cannot be reduced" card in Dominate, or Potence ??? (corruption, corruption...) Limiting yourself to a CL makes you miss the "whole > picture". Please note: CL is a nice houserule, but the game is a lot > better when played as designed, i.e. NL. Also, you get the added bonus > that you don't have to adapt when going to a tournament... :) Yes, you're right about the tournaments, for people who are really interested in competition. I'd like to go to one, but my main concern is playing with my friends (or other people, as many, many people play CL in france), and having fun. The rules are a way, not a goal. If I have fun in CL, good, if I have fun in NCL, good also. My personnal belief is that the things that are balanced or unbalanced in one format still are in the other ; only, you have to adapt differently. > > Oh, BtW, I'll mention here that, contrary to general belief, Malkav decks > > are not that much stronger in CL, and (...) they can only have a limited > > amount of Psychic Veils or other such very, very good cards > > *Sigh* > 4 Cloak the Gatherin, 4 Lost in Crowds, 4 Faceless Night, 4 Spying > Missions, 4 Mask of 1000 Faces, 4 Elder Impersonation, 4 Forgotten > Labyrinth. What else do you need? Those are 28 Stealth cards, more > than enough to let your casual Sport Bike behind. Brujah, Gangrel, > Ventrue, Noferatu don't even stand a chance against this mass of > stealth. They have 4 Bums and 4 Ambush to go in "full contact", they have 4 Elder Intervention, 4 Pack Tactics, 4 Sport Bikes, 4 Guardian Angels, the locations, etc. etc. ; but yes, it is a weakness of these clans, which is why they will want to add a "little something more" (Aus, Obt...) if they REALLY want to intercept. There is some more intercept in ANi, for Nos and Gangrels. Now, the Ventrue don't need to intercept that much : they redirect, and the Malks do all the work for them. And no deck can do everything anyway. Dare tell me that Malk weenie decks don't get easily their VPs in 90 NCL ? Aren't they what everybody-not-full-of-intercept fears the most ? > Now add to that 4 Bondings, 4 Conditionings, 4 Threats, 4 Govern the > Unaligned, 4 Scouting Mission, 4 Foreshadowing Destruction, 4 Dominate > Kine, 4 Command of the Beast and you have a lot more bleeding power > than a Deflector can stand. (4 Deflections, 4 Redirections, 4 > Telepathic Counter, 4 Telepathic Misderection (but they tap you and > cost 1 blood...)). > See the problem? Opposed to NCL where you can put lots of redirecting ? Yes, I get your point. But then, a Malk deck like that in our games will certainly kill his non-intercepting prey, but if they have nothing more for combat ending, they won't survive much longer, and not at all against, let's say, the Tsimisce ; now, if they add for example sor Cel for dodge et all, they'll have a little less stealth / bleed. It balances pretty well, all in all. Anyway, I think no matter the format, Malks and their eventual copycats are feared by all, except if you build your deck against decks like that. > Psychic Veil is just a gimmick in this case. And James said it wasn't that good anyway. I haven't played it yet, as I just got my 3 copies from trading, but it still seems pretty good to me, when you're going against a guy who relies on only 1 intercept card. It is also 1 of the 3 cards I know which can give stealth to an ally (with cloak and Shroud Mastery), and that seems pretty interesting to me (I'm trying to build a Giovanni deck upon these bases, even it's not that easy really...). Orpheus

Me >> "Orpheus" > > > I have won two tournaments this year, and been in the finals at two > > others with Lasombra vote decks. I have also been in the finals of > > a tournament with a Tzimisce vote deck. > > Yes, I have seen your decks. I have but one question : was there any real > good Camarilla vote deck opposed to you on these tournaments ? If so, what > made you win and them lose ? Yes, I have been opposed by other good votes decks with Camarilla vampires in tournaments that I have won. Some of the things that allow Sabbat vote decks to beat Camarilla vote decks are as follows: An (almost) Autopass vote to gain votes that generates other votes that pass automatically. (Cardinal Benediction followed by Cryptic Rider and any other vote - Blood Siege is particularly appropriate in this third card slot.) Having permanent votes on the table. The clans I vote with in tournaments (Lasombra, Tzimisce, Tremere Antitribu) can all gain and support large quantities of vampires with three votes. Private Audience can cause all of your votes to pass without opposition, as the other players, especially if playing Camarilla vote, cannot vote much more often than not. -Closed Session isn't as good, as right now there are many more Camarilla voters in the tournament scene than Sabbat or Independent voters, so isn't included in most Camarilla voting decks. Playing the table or metagame against itself. The Camarilla vote players that I beat with the Sabbat voting decks didn't play the table or the metagame as well as I did in those particular tournaments. In general, the deck that calls (and passes) more votes will win, regardless of the sect of their vampires. Therefore making the votes palatable to possible cross-table allies is much more important in the beginning until you can gain vote lock while voting. No winning vote deck has to have vote lock on offense and defense, but it must be able to pass 90%+ of the votes it does call. As an aside: There is no vampire in the game that is worth more than three pool in the long run. Decks that vote and Minion Tap/Fifth have to split their stealth and their actions among voting and Fifthing. Sabbat decks can simply take the pool with the first Minion Tap, rely on their strong combat, and not ever bother to replace the blood. Therefore they will get more possibilities to call votes, which should allow them to have more successful votes, and played and chosen well, to win. > > > Right, but during the discussion it appeared that there were some other > > > really good "Camarilla only" votes I didn't even know of (having started > > > with SW) ; Sabbat still has some pretty good votes, but it takes us back > to > > > the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? > > > > Yes. > > Would you care to develop ? :-) No voting deck needs the specialty vote decks to succeed. A Ventrue vote deck can do just as well with out Parity Shift as it can with Parity Shift, and will likely be more reliable for not putting them in. I am not debating Sabbat vote cards versus Camarilla vote cards, I don't think that's a worthwhile effort. The Sabbat votes are seriously underpowered as compared to some of the Jyhad originals or to the ones introduced in Dark Sovereigns or Ancient Hearts. I am debating whether or not the Sabbat as a sect suffer for that when playing vote decks. I do not feel that they do. Delaying Tactics and Direct Intervention work just as well for vote defense regardless of who is attempting to call the vote. In an environment where Protect Thine Own and Parity Shift exist, not playing with a few of each of the above is dangerously short-sighted, especially if playing with non-Camarilla vampires. > > > But we've already established that they were no superb fighters, no > superb > > > stealthers, and too expensive for mass-bleeding, so... what IS their > main > > > tactic ? > > > > Winning. > > LOL > > Very funny answer, but I'm afraid winning is a goal, not a tactic. So, as > you're one of the expert Lasombra tacticians (this is not derisional, > everyone knows this is the case), would you, once more, care to develop > (globally, like if we don't have the time to analyse all your decks...) ? > > > You have not in any way established any of the claims you make in > > the above paragraph. Care to back them up? > > Well, I would, but it seems to me that it's been done many times in this > thread, including the very good comparing analysis that James did just B4 > the thread changed its name... No, the only thing established in that other thread is that other clans may specialize better in general, not that decks that focus on bleeding, voting, or fighting are any better or worse for the Lasombra than they are for any other clan. (That doesn't read back the way I was thinking it, I may try to reword shortly.) The thread says Brujah are better fighters. So what? That doesn't mean that the Lasombra can't field one of the most effective combat decks in the game. The decks that I play with the Lasombra that are Rush type decks, whose main focus is winning through the attrition of vampires, do well, against Brujah, Gangrel, Nosferatu, Tzimisce or whatever else comes their way, but won't win in every combat. No clan can say that they will win every combat, there are too many variables for that to be in any way correct. Unless you are playing a two player game, there will be more interaction that just the Brujah and Lasombra fighting. There is a good possibility that they will both do significant damage to the other, and that which ever one is the predator will have a better chance of victory if they both fight exclusively. If the Lasombra deck is the predator, bleed bounce will turn the tide, and the Brujah should go down first if they are both decks with a large combat focus. The thread says the Malkavians are better bleeders. So what? The Lasombra can't excel at bleeding at stealth because another clan can do it too? With the Path of Night, you have +4 stealth that you can add to each bleed action that won't cost you any blood to play. Rarely is more than that (or even that much) needed. I'm not going to re-address voting, any Sabbat clan can make a winning vote deck with proper preparation. > > So, you are arguing that because you have crippled the game, you have > > to improve the Sabbat votes / sect? > > No, I'm sorry to say that we haven't "crippled the game" ; Yes, you have. You have taken a portion of the game, and discarded it completely. Perhaps crippled isn't the word, perhaps castrated will be more suitable. I've played with a 3CL, a 4CL, a 6CL, a 1CL on uniques, and many other variants in the last 7 years. I enjoy all of the game variants. I prefer the game as played by the rules, and the cards are designed to be balanced in that environment. > > Redirection is a crappy version of Deflection, to call it a good card > > is to mistake it for something else. > > I was speaking of redirections, not Redirections : I meant all the cards > that redirect, no matter the specifics. But tell me something : isn't it you > who created "In the Presence of Lasombra", with 6 Redirections and no > Deflections ? Yes, the deck needed the card cycling ability of Forced Awakening more than it needed the stay untapped power of Deflection. That particular deck gets 2-3 vampires in play early, and must be able to cycle to the defensive cards while on defense. Therefore to avoid paying two blood, for Forced Awakening and Deflection, the smarter option of paying only one blood on vampires that are going to be tapped anyway was taken. In any deck that can afford to leave one vampire untapped to play bleed bounce, Deflection is the better card every time. When you have to play two cards to do any bleed bounce, it is a harder choice. > But I think that even by yours, at > equal thought / skill / choice of cards, Camarilla wins. Please prove me > wrong. I don't have time at the moment, but the material to do so is here: http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/clan-twd.htm This weekend I may do another interface to access the archive by strategy, but it takes quite a bit of time to do those interface pages so I can't give any guarantees. Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <9qno9b$e7c$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >> Under NL, the "no action modifier twice" rule has a greater impact on >> deck-construction. Loading up on 2 different stealth cards won't make >> me happy, when I'm clogging my hand with duplicates of them. > >Yes, but the end effect is the same, as we you won't want to have too many >duplicates, and we can't... The end result is extremely far from "the same". Some decks will want to rely on certain cards - perhaps having an excess of minions. [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <9qnmhk$cuf$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >No, I'm sorry to say that we haven't "crippled the game" ; I have to agree, >though, that it is a different game, with different implications and where >some cards or clans change in value or strategy. Cards and rules changes are, however, created for the *real* game. If you are not playing by the real rules, you are not in a position to be able to advocate changes to the real rules and real card-set. [ quoted text not captured ]

<big snips all over the place> > > > the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? > > > > Yes. > > Would you care to develop ? :-) Camarilla vote is a beating, they are very good at it and have a number of advantages: Minion Tap/5th, massive life gain through princes, and the traditions in general. IC members, 4 votes is a beating. More expansions, so more titled vampires. Sabbat vote: Cardinal Benediction, we want three more votes, and you don't get to interfer, rinse repeat (with enough fatties). Regent (on a protected vampire, my group likes Cailen) for that IC touch. Blood Siege, kill their votes, kill their intercept, kill their bloat. Overall better combat on voters, self evident, both for offense and defense. Your advantage is to be smart, know what you're facing and design your deck to deal with it. > > Any Sabbat clan can play a successful and tournament winning vote deck. > > It takes more thought, more skill in play, and playing by the real > > rules of the game. > > Ok, maybe by our rules it is impossible. But I think that even by yours, at > equal thought / skill / choice of cards, Camarilla wins. Please prove me > wrong. Come visit Madison Wisconsin USA some Sunday, and I'll be happy to prove to your satisfaction that a Lasombra vote deck can take a field rife with vote decks (last time it was a Ventrue Princes, and a OBF/PRE voters). And I don't even go after other peoples titles or make many of my own. If that isn't feasable, I'd suggest making a NL deck along the lines of one of the Lasombra's tournement winning decks, and take it to town at one of your local games. Cameron Crack == Death

In message <8f507d2e.01101...@posting.google.com>, Shaun McIsaac <smci...@onesourcecorp.com> writes >James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<xv4M2FRMNWz7Ew >J...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... >> There may be a larger problem in the relative power levels. However, >> when we take sect wide views of power levels, we also have to take note >> of the specifics, too. > >> Compared to the Ventrue and Brujah (two of the strongest Camarilla >> voters), the Lasombra are a different kettle of fish. > > I don't think anyone here is arguing for a Sabbat version of protect >thine own. Being different is fine. Being different and incapable of >competitive play is another thing entirely. No-one has thus far successfully asserted that they aren't capable of that, however. That they don't have all the options the Camarilla have (and vice versa) is pretty much established. That the Ventrue are better voters (but worse at <X>, <Y> and <Z>) comparatively is also established. >> Taking 2nd Tradition for the sake of argument. How much intercept do >> the Ventrue have access to? Aside from the standard disciplineless >> stuff available to all (newspapers, bikes, angels etc.), they have >> Powerbase: Berlin, which is rarely used. None of their disciplines are >> favoured with intercept. Similarly, the Brujah have access to similar >> amounts of intercept, with no real discipline based alternatives. 2nd >> Tradition, therefore, provides a significant boost to them, for the cost >> of princes. (Of course, in the case of blocking bleed actions, the >> Ventrue also have access to bleed bounce - something which both the >> Lasombra and Tzimisce referred to below also do, but which the Brujah >> generally lack.) > >No one cares that there are a dozen or however many Ventrue without >aus or ani that aren't princes/justicars. This is true, of course. However, a deck that wishes to have an intercept element may often choose to focus upon one vampire - this means that that vampire can be tooled up with equipment, with skill cards, with Guardian Angels or whatever. In that instance, the other dozen vampires don't really count, because you've constructed your deck in such a manner as to provide yourself with a good chance of getting that vampire or vampire(s). >There are plenty of *bad* >ventrue that no one will ever put in a serious deck There aren't that many truly bad Ventrue, really. It all depends on the deck you're constructing. All of the weenies are viable, though Iztahk is slightly odd for a Ventrue (though not unplayable if you decide to go for weenie Ventrue presence vote, using Directorate Assemblies when things get messy). Nakova is fairly sucky, but most of the mid-range vampires are playable (though +1 strength isn't the best thing to have in a deck for Ventrue re: Luccia). Of the top-end vampires, only Helena and Natasha tend to escape play considerations, in my experience. Of course, a lot of the current crop of Ventrue decks like utilising Fifth Tradition, Forgotten Labyrinth and Minion Tap style combos to fuel Hostile Takeover etc. which necessitates a different style of play, hence excluding some of the vampires purely on the consideration of whether they're right for that deck. That doesn't have to remain the case, of course. >> That the Lasombra can already muster 2 intercept of their own >> (Obtenebration) would mean that providing them with access to a 2nd >> Tradition duplicate would significantly empower them. If they are >> approximately balanced as they stand now, this would quite likely knock >> game balance out by some way. > >Eternal Vigilance, while a nice card, needs a bit more *omf* to be on >a level with 2nd trad. I was moderately disappointed, but not overly so. I felt it could have been slightly better, but it's far from terrible. Combined with the natural abilities of the clans concerned (if played in that manner) and you have a reasonable match for it. A vampire with Mr Winthrop and Eternal Vigilance is doing really rather well anyway. >> Also compare the Tzimisce, who are *without doubt* the clan with the >> best access to intercept in the game - Animalism permanents combined >> with Animalism untap transients and Auspex transients is extremely >> powerful, in the context of intercept. Add Eternal Vigilance to the mix >> and you have an extremely potent set of intercept. Do they need even >> more intercept? > >The have the most intercept in the game, but then again who cares if >they can use bad intercept cards? For some values of "bad", of course. A Tzimisce intercept deck will, most likely, want to fight - whereas a Ventrue deck with an intercept element will most likely want to run away. (Both of these are not certain, but seem likely, given a "usual" environment.) Using Eternal Vigilance to wake, together with The Spirit's Touch and/or Precognition gives a lot more combat oriented abilities than 2nd Tradition. Were you, perhaps, also using a Wake, you have far more flexibility than the Ventrue would have with 2nd Tradition; they have to attempt to block, whereas you could bounce a bleed after waking, or simply cycle the card out of your hand for no effect if you saw a Big Fat Vampire doing something scary. >I'd much rather have 2nd trad and a >permanent (be it a r. spy or a bike/paper), or a 2nd trad and aus >cards, than most of what the Tzimisce will use. Raven Spy, Raptor and/or Auspex transients, along with a paper quite possibly, and various forms of Wake are likely to feature. Cat's Guidance and Guard Dogs often feature as potentials, and you have far more flexibility in play and ability than a standard 2nd Tradition deck will ever have. 2nd Tradition will, of course, give you a significant ability to intercept - but that's all it gives you. The Tzimisce have a far more varied and interesting set of cards. Can you play them as a 2nd Tradition replacement? In terms of just slotting them in as replacements and going, no. In terms of crafting a seriously useful set of intercept, yes. >> For some value of "interesting votes". Archon (Camarilla only) is >> replaced by Templar, both of which are similarly useful cards. > >Templar isn't even close. No blood payment for blocking and no >immunity to blodd hunts. The immunity to Blood Hunts is often far less useful than it would first appear. If you get a vampire into torpor, or burn them outright, it may be better to not spend your actions diablerising them. (Of course, sometimes it might.) But the Sabbat's generally far more aggressive combat makes it easier to burn someone outright. One important aspect of Templar, however, is that it can be called by all the Sabbat titles. >> But let's look at the other votes still available to them. Banishment >> is certainly interesting. > >Banishment is not unique to the Sabbat. Who said the votes had to be unique to them? They still have plenty of interesting votes. Are you under the mistaken impression that because you're playing Sabbat you should be playing a vote deck with votes that are only available to the Sabbat or somesuch notion? That the Lasombra (or whoever) cannot be played in the same way as the Ventrue (or whoever) is a given but there are some elements which can be used by both. >> Kine Resources Contested is one of the best >> cards in the game. > >KRC is not unique to the Sabbat. Again, attempting to prove some sort of point is unhelpful. The Sabbat still have access to many powerful and useful vote cards. They don't have access to others. But a Ventrue vote deck won't have access to some of the tactics available to a Lasombra vote deck, equally. >> Conservative Agitation also has its place. > >ConAg is not unique to the Sabbat. Again, as above. >> Sabbat Inquisitor - you vote to give a vampire +1 bleed, if nothing else! > >Generally that is all you're doing. However I find that you're better >off bleeding or voting as opposed to both at once (the usefulness of >Govern in a vote deck being the exception). This is far from certain, in any given environment. In the instance that someone shuts down one element of a deck, being able to fall back onto other elements is extremely useful. Of course, the whole toolboxing vs focused thing is a well-established game paradigm that has been explored many times on the newsgroup. Being able to generate +1 bleed for a support vampire and also, in the case of the Presence Lasombra/!Brujah deck I mentioned a while back, get some pool back via Voter Captivation is certainly not something to be sniffed at. >> Reinforcements is available to many, and very good it is too. > >Reinforcements is not unique to the Sabbat. You may care to recall that the original comment made was: "But let's look at the other votes still available to them." The idea is that the Sabbat have no interesting votes to call; perhaps they have few interesting votes to call which are exclusive to them. The original quote from you was: >>But what are they going to do >> with the votes >> when there's hardly any interesting votes to call? They have plenty of interesting votes to call. Whether they're exclusive or not is irrelevant. They have "interesting votes to call". >> Rabble Razing is as effective against weenies when played by the Sabbat as it >> is played by anyone else. > >Rabble Razing is not unique to the Sabbat. You may care to go back and correct your original statement, then. How is Rabble Razing not interesting? That is the only criterion that was laid down. >> Political Stranglehold - powerful, useful, interesting. > >Political Stranglehold is not unique to the Sabbat. And again. >> A well-timed Political Flux can either give you a huge >> margin over what you should have or annul someone else's. > >Political Flux is not unique to the Sabbat. And again. >> National Guard Support is potentially excellent bleed defence, especially if >> you're not going for a bleed deck element at all. > >Yes, but only b/c there aren't enough ProRes and AIs to go around. There are plenty of Archon Investigations out there. Protected Resources, whilst good, does hamstring you yourself, of course. >Also: >National Guard Support is not unique to the Sabbat. Also: >>But what are they going to do >> with the votes >> when there's hardly any interesting votes to call? It's an interesting vote they can call. >> Consanguineous Boon and Autarkis Persecution >> are solid pool gain, as ever. >> Honor the Elders is extremely useful. >> Disputed Territory mucks around other decks - >> steal that Heidelberg, stop their blood flow. > >More non-Sabbat votes. Yippie! No, they're votes that the Sabbat vampires can call. A Sabbat voting deck would do well to consider any or all of them. A Sabbat voting deck that cut off its nose to spite its face ignoring them would be plain stupid. >> Blood Siege! Now >> *there's* an interesting vote if ever I saw one. What other card in the >> game can generate a permanent 4 vote swing, > >Protect Thine Own on that Gangrel Pricus with an extra vote. Forfeit >the title and her head. Snippage of the rest of the point is unhelpful here. Protect Thine Own will, in no way, deny a deck access to Traditions. >Also, since any vampire can burn blood for votes, the Camarilla are in >a better position because they're more likely to be near capacity >thanks to 5th trad. The card has a decent chance of being a dead >draw. The Camarilla, as Jeff has pointed out, are often more likely to *need* that blood. A Tzimisce deck or a Lasombra deck both have significant chances of being capable in combat (if you construct them in that manner - ignoring combat, being such a basic element of the game, would be unhelpful, however). They're going to be able to hit back if you come at them when they're on low blood. This is far less likely for a Ventrue deck, and difficult for a Toreador voting deck. >> Are these cards not interesting? > >Only templar, s. inquisitor, investiture, CB, and blood siege were >unique to the Sabbat. If you wish to go back and revise the comment you made, this is fine. However, to dismiss any discussion which was made without that exclusivity clause is unlikely to be helpful. >> Investiture and Cardinal Benediction can be passed >> excluding Camarilla vampires very >> easily, no extra cards needed. > >The 2nd investiture (or 1st if you already have a cardinal) is usually >pointless. Potentially. It depends on the deck and on the play environment. In an environment where Prisci are more common, you metagame your deck to compensate. (And the other way, of course.) (It also shuts down some of the potential nastiness of Regent on Gratiano.) If you have a cardinal but face some opposition in the environment because Sabbat voters are a little more common, you may appreciate the extra vote(s) you get to be followed up with a Cryptic Rider. >However without access to 5th/MT it is >difficult to bring out the same # of high caps as the Camarilla. Honor the Elders helps here, to some degree (a point you snipped when dealing with it). Honor the Elders combined with Voter Captivation would be a good card, if you could manage it. (See Moncada and Francisco for fun.) If you combine Honor the Elders, Bewitching Oration/Awe and Voter Captivation you can have some quite serious blood and pool flow going there. And this doesn't require a master phase action to be used, though is mildly card intensive in return. >> Have a look at, say: >> >> "Tournament Winning Deck: Praxis Seizure: College Station (4vps in final >> round) July 14th, 2001 by Jeffrey Thompson" on <URL:http://www.thelasomb >> ra.com/decks/twd.htm> > >Laf: > 4 Eternal Vigilance (should have been anything else, I discarded them >all every game) >Apparently I'm not the only one who thought these weren't quite good >enough. You may care to look at the deck, of course. (Though this wouldn't help with attempting cheap points.) And recall that the point in context was regarding vote decks, rather than Eternal Vigilance in general. The deck itself has no real source of intercept (indeed, I can't see *any*). In an environment where stealthed actions are common-place, Eternal Vigilance is almost certainly going to be worthless. This doesn't make the card worthless, just that card in that context. >The 'balance' between the Sabbat and the Camarilla is that the Sabbat >tend to have better disciplines, while the Camarilla have more useful >sect specific cards. That's one element of the balance, yes. The Sabbat are often slightly more toolboxey in their own disciplines, too. Flexibility is a not inconsiderable power. >The problem with that is that you get vampires >like Arika, Lucian, etc. which will have the disciplines that you want >and get the great camarilla stuff too. You only have to play the best >vampires for your goal; the substandard ones don't matter. For some decks. And for some values of "sub-standard". Not every deck out there wants, needs or cares for the "great camarilla stuff". [ quoted text not captured ]

On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, James Coupe wrote: > In message <e7883b0c.01101...@posting.google.com>, Carl > Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> writes > >Psychic Veil is just a gimmick in this case. > > Psychic Veil often is. It's good but it's not *that* good. it's handy in a shambling hordes/bane mummy deck. and yes, that is one deck, not two decks. yes, i have played the deck. yes, it has won all the games i played it in. no, i have no idea why. screwy metagame i guess. salem.

On 18 Oct 2001 09:40:41 -0700, Carl Pilhatsch wrote: >Well, VTES is probably the best balanced CCG out there Like Carlsberg claims to be probably the best beer in the world? This is what some folk are fond of calling an unsupported assertion. But first, what does it mean? Are you talking about balance between the players, the cards, the clans, the disciplines or what? Then how are you measuring it? And which CCGs are you comparing it with? Is this anything more than just chauvinism or idle boasting? One could ramble all over the place with this topic (feel free). To pick one narrow point, VTES has a good mechanism for handicapping the player that goes first. How balanced is this? If you had a choice, would you prefer to go 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th? Andrew

On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 15:54:04 +0100, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> wrote: >On 18 Oct 2001 09:40:41 -0700, Carl Pilhatsch wrote: > >>Well, VTES is probably the best balanced CCG out there > >Like Carlsberg claims to be probably the best beer in the world? This >is what some folk are fond of calling an unsupported assertion. But >first, what does it mean? Are you talking about balance between the >players, the cards, the clans, the disciplines or what? Then how are >you measuring it? And which CCGs are you comparing it with? Is this >anything more than just chauvinism or idle boasting? This was only an opinion ( a matter of taste ) not a fact. That's why Carl said "probably". >One could ramble all over the place with this topic (feel free). To >pick one narrow point, VTES has a good mechanism for handicapping the >player that goes first. How balanced is this? If you had a choice, >would you prefer to go 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th? If I play a weenie or with 5 or 9 cap vamps, 1st will be just fine. Remy

On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 15:54:04 +0100, Andrew S. Davidson <a...@csi.com> wrote: >One could ramble all over the place with this topic (feel free). To >pick one narrow point, VTES has a good mechanism for handicapping the >player that goes first. How balanced is this? If you had a choice, >would you prefer to go 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th? Depends on what kind of deck I'm playing, and depends on my opening crypt. If I'm playing a weenie deck, I want to go 1st or 5th; the "first action" is critical, but it's also nice to be able to turn over 4 vampires behind a person who has none at all yet. If I'm playing a big-fatty deck, it depends on the fatty I want first. If my crypt is Ambrogino, Marianna, Carlotta, and Paul diCarlo, I can make arguments for wanting to be in EACH position. 1st: I get Ambrogino on turn 3 with no significant loss of time. Alternatively, I get Carlotta AND Paul on turn 3. 2nd: I get Paul diCarlo immediately and have a minion who can act. 3rd: I get Carlotta on turn 2. 4th: I get Marianna on turn 2. 5th: I get Marianna on turn 2. Now, which seating position is BEST for me depends totally on what my deck is designed to do, and what is sitting near me. If I'm a "govern-backwards" deck, I would LOVE to be in the 1st slot; I can get my oldest vampire out, Govern to Carlotta, and have a second fatty on turn 4. If I'm a "beat things up" deck, I probably want Paul ASAP, and Carlotta soon after. So IMO, the "seating position" scheme is quite balanced, though there is a small ambiguity between 4th/5th at most tables. -- Derek

>Are you talking about balance between the >players, the cards, the clans, the disciplines or what? Cards, decks, players. Cards - Individual cards have relatively small effects. More important to have a good deck than to play a good card. Decks - What are the tier 1 decks in V:TES? Is tier 1 a meaningful concept in V:TES? Isn't the variety of the winning decks notable? I've played lots of crap decks and they can get VPs because of a favorable situation. I've played good decks that didn't get any. More important to manage a game well than to have the best deck, assuming you can even figure out what the best deck is. Players - Multiplayer games allow for ganging up on the leader. Free for all multiplayer games suffer for this as all the game comes down to is ganging up on the leader until someone sneaks victory through or everyone else has exhausted too many resources to keep battling. V:TES rewards focusing on specific players; it has partial victories (underrated and unexamined, IMO). To a much greater degree than other multiplayer CCGs, from what I've seen, it remains stable when played well by most or all of the players. Note that I say most because, while one sided games are very possible, rarely does one bad player cause them. Then how are >you measuring it? And which CCGs are you comparing it with? All of them, though it should probably only be compared to other multiplayer CCGs as multiplayer CCGs are inherently more balanced. Which do you consider better balanced?

emmits...@hotmail.com (Emmit Svenson) wrote in message news:<75bdf7ed.01101...@posting.google.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] And the sneaky git started his own thread! http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&group=rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad&selm=81bc9a19737589fdd050acab197f7da5.24814%40mygate.mailgate.org

> > Psychic Veil often is. It's good but it's not *that* good. > > it's handy in a shambling hordes/bane mummy deck. Hum, ineresting ; Setites with Necro ? What use is the stealth when both of these are made for hurting ? Just in order to get the right target ? > yes, it has won all the games i played it in. If you want to display the deck somewhere.... > no, i have no idea why. screwy metagame i guess. Ok, now I'll really pas for an ignorant, but I must confess... I don't know what everybody means by : "metagame" !!

To > pick one narrow point, VTES has a good mechanism for handicapping the > player that goes first. How balanced is this? If you had a choice, > would you prefer to go 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th? Ask James, he's n°1 in an ongoing (170) Jyhad Online game, and I'm not sure he likes the position. It's not very nice to be the last one to get a vampire out, while some others already have 2... (of course, the choice of the Caps of the vampires is of importance, but still... James, your opinion ?). > > Andrew

James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<ls75GNhC...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > In message <8f507d2e.01101...@posting.google.com>, Shaun > McIsaac <smci...@onesourcecorp.com> writes > >James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote in message news:<xv4M2FRMNWz7Ew > >J...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>... > >The have the most intercept in the game, but then again who cares if > >they can use bad intercept cards? > Using Eternal Vigilance to wake, together with The Spirit's Touch and/or > Precognition gives a lot more combat oriented abilities than 2nd > Tradition. I'd rather have 2nd trad and a Skin of Steel than EV and Precog (at the same cost). And I like Precog. > 2nd Tradition will, of course, give you a significant ability to > intercept - but that's all it gives you. *and* the untap in a single card. That doesn't get blocked when I try to 'equip' it. > >Templar isn't even close. No blood payment for blocking and no > >immunity to blood hunts. > > The immunity to Blood Hunts is often far less useful than it would first > appear. If you get a vampire into torpor, or burn them outright, it may > be better to not spend your actions diablerising them. (Of course, > sometimes it might.) The blood hunt immunity rarely matters (because you had the vote lock to get the archon in the first place), but is occassionally useful. The blood payment, OTOH, is quite nice. > But the Sabbat's generally far more aggressive > combat makes it easier to burn someone outright. If really you want to burn vamps, the Tremere do a much better job than anyone else. AotA - Entombment - Decapitate (or most of what the Tzimisce would try) is too fragile. War ghouls with daggers work, but take a lot of set up. This, however, is all OT with respect to the rest of this discussion. > One important aspect of Templar, however, is that it can be called by > all the Sabbat titles. Yah, primogen do kinda suck. However, you don't have to play with primogen if you don't want to, as pretty much every clan has at least 2-3 interesting princes and justicar. > Who said the votes had to be unique to them? They still have plenty of > interesting votes. > Are you under the mistaken impression that because you're playing Sabbat > you should be playing a vote deck with votes that are only available to > the Sabbat or somesuch notion? The fact that sabbat can play "all kindred" cards does not impress me. In the same way that I wouldn't play purely Cam. exclusive votes in a Cam. vote deck, I wouldn't play purely Sabbat votes in a Sabbat vote deck. However, you must see that using "all kindred" cards (or Sabbat cards where the Cam. have a better equilavent) isn't exactly going to convince anyone that the Sabbat are good at voting or have interesting votes. What it means, if anything, is that all kindred have interesting votes. But the all kindred votes, while a staple of both Cam and Sabbat vote decks, need some support. And the support is just that much better on the Cam. side. Which is why you look at Lasombra's deck listings and see that: A) Every camarilla clan has more winning decks than the ! counterpart except Caitiff (0) vs Pander (3), and B) The Malkavians and the Ventrue, each individually, have more winning decks than the Lasombra and the Tzimisce combined. While the success of the Malks can be attributed to an excellent discipline set, many of those Ventrue decks are doing princely things. > The idea is that the Sabbat have no interesting votes to call; perhaps > they have few interesting votes to call which are exclusive to them. > The original quote from you was: > >>But what are they going to do > >> with the votes > >> when there's hardly any interesting votes to call? > They have plenty of interesting votes to call. Whether they're > exclusive or not is irrelevant. They have "interesting votes to call". No, the original quote from me was: You're (both) missing the greater point here. The Camarilla titles are not even remotely balanced compared to the Sabbat ones. <snip> While there is some ok Sabbat only stuff, nothing really compares to what the camarilla can do with 5th/MT, 2nd, PS, and PTO. > >> Rabble Razing is as effective against weenies when played by the Sabbat as it > >> is played by anyone else. > >Rabble Razing is not unique to the Sabbat. > You may care to go back and correct your original statement, then. How > is Rabble Razing not interesting? That is the only criterion that was > laid down. Because RR sucks? Also, it makes little sense to argue about sect balance if you're convinced that only the parts of the game that you think are important, are on the table for discussion. While I tend to build focused decks, I'm more than willing to entertain a fair amount of all-purpose cards/strats. Open your mind pls., or this stops being a discussion and becomes quite pointless. > >> National Guard Support is potentially excellent bleed defence, especially if > >> you're not going for a bleed deck element at all. > > > >Yes, but only b/c there aren't enough ProRes and AIs to go around. > There are plenty of Archon Investigations out there. Protected > Resources, whilst good, does hamstring you yourself, of course. AI is not an easy card to find in any number greater than 1 or 2. Vtes boxes/packs/decks are not cheap now, and weren't available to relatively newer players at the original price. NGS, in constrast, comes from a set which is much easier to find. > >> Blood Siege! Now > >> *there's* an interesting vote if ever I saw one. What other card in the > >> game can generate a permanent 4 vote swing, > > > >Protect Thine Own on that Gangrel Pricus with an extra vote. Forfeit > >the title and her head. > > Snippage of the rest of the point is unhelpful here. Protect Thine Own > will, in no way, deny a deck access to Traditions. No, they need to play Camarilla title removers for that. But a successful PTO can cause considerable vote swing, and is often so devastating that the Meth being hit doesn't recover. I find the *7* VP this card earned me in the prelims last week to be 'interesting'. Would have been 8 VP but I decided to allow Keith to get 2 VP in the first game, because I wanted a deck like his to reach the finals instead of a deck which possed a stronger threat. This turned out to be the correct decision and almost certainly won me the tournament. > >Also, since any vampire can burn blood for votes, the Camarilla are in > >a better position because they're more likely to be near capacity > >thanks to 5th trad. The card has a decent chance of being a dead > >draw. > > The Camarilla, as Jeff has pointed out, are often more likely to *need* > that blood. > > A Tzimisce deck or a Lasombra deck both have significant chances of > being capable in combat (if you construct them in that manner - ignoring > combat, being such a basic element of the game, would be unhelpful, > however). They're going to be able to hit back if you come at them when > they're on low blood. This is far less likely for a Ventrue deck, and > difficult for a Toreador voting deck. The Tzimisce and Lasombra are more capable in offensive combat than those, though I prefer (euro) brujah for the fight vote combo, and Shotokan (hi Josh) if you're interested in nasty fighting capabilities (and the high cap shotos have decent voters too). Feel free to continue stressing combat to the Seekonk crowd though :) > >> Investiture and Cardinal Benediction can be passed > >> excluding Camarilla vampires very > >> easily, no extra cards needed. > >The 2nd investiture (or 1st if you already have a cardinal) is usually > >pointless. > Potentially. It depends on the deck and on the play environment. In an > environment where Prisci are more common, you metagame your deck to > compensate. BTW, the above should read already have a prisci. In any case, if you have to fight for the prisci subreferendum, it's usually not worth the effort of getting the extra prisci out which still have a total of 3 votes. I don't see many metagames where you'd want a to put more than 1-2 Investitures in. > >However without access to 5th/MT it is > >difficult to bring out the same # of high caps as the Camarilla. > > Honor the Elders helps here, to some degree (a point you snipped when > dealing with it). Honor the Elders combined with Voter Captivation > would be a good card, if you could manage it. (See Moncada and > Francisco for fun.) If you combine Honor the Elders, Bewitching > Oration/Awe and Voter Captivation you can have some quite serious blood > and pool flow going there. And this doesn't require a master phase > action to be used, though is mildly card intensive in return. Pound for pound, MT/5th is just more powerful / less situational. > The deck itself has no real source of intercept (indeed, I can't see > *any*). In an environment where stealthed actions are common-place, > Eternal Vigilance is almost certainly going to be worthless. This > doesn't make the card worthless, just that card in that context. That's a very common context. > >The problem with that is that you get vampires > >like Arika, Lucian, etc. which will have the disciplines that you want > >and get the great camarilla stuff too. You only have to play the best > >vampires for your goal; the substandard ones don't matter. > For some decks. And for some values of "sub-standard". Not every deck > out there wants, needs or cares for the "great camarilla stuff". So is your defense of the Sabbat now that they don't 'want' 8~10 point pool swings on their actions (PS, PTO, and 5th all qualify there)? That they'd rather have a templar instead of an archon?

Ok, I'll just mention that I'll just answer here and read what gets posted next, but won't take the time to argument too much : this is taking way, way more time than I should allow to this (devouring) passion of a game. So don't you think I used my stealth to get out of a difficult conversation... ;-) So, good fellow, do read on... > Yes, I have been opposed by other good votes decks with Camarilla vampires > in tournaments that I have won. Some of the things that allow Sabbat vote > decks to beat Camarilla vote decks are as follows: > > An (almost) Autopass vote to gain votes that generates other > votes that pass automatically. (Cardinal Benediction followed by > Cryptic Rider and any other vote - Blood Siege is particularly appropriate > in this third card slot.) Yes. Nice use of one of the advantages of the Sabbat : cards like CB (if you have all the requisites for playing it, of course). > Having permanent votes on the table. The clans I vote with in tournaments > (Lasombra, Tzimisce, Tremere Antitribu) Wow ! The last two didn't seem like the obvious voters... can all gain and support large > quantities of vampires with three votes. Yes, although I've tested once more that when an Inner Circle comes out he shifts the voting balance all by himself... > Private Audience can cause all of your votes to pass without opposition, > as the other players, especially if playing Camarilla vote, cannot vote > much more often than not. > > -Closed Session isn't as good, as right now there are many more Camarilla > voters in the tournament scene than Sabbat or Independent voters, so isn't > included in most Camarilla voting decks. Interesting : taking advantage of what seems to be a disadvantage (or : the politics / statistics of tournament game). People think it's easier to play Cama votes, so you end up being the only Sabbat vote ; nice. > Playing the table or metagame I can't wait 'til someone tells me what the metagame is... > against itself. The Camarilla vote players > that I beat with the Sabbat voting decks didn't play the table or the > metagame as well as I did in those particular tournaments. All right, but that only proves that you had better game mastery than them, not that you would have won with your deck against theirs if they had been your strategic equals... > In general, the deck that calls (and passes) more votes will win, regardless > of the sect of their vampires. Therefore making the votes palatable to > possible cross-table allies is much more important in the beginning until > you can gain vote lock while voting. No winning vote deck has to have > vote lock on offense and defense, but it must be able to pass 90%+ of the > votes it does call. Yes, of course. Only play Consanguineous Boon or Transfer of Power if you're sure that the vote will pass (one more advantage of Parity Shift of Transfer : only one target, and an included optional bribe...). > As an aside: > > There is no vampire in the game that is worth more than three > pool in the long run. What do you mean by that ? > Decks that vote and Minion Tap/Fifth have > to split their stealth and their actions among voting and Fifthing. > Sabbat decks can simply take the pool with the first Minion Tap, > rely on their strong combat, Do you really think Sabbat combat power is superior ? For Toreadors, I would agree ; for Ventrues, only Lazve has that edge ; for Brujahs, it seems about the same to me (is Jacko better than Crusher ?) ; the City Gangrels are definitely less fearsome than the Country, especially for someone with IGs in stock (go ahead, burn your blood for additionals, I won't feel a thing ; and when I get my claws on you...). I don't know about Tremere, and except for Coma and some such the !Malks are not much fearsome than their counterparts (who now also have Dem anyway). The Nossies ? About the same, I'd say, except that the anti have nice included powers, but that the Cams can play Fortitude as a fourth discipline, so... So in some cases this seems to be true, but I wouldn't accept it as a general rule. > and not ever bother to replace the blood. Even in a !Brujah deck ??? > Therefore they will get more possibilities to call votes, which should > allow them to have more successful votes, and played and chosen well, > to win. This is an interesting choice, but it seems to me that it's just a strategy, not a real difference like "the Camarilla needs more blood than the Sabbat" (or blood OF the Sabbat ?). > > > > the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? > > > > > > Yes. > > > > Would you care to develop ? :-) > > No voting deck needs the specialty vote decks to succeed. > A Ventrue vote deck can do just as well with out Parity Shift > as it can with Parity Shift, and will likely be more reliable > for not putting them in. So you think it is not a good card ? > I am not debating Sabbat vote cards versus Camarilla vote cards, > I don't think that's a worthwhile effort. The Sabbat votes are > seriously underpowered as compared to some of the Jyhad originals > or to the ones introduced in Dark Sovereigns or Ancient Hearts. Ok, so we agree on that point. Do you have any idea if WW feels this must stay the case or be remedied ? > I am debating whether or not the Sabbat as a sect suffer for that > when playing vote decks. I do not feel that they do. All right. Let's see why : > Delaying Tactics and Direct Intervention work just as well for > vote defense regardless of who is attempting to call the vote. > In an environment where Protect Thine Own and Parity Shift exist, > not playing with a few of each of the above is dangerously short-sighted, > especially if playing with non-Camarilla vampires. Yes, and not to mention the awful Camarilla Segregation... > > > You have not in any way established any of the claims you make in > > > the above paragraph. Care to back them up? (...) > The only thing established in that other thread is that other clans may > specialize better in general, not that decks that focus on bleeding, voting, > or fighting are any better or worse for the Lasombra than they are for any > other clan. > > (That doesn't read back the way I was thinking it, I may try to reword > shortly.) Yes, I had to re-read that a few times too... :-) > The thread says Brujah are better fighters. > So what? > > That doesn't mean that the Lasombra can't field one of the > most effective combat decks in the game. The decks that I > play with the Lasombra that are Rush type decks, whose main > focus is winning through the attrition Attrition ? > of vampires, do well, > against Brujah, Gangrel, Nosferatu, Tzimisce or whatever > else comes their way, but won't win in every combat. No > clan can say that they will win every combat, there are too > many variables for that to be in any way correct. > > Unless you are playing a two player game, there will be more interaction > that just the Brujah and Lasombra fighting. There is a good possibility > that they will both do significant damage to the other, and that which > ever one is the predator will have a better chance of victory if they > both fight exclusively. If the Lasombra deck is the predator, bleed bounce > will turn the tide, and the Brujah should go down first if they are both decks > with a large combat focus. Ok, for me that still goes to say that, globally, Brujahs fight better, but that the situation can still turn to the Lasombra's advantage, and / or that the Lasombra have other advantages that compensate ; of course, nobody can win every fight, and that's fortunate, but I think that most of the time the winners will be the Gangrels or Brujahs - of either sect - and, maybe sometimes, the Tzimisce or Assamites... > The thread says the Malkavians are better bleeders. > So what? > > The Lasombra can't excel at bleeding at stealth because > another clan can do it too? No, of course not ; but if you're relying on speed to win, the Malks can have more than you can (Elder Impersonation is way better than Blanket of Night for the same cost ; Faceless Night taps you ; etc.). Of course, you can also play Obf, but... Well, in NCL some people have objected that it would be stupid, as Lasombras already have stealth ; but still, 3 Lasombras (of which 2 key vampires) have Obf, so maybe it can B useful ? > With the Path of Night, you have +4 stealth that you can add > to each bleed action that won't cost you any blood to play. > Rarely is more than that (or even that much) needed. Rarely, yes, but against a real Intercept deck I guess that 3 different cards may not always be enough. If you rely only on that strategy, the Malks will go faster ; of course, they will also get destroyed faster, if you also include some other goodies, which goes to say once more that Lasombras will be less specialised, and depending on the quality of the deck / game, will win OR lose because of that. Yes ? > I'm not going to re-address voting, any Sabbat clan can make a winning > vote deck with proper preparation. I only ask to believe. And I feel like Mulder here, because I WANT to believe, as I enjoy very much playing Sabbat (unlike on tabletop roleplaying game, because they're too twisted for me) ! > > No, I'm sorry to say that we haven't "crippled the game" ; > > Yes, you have. > You have taken a portion of the game, and discarded it completely. > Perhaps crippled isn't the word, perhaps castrated will be more suitable. I'm sorry to say that the game, on its whole, seems about as balanced as in the original rules ; and I'd say that, if people have begun to put card limits, it may be because they were getting tired of seeing always the same cards in (pick any number from 5 to 20+) exemplaries, or maybe because they would like to keep their decks for a longer time and not playing all the time the same combos. > I've played with a 3CL, a 4CL, a 6CL, a 1CL on uniques, and many other variants > in the last 7 years. I enjoy all of the game variants. I'm glad to hear that, as your precedent sentence seemed to condemn them. Personally, once I think I'd enjoy some things a whole lot less if I were castrated... ;-[ I prefer > the game as played by the rules, I can understand that. and the cards are designed to be balanced > in that environment. Yes, and maybe they are less so in our version ; but still, this way of playing is very enjoyable. I wonder : is Jyhad the only TC game rich enough for allowing all these variants ? Or is it a common practice ? > > > Redirection is a crappy version of Deflection, to call it a good card > > > is to mistake it for something else. (...) But tell me something : isn't it you > > who created "In the Presence of Lasombra", with 6 Redirections and no > > Deflections ? > > Yes, the deck needed the card cycling ability of Forced Awakening more than > it needed the stay untapped power of Deflection. That particular deck > gets 2-3 vampires in play early, and must be able to cycle to the defensive > cards while on defense. Therefore to avoid paying two blood, for Forced > Awakening and Deflection, the smarter option of paying only one blood on > vampires that are going to be tapped anyway was taken. > > In any deck that can afford to leave one vampire untapped to play bleed bounce, > Deflection is the better card every time. When you have to play two cards > to do any bleed bounce, it is a harder choice. Interesting PoV ; nothing replaces the experience, uh ? > > But I think that even by yours, at > > equal thought / skill / choice of cards, Camarilla wins. Please prove me > > wrong. > > I don't have time at the moment, but the material to do so is here: > > http://www.thelasombra.com/decks/clan-twd.htm > > > This weekend I may do another interface to access the archive by strategy, > but it takes quite a bit of time to do those interface pages so I can't > give any guarantees. Nice ! I'll go take a look when it's done. Ok, that's it for me, I'll let you guys go on and read with interest what you post on this thread when I have the time, provided that it isn't just once more on the "CL or not CL" theme, which interests me less than mildly. May the Muses smile upon you, Orpheus [ quoted text not captured ]

cur...@aol.com (Curevei) wrote in message news:<20011019135744...@mb-cf.aol.com>... > Players - Multiplayer games allow for ganging up on the leader. Free for all > multiplayer games suffer for this as all the game comes down to is ganging up > on the leader until someone sneaks victory through or everyone else has > exhausted too many resources to keep battling. V:TES rewards focusing on > specific players; it has partial victories (underrated and unexamined, IMO). > To a much greater degree than other multiplayer CCGs, from what I've seen, it > remains stable when played well by most or all of the players. Note that I say > most because, while one sided games are very possible, rarely does one bad > player cause them. Hmmm... actually, I've found that one bad player withing a multiplayer game puts a lot of power in the hands on that 'bad' players predator and or prey... In every game I've played, usually the predator of that one bad player you've got in a game tends to 'win' (as in take more than one vp)... So in this case... the games not balanced. ~SV

In message <9qq30d$mg8$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >To >> pick one narrow point, VTES has a good mechanism for handicapping the >> player that goes first. How balanced is this? If you had a choice, >> would you prefer to go 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th? > >Ask James, he's n°1 in an ongoing (170) Jyhad Online game, and I'm not sure >he likes the position. He doesn't, but it's not been killer so far, mostly annoying. (For reference, I just got out Silvia Giovanni (10 cap), doing it on my fourth turn. Ack.) (As to why I'm playing Silvia Giovanni, trust me, I've no idea.) [ quoted text not captured ]

Orpheus asked what metagame means. The metagame is the game around the game. Do I take a voting deck that works in local play to a tournament in another state? The decisions on this are based on what you think the current metagame is (or will be). What type of decks exist, what type of counters to your own deck exist and whether or not they can reasonably be expected to show up. The metagame also describes the drift in a group. A group might start out with no one playing votes, everyone playing some form of bleed or combat deck. As one player decides to do a serious vote deck, the metagame changes. What you need to put in your decks changes, in this example, you now need to include vote defense. As more people in that group add vote defense, or switch to voting themselves, the player cognizant of the metagame will switch to something different. Richard Garfield wrote an article or two on the concept of the metagame in early issues of the Duelist. If you are interested in the topic, you might search back issues, or search WOTC's website. http://www.wizards.com [ quoted text not captured ]

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:9qq7e0$qha$1...@wanadoo.fr... > > Having permanent votes on the table. The clans I vote with in tournaments > > (Lasombra, Tzimisce, Tremere Antitribu) > > Wow ! The last two didn't seem like the obvious voters... Telepathic Vote Counting. Any vampire with superior Auspex can keep that pesky Inner Circle member or Cardinal of your prey from voting. In many cases as good as a Bewitching Oration. When combined with Private Audience, it can get most of your votes passed. > can all gain and support large > > quantities of vampires with three votes. > > Yes, although I've tested once more that when an Inner Circle comes out he > shifts the voting balance all by himself... Private Audience. Telepathic Vote Counting. > Interesting : taking advantage of what seems to be a disadvantage (or : the > politics / statistics of tournament game). > People think it's easier to play Cama votes, so you end up being the only > Sabbat vote ; nice. > > > Playing the table or metagame > > I can't wait 'til someone tells me what the metagame is... See the thread of that name. Playing the metagame is taking advantage of the way other people perceive the game to be strong by making it into their weakness. > > against itself. The Camarilla vote players > > that I beat with the Sabbat voting decks didn't play the table or the > > metagame as well as I did in those particular tournaments. > > All right, but that only proves that you had better game mastery than them, > not that you would have won with your deck against theirs if they had been > your strategic equals... Even if they were my strategic equals in that particular game, my outguessing them about the other 3 decks at the table would have turned in the tide. I played the metagame, the game of knowing what other people are playing and why very well in the tournaments that I have won. I guessed just as poorly at the GenCon Continental Championships, I ended up sitting next to two Immortal Grapple Bum's Rush Potence Weenie decks, and it was the only thing the deck I was playing that day could not deal with at all. > > As an aside: > > > > There is no vampire in the game that is worth more than three > > pool in the long run. > > What do you mean by that ? If you are leaving more than 3 blood on a vampire that cost more than that to bring into play, you are making a mistake in a vote deck. Calling votes requires 1 blood (ie, if you don't have one blood, you can't call a vote, because you have to hunt). Most vote modifiers are free. Anything else you are paying for shouldn't cost you much, as you need to be calling votes to make the voting deck work. > > Decks that vote and Minion Tap/Fifth have > > to split their stealth and their actions among voting and Fifthing. > > Sabbat decks can simply take the pool with the first Minion Tap, > > rely on their strong combat, > > Do you really think Sabbat combat power is superior ? Sabbat combat power is "perceived" as superior. Therefore you need less stealth on your votes as your opponents don't want to block and go to torpor. You can include relatively little combat as long as it is effective the first time and get away with it. > For Toreadors, I would > agree ; for Ventrues, only Lazve has that edge ; for Brujahs, it seems about > the same to me (is Jacko better than Crusher ?) ; the City Gangrels are > definitely less fearsome than the Country, especially for someone with IGs > in stock (go ahead, burn your blood for additionals, I won't feel a thing ; > and when I get my claws on you...). I don't know about Tremere, and except > for Coma and some such the !Malks are not much fearsome than their > counterparts (who now also have Dem anyway). The Nossies ? About the same, > I'd say, except that the anti have nice included powers, but that the Cams > can play Fortitude as a fourth discipline, so... > So in some cases this seems to be true, but I wouldn't accept it as a > general rule. It isn't a general rule. It is a perception on the part of the tournament playing public that you can exploit with a vote deck. Metagame. > > and not ever bother to replace the blood. > > Even in a !Brujah deck ??? You can replace the blood, in fact it helps if you do, but it is not in any way required. Most vampires in my voting decks will have three blood immediately after coming out, and never bother to go higher. Those that can, with Voter Captivation or Taste of Vitae certainly will, but it is not required to make the deck effective. > > Therefore they will get more possibilities to call votes, which should > > allow them to have more successful votes, and played and chosen well, > > to win. > > This is an interesting choice, but it seems to me that it's just a strategy, > not a real difference like "the Camarilla needs more blood than the Sabbat" > (or blood OF the Sabbat ?). I didn't say that. I said you don't waste actions attempting to gain blood, therefore your Sabbat Vote Deck has the potential and ability to do better. Both your predator and your prey have an interest in Minion Tap/5th not working. Your prey because it allows you to get more minions into play so that you can do more things against him. Your predator because it can allow you to ignore the things that he does entirely. (You bleed me for 1 with 4-5 minions. I am going to Minion Tap/Fifth to replace that pool. I never have to block your bleeds. Your hand jams with combat, stealth, or whatever else your deck does because your expected result - that I would block - is never fulfilled.) > > > > > the question : is it enough against Camarilla votes ? > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > Would you care to develop ? :-) > > > > No voting deck needs the specialty vote cards to succeed. > > A Ventrue vote deck can do just as well with out Parity Shift > > as it can with Parity Shift, and will likely be more reliable > > for not putting them in. > > So you think it is not a good card ? You need to be losing to play it (ie have lower pool than others). You can do that in a way that is advantageous to you, Temptation of Greater Power, lots of minions with lots of bleed bounce, Hostile Takeover, <more>. You do not need to be low on pool to play Kine Resources Contested. You are more likely to do well with a deck that gains pool and calls Kine Resources Contested than a deck that loses pool (or spends) and calls Parity Shift. > > I am not debating Sabbat vote cards versus Camarilla vote cards, > > I don't think that's a worthwhile effort. The Sabbat votes are > > seriously underpowered as compared to some of the Jyhad originals > > or to the ones introduced in Dark Sovereigns or Ancient Hearts. > > Ok, so we agree on that point. Do you have any idea if WW feels this must > stay the case or be remedied ? I cannot speak for White Wolf. The next set is Bloodlines. No Sabbat-only votes there (unless some of the Bloodlines are political Sabbat, unlikely). The set after that is scheduled to be a Camarilla expansion. Definitely no Sabbat-only votes there. This would seem to indicate that they feel the game is balanced the way it is, and does not need a Parity Shift for the Sabbat, or it would have been included in Sabbat War. > > I am debating whether or not the Sabbat as a sect suffer for that > > when playing vote decks. I do not feel that they do. > > All right. Let's see why : > > > Delaying Tactics and Direct Intervention work just as well for > > vote defense regardless of who is attempting to call the vote. > > In an environment where Protect Thine Own and Parity Shift exist, > > not playing with a few of each of the above is dangerously short-sighted, > > especially if playing with non-Camarilla vampires. > > Yes, and not to mention the awful Camarilla Segregation... Okay, I won't since it isn't a vote. :> > No, of course not ; but if you're relying on speed to win, the Malks can > have more than you can. That's why bleed bounce is so nice. One of the tournaments at GenCon this year I had a Malk Stealth Bleed predator, and his predator was also Malk Stealth bleed. I was very happy to start the game with 4 Deflections in hand. I was 3 or 4 pool from ousting my prey before the combined efforts of the two Malkavians got me. > > I'm not going to re-address voting, any Sabbat clan can make a winning > > vote deck with proper preparation. > > I only ask to believe. And I feel like Mulder here, because I WANT to > believe, as I enjoy very much playing Sabbat (unlike on tabletop roleplaying > game, because they're too twisted for me) ! > > I've played with a 3CL, a 4CL, a 6CL, a 1CL on uniques, and many other > > variants in the last 7 years. I enjoy all of the game variants. > > I'm glad to hear that, as your precedent sentence seemed to condemn them. I condemn requiring other people to build decks "our way", when that way is not supported by the rules or by the design of the game. Whether its no Sneak&Bleed because its "cheesy" or card limits. Peer pressure is not a good way to increase people's enjoyment of the game. Letting them play is the only way to do it. I played most of the card limit variants because the people I was playing with used them, not because card limits are good for the game. I had fun. I would play with those players again. I wouldn't play in a group using a card limit as my only option. I would probably remove myself from the local game if that were the case where I was. Too much variety and too many strategies are removed from the game when the decks are artifically limited. I still have decks that I built under a 4 card limit, and I have even built decks that end up usable under a 4 card limit, but I will not require anyone else to play that way. I will encourage the official rules in all card limit discussions. [ quoted text not captured ]

Orpheus wrote: > Ok, now I'll really pas for an ignorant, but I must confess... I don't know > what everybody means by : "metagame" !! "Metagame" was a term that was originally coined by board gamers to discuss issues around things gamers do that may be counterproductive in terms of winning the game currently being played but may help their interests in future games. The classic example was a player in a multiplayer game who felt he'd been doublecrossed or otherwise abused, disrespected, ganged up on, or whatever by some other player he had hoped to get better treatment from and therefore decided to sacrifice any chance he had for winning the current game in order to torpedo the other player's chances of winning - e.g. by sending his entire force to attack that player and leaving his home territory undefended against a third player. The perceived benefit would be to gain a reputation as someone who other players would do well to avoid upsetting in future games. In CCGs, the term refers to a different aspect of play: choosing a strategy at deckbuilding time. Since this is done by each player without knowledge of what deck they're going to be playing against, it's considered important that any CCG have no "pure strategy" - which is a term used in games theory. A "pure strategy" is one that is either superior or at worst equal to all other strategies available, meaning that intelligent players would always prefer to use it to optimize their chances of winning. A CCG with no pure strategy leaves it to players to guess what other players will choose in order to decide which strategy they themselves should choose. (A CCG with a pure strategy is no fun, obviously. No interesting choices to be made.) Players who succeed at outguessing their opponents and choosing the most advantageous strategy in a game or tournament are said to have "won the metagame". The term is analogous to the board game use of the same term (discussed above) since in both cases, strategy decisions are made with no single game in mind but with overall success over many games being the consideration. Fred

> > Ok, now I'll really pas for an ignorant, but I must confess... I don't know > > what everybody means by : "metagame" !! > > "Metagame" (snip snip) Well, thank you for your explanations Fred ! Orpheus -- "Though the artist is born of the pattern, a part of its nature is hid from him. This part is called pain, and exists for hissake..."

> >> would you prefer to go 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th? > > > >Ask James, he's n°1 in an ongoing (170) Jyhad Online game, and I'm not sure > >he likes the position. > > He doesn't, but it's not been killer so far, mostly annoying. Right, it woulf have been much worse if I was playing weenie bleed, had already gotten 2 out (very possible : I'd already made 12 transfers) and had bleeded thoroughly with conditionnings... (not to mention the deflection). > (For reference, I just got out Silvia Giovanni (10 cap), doing it on my > fourth turn. Ack.) But as I mentionned, playing big vampires is a choice, there are risks, but if your deck is well built and there is no "weenie abuse" as a predator, it may well be worth it... > (As to why I'm playing Silvia Giovanni, trust me, I've no idea.) You mean the deckserver gave you a randomvamipre to play ? ;-) -- Orpheus http://cypheranima.free.fr news://news.zoo-logique.org/VTES-francophone audio...@yahoogroups.com -- "May you live in interesting times" Old chinese curse.

>> And the Lasombra shouldn't play with Transfer of Power of Tithings. >> Just a lot of Domain Challenges, KRCs and Conservative Agitations. > >Would you care to say why ? Ok, I tried Tithings (a Sabbat only vote), and I >must agree that it is way to hard to pass, much harder than PS or ToP. But >why not play ToP ??? Haven't done it myself but have you tried using Bribes with Tithings and/or Transfer of Power? It might be a bit weird if you end up causing no overall pool loss to your predator or prey but you'll still gain a pool from each one. And there won't be as many Methusalehs voting against it because anyone cross-table who could vote against it could just vote for it and lose one + gain one = no change. Plus, this can be extra good with the !Ventrue and to a lesser degree the Tzimisce. The former have Demonstration, Quentin, and Telepathic Vote Counting while the Tzimisce only have the last one. All of which can help prevent your predator/prey from gaining pool from Bribes. (LOL! You're actually canceling other Methusaleh's minion's votes that are actually in favor of your vote!). I admit it's a lot more work than a simple Parity Shift but it's an interesting possibility... Halcyan 2

In message <9qrifi$s0j$3...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes >> He doesn't, but it's not been killer so far, mostly annoying. > >Right, it woulf have been much worse if I was playing weenie bleed, had >already gotten 2 out (very possible : I'd already made 12 transfers) and had >bleeded thoroughly with conditionnings... (not to mention the deflection). For some values of "much worse". I was watching what was happening regarding vampires on the table, and I did have other alternatives had "problems" started occurring elsewhere on the table. [ quoted text not captured ]

Okay, I guess the discussion is interesting enough that I'll "waste" some more of my precious time to discuss here ; why, oh why did I get converted to Jyhad ?! ;-) > > > (Lasombra, Tzimisce, Tremere Antitribu) > > > > Wow ! The last two didn't seem like the obvious voters... > > Telepathic Vote Counting. > When combined with Private Audience, it can get most > of your votes passed. > > > can all gain and support large > > > quantities of vampires with three votes. > > > > Yes, although I've tested once more that when an Inner Circle comes out he > > shifts the voting balance all by himself... > > Private Audience. > Telepathic Vote Counting. So, wouldn't it be way more interesting, if you're really axed on votes, to play !Ventrue instead ? Still the Telepathic, not lots of titles but lots of vote-countering cards and abilities... Must be very effective, if well adjusted... > > I can't wait 'til someone tells me what the metagame is... > > See the thread of that name. I have, thanks to you too (Frederick's explanatiosn were also quite thorough, although complementary from yours). > Playing the metagame is taking advantage of the way other people > perceive the game to be strong by making it into their weakness. Yes, I understand. > > > against itself. The Camarilla vote players > > > that I beat with the Sabbat voting decks didn't play the table or the > > > metagame as well as I did in those particular tournaments. > > > > All right, but that only proves that you had better game mastery than them, > > not that you would have won with your deck against theirs if they had been > > your strategic equals... > > Even if they were my strategic equals in that particular game, > my outguessing them about the other 3 decks at the table would > have turned in the tide. I played the metagame, the game of > knowing what other people are playing and why very well in the > tournaments that I have won. I guessed just as poorly at the > GenCon Continental Championships, I ended up sitting next to two > Immortal Grapple Bum's Rush Potence Weenie decks, and it was > the only thing the deck I was playing that day could not deal > with at all. Yes, so this in particular still proves only that you "played the metagame" better, although the fact that you did something unusual (Sabbat vote) is a great part of what made you win ; but in still stays an exception, as the statistics of winning decks prove it (see them in a previous message, by Shaun I think...). So, most of the time, Cama vote seems to take it down, but you're a skilled enough player to win with Sabbat, which only proves that it is possible, not that everyone can do it. > > > There is no vampire in the game that is worth more than three > > > pool in the long run. > > > > What do you mean by that ? > > If you are leaving more than 3 blood on a vampire that cost more > than that to bring into play, you are making a mistake in a vote > deck. Calling votes requires 1 blood (ie, if you don't have one > blood, you can't call a vote, because you have to hunt). Most vote > modifiers are free. Anything else you are paying for shouldn't > cost you much, as you need to be calling votes to make the voting > deck work. What if you get Bum's Rushed by a furious Brujah and you have only 3 blood left ? (You BURRRRN !!!). > > Do you really think Sabbat combat power is superior ? > > Sabbat combat power is "perceived" as superior. > > Therefore you need less stealth on your votes as > your opponents don't want to block and go to torpor. > You can include relatively little combat as long as > it is effective the first time and get away with it. Yes, I've fought a Tzimisce who didn't know I had almost no Pot in my deck, and thus was very careful (in the beginning) to send his precious ghoul to me, so I understand what you mean. Propaganda, Dr Goebbles !!! ;-) > It isn't a general rule. > It is a perception on the part of the tournament playing public > that you can exploit with a vote deck. > > Metagame. Point taken. > I said you don't waste actions attempting to gain blood, therefore > your Sabbat Vote Deck has the potential and ability to do better. > > Both your predator and your prey have an interest in Minion Tap/5th > not working. Your prey because it allows you to get more minions > into play so that you can do more things against him. Your predator > because it can allow you to ignore the things that he does entirely. I don't get your point here ; doesn't this imply that the 5th / MT combo would eventually win in this situation, no matter if it apparently "loses time" ? > > > A Ventrue vote deck can do just as well with out Parity Shift > > > as it can with Parity Shift, and will likely be more reliable > > > for not putting them in. > > > > So you think it is not a good card ? > > You need to be losing to play it (ie have lower pool than others). > You can do that in a way that is advantageous to you, > Temptation of Greater Power, lots of minions with lots > of bleed bounce, Hostile Takeover, <more>. > > You do not need to be low on pool to play Kine Resources Contested. > > You are more likely to do well with a deck that gains pool and > calls Kine Resources Contested than a deck that loses pool (or spends) > and calls Parity Shift. As you said, there are always strategies that you can use to get low on blood, including Influencing one of the big vampires in your uncontrolled region at the previous turn (and leaving everyone for defense), even if it means recovering this blood at the end of the "Parity-Shifting turn" and the next (you'll have won more than enough to compensante anyway). KRC is easier to use, but much less powerful (easy to calculate : the pool loss / gain difference between you and your prey is the double !! Except if you help your ally for one purpose or another, which will help anyway...). > The next set is Bloodlines. No Sabbat-only votes there (unless some of > the Bloodlines are political Sabbat, unlikely). Yes, unlikely, but I do hope that there will be some smalle cap (the Big Lasombra are pretty good) Kyasid with interesting discipline combos, including maybe some useful for voting... We'll see !! (but you already know...) > > > Delaying Tactics and Direct Intervention work just as well for > > > vote defense regardless of who is attempting to call the vote. > > > In an environment where Protect Thine Own and Parity Shift exist, > > > not playing with a few of each of the above is dangerously short-sighted, > > > especially if playing with non-Camarilla vampires. > > > > Yes, and not to mention the awful Camarilla Segregation... > > Okay, I won't since it isn't a vote. :> No, but it's a great Camarilla advantage (among many others). > > No, of course not ; but if you're relying on speed to win, the Malks can > > have more than you can. > > That's why bleed bounce is so nice. > One of the tournaments at GenCon this year I had a Malk Stealth > Bleed predator, and his predator was also Malk Stealth bleed. > > I was very happy to start the game with 4 Deflections in hand. > I was 3 or 4 pool from ousting my prey before the combined efforts > of the two Malkavians got me. So, what it proves to me is that your game was good, but still no match against Malks ; it also implies that your prey couldn't redirect also, because if he could you'd have been dead B4. I think, no matter the rules, Malks are so dangerous that you have to build your "metagame" with them in mind if you want to have any chance of surviving, and even then... > > > I've played with a 3CL, a 4CL, a 6CL, a 1CL on uniques, and many other > > > variants in the last 7 years. I enjoy all of the game variants. > > > > I'm glad to hear that, as your precedent sentence seemed to condemn them. > > I condemn requiring other people to build decks "our way", > when that way is not supported by the rules or by the design of the game. > Whether its no Sneak&Bleed because its "cheesy" or card limits. > Peer pressure is not a good way to increase people's enjoyment > of the game. Letting them play is the only way to do it. OF COURSE !!! I never said my way was the only one, did I ? I'm trying NCL right now, including on JOL, and even if I don't like it I respect other people's PoV ; and I'm on this mostly-official-rules forum, ain't I ? What pisses ME off is when people say that our way of playing is worthless, because it isn't (I won't spend my time and your going again on that road, but, if nothing else, lots of people have their fun that way). > Too much variety and too many strategies are removed from the game > when the decks are artifically limited. I still have decks that > I built under a 4 card limit, and I have even built decks that > end up usable under a 4 card limit, but I will not require anyone > else to play that way. I will encourage the official rules in > all card limit discussions. I understand that too. I'll let U know what I think after extensive testing. But here, most people play in CL, and I think at best I'll still play both ways depending on the people (exactly as if I played 2 RPG campaigns with house rules modifications, and had to adapt to the GM). -- May the Muses smile kindly upon you, Orpheus http://cypheranima.free.fr news://news.zoo-logique.org/VTES-francophone audio...@yahoogroups.com > > [ quoted text not captured ]

In message <9qrkk5$qt$1...@wanadoo.fr>, Orpheus <orph...@wanadoo.fr> writes <How to make !Tremere and Tzimisce go> >> Private Audience. >> Telepathic Vote Counting. > >So, wouldn't it be way more interesting, if you're really axed on votes, to >play !Ventrue instead ? Still the Telepathic, not lots of titles but lots of >vote-countering cards and abilities... Must be very effective, if well >adjusted... Potentially, though recall that prior to Sabbat War, the !Ventrue only had 2 voting vampires - 1 Archbishop and 1 Bishop. The Tzimisce managed 4 (now 5), though Violet doesn't really count (no aus, and a weird vampire in the extreme). The !Tremere manage 4, though only 2 have AUS (one doesn't even has aus). Post Sabbat War, it's an interesting trick to try. I, personally, don't have many TVC, however. >Yes, so this in particular still proves only that you "played the metagame" >better, although the fact that you did something unusual (Sabbat vote) is a >great part of what made you win ; but in still stays an exception, as the >statistics of winning decks prove it (see them in a previous message, by >Shaun I think...). Partly, Sabbat politics isn't that popular anyway, because it's not as simple as a straight-forward Ventrue deck can be. You look at the Ventrue, as a neophyte player, and see Awe and Bewitching Oration and think "Yay!" You look at the Lasombra and see no Presence and think "Boo!" >So, most of the time, Cama vote seems to take it down, Use of Private Audience is key, as Sabbat politics is uncommon. It's far more useful (as a result) than Closed Session. >but you're a skilled enough player to win with Sabbat, which only proves >that it is possible, not that everyone can do it. There are many decks out there that "not everyone can do". A good Temptation of Greater Power deck is an art form. The Out of Turn Malkavian Rotschreck deck has enough moving pieces to build a watch with. >> If you are leaving more than 3 blood on a vampire that cost more >> than that to bring into play, you are making a mistake in a vote >> deck. Calling votes requires 1 blood (ie, if you don't have one > blood, >you can't call a vote, because you have to hunt). Most vote >> modifiers are free. Anything else you are paying for shouldn't >> cost you much, as you need to be calling votes to make the voting >> deck work. > >What if you get Bum's Rushed by a furious Brujah and you have only 3 blood >left ? (You BURRRRN !!!). Not particularly. Whilst being able to fend off combat with vampire-bloat is a nicety, it's not going to stop anyone. A Brujah deck is going to come at you and: Torn Signpost Blur 9 damage That's you in torpor anyway. A Gangrel deck is quite possibly going to: Carrion Crows Scorpion Sting Claw 4 damage, including 2 aggravated That's you in torpor anyway. And so on. If you don't have any other forms of defence, you're going to die anyway. >> I said you don't waste actions attempting to gain blood, therefore >> your Sabbat Vote Deck has the potential and ability to do better. >> >> Both your predator and your prey have an interest in Minion Tap/5th >> not working. Your prey because it allows you to get more minions >> into play so that you can do more things against him. Your predator >> because it can allow you to ignore the things that he does entirely. > >I don't get your point here ; doesn't this imply that the 5th / MT combo >would eventually win in this situation, no matter if it apparently "loses >time" ? That all depends. If my deck is calling three votes a turn, ousting its prey quickly and so on, I may well end up out-pacing a 5th Tradition/Minion Tap deck such that it never gets the chance to do what it wants. >> > Yes, and not to mention the awful Camarilla Segregation... >> >> Okay, I won't since it isn't a vote. :> > >No, but it's a great Camarilla advantage (among many others). If you're playing pure Camarilla, yes. And if your prey is playing non- Camarilla. And if you can target it because no-one else is going to get really pissed off at you because of playing it. And if.... >I think, no matter the rules, Malks are so dangerous that you have to build >your "metagame" with them in mind if you want to have any chance of >surviving, and even then... Not particularly the Malks, no. However, there are a number of things you really do need to bear in mind when building almost any deck. 1) What do I do if someone bleeds me? 2) What do I do if someone calls votes against me? 3) What do I do if I get into combat with someone? Combined with this: 1) What do I do if someone (my predator?) is using lots of stealth? 2) What do I do if someone is using lots of intercept? >I understand that too. I'll let U know what I think after extensive testing. >But here, most people play in CL, and I think at best I'll still play both >ways depending on the people (exactly as if I played 2 RPG campaigns with >house rules modifications, and had to adapt to the GM). The problem is, the Sabbat was *designed* knowing that it was NL. Sabbat War and Final Nights even more so. You can't find the play- balance that they were designed with under xCL. [ quoted text not captured ]

On Sat, 20 Oct 2001 12:42:13 +0200, "Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >> > > (Lasombra, Tzimisce, Tremere Antitribu) >> > >> > Wow ! The last two didn't seem like the obvious voters... >> >> Telepathic Vote Counting. >> When combined with Private Audience, it can get most >> of your votes passed. >> > >> > Yes, although I've tested once more that when an Inner Circle comes out >he >> > shifts the voting balance all by himself... When you have Dragos and Meshenka out, and suddenly Dragos becomes a Cardinal with 4 votes in favor and the Cammies can only sit and stare, your vote bloc is normally a quite-rude surprise for most other vote decks... much like having a sudden Inner Circle member appear. But I can throw down Cardinal Benedictions much faster than someone can get out IC members; and then I can throw down an Investiture on my 4-cap, Lolita Houston, and regain the Priscus vote after I turn Meshenka into a Cardinal. >> Private Audience. >> Telepathic Vote Counting. > >So, wouldn't it be way more interesting, if you're really axed on votes, to >play !Ventrue instead ? Still the Telepathic, not lots of titles but lots of >vote-countering cards and abilities... Must be very effective, if well >adjusted... The !Ventrue are one of the most powerful voting clans at the moment. Their weakness is intercept, much like the classic Ventrue. However, it's worth noting that playing the Tzimisce as voters has its own reward; you have easy access to either S:CE *or* aggravated hand damage, as you see fit. And nobody knows which you're going to use until you actually play some. Not to mention that Changeling and Creepshow Casino can be combined to give you votes called at +3 stealth... out of reach of 2nd tradition. >statistics of winning decks prove it (see them in a previous message, by >Shaun I think...). So, most of the time, Cama vote seems to take it down, >but you're a skilled enough player to win with Sabbat, which only proves >that it is possible, not that everyone can do it. Well, that's sort of the definition of skill... One who can do more of what is possible. Just because the average player can't win with Sabbat voters doesn't mean the potential isn't there. >What if you get Bum's Rushed by a furious Brujah and you have only 3 blood >left ? (You BURRRRN !!!). No. You go to torpor, which is significantly different - it's a place where you can be rescued from, and then hunt, and your voting power will be completely restored. Burning vampires in combat is extremely difficult to do effectively (ie. while actually ousting one's prey). -- Derek

"The Lasombra" <thela...@hotmail.com> wrote: >Orpheus asked what metagame means. > > >The metagame is the game around the game. The relevant dictionary meaning for "meta-" here is "above". One game of VTES is a game. How you play the game in general is the metagame: the game of playing the game. Lasombra's examples are good. [snip] Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation: I have preferences. You have biases. He/She has prejudices.

> Haven't done it myself but have you tried using Bribes with Tithings and/or > Transfer of Power? It might be a bit weird if you end up causing no overall > pool loss to your predator or prey but you'll still gain a pool from each one. > And there won't be as many Methusalehs voting against it because anyone > cross-table who could vote against it could just vote for it and lose one + > gain one = no change. Yes, I've planned to do it with ToP (didn't get the right cards at the right moment, though, but you can always bluff B4 the vote so as not to get intercepted...). :-) Tithings : byt the time I got it out, everybody had at least one 7+ vampire (some had put disciplines on their 6 cap minions). > Plus, this can be extra good with the !Ventrue and to a lesser degree the > Tzimisce. The former have Demonstration, Quentin, and Telepathic Vote Counting > while the Tzimisce only have the last one. All of which can help prevent your > predator/prey from gaining pool from Bribes. (LOL! You're actually canceling > other Methusaleh's minion's votes that are actually in favor of your vote!). I > admit it's a lot more work than a simple Parity Shift but it's an interesting > possibility... Yes, interesting. A little twisted, though... But it could work. :-) > Halcyan 2

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:9qrkk5$qt$1...@wanadoo.fr... > Yes, so this in particular still proves only that you "played the metagame" > better, although the fact that you did something unusual (Sabbat vote) is a > great part of what made you win ; but in still stays an exception, as the > statistics of winning decks prove it (see them in a previous message, by > Shaun I think...). You cannot use the statistics of winning decks to "prove" anything. You have zero information about the other 8-80 decks at the event. If 18 Ventrue decks win tournaments with less than 10 people there does that make the clan better or worse than the 3 Lasombra decks that won tournaments with 40+ people? You cannot say. You cannot tell if anyone else played Sabbat vote at any of those events. Even if I were the only one playing Sabbat vote at all, the fact that I have won tournaments with them (and been to the finals many more times) would seem to indicate that the Sabbat clans can hold their own. > So, most of the time, Cama vote seems to take it down, > but you're a skilled enough player to win with Sabbat, which only proves > that it is possible, not that everyone can do it. I'll repeat 'It doesn't "prove" anything.' > > > > There is no vampire in the game that is worth more than three > > > > pool in the long run. > > > > > > What do you mean by that ? > > > > If you are leaving more than 3 blood on a vampire that cost more > > than that to bring into play, you are making a mistake in a vote > > deck. Calling votes requires 1 blood (ie, if you don't have one > blood, > you can't call a vote, because you have to hunt). Most vote > > modifiers are free. Anything else you are paying for shouldn't > > cost you much, as you need to be calling votes to make the voting > > deck work. > > What if you get Bum's Rushed by a furious Brujah and you have only 3 blood > left ? (You BURRRRN !!!). I play a Wake, Obedience, and send the Brujah home to bed without any supper. If you know what you are doing, and you know what other people are doing, you are in no danger. A properly built Sabbat vote deck should be in no danger regardless of the amount of blood on any particular vampire. > > I said you don't waste actions attempting to gain blood, therefore > > your Sabbat Vote Deck has the potential and ability to do better. > > > > Both your predator and your prey have an interest in Minion Tap/5th > > not working. Your prey because it allows you to get more minions > > into play so that you can do more things against him. Your predator > > because it can allow you to ignore the things that he does entirely. > > I don't get your point here ; doesn't this imply that the 5th / MT combo > would eventually win in this situation, no matter if it apparently "loses > time" ? My point is that BOTH your predator and prey will be trying to block the 5th Tradition. If you are not doing any damage to your predator with a vote, it is generally in their best interest to save their intercept for their own predators. As a result, the 2 cards in the combat are insufficient. You must supplement with either stealth, unblockability, or bargaining, and the Sabbat vote deck that is only calling votes isn't wasting its time or resources in this manner. > As you said, there are always strategies that you can use to get low on > blood, including Influencing one of the big vampires in your uncontrolled > region at the previous turn (and leaving everyone for defense), even if it > means recovering this blood at the end of the "Parity-Shifting turn" and the > next (you'll have won more than enough to compensante anyway). One Delaying Tactics. Your strategy is now your predator's windfall. See Josh Duffin's tournament report for the Raleigh tournament of last month. http://www.geocities.com/colinriggs/Raleigh9-01.html His strategy, being low enough on pool to call Parity Shifts and still be able to pass them, ousted him in two games because of Delaying Tactics. If his votes had been Kine Resources Contested, he wouldn't have spent pool in the same fashion and he would most likely have survived his predators long enough to gain more pool or oust his preys. > Yes, unlikely, but I do hope that there will be some smalle cap (the Big > Lasombra are pretty good) Kyasid with interesting discipline combos, > including maybe some useful for voting... > We'll see !! (but you already know...) I am not a playtester. I do not speak for White Wolf. > So, what it proves to me is that your game was good, but still no match > against Malks ; If my grand predator hadn't also been a stealth bleed deck, I could have swept the table. Only having to fend off one predator at a time would have made an incredible difference. > it also implies that your prey couldn't redirect also, > because if he could you'd have been dead B4. Three decks in that finals could deflect, both the Malk decks, and my vote deck. The other two either had Garou Rush as defense against bleeds or "ridiculous" intercept (her term, not mine). [ quoted text not captured ]

Okay, I read your previous mail with interest, nothing to ass except one thing : > > What if you get Bum's Rushed by a furious Brujah and you have only 3 blood > > left ? (You BURRRRN !!!). > > I play a Wake, Obedience, and send the Brujah home to bed without any supper. Obedience is great, but the trouble with it, as with other Dom cards (and with the discipline in RPG and LRPG) is that little Generation thing. In one game I had Ur-Shulgi contracting my face, and obviously nobody I had could play Obediences on him. The Combat decks often includ such biggies, and even if the 11 cap is an exception, all the 7-or-less vampires will tremble when Jacko comes, and if the player knows what Dom can do he will rush the small vampires first. I guess no tactic is without its faults...

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:9qt5an$2kp$1...@wanadoo.fr... > Okay, I read your previous mail with interest, nothing to ass except one > thing : I don't see any questions in the text you posted. What did you want to ass? [ quoted text not captured ]

> I don't see any questions in the text you posted. Weird ! I did type the text... > What did you want to ass? To ASS ?!? :-) To ask : What do you do when You're being contracted by Ur-Shulgi, or otherwise attacked by a guy who's of higher generation than you, and thus on whom you can't use Obedience ? [ quoted text not captured ]

"Orpheus" <orph...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:9qu4e0$sli$1...@wanadoo.fr... > What do you do when You're being contracted by Ur-Shulgi, or otherwise > attacked by a guy who's of higher generation than you, and thus on whom you > can't use Obedience ? Depends on the deck. If you know you are only going to have about 3 blood on your vampires, you plan accordingly, since it is a vote deck we're discussing, you don't want to spend a lot of cards on combat, 2 or 3 at most per combat. Here are some examples of what I would want to do for combat in voting decks for each of the Sabbat clans. With Tzimisce voting: Carrion Crows, Chiropteran Marauder, (Amaranth). With Lasombra voting: Arms of the Abyss, Entombment, (Amaranth). With Tremere Antitribu: Movement of the Mind, Theft of Vitae. With Nosferatu Antitribu: Carrion Crows, Pushing the Limit. With Ventrue Antitribu: Rolling with the Punches, Skin of Night. With Malkavian Antitribu: Behind You, Swallowed by the Night, (Dodge). With Brujah Antitribu: Torn Signpost, Blur, (Taste of Vitae). With Gangrel Antitribu: Bone Spur (Amaranth), Form of Mist. With Toreador Antitribu: Majesty, (Art of Pain) Blur (Taste of Vitae). Carpe noctem. Lasombra http://www.TheLasombra.com [ quoted text not captured ]

On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Orpheus wrote: > > > Psychic Veil often is. It's good but it's not *that* good. > > > > it's handy in a shambling hordes/bane mummy deck. > > Hum, ineresting ; Setites with Necro ? What use is the stealth when both of > these are made for hurting ? Just in order to get the right target ? well, half the bane mummies make better bleeders than fighters..so stealth the bleeds through, and yes, stealth helps the hordes get the right targets....but most importantly if you have necro you can play haunt on your otherwise worthless Grand Temple of Set, and it's good friend Powerbase (Wherever..other than madrid, rome or berlin) not that i have ever actually got to play the Grand Temple whenever i've played the deck (which is probably why i have won....O:) > Ok, now I'll really pas for an ignorant, but I must confess... I don't know > what everybody means by : "metagame" !! erm, i've been taking it to mean "the general types of decks and players in your local area" for example, if everyone you know and play with plays gangrel, brujah or assamites, you would more than likely have a "combat heavy metagame". and, recently, i have taken the acronym YMMV, which is i beleive "your mileage may vary" to read "your metagame may vary", just because it seems cool. (which i doubt it is) and yes, i will be posting my deck on my website soon ( i have it in html, but i am yet to upload) and i could also post a list here if need be. salem.