Which Master do you most hate to see played in a tournament?

(This list not meant to be all-encompassing.) Please list your reasoning below. I'm curious as to what everyone's thoughts might be. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017

Just tired of Lilith's Blessing. Way over played and it just leads to everyone talking about it.

Please add Ashur - see multiple MPA

> Squidalot wrote: > Please add Ashur - see multiple MPA > I must agree again. Ashur is hard to get (since you need a lot of Ashur tablet while the card itself was not printed a lot) and disgustingly efficient, authorizing to more or less taylor your deck to the situation, with pool and one card in hand to boot. The card by itself is not too powerful, but it's very powerful and often frustrating to play against. Since it's not in the proposition, I have cast a vote for Lillith Blessing. Then again, the card is not broken per see, but powerful in almost all decks, and the pool generated make games longer. Pentex subversion could also be a choice. But I believe Pentex to be a necessary evil, when I don't see Ashur Tablet or Lillith filling a necessary role.

Powerbase: Montreal Ashur Tablets, The Erciyes Fragments, Malkavian Dementia (Derange decks), Fortschritt Library (and other dedicated enabler cards), Millicent, and, yes, Pentex all likely have a greater ability to make a mess of a game, but Montreal is primarily about making games last longer in a completely noninteresting way. Traveller Card Game

I didn't put Ashur on the list because I personally hate to see every other Master card on that list worse than seeing Ashur. Vote for The Parthenon if you hate MPA decks so much. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017

> KevinM wrote: > Vote for The Parthenon if you hate MPA decks so much. > Well, the parthenon is not the problem. It's Lillith blessing and Ashur, by allowing to use thoses MPA very efficiently. Beside, the Parthenon is not by a logn way the only MPA source.

This should be easy; Ashur, Villein and Lilith's Blessing and whatnot all see a lot of play, are quite powerful (or in one specific case broken) but don't disrupt the game. I don't hate good cards. I feel people hate Ashur Tablets because they don't own enough. I can see the hate for Pentex because it can ruin a particular game for you, but I believe its existence makes the game better or at least more playable. What I hate is disruptive cards. Therefore, the obvious choice is Direct Intervention.

This one easy for me. Direct Intervention disrupts the game and makes annoying and long table talks. Makes annoying also situations when somebody plays it too late (or somebody plays other card too early). I play govern DI DI DI? Now I play seduction DI DI DI?

I hate none of the listed. I hate Liquidation. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

No Ashur Tablets? Weird. I vote for Villein. I'm still annoyed by its trifleness. Baron of Frankfurt

Edited for content. Write-in for Temptation of Greater Power. Simply ruins the game for either 1(target) or 2 (target and anyone overpaying) people in the current large-cap metagame. 1st runner up: write in for Ashur Tablets > KevinM wrote: > I didn't put Ashur on the list because I personally hate to see every other Master card on that list worse than seeing Ashur. > Then you haven't been predator of really good Liquidation-Ashur deck. Universally accessible recursion is broken in any game using random card drawing as a conceptual underpinning. From the choices you offered....there really is only one bad card in my view Direct Intervention. Functionally incorrect in two ways. MPA that denies minion-based function (which is what blocks should do) and it disregards the Predator-Prey game mechanic.

Pentex Subversion (tm) is the only card on this list that says, "You lose." All others allow you to at least try to continue playing your game. When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike. pckvtes.wordpress.com @pckvtes

> Jeff wrote: > Pentex Subversion (tm) is the only card on this list that says, "You lose." All others allow you to at least try to continue playing your game. > I feel this game might be quite a bit different if Pentex would be removed. Person who has the best sitting muscles game play would be encouraged even more and there would be more timeouts also. I feel Pentex is the necessary evil. There could be some more elegant solutions of course.

Villein. It was clearly designed to nerf Minion Tap AND Enable Big-Caps decks, was then ruled in such as way that it didn't really push itself away from Weenies and did nothing about the more usual problem with the "Multi-Minion-Tap Bloating" strategy which is gaining 5+ blood from certain cards (in particular Voter Cap). Now it is basically just a Minion Tap as a trifle with a trivial requirement that stops you from "Minion Tap for Zero". Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

Lilith's blessing, no contest for me

None of the above. Just expect to see them and live with it. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

I lament that I have but one vote to give. Several of those are quite deserving.

I vote for Smilling Jack. It's not because of the card but more because of kind of decks this card is usually put in - walls. There is a big number of those in my meta and I really hate playing against. It's kind of deck that don't let you play a game and the number one reason for timeouts

That damn prey-saving cross-table Golconda. Sebastian

I dislike dreams because everyone and their dog uses it. That wouldve been my first guess before seeing the list. Then it would be the golden bullets of SR/DI/wash. I hate all those 3 with a passion, but wash specefically...cheapass golden bullet without losing my MPA? Yes please. *groan*

The card I dislike the most is Giant's Blood since these days it always come with a Villein. The first player to draw it gains the "lottery" (from 5 to 11 pool), which is strongly unbalancing the table. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

None in the poll and none in the current card pool. ---- Banging trashcans, breaking windows We'll wake you up tonight We like the good time, we scream and shout And that's what fun's about

i like all the cards listed. i hate jake washington, because he's super good and super expensive and i own zero. also because he's the only ally thats a master card.

DI. I don't like the theme of a Methuselah taking personal action. I really dislike its unlimited range. I probably wouldn't mind it so much if it was only predator or prey. Later, ~Rehlow

I voted for Direct Intervention. It often results in a correction of game state when someone plays their cards in succession, and another player jumps in to DI the first card in succession. Either someone played their cards too fast, or someone didn't play their DI fast enough. Either way it's a mess. Otherwise I think the card is fine. Independent Futurist. Contrarian (titled, X votes where X is the number of votes as the acting minion.) Target Vitals is always the better combat card.

voted Pentex. hate the card, though must admit it brings some balance to a few star vampire-decks that would otherwise be nearly unstoppable (mostly multi-acters, especially if out-of-turn or Una). should have a permanent cost of 1 blood per turn paid by a vampire controlled by the meth who played it (or an additional pool cost each turn) imo. the card creates a situation that is overly static as it is now, and cross-table 'rescues' are still a rare thing to behold -no matter how much people talk about them as if they were somehow commonplace.

Temptation of Greater Power.

I hate stupid cards like this much more than good cards: Pere Lachaise, France Master [3 Pool] Master: unique location. You may move a vampire from your ash heap to this card, face down. You may use a master phase action to move 1 blood from the blood bank to this vampire. If the blood on the vampire equals the vampire's capacity, place the vampire in the ready region at the end of the master phase and burn this card. Any minion can burn this card as a action and send the vampire on it directly to the ash heap. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

I also hate it when my allies play Threestar Cab Company - which, praise them, doesn't happen that often.

I don't hate seeing any of these, but I do sometimes sigh sadly when my prey makes it to his Villein, so I went with that. IMHO, the biggest game-ruining master card is easily Temptation of Greater Power. Pay three pool and end a Methuselah's game (or pay lots of pool and take someone's star vamp.. ending his game.) Sure, some decks aren't so vulnerable, but most are, and between your predator and prey there will almost always be a good target. Despite my hate, however, I put this card in any deck that can support it. It's just too powerful to leave out. After that, I'd go with Ashur Tablets, which I know were deliberately left off the list. Note that my hate is not for multiple-MPA-play (that's just cheesy and annoying, like Villein) -- it is for the Ashurs themselves. Cheers, -Bill -Killiam (Bill Troxel) "I look back from where I'm from Look at the woman I've become And the strangest things seem Suddenly routine" -Hedwig Robinson

I agree that ToGP is broken in a way that it always ends *someone's* game when it gets played. It doesn't see a lot of play fortunately, but it's really a stupid card. > it is for the Ashurs themselves. > This puzzles me. What is so insanely broken about them that makes them so hated? I have never actually seen a proper argument why they are broken. People seem to arbitrarily hate Ashur Tablets because they possess none and they cost $15 each. I play them a lot and the more I play them, the less powerful they seem.

> Izaak wrote: > People seem to arbitrarily hate Ashur Tablets because they possess none and they cost $15 each. I play them a lot and the more I play them, the less powerful they seem. > Well, they are not powerful in the PTO way. They are powerful in the 'skew the probability in my favor' way, which is really harder to pinpoint. So it may both be you underestemating their effect on your deck and people overestimating it. Also, it is linked to MPA since MPA help Ashur a lot (in the same way as Lillith is helped by MPA), and MPA + Ashur can allow you to screw another Ashur user. So the best response to Ashur is MPA + Ashur.

ashurs are only really annoying because of the mmpa. its kinda hypocritical for me to say, sine my first deck that used them was anson, but the first deck i used them in that really needed them was g2 gargoyle combat, i just kept running out of cards, primarily since red cards are sadly not permanent. the fact that temptation of greater power requires nothing more than pool, and lets you get pool on credit (seriously, wow, there should be a card called "credit check of greater power" that makes sure you're not going to "borrow" pool to pay off the temptation with parity shifts.... ) makes it obnoxious when it hits you. cards like hostile takeover and from a sinking ship are more fair by leaps and bounds, and still would be more fair even if they could take bigger vamps. and bad players still use threestar cab company? i've always wanted to see my prey play that card when i'm using Santaleous......

> Izaak wrote: > I have never actually seen a proper argument why they [Ashur Tablets] are broken. > Then I offer this for your consideration. It's lengthy, but you asked for a "proper argument." There are 2 related aspects of library recursion that suggest brokenness. First, V:tES is a card game. Intimately tied to the definition are common threads: the random draw of objects from a face-down, predefined set and the imperfect knowledge that results from that action. Second, V:tES is structured for each player using 3 basic resources for play. - pool as the global resource, - crypt-based minions to act in one's playspace and - library cards to connect resources and manipulate the playspace. Its time to look at how Ashur Tablets can violate both of those fundamental design properties. Ashur Tablets accesses a fourth resource, the Ash Heap. This resource is not innately available to every player. It seems reasonable to conclude that any player who accesses additional (valuable) resources might gain a strategic advantage. This 4th resource either develops naturally or can be profitably grown. Beyond the cards used to access this resource, there is no opportunity cost in using it. Arguably, even that cost is offset by the 3 pool gain realized triggering a set of Ashur Tablets. So far, we're up to free access to a resource not every player has. But since we haven't proven that resources is valuable, it is best to continue. Some might suggest the Ash Heap is not an independent resource, but is completely redundant with the library. True in definition, not in practice. If Ashur Tablets read "shuffle your Ash Heap. Put 13 randoms cards from your Ash Heap into your Library," then it would be a truely redundant resource and I wouldn't be writing this post. Selecting 13 tactically appropriate cards to return is a different matter. It significantly reconstructs a deck at point of use. We're using perfect knowledge of cards in the Ash Heap and reliable information about other player's minions and and his Ash Heap to rebuild a deck at point of use. Ooops. Perfect knowledge (and solid inferences) in a game of imperfect knowledge. That seems like a strategic advantage in the hands of any capable player. Large-scale recursion impacts card drawing probability. As fewer cards reside in the library, the probability of drawing desired cards (the situationally useful ones recurred) grows. Now we have further optimized the deck to any task immediately at hand. That's messing with the random nature of drawing from a predefined set. Its not really pre-defined anymore. We're starting to stack the odds in our favor as the library empties. Even when a deck is perfectly designed for the tasks at hand, variability in draws can affect its ability to perform. either immediately or some point in the future. We call it "clumping." Recursion can smooth variability in past card draws. Hit too many of card "X" in the first 1/4 of the deck......recur as needed to re-balance the set of available objects again. Wait, isn't that counteracting risk of unfavorable permutations in drawing from a predefined set? And it creates a new set of a more favorable options for subsequent draws? Seems like a double whammy on the whole randomness aspect of the game. The way I see it, we just ripped the fundamental fabric the game. Two for two now. In short, hand-selected recursion undermines the reliance on one's library as one of the three primary resources, can smooth variability in draws. In extreme cases, it can transfer the focus of card flow into to "working the Ash Heap." As an analogy, imagine playing poker and being able to draw your cards from a face-up muck1. Immediately, you transform the probability of "hitting your draw" into a simple function of your ability to reach into the muck. As the ease of recursion increases, the mechanic becomes increasingly broken. Nothing is easier than Imbued recurring Conviction. Second on the list is Ashur Tablets (MPA only, no clan or discipline requirement). -Darby. 1 The muck is the agglomeration of discards and folded hands in a game of poker.

so, dialing in a closer-to-perfect library structure is the primary strategic advantage of the tablets, unarguably, and the card to the hand is a benefit as is the 3pool (making it so you were playing delayed ascendance with the first 2 tablets). the effect is very pronounced when you repeat the process multiple times, allowing you to pick specific cards and rebuild your deck based around game state. all not arguable, anyone who has played with the tablets know that you weed out cards you don't need and leave them in the ash heap and take the cards with future potential. if each Methuselah could only benefit from the tablets "popping" once a game, i think they would remain good but not problematic (i use them in big decks to get my red cards back, but abusing them to perfect what you draw does make your deck go from efficient to barely random). library recursion in card games has typically been a tool to use or not use, but in a game with 5 players it becomes used very differently than if only 2 people were doing things to re-play cards. tablets allows for extreme maximization of some resources and the ability to ignore others. i see the amount of principles it displaces, and can't argue that players take advantage of it, but i'm not sure its unbalanced our game in an irreparable way. limiting it would hurt MMPA decks, but they'd still be playable, but not table-crushing. i don't like trashing good cards, but abused cards sometimes need curved down some. i'm just tired of girls decks winning tournaments, and i think ashur tablets, non lilliths blessing, is largely responsible for their current effectiveness.

Darby, nice response about all the benefits of Ashur Tablets. However, it does not delve into their inherent drawback which is the "race" to see who can pop them first. They do have a real cost which is one MPA each. This can lead to a sunk cost when the benefit of playing them is not realized (someone else pops them first and yours are then gone). I think these risks are substantial enough that Ashur Tablets are not inherently broken or bad for the game. What is more significant from my point of view is access. I firmly believe that if everyone owned 9+ Ashur Tablets, that they would greatly diminish in power. More people would experiment with them and they would start to self-regulate within the metagame. Some Tablet Poppers (tm), myself included, often negotiation with others at the table who play with them in order to mutually (though asynchronously) benefit. This also reduces risk especially since there are relatively few Methuselahs who play them in real games. JOL is another story entirely. Lastly, a bit of advice for everyone in the game, PLAY MORE SUDDEN REVERSALS. When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike. pckvtes.wordpress.com @pckvtes

> Izaak wrote: > People seem to arbitrarily hate Ashur Tablets because they possess none and they cost $15 each. I play them a lot and the more I play them, the less powerful they seem. > I think this is totally valid reason to not like Ashurs. This is first time in Vtes when there is a no discpline or clan specific common card which can go to different decks in many copies. Vtes is not supposed to be about that. Villein situation is even worse for new players. I feel Vtes went out of production at very bad time because there are some good and too valuable common and uncommon cards which can go to many decks.

> Jeff wrote: > Lastly, a bit of advice for everyone in the game, PLAY MORE SUDDEN REVERSALS. > In my experience, this tend to not help, when often a source MMPA:s and Anthelios is in play. Sure, it get´s trickier, but just a bit, and adding all those Suddens to your deck cripples your own game. The main problem is not the Tablets, it´s the MMPA:s and the solid refusal of anyone responsible to admit and adress that problem. MMPA:S IS TOO GOOD. Again: TOO GOOD. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Jeff wrote: > However, it does not delve into their inherent drawback which is the "race" to see who can pop them first. They do have a real cost which is one MPA each. This can lead to a sunk cost when the benefit of playing them is not realized (someone else pops them first and yours are then gone). I think these risks are substantial enough that Ashur Tablets are not inherently broken or bad for the game. > This I am interested. How often do you see Ashurs discarded because somebody else triggered them first. I see this almost never but this might be metagame thing. I feel it is rare worth it to start the race.

Also Ashurs had made some combat decks suddenly very viable which is kind of cool (mainly with MMPA:s). Reasons for this should be thought carefully if somebody wants to make combat better and what kind of new cards would offer similar benefits to combat decks without MMPA:s.

> Jeff wrote: > Darby, nice response about all the benefits of Ashur Tablets. > Thanks Jeff. > Jeff wrote: > However, it does not delve into their inherent drawback which is the "race" to see who can pop them first. > In my opinion, there is no real race. In all my tournament AND casual games, I've lost a total of ONE Ashur tablet to it. If there's only player with MMPA, he owns the Tablet stack: he has more copies to draw and can play them more quickly. He is makes a strategically correct play when he monopolizes the effect. I've never seen an MMPA vs MMPA without contestation in tournament play. I've even seen good players collude before smaller tournaments to avoid this very conflict (completely legal when decks are selected). JOL might be different, but I care little for what happens in that environment. So from my experience, that "drawback" is largely irrelevant. ---METAGAME DIVERSION HERE--- I think we'll see the occasional Nana vs Anson MMPA-headbutt this year. Net-deckers will run Nana and the bleeding edge players use Rapid-fire Anson. The prince will hold his own until [ANI} players figure out a few Drawing Out the Beast, Terror Frenzies or Canine Hordes are good - at which point Nana gets her Tablets back. -Darby

> Surreal wrote: > Also Ashurs had made some combat decks suddenly very viable which is kind of cool (mainly with MMPA:s). Reasons for this should be thought carefully if somebody wants to make combat better and what kind of new cards would offer similar benefits to combat decks without MMPA:s. > Well, being able to add back the card actually useful in your situation is kind of extra cool for combat tactics who often lack polyvalency. The Waste Management Operation of the !brujah is actually already an interesting card for !brujah. It's just very slow and kind of difficult to play since you must plan what you will need at least 5-6 turn in advance. The other existing replacement that I know how is Sudario Refractio. An ugly way to fix the ashur problem may be a trifle ashur that : * can only be played once per turn * is trifle * does not give pool * put all card in the deck and both ashur tablet and thoses imitations would be removed by set of three. The original would be still better if you have the master action to spare, significantly weakened by the fact that everybody could easily play 3+ of thoses cards, everybody would be able to play this if needed, and Villein would be indirectly affected since more trifle card would be played. They may very well be more elegants solutions, of course. As a side note, in my opinion !brujah are the one to check if new card reinforce combat. Iron Glare, Scalpel Tongue, Waste operation Management, and their other powerful master, Unexpected Coalition, ... Only (relativeley) bad vampires and the ineffectuality of combat keep them in check.

> Ashur wrote: > The main problem is not the Tablets, it´s the MMPA:s and the solid refusal of anyone responsible to admit and adress that problem. MMPA:S IS TOO GOOD. Again: TOO GOOD. > You and I disagree in a chicken and the egg sort of way. You say chicken. I say egg. Neither of our positions changes the fact that both chicken and egg exist, an observation on which we both agree. Here's where I think our opinions are entirely consistent.....when you have a MPA effect that is already borders on overpowered, M-MPA leverages it to the point of absurdity. Here's where the difference of opinion lies, forgive me if the statements seem accusatory at all - they are not meant that way. You would address the M-MPA as the root cause, leaving arguably broken mechanics to be potentially exploited, though at a slower pace. Those effects do feel less problematic in the more limited context. I would address the power issue of the individual cards. Having tried to build Hag's Wrinkles decks, I find that an unlimited number of modest-impact actions yields modest results. My goal would be to make M-MPA like Hag's Wrinkles. In the process, I would almost certainly nerf aspects of some single MPA decks. Both balance the game, at least more than it is currently balanced. I can even see the logic in reverting to a more 1:1 Master:turn relationship, because of the difficulty/sacrifices in countering MPA effects. I just see addressing the underlying (IMO) broken mechanics as a more fundamentally complete solution - one that can be applied with minimally disruptive approach (banning). That isn't to say that something like "You may have no more than 2 MPA in a turn" isn't a reasonable and comprehensive addition to the rules set. We've certainly institued changes like that before (e.g., NRA rules). Regards, and looking forward to your opinion - Darby

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > i'm just tired of girls decks winning tournaments > Then play bounce. > ReverendRevolver wrote: > and i think ashur tablets, non lilliths blessing, is largely responsible for their current effectiveness. > Then play Sudden Reversal. When you start to play cards that directly metagame against popular deck types, those deck types will get played less. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017

I don´t agree. One question first: Would you play Tablets without MMPA:s? I would not. Ergo - MMPA:s is the problem. Also, I want to stress that I don´t want to errata or bann anything, or change the rules - unless it´s absolutely necessary (and I don´t think it is). A simple solution would be some playable, really solid hoser-cards, ie effects that remove/limit/messes with MPA:s. Hoser CAN be nice, although I often feel they are badly designed (Trochomancy has weird timing, Scourge of the Enochians hits to broad, Carlton made certain decks totally unplayable etc). The same could be done versus recursion, if that is the problem. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> KevinM wrote: > When you start to play cards that directly metagame against popular deck types, those deck types will get played less. > So why was PTO banned while Confusion of the eye was a perfectly legit counter ? More seriously, while Sudden reversal may be underplayed, it's partly because it interact awfully with Villein while not alway being that powerful. Especially with Anthelios and MPA. And redirect for Girl find... While it may help, it's not like bleed redirection were not common, nor enough.

> Ashur wrote: > I don´t agree. One question first: Would you play Tablets without MMPA:s? I would not. Ergo - MMPA:s is the problem. > Ergo, *you believe* MMPAs are the problem. I have put 6-9x Ashur Tablets in every single JOL deck I have played since they were released. If I owned more than 4, I would have 6x in every deck I play in a tournament, irrespective of MMPA capability. > A simple solution would be some playable, really solid hoser-cards, ie effects that remove/limit/messes with MPA:s. Hoser CAN be nice, although I often feel they are badly designed... > The law of unintended consequences heavily applies. When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike. pckvtes.wordpress.com @pckvtes

i just don't want to see playable cards getting banned while we're out of print. i realize our current lack of being published is somewhat of an out of rules context consideration, but still, tablets are just good, not broken, if used moderately. of course, noone uses that good of a card just moderately, but its danger lies in the possibility of excess use. turbo parity shift is annoying to sit at a table with, especially when other players are dumb enough not to stop it. of course, they have to spend pool to steal pool, and they give it away (which is also an annoying strategy for the table as a whole) so it requires more set up than "my master phase action is ashur tablets. my cybele master phase action is ashur tablets. i tap parthenon and play ashur tablets." the difficulty in preventing a currently very common deck from dropping 3 tablets in one turn is painful. they re-use DI, Pentex, Dreams, or whatever they want. i don't think its quite as bad as imbued, but its getting close. as i said, talk of banning any cards other than possibly gas powered chainsaw and gangrel atavism makes me grit my teeth. if ashurs could only pick up minion cards, or were limited to going of once per methuselah per game, they would still be very good, but not completely broken. no other effect gets so many cards back into the deck, so even with limitations it would be stronger than sudario refraction or waste management op. i'm all in favor of tablets only being able to pick up 1 action to the hand and 12 combat cards to the deck (combat, stealth, and reaction cards are what normally moves from hands quickly, so those could benefit from 2 uses) but i like the tablets existing.

Multiple MPAs are a problem independent of broken/overpowered masters like Ashur Tablets. Interesting minion interaction, the heart of both the game play and the theme, is ignored at best by decks playing 2 or more master cards per turn.

> KevinM wrote: > > > ReverendRevolver wrote: > > i'm just tired of girls decks winning tournaments > > > Then play bounce. > Eh... Misdirection/Blind Spot every turn with Anthelios + other cancel cards = oust. Or just get messed up by Deep Singing-aggro-girls. > KevinM wrote: > > > ReverendRevolver wrote: > > and i think ashur tablets, non lilliths blessing, is largely responsible for their current effectiveness. > > > Then play Sudden Reversal. > Not effective enough, as I mentioned earlier. > KevinM wrote: > When you start to play cards that directly metagame against popular deck types, those deck types will get played less. > Sure, you can metagame all you like, but I think the only reason Girls hasn´t won even more tournament than it has, is that people can´t get the cards to build it. The Girls-decks are results of a series of tragic design mistakes. Villein was made to make bigcaps more playable - that could have been achieved in lots of other ways better than making a trifle Minion Tap. And recursion should not be as easy as Ashur Tablets. MMPA:s and generic recursion should be hosed. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> KevinM wrote: > > > ReverendRevolver wrote: > > i'm just tired of girls decks winning tournaments > > > Then play bounce. > > > ReverendRevolver wrote: > > and i think ashur tablets, non lilliths blessing, is largely responsible for their current effectiveness. > > > Then play Sudden Reversal. > > When you start to play cards that directly metagame against popular deck types, those deck types will get played less. > i have an anti-girls deck. santaleous, trockomancy, that sort of fun stuff. it ruins my preys day if they're running that sort of deck. taking away one master phase with a sudden doesn't hurt those decks very much, i've found dedicated combat can catch them off guard as can lots of dominate. but they are very efficient decks. most of the cards people complain need banned lately are ashurs, villein, and lilliths blessing(which i find awesome and think should have been printed in some way ages ago). the issue isn't with the individual cards so much as with the deck using them very effectively. they aren't the end-all-be-all, otherwise you couldn't win without 30+masters and Anson, Nana, or Cybele. but they are very good. currently these decks are shaping the tournament meta, and i'm sure they will rotate out eventually and become just another staple people like to play. taking cards out of their discard pile hurts them, and i don't think the cards girls decks run on are broken, i just think that more cards should attack the ash heap as an afterthought. cards don't need to be made to re-arrange the meta. decks do that.

> Jeff wrote: > I have put 6-9x Ashur Tablets in every single JOL deck I have played since they were released. If I owned more than 4, I would have 6x in every deck I play in a tournament, irrespective of MMPA capability. > Why? Does this work for you? I play with people who use MMPA:s for their Tablets, and they always win the race. > Jeff wrote: > The law of unintended consequences heavily applies. > Yeah. That´s why a competent, impartial, unpretentious design team, more playtesters/playtesting and a totally transparent design process are a good ideas. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> I have put 6-9x Ashur Tablets in every single JOL deck I have played since they were released. If I owned more than 4, I would have 6x in every deck I play in a tournament, irrespective of MMPA capability. > This is interesting. I own 19 and I have only one deck with one master phase that plays them and that's my Assamite Black Hand deck that was featured on Extrala's blog earlier. It runs them solely because that deck has *always* runs out of cards in every game I played with it. Pretty much every other deck is better off just sticking in more of the stuff you are going to recycle anyway and play more useful masters instead. It's simply not worth cutting out a Fame or a Dreams of the Sphinx in favor of 13-card recursion near the end of the game. Six tablets is a HUGE opportunity cost in that you cannot play six *other* masters that might actually help you win. Certainly a lot "huger" than the 6 pool you gain from it. TryDeflectingThisGrapple, interesting analysis about the fourth resource. I certainly agree recursion is strong, similar to how Deflection and Govern are strong. Ashur Tablets is a good card, don't get me wrong. But what you -and many other people are forgetting- is that Ashur Tablets are a long-term plan. I talked at length with Brian Morris about this at the recent EC, after the LCQ finals were won by a Nana deck and he put it like this: Any deck with more than 3 or 4 Ashurs is very weak early on. It has all sorts of prayer cards and weird card ratio's because it BANKS on being able to discard the useless stuff and put the useful stuff back in. If you hit them early on, they're going to have like one Wake and no bounce or maybe a combat card, because their hand is full of masters and cards that are not good at this specific table, but might give them the win next round. Then when you give them time to discard the useless stuff and let them Ashur back in like 20 cards, their library is going to gave FUCK YOU written all over it. And that's how accurate it gets. Of course, in a world where people play extremely defensive and are more occupied with staying alive and controlling the table instead of killing their preys such decks THRIVE.

> Izaak wrote: > And that's how accurate it gets. Of course, in a world where people play extremely defensive and are more occupied with staying alive and controlling the table instead of killing their preys such decks THRIVE. > This totally makes sense but people has always played extremely defensive. Play style hasn't changed and it is useless to blame people playing "bad". Now many decks just seem not to focus on fast ousts which benefits the decks trying to build up for end game. Start making Kindred Spirits decks again and meta might shift to another direction. Slow meta of course benefits for decks which plan to be strong in end game. Girls will shine in the end when there are many ICs in your side and good cards in your lib. Maybe try to counter Ashurs with faster decks. It would also be good discussion if small cap S&B decks might actually need some stronger cards. I don't see those kind of decks very often anymore. Scourge made some fast decks risky because you might get countered by one card. Villein also made fast decks worse. Balance might favor "bit slow and building up for end" decks now but it is all about the meta.

> Surreal wrote: > This totally makes sense but people has always played extremely defensive. Play style hasn't changed and it is useless to blame people playing "bad". Now many decks just seem not to focus on fast ousts which benefits the decks trying to build up for end game. > There is a consideral social consideration in playing slower deck. No malkavian deck can survive to an entire table against them, while appearing as direct threat to about anyone on the table, and it make playing quick deck much more demanding in table talk skill. And table talk does not do everything. Surviving until the point where the table begin to crumble and then making your move is a sound strategy in VtES. Deck good in end game are much more likely to pull this off than quick stealth bleed. > > Surreal wrote: > It would also be good discussion if small cap S&B decks might actually need some stronger cards. I don't see those kind of decks very often anymore. Scourge made some fast decks risky because you might get countered by one card. Villein also made fast decks worse. Balance might favor "bit slow and building up for end" decks now but it is all about the meta. > The meta don't do everything. Still, quick deck need mainly way to build up without threatening people. Bleed are brutal enough as they are, it's more that if the table is not ready for a quick oust of your prey, you more or less waste your turn with your hand full of kindred spirit.

> Ohlmann wrote: > The meta don't do everything. Still, quick deck need mainly way to build up without threatening people. Bleed are brutal enough as they are, it's more that if the table is not ready for a quick oust of your prey, you more or less waste your turn with your hand full of kindred spirit. > Meta is also how the people play the game. I haven't ever understand players who jump instantly to gank the fast deck if the deck is getting a VP somewhere in cross table. But I feel Vtes has become more control also. There are more actions happening now (like simple rushing) effecting other players minions because that is stronger play with the decks building up and relaying more in the end game. Control aspects are very bad for fast decks because those decks rarely has anything to protect. You can put some protective cards but then you are sacrificing the fastness. But I feel simple S&B are not good anymore. EDIT This might be happening because players are way more experienced now. You rarely have good ways to control anything in the table with fast decks. You just rely your deck working if play with a fast deck and you can't adapt any changes happening in the table. So even with great skill you can't do so much with fast bleed decks. This might one reason why experienced players don't like them.

> Surreal wrote: > EDIT This might be happening because players are way more experienced now. You rarely have good ways to control anything in the table with fast decks. You just rely your deck working if play with a fast deck and you can't adapt any changes happening in the table. So even with great skill you can't do so much with fast bleed decks. This might one reason why experienced players don't like them. > Exactly

> Ashur wrote: > Yeah. That´s why a competent, impartial, unpretentious design team, more playtesters/playtesting and a totally transparent design process are a good ideas. > Preach it, brother. When you are anvil, be patient; when a hammer, strike. pckvtes.wordpress.com @pckvtes

> Surreal wrote: > It would also be good discussion if small cap S&B decks might actually need some stronger cards. I don't see those kind of decks very often anymore. Scourge made some fast decks risky because you might get countered by one card. Villein also made fast decks worse. Balance might favor "bit slow and building up for end" decks now but it is all about the meta. > I think this would be a bad, kind of powercreepy balancing act. It´s like fast s&b-decks versus Girls or weenie-aus "at the top" and then "below" that it´s the rest of the decks, and about 90 percent of all cards printed. This game needs to have more decks in the top tiers. Boost the concepts that are doing bad/semi-bad instead boosting a race between the top decks. (Sorry for going a bit off-topic) "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Ashur wrote: > Yeah. That´s why a competent, impartial, unpretentious design team, more playtesters/playtesting and a totally transparent design process are a good ideas. > Don't be an ass to people, either currently in the design team or formerly in the design team directly or indirectly. There are reasons why the design process is not an open completely-publicly-scrutinised process. The first that pops into mind is basically "Trial by Media" design or "Populist Design". That will not do great things for the game. If you think you would make a long-term valuable contribution to the design team, then start knocking on Ben Peal's inbox... maybe he wants to add more people now (maybe again he doesn't). **END MINI-RANT** The Girls' XYZ Decks (which aren't a problem in Australia, since they really aren't played and personally I haven't seen any on JOL so consequently it seems like they are a Euro-trend) seem like they are the convergeance of unforseen design problems. Something akin to people not realising that suspension bridges can have resonant frequencies similar to the frequency of air currents ( click here ). Effect 1: MMPAs This is exactly the effect that made the Triple A decks nearly impossible to oust and scarily hard to beat-off the blood. Once Anson hit the table, it was easy for a player to strip them of blood via Minion Tap, Golconda that minion and have 8 pool back on them in a single turn (Zillah's + 4 transfers) and have had a net pool gain equal to (Minion Cap - 1) and realistically delayed themself by 1 action from ousting their prey. It also allowed for the "lunge vote" where 3 TGBs are dropped in a turn and then, for example, 3 KRCs are called before Alexandra untaps one of them which bleeds for the remaining 1 pool... These were deadly decks and could usually create quite large buffers of pool through a steady combination of Minion Tap, TGB, Voter Cap and the odd Golconda. They became more durable with the printing of Anthelios since you could effectively convert a dud-master into a useful one (swap that Minion Tap for a Golconda you're going to use on the empty minion). Effect 2: Ashur Tablets and Ashheap Recursion Ashur Tablets further enhance the effectiveness of 'burning' cards into your ashheap. There are comparatively few effects that will trash cards from your ashheap; ergo it is a safe place to 'dump' copies of a card IF you can get them back. Cards such as Liquidation and Specialization help with this phenomena, especially since your deck may have combat defence cards and finds itself in a combat-light environment or etc, etc, etc. This is also the reasons why I hate Heart of Cheating... For 1 pool it gives you library-cycling without 'losing' resources. It's not much better than Ashur Tablets for its effect on the game. However, it does have a little more weakness because of its equipment nature (but not by much). I think the best of these 'library-cycling' effects is still Rachel Brandywine, because it does allow some limited end-game engineering of your deck but only 1 card at a time and from your hand and not effectively off the top of the library (you are still a victim of imperfect knowledge of future events in your library). Effect 3: Multi-player Solitaire There seems to be a trend of more decks becoming effectively 'multi-player solitaire' decks in the multiplayer environment. They interact minimally with anything but their prey's pool and seem to just be an elaborate proof of "I can build a highly narrow, highly efficient card sequence that cannot be intervened". I understand the desire to basically ensure that your deck is difficult or even impossible to interfere with, but it makes for a boring game when the point is interaction/interferance. For my own mind, they are boring as bat-crap. The Girl's XYZ Decks seem to be of this category; along with The Una Deck and [Somebody]-a-tron decks. I see there being more place to the Turbo Baron deck (in its older -weenie recur Baron from the Ashheap and Soul Gem format) in VTES. The Girls' XYZ decks seem to be the convergeance of these three trends. A deck that has high-efficiency non-intervened strategy, strong Ashheap recursion and pool bloat from using cards already-drawn again and catalysing both of these effects with the ability to play 3 non-Trifle MPAs in a single turn. To my mind, the key targets should be: 1) Creating cards that interfere with others ashheaps efficiently for either defence or ousting capability. This will encourage people to purposefully attack the Girls' ashheap (and limit the value of Ashur tablets) and cripple their recursive ability. "When [Salvager] successfully bleeds your prey, you may burn X random cards from their ashheap to increase the pool burned by your prey by 1" 2) Creating cards that can effectively cancel a vampire's card text or even somehow allow for the limiting of MMPAs. e.g. "When you control [nasty mo-fo] using effects on a vampire that are not stealth, intercept or strength cost that minion 1 blood.", "While [Jim Bob the Destroyer] is ready, your prey must burn 1 pool to use MPAs.", "While [Steve-Dave] is ready each non-trifle MPA beyond the first costs every Methuselah 1 additional pool". Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> KevinM wrote: > I didn't put Ashur on the list because I personally hate to see every other Master card on that list worse than seeing Ashur. > > Vote for The Parthenon if you hate MPA decks so much. > Sadly, imho it's ashur tablet that pose currently the most of problem (all-time consuming card: retrieving 13 cards and choosing one to put in hand, shuffle et all just makes too easy stalling for time) definitively it should be on the hate list For sure AT it's the card i personally hate most atm Emiliano vekn.net administrators staff

<lost of rant> You are entirely missing the point that the Girls will Find... deck's engine runs entirely based off of the special of one vampire. Without Aksinya, the deck is trash.

the card that cancels vampires specials already exists. It's Seeds of Corruption. The problem is that card can be played only on your prey

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > 1) Creating cards that interfere with others ashheaps efficiently for either defence or ousting capability. This will encourage people to purposefully attack the Girls' ashheap (and limit the value of Ashur tablets) and cripple their recursive ability. "When [Salvager] successfully bleeds your prey, you may burn X random cards from their ashheap to increase the pool burned by your prey by 1" > I don't know why you would consider such s silver bullet solution. If Ashur Tablets are a prime contributor to a serious, widespread problem, ban them. It works, is globally applied (all decks), is simple, is elegant. It prevents carrying another crap hoser like the Uncoiling. And has little potential for unforeseen new problems. Harbingers Millstone wasn't exactly owning the tournament scene. If library recursion isn't the problem, isolate the real issues (honestly, I think you did - it's a confluence, to which I would add power levels for pool recursion trifles). Regards, - D

> nc-italy wrote: > > > KevinM wrote: > > I didn't put Ashur on the list because I personally hate to see every other Master card on that list worse than seeing Ashur. Vote for The Parthenon if you hate MPA decks so much. > > > Sadly, imho it's ashur tablet that pose currently the most of problem > (all-time consuming card: retrieving 13 cards and choosing one to put in hand, shuffle et all just makes too easy stalling for time) definitively it should be on the hate list. For sure AT it's the card i personally hate most atm > Respectfully, I must point out that you are wrong. If someone is stalling, they are breaking the rules and are able to have appropriate penalties applied to them. If someone if playing the card and taking the physical steps at an appropriate pace, they are not stalling. If the players at the table cannot figure out which it is, they should call a judge. Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017

Kevin, you're right about stalling, but I think nc-italy still has a point. Even correct handling of Ashur Tablets can take a long time - for example it's not always obvious which card to take into hand, so the player may spend a few seconds thinking about the game state. It may seem like a minor point compared to Darby's argument based on recursion (pretty damning, IMO), but in a game where timeouts are so prevalent perhaps we should consider the time cost in playing any card.

When I play Ashur Tablets, which is in about all my decks (most with only one MPA), I keep my "Top 13" cards on the top of my ash heap once I have an ashur on the table. If I feel like I am giving away info, then I put them all together but inside the heap some place. So when I drop my 3rd one, I pull the cards right out, lay them on the table for all to see, pick the one for my hand and go. It takes more time to shuffle than any other part of the move. David Tatu V:EKN Scribe

> TryDeflectingThisGrapple wrote: > I don't know why you would consider such s silver bullet solution. > **SNIPPED STUFF** > It prevents carrying another crap hoser like the Uncoiling. And has little potential for unforeseen new problems. Harbingers Millstone wasn't exactly owning the tournament scene. > > If library recursion isn't the problem, isolate the real issues (honestly, I think you did - it's a confluence, to which I would add power levels for pool recursion trifles). > > Regards, > - D > As I said, convergeance of effects. Askinya + Anthelios = Dump a card that will be useful somewhere safe to be picked up later FOR A BONUS. Anson + Anthelios = Dump a card that might be useful later to pick up one that is useful NOW. Both of the above versions + Ashur Tablets = I don't have to really care WHAT Masters I dump, becuase I will almost be guaranteed to get back a steady supply and still get what I want. AND I get 3 pool for it! The main thing which makes NewAAA better than old AAA, and I suspect a strong component of Girls Will XYZ, is the ability to just burn deadwood using an MPA to gain a USEFUL MPA from your ashheap. This is done by Anthelios mostly it seems and the most constructive ways to interfere with that is: 1) Kill Anthelios (which usually means taking out the Methuselah controlling it) 2) Find ways to burn cards out of their ashheap (Which ATM is basically Trochomancy). I can see a lot more scope in the game in the future for increasing the influence of ashheap recursion (and to quote yourself and ICL, add a 4th Core Resource) IF and ONLY IF we increase the influence of interaction with ashheaps generically. I'd take cards from the playbook of G1 Nos, who had a remarkable number of library-peek type abilities scattered throughout. Why should we then not have vampires with card-texts such as: 1) "Vulture's Buffet": [XYZ] may remove a card from your prey's ashheap from the game gaining 1 blood as a +1 stealth hunt action. 2) "Trochomancy": [XYZ] can burn X cards [chosen by method] from a Meth's ashheap to gain +[bleed/stealth] 3) "Trochomancy of PAIN": [XYZ] can burn X cards [chosen by method] from the ashheap of the controller of the blocking minion to gain +Y strength 4) "Vulture's Buffet of Votes": [XYZ] may remove X political actions from your prey's ashheap to gain +Y additional votes And so on. These are the ideas that came to the top of my head. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Dorrinal wrote: > Kevin, you're right about stalling, but I think nc-italy still has a point. Even correct handling of Ashur Tablets can take a long time - for example it's not always obvious which card to take into hand, so the player may spend a few seconds thinking about the game state. It may seem like a minor point compared to Darby's argument based on recursion (pretty damning, IMO), but in a game where timeouts are so prevalent perhaps we should consider the time cost in playing any card. > If players, in general, aren't going to call over a judge when a single point of KRC damage is the subject of a 15 minute discussion, they have no legitimacy when they speak of the 1-2 minutes it takes to manipulate Ashur's effect. I don't say that toward Emiliano in specific, although I'd suspect that his threshold is similar to the example that I suggest in the example above. It's fairly true for me, and I'd bet for 99% of all players in all games that I've ever played. Until a majority of players start bitching about every 15 minute discussion for the single point of KRC damage, reasoning about Ashur's ban-worthiness under the suggestion that it takes too much time to manipulate the effect is moot. (NOTE: If it takes the non-handicapped Ashur player more than 2 minutes to manipulate Ashur's effect, then the players may wish to consider calling a judge to watch the proceedings.) Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas "Know your enemy and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment...Complacency...Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier Please visit VTESville daily! vtesville.myminicity.com/ Facebook: www.facebook.com/groups/129744447064017

> david.tatu wrote: > When I play Ashur Tablets, which is in about all my decks (most with only one MPA), I keep my "Top 13" cards on the top of my ash heap once I have an ashur on the table. If I feel like I am giving away info, then I put them all together but inside the heap some place. So when I drop my 3rd one, I pull the cards right out, lay them on the table for all to see, pick the one for my hand and go. It takes more time to shuffle than any other part of the move. > For myself, I tend to just literally deal the cards out of my ashheap onto the table as I go through. I takes me more time to choose the cards in JOL than it does in RL. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> KevinM wrote: > If players, in general, aren't going to call over a judge when a single point of KRC damage is the subject of a 15 minute discussion, they have no legitimacy when they speak of the 1-2 minutes it takes to manipulate Ashur's effect. > KRC time, as lengthy as maybe, is table interaction and discussion (which has been deemed to be part of a multi-player ccg such as vtes) between players Conversely Ashur time recursion and ash heap pickings decision is not interaction at all, it can pose a timing issue also in the respect of players (as already said by others) that just play slow not for stalling time but being slow thinkers by their own 13 card recursion from the entire ash heap set of cards has been always ridicously OP to me, besides timing issue that the effect per se poses in the normal flow of turn (in fact by this i've already proposed to change ashur's text narrowing the selection just to minion cards and not also master cards) best Emiliano vekn.net administrators staff

> david.tatu wrote: > When I play Ashur Tablets, which is in about all my decks (most with only one MPA), I keep my "Top 13" cards on the top of my ash heap once I have an ashur on the table. If I feel like I am giving away info, then I put them all together but inside the heap some place. So when I drop my 3rd one, I pull the cards right out, lay them on the table for all to see, pick the one for my hand and go. It takes more time to shuffle than any other part of the move. > This is superb! All good players do this. It´s in most cases smart, and it´s also good sportmanship. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > Don't be an ass to people, either currently in the design team or formerly in the design team directly or indirectly. > Please try reading with benevolent eyes before ranting, and take into consideration English is not everyone´s native language. First: I feel sorry for the playtesters under WW, as I´ve heard plenty of times that they´re opinions were ignored. Second: The current design team (post the dropout drama) seem competent, impartial and unpretentious – or at least I don´t know otherwise. And we now have more playtesters and more playtesting. What we lack is a totally transparent design process – I hope I´m allowed to state that I wish for this here? > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > >Snip analysis of Girls-decks < > Your analysis is almost spot on. Very good, especially if you don´t have to face this menace every time you play. Yes, it´s totally about abuse of MMPA:s and generic recursion. And yes, it´s a lot about playing solitaire. I don´t understand why it´s so hard to make anything about these decks. I remember sometime reading posts and talking to people that state that because of Vtes is a card game, it must be more about deck manipulation and recursion. I think this is against the spirit of the game, as it was originally designed (ie, minions taking actions, politics, social gaming etc instead of players shuffling decks and throwing effects and counterspells at each other). I hope these people are not in positions of power when it comes to card/rules design now. > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > This is also the reasons why I hate Heart of Cheating... > But I don´t have the same problem with Heart of Cheating though. It´s unique and it affects all decks similarly – you don´t have to design your deck around it. As a matter of fact I think it´s kind of fun when an otherwise crappy deck puts the Heart into play and suddenly sweeps the table. The best thing about the Heart is that it ousts players. Sure, it also helps your defense, if it´s what you’re after, but mainly it speeds up tables, which is nice in the current meta. > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > Effect 3: Multi-player Solitaire > Spot on. I hate the combo-decks and solitaire-decks more than anything. I have no idea why cards like for example Una or Eternal Mask is ever printed, but I guess someone in charge get a hard on. > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > 1) Creating cards that interfere with others ashheaps efficiently for either defense or ousting capability. This will encourage people to purposefully attack the Girls' ashheap (and limit the value of Ashur tablets) and cripple their recursive ability. "When [Salvager] successfully bleeds your prey, you may burn X random cards from their ashheap to increase the pool burned by your prey by 1" > Yes, but unless you do a large amount of such minions, you have to make it generic cards. > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > 2) Creating cards that can effectively cancel a vampire's card text or even somehow allow for the limiting of MMPAs. e.g. "When you control [nasty mo-fo] using effects on a vampire that are not stealth, intercept or strength cost that minion 1 blood.", "While [Jim Bob the Destroyer] is ready, your prey must burn 1 pool to use MPAs.", "While [Steve-Dave] is ready each non-trifle MPA beyond the first costs every Methuselah 1 additional pool". > It does not have to me minion cards. I have nothing against for example a master or an event that make masters cost more, especially masters after the first every turn. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

The are simple reasons for why these should be Minions or Actions (and not Masters or Events)... Cold War Arms Race. The more you make Masters only interfere with Masters, the more it becomes a race of who can generate the most MPAs soonest. Everyone will want to sit with 4+ Wash AND 4+ SR in ever deck so they can just 'counterspell' people's master cards. If these become Minions or Actions, then other players are forced to turn around and interact with the minions. They need to remove the offending minion from behind them, they need to take actions to remove cards from the ready region. Pushing these interactions into Minions and Actions forces an increase in the interactivity of the minions. This is what we want. We don't want this to become "Magic: The Master Phase" so we must actively choose to push the effects that will hamper Girls Will XYZ into minion-related effects. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

I've never played in a tournament...but chose based on the terror that a Pentax brings in my casual games.

Only played in two tournies... way way back But Millicent Smith really slows things down... no sir... I don't like her... screws up the whole risk to reward ratio

I used to hate seeimg pentex, but since it hasnt screwed me over recently, im gonna go with liquidation. Only one kimd of deck runs it. The bad kind. Recently, ive grown to fear anarch troublemaker too, just because bad players give it to good players and good players use it to burn my freaking equipment......

Although this is actually quite an old discussion (from last year) I recently learned to hate Heidelberg Castle as people of my playgroup tend to play minion stealing cards very often in the meantime. Though as long as I played those stealing decks I really loved the Castle . Baron of Frankfurt

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Surreal wrote: > > Also Ashurs had made some combat decks suddenly very viable which is kind of cool (mainly with MMPA:s). Reasons for this should be thought carefully if somebody wants to make combat better and what kind of new cards would offer similar benefits to combat decks without MMPA:s. > > > As a side note, in my opinion !brujah are the one to check if new card reinforce combat. Iron Glare, Scalpel Tongue, Waste operation Management, and their other powerful master, Unexpected Coalition, ... Only (relativeley) bad vampires and the ineffectuality of combat keep them in check. > I had a good !brujah deck, which abused Ashurs, Villein and Lil'blessing. Ashurs are rather fundamental part of the deck, they do exactly what Darby wrote in his analysis. When I first saw Ashur Tablet, I wanted to use it in a combat deck. I love the card, but I also admit that it is a very powerful asset. Fortunately, most of my playgroup owns lot of them, ensuring ashurs race and negotiations. I think, that there are lots of more powerful master cards in the game. ---- Banging trashcans, breaking windows We'll wake you up tonight We like the good time, we scream and shout And that's what fun's about

> Joscha wrote: > Although this is actually quite an old discussion (from last year) I recently learned to hate Heidelberg Castle as people of my playgroup tend to play minion stealing cards very often in the meantime. > > Though as long as I played those stealing decks I really loved the Castle . > War Ghouls are hot for thwarting such tomfoolery. "Matthais spirit marionettes little tailor". Warghoul blocks, intercept from unmasking. "Matthias plays repulsion"war ghoul taps and blows up to destroy castle. Or, good old "mariel lady tbunder steals pb monretreal" a billion stealth and intercept later, shes still stealing it. "You can have it. Warghoul burns pb monty..." Lotsa fun, that car. Even useful when its almost out of life. Can even save a stubborn crosstable from Arika famage, but ive never done that......

> Jussi wrote: > I think, that there are lots of more powerful master cards in the game. > True. Just think of Temptation of a Greater Power, which can ruin another's game completely. Baron of Frankfurt

Lilith's Blessing. It's a pain to remove someone from the Archon.

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > War Ghouls are hot for thwarting such tomfoolery. > Hm, granted. But honestly I'd be rather glad to get rid of a War Ghoul that easily by stealing a Powerbase or Spirit Marionette somebody. A better way would be to use Arson or other anti-location cards (Dominate Kine for the win). But anticards are not the topic of the OP IRRC. Baron of Frankfurt