Master change suggestions

Many people complain about MMPA abuse. I'm aware that some recent cards make MMPA a very strong strategy: Ashur Tablets, Liquidation, Villein, leading sometime to watch someone play Master: The Eternal Master Phase. I don't know if it's a bad thing or not, but the following rules could be tested. Maybe it's crap, maybe it's good, I really don't know before hand. The idea is to hinder MMPA without affecting much the "regular" decks. Category: limiting MPA use Option 1: You can't play more than 2 master cards each turn (whatever the number of master phase actions you have). Extra master phase actions may still be used for other effects (eg. taking a counter from a Short Term Investment). Category: not replacing master cards Option 2: Master cards played during the master phase are not replaced until the discard phase (unless othewise stated). Option 3: Master cards beyond the first played during the master phase are not replaced until the discard phase (unless othewise stated). Alas, options 2 and 3 would reduce the effectiveness of trifle cards which can be a bad thing (think about a combat deck that plays Wider View + Blood Doll and has its hand reduce by 1 for the turn). Thoughts? Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

option 3. sounds very very nice

> Pendargon wrote: > option 3. sounds very very nice > I changed the order of options while posting (sorry!), is it still option 3? Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Option 4: No changes

No, it is option number one now.

Of these I think the option to limit master cards to 2 is the best. But no, it has to affect other use of MPA:s too, to include Anthelios. I think the other two options is bad because it complicates the learning curve for new players. "ALAWAYS REPLACE" is what I yell at them, "unless the cards say otherwise". "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Option 1 : limit MPA to two per phase.

> Ankha wrote: > Option 1: You can't play more than 2 master cards each turn (whatever the number of master phase actions you have). Extra master phase actions may still be used for other effects (eg. taking a counter from a Short Term Investment). > It would have been nice before Lilith's Blessing. Now I am not sure it is enough. > > Option 2: Master cards played during the master phase are not replaced until the discard phase (unless othewise stated). > > Option 3: Master cards beyond the first played during the master phase are not replaced until the discard phase (unless othewise stated). > There are already master cards that have been balanced with a Do not replace clasue (Liquidation and Wash at least), so I am afraid this change is too deep to add on top of the game as it is now.

> Ankha wrote: > Many people complain about MMPA abuse. I'm aware that some recent cards make MMPA a very strong strategy: Ashur Tablets, Liquidation, Villein, leading sometime to watch someone play Master: The Eternal Master Phase. > ... > Thoughts? > I realise this is in the Card Balance and Strategy section, rather than Expansions and Card Ideas, but how feasible would it be to address some of the issues with useful cards? For example, just rattling some ideas off with little thought to cost/balance, but rather just utility: Secrecy is Paramount Event, Inconnu Put this card in play. Tap this card when a Methuselah uses more than one master phase action in her master phase, and the additional action was not gained from a Trifle; that Methuselah burns some pool. Tap this card when a Methuselah plays a Gehenna event; that Methuselah burns some pool. The idea being that the Gehenna event bit makes it more generically useful, and the choice gives you some interesting decisions to make. Taking the Secrets to the Grave Reaction, Necromancy Playable as a reaction, even if there is no action. You can play only one TtSttG per turn. [nec] Play when another Methuselah or something they control burns a card you control (after it burns). The acting minion minion takes some damage or, if there is no acting minion, the Methuselah whose turn it is burns some pool. [NEC] Play when a Methuselah moves a card from their ash heap to their hand or library (after the move). Some cards from that Methuselah's hand are removed from the game, at random. (Replacements are drawn after all cards have been removed.) The inferior is a bit meh, but wants to be something a bit generally defensive so you might keep three or four on hand. Placeholder: Mystic Ritual of Great Significance Political Action Requires a Magaji, or a Laibon vampire with at least three Orun If this referendum is successful, put this card on this acting vampire. During your next untap phase, remove this card from the game and move this vampire to torpor. Each Methuselah chooses a vampire who is not older than this acting vampire; those vampires go to torpor. Remove any in-play copies of Anthelios, Ashur's Tablet, Rumors of Gehenna, or the Parthenon from the game. If the vampire with this card leaves the ready region at any other time, remove this card from the game. Inspired by Baltimore Purge, on steroids.

The trouble with cards is that it doesn't really address the issue that is quite general: it's very easy to have multiple MPA and abuse from it. This is a bit annoying also because it makes it harder to design new master cards that won't be abused by MMPA. Paying additionnal pool for further MPA has very little impact on heavy MMPA, and quite an unwanted impact on other decks that would play Wider View + Blood Doll for example. Making it an event will make it end when the player is ousted. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > The trouble with cards is that it doesn't really address the issue that is quite general: it's very easy to have multiple MPA and abuse from it. > It's quite easy to abuse stealth-bleed, but we still print bounce cards, and we still print new bleed modifiers. > Ankha wrote: > Paying additionnal pool for further MPA has very little impact on heavy MMPA, and quite an unwanted impact on other decks that would play Wider View + Blood Doll for example. > How would a card that explicitly excludes the extra MPA generated by a Trifle hurt someone playing Wider View + Blood Doll? Or someone playing two copies of Aye? > Ankha wrote: > Making it an event will make it end when the player is ousted. > Sure, and Narrow Minds goes away when the player is ousted, but it's still a useful card. What I'm trying to address is giving players scope for interaction, deck development and meta-game choice, rather than taking away choice. (This also gives players the scope to be wrong, and to do wrong things. That's a feature, not a bug.)

I don't think, that multiple Master phases allow that strong abuse of master cards. It's true, that given deck archetype is strong, namely being able to play several strong effects. What makes multiple MPA decks strong is that they look innocent compared to for example wheenie DEM or OBF/DOM decks. MMPA decks are resilient, but not overly so. MMPA decks have some severe issues, one being that they need certain vampires needed to run them: Anson, Nana, Huitzi and Cybele. That makes them identifiable. Second issue with MMPA decks is, that they can play only one master card out of turn (if they have out-of-turn master in hand) and rest can be played only during master phase. That makes them vulnerable at all other turn phases, since they are likely to have reduced hand size due master card clogging. I see, that there are several ways to beat them: Take down their key vampire - the one that grants them more master phases. Rushing is one option, but Nana and Anson are "only" 8 caps, so you can banish them. Yes, I know that they can be influenced back, but that both delays them and takes away pool gained from villein. That is what you could do cardwise. One thing is, that MMPA decks are rather slow, and that is one of their strengths - they seem to do nothing while running their thing: there is likely faster and more aggressive deck which seems to be a table threat at the moment. Aggressive decks allow other decks to fly under radar, and MMPA decks also abuse that aspect of the game. Why are MMPA decks so strong? It all depends on who plays them, which is true to all (good) decks. And smart players, whether they played a MMPA deck or not, play V:tES as mind game as well as card game. My point is: Use MMPA deck's disadvantages (slow, master card clogging) to your advantage. My second point is: You are not alone in the table to play against any deck - play mind game and request help from other players or help other players to oust a troublesome (MMPA) deck. ---- 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

> Jussi wrote: > My point is: Use MMPA deck's disadvantages (slow, master card clogging) to your advantage. My second point is: You are not alone in the table to play against any deck - play mind game and request help from other players or help other players to oust a troublesome (MMPA) deck. > It's easy to say, but : * exploiting slowness is not alway possible. The grandpredator here is the key player, since if he go full force forward the MMA deck will have times to install itself. And quick deck are by definition incited to go forward quickly, since they are, you know, quick decks. * you are not alone, but it does not mean that everyone want the MMA deck ousted. * quick deck may not be efficient enough against the 60-70 other percent of decks. Potence Rush is not something that work so very well because of frequent ousting problem. S&B may be twarthed by Aksynia, a number of other counter measure, or simply be piled up and cross ousted. Lastly, the MMA deck have a big advantage in table negociation : you will have to motivate people to take costly action immediatly, he only have to stall aggressives actions. He have it a lot easier.

> Ohlmann wrote: > > It's easy to say, but : > * exploiting slowness is not alway possible. The grandpredator here is the key player, since if he go full force forward the MMA deck will have times to install itself. And quick deck are by definition incited to go forward quickly, since they are, you know, quick decks. > * you are not alone, but it does not mean that everyone want the MMA deck ousted. > * quick deck may not be efficient enough against the 60-70 other percent of decks. Potence Rush is not something that work so very well because of frequent ousting problem. S&B may be twarthed by Aksynia, a number of other counter measure, or simply be piled up and cross ousted. > > Lastly, the MMA deck have a big advantage in table negociation : you will have to motivate people to take costly action immediatly, he only have to stall aggressives actions. He have it a lot easier. > While all these arguments might be true, all of them is the result of players playing wrong against the master decks. That is hardly a good argument for nerfing the decks themself, but an incentive for people to develop their playing style when facing master decks. Andreas Thomasson Prince of Linköping

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Jussi wrote: > > My point is: Use MMPA deck's disadvantages (slow, master card clogging) to your advantage. My second point is: You are not alone in the table to play against any deck - play mind game and request help from other players or help other players to oust a troublesome (MMPA) deck. > > > It's easy to say, but : > * exploiting slowness is not alway possible. The grandpredator here is the key player, since if he go full force forward the MMA deck will have times to install itself. And quick deck are by definition incited to go forward quickly, since they are, you know, quick decks. > * you are not alone, but it does not mean that everyone want the MMA deck ousted. > * quick deck may not be efficient enough against the 60-70 other percent of decks. Potence Rush is not something that work so very well because of frequent ousting problem. S&B may be twarthed by Aksynia, a number of other counter measure, or simply be piled up and cross ousted. > > Lastly, the MMA deck have a big advantage in table negociation : you will have to motivate people to take costly action immediatly, he only have to stall aggressives actions. He have it a lot easier. > Writing words are easy, yes. V:tES on the other hand is not. MMPA decks don't have good advantage in table negotiation - parity shift decks do. You can always say no, and see if the player playing MMPA deck will do what he/she intended to do anyways. It's just a matter of how people tend to play; are they intimidated or indifferent to any decks they face or are they focusing to all decks, table synergy and that sort of thing. For example: I've been a prey of a wheenie dementation decks quite often. I've always been ousted without other players help - and I've survived, even gained a game wins if they have given help. And those situations (with or without help) held one thought only: "Do I have better chances of winning against player being hammered with dementation bleed or do I have better chances of winning against dementation bleed." Same goes for MMPA decks alongside with any other deck, and you should ask other players in table the same question (and you should ask it from yourself as well). Simply put: V:tES is a game where all players may, to an extent, influence other players' game, which results in very complex cause-effect patterns. ---- 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 > > Option 1: You can't play more than 2 master cards each turn (whatever the number of master phase actions you have). > Simple rule, similar to restricting playing only one Event in the discard phase. And no card changes necessary!

> Ankha wrote: > Option 1: You can't play more than 2 master cards each turn (whatever the number of master phase actions you have). Extra master phase actions may still be used for other effects (eg. taking a counter from a Short Term Investment). > > Thoughts? > I prefer "Methuselahs have a maximum of 2 master phase actions". It seems cleaner. And helps to slow down Anthelios. Nick

Honestly, I'm a fan on none of these ideas. If we want to push up the interaction between minions, why don't we try to create effects on minions that will limit things like MMPA. As I detailed on other posts, MMPA isn't a problem on its own. Since Anthelios was printed, AAA decks became significantly stronger because they had recursion AND MMPA. The AAA deck was strong, but not brutal before the printing of Anthelios. It was stronger, but not brutal, after the printing of Anthelios. Basically, if you want to avoid "Vampire: The Master Struggle" then we should not be either: a) Reactively nerfing MMPA (since MMPA has been around since Anson and Parthenon and didn't break the game) b) Creating a plethora of other masters that are intended to interfere deliberately with other masters... which creates Vampire: The Master Card Cold War. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

I'll say it again, ban Anthelios. You say, put the uncoiling in your deck. I reply it is already in all my non Gehenna decks.

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > a) Reactively nerfing MMPA (since MMPA has been around since Anson and Parthenon and didn't break the game) > I disagree. Prior to 2004, master decks were a plague due to the abuse of MMPA and Anarch Revolt (before it was errated to affect Methuselahs controlling no anarch). Type "anarch revolt" in the googlegroups, you'll find already lots of people complaining, the RopeCon 2004 report[/quote] being quite interesting. You can also check Lasombra's TWD. They've won big tournaments and were quite an archetype (like Girls can be nowadays). All of these big wins occured between 2003 and 2004, and ended with the release of KMW (which fixed Anarch Revolt). Anarch Revolt was probably a problem (as much as Ashur or Anthelios can be now), but mainly because MMPA allow to abuse them. Antwerp 2004 Belgian European Championship Qualifier Antwerp, Belgium August 1st, 2004 59 players Ropecon tournament Helsinki, Finland July 23rd, 2004 82 players 3R + F Deal with the Devil Paris, France 07/03/04 20 players Australian Championships. The event had 34 entrants. Date was 14th December 2003. Sydney, Australia United Kingdom National Cup Watford, UK August 23, 2003 28 players RopeCon 2003 Helsinki, Finland Friday August 8, 2003 78 players Western Canada North American Championship Qualifier Tournament Edmonton, Alberta May 24, 2003 sixteen players Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > As I detailed on other posts, MMPA isn't a problem on its own. > Well, if MMPA can be used by a "lot" of card who aren't abuseable without MMA, then maybe it's the MMA the better link to attack. Without MMA, there would be less complaint against : * ashur * anthelios * Lillith (*less* complaint, not none ) So, if one believe thoses cards to be problematics (which may or may not be the case), then it seem logical to do one nerf (against MMA) and not three. Edit : to put into perspective, it's also something tha MtG have sometime done, attacking the accelerator and not the heart of the problem. See Necropotence, Dark Ritual, etc.

Cripple Ashurs (for example, only affecting minion or combat cards) and MMPA will still be a valid deck archetype but much less imbalanced.

I personally think it's fine, but if you want to restrict the accelleration a little, how about a rule change: The second and following master cards played by a methusela played each turn costs and additional pool. If the first card played is a trifle, this applies to the third and following master cards instead.

> Cyrus wrote: > The second and following master cards played by a methusela played each turn costs and additional pool. If the first card played is a trifle, this applies to the third and following master cards instead. > That is too complicated to be a core rule. It would be nice as an Event but the design team stated they would not make hosers.

changing the core rules of the game to nerf one archetype (and lets face it, anson guns running about 20 masters is going to be hurt way more than mmpa decks using running villein into lilliths blessing activation into liquidation into a tablet. they gain too much pool for that to shut them down.)is very drastic. the mmpa decks are strong because ashurs pick up masters and events that get dumped by liquidating and using aksynia's special (and sometimes just cards that get discarded to cylce during the discard phase so the player can find another tablet). the girls decks do the same thing as some imbued decks where they infinitely get to recur the one copy of DI the deck has by anthelios cycling, and have it within their power to do the same thing with pentex and the like. recursion is the issue, not the stupid number of mpa's inherently, but what is done with them. if they just played life in the city into ascendance, cybele'd into ascendance, nana'd into ascendance, then parthenoned to a fourth ascendance, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. but dropping a wider view with the same minions and parthenon and the playing liquidation and 3 tablets gains them 6 pool and recurs all the liquidated cards plus 6 more. liquidation isn't nearly as good if you can't pick up whatever you just burned. ashurs are good cards. some people spent alot of money on them(not me, i think i traded for all but 2 of mine, and in fact, i ripped myself off earlier on because new carthage was going for more than tablets when KoT was still available) and that is a good reason to not ban them in their opinions. i like the idea behind them solely from a standpoint of letting you recur some cards if you play a very fluid deck and find yourself out deck at a 3 player table. the first deck i ever included them in out of decking necessity was gargoyle combat. they didn't break the deck, and really, rock cats and stone dogs cost so much, i barely noticed the bloat as anything other than almost paying for an ally. but they let me fish for grapples and pounces and disarms and tastes and put them back into my deck and put a rush in my hand. i've even toyed with the idea of using them in combo decks to recycle graverobs and that sort of thing. but i've never won a game because i've gotten to resculpt my deck as i go. i only ever run about 5 tablets, because if you're using them just to recur cards and not as a replacement for a good deck, you only need to recycle 13 cards and gain 3 pool once per game. so, i would just like to see ashur tablets get changed, not banned. if they can only pick up minion cards, they'd be less of an issue. if they could only pick up minion cards AND could only pop once a game per methuselah, perfect, fixed, still work for all the non mmpa decks just fine and nerf mmpa, but still let them be playable to some degree.

suggested this in another thread, but what about changing some masters to make them the opposite of trifles - ie, when you play them, you have to skip your next MPA before you can play another master? This could easily be keyworded.