Which is the problem: blood creation or recursion?

As accidentally asked in the wrong place... With the recurring debates around Villein, Lilith's Blessing, Minion Tap, Giants' Blood and so on, it seems that maybe as a community we need to at least discuss/debate: Is the creation of pool 'from nothing', in quantities greater than a basic hunt, a problem for competitive VTES with time limits? Is the recursion of blood back to pool, in quantities greater than 1 per Master Card (i.e. Blood Doll/Vessel Rate), a problem for competitive VTES with time limits? Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

This poll doesn't include an option for those who think that things are fine. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

No, it doesn't. Most people seem to come on one side or other of the "If Villein + GB is too good, what do you do?" I'm starting from the point of assuming that Villein + GB/Lilith's is too powerful. Since many people seem to think so. So what's the issue: the Villein or the "Free Blood"? Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

Third option for me. It is fine like it is

I added two additional options to the poll indicating that both or neither of the issues are problems. Jussi Hattara Webmaster Extraordinaire Finnish Politics!

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > No, it doesn't. Most people seem to come on one side or other of the "If Villein + GB is too good, what do you do?" > > I'm starting from the point of assuming that Villein + GB/Lilith's is too powerful. Since many people seem to think so. So what's the issue: the Villein or the "Free Blood"? > Why not both independently (both being too strong) or both relatedly (one being too strong because of the other, but both are fine just by themselves) ? If you don't want the answers from those who think that they are both fine, you should make it clearer. Obviously, some people think they are.

I don't find blood generation to be a problem. I don't find blood recursion to be a problem. What I do find problematic is the combination (or the ease) of it. With the current meta (big caps+villein+LB/GB), you have to ..: be able to remove tons of pool, or play tons of Sudden Reversal/Wash (Removal of vampires is also an option, but that has problems of its own.) Free high cap. vampires aren't good for the game.

> extrala wrote: > What I do find problematic is the combination (or the ease) of it. With the current meta (big caps+villein+LB/GB), you have to ..: be able to remove tons of pool, or play tons of Sudden Reversal/Wash > I would add crypt acceleration to the lot. If people were alway needing 3 turns to make their big cap come, the whole thing would be a lot more in control. Your observation that big cap are too cheap is true, but it's because both pool cost and time cost are lowered easily. Maybe Zillah Valley limited to one per player per game may be enough. Attacking Zillah with wash is kind of efficient, but people just need to put more Zillah to ignore that.

> Ohlmann wrote: > I would add crypt acceleration to the lot. If people were alway needing 3 turns to make their big cap come, the whole thing would be a lot more in control. > > Your observation that big cap are too cheap is true, but it's because both pool cost and time cost are lowered easily. > > Maybe Zillah Valley limited to one per player per game may be enough. Attacking Zillah with wash is kind of efficient, but people just need to put more Zillah to ignore that. > Zillah's Valley could easily be fixed with an increased cost like Sybil's Tongue. So it doesn't hurt you with your first big cap which you need to play your game, but is increasingly costly later on if you want to push out other big caps. pckvtes.wordpress.com

Voter Cap + Minion Tap is an old issue. Voter Cap rewards a deck (far better than any other card) for ousting their prey. Voter Cap + Minion Tap makes a minion at least free, potentially gaining their capacity in pool. Voter Cap + Villein is similar, but the Villein will hurt cumulatively (or you just repeat it across multiple minions instead of just doing it repeatedly to one minion). Giant's Blood + Villein seems to just be a MMPA version of the Voter Cap + Villein version. Probably because it is more difficult for other players to interfere with this tactic (the opportunity costs for other players is significantly higher). Lilith's Blessing + Villein seems to be another MMPA version of the Tap & Cap trick spread across every minion. Reclaim the full cost of the minion and then refill them so the minion is free. Renewed Vigor + Tap/Villein is also a tactic that seems to have the same results for gameplay as any of the others. All of these have in common a problem of reclaiming blood for no effective additional actions. They all generate significant amounts of blood from nothing. Blood creation is obviously far more of a problem than recursion. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > Blood creation is obviously far more of a problem than recursion. > As obvious as it appear, there is deck that put 30+ worth of transfer on play without playing any of them (because they didn't draw Lillith, I mean). They does not strike me as that much weaker than political versions. Additionaly, blood creation is dangerous mainly it can be recycled onto others minions. Even simply as pool it would be far less dangerous, and the 30 pool everyone have at start is plenty enough to put 4 inner circle in play without any pool creation, simply by using 1-2 Zillah and 1 villein on each. Or abusing Information Highway, even if it's simplet to disrupt than Zillah.

I think they are fine, as it is now, but....if I have to name the biggest problem, then it's villein. The Trifle effect gives too much effectiveness, even without the option of MMP (like anson and so), any deck can pull of the GB or LB (LB also could be a problem, but making that unique can solve a few things) combo with it, with not too much option to intervene. Not many decks have the space to include 5-8 sudden reversals, and Wash just even more cycles their hands many times. The other filling ups are connected to actions or modifiers, which can be blocked, DId or just negotiated, so far more interaction can be done against them.

As I have stated lots of times, a way to solve this is to create new and creative ways to interfer with master cards and MPA:s. MPA:s is a resource in this game, just as pool, minion actions, transfers and the rest, so it´s no logical reason not to create cards that interfer with them. As of yet the design team has not been interested in doing so - we´ll see in the future. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

@Ashur: Because interfering with others MPAs basically pushes the game into Vampire: The Master Phase. This game is supposed to be about MINION interaction. If your solution is to further reduce minion interaction, I am happy that the DT have ignored it. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > @Ashur: > Because interfering with others MPAs basically pushes the game into Vampire: The Master Phase. This game is supposed to be about MINION interaction. If your solution is to further reduce minion interaction, I am happy that the DT have ignored it. > But it's not required by its solution. It could be an action that force target methuselah to skip its next Master phase, for example. Or, more complicated, a reaction playable on a master card (think Rewind time) that create a referendum and cancel the master if the referendum pass. Of course, thoses are unpolished example. But minion interacting with master is completely possible.

The rising is a great card to solve this problem...

> Ohlmann wrote: > But it's not required by its solution. It could be an action that force target methuselah to skip its next Master phase, for example. Or, more complicated, a reaction playable on a master card (think Rewind time) that create a referendum and cancel the master if the referendum pass. > > Of course, thoses are unpolished example. But minion interacting with master is completely possible. > The idea behind Methuselahs is that they are so ancient that even the oldest of vampires, barely able to keep themselves out of torpor, unwittingly obey their wishes. It is thematically horrific to then destroy that element of this game. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > The idea behind Methuselahs is that they are so ancient that even the oldest of vampires, barely able to keep themselves out of torpor, unwittingly obey their wishes. It is thematically horrific to then destroy that element of this game. > Except several vampire we can influence *are* Methuselah. You won't say that Saulot, Elimelech, Ur-Shulgi, Villon, Helen, and co are not Methuselah, except if you really have no idea what the world of darkness is. Also, there is two precedent : Rewind time and Santaleous (who, like all 9+ cap, is a good candidate to actually be a methuselah anyway) So, it's not thematically horrific : it's thematically logical. It's hard to justify multiple MPA because of a vampire without thinking that big cap are methuselah and can do master. It's just they cannot do that easily.

In VTES structuring, Ur Shulgi, Saulot, et al, must not be 'actual Methuselahs' in the same sense that the player is a Methuselah. I have plenty of idea of how the oWoD works. Rewind Time = Temporis. If there is any discipline which should potentially be able to circumvent the abilities of an ancient vampire... Time travel should just about cover that. Santaleous I honestly find to be an aberration. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Juggernaut1981 wrote: > In VTES structuring, Ur Shulgi, Saulot, et al, must not be 'actual Methuselahs' in the same sense that the player is a Methuselah. I have plenty of idea of how the oWoD works. > Well, you can't deny that Saulot, Meneles, and Helen, especially the first two, are directly written in the old wod as being the actor and not the pawn. A lot of other are not plausible as being only pawns, like Ur-Shulgi and a lot of other peoples Also, imbued player are not alway Methuselah (they can be, but they can also be the Weaver, or one of its spirit, or simply a congregation of humans that want to get rid of vampires) So, the reality is that player represent a methuselah, or a methuselah-level entity, or a group of methuselah temporary working together. Some stay in the background, other jump directly in the fray (like the aforementioned Saulot), and all use their backlogs of scheming to get Master effect. Whether there is only one mastermind or several working together are both completely casher with the rules. And, if Santaleous is an aberration, Anson is also one. As is every MPA-giving vampires.

> wesile wrote: > The rising is a great card to solve this problem... > I agree! Had forgot about that. Good example. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Juggernaut1981 wrote: > > @Ashur: > > Because interfering with others MPAs basically pushes the game into Vampire: The Master Phase. This game is supposed to be about MINION interaction. If your solution is to further reduce minion interaction, I am happy that the DT have ignored it. > > > But it's not required by its solution. It could be an action that force target methuselah to skip its next Master phase, for example. Or, more complicated, a reaction playable on a master card (think Rewind time) that create a referendum and cancel the master if the referendum pass. > > Of course, thoses are unpolished example. But minion interacting with master is completely possible. > I agree with Ohlmann here. And of course we have to be careful with the theme of the game, but when master cards and MPA has become such strong resources, there must be ways to interact with them. Those ways can be hard to pull off (lots of requirements), but for the good of the game it should be more of them. One example is the "Send a messege" card idea discussed earlier - when you torpor a minion, play the card and his/her controller loses next master phase. This is both minion interaction and interaction with methuselahs. Saying "no interaction with masters because methuselahs are methuselahs" is just stupid - bleeding is interacting with the methuselahs! "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Both are fine (though recursion is debatable). Massive *pool* gain is the problem. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > Massive *pool* gain is the problem. > Could you give example ? Apart from Golconda, I can't see a massive pool gain which is used by really competitive deck and is not pool recursion. Then again, I suspect it's more that I don't have the same way to define massive.

Ok Ohlmann, Massive is difficult to describe, because in a sens some people think that gaining over 10 pool during a master phase should occur like once per game. Others think that playing Parity shift twice, which can be a 20 pool swing, is a better exemple of massive pool gain since it's easier achieved. Some people also think massive when you have 4 inner circles + a sidekick in play and your pool total is still around 20. My feelings : If we stick to the definition, the basis of jyhad : the 30 pool you start with, are your influence. You spend them to have minions on the table. The more you spend, the more minions capable of overwhelming the tables you have -be it by combat, politics or number of actions. The influence does not come out of nowhere : it's originally from methuselahs pool. So if a deck is capable of influencing a total of vampires twice over the starting pool of the methuselah, you can choose to call it "smart deckbuilding". You can also say "there may be a loophole". Remember magic ? It was wizards launching powerful, colorful creatures at each other. At some point there was no point in playing creatures. You barely saw them in tournament, because it removed a frailty from decks and trumped other anti creature cards. So one of the basics of gameplay, which made casual games really fun (remember you first mtg game!) was , because of competition, amputated from the scene. So the team took decisions to change that. So mtg could become the game it was designed for. I think one of the aspects that drew people to V:tes was the fact that each and every vampire, you paid with your pool, ie: your own blood. That there was tension, that some tiny decisions can result to life or death. Will this single pool make the difference ? Well at least i'll leave the jyhad in a blaze of glory ! Now, when I sit at a table, it's not the same excitation anymore. Maybe something is gone ? But the things at stake are relatively different : some decks can propulse themselves so high on the pool curve, there is nothing you can do once it's started (except if said player suddenly starts to play like a monkey). How can you go through 30 pool of a (new) prey with 4 vampires out ? And if he gains 10 more ? There is almost no deck that is designed to do 60 pool damage. Or at least one which is interesting to play. So that leads to discouragement. "Yes, bleed me for 3, I will just villein/lilith the next vamp" ... 27 pool to go... The problem is you cannot gang on those decks. You can try to slow them but eventually, you have to play the game. And because they are the one that shine when others are struggling to win the game, once there is a windows, they soar above the rest in terms of bloating. As Bram Stoker said : "The blood is the life". so where is the thrill of the beginning ? It's not really the game I used to enjoy... But I still love it. Do I have an idea for fixing this ? No. maybe we should cap the methuselah's pool ? And even like this, it would not be balance. Sorry if I have no answers, but at least I shared my feelings. Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > Massive *pool* gain is the problem. > > > Could you give example ? Apart from Golconda, I can't see a massive pool gain which is used by really competitive deck and is not pool recursion. Then again, I suspect it's more that I don't have the same way to define massive. > Any way that increases your pool by more than 3: Villein and Minion Tap mainly. I don't know why you're talking about pool recursion or what you mean by it, maybe it falls in that category. Political Stranglehold, Reins of Power and Ancient Influence come next but since they're limited to 1 per game (or make you lose pool) they're a limited problem. Con Boon could also be a trouble, but Ancilla Empowerement/Anarchist Uprising do the same amount of damage so they're ok. Golconda costs you a vampire, so I don't have any problem with that. When you play it, you're usually in big trouble. Partiy Shift isn't an issue, because it removed pool from another player, meaning that no pool is created (the game probably end as quickly). Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

I voted no problems with either... with the possible exception of Giant's Blood. Metagaming is important. Too few people go into a game saying "I'm going to DI/block/Delay that vote" or Sudden that Villein + GB or Amaranth Cybelle. Time to put up. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

> Ankha wrote: > Any way that increases your pool by more than 3: Villein and Minion Tap mainly. I don't know why you're talking about pool recursion or what you mean by it, maybe it falls in that category. > Well, I may be wrong, but for me Villein and Minion tap are pool recursion : you use the same pool several time to put multiples vampires into play. I seperate it from pool/blood gain in that no ressource are actually added to the system. In effect, you pay the second vampire with blood from the first one, with a bit a loss (because you will not usually empty a vampire completely, and because Zillah cost pool) > Ankha wrote: > Political Stranglehold, Reins of Power and Ancient Influence come next but since they're limited to 1 per game (or make you lose pool) they're a limited problem. > Con Boon could also be a trouble, but Ancilla Empowerement/Anarchist Uprising do the same amount of damage so they're ok. > Golconda costs you a vampire, so I don't have any problem with that. When you play it, you're usually in big trouble. > I agree that all thoses card are not problematic. Golconda may be, but mainly because it can restart the villein / zillah / information highway mechanism without much condition.

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > Any way that increases your pool by more than 3: Villein and Minion Tap mainly. I don't know why you're talking about pool recursion or what you mean by it, maybe it falls in that category. > > > Well, I may be wrong, but for me Villein and Minion tap are pool recursion : you use the same pool several time to put multiples vampires into play. > Then the term would be 'recoup' rather than 'recurse'. When you influence 11 pool on a vampire, this pool is stucked/invested and will ultimately disappear (to pay cards, or in combat etc.) but your pool level shouldn't go back in a short time (say 1 turn) to its initial level. Apart heavy bleed deck, no deck is capable of ousting prey(s) with 30 pool within 2 hours. Heavy pool gain (such as Villein) means that decks will be un-oustable and will ultimately lead to time out. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Reyda wrote: > How can you go through 30 pool of a (new) prey with 4 vampires out ? And if he gains 10 more ? There is almost no deck that is designed to do 60 pool damage. Or at least one which is interesting to play. So that leads to discouragement. > If a player has 30 pool and 4 big caps it means that a) someone brought a tournament deck to a casual game b) someone played badly or c) someone played well. What you are describing is not a standard mid game scenario. It's a win condition of a particular type of deck, analogous to 10 Tumnimos + Week of Nightmares or Enkidu being the last man standing. If a Girls type deck isn't rushed or heavily bled in the early turns then yeah, it will probably win. This is true for many tier 1 decks. What does bug me, though, is Liquidation. Free pool with 0 interaction, starting from turn 1.

> Ankha wrote: > Con Boon could also be a trouble, but Ancilla Empowerement/Anarchist Uprising do the same amount of damage so they're ok. > Sometimes it happens that you get ridiculous amounts of pool by using Con Boon. In the FCQ's 3rd round in Budapest at one point I had 50 pool and 10 small cap !Toreador out (Beckett adv had also made an appearance but some feral gals ate him up). 3 Con Boons and one Art Scam (kinda pointless after just getting 30 pool) in one turn kinda bloat you up nicely... In the pic I already managed to spend one point to Lilith or paid one to see one etc Attachment hikeejapoolii.jpg not found Finnish Politics!

> Suoli wrote: > If a player has 30 pool and 4 big caps it means that a) someone brought a tournament deck to a casual game b) someone played badly or c) someone played well. What you are describing is not a standard mid game scenario. > Meaning that the meta game should reduce itself to 1/ play rush 2/ play heavy bleed 3/ play girls. It's a bit limited. Vote decks and intercept decks won't be able to kill it, nor a ally or toolbox or even imbued. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Lönkka wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > Con Boon could also be a trouble, but Ancilla Empowerement/Anarchist Uprising do the same amount of damage so they're ok. > > > Sometimes it happens that you get ridiculous amounts of pool by using Con Boon. > Sure, but it's much more difficult than plainly playing a trifle master. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > Suoli wrote: > > If a player has 30 pool and 4 big caps it means that a) someone brought a tournament deck to a casual game b) someone played badly or c) someone played well. What you are describing is not a standard mid game scenario. > > > Meaning that the meta game should reduce itself to 1/ play rush 2/ play heavy bleed 3/ play girls. It's a bit limited. > Vote decks and intercept decks won't be able to kill it, nor a ally or toolbox or even imbued. > I don't agree that rushing allies or good vote decks can't kill Girls. Toolboxes and Imbued, on the other hand, are currently not that viable against tier 1 decks anyway, with or without Girls. The only problems I see with the deck type is that playing Liquidation and Ashurs can take up a lot of time and that everyone seems to be playing it.

> Reyda wrote: > Now, when I sit at a table, it's not the same excitation anymore. Maybe something is gone ? But the things at stake are relatively different : some decks can propulse themselves so high on the pool curve, there is nothing you can do once it's started (except if said player suddenly starts to play like a monkey). > > How can you go through 30 pool of a (new) prey with 4 vampires out ? And if he gains 10 more ? There is almost no deck that is designed to do 60 pool damage. Or at least one which is interesting to play. So that leads to discouragement. > "Yes, bleed me for 3, I will just villein/lilith the next vamp" ... 27 pool to go... > The problem is you cannot gang on those decks. You can try to slow them but eventually, you have to play the game. And because they are the one that shine when others are struggling to win the game, once there is a windows, they soar above the rest in terms of bloating. > As Bram Stoker said : "The blood is the life". > > so where is the thrill of the beginning ? > It's not really the game I used to enjoy... But I still love it. > > Do I have an idea for fixing this ? No. > I snipped to these comments because they make me think of another problem the game has had forever but which largely gets fixed or, at least, managed by the nature of the game and the desire of players to build decks to win tournaments. Weenies. It's the opposite problem to decks like Girls, Council of Doom, and the like. A good weenie deck (not to be confused with babymaker decks like Clown Car or Foundation Exhibit) will ensure that the prey dies, even though the weenie deck may never oust the player. Many of the decks with massive bloat are not all that fierce on offense. If you play conservatively, limited stealth and a small number of actions a turn can be handled. Since it might not be clear, what I'm saying is that weenies are metagamed out because the table works to prevent them from turning the corner - it's a (relatively) high risk/reward strategy, while decks that are better at bloating than ousting are taking a relatively low risk/reward strategy. Similarly, can always make a wall deck that is virtually unoustable (the zero risk/reward hypothetical perfect defense deck), but it's a poor choice when it doesn't oust anyone itself. Just my view. I wouldn't give it much weight since I don't participate in the higher profile events around the world. I just wonder if decks that can easily gain massive amounts of pool fall out of favor if they struggle to oust opponents because the opponents play conservatively in much the same way that I don't expect a lot of weenie decks in a tournament because they can be too easily stopped at 1 or 2 VPs. Traveller Card Game

> Ankha wrote: > Then the term would be 'recoup' rather than 'recurse'. > When you influence 11 pool on a vampire, this pool is stucked/invested and will ultimately disappear (to pay cards, or in combat etc.) but your pool level shouldn't go back in a short time (say 1 turn) to its initial level. Apart heavy bleed deck, no deck is capable of ousting prey(s) with 30 pool within 2 hours. > Heavy pool gain (such as Villein) means that decks will be un-oustable and will ultimately lead to time out. > Both myself, ICL and a few others have talked about "Pool Recursion" in the same way as "Card Recursion". You have spent the resource (Pool/Card) and then recycled it from its later location back to where you can use it again (Pool/Hand). Classic Pool Recursion cards are (as the earlier posts mentioned) Minion Tap, Villein, Tribute to the Master, Blood Doll & Vessel. Classic Blood Creation cards are Voter Cap, Renewed Vigor and Giant's Blood. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

@ICL: The recent AUNZ Continental Champs had quite a prevalence of combat weenies. Noticably: Nec-Shamblers Ani-Rush Pot-Rush (one which made the finals of the LCQ and placed well on the Championship day as well) which IIRC had two different styles appear (Pot-Hug and Increased Strength-Thrown Junk) Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

It seems like I don't play the same game as you guys are. Games you are talking about with everyone going big caps + villein + giant's blood actually didnt happened to me last EC, neither last nationals in France. Concerning my tables: In 9 rounds in Budapest, I saw one Villein+Liquidation+Ashur deck. Well, I don't count me playing Council of Doom day 2 In french nationals, 6 rounds + 1 final, I didnt saw any kind of those decks. The 2 decks that won french LCQ and nationals were not playing villein neither ashur tablets. I don't know what tables you guys are playing when you play Jyhad - but certainly not the one I'm used to.

I will just put my two cents here. Voter Cap + Minion Tap is an old issue. Voter Cap rewards a deck (far better than any other card) for ousting their prey. Voter Cap + Minion Tap makes a minion at least free, potentially gaining their capacity in pool. Voter Cap + Villein is similar, but the Villein will hurt cumulatively (or you just repeat it across multiple minions instead of just doing it repeatedly to one minion). Giant's Blood + Villein seems to just be a MMPA version of the Voter Cap + Villein version. Probably because it is more difficult for other players to interfere with this tactic (the opportunity costs for other players is significantly higher). Lilith's Blessing + Villein seems to be another MMPA version of the Tap & Cap trick spread across every minion. Reclaim the full cost of the minion and then refill them so the minion is free. Renewed Vigor + Tap/Villein is also a tactic that seems to have the same results for gameplay as any of the others. All of these have in common a problem of reclaiming blood for no effective additional actions. They all generate significant amounts of blood from nothing. Blood creation is obviously far more of a problem than recursion. All the above are true. I agree to a point. I played the game when it first came out. Pool gaining was powerful, but still defeat able. Today with so many different ways to reclaiming blood / pool for little or no cost. I think what really change the game, is the rock, paper, scissors interactions that was very well balance that keep everything in check. Now I think that part of the interaction is out of "gamut”. How to fix that part the interaction? I am not sure.

> Pyrocuror wrote: > Concerning my tables:In 9 rounds in Budapest, I saw one Villein+Liquidation+Ashur deck. Well, I don't count me playing Council of Doom day 2 > In french nationals, 6 rounds + 1 final, I didnt saw any kind of those decks. > The 2 decks that won french LCQ and nationals were not playing villein neither ashur tablets. > Well ,talk to Johannes who played 7 games during the EC against a Nana (I assume with Ashure, he may confirm) decks. Those are two extremes. What I know, is that mostly of the time when there's a IC deck on the table, the table times out if the IC deck doesn't make the GW. The IC deck may die, but it takes so much time that his predator won't have time or resources for another VP. > bluezeb wrote: > I will just put my two cents here. > > All of these have in common a problem of reclaiming blood for no effective additional actions. They all generate significant amounts of blood from nothing. Blood creation is obviously far more of a problem than recursion. > I disagree. Gaining blood is fine, if the blood is used to play cards, not to gain pool. Draining 1 pool per turn using a Blood Doll is slow and acceptable. Gaining 8 pool or more with a trifle master is fast. If Villein/Minion Tap were banned (for example), Voter Captivation, Lilith's Blessing, Abactor... won't be issues. You have blood, you can play more cards, more combat etc. You also have to be more careful and can't bring out 30+ influence on the table. Or you ban blood gaining cards (far more numerous and complicated!), meaning you play with free vampires that have no blood, with 0-cost cards because you can't afford to pay blood, which would lead to a more boring game (imho) and more tiemout since everyone gains pool easily. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > What I know, is that mostly of the time when there's a IC deck on the table, the table times out if the IC deck doesn't make the GW. The IC deck may die, but it takes so much time that his predator won't have time or resources for another VP. > I disagree with this fact you are exposing, for instance during the EC I had 5 games with Inner circles, no GW for the IC deck, and only one time out, the rest GW for other guy not playing IC.

> I disagree. Gaining blood is fine, if the blood is used to play cards, not to gain pool. Draining 1 pool per turn using a Blood Doll is slow and acceptable. Gaining 8 pool or more with a trifle master is fast. > The necessity to do so is all derived from the fact that 2-caps can still bleed for 5 in this game. If fast Eddy wouldn't be hitting your pool for 4 starting with turn 2 and is then joined by two more buddies that can do the same, there would be less need to get silly amounts of pool back from your 10-caps *fast*. This issue has been brought up since 1994 and instead of implementing the extremely easy to remember, suggested since 1994, totally sensible rule that a vampire can't bleed for more than its capacity, there have been various efforts throughtout the game's lifespan to make more (if not all) midcaps and fatties at least playable. Most efforts have failed (barring a few archtypes) until Villein got printed. > If Villein/Minion Tap were banned (for example), Voter Captivation, Lilith's Blessing, Abactor... won't be issues. You have blood, you can play more cards, more combat etc. You also have to be more careful and can't bring out 30+ influence on the table. > If Villein/MT were banned, the game would evolve to the point where you play midcaps with 10 deflections or weenie dom, weenie dem or weenie aus. Between all the poolgain people are STILL winning tables and/or tournaments with weenie dementation. I don't want to know what would happen without MT/Villein. > Or you ban blood gaining cards (far more numerous and complicated!), meaning you play with free vampires that have no blood, with 0-cost cards because you can't afford to pay blood, which would lead to a more boring game (imho) and more tiemout since everyone gains pool easily. > Or, you start with banning GB and Liliths (and maybe limit master cards to 2 per turn, including trifle and OoT) and see how the game evolves from there?

> Izaak wrote: > > > I disagree. Gaining blood is fine, if the blood is used to play cards, not to gain pool. Draining 1 pool per turn using a Blood Doll is slow and acceptable. Gaining 8 pool or more with a trifle master is fast. > > > The necessity to do so is all derived from the fact that 2-caps can still bleed for 5 in this game. If fast Eddy wouldn't be hitting your pool for 4 starting with turn 2 and is then joined by two more buddies that can do the same, there would be less need to get silly amounts of pool back from your 10-caps *fast*. > No, it's not a necessity since you have many ways to counter it: playing Deflection-like cards, bleed reducer, Protected Resources, intercept... Pool gain is more popular (and efficient) because it resists bleed, vote, and allows you to spend pool on other resources. Reducing pool gain doesn't mean the weenie decks will win, rather than you'll have to use other methods to resist. > Izaak wrote: > This issue has been brought up since 1994 and instead of implementing the extremely easy to remember, suggested since 1994, totally sensible rule that a vampire can't bleed for more than its capacity, > It's midly an issue, there are plenty of cards against weenie (more than in 1994) and few vampires that bleed you for more than their capacity. Maybe Samson in one game out of many, Keith Moody or Midget (for 4 instead of 3) but most of the time Apache Jones will bleed you for 4. This rules would save only 1 pool from time to time. > Izaak wrote: > > > If Villein/Minion Tap were banned (for example), Voter Captivation, Lilith's Blessing, Abactor... won't be issues. You have blood, you can play more cards, more combat etc. You also have to be more careful and can't bring out 30+ influence on the table. > > > If Villein/MT were banned, the game would evolve to the point where you play midcaps with 10 deflections or weenie dom, weenie dem or weenie aus. Between all the poolgain people are STILL winning tables and/or tournaments with weenie dementation. I don't want to know what would happen without MT/Villein. > Players will pack more combat, intercept or bleed reduction. Or more Blood Dolls, or more Banishment. They are plenty of solutions. > Izaak wrote: > > > Or you ban blood gaining cards (far more numerous and complicated!), meaning you play with free vampires that have no blood, with 0-cost cards because you can't afford to pay blood, which would lead to a more boring game (imho) and more tiemout since everyone gains pool easily. > > > Or, you start with banning GB and Liliths (and maybe limit master cards to 2 per turn, including trifle and OoT) and see how the game evolves from there? > IMHO, it won't change anything. GB and Lilith's are not necessary to make an IC deck work. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> No, it's not a necessity since you have many ways to counter it: playing Deflection-like cards, bleed reducer, Protected Resources, intercept... > Out of these, only bounce actually work. This has been proven over and over again and I really don't think it's even worth mentioning bleed reduction and protected resources. > Pool gain is more popular (and efficient) because it resists bleed, vote, and allows you to spend pool on other resources. > Yes and this is exactly why it's good. It doesn't shoehorn your deck into some other tier1 archtype, but instead allows you to compete with different, more varied strategies and wackier cards. > Players will pack more combat, intercept or bleed reduction. Or more Blood Dolls, or more Banishment. They are plenty of solutions. > Except, there are not. Because if there were, people wouldn't all be using Villeins (or MT's before KoT). > IMHO, it won't change anything. GB and Lilith's are not necessary to make an IC deck work. > Wah? Since when is the discussion about the viability of IC decks? It's about ridiculous amounts of pool. GB and Lilith have *everything* to do with that.

Actually the discussion is meant to be about this: If you were going to change the way VTES manages its blood-to-pool conversion do you want to: 1) Reduce the amount of blood people can convert back into pool 2) Reduce the amount, and ease, of creating new blood on minions 3) Both 4) No changes needed. Personally, my issue is 2. It weakens combat strategies (which are already shifted towards S:CE and avoidance). Its main cards enhance already strong archetypes (i.e. Voter Cap is potentially too powerful). Its ability to drag games on for a long period of time has been apparent for a LONG time in VTES(Who here has not seen a Tap & Cap deck, probably a Ven Lawfirm or a AAA, on 30+ pool with 30+ in minions and locations towards the mid-to-late game?). Most of the cards which provide large volumes of blood (Voter Cap, GB, Renewed Vigor) provide resource changes far greater than almost any card in VTES (Even Parity Shift can only make a 10-pool swing, Con Boon rarely makes a 10+ pool change). Voter Cap often provides 6 blood and 2 pool (there is no other card play that provides that amount of resource) AND does so as a reward for basically taking ousting actions. This influx of resources can cancel out whole turns of bleeding/voting/actions by a predator in a single action mod. Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

> Izaak wrote: > > > No, it's not a necessity since you have many ways to counter it: playing Deflection-like cards, bleed reducer, Protected Resources, intercept... > > > Out of these, only bounce actually work. This has been proven over and over again and I really don't think it's even worth mentioning bleed reduction and protected resources. > Proven by who? And bounce is simply superior to bleed reduction, but that doesn't mean bleed reduction isn't effective. > > Players will pack more combat, intercept or bleed reduction. Or more Blood Dolls, or more Banishment. They are plenty of solutions. > > > Except, there are not. Because if there were, people wouldn't all be using Villeins > once again, you're mixing up things. People play Villein because it's the more effective strategy. That doesn't mean other strategies are inexistant. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Ya know, we could argue this forever, but I was fairly sure you played tons of tournaments and should have witnessed enough games to conclude that other than bounce and poolgain, all forms of pool defense are simply bad, because they require your deck to revolve around it. Even before Villein, who played bleed reduce? Right, nobody did because it's ineffective at what it's supposed to do. Who plays protected resources? Some vote decks do, and even that is a stretch. Wall decks, sure, they don´t need pool recovery but that´s because they´re freaking walls. Before Villein everyone played Minion Tap on their 7+ caps because, yes, it's efficient but also because it's mandatory to do so. There simply are no viable alternatives. > once again, you're mixing up things. People play Villein because it's the more effective strategy. That doesn't mean other strategies are inexistant. > That Villein is better than Minion Tap we all now and shouldn't be argued. Would you prefer to go back to the scenario where 90% of my master cards would sit in the box forever, because I need to hog MT's and/or Blood Dolls again? Because I wouldn't.

> Izaak wrote: > Ya know, we could argue this forever, but I was fairly sure you played tons of tournaments and should have witnessed enough games to conclude that other than bounce and poolgain, all forms of pool defense are simply bad, because they require your deck to revolve around it. > > Even before Villein, who played bleed reduce? Right, nobody did because it's ineffective at what it's supposed to do. Who plays protected resources? Some vote decks do, and even that is a stretch. Wall decks, sure, they don´t need pool recovery but that´s because they´re freaking walls. > > Before Villein everyone played Minion Tap on their 7+ caps because, yes, it's efficient but also because it's mandatory to do so. There simply are no viable alternatives. > Am I the only player that have decks featuring 7+ caps without any MT or Villein? I hope not. Anyway, it's certainly not mandatory. Just an easy and effective way (some may say 'no-brainer'). > Izaak wrote: > > > once again, you're mixing up things. People play Villein because it's the more effective strategy. That doesn't mean other strategies are inexistant. > > > That Villein is better than Minion Tap we all now and shouldn't be argued. Would you prefer to go back to the scenario where 90% of my master cards would sit in the box forever, because I need to hog MT's and/or Blood Dolls again? Because I wouldn't. > The quote was snipped because of using my phone to edit the message, but the debate is not on whether Villein is better than MT, rather than it's better than any other pool strategy (except in cases you need that blood on your vampire to play cards). Being able to play more master cards because Villein is a trifle is a bit weird. It's like saying master should be free (=>paid with the pool villein gives) and don't require a MPA to be playable (=> MPA provided by Villein). Master are becoming too easy to play nowadays, but it's just my point of view. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > Am I the only player that have decks featuring 7+ caps without any MT or Villein? I hope not. Anyway, it's certainly not mandatory. Just an easy and effective way (some may say 'no-brainer'). > It depend on the vampire you are considering. If you play some specifics vampires, like the True Brujah 10 cap that untap every turn, or the good old Enkidu, you may not need MT or Villein. If you try to play Raphael de Corazon, for an example of the numerous non-multiacting big cap, then it's either a pure wall deck or a pure suicide. > Ankha wrote: > Being able to play more master cards because Villein is a trifle is a bit weird. It's like saying master should be free (=>paid with the pool villein gives) and don't require a MPA to be playable (=> MPA provided by Villein). Master are becoming too easy to play nowadays, but it's just my point of view. > It's not all that weird. You have limited non-trifle master slot, until pain of choking on them. Minion tap is so important if your vampires are a tad big that it block all thoses slots.

> Ankha wrote: > Being able to play more master cards because Villein is a trifle is a bit weird. It's like saying master should be free (=>paid with the pool villein gives) and don't require a MPA to be playable (=> MPA provided by Villein). Master are becoming too easy to play nowadays, but it's just my point of view. > very good argument actually. Would you play Monastery of shadows without Villein ? Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

> Izaak wrote: > Even before Villein, who played bleed reduce? Right, nobody did because it's ineffective at what it's supposed to do. > It is not so much bleed reduce that sucks but the bleed reduce cards printed until Sword of Caine: reduce by 1 only unless you have , but then you have access to bounce. Cards like Truth in Ink, Wrong and Crosswise or Hide the Heart are solid.

> Non-existant user wrote: > It is not so much bleed reduce that sucks but the bleed reduce cards printed until Sword of Caine: reduce by 1 only unless you have , but then you have access to bounce. Cards like Truth in Ink, Wrong and Crosswise or Hide the Heart are solid. > I never seen Truth in ink played by other people, and my try were horribles failures. Wrong and Crosswise is solid because it work as vote defence. In the same way, Hide the heart is versatile, and good because of that. Confusion of the eye is on the same boat. The card I have seen used succesfully a bit were Banner of Neutrality, I don't know why. Also the Salubri that reduce bleed by two.

> Reyda wrote: > > > Ankha wrote: > > Being able to play more master cards because Villein is a trifle is a bit weird. It's like saying master should be free (=>paid with the pool villein gives) and don't require a MPA to be playable (=> MPA provided by Villein). Master are becoming too easy to play nowadays, but it's just my point of view. > > > very good argument actually. > Would you play Monastery of shadows without Villein ? > Probably not. Which boils down to the same argument again. I'm saying it's a good thing that Villein allows more (different) masters to make it into decks. I like the fact that Jake, Monastery, Visit, Troublemaker and dozens of other masters now actually are put on the table. The retarded "I gain 300 pool and never oust someone" decks are an unfortunate side-effect, but I take that over a couple of thousand cards in my boxes that won't even come under consideration for a deck. What I'm also saying that it's bad that half the vampire pool is useless trash without a way to get them for about half the cost which is more an issue with the way the game is designed than anything else. We can all make up specific examples all day long, but the reality is just that you can't really play mid/big caps without a way to get your investment back. In that aspect, MT/Villein just is a bit of a workaround the core design flaw of the game: a 5-cap can do almost as much as an 11-cap so you'd better have a damn good reason to play said 11-cap. Having access to MT/Villein just means you have some room to work with. Maybe the same can be accomplished by having everyone start at 45 pool and 5 uncontrolled cards instead of 30 and 4 (and then ban MT/Villein/decrypting cards). Maybe there is some other solution that nobody have thought of as of yet, but it's 2012. The game's 18 years old. It's also dying, so I don't think a change like that will happen. So ye, I'll settle for Villein and a banning of Lilith/GB to get rid of the REALLY stupid poolgain / free vampires shit that's been all over the place the last year and a half and then let the meta fix itself.

> Ohlmann wrote: > > > Non-existant user wrote: > > It is not so much bleed reduce that sucks but the bleed reduce cards printed until Sword of Caine: reduce by 1 only unless you have , but then you have access to bounce. Cards like Truth in Ink, Wrong and Crosswise or Hide the Heart are solid. > > > I never seen Truth in ink played by other people, and my try were horribles failures. Wrong and Crosswise is solid because it work as vote defence. In the same way, Hide the heart is versatile, and good because of that. Confusion of the eye is on the same boat. > > The card I have seen used succesfully a bit were Banner of Neutrality, I don't know why. Also the Salubri that reduce bleed by two. > Being black hand is a difficult trait to support for bleed reduce. Decks that are already black hand can make some use of it, depending on their disciplines (i.e. obf dom black hand don't need or want it). Banner of Neutrality is an ok card for weenie independent decks like Assamites because they already have Nest of Eagles and they can work together. That Salubri is just crazy good. I realize I'm off topic now, but is there anything else to say? Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

I don't want to nerf Villein right now. Here are the reasons (some of them were already pointed out): - I don't want to see again 90% of the decks packing 6 blood dolls. It was the case when I started toplay V:TES, and really I don't see why it is more interesting to ruin half of your masters slots + MPA when you build a deck. Izaak pointed it, you can now play more different masters thanks to the trifle trait on bloat masters. - I don't want to see 80% of the decks dying turn 5 to Vignes and Dementation. The fact is, if a Vignes deck is well built, it will probably bleed for 18 or so (even more depending on draws) turn 5. - Nerfing villein is nerfing big caps decks. Means more weenie, more vignes/dem, and thus more intercept to survivre vignes/dem. I don't want to see more intercept decks at V:TES tables. There are enough of it. Cept decks makes tables slower (more than ashur/liquidation) and prevents people from playing. Cept decks are just frustrating to play against. I'm ok with them right now, but I don't want to see table crowded with those. And again, at least here in France, the meta is really diverse - there is rarely more than 1 fatty villein deck in a given tables. I know only 3 ppl in Paris playing villein/ashur tablets on a regular basis, including me - and I play a lot of different decks. V:TES is on his slow way to the end - let people play the decks they like. I like to play a lot of masters, and to manage my master phases. It's not more interesting to me to play minion cards - except torn grapple disarm decapitate ofc My 2 cents of subjective point of view of me myself and I.

> Izaak wrote: > The retarded "I gain 300 pool and never oust someone" decks are an unfortunate side-effect, > The friends of the people that play these horrible decks should take them aside and explain to them -- or even track for them, on paper -- the number of VPs that they are getting, and make them understand that they aren't bad players, they are just playing bad decks. 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 really like this idea: bleed of crypt cards is capped by capacity. Someone needs to start a new topic and explain why it should never happen in VTES (as stubborn a community to change as one can ever find). edit: Wasn't there another idea floating out there? Native bleed by capacity tier or something? 1-4 cap = 0 bleed, 5-8 cap = 1 bleed, 9+ cap = 2 bleed. Having IC's have native bleeds targetable to Archon Investigation doesn't bother me much.

> Azel wrote: > I really like this idea: bleed of crypt cards is capped by capacity. > > Someone needs to start a new topic and explain why it should never happen in VTES (as stubborn a community to change as one can ever find). > > edit: Wasn't there another idea floating out there? Native bleed by capacity tier or something? 1-4 cap = 0 bleed, 5-8 cap = 1 bleed, 9+ cap = 2 bleed. > > Having IC's have native bleeds targetable to Archon Investigation doesn't bother me much. > If you think this should be in another thread, then start it. Not sure why it ended up here... Retired Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418

I think the problem isnt blood or pool recursion. It is, as Ashur said, the missing interaction with master cards. - Too many good master cards are playable by all players (no limitation by sect or clan). - It is too simple to play more good master cards (trifles, Parthenon, vampires with +1 MPA) - It is too difficult to interfere with others masterphase.

> Azel wrote: > edit: Wasn't there another idea floating out there? Native bleed by capacity tier or something? 1-4 cap = 0 bleed, 5-8 cap = 1 bleed, 9+ cap = 2 bleed. > Sure, that would be an amazing change for the game to make all 1-4 cap vampires worse than a 2 pool Nephandus. This + ruining like 20 (or more) deck archetypes, including most of the weenies and half of the ally decks. But be sure to also ban villein & minion tap along, so and weenies and big caps are not playble anymore... And we could finally all play ventrue grinders, carna and howler with 6 blood dolls. Yay !

Mmmm... People are upset because it's difficult to interfere with master phases... What if you could play multiple out of turn master cards without penalty ? I mean, you could play 2 sudden during other player's turns and simply lose the usual master phase action when your turn comes back ? ie: you can play more oot master than you can forfeit. So people would not be annoyed to pack more suddens or washes... ? It can have a real impact on deckbuilding... and Yes, I know someone will bring Archon investigation on the discussion, but would it be that bad ? Imagination is our only weapon in the war against reality -Jules de Gaultier

I would rather worry about unlimited Rotschreck, DI, Angel of Berlin,...

> Non-existant user wrote: > I would rather worry about unlimited Rotschreck, DI, Angel of Berlin,... > Mmmmm... unlimited Rötschreck :drool: Ivan - Maybe this?