Assamites with presence

I hate that moment when you create a deck and then are reminded, "oh yeah, still fucked by immortal grapple, Spirit Marionnette + Heidelberg. Nevermind." Here's another deck I won't build: Deck Name: Assamite with presence Author: Brandon Haas Description: Crypt (12 cards; Capacity min=1 max=10 avg=7.42) ================================================ 1x Alu 2 obf Assamite:5 1x Antara 8 aus obf pre CEL FOR QUI Assamite:4 1x Basir 1 qui Assamite:4 1x Djuhah, The Bronze Bow 7 aus cel pre OBF QUI Assamite:5 5x Jamal 10 pot CEL OBF PRE PRO QUI Assamite:5 1x Kashan 7 obt pre CEL OBF QUI Assamite:4 1x Monty Coven 8 dom for pre CEL OBF QUI Assamite:5 1x Vardar Vardarian 6 cel pre OBF QUI Assamite:4 Library (90 cards) ================== Master (18) 1x Barrens, The 1x Dreams of the Sphinx 1x Giant's Blood 1x Market Square 1x Pentex(TM) Subversion 4x Presence 1x Secure Haven 6x Villein 1x WMRH Talk Radio 1x Yoruba Shrine Action (10) 1x Condemn the Sins of the Father 4x Enchant Kindred 2x Entrancement 1x Khabar: Glory 2x Loss Political Action (3) 3x Reckless Agitation Equipment (4) 1x .44 Magnum 1x Heart of Nizchetus 1x Ivory Bow 1x Sport Bike Ally (3) 1x Carlton Van Wyk (Hunter) 1x Deviki Prasanta 1x Mylan Horseed (Goblin) Action Modifier (10) 6x Aire of Elation 4x Zephyr Reaction (16) 10x Black Sunrise 6x Nest of Eagles Combat (24) 12x Catatonic Fear 6x Focus the Blood 4x Target Vitals 2x Thin Blood Combo (2) 2x Scalpel Tongue Created with Secret Library v0.9.4d. (Apr 7, 2016 19:32:07) Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

I don't understand the reason of making this deck Assamite. It's pure presence deck. Being assamite just make it worse because of weak crypt

I don't mean to be rude, and maybe I'm missing something here. But isn't this a star vampire bruise/bleed deck with very little defense? I think that IG and Salubri aren't the only things that are going to ruin its day, so blaming them specifically seems odd.

Wow, friendly crowd. Nearly all non-standard deck concepts are going to be weaker than established decks. There is a reason that these decks are established. Just commenting to point that out doesn't really seem to accomplish anything other than alienating the player who posted. And if you haven't noticed, there aren't many of us left. Let's not drive off the few people who still play VTES. I also think that the comment regarding very dominant archetypes is a fair one. To my mind, it's a shame that card like Immortal Grapple shut down deck ideas (oh melee weapons other than WWS, how I miss you). And vampire stealing has no place in our game. Protect Thine Own was also banned because one action shouldn't deprive a player of that much pool along with their ability to act / defend. Vampire stealing is directly analogous. But I suppose I'm wandering off topic now. Brandon - I'd love to see how this deck performs the next time we play. I'm excited to see you squeeze value out of Deviki Prasanta. Check out my VTES blog: Gaming with BS I also host a google doc which separates the TWDA into clans . That means I track how often clans win, which crypt groups get used, and how many people attend events. You can access all of that info here:

I didn't meant to be harsh. Rather want to mention better alternatives for crypt choices. Also, as I really like deck building aspect in Vtes, I'm just curious is there a design reason behind this deck being assamite or the author just love the assamites. Which is good enough reason One last thing, if you are afraid of IG so much you can add few copies of disengage. And add more target vitals.

> alek wrote: > I didn't meant to be harsh. Rather want to mention better alternatives for crypt choices. Also, as I really like deck building aspect in Vtes, I'm just curious is there a design reason behind this deck being assamite or the author just love the assamites. Which is good enough reason > One last thing, if you are afraid of IG so much you can add few copies of disengage. And add more target vitals. > The deck is a PRE QUI deck that also uses some assamite cards and celerity cards. Having Focus the Blood pay for Thin Blood + Catatonic Fear is awesome, Catatonic Fear + Target Vitals is also pretty awesome. It all fits in this combat package. There are many more cards I would like to play here, but there isn't room. Entrancement, Enchant Kindred and Loss all have non-bleed options on them, allowing the player to decide when they want to use the card to gain control vs bleed. There is a pretty solid reaction package, especially if you can get at least one permacept card in play like WMRH. Even if not I can be untapped for a vote after Black Sunrise and maybe Scalpel Tongue or to reduce with Nest of Eagles. Disengage is not a good card. If you are playing Disengage, just play Groundfighting, DI or fortitude. In theory Disengage allows you to get away from grapple, but 90% of the time it only succeeds in taking what would be useful cards in your deck and turning them into garbage. None of the above options is all that good vs dedicated IG except Fortitude, which is pretty boring/problematic. This deck is probably too toolboxy to be that effective in a game of VTES, but you never know. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

agree that disengage is not a good one, but if it can safe your butt go for it. I saw PRE OBF s&b deck that only concern was IG. After adding few disengages it won a tournament. On the other hand, groundfighting card you've mentioned is much better but requires anarch. From your description, you want to use assamites mainly for defense (black sunrsie, nest of eagles, etc.) and focus the blood. For those you can use AUS which has much better defence options and Viccisitude (Inner Essence). Tzimisce have nice crypt for this (The Rose, Velya, Lambach and anti Toreador Matteus, Flesh Sculptor). Additionally Lambach has built in aggro hand damage which is really nice against IG. Slightly off topic, but if you like catatonic fear + target vitals combo it pairs really nicelly with shattering crescondo. Below is a deck of mine which was really succesfull in casual games and gave me a tournament final. Maybe you can find some inspiration here: Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 28, Max: 36, Avg: 8,16) 4 Dmitra Ilyanova obf CEL FOR POT PRE9 Brujah 4 Scout Youngwood MEL OBF PRE for qui8 Daughters of Cacophony 2 Tara cel POT PRE 6 Brujah 2 Undele obf pre ser CEL FOR9 Ishtarri Library: (75 cards) Master (16 cards) 6 Ashur Tablets 2 Dreams of the Sphinx 1 Giant`s Blood 1 Monastery of Shadows 1 Pentex Subversion 3 Villein 2 Wider View Action (11 cards) 1 Entrancement 10 Shattering Crescendo Action Modifier (18 cards) 3 Bewitching Oration 1 Faceless Night 4 Forgotten Labyrinth 2 Into Thin Air 2 Lost in Crowds 3 Perfect Paragon 3 Voter Captivation Political Action (10 cards) 1 Ancilla Empowerment 4 Kine Resources Contested 1 Lily Prelude 4 Parity Shift Reaction (6 cards) 6 Second Tradition: Domain, The Combat (13 cards) 7 Catatonic Fear 6 Target Vitals Equipment (1 cards) 1 Heart of Nizchetus

> brettscho wrote: > To my mind, it's a shame that card like Immortal Grapple shut down deck ideas (oh melee weapons other than WWS, how I miss you). > Melee weapons suck, with or without Immortal Grapple. They cost too much and work only at close range. Compare a Bang Nakh with a .44 Magnum for instance. No, IG is not a problem. An absence of IG would be a problem for Potence combat decks. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

> Ankha wrote: > > > brettscho wrote: > > To my mind, it's a shame that card like Immortal Grapple shut down deck ideas (oh melee weapons other than WWS, how I miss you). > > > Melee weapons suck, with or without Immortal Grapple. > They cost too much and work only at close range. Compare a Bang Nakh with a .44 Magnum for instance. > No, IG is not a problem. An absence of IG would be a problem for Potence combat decks. > IG and Combat Ends together are the problem with combat as I see it because they constitute winner take all combat in a nutshell. Have CE and opponent doesn't grapple? You generally get out of combat without a scratch other than what the combat ends card costs. Your opponent has grapple vs your works-most-of-the-time combat ends? Go to torpor or burn. Removing grapple and not addressing strike: combat ends would be a bad idea. I would prefer to see combat be more varied and with combat ends being weaker or nonexistant I think that would happen. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

> brandonsantacruz wrote: > IG and Combat Ends together are the problem with combat as I see it because they constitute winner take all combat in a nutshell. Have CE and opponent doesn't grapple? You generally get out of combat without a scratch other than what the combat ends card costs. Your opponent has grapple vs your works-most-of-the-time combat ends? Go to torpor or burn. > > Removing grapple and not addressing strike: combat ends would be a bad idea. I would prefer to see combat be more varied and with combat ends being weaker or nonexistant I think that would happen. > Yes, I agree with this. Combat ends (and IG) would work different if I would redesign VTES today. "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

Most complaints about IG can be summed up with the following sentence: "I have this cool deck where no one can block me and I can avoid all combat, I'd be unstoppable!! Oh fuck IG." I'm fine with removing cards like IG from the game, if all S:CE cards are removed as well. **edit addendum** Though I expect whines about additional strikes and cancel dodge cards shortly after. -1 Strength

> Wow, friendly crowd. Nearly all non-standard deck concepts are going to be weaker than established decks. There is a reason that these decks are established. Just commenting to point that out doesn't really seem to accomplish anything other than alienating the player who posted. And if you haven't noticed, there aren't many of us left. Let's not drive off the few people who still play VTES. > Let’s read the original post again: > I hate that moment when you create a deck and then are reminded, "oh yeah, still fucked by immortal grapple, Spirit Marionnette + Heidelberg. Nevermind." Here's another deck I won't build > The point of this post wasn’t to learn how to make the deck better. It was to whine about Immortal Grapple and minion stealing. I think the responses the poster got were reasonably friendly and appropriate given the context of the original post. Sure, they were critical. But let’s relax a little with admonishing relatively innocuous posts for alienating people. > I also think that the comment regarding very dominant archetypes is a fair one. To my mind, it's a shame that card like Immortal Grapple shut down deck ideas (oh melee weapons other than WWS, how I miss you). And vampire stealing has no place in our game. Protect Thine Own was also banned because one action shouldn't deprive a player of that much pool along with their ability to act / defend. Vampire stealing is directly analogous. But I suppose I'm wandering off topic now. > Immortal Grapple and minion stealing have been in the game since 1994. V:TES was designed to have trump cards and deck archetypes that tend to fare better than others. It is what it is. I find it funny that V:TES attracts the arm-chair game designer type who wants to “fix” everything. What is the point of playing a game only to complain about its faults? Just go design your own game already.

> TwoRazorReign wrote: > Immortal Grapple and minion stealing have been in the game since 1994. V:TES was designed to have trump cards and deck archetypes that tend to fare better than others. It is what it is. I find it funny that V:TES attracts the arm-chair game designer type who wants to “fix” everything. What is the point of playing a game only to complain about its faults? Just go design your own game already. > At this point, the game has no official designers. I guess Ben Peal and the others should just give up and stop being the armchair admirals that they are. Maybe they should just go design their own game rather than continue to produce card for us to enjoy. Did you ever fault LSJ for continuing a project started by Richard Garfield (and others) rather than making his own game? Also, VTES is 20+ years old. If you gave me a 20 year old computer, would you really expect that I wouldn't suggest changes? Would you really be insulted when I hinted that it could be improved by a new CPU? That's how I view the game - a well built core that has some fantastic and unique ideas, but some rotted branches that may have made sense 20 years ago, but don't (to my mind) anymore. This is particularly germane given the possibility that VTES will be picked up by a publisher or even relaunched. Even if the ideas come to naught, it keeps people thinking about the game, which I consider to be rather important at the moment. So I would personally encourage people to toy with the game mentally as a way to keep invested in the game and to keep their flagging interest in the game alive. Check out my VTES blog: Gaming with BS I also host a google doc which separates the TWDA into clans . That means I track how often clans win, which crypt groups get used, and how many people attend events. You can access all of that info here:

@Tworazor "Immortal Grapple and minion stealing have been in the game since 1994." Yes, and Temptation of Greater Power, one of the original minion stealing cards was just banned. Why? Minion stealing is very swingy and this card was determined to be overpowered. Spirit Mirionnette wouldn't be a problem if Heidelberg didn't exist or was errated to only work on vampires you permanently control. Heck, Spirit Marionnette could just change the stolen minion into the acting minion in that action. However it is done I would like to see something happen. "V:TES was designed to have trump cards and deck archetypes that tend to fare better than others." Rather than chase our tail all day and play rock-scissors-paper with hosers I would like the balance of existing cards be altered. If "combat ends" means "skip to the press step" or "ignore any damage and effects from the opposing minion's strike," then combat gets more interesting with presses, maneuvers, prevent, etc being more useful in general. Combats that involve a lot of back and forth are the most interesting in my experience. Altering Combat Ends and banning IG does not remove archetypes from the game, it only changes how cards work for them. If Ventrue Lawfirm plays Majesty with the proposed change, then unless the opponent presses, uses an additional strike or environmental damage it works the same as before, untap and do some other nasty action. Now the Ventrue lawfirm has more incentive to play presses, prevent, even additional strikes. Immortal Grapple prevents players from doing all of the interesting things that you can do with strikes, which can vary greatly from Crows, Soak, Blur, and Psyche. "It is what it is." I mostly agree. I don't think VTES will see major rules changes. Some future game that may or may not be compatible with VTES might address these problems. VTES is what it is: often disappointing. "I find it funny that V:TES attracts the arm-chair game designer type who wants to “fix” everything. What is the point of playing a game only to complain about its faults? Just go design your own game already." It isn't only VTES that attracts critical attention. VTES is a complex game that has lots of things, many of which could use tweaking. 22 years ago was probably the time to make some changes, it is much harder now. The criticism you seem to be offering it is "if you don't like it shut up or stop playing." That's not constructive. There have been many rules changes over the years and design decisions, all of which have involved seeing the game a little differently. I like the World of Darkness setting and have purchased and enjoyed their computer games, card games and RPGs. I would be interested to see what else people can come up with as far as new games. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

Part of deckbuilding is taking into account metagame. When designing decks deckbuider should think about popular archetypes and cards that he will face and ways of dealing with them. Let's assume there is no IG in the game. There will be some other strong effects that deck needs to deal with. You can't design decks in limbo and then complain about cards, rules, etc. that make it weak. There will be always some constraints you need to adress if you want your deck to be competetive. To not make my whole post philosophical; there is number of good ways to deal with spirit marionnette: intercept, staying tapped or just play secure heaven.

"Part of deckbuilding is taking into account metagame. When designing decks deckbuider should think about popular archetypes and cards that he will face and ways of dealing with them." Ok. "Let's assume there is no IG in the game. There will be some other strong effects that deck needs to deal with. You can't design decks in limbo and then complain about cards, rules, etc. that make it weak. There will be always some constraints you need to adress if you want your deck to be competetive." First of all, yay. Second, did you read what I wrote? "To not make my whole post philosophical; there is number of good ways to deal with spirit marionnette: intercept, staying tapped or just play secure heaven." IG is easier to metagame against than Spirit Marionnette + Heidelberg. At least with IG you are likely to be able to prevent the damage to your minion and may even be able to DI the grapple (hey, I'm hosing a hoser card! woohoo!). The best way to metagame against having your first minion drained before you get a chance to act is probably to play a ton of Suddens and intercept. If I don't have 15-20 card slots (i.e. princes with 12 second traditions, 8 suddens) to dedicate to that or get a bad draw (or my opponent gets a better draw than I do), then my efforts don't matter. I want to meta against IG as well? Ok, do I play Skin of Steel or Superior Mettle? Add 12+ copies of that, maybe a police station. If I have enough superior fortitude I can get by with Rolling with the Punches. Now that 1/3+ of my deck is dedicated to not being hosed, what do I actually want to play? Is this why stickmen do so well? Dominate provides an efficient offence, while a solid 1/3 + of the deck is dedicated to combat and intercept. Don't forget bounce. This meta feels pretty restrictive to me, unless I can get lucky. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

Very strong defense capabilities are for sure part of stickmen success. But there are is a loooot of other decks that do not use that many defensive cards and are equally succesfull. They instead rely on speed, minion advantage, hit back, etc. Also I don't see that much spirit marionette decks on tournament in my area. If it's very often seen during your games just put one more secure haven and 2 pentexes. Those will not only protect you against a lot of other problems but also provide extra offensive capabilities (I mean Pentex). To be honest I always put at least one copy of pentex subversion in every deck.

> alek wrote: > Very strong defense capabilities are for sure part of stickmen success. But there are is a loooot of other decks that do not use that many defensive cards and are equally succesfull. They instead rely on speed, minion advantage, hit back, etc. Also I don't see that much spirit marionette decks on tournament in my area. If it's very often seen during your games just put one more secure haven and 2 pentexes. Those will not only protect you against a lot of other problems but also provide extra offensive capabilities (I mean Pentex). To be honest I always put at least one copy of pentex subversion in every deck. > Agreed about Pentex. I never play Secure Haven, maybe it is time to throw in a copy along with Pentex. A big difference between the two is Pentex's offensive usefulness. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one. -Friedrich Nietzsche brandonsantacruz.blogspot.com/

> brettscho wrote: > Just commenting to point that out doesn't really seem to accomplish anything other than alienating the player who posted. > Try to control how other folks post doesn't accomplish anything w/r/t generating conversation about this deck, either. If you have a problem with someone else's post, the "Report to Moderator" button is right there for you to use. > brettscho wrote: > I also think that the comment regarding very dominant archetypes is a fair one. To my mind, it's a shame that card like Immortal Grapple shut down deck ideas (oh melee weapons other than WWS, how I miss you). And vampire stealing has no place in our game. Protect Thine Own was also banned because one action shouldn't deprive a player of that much pool along with their ability to act / defend. Vampire stealing is directly analogous. But I suppose I'm wandering off topic now. > Not especially. You weren't on topic. FWIW, I'll repost my earlier post with some emphasis added so that it's hopefully made more clear how I was trying to foment conversation about the deck. And maybe that emphasis will even result in a direct response to its points. I don't mean to be rude, and maybe I'm missing something here. But isn't this a star vampire bruise/bleed deck with very little defense? I think that IG and Salubri aren't the only things that are going to ruin its day, so blaming them specifically seems odd.

Responding to brettscho: > At this point, the game has no official designers. I guess Ben Peal and the others should just give up and stop being the armchair admirals that they are. Maybe they should just go design their own game rather than continue to produce card for us to enjoy. Did you ever fault LSJ for continuing a project started by Richard Garfield (and others) rather than making his own game? > No, I’m not faulting any current or past game designers here. I’m faulting you and your insistence that IG and minion stealing are problems that current or future designers must address. > Also, VTES is 20+ years old. If you gave me a 20 year old computer, would you really expect that I wouldn't suggest changes? Would you really be insulted when I hinted that it could be improved by a new CPU? That's how I view the game - a well built core that has some fantastic and unique ideas, but some rotted branches that may have made sense 20 years ago, but don't (to my mind) anymore. This is particularly germane given the possibility that VTES will be picked up by a publisher or even relaunched. > 20-year-old cards (ie, the Jyhad set) make up a large portion of the cards that see play today. In my view, those old cards are the backbone that this game is built on. Your comparison insinuates that the Jyhad set is as obsolete as my dad’s Compaq desktop computer from 1994, which is long gone. I don’t really get your comparison of VTES to obsolete technology. > Even if the ideas come to naught, it keeps people thinking about the game, which I consider to be rather important at the moment. So I would personally encourage people to toy with the game mentally as a way to keep invested in the game and to keep their flagging interest in the game alive. > This is a fine point. I just disagree that trumps (eg, IG and minion stealing) are such huge problems that they need to be removed from the game. I remind you that this is a card game, and it was designed to have trumps. For lots of people, this style of card game is fun. Responding to brandonsantacruz > @Tworazor > "Immortal Grapple and minion stealing have been in the game since 1994." > > Yes, and Temptation of Greater Power, one of the original minion stealing cards was just banned. Why? > Because a current member of the rules team had an issue with this card, so it got banned from tournament play. Seeds of Corruption was banned because a member of the design team had an issue with that card. You can read their opinions in past posts on this forum. > Minion stealing is very swingy and this card was determined to be overpowered. Spirit Mirionnette wouldn't be a problem if Heidelberg didn't exist or was errated to only work on vampires you permanently control. Heck, Spirit Marionnette could just change the stolen minion into the acting minion in that action. However it is done I would like to see something happen. > The Spirit Marionette + Heidelberg combo is not really the scourge you are making it out to be, but I can understand your reasoning why the combo should get some scrutiny. > "V:TES was designed to have trump cards and deck archetypes that tend to fare better than others." > > Rather than chase our tail all day and play rock-scissors-paper with hosers I would like the balance of existing cards be altered. > Then you should play a board game, or a card game without trumps. VTES is a card game that has trumps. Those trumps provide balance. Lots of players don’t have an issue with this "rock-paper-scissors" balance. > If "combat ends" means "skip to the press step" or "ignore any damage and effects from the opposing minion's strike," then combat gets more interesting with presses, maneuvers, prevent, etc being more useful in general. > This would homogenize decks at the tournament level, making all decks devote half their card slots to combat, effectively reducing the number of viable non-combat archetypes and increasing the number of combat archetypes. Your proposed changes are not the panacea you think they are. > Combats that involve a lot of back and forth are the most interesting in my experience. Altering Combat Ends and banning IG does not remove archetypes from the game, it only changes how cards work for them. > IG Potence Rush is just one major archetype that would be removed under your proposed change. So it definitely would remove viable archetypes at the tournament level. As for Ventrue Lawfirm: > If Ventrue Lawfirm plays Majesty with the proposed change, then unless the opponent presses, uses an additional strike or environmental damage it works the same as before, untap and do some other nasty action. Now the Ventrue lawfirm has more incentive to play presses, prevent, even additional strikes. Immortal Grapple prevents players from doing all of the interesting things that you can do with strikes, which can vary greatly from Crows, Soak, Blur, and Psyche. > The Ventrue Lawfirm archetype would disappear as we know it at the tournament level because the 12 card slots devoted to S:CE would now be 12 card slots devoted to ineffective-against-presses S:CE. The card ratios in that archetype would shift toward an increase in combat cards, thus rendering the archetype in its current form ineffective. > "It is what it is." > > I mostly agree. I don't think VTES will see major rules changes. Some future game that may or may not be compatible with VTES might address these problems. VTES is what it is: often disappointing. > And yet you keep playing. And whining. Why? > "I find it funny that V:TES attracts the arm-chair game designer type who wants to “fix” everything. What is the point of playing a game only to complain about its faults? Just go design your own game already." > > It isn't only VTES that attracts critical attention. VTES is a complex game that has lots of things, many of which could use tweaking. 22 years ago was probably the time to make some changes, it is much harder now. The criticism you seem to be offering it is "if you don't like it shut up or stop playing." That's not constructive. There have been many rules changes over the years and design decisions, all of which have involved seeing the game a little differently. > You get the gist of what I am saying, yes. Another way of saying it is: “If you don’t like the trumps this game was designed to have, then stop whining about it and play another game.” Whining about how combat works in VTES is not constructive in my opinion. > I like the World of Darkness setting and have purchased and enjoyed their computer games, card games and RPGs. I would be interested to see what else people can come up with as far as new games. > You just said the card game is “often disappointing.” It doesn’t seem like you enjoy the card game a whole lot.

> TwoRazorReign wrote: > Stuff > Well, thank you for your thoughts. Sorry we don't agree. I would ask that you don't insinuate or outright tell people that they'd be better off leaving the game. We have few enough players as is. Of course, this is merely a request, do with it as you will. Thanks. Check out my VTES blog: Gaming with BS I also host a google doc which separates the TWDA into clans . That means I track how often clans win, which crypt groups get used, and how many people attend events. You can access all of that info here:

Whining about what's "wrong" with a CCG is almost as old as the CCG. Thing about CCGs is that their audiences, even when small, can be quite diverse when it comes to player interests. Now, not every CCG has an audience like Magic, where diversity of interests may be greater and the types of players in the smaller groups are still relatively large groups, but there is no one way to play a CCG, and broadening appeal can be through providing different card effects for different players. Preventing someone from playing the game - SensDep, swarm rush, winnie bleed or vote that is too fast to respond to, immediate removal (e.g. Chameleon), etc. - is something some people enjoy and others aren't bothered by. The difficult thing is where to make the game more fun for more players while also allowing for minority interests. Magic made counterspells less powerful, made creatures better, and other changes to try to push what was more fun to people and deemphasize what most players found less fun. I do take issue with the idea that anything printed is sacred. It's not a bad thing that cards from Jyhad are playable, of course. But, I find that often there's a mentality with niche CCGs that a game is bound by what it has already printed. To an extent, because you want to retain players, there must have been something about what was already printed that was worthwhile. On the other hand, what do we actually know about what interests new players, what makes existing players happy, and what drives away players? WotC has the resources to poll players and the Magic playerbase is large enough that one can look for polls on favorite and least favorite cards, mechanics, colors, sets, whatever. I was looking, actually, at people's opinions on best/worst mechanics in Magic not that long ago. What would be interesting and maybe even valuable is to find out what mechanics (cards, sets, deck archetypes, clans, disciplines, etc.) are actually people's most favorite and least favorite, so that the game can adapt to what is more fun and leave fewer options that tend to be less effective to minority interests. Some players don't care about these things, having the mentality along the lines of "Whatever is available is what I try to build the best deck out of." or whatever and may feel that removing something is "dumbing down the game", but you can't avoid criticism. As it's rather ambitious to try to find out for all of those things at once, can maybe start with something not too complicated, like favorite sets and least favorite sets. This is not the thread for that, but anyone want to start those two polls (given the forum limitations that you probably can't include every set)? Brett, if I don't blog about my list for some of these things when my trip is over, remind me that it's good fodder for a number of blog posts. I have talked about sets I've liked and haven't liked with people, but I know I haven't gone to the point of really thinking about every single set in comparison to each other at one time nor have I blogged much about this sort of thing (you would think I would have). Traveller Card Game

> ICL wrote: > Brett, if I don't blog about my list for some of these things when my trip is over, remind me that it's good fodder for a number of blog posts. I have talked about sets I've liked and haven't liked with people, but I know I haven't gone to the point of really thinking about every single set in comparison to each other at one time nor have I blogged much about this sort of thing (you would think I would have). > Can do - I'd very much enjoy reading about your thoughts on individual sets. I really liked your post which discussed the 10th anniversary article by LSJ regarding the best and most overlooked cards from each set, and what cards you'd pick (I usually agreed with you, but both of us have a lot more hindsight than LSJ did when the article was written). Others should check out that article here. Hope you'll be around next weekend, I'm itching to play again! Check out my VTES blog: Gaming with BS I also host a google doc which separates the TWDA into clans . That means I track how often clans win, which crypt groups get used, and how many people attend events. You can access all of that info here:

> brettscho wrote: > > > TwoRazorReign wrote: > > Stuff > > > Well, thank you for your thoughts. Sorry we don't agree. > > I would ask that you don't insinuate or outright tell people that they'd be better off leaving the game. We have few enough players as is. Of course, this is merely a request, do with it as you will. Thanks. > I was merely wondering why someone continues to play a game they don't seem to enjoy playing. I just find it odd is all. I enjoy reading your blog and everything, but can you try to be a little more open to the thoughts and ideas of others you don't agree with and have a discussion? If you find what other people are posting is simply too preposterous to discuss, then just don't reply. Telling people what and what not to post on this forum is not a good look for you. Frankly, it's controlling and weird.

Tried to ignore it, but this comparison annoys the crap out of me. > brettscho wrote: > Also, VTES is 20+ years old. If you gave me a 20 year old computer, would you really expect that I wouldn't suggest changes? > Classic apple/orange comparison... Perhaps you should compare it to another strategy table top game, lets say mmh, I don't know, Chess? I'm pretty sure people have been pretty miffed with the weird funky moves a Knight can make over the last few hundred years... As for the computer comparison, I totally agree, the cards should've been made of a biodegradable sustainable plastic thats slightly sanded for good grip by now! Yarrr! Thats it, carry on with everyones favourite whine debate Who knows, it might sprout some fruit, wether it be apples or oranges. -1 Strength

> What would be interesting and maybe even valuable is to find out what mechanics (cards, sets, deck archetypes, clans, disciplines, etc.) are actually people's most favorite and least favorite, so that the game can adapt to what is more fun and leave fewer options that tend to be less effective to minority interests. Some players don't care about these things, having the mentality along the lines of "Whatever is available is what I try to build the best deck out of." or whatever and may feel that removing something is "dumbing down the game", but you can't avoid criticism. > I'm not sure who exactly you are responding to in this thread, but you seem to be very knowledgeable about CCGs and the players who play them. The first post in this thread was someone posting a deck and whining how it's not competitive because the game is flawed. This person was criticizing the game in a petulant way, and then went on to claim that the game is disappointing. I'm really interested in finding out why a person plays a game they clearly don't enjoy. This psychology seems to be prevalent among VTES players. Are people just hate-playing a flawed game? If their suggested "fixes" get implemented, will they even still play, or would they no longer play because they'll have nothing to complain about? Is this psychology common among other CCGs, or is it just VTES? I'm not joking when I ask these questions, I really do find this topic fascinating.

It is common among other CCGs. I used to complain a lot about the CCGs I played, hoping for some sort of idealized version that would optimize my fun. But, I don't know if what I wanted to happen would actually make them the way I wanted, even if certain, specific changes seemed to have a high probability of making CCGs less unfun. I may still do some complaining, but I don't feel like I have any control over what a game will be like given that I didn't have a huge impact on changing games I was playtesting or, even, designing for. Part of this lack of control is too many other voices that want something different. Part of it is inertia - once you print something, people tend to think of it as part of the game, which is something I was addressing. Some card games can rotate out or reset the card pool, but I'm not necessarily a fan of the former and the latter sounds rather annoying. I also have less reason to complain about with V:TES and the other CCG I currently play. The latter because I don't have the history with the game and the investment in how it evolved over time. With V:TES, I'm a bit late to the party for a veteran, starting only in 1996, but I still quite enjoy playing the game, even if there are lots of cards I dislike seeing played. Plenty of people bitch and moan but like playing a game, which is the camp I'd put myself. What concerns me is when local players bitch and moan and truly seem to not enjoy the game often enough to not want to keep playing. It's hard enough keeping a group playing when people prioritize other aspects of life, but, when they actually dislike playing, then they really shouldn't be. I only held on to playing one CCG I found to be unpleasant to play because I don't tend to stop doing things I do, well, and for a time I was designing for the game. I would not have posted the original post in this thread because it's not really about building a deck, so it confuses the point trying to be made. Well, that, and I'm perfectly happy to build Assamites with ... Vicissitude, Abombwe, Spiritus ... because deckbuilding can get very stale if only ever worrying about what's best, especially with a game like this that sees relatively little shake up with the card pool, even when WW was printing sets. Traveller Card Game

> ICL wrote: > With V:TES, I'm a bit late to the party for a veteran, starting only in 1996, > LOL With '96 I'd certainly consider you a grognard... Finnish Politics!