Often when we play in our playgroup we discuss cards that are to strong or to week.
I'm guessing we are not alone but would people want changes to the old cards even if some got weaker?
A few on my mind is Parity shift, its brokenly good and way to easy to cheese in with giving away a couple of pool. But if you didn't have the option to give other players pool I think it would be a more balanced card.
Voter cap, removing the x factor and change it to a fix number so you cant villain, zillas + cap every turn. I think this would speed up tables that have more then one player that have votes. No need to change votes to make sure the acting vamp doesn't voter cap too much etc.
Public valification, the idea of the card is good and cool but with the younger requirement its totally unplayable. I missed the play testing of the card so maybe there's a good explanation why it has it.
Changes to vekn produced cards shouldn't be a problem right? Why we cant make erratas is because there has to be a printed version of the "correct" wording.
So what do you think? Is it a good or just bad idea to go and try to fix old/new cards?
National Coordinator of Sweden
I think that with current card pool it will be impossible for a game to return to print - too many cards.
As it is understood by now in the industry no more than 1500 is acceptable.
So, I'd we are going to see such big changes, then errata of some cards will be totally fine.
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
> I think that with current card pool it will be impossible for a game to return to print - too many cards.
>
> As it is understood by now in the industry no more than 1500 is acceptable.
>
Why is the amount of cards a problem for the game to be printed again?
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
> Ashur wrote:
> Why is the amount of cards a problem for the game to be printed again?
>
www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/11/5/a-new-stage-of-growth/'
In general it just cost too much for everybody involved to maintain production capacity, stocks and channels of introducing new players to the game.
NC Russia
I think it isn't difficult to pick 1000 usable cards from the current card pool that require no or little errata and constitute a solid card base.
Old cards such as Shackles of Enkidu wouldn't need to be reprinted at all.
Cards that shape the current game such as Parity Shift, Villein etc. could be left aside or not, depending on the design team vision. But in any case, either it would be reprinted as is, or another card should be designed to replace it (so no major errata): reprinting the same card with a major errata brings only confusion to the game.
Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
> elotar wrote:
>
> > Ashur wrote:
> > Why is the amount of cards a problem for the game to be printed again?
> >
> www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/11/5/a-new-stage-of-growth/'
>
> In general it just cost too much for everybody involved to maintain production capacity, stocks and channels of introducing new players to the game.
>
I agree with Ankha. And also, as FFG say, you can always solve this by using formats and rotation. The grouping of crypt cards in VTES is already such a thing.
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
> Ashur wrote:
> The grouping of crypt cards in VTES is already such a thing.
>
No. The only problem, which is solved by grouping, is limit of power level. But it's the least important one - retailers still need to have in stock all groups, all groups still need to be in print, players still need to have knowledge and means to have all groups to be in the game.
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
>
> > Ashur wrote:
> > Why is the amount of cards a problem for the game to be printed again?
> >
> www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/11/5/a-new-stage-of-growth/'
>
> In general it just cost too much for everybody involved to maintain production capacity, stocks and channels of introducing new players to the game.
>
There is no need to reprint cards that do not need to be reprinted.
But reducing/banning cards just in order to weed out available cardpool would be pretty darn silly and would lessen the deckbuilding choices. PLENTY of 2nd hand wallpaper is to be found for years and years to come for even the newbies who have yet to play their first VTES game.
If you have a problem with your gamegroup with too many cards being available then I dare suggest you make a local ruling of allowed cards and you guys play with those cards.
Others will probably be semi-interested to hear what happened after a year or so.
No need to cut other people's deckbuilding choices so you can achieve the situation desired by you/your playgroup.
Finnish Politics!
> Lönkka wrote:
> If you have a problem with your gamegroup
>
I'm telling, that no sane company will publish the game with more than 1500 cards and you are answering with some musings about my playgroup.
NC Russia
But... they don't need to reprint all the cards. And they don't need to ban the cards they won't reprint.
New base set 400/500 cards with a mix of old and new card, that's all, followed by small extension, just like when WW published the game.
Maxime Socroun, 3200321
> elotar wrote:
> So, I'd we are going to see such big changes, then errata of some cards will be totally fine.
>
Ah, neglected to touch this before, Pascal and Vincent have already done the giganormous thing and gone through all the cards and worked on the wordings so they are clearer than before and also use the same template when handling a certain similar type of thing.
So these are just waiting for the green light for the reprint to be used.
Finnish Politics!
> Ezra wrote:
> But... they don't need to reprint all the cards. And they don't need to ban the cards they won't reprint.
> New base set 400/500 cards with a mix of old and new card, that's all, followed by small extension, just like when WW published the game.
>
When WW published the game tabletop market as well as position of WW on it was completely different than of today.
Do you know how much it costs to produce and market "base set of 400/500 cards" even without all this crappy problems with the IP ownership?
Do you know how it will sell?
I know, actually - it will not sell. And not only me, but all other parties, which was involved in negotiation process for the last several years know it too. Why? Because we still got base one of the sets at stock after 10 years after the release date!
VtES was discontinued two times not because it was making too much money
NC Russia
> Lönkka wrote:
> What Ezra said (and what I've been trying to tell you all along. I think...)
>
www.vekn.net/forum/card-balance-strategy-discussion/75387-if-the-game-would-go-into-print-should-there-be-changes-to-old-cards/79319
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
> Do you know how it will sell?
>
> I know, actually - it will not sell. And not only me, but all other parties, which was involved in negotiation process for the last several years know it too. Why? Because we still got base one of the sets at stock after 10 years after the release date!
>
And how many places are selling that set, hmmm?
How many other places have been selling that set, say, for several past years?
You actually know how much of the product was bought and stocked by that company?
(HINT: I know because I bloody well ordered the darn cards for that company!)
Finnish Politics!
> Lönkka wrote:
>
> > elotar wrote:
> > Do you know how it will sell?
> >
> > I know, actually - it will not sell. And not only me, but all other parties, which was involved in negotiation process for the last several years know it too. Why? Because we still got base one of the sets at stock after 10 years after the release date!
> >
> And how many places are selling that set, hmmm?
> How many other places have been selling that set, say, for several past years?
>
> You actually know how much of the product was bought and stocked by that company?
> (HINT: I know because I bloody well ordered the darn cards for that company!)
>
For the several years after the release of third edition it was in stock everywhere. And as a product (excerpt epic fail with backs) it was quite well received.
But nobody bought it.
Obviously it was discontinued by most sellers, exceptionally when even WW lose hope in their product.
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
> VtES was discontinued two times not because it was making too much money
>
WW acted like they f''kin hated their own IP:s those years. First Gehenna, then switching from oWoD to nWoD and all that crap. Totally brainfarts. Who could expect VTES to function when WW left oWoD? At least KoT and HttB sold great from what I´ve heard, in spite of WW:s strange treatment of the IP.
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
> elotar wrote:
> But nobody bought it.
>
> Obviously it was discontinued by most sellers, exceptionally when even WW lose hope in their product.
>
Riiiight!
And you know all this because?
I don't know much about the print runs and such but I'm under the impression that it was SIZEABLE.
I know the numbers we in Finland have been buying and selling it and the numbers don't support your claim.
Ashur said elsewhere:
>
> Ashur wrote:
> [quote="elotar" post=79323I have no idea what you´re after really, except whining.
>
I totally agree. So from now on I've more or less will ignore you even if you currently seem to be the most prolific poster around here. Unfortunately since most of the posts are just whining I see little reason in participating in your one man show. All the best, mate!
Finnish Politics!
> Lönkka wrote:
> I know the numbers we in Finland have been buying and selling it and the numbers don't support your claim.
>
Show me the numbers, than. From your "trio" I haven't heard anything, exept anecdotes and insults, and you wonder, why I'm not paying enough respect to you replies?
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
> Show me the numbers, than. From your "trio" I haven't heard anything, exept anecdotes and insults, and you wonder, why I'm not paying enough respect to you replies?
>
Do you actually think a game store owner in Finland would show you his owns, his countrys or White Wolfs sale numbers?!
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
> Ashur wrote:
> Do you actually think a game store owner in Finland would show you his owns, his countrys or White Wolfs sale numbers?!
>
We he can't show me 10 year old numbers?
NC Russia
realistically, the only numbers that matter for sales are white wolf's wholesale numbers. One store, one distributor, or even a nation's sales of a certain product might not reflect sales as a whole. Or it might; I'm just speculating here.
Elotar, I get that english isn't your first language and that you've got a lot of passion for the game. It's cool. However, your assertions are all over the place and you also appear to spend a lot of time arguing from your conclusion.
I have more, but typing with my thumbs before work isn't the best way to get my point across.
> self wrote:
> One store, one distributor, or even a nation's sales of a certain product might not reflect sales as a whole.
>
Sales numbers as an argument was proposed by Janne. I just asked for the numbers themselves, not the cool story about them. Why are you telling me this?
> self wrote:
> ...your assertions are all over the place...
>
An it goes on - I've presented no assertions in any of this threads. It's quite the opposite - i'm presenting tournament data, statistics of this forum and other places, established cases from the industry ets. and my opponents are making unfounded assertions and are throwing insults.
I'm not holding grudges - obviously it's my bad english I have to blame that I can't get my point across.
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
> We he can't show me 10 year old numbers?
>
No, why should he have to? You can´t trust him enough on his word? And White Wolfs numbers I´m not sure anyone can give us, unless like someone who worked there at the time has them. Again, why is this important? White Wolf didn´t "lose hope of the product" because of low sales. Don´t you remember what happened? Gehenna, nWoD, no MMORP and so on? Do you want me to explain the history of (old) White Wolfs last years?
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
> Ashur wrote:
> No, why should he have to?
>
Because if you are telling something you have to be ready to back it up, if you'll be asked. Why this concept is so hard for you to grasp?
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
>
> > Ashur wrote:
> > No, why should he have to?
> >
> Because if you are telling something you have to be ready to back it up, if you'll be asked. Why this concept is so hard for you to grasp?
>
So he should show you his company's financial figures purely for your personal edification? That's fucking stupid.
> Ashur wrote:
> And White Wolfs numbers I´m not sure anyone can give us, unless like someone who worked there at the time has them. Again, why is this important? White Wolf didn´t "lose hope of the product" because of low sales. Don´t you remember what happened? Gehenna, nWoD, no MMORP and so on? Do you want me to explain the history of (old) White Wolfs last years?
>
V:TES was profitable for White Wolf. It wasn't profitable on the scale of, say, V:tM, Werewolf, or Mage, but it was profitable. The only reason why it was discontinued was because CCP wanted to get completely out of the pen and paper business, including the distribution and fulfillment storage and logistics involved. A very serious effort was made by a third party to get the V:TES licenses when CCP made this decision (a couple years prior to the Design Team forming) , but that didn't work out.
> elotar wrote:
>
> > Ashur wrote:
> > Why is the amount of cards a problem for the game to be printed again?
> >
> www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/11/5/a-new-stage-of-growth/'
>
> In general it just cost too much for everybody involved to maintain production capacity, stocks and channels of introducing new players to the game.
>
White Wolf was also concerned about this with respect to V:TES. However, with modern production options, such as print-on-demand, the burden on retailers to maintain high stock levels is much less of an issue. When the Design Team was working with OneBookShelf (DriveThruCards.com) on V:TES proposals, the model included "core" products for retailers (boxed sets of preconstructed starter decks), with add-ons and reprints available via print-on-demand.
> Kimpan wrote:
> So what do you think? Is it a good or just bad idea to go and try to fix old/new cards?
>
I've been outspoken in my view that there are a lot of old and weak cards that can use some updating and overhauling. The ideas behind the cards are fine (Form of the Serpent, for example), but the cards fail in execution. Might as well re-use that design space and improve it. This was done in Camarilla Edition, and it should be done again.
> BenPeal wrote:
> So he should show you his company's financial figures purely for your personal edification?
>
Holy crap "financial figures"! Sales of discontinued game 10 years ago! What's a problem with you, guys?
At our warhammer forum our distributor regularly discusses present sales of different factions, products and his strategy, and, as I understand, it even helps him in business!
NC Russia
> BenPeal wrote:
> V:TES was profitable for White Wolf. It wasn't profitable on the scale of, say, V:tM, Werewolf, or Mage, but it was profitable. The only reason why it was discontinued was because CCP wanted to get completely out of the pen and paper business, including the distribution and fulfillment storage and logistics involved.
>
Nobody ever drops profitable business. Usually it just means that there are hidden costs, that was finally calculated.
How it was for VtES we will never know, especially if nobody in the know will be sharing any factual information .
NC Russia
> BenPeal wrote:
> However, with modern production options, such as print-on-demand, the burden on retailers to maintain high stock levels is much less of an issue. When the Design Team was working with OneBookShelf (DriveThruCards.com) on V:TES proposals, the model included "core" products for retailers (boxed sets of preconstructed starter decks), with add-ons and reprints available via print-on-demand.
>
Interesting idea about combination of core products and print-on-demand.
The only concern I have - I don't know any card game, which is distributed this way. Am I missing something?
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
>
> > BenPeal wrote:
> > So he should show you his company's financial figures purely for your personal edification?
> >
> Holy crap "financial figures"! Sales of discontinued game 10 years ago! What's a problem with you, guys?
>
> At our warhammer forum our distributor regularly discusses present sales of different factions, products and his strategy, and, as I understand, it even helps him in business!
>
So if you'd like to continue this conversation, please send us your tax records from 10 years ago.
> elotar wrote:
>
> > BenPeal wrote:
> > V:TES was profitable for White Wolf. It wasn't profitable on the scale of, say, V:tM, Werewolf, or Mage, but it was profitable. The only reason why it was discontinued was because CCP wanted to get completely out of the pen and paper business, including the distribution and fulfillment storage and logistics involved.
> >
> Nobody ever drops profitable business. Usually it just means that there are hidden costs, that was finally calculated.
>
Try googling "selling a profitable business". There are many valid reasons why this would be done.
> How it was for VtES we will never know, especially if nobody in the know will be sharing any factual information .
>
My information comes from face-to-face conversations with Steve Wieck (original co-founder of White Wolf), Chad Brown (international sales manager for White Wolf), and Oscar Garza (project manager for V:TES at White Wolf).
It also comes from working directly with Steve Wieck (now owner of OneBookShelf) on trying to get the rights to publish V:TES again. Why would he do that if it wouldn't be profitable for him?
> elotar wrote:
>
> > BenPeal wrote:
> > However, with modern production options, such as print-on-demand, the burden on retailers to maintain high stock levels is much less of an issue. When the Design Team was working with OneBookShelf (DriveThruCards.com) on V:TES proposals, the model included "core" products for retailers (boxed sets of preconstructed starter decks), with add-ons and reprints available via print-on-demand.
> >
> Interesting idea about combination of core products and print-on-demand.
> The only concern I have - I don't know any card game, which is distributed this way. Am I missing something?
>
It's a relatively new development in the industry, but the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game is one example:
www.drivethrucards.com/browse/pub/5549/Paizo
> BenPeal wrote:
>
> > elotar wrote:
> >
> > > BenPeal wrote:
> > > So he should show you his company's financial figures purely for your personal edification?
> > >
> > >
> > Holy crap "financial figures"! Sales of discontinued game 10 years ago! What's a problem with you, guys?
> >
> > At our warhammer forum our distributor regularly discusses present sales of different factions, products and his strategy, and, as I understand, it even helps him in business!
> >
> So if you'd like to continue this conversation, please send us your tax records from 10 years ago.
>
I'm from Russia. I'm not paying any taxes. obviously
NC Russia
> BenPeal wrote:
>
> It's a relatively new development in the industry, but the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game is one example:
>
> www.drivethrucards.com/browse/pub/5549/Paizo
>
Cool. So they are managing to be profitable at $0,35 for a card? Will this prices be achievable for VtES?
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
>
> Nobody ever drops profitable business.
>
your company has three different business A, B and C
ROI of A: 5%
ROI of B: 25%
ROI of C: 50%
if you drop A to dedicate more effort on C it will be a valid example of dropping a profitable business.
And as Ben said there are lots of different reason for dropping profitable business
> acbishop wrote:
> if you drop A to dedicate more effort on C it will be a valid example of dropping a profitable business.
>
It will be a valid example of you not calculating ROI right, if you got some limited "effort" resource.
Ben is confusing "selling" and "dropping" a business. There is a small difference
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
>
> > acbishop wrote:
> > if you drop A to dedicate more effort on C it will be a valid example of dropping a profitable business.
> >
> It will be a valid example of you not calculating ROI right, if you got some limited "effort" resource.
>
> Ben is confusing "selling" and "dropping" a business. There is a small difference
>
Usually, unless you are Galileo, when everyone does not agree with you it's the other ones that are right and you are wrong.
Just saying.
> cordovader wrote:
>
> Usually, unless you are Galileo, when everyone does not agree with you it's the other ones that are right and you are wrong.
>
> Just saying.
>
"Millions flies can't be wrong?"
NC Russia
> elotar wrote:
>
> > BenPeal wrote:
> >
> > It's a relatively new development in the industry, but the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game is one example:
> >
> > www.drivethrucards.com/browse/pub/5549/Paizo
> >
> Cool. So they are managing to be profitable at $0,35 for a card? Will this prices be achievable for VtES?
>
To the best of my knowledge, it's profitable.
As for V:TES, we were targeting a lower price point per card, but you'd have to buy 100 cards at a time. For example, upload an ARDB file for a 100-card deck and get it printed and sent for a flat fee.
> elotar wrote:
> Ben is confusing "selling" and "dropping" a business. There is a small difference
>
Not really. CCP thought they were better off reallocating their pen and paper resources towards making white elephant video games. They also didn'the have the vision to see the shift in the RPG industry towards pdfs and print-on-demand. Sometimes the reason is that the company is dumb.
And again, Steve knew how profitable V:TES was for him and put in a very serious effort to try to do it again. And remember that CCP dropped the RPGS, too, and Onyx Path picked them up and has done well with them.
> BenPeal wrote:
> Sometimes the reason is that the company is dumb.
>
This works as an explanation, I think.
And am I right, that by now Wieck don't want to get into PoD of VtES to not worsen relations with WotC/Hasbro?
NC Russia
> BenPeal wrote:
>
> > elotar wrote:
> >
> > > BenPeal wrote:
> > >
> > > It's a relatively new development in the industry, but the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game is one example:
> > >
> > > www.drivethrucards.com/browse/pub/5549/Paizo
> > >
> > >
> > Cool. So they are managing to be profitable at $0,35 for a card? Will this prices be achievable for VtES?
> >
> To the best of my knowledge, it's profitable.
>
> As for V:TES, we were targeting a lower price point per card, but you'd have to buy 100 cards at a time. For example, upload an ARDB file for a 100-card deck and get it printed and sent for a flat fee.
>
35$ por a deck seems pretty reasonable to, given that most players with big collections can build tons of decks out of 100 cards.
Old cards will just have a collectors value.
> cordovader wrote:
>
> > elotar wrote:
> >
> > > acbishop wrote:
> > > if you drop A to dedicate more effort on C it will be a valid example of dropping a profitable business.
> > >
> > >
> > It will be a valid example of you not calculating ROI right, if you got some limited "effort" resource.
> >
> > Ben is confusing "selling" and "dropping" a business. There is a small difference
> >
> Usually, unless you are Galileo, when everyone does not agree with you it's the other ones that are right and you are wrong.
>
> Just saying.
>
Pentex Board of Directors
Prince of Oye Plage
Alastor Grand Nord
> elotar wrote:
> www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2014/11/5/a-new-stage-of-growth/'
>
> In general it just cost too much for everybody involved to maintain production capacity, stocks and channels of introducing new players to the game.
>
I take issue with that article. It is written to support FFGs position and eventual decision on 5 different LCGs they print. VTES is not an LCG and need not compete against other card games by its eventual producer.
Also, from the article;
> •An overwhelming card pool intimidates and turns away players who may otherwise be interested in the game.
>
This is presented as fact without any proof. A large cardpool wouldn't bother me, why would it bother anyone? Lots of cards to buy? woohoo! I can if I choose buy starters supported by singles to play a few dedicated decks if I don't want a large collection/buy in cost? Woohoo! No one loses here.
> •As a game's card pool grows unchecked, its metagame begins to stagnate, and the game falls apart under its own weight.
>
Again, where is the proof? Sure its hard to beat the old staples sometimes because that way lies powercreep, but so what? New cards mean new possibilities!
> •Players aren’t the only people who are impacted by large card pools, and as retailers need to carry more and more products in order to support a game, it becomes harder for them to do so.
>
Also indefensible imo. If you told a retailer that you had more product to sell, would this really be a problem? Once an expansion goes out of print, you don't stock it. And those cards find themselves back in print via reprints. Was anyone really after shackles of enkidu after it was out of print? Some collectos perhaps, but little else.
Their solution of rotation makes me wary, as this is one of the staples WOTC uses for their cashcow, MTG. It is profit driven imo, and not realy a 'solution' to the presented problem, which already has problems of its on as pointed out above.
So yeah, lets just get this game back in print. We need not worry about all of the cards, but a few changes as we go to some of the old bad ones I wouldn't mind, or we just drop them.