Contents and card changes in 25th Anniversary revealed

This you will need to read: www.blackchantry.com/2019/06/04/contents-and-card-changes-in-25th-anniversary-revealed/ "My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."

just: What is happening? Archbishop of Itaocara Prince ID #510

What the new card do?

At least the Minion with pentex cant try to remove the pentex and instead of cant bloco, cant block or react? Whats the last time a freak drive abuser won a tournment? Why dont just make Freak drive burn blood or cost X where X is how many times this minion uses it this turn? Why change ankara and affect ALL action modifiers breaking a LOT of strategies that dont have ANYTHING related to freak? Why dont you release more cards that stops mult acting abuse instead of unleash colateral damage changing strategies that make a couple of decks viable? Archbishop of Itaocara Prince ID #510

Congrats on giving up to some complaints and crippling a card that is overrated. What's the point of allowing the minion with the pentex to remove it by himself? What's the need in Balance parity shift? It's like conservative agitation: a little strong in the beggining and very weak at late game. Why change ankara's affecting lot's of other decks that dont use freak drive? You guys are doing a marvelous job by giving a new life to our game, but, in the process you're crippling lots of cards that will change the gameplay for worst.

Great move Vincent & the Rules Team!!! It was time to nerf those cards !! Pentex Board of Directors Prince of Oye Plage Alastor Grand Nord

I love how the announcement refers to the "can't act" portion of a card, but the card actually says "cannot take actions." Typical VTES inconsistency. Glad that hasn't changed after 25 years!

> thiago_sousa wrote: > Congrats on giving up to some complaints and crippling a card that is overrated. What's the point of allowing the minion with the pentex to remove it by himself? > What's the need in Balance parity shift? It's like conservative agitation: a little strong in the beggining and very weak at late game. > Why change ankara's affecting lot's of other decks that dont use freak drive? > > You guys are doing a marvelous job by giving a new life to our game, but, in the process you're crippling lots of cards that will change the gameplay for worst. > In what way do you see this as detrimental? Be specific.

I don't know if this is the correct place to complain about the changes. But here I go: First, I consider Pentex to be a more nasty card when used as a finisher (can't block), than in early/mid game to cripple a vampire from taking action. Because the later can be dealt with as it provides time to the target metuselah or others to remove it. But, whatever, at least it is a change in the right direction. Now, the real issue here, is crippling Una and Ankara, when the real culprit is Freak Drive. I understand the reasoning behind not wanting to make Freak Drive a once per turn card, because there are decks that make moderate use of it that don't warrant such punishment. Since the target of this change is Turbo decks which abuse the card, the obvious changes to Freak Drive could be one of the following: - Instead of cost, the vampire burns one blood to untap - Increase the cost of each subsequent Freak Drive played by the same vampire during the turn by 1. (This is my prefered alternative, since I think reflects better the fantasy of the card). I really do hope that the developers take this words to heart, becasue right now they are killing a lot of decks (or making them barely playable) that rarely use freak drive. Best regards.

> Viper wrote: > Since the target of this change is Turbo decks which abuse the card, the obvious changes to Freak Drive could be one of the following: > > - Instead of cost, the vampire burns one blood to untap > I don’t mind the nerfs as they are, but... This would be a really elegant fix indeed! Emiliano "Sans Terre" - Wandering Player - Prince of Brussels

R U KIDDIN' ME?

> Vlad wrote: > Great move Vincent & the Rules Team!!! > It was time to nerf those cards !! > Credit goes to BCP and the playtesters in fact. Prince of Paris, France Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director

Fantastic changes, and long overdue! Pentex remains a powerful oust card, but no longer stops someone from having a game. Parity Shift remains very powerful, but is no longer totally overpowered as compared to other votes. Instead of nerfing Freak Drive (which, as noted, would have negatively affected a lot of "good" decks), they hit the couple of broken deck types which are bad for the game (no, sitting and watching someone take a 30+ minute Una turn is not fun or something the game needs). And note that Ankara Citadel and Una still remain good cards, still very useful in many contexts. Black Metamorphosis gets +1 stealth: yeah, very minor, but nice and makes sense. This of course begs the question: shouldn't Shadow of the Beast get this too?

Could be interesting to have a polling system about this new card change, and see again the data in a year or so when the cards will be played for real Lurking in the underground of Bologna, Italy

why should they be kidding? i hope they are not! +1 stealth on black metamorphosis is a cool thing to have

Pentex - this card was changed from deck type killer to a "seduction" type of card. It's still good and will see play. In my opinion good change parity - This is a interesting one. In my opinion it got nerfed and boosted in the same time. Now its much more reliably in late game but it's crippled at the beginning. I think decks that were based on it will change,, as an overall political action it will be played as an addition to KRC. In my opinion an interesting change not sure if good or bad, time will tell. Freak Drive , Una and Ankara - to be honest i don't care about this. But this nerf affects cards that play good with Freak Drive not the card itself(and its the reason this deck exist). Because of this we are in situation when the fire is taken out but the arsonist is still out there. In my opinion its only a matter of time and next decks like this will appear.

With this kind of nerf to Pentex, should have also reduced it's cost down to 1 pool. Also to clarify on shift, does that mean it now ALWAYS transfers 3 pool? Or does it still go down when there is only 2 players left in the game.

> PetriWessman wrote: > Pentex remains a powerful oust card, but no longer stops someone from having a game. > My main concern about the change is, that when a one-star show has non-interactive decks as its prey and predator, the other 2 guys are pretty much screwed. They can't really interact with the vampire while it's weak, and when they finally can, it will usually be too late and the vampire in question will be bloated out of proportion, with no realistic chances of stopping it. I'm yet to see someone get their star vampire pentexed early/mid game to the point, where they stop having a game. Usually there's someone at the table who benefits from said vampire being able to do stuff and just helps with destroying the pentex. However I've seen many games, where a star vampire got out of hand thanks to favorable table position and a well aimed pentex in the late game was the only thing that prevented the deck from sweeping the table. As it stands, especially since a vampire can now destroy its own pentex, it got downgraded to an oust card very similar to Anarch Troublemaker.

> Sambomb wrote: > Why change ankara and affect ALL action modifiers breaking a LOT of strategies that dont have ANYTHING related to freak? > OK, let's list what IS "a lot" please. I chose to show EVERY action modifier costing blood on secret library and after that I looked for every card in the last extension which is IIRC the only one not implemented in secret library. And I present to you all the ones easily playable by tremere, mata hari, trujah and even gwyedd. Tremere Conditioning (OK for this one) Empowering the puppet King (I imagine a tremere deck with a LOT of EtPK will be dead now) Hall of Hades court at (really ??) Lose cannon at (not a strategy...) Perfect Clarity (OK for this one but it goes with conditioning) Serenading the Kami (why not in a rush combat tremere deck) Sleeping mind (Could be played with the Conditioning/Perfect Clarity strategy so why not) Mata Hari : Blood Brother Ambush (meh...) Day op (come on...) Elder Imp and forgotten lab (OK for these ones) False resonance and fata morgana (I can see something here) Freak Drive (yes it is here) The Grandest Trick (no idea with this one) Igoli's Loyality () Kindred Manipulation (could be great is Mata Hari was not capa 7) Kiss of Ra (you will lose 2 bloods per use) Mantle of the moon (maybe...) Old friends (beurk...) Red Herring (why not 1 or 2 copies) Sleep Unseen (great Idea for Mata Hari) Strange Day (I like this one) Uncontroled Impulse (OK OK) Walk through Arcadia (...) Zapaderin (could be fun) Trujah : Aire of Elation (OK) Approximation of loyalty (why not) Every stealth cards for Nehemiah (why not) Force of personality (it can be played) Hall of Hades Court (great Idea) Quicksilver contemplation at (OK OK) Tangle Atropo's Hand (good card) Gwyedd : Earth control, Mind tricks, Rapid Change (yes) Horrific countenance (here we speak !) Touch of clarity (the famous Gwyedd power bleed !) Now let's look at what we have and tell me exactly which of those strategies are "broken" ? I see embrace / empowering the puppet king as dead now (was it a strategy ???) Power bleed tremere will not play AC anymore but I don't think it will be broken (Well a lot of these decks never played it in the first place...) Mata Hari will need to play less blood costing stealth cards ! (Oh wait, she has ...) Nehemiah will need to change and I guess we can say this strategy IS broken So I see 2 strategies being broken (but I personally NEVER see any of these 2 decks I describe) and 1 being mildly annoyed. I will wait for you to point to me all those strategies being broken by this change to AC. And honestly, even bad strategies ! I know the game is not only TWD...

> Ankha wrote: > > > Vlad wrote: > > Great move Vincent & the Rules Team!!! > > It was time to nerf those cards !! > > > Credit goes to BCP and the playtesters in fact. > For once, I'm going to give you guys a big thumbs up! Smoking craters tell no tales. —Tex talks Battletech

Ah, the most poetic thing is all this random people that never made it to a final table saying how “good” this changes are. You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex.

> cordovader wrote: > Ah, the most poetic thing is all this random people that never made it to a final table saying how “good” this changes are. > > You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex. > Wow Jorge ! That's great reading from you : So people who don't play finals have nothing to say about the game ?!? That's very rude and elitist... Btw : sex isn't all about penis & penetration... If you think so I pity you buddy Pentex Board of Directors Prince of Oye Plage Alastor Grand Nord

> Vlad wrote: > > > cordovader wrote: > > Ah, the most poetic thing is all this random people that never made it to a final table saying how “good” this changes are. > > > > You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex. > > > Wow Jorge ! > That's great reading from you : So people who don't play finals have nothing to say about the game ?!? > > That's very rude and elitist... > > Btw : sex isn't all about penis & penetration... If you think so I pity you buddy > They can say what they want, but it’s absurd to take into consideration for competitive play the opinions of people that are not into competitive play. I don’t know, maybe doing a poll on competitive players that don’t have the time to playtest wouldn’t have been a bad idea. PS : ok I will change my phrase to “like eunuchs talking about penetration”, if it pleases the Scottish Vice-Champion of an 8-player tournament.

LOL Jorge... So it's down to a dick size competition... That's so sad... You should really take a deep breath buddy !!! Pentex Board of Directors Prince of Oye Plage Alastor Grand Nord

Yeah, there is something "poetic" in the idea that someone should listen to a Random Guy Who Likes Old Pentex instead of 100+ playtesters & the whole current design team. And decades of player feedback & discussion. Or was the word "idiotic"? Or "arrogant"? Whatever. You don't like this change? Fair enough. But stop being a dick about it and insulting other players.

> Vlad wrote: > That's great reading from you : So people who don't play finals have nothing to say about the game ?!? > > That's very rude and elitist... > Kind of like changing decades-old card text to serve the interests of tournament players? Lost in all this is casual players now have to play with these changes if they want to buy new cards. That's the difference between banning and changing card text. In my opinion, these changes were really not needed from a casual standpoint. Yes, I understand casual players can just play the cards as they were printed previously, but, if doing that, it would be nice to buy new cards without any changes. All this said, I cannot comment on how this affects tournament-level VTES. Maybe it will make for a better game, casual or competitive. Here's hoping these changes do that. Was anybody around for the changes to Fifth Tradition? It seems like the changes to Pentex and Parity Shift are comparable (people can let me know if I'm mistaken). I wonder how the Fifth Tradition change affected the game and the opinions people have on that.

> PetriWessman wrote: > Yeah, there is something "poetic" in the idea that someone should listen to a Random Guy Who Likes Old Pentex instead of 100+ playtesters & the whole current design team. And decades of player feedback & discussion. > > Or was the word "idiotic"? Or "arrogant"? Whatever. > > You don't like this change? Fair enough. But stop being a dick about it and insulting other players. > I didn’t insult anyone, if you felt insulted that’s maybe your problem. Arrogant is almost a compliment for me, so thank you. You seem a better person than player anyway.

somehow the feeling I get is very similar to the one on election day. yay for Trump (for those that dont know me - just sssslightly sssarcastic)

In general, it's a mistake to think the game should (only) cater for some small group of tournament winners. Black Chantry (and playtesters) make changes based on what's good for the overall health of the game, which includes the general game experience, and includes both tournament play and casual play. This means that cards and decks which promote a bad play experience -- in the form of "often cannot get to play at all", like Una & Pentex -- are problems for the game, and must be dealt with. And it's not all about just tournaments, a *vast* majority of games played are casual games. Where everyone is trying their best to win, of course. In general, one could argue that casual games are perhaps *more* important to the general health of the game, tournaments are a side attraction. On to the actual changes: Pentex is now an oust card (like Anarch Troublemaker), and not a one-stop solution to everything or a defense card. It's probably annoying to have to *think* about what to include now, instead of just auto-including 1-2 Pentex, but that's life. I expect to see less Pentex in tournaments (and casual) from now on, but I would be extremely surprised if I didn't see it at all. It's still a great finisher. As for Parity Shift, everyone knows it was too powerful. Full stop. Now it's a lot more balanced (though still by far the best vote in the game); less powerful in beginning, more powerful in the last 1-on-1 portion. I'd still include lots of it in titled Cam vote decks, nothing much changes there. And Una? That's not something people focused on tournament wins should care about in the first place; Una Twister decks don't win reliably, what they do reliably do is kill everyone else's game and bypass basic game interaction. Good riddance. Sure, there are other degenerate decks like that out there (which the Ankara change didn't kill), but like BC said in the article, they're keeping an eye on the developing meta. I like the fact that BC avoided touching FD itself, I think that was a good call. It's not the end of the world, even if one disagrees with the changes, and the actually good players will quickly adapt. The ones who now suddenly can't win without old-style Pentex or Parity Shift, well maybe they weren't actually all that good in the first place. We'll see.

> PetriWessman wrote: > Black Metamorphosis gets +1 stealth: yeah, very minor, but nice and makes sense. This of course begs the question: shouldn't Shadow of the Beast get this too? > Very minor tweak. Don't know how muych this was needed as Obtenebration does have (good) access to stealth. I think that, for example, Rampage would've been a far better candidate to fix. It is one of the few discipline based cards featuring only the inferior version (Army of Rats also springs to mind but that card actually is just fine as it sees frequent use) and is only just barely marginally better than Arson which has zero requirements (replace immediately and get +1 stealth if it is your _own_ location... *roll eyes* ) And it is not like Potence is ANY way close to being as good a discipline as Obtenebration. So Potence would most definitely need all the love it can get. And hugs. With Potence you gotta have hugs! +1 stealth to Rampage AND superior version which would probably work best, also thematically, if it was a rush. So here is my idea: Rampage +1 stealth (pot) Burn any location. (POT) Enter combat with a ready minion controlled by another Methuselah. An alternative would be to have bleed for superior effect but I think thematically the rush would be far better suited for Rampage. HULK SMASH! (Lastly, kinda true about Shadow of the Beast but Protean actually has even better stealth package than Obtenebration is there hardly is need for SoB to have inbuilt stealth. Although I'm not advocating against it as SoB doesn't see play. At all. In light of that I'd be inclined to remove the one blood cost from it too. Or at least since that is probably the bigger reason it doesn't see play...) Finnish Politics!

> PetriWessman wrote: > In general, it's a mistake to think the game should (only) cater for some small group of tournament winners. Black Chantry (and playtesters) make changes based on what's good for the overall health of the game, which includes the general game experience, and includes both tournament play and casual play. > > This means that cards and decks which promote a bad play experience -- in the form of "often cannot get to play at all", like Una & Pentex -- are problems for the game, and must be dealt with. And it's not all about just tournaments, a *vast* majority of games played are casual games. Where everyone is trying their best to win, of course. In general, one could argue that casual games are perhaps *more* important to the general health of the game, tournaments are a side attraction. > > On to the actual changes: > > Pentex is now an oust card (like Anarch Troublemaker), and not a one-stop solution to everything or a defense card. It's probably annoying to have to *think* about what to include now, instead of just auto-including 1-2 Pentex, but that's life. I expect to see less Pentex in tournaments (and casual) from now on, but I would be extremely surprised if I didn't see it at all. It's still a great finisher. > > As for Parity Shift, everyone knows it was too powerful. Full stop. Now it's a lot more balanced (though still by far the best vote in the game); less powerful in beginning, more powerful in the last 1-on-1 portion. I'd still include lots of it in titled Cam vote decks, nothing much changes there. > > And Una? That's not something people focused on tournament wins should care about in the first place; Una Twister decks don't win reliably, what they do reliably do is kill everyone else's game and bypass basic game interaction. Good riddance. Sure, there are other degenerate decks like that out there (which the Ankara change didn't kill), but like BC said in the article, they're keeping an eye on the developing meta. I like the fact that BC avoided touching FD itself, I think that was a good call. > > It's not the end of the world, even if one disagrees with the changes, and the actually good players will quickly adapt. The ones who now suddenly can't win without old-style Pentex or Parity Shift, well maybe they weren't actually all that good in the first place. We'll see. > I am globally in line with what you say except on 1 point : "Black Chantry (and playtesters) make changes based on what [they see as] good for the overall health of the game," It is a possibility that BCP AND the playtesters are wrong... But yes, "we'll see"

> PetriWessman wrote: > ... > It's not the end of the world, even if one disagrees with the changes, and the actually good players will quickly adapt. The ones who now suddenly can't win without old-style Pentex or Parity Shift, well maybe they weren't actually all that good in the first place. We'll see. > I really hope the rule changes will become effective right before the EC. Then we might get the first "big data" about the effect of the changes. B) National Coordinator Germany nc [dot] germany [at] magenta [dot] de

All changes long time called for. Some nitpicks: Ankara Citadel "not action modifiers" feels kinda unnatural. Instead of +1 stealth for BM it should be better to make all undirected action default +1 stealth in the rulebook. NC Russia

> PetriWessman wrote: > In general, it's a mistake to think the game should (only) cater for some small group of tournament winners. Black Chantry (and playtesters) make changes based on what's good for the overall health of the game, which includes the general game experience, and includes both tournament play and casual play. > I think the mistake is conflating a tournament-level meta with a casual one, like you are doing. The changes were clearly made in reaction to a tournament level meta, where "deck archetypes that have exploited multi-acting to the point of abuse" are apparently a problem. This has zero relation to a casual meta where players either don't play those decks because of personal preference (in the case of experienced players), or may not know these decks can even exist (in the case of inexperienced players). Pentex or Parity Shift were never a problem in these play environments. By changing card text, you are also affecting those casual environments for better or worse. Please note I definitely understand the changes could be for better in these environments as well, my point is the changes were not really necessary for casual environments.

The problem is that in VTES we don’t have enough data to make statistics relevant, like in other card games. And the fact that we’re talking about a multiplayer game adds some difficulty, since seating and deck combinations are endless. So seeing a lot or few decks of a given archetype is not that relevant to judge if they are too or little powerful (unless it’s systematic, which is not the case in VTES). In VTES when you see the same deck entering the finals it’s usually the same player : - Martin Weinmayer with Stanislava - Alain Greiner with Nephandi - etc.

Well, dunno. I see a lot of Pentex and Parity Shifts even in my casual games, and these changes should also reflect there in (what I see as) better games. But yeah, these changes are not *necessary* in casual, that is true. But removing some "kill all fun" scenarios (like getting star Pentexed as is comes out, or sitting in table with Una or related deck) from casual games also is a win in my book. Worst case, that's someone's first game experience.

> Timo wrote: > I am globally in line with what you say except on 1 point : > > "Black Chantry (and playtesters) make changes based on what [they see as] good for the overall health of the game," > > It is a possibility that BCP AND the playtesters are wrong... But yes, "we'll see" > Oh, I agree. Nothing says BCP and the playtesters are correct in all cases, or in this one. But I still trust their consensus on what cards are actual problems and potential solutions to those that are over some singular VTES player (no matter how tournament-experienced). Because it's still 100+ people and their very educated opinions + playtest + internal discussion vs one person's current opinion (without any playtest of changes). Not to mention a decade plus of discussions about these cards. The fact that I agree with their solutions here is a nice plus for me, of course. I like the fact that no cards are being banned, and every single card still remains very playable, even at tournament level. I'll still keep using Pentex, though only in strongly forward-going decks now I suspect. I'll still keep including Parity Shifts in Camarilla titled voters (still an awesome card) I'll still consider Una in some decks (still a great vampire: great disciplines + title + now occasionally possibly useful special) I'll still use Ankara in lots of Tremere decks, still a fantastic card for reducing action (or combat card) cost.

> cordovader wrote: > Ah, the most poetic thing is all this random people that never made it to a final table saying how “good” this changes are. > > You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex. > And the d-bag award goes to... I came here to feast on nerd tears and this has exceeded my most optimist projections.

People are raging for no reason. They don't want to understand the concept of unbalanced cards are unjust and unfun, and worse, that they are opressive. They don't want to understand the concept of diversity or balance at all. They grew accustumed to take out a player entirely of the game with just one card (pentex), and keep thinking this is "normal" and "fair". You can always use sudden reversal, contest pentex or build better decks, no? Black Chantry is doing an amazing job in balancing the game and listening to player concerns. Thank you very much for those erratas and your good work. Also, anxious for more errata on abusive and ridiculous overpowered strategies, like turbo multiaction (possession or Call the great beast), reversal of fortunes decks and finally first tradition decks. I am death. Paul Kersey, Death Wish

> Mewcat wrote: > > > cordovader wrote: > > Ah, the most poetic thing is all this random people that never made it to a final table saying how “good” this changes are. > > > > You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex. > > > And the d-bag award goes to... > > I came here to feast on nerd tears and this has exceeded my most optimist projections. > Came for the Euro tears, stayed for the Mewcat trolling. I wonder how many of the "learn to play" euro crowd are threatening to sell their collections.

Strong emotions and opinions are expected. However, we have had enough of projection on persons for now. Continue with the topic of card changes and the Anniversary box contents. And mind your language while you're at it. This is a friendly reminder at this point. "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

> DJHedgehog wrote: > > > Mewcat wrote: > > > > > cordovader wrote: > > > Ah, the most poetic thing is all this random people that never made it to a final table saying how “good” this changes are. > > > > > > You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex. > > > > > > > > And the d-bag award goes to... > > > > I came here to feast on nerd tears and this has exceeded my most optimist projections. > > > Came for the Euro tears, stayed for the Mewcat trolling. > > I wonder how many of the "learn to play" euro crowd are threatening to sell their collections. > If you think I am ranting that means you don't know me at all. This just reminds me a lot about WoW, where the same people that never managed to go up in the rankings were always crying about this or that and they still never managed to do so. It's just so funny to see people asking for nerfs of stuff like: - Call the Great Beast - First Tradition - Reversal of Fortunes Yeah they really are a game issue this cards, like Seeds of Corruption. PS : thanks for the award btw, I really appreciate it.

I think are better ways to fix it, not that they dont need changes. Specially Ankara and Una. Freak drive burns blood would be much more ellegant solution. Parity is Ok And I still think that Pentex could have a bunch of other possible fixes Archbishop of Itaocara Prince ID #510

> Sambomb wrote: > I think are better ways to fix it, not that they dont need changes. > Specially Ankara and Una. > Freak drive burns blood would be much more ellegant solution. > Parity is Ok > And I still think that Pentex could have a bunch of other possible fixes > I don't necessarily think freak drive was handled the way I would have wanted, but I think it's fine. It leaves the most popular card intact and eliminates the negative interactions that made it a problem. I have no doubt they explored a lot of options and this felt the most "natural". Pentex-wise, this is the best solution of all the ones I've seen discussed, other than an outright ban. If you compare it to Misdirection (a card that sees play despite being far worse than un-nerfed pentex), Pentex still has a function and is worth 2 pool for aggressive decks worried about an all-star blocker. It is no longer an auto include and that makes me happier than anything else.

Real talk: I saw 8 pages of replies and assumed they un-banned PTO or something.... Glad una sucks(more) now. I will no longer be tempted to use her to play reaction cards. Pentex backwards just became a much clearer message to your predator. Citadel is still very strong. P-shift..... yea, that's probably fair. plus votes is still stronger than anything else voting. Baby steps. BM, sounds legit. But I've got much more important questions: When do I get to see the new Freak Drive art And What's the box made out of?

> DJHedgehog wrote: > Came for the Euro tears, stayed for the Mewcat trolling. > > I wonder how many of the "learn to play" euro crowd are threatening to sell their collections. > apparently, many of them "Don't do business with Americans." when presented with a sincere offer to take their cards off their hands.

I'm more interested about the implications of errata'ing cards going forward. This is an interesting time for table-top gaming / collectible card gaming. Never before has their been a game, to my knowledge, that had so many different editions, different graphic layouts, and such a history of being errata'ed. So I wonder... what happens to a physical game when it starts receiving errata the same way digital games receive patches and updates. And what is the effect of proxies being acceptable, and BC working with multiple print-on-demand, crowdfunding, and localized producers and distributors on all of this? I wonder what Elotar thinks... 25th Anniversary Edition has some nice cards... Instantaneous Transformation, Freak Drive, and Forced March? Cool with me. BTW, when are Govern, Conditioning, and Deflection getting errata'ed? Gangrel. Noddist. Camarilla. Once each turn, LivesByProxy may burn 1 blood to lose Protean until the end of the turn and gain your choice of superior Auspex , Obfuscate , or Potence for the current action.

I'm really annoyed by some of these changes. (BTW, I'm a very old casual gamer.) (1) I think that, most of the times, Nerfs happen in any type of games (card games, MMOs and other computer games, board games, even in TTRPG) to reduce the power of the strong cards/abilities/classes etc. By the way, I do understand that there are instances of "problem" decks that are not powerful. But "problematic", "annoying" etc. are very subjective terms. (2) So, the most successful Gangrel deck is a stealth-vote/bleed deck that uses Dominate? That makes me a little sad. I don't hate or think <Stanislava> is a problem. But, how many <Stanislava> decks are in TWD? How about <Una> decks? (3) Specific cards <Pentex Subversion> I do agree that this cards should be Nerfed. But the new card does almost nothing *against* <Stanislava>, for instance. How about: (a) The minion with this card cannot block actions and cannot take actions *except to burn this card*. (b) The minion with this card must burn additional 2 blood each time he or she attempts to take an action or block. (Pentex SubversionIs cost should be reduced.) (Or maybe, the controller must burn 2 pool?) <Una> <Ankara Citadel> If they have to be Nerfed, make them "once (or 2 or 3 times)" per turn. <Parity Shift> <Black Metamorphosis> I'm happy with these changes.

Oh, I forgot. <Una> <Ankara Citadel> First of all, I think BCP should have changed <Freak Drive>. I think <Freak Drive> is too powerful (even without <Una> <Ankara Citadel>). I think they should be "Once per turn" or "Cost 2 blood".

Infinite hunts really overtunes freak drive. Do we need hunt to be repeatable? Prolly not.

> Mewcat wrote: > Infinite hunts really overtunes freak drive. Do we need hunt to be repeatable? Prolly not. > Rabbat+Aaron's feeding razor+Freak Drive is the easiest way to abuse that. But I'm not sure it's broken enough to nerf hunt. I don't get the euro-hate. I do not think Cordovader said anything about where people come from.

> jonathan wrote: > > > Mewcat wrote: > > Infinite hunts really overtunes freak drive. Do we need hunt to be repeatable? Prolly not. > > > Rabbat+Aaron's feeding razor+Freak Drive is the easiest way to abuse that. > > But I'm not sure it's broken enough to nerf hunt. > > I don't get the euro-hate. I do not think Cordovader said anything about where people come from. > I wonder why the whole world likes the US so much.

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > What's the box made out of? > It's made out of the crystalized tears of players who just recently spent lots of money on copies of Pentex of eBay.

> cordovader wrote: > > > jonathan wrote: > > > > > Mewcat wrote: > > > Infinite hunts really overtunes freak drive. Do we need hunt to be repeatable? Prolly not. > > > > > > > > Rabbat+Aaron's feeding razor+Freak Drive is the easiest way to abuse that. > > > > But I'm not sure it's broken enough to nerf hunt. > > > > I don't get the euro-hate. I do not think Cordovader said anything about where people come from. > > > I wonder why the whole world likes the US so much. > I'm pretty sure the answer is: 1. Mc Donald's 2. Jack Black Or maybe it's the other way around.

> ReverendRevolver wrote: > What's the box made out of? > Petri kinda already answered this with his stellar reply, but joking aside I think it'll be cardboard. Probably thicker stuff than your "normal" starter/bundle boxes but still cardboard. Certainly not metal like the previous 10th Anniversary Sets. Finnish Politics!

Seems to be thicker cardboard. But the packaging is still gorgeous. I will buy the product just for the box.

> Lönkka wrote: > > > ReverendRevolver wrote: > > What's the box made out of? > > > Petri kinda already answered this with his stellar reply, but joking aside I think it'll be cardboard. Probably thicker stuff than your "normal" starter/bundle boxes but still cardboard. > > Certainly not metal like the previous 10th Anniversary Sets. > Ah Petri, trying to mock people with 1 tournament win since 2004. 8)

> Lönkka wrote: > > Very minor tweak. Don't know how muych this was needed as Obtenebration does have (good) access to stealth. > But for a LaSombra deck that focuses on combat instead of stealth this is a nice change. It may allow you to get through the action you are relying on for the deck to function while your hand is full of combat cards. Compare to preternatural strength which is +2 stealth action, > cordovader wrote: > Or was the word "idiotic"? Or "arrogant"? Whatever. > > You remind me of eunuchs talking about sex. > > You seem a better person than player anyway. > > cordovader wrote: > Ah Petri, trying to mock people with 1 tournament win since 2004. 8) > And you're certainly not insulting anybody, oh no. Smoking craters tell no tales. —Tex talks Battletech

Pentex changed; good. parity shift changed; anh.....not so sure, a good card just became average. other changes; meh However, Ankara Citadel/Freak Drive. If reduced cost of freak drive is the problem (and I agree, having the entire table put their hands down for 20 minutes while the una deck plays with itself), then correct that problem and that alone. I have a number of decks that focus on getting mileage out of Ankara, perfect clarity and horrific countenance for instance. Also good ole kiss of ra. Even will o wisp. Did these really have to be nerfed?? Assuming this is an unintended effect, then the erratta to Ankara is bad. Simple solution would be (since we are adding text to existing cards) making freak drive state "the cost of this card cannot be reduced". Or make the untap a burn blood effect. Done. Pissed that my tremere trick decks just got shafted.

> cordovader wrote: > Ah Petri, trying to mock people with 1 tournament win since 2004. 8) > Oh, I would mock deserving people even if I had zero tournament wins ever, don't worry. I have, however, been playing this game more or less nonstop since it was called Jyhad, and running big tournaments as head judge since pretty much forever, so you might want to seriously dial down the douchebag tone if you want people to actually listen to (as opposed to: laugh at) you. Right now, I'm not impressed. You're a very good tournament player. Good for you (honestly). But that counts for zip here, in this discussion, if you are unable to behave & discuss like a civilized adult. And no, "that's just the way I am" is not a valid excuse. An admin already warned people about stupid ad hominem stuff, and you keep on with it? Really? Stick to commenting on the card/rule changes themselves, assuming you have anything constructive to say there. So far I haven't seen any (complaining about people liking the changes does not count).

> talonz wrote: > Simple solution would be (since we are adding text to existing cards) making freak drive state "the cost of this card cannot be reduced". Or make the untap a burn blood effect. Done. > > Pissed that my tremere trick decks just got shafted. > That's a valid point, I'd say. Not sure why it wasn't done that way, maybe there were other considerations? One of them might have been reluctance to touch Freak Drive in any way, since it's such a staple in a huge number of decks. Dunno. I sort of like that idea of having the untap effect burn blood, on a quick think it should solve the issue. But maybe there's something we're missing here?

> PetriWessman wrote: > since it's such a staple in a huge number of decks. Dunno. > And Parity Shift isn't ? Confused beginner here ...

> Rynkle wrote: > > > PetriWessman wrote: > > since it's such a staple in a huge number of decks. Dunno. > > > And Parity Shift isn't ? > > Confused beginner here ... > Well, not quite in the same way Parity Shift is a staple of titled (and almost always big-cap) Camarilla decks, but it's limited to those. That's a relatively small subset of decks in general though, even if a bit over-represented in TWDA (because Parity Shift is just so good). Freak Drive fits in pretty much any deck with access to Fortitude, which is a much bigger spread. So I can understand BCP reluctance to touch it (as they stated, in the announcement article). But as noted, maybe a "burn blood to untap" (instead of cost) would have been a valid way of solving this, instead of tweaking Una & Ankara? I suspect that was considered (BCP + playtesters are a very experienced & smart group of people), but rejected for some reason. Hard to say without more info.

> jonathan wrote: > > > Mewcat wrote: > > Infinite hunts really overtunes freak drive. Do we need hunt to be repeatable? Prolly not. > > > Rabbat+Aaron's feeding razor+Freak Drive is the easiest way to abuse that. > > But I'm not sure it's broken enough to nerf hunt. > > I don't get the euro-hate. I do not think Cordovader said anything about where people come from. > You are missing the point. Decks abusing freak drive play many freak drive, say 30 to 50. Most cards incentivize you to play reasonable ratios or suffer. Since you can, with high reliability, hunt freak drive cycle you dont get punished for playing so many. Remove infinite hunt and now choking on freak drive is real. What purpose does repeat hunt serve exactly? As far as euro hate concept I think it it a response to how entrenched some of the old blood seems to be. Dont put it in a response to me cuz I didn't say anything about it.

Personally, this change will likely make me put more parity shifts in the appropriate decks, because previously there was the problem that after you play one, you likely have considerably more pool than your prey and it is tricky to burn through it to play another unless your lucky enough that your predator is heavy bleed deck. Like most of my cam vote decks had about 4 shifts, and even then I had to usually discard half of them due to having too much pool. But, now when it is only 3 pool swing, it is much easier to dump your pool to be able to play many shifts.

> Klaital wrote: > Personally, this change will likely make me put more parity shifts in the appropriate decks, because previously there was the problem that after you play one, you likely have considerably more pool than your prey and it is tricky to burn through it to play another unless your lucky enough that your predator is heavy bleed deck. Like most of my cam vote decks had about 4 shifts, and even then I had to usually discard half of them due to having too much pool. But, now when it is only 3 pool swing, it is much easier to dump your pool to be able to play many shifts. > That's sort of what I'm thinking, too. Also, even though it's a minor thing, the fact that PS now swings the full 3 pool even when it's 1-on-1 may make it more useful in the end duel, especially against an aggressive opponent who is doing a lot of pool damage to you. We'll see, the proof is in the actual play. . Still a very powerful card in any case, arguably still the best vote card in the game.

A warning will now take place: further posts that take things to another person or group will be moderated. It is understandable that reactions are hot tempered. Nevertheless, if you have any doubts your post would offend a person, show restraint and reconsider your post. Moderation trusts forum users have this ability and will use it. Discussion on the cards and changes will of course be more than welcome as normal. If you are unsure about how to manage your posting, please refer to the forum guidlines: www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines "Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!" -Nalia De-Arnise garourimgazette.wordpress.com/ www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

I have mixed feelings toward the changes... but at least the design group decided not to ban any card. Pentex: Yes it is a strong card and probably the most contested card in the game... now it will remain in tap n'bleed and some other decks but the "you won't kill me next turn because your star is now pentexed and I have some intercept effect" is gone. I don't really like the change. Una - you could leave action cards as well... Parity shift is now a new card... not as good in the beginning... better in the endgame. Ankara citadel and Black metamorphosis - reasonable change. I will respect the decisions of the design team. I understand the work and effort and you can't please everyone.

Maybe the following is part of the message, BCP is sending out: You have proven that some cards and deck types are STRONG in the past years, again and again. Now we modify a few of these cards, which will probably force you to rethink their usability and the decks relying on them. Build new decks, create a new meta. (And instead of banning specific cards and bring out totally new cards, we give you the opportunity to keep and play with your old cards [as long as you are able to remind their new wording].) If so, I am fine with this. Even though, it will be hard to play with cards not showing the latest text. National Coordinator Germany nc [dot] germany [at] magenta [dot] de

So, was thinking about the new Pentex on the way back home from work. It's certainly the most controversial of the changes, and also the one that most requires some player rethink. Up to now, it's been an auto-include in forward-going decks (especially tap+bleed) and wall decks, and in decks which feature superstar vamps (in order to contest it, if nothing else). It's also been a very good general master to plop into pretty much any deck, as long as there is room in the master slot (very much like Dreams in that regard). Now that is partly out the window, partly not. Pentex lost almost all of the defensive aspect, but the offensive/denial part is still there. So right now, what I'm thinking is: Decks where I'll still auto-include Pentex: aggressive forward-going decks, especially tap+bleed. Superstar wall decks (to contest if needed, mainly). Nothing has changed there. Decks where I am likely to still include Pentex: decks which have a lot of undirected actions and limited amounts of stealth, especially if the local meta features a lot of superstar wall decks (Goratrix etc). Decks where I'm now unlikely to include Pentex (where I often would have before): grinders, toolbox decks in general, non-superstar wall decks (not 100% sure on this though), rush combat decks, superstar decks where previously I was worried about that hostile Pentex So for some deck types nothing changes, for others a lot. Especially for superstar decks in general, you no longer need to include multiple Pentex + Sudden/Wash just because you're worried about that hostile Pentex. That frees up a lot of master slots for something else. Of course, you now need to think of some other answers besides "hope me or someone else has a Pentex" to the problem of ending up next to a superstar rush deck, like Enkidu. Those kinds of decks arguably now got a small bit more powerful, one less thing for them to worry about -- but hey, it's hard to actually win with that sort of deck, so I don't see that as a bad thing. In general, one thing to keep in mind is that this affects everyone. While you can no longer totally shut down someone's vampire with that Pentex, neither can it be done to you. Opportunities. ...and of course, if you do choose to include Pentex, it's less likely to get contested now Thoughts? Other guesses about how Pentex change will affect metagame?

> PetriWessman wrote: > > Thoughts? Other guesses about how Pentex change will affect metagame? > Pentex now only stops blocking and it really only good to deal with a minion with static intercept so only makes sense in aggressive bleed decks but you would play less of them since that is all it does. You don't immediately toss out decks that don't bounce and don't make stealth with small minion numbers so maybe a few of those will show up. I don't really see any massive shift taking place, just less pentex and more decent game play.

I'm generally fine with the changes made in this erreta pass, but I feel there is some room for improvement. Parity shift for 5 + Lutz burn 1 have scored me lots of VPs and there is no doubt in my mind that it was THE strongest vote card in a vacuum. In this example that's a swing of 11 pool! Giving it a fixed 3 is a fine change. It does feel more in line with other options now. I hope to see more new vote cards printed soon though. The options for main vote win conditions is still going to be Parity shift and KRC. An original sabbat vote win con maybe? Pentex have been a little too universal and the source of a lot of feel bad moments in gameplay. However I felt that it had its place in the game stopping certain strategies. Leading us into the freak drive discussion. I feel that nerfing other cards becouse of freak drive being abused is a design mistake. Why not simply change freak drive to "burn 1 blood" instead of a cost. Or maybe add a line that says "the cost of this card can not be reduced below 1". Feels like a much more elegant solution. It does not cause collateral damage to unintended cards / strategies. Keep up the good work with bringing our favorite game back in print! Edit: forgot to mention the black metamorphosis change. I think this was a good idea. Hopefully this will lead to some interesting lasombra combat decks popping up. Looking at preternatural strength and heroic for comparison, it might even have been safe to give it 2 stealth. Would need to playtest that a bit though.

All of the changes were good, but i disagree the most with the Black Metamorphosis, it should have +2 stealth baseline, because it should be hard to block it due to not needing any social integration. Long story short: Pentex, good, now works as block denial,not total shutdown. Still good in certain archetypes, but no longer must have in all. Parity Shift, good, now it's more in-line with other political actions and perhaps there will be more non-cam political decks. Still super strong. Freak Drive, good, that was degenerate. But it's least impactful change. Sabbat.Black Hand Shakar: Lech loathe ranged weapons. Once each action, he may burn 1 blood to become Camarilla Prince of Krakow until the end of the action.

I won't say my "2 cents" because it feels more like 2 "handfuls of cents" in this case. I hope I don't bore anyone. On a general basis. If you asked me about changing what some cards that have been in the game since almost the vey beginning do, I would say no. If nothing else just for keeping the spirit of those cards. That said all the latest changes seem to be the result of a thoughtful work, definitively not the first answer to a problem. Something I would have been grateful for would have been a bit of open development in this matter. While Paradox needs the existance of a company such as Black Chantry Productions to be able to talk about VtES, I want to think BCP is still related to (if not part of) the VEKN which is a player organization since its birth. So, it should involve the player base as much as possible. I have personally met some of you and think of you more as players stepping up for the game's sake than as businessman in a company. I don't know how long has this process taken. But writing some posts in this very forum during its different steps open to player feedback would have been great. Things in the line of "After discussing internally the situation of these cards, we've reached the conclussion that something must be done. Any feedback would be appreciated but keep in mind that while we will listen to your opinion, we won't necessarily follow what you propose." or "We plan on playtesting these changes. If you feel you can offer a better solution, feel free to contribute knowing your idea has probably already been taken into account and discarded.". I want to think that the whole VtES community is able to reach better solutions to matters regarding the game than just a part of it. No matter how experienced and knowable of the game that part is. Let's focus on every single card now. Pentex Subversion (main dish first without foreplay) Let's be honest, if this would have been the only chage made, the shitstorm here and on facebook would have been the same as it is now. And it is no surprise. Search for all the 2 pool masters in the game using the searching engine of your choice. Out of the 81 existing ones, Pentex Subversion is the best, way ahead of the second. To the point some people advise to put between 1 and 3 in every deck and it's not a bad advice. It also affects deck building in other ways... a lot of big capacity vampires are discarded regardless of the lore behind them or their abilities when creating a new deck just for the existance of this card. But none of this is new to the vast majority of you. I recall people complaining about this card back in early 2000s if not before. I even remember Similing Tom joking about americans calling it "European Stealth" (it seems back then it was not played as much in the States). I also think none of the stated above is the reason for the cardtext change. About 3 years ago a friend of mine went to Ginés' Conclave (I was unable to go due to working during weekends). When asked about how it went, he said: "Well... I planned on trying my new Mistress Falchon deck but she has been pentexed just after leaving the uncontrolled region in each of the 3 rounds, so I was unable to play any game. To make things worse some people offered me a casual game, in which I was also pentexed. What a waste of a Sunday". To him I said: "Man up! This is part of the game. Improve your social skills and don't give up so easily just because things don't come easy". But I couldn't deny the fact those were indeed bad gaming experiences for him. And you all will probably have some similar experiences to tell. And I haven't talked yet about newcomers playing it with no reason just because they have it in their hands (remember that 1 to 3 advice above?). Specially for new players or people that can't play as often as some of us do this is not right. Giving up a weekend day with your loved ones for nothing doesn't feel right. This is something I would change Pentex for... Regarding the change itself. As I said before I feel there has been some work (plenty of back and forth) behind it. It keeps its use as an ousting tool while not being so prone to produce those bad gaming experiences I was mentioning. And still an interesting card between those 81 2 pool masters. I'm not sure which alternative I would have offered if asked beforehand about the matter. Probably increasing the cost by one pool without any changes to the card text (which probably would have led to the same sitation as no making any change at all). Parity Shift (I hope you are hungry for more) To me, it makes sense the more restrictions a card has to be played the better it should be. Compare Computer Hacking to Entrancement or Scouting Mission (at this point I'm afraid to mention another Dominate bleed action card just to not add more fuel to the bonfire). Wake with Evening Freshness against Eyes of Argus or Black Sunrise. And so on... We will probably agree Kindred Resources Contested is the "standar" political action. Let's compare Parity Shift both with it and other commonly played political cards, In its best case playing scenario, it deals an additional point of damage than KRC while not having to split its damage (focusing it in your current target) and giving the pool equivalent of an ancient influence controlling a 10 capacity vampire to one player (which can be yourself) or an Consaguineous Boon controlling 5 vampires of a nonavailable for other players clan. The famous 10 pool swing. In its worse, you still deal 2 damage to your prey while gaining 2 pool (still a better net exchange than 3 to your prey at the cost of one damage to yourself). All this requiring an easy to meet pool threshold (don't forget pool is the most easily spent currency in game) and playing with a Camarilla Prince (a fairly common title) or a Justicar. If you compare this to the examples above, you will see there is a noticeable difference between the power level of PS regarding KRC than between any other more restrictive card against its "base" card. It's no surprise that talking about political decks in this game almost everytime means talking about Camarilla political decks. I think in this case it's not a matter of avoiding bad gaming experiences than a design problem. Taking PS into account, how good should a Sabbat (or Laibon, or Anarch...) political card be to encourage that sect political game? Would be healthy to the game having a PS equivalent card for each major sect in the game? I guess our developers reached the conclusion it isn't. As for the change itself. It feels like trying to reach a common ground. On one hand, the card is worse in early game. On the other, it's better at the end. I would have suggested something like this if asked. I still believe the card is way better than other common political cards. I also hope this change opens the door to other political cards with about the same power level as PS for other factions. Una and Ankara Citadel (Lets pour some drinks to bathe it all) If you nerf such an influential card as Pentex Subversion it is bound that some now unanwsered decks will appear. I guess these 2 were the most annoying of the lot. Once again, I suspect this has more to do with avoiding bad gaming experiences than balance issues. Specially knowing, as some of you have already pointed out, that changing Freak Drive text so that the 1 blood is no more a cost but an effect of the card would have been a much more elegant solution. Collateral damage, I guess. Anyways both cards are still playable. I fear, as many of you, this could be the beginning of a wave of card adjustements that would have been unnecessary without the previous changes. And for the game's sake, if avoiding changing freak drive results in having to change a handful of other cards, please take the easiest way and deal with the problem itself. Black Metamorphosis (light dessert at least and at last) If improving this card brings the Lasombra combat archetype to the game, the change is welcomed. I'm not sure this will be the case. P.S.: I hope you didn't have to take a break while reading all this

While we are discussing it, Mimir now can have ? One of his BIGGEST advantage is to be immune to Pentex so you can build a star deck without worry about be hampered with one card. Archbishop of Itaocara Prince ID #510

On reflection, I'm hoping the minor (but good) change to Black Metamorphosis is the start of a trend, where BCP improves old not-that-good cards to useful status. The game is full of cards like that. Good ideas, and useful potentially, but implementation a bit too weak. For example, doing the same to Shadow of the Beast should be a no-brainer. Or adding unconditional +1 stealth to Rampage (or some other bonus). Removing built-in burn options from most of the DS-era locations. Stuff like that. Sure, some cards are so useless and wallpaper that fixing them isn't really possible (clan hosers, etc). But there's a *huge* pile of "wallpaper" which could well slowly be turned into useful cards which might actually see play. Should be a win-win for everyone, provided reprinted cards are available of course. Tournament decks don't include these (since they are currently bad), and it would open up a pile of new options without needing complete redesign. There's probably a lot of stuff in the way (art rights?), but hey, I can always hope Added: on second thought, +1 stealth on Rampage doesn't make much sense thematically. I mean it's Potence being used to smash buildings, not very stealthy is it So maybe something like: Burn a location. Whenever this action is blocked, before range is determined during the first round of the resulting combat, this vampire can gain +1 strength that combat. As above, but can gain +2 strength.

If I'm not mistaken, Ben commented a while ago on how many Quietus cards from Final Night suddenly become playable if their cost is reduced by one across the board. Maybe that's a sign of them working in the direction you propose

Actually, when I look at the games I played, Pentex and Parity Shift have been mainly used on defensive or cross-table balancing duties. Sure, you can use them to cripple your prey. But both these cards are so much more than that. If you have been sitting next to Enkidu and losing all your vampires before you can play, or next to the best stealth and bleed decks while playing decks that either need long setup or do not have access to bounce cards, you will know what I mean. In fact, without Pentex and P-shift in their original version, your odds of being ousted early or not being able to play at all probably increase. Very oppressive decks that tackle games as a succession of duels are only made better by these changes. Dominate is only made better by these changes. I played a game last week where one poor dude was prey to a weenie dementation deck. It took cross-table Pentex and parity to give him a chance to play. With the new game texts, Pentex would not have slowed down the weenie dementation deck, and parity shift would not even compensate a standard bleed action (and the three pool loss would have been recouped in less than a turn with kindred spirit bleed actions). During the next game, I played a big cap deck that needed some setup. My predator played weenie potence. I used Pentex to gain time and build up my board. I used Pentex on one of his minions, I knew I would not be able to defend it for a long time. He tried to burn it, I blocked and one of my lesser vampires went to torpor. Then on the 2nd attempt he could burn the pentex. It actually deprived him of a grand total of 1 action, but it was enough to give me a chance to play the game, though I payed a pretty high cost of 1 card, 2 pool and 1 vampire in torpor. I can't even remotely imagine that I am the only one having encountered countless similar situations. If I am, then it probably means that many people play the game zeroing in on their prey without looking at the table as a global ecosystem. So if it's just a succession of one-on-one duels, I think many 2-players games are much better. In my opinion, the best vote deck in the game doesn't even have access to P-shift. Legacy of Pander decks usually play 3 to 5 Kine Resource Contested or Conservative Agitation per turn. Old P-Shift was worth 1,66 KRC in terms of pool gain. New P-shift is worth 1 KRC. And LoP decks mostly play Pentex because of the "cannot block" effect. So, basically, the new Pentex version. On the other hand, there are also many cases where Pentex and P-Shift were clearly abusive. So yes, maybe changes were called for. But there were many many adjustments that could have been made while keeping the above-mentioned functions intact. So, that's it for the rant. What is done is done and we have a new meta to explore. I hope that my fear of NPE-situations becoming even more frequent will not be proven in practice. And if it is, I hope the problem will be tackled by designing new cards, instead of nerfing more and more of the existing card-pool. And then, about the anniversary deck. Stan would not have been my first choice for such a product but I guess it ticks many boxes (powerful, easy to play) so it's good. Overall it's even great. The best preconstructed deck ever. The box is gorgeous. We get cards that were only available through DIY printing available. And new art... And a new vampire... Really, great. But now, the reprints are awful: Femur of Toomler, Hand of Conrad, Form of corruption, Khobar Towers... And then you have CVS which is very hard to find but not what players wanted. People wanted Direct Intervention (which will be direly needed as Pentex won't keep your Baron on a leash anymore), Mind Rape, Call the great beast, Golconda, and many many other key cards... So mixed feelings on the product. I will still buy it because I want to support the game... But mixed feelings...

I played a game last week where one poor dude was prey to a weenie dementation deck. It took cross-table Pentex and parity to give him a chance to play. ============ Why not fix the oppressive deck directly? half measures avail us nothing

> Mewcat wrote: > I played a game last week where one poor dude was prey to a weenie dementation deck. It took cross-table Pentex and parity to give him a chance to play. > ============ > > Why not fix the oppressive deck directly? half measures avail us nothing > It's a very good question that I can only answer on a very personal level. So I will only talk about my own view on the game. I really enjoy the interactions and intellectual effort it takes to find solutions with the different resources available at the table. I don't think that there were anything that were not manageable pre-errata. I am also convinced that a good deck will necessarily be unfair in some situation, wether it is very fast and aimed forward only, or some slow build-up deck, or wall deck... My slow big cap inner circle deck will be very vulnerable at the start of the game, but if it gets rolling, it's completely degenerate. So it's fair that people will try to prevent me from reaching critical mass. And it's fair that LoP tries to oust me before I completely shut him down. If my deck can't handle weenie Dementation, or the Unmasking, or rush combat, or whatever... I'm ok with not being able to play the game, being ousted or losing my board quickly because of the seating. I could have choosen a different deck, that could handle better what the random seating put me next to. But I did not. I made a choice that led me to suffering. It's not the game's fault, it's not the card's fault. It's my own fault (and I must add that I really enjoy trying to find means to get out of bad situations). Actually, after frustrating games, I try to debrief with friends. There is almost always things I could have done better. And if I can't see any, so be it. I also am not bothered by Una. When you look at the big picture, it does not win that much tournaments. When it does, it is played by awesome players, that would make finals anyway. But for that specific day, they chose Una because they thought it was their best shot at final victory. They read the meta well, and played well. The best deck, played by the best player, does not win every game. Table sweeps are more the exception than the rule. Also, decks like weenie Dementation are a gold mine for new players: they are really easy to understand, they tend to make 1VP quite easily. But it's really hard to make GWs with them on a table with competent players. So the weenie Dementation will learn many things: going all out on your prey may be detrimental if you want to score more than 1VP, Kindred spirits gives you a way to deal with bad matchups, too much stealth in hand will choke the deck. Also, it teaches that being the big threat on the table from the get go generally hinders you. In my mind, oppressive is very different from overpowered. Early pressure is just one of many general strategies. It's strong, it can be frustrating for people being preyed on, but it is far from giving easy GWs all the time. Every deck in the bloody game is far from giving easy GWs all the time. Final reminder: everything I write above is just my personal opinion. It's what I think and how I feel. It is nowhere close to any absolute truth.

> Mewcat wrote: > Why not fix the oppressive deck directly? half measures avail us nothing > Tell this to BCP and the Ankara / Una nerf Archbishop of Itaocara Prince ID #510

> Luriel wrote: > I won't say my "2 cents" because it feels more like 2 "handfuls of cents" in this case. I hope I don't bore anyone. > > On a general basis. If you asked me about changing what some cards that have been in the game since almost the vey beginning do, I would say no. If nothing else just for keeping the spirit of those cards. That said all the latest changes seem to be the result of a thoughtful work, definitively not the first answer to a problem. > > Something I would have been grateful for would have been a bit of open development in this matter. While Paradox needs the existance of a company such as Black Chantry Productions to be able to talk about VtES, I want to think BCP is still related to (if not part of) the VEKN which is a player organization since its birth. So, it should involve the player base as much as possible. I have personally met some of you and think of you more as players stepping up for the game's sake than as businessman in a company. > > I don't know how long has this process taken. But writing some posts in this very forum during its different steps open to player feedback would have been great. Things in the line of "After discussing internally the situation of these cards, we've reached the conclussion that something must be done. Any feedback would be appreciated but keep in mind that while we will listen to your opinion, we won't necessarily follow what you propose." or "We plan on playtesting these changes. If you feel you can offer a better solution, feel free to contribute knowing your idea has probably already been taken into account and discarded.". > > I want to think that the whole VtES community is able to reach better solutions to matters regarding the game than just a part of it. No matter how experienced and knowable of the game that part is. > > Let's focus on every single card now. > I don't think the current design teams owe it to us to include everyone on the decision. I don't think making a decision by committee is the best way to make card changes. I don't think it's the designer's job to communicate their every thought and let the community weigh in. There is something about VTES that I don't see in every game, and it's this sense that the players "own" the game. The truth is that they never have. Players support the game by playing, but design choices require a designated team who can steer the game on a macro level. Everyone might not agree with the changes but ultimately not everyone is going to agree with them no matter what. People called out for change, people called out to maintain the status quo. One of those groups is going to be disappointed.

@Jonathan You are kind of all over the place. First u say that weenie dem requires outside intervention so someone can play the game, then say no deck is problematic. I'm not sure what the point is. Just dont change anything, prrhaps?

My point is : it's a multiplayer game with many possibilities for interacting outside of the predator/prey relationship. So yes, weenie Dementation is very powerful and can oust you very fast. But I also do not think it is a problem. It loses hard to bounce and weenie combat, it can suffer from massive hand jamming and table hate. It also burns through its resources very fast, which makes GWs quite difficult to earn. I see no paradox here. I apologize if my poor command of the English language prevents me from stating my opinion clearly.

If a deck ousting someone in 15 minutes isn't a problem I dont know what is. What would you see as problematic? Surely there is a line that once crossed cant be fixed by multiplayer mechanics.

> Mewcat wrote: > If a deck ousting someone in 15 minutes isn't a problem I dont know what is. > > What would you see as problematic? Surely there is a line that once crossed cant be fixed by multiplayer mechanics. > The list of banned cards gives a good overview of what problematic means. Due to how table dynamics work, decks that put heavy pressure on their prey from the get go generally struggle to get game wins. There is an old saying that goes "she who has no predator wins". If you put too much pressure on your prey, your grand-prey will have no predator. She will be able to build a strong board and hand, and keep her pool total quite high. This usually means several VPs on the long run. Letting my prey play has two main benefits: - she will influence more and naturally erode her pool, and if I have an opportunity to oust her, I will burn less resources, - she will put pressure on her prey, so if I oust her, my 2nd VP may be easier. My main task will then be to not let her grow too strong, and seize the right moment for a lunge. It is a very delicate balance. Sometimes, like in my previous example, other players will gain something by helping the aggressive deck's prey. Sometimes, it's just better to let them get ousted. There is no general guidelines on such matters. Some other times, table dynamics theory does not apply and you're out in the dark trying to devise a game plan on the go. Sometimes aggressive decks will benefit from favourable circumstances and sweep the table. Some other times their weenie Animalism prey will send all their minions to torpor. Most things balance out if you look at the big picture. (I hope that I managed to state my point clearly this time)

Sure but ousts can be so quick that none of that matters. The guy ousted turn 4 or 5 is barely noticed and if he didn't take the 1 or 2 actions forward that otherwise may have it doesnt change much.

> Mewcat wrote: > Sure but ousts can be so quick that none of that matters. The guy ousted turn 4 or 5 is barely noticed and if he didn't take the 1 or 2 actions forward that otherwise may have it doesnt change much. > That is completely correct. Though let's have a look at the table dynamics theory: Me > prey (under pressure) > grand-prey > grand-predator (under pressure) > predator The harder I attack my prey, the stronger my grand-prey and predator get. It means that after I oust my prey, I will be sitting between the two strongest remaining players. Even if I get an early oust, on turn 5, it means two players have been able to develop unhindered for 5 turns, and I'm stuck between them. Of course, practical games do not always follow the theoretical guidelines, because seatings are randomized, and deals disrupt table dynamics (which is actually their main point). But I have countless practical examples that validate the theory (and quite a few exceptions). The irony is that focus on global table dynamics is one of the main characteristics of the "latin-european play style", but I first got acquainted with that in the Vtes players guide which was written by very strong US players (most notably Robert Goudie and our dear lead designer, Mr Ben Peal). For the record, I "won" the book by finishing last in a national championship, quite a long time ago. Anyway, as much as I love talking about Vtes theory, I think I made my statement clear, and we are getting quite far from the initial topic.

> jonathan wrote: > The irony is that focus on global table dynamics is one of the main characteristics of the "latin-european play style", but I first got acquainted with that in the Vtes players guide which was written by very strong US players (most notably Robert Goudie and our dear lead designer, Mr Ben Peal). For the record, I "won" the book by finishing last in a national championship, quite a long time ago. > That is not irony. It only means that the understanding of core game concepts is more widespread than you would like to think, and that you might need to think about playstyles in more complex terms than "I understand the game, you don't."

> Non-existant user wrote: > > > jonathan wrote: > > The irony is that focus on global table dynamics is one of the main characteristics of the "latin-european play style", but I first got acquainted with that in the Vtes players guide which was written by very strong US players (most notably Robert Goudie and our dear lead designer, Mr Ben Peal). For the record, I "won" the book by finishing last in a national championship, quite a long time ago. > > > That is not irony. It only means that the understanding of core game concepts is more widespread than you would like to think, and that you might need to think about playstyles in more complex terms than "I understand the game, you don't." > I it was not what I meant. I apologize if that's how it sounds. I pointed to play style differences, trying to explain my point of view and the theoretical elements that I use. I also wanted to make it clear who developed and explained all that in a very clear and didactic manner. You are very right that my scope is very narrow, and I don't have any understanding of other play styles. I am actually very interested in learning about other play styles, and their theoretical basis. I am sorry if I offended you, and I look forward to widening my horizon and learning about how people see the game in different places of the world.

By the way, in the new text of the Ankara Citadel; what does "non-action modifier" mean exactly? Is it simply poor wording or are there actually diferent kinds of modifiers? For example Bonding modifies the current action so it would be an "action modifier"; but Lobotomy is played once the Ally has been recruited successfully so it happens afterwards (so to say) and that would be a "non-action modifier". This would be a great solution to recover playability for a card that hes been unfairly (and unnecessarily) nerfed. Pretty much we could continue using AC as always, except freak drives... Otherwise, why not simply say "action modifiers", really, the "non-action" thingy ...very confusing. If aaaaaall "action modifiers" are simply action modifiers, the "non" is really annoying I play Rock Cats. Rock Cats with balls of yarn, toy mice and the fingers of disarmed vampires

I think you should treat it more as "non" and "action modifier", not "non-action" and "modifier"...

That... doesn't make much sense... Must be a mistake then. Grammatically speaking, the hyphen "-" is used to join words to indicate that they have a combined meaning like for example "take-away". If "non" and "action" are linked with a hyphen its clear these words are intimately linked. Edit: there is no evidence anywhere that there are diferent types of modifiers, so... I suppose that's that I play Rock Cats. Rock Cats with balls of yarn, toy mice and the fingers of disarmed vampires

> Ismeno wrote: > That... doesn't make much sense... Must be a mistake then. Grammatically speaking, the hyphen "-" is used to join words to indicate that they have a combined meaning like for example "take-away". If "non" and "action" are linked with a hyphen its clear these words are intimately linked. > Edit: there is no evidence anywhere that there are diferent types of modifiers, so... I suppose that's that > If the intended meaning of "non-action modifier" is "cards that are not an action modifier," the hyphen should instead be an en dash: non–action modifier. "action modifier" is an open compound. An en dash instead of a hyphen should be used to connect a prefix such as "non" and an open compound. This is a widely adopted stylistic rule that exists mainly to avoid the confusion that ismeno is experiencing. Further compounding this confusion may be that we now have "modifier" printed on action modifier cards. "Modifier" is not a card type and should not be used, in my opinion. One could see "modifier" printed on a card, think that the card type is called "modifier," then proceed to read "non-action modifier" as "a modifier that does not modify an action."

> TwoRazorReign wrote: > > > Ismeno wrote: > > That... doesn't make much sense... Must be a mistake then. Grammatically speaking, the hyphen "-" is used to join words to indicate that they have a combined meaning like for example "take-away". If "non" and "action" are linked with a hyphen its clear these words are intimately linked. > > Edit: there is no evidence anywhere that there are diferent types of modifiers, so... I suppose that's that > > > If the intended meaning of "non-action modifier" is "cards that are not an action modifier," the hyphen should instead be an en dash: non–action modifier. "action modifier" is an open compound. An en dash instead of a hyphen should be used to connect a prefix such as "non" and an open compound. This is a widely adopted stylistic rule that exists mainly to avoid the confusion that ismeno is experiencing." > Exaaaactly, as I thought, just poor wording/mistake/misprint... But I do admit I was kinda hoping this would actually re-ignite the use of the AC. I'm still butthurt after the nerfing of the AC and not FD... Bye bye Perfect Clarity I play Rock Cats. Rock Cats with balls of yarn, toy mice and the fingers of disarmed vampires