Action cards ratio

As a new player (who plays 3-4 times a year), one of my greatest challenges is to make decks that work. When I usually succeed, my deck has 100-110 cards because I really want to have that card... and that card... and that card... I know, I really need a trimming my deck 101 crash course.

Do you have a "rule" for ratios "action cards (+equip+retainer+ally+political)" vs. "total cards"? After all, all those cards does cost an action. Unlike combat cards, let say you have 3 vampires, you may usually have only three possible action cards played.

I believe I have too much of those cards and that is what is keeping me from the 80-90 cards objective.

Thanks!
Mark

Typically a game has 12 - 13 turns, so that's a good starting point for master cards (more with Trifles and double ups to be discarded).

It also depends on the type of deck. Legally a deck can be 60 - 90 cards in size.

Combo / Trick / Super Efficient decks should not be more than 60 cards (less with burnables).
Stealth bleeders 75 or so.
Toolboxes decks 80 or so.
Combat decks typically close to 90.

Ratios depend on card flow, so a combat deck with a high card flow needs a lower master ratio to ensure they don't jam on masters (1 in 8 - 9 cards). Where as an MMPA deck may have a 1+ in 2 ratio (30 - 40+ master cards). So it really depends on what the deck is doing.

I good place to start is the TWDA here: www.veknfrance.com/decks/twd.htm

Search for vampires you want to use and take a look at the resulting decks and the ratios they use.

My approach is to start at 60 cards (forcing you to focus on the core of the deck) and then to flesh it out / expand on areas that need a boost from there (ie. more stealth, combat defence, combat etc). Others start at 90 cards and then work down from there.

It depends on what works for you.

There's some nice sheets to help count as you go here: vtes-consumed.blogspot.co.nz/2013/05/counting-cards-no-thank-you.html — if you order your cards by importance you will soon know what to leave out once you get close to 60.

If going the other way, one thing you can do is have 2x ash heaps — one for cards you play and another for cards you discard (or just decide are crap). At the end of each game review both ash heaps and decide what goes back in the deck or what gets dropped.

Ke

If you have a non-weenie deck and you plan on acting but still leaving vampires untapped for blocking/reactions, in my experience you want to keep the number of action cards around 20, unless you are multi-acting. Reactive/ wall decks would have less actions, weenies may have more without jamming.

Also consider to make it easier for your deck to discard circumstantial stuff if you like to be toolboxy, using for instance Heart of Nizchetus , Barrens , Dreams of the Sphinx , or Disciple-based cards for instance Infernal Pursuit or Aura Reading .

Some vampires' special abilities also help a lot to flush cards such as Unmada , Beckett, Uchenna , Paul Cordwood etc.

Thanks to both of you. The ash heaps tip is very clever and will use it from this time forward. I'm more of a "100+ trying to hit 90"-type than "60 looking to upgrade" kind of player. I do not have the experience it takes I guess.

My main error seems definitely the number of action+political+equip+ally+retainer cards I have in my decks. Sometimes, it can hit the 40%. I will follow your advice Borrelstein and keep a 20/90 ration maximum (and adjusting according to the type of deck I play). I find it difficult with political decks to keep the number of cards low.

Another question, same subject: Do you work with ratios. Do you keep in mind (other than masters) that I should have no more than X of Y? Do you count the number of cards costing pool or blood, trying to avoid depletion of your own pool? Maybe I am super freak about this: I have my Excel spreadsheet with all cards and my decks, generating reports with the number of everything (type, pool, blood...), but I realize I do not have the experience needed to understand the data.

Its really hard to give any kind of exact numbers because there is many things affecting it, such as how quickly does your deck go through cards in general? How many minions do you on average have to do actions? Do you have multiatcing? What kind of flush tech you have to clear hand jams? Like for example, my Ventrue law firm deck that usually gets lot of vampires out, and has tons of multiacting between majesties, freak drives, and change of targets, usually has about third of the deck actions to have something to do, whereas my Toreador attrition deck that uses only vampires with built- in +bleed and thus can at least bleed for 2 even with cardless action, and usually doesn't have too many vampires out has only around 15 or so action cards (mostly political actions), even though it does have some multi-acting in it too with Alexandra's special, change of targets and helicopters.

You just need to play a particular deck enough to get a feel of whether you have too much or not enough actions and then adjust accordingly. Most of my decks go through several versions before they are even approaching ready.

Prudent_Audacity wrote:

Another question, same subject: Do you work with ratios. Do you keep in mind (other than masters) that I should have no more than X of Y? Do you count the number of cards costing pool or blood, trying to avoid depletion of your own pool?

Yes. To a degree.

I use FELDB to build decks. I often look at the distribution of card types when determining whether I have too much or too little of something.

So, for instance, an 80 card deck with 15 masters, 20 action modifiers, 20 reactions, 10 combat cards, and the rest multitype or actions would seem normal. May be wondering what type of deck this is. I build a lot of decks that are structurally similar whether they are stealth bleed decks that intercept or intercept decks that bleed at stealth. Maybe some other decks, too.

Point being not how I build decks but that experience gives a sense of proportions. To your problem, at many times, I've found a deck to be dysfunctional because it had too many actions. If I see a high action count relative to other card types, I become concerned. Of course, by action I mean anything that falls under the general action umbrella - political action, ally, retainer, equipment. I've actually proposed the theory that some (non-master) card types are better than others. For instance, if you get the same effect from an action modifier, that's stronger than getting it from an action - Flurry of Action comes to mind as a card I would have preferred being an action modifier when it was printed, as Celerity needed good cards. Reactions are more "powerful" because most of the game is played on other people's turns.

I pay more attention to card costs than I once did. I think there's an element of style of play and style of deck at work. I build decks with vastly less offense than I used to, which means longer games, which means keeping blood on minions matters more. Also, my decks can't afford to hunt as much as I used to hunt, again meaning blood loss affects operating ability more. Pool cost is more of a concern when it comes to how much defense/bloat I put into decks.

Anyway, I used to be more of a "cut down to 90" deckbuilder but am much more of a "build up from 60" deckbuilder these days. I still end up with a lot of 90 card decks, but I consider those flabby, just playing them because most of the time I don't really care how efficient the deck is. For more polished decks, I consider my target number to be 75 or less. People will say it depends upon what sort of deck you are building. I just happen to build lots and lots of decks in the same style.

As an aside, I also tend to equate one permanent effect to 3(?) transient effects. So, a Camera Phone means taking out, perhaps, three bleed cards.

But, really, I'd put a lot less energy into the theoretical way to build decks and put a lot more weight on playing either your own decks or other people's decks and using the various methods to identify what doesn't get used or what you don't want in hand. As people have said, any particular deck may not fit a cookiecutter mode of construction. My favorite card type is probably reaction, yet my last tournament winning deck had only two, neither of which were wakes.