Combat - why is it currently considered weak ?

Jeff wrote:

Combat is "incidental" meaning that it only happens when minions fight...when restraint (intercept) overcomes delivery...or when a rush action is successful. It doesn't impact a methuselah's pool (blood on vampires is *not* pool) except indirectly from Fame, Tension, etc.

But that mean that combat have no real role. I don't think it's a good idea to let something that involve such a big number of card to be very rarely useful. (especially since they are most often pretty easy to get)

In any case, combat is for now an inefficient delivery system (vampires can't block or react when burned or torporized), a slow payload (fame and all are not too quick), and a very card intensive defense. None of which are too useful, because it's too generic and not focused enough.

In all case, the amount of effort needed in term of card, cardflow sacrifice, and (usually) action mean that combat is pretty inefficient, and people know it, at least now.

One of the pitfall to avoid if anything on the subject is done is to make it very powerful in all aspect. That don't mean that it is impossible to do a middle ground where either combat have a role that he do well and other that he do somewhat (my proposition about delivery system for combat), or is not more powerful than now, but require far less card so it can be used as a secondary strategy.

(for now, it can, with some very special setup, like the ANI combat that more or less need two card, all other indermining the deck)

Jeff wrote:

Hardly a ringing endorsement.

Well, ya know, you were like "combat is the worst strategy!". There are certainly worse ones

But this is kind of my whole point. Combat sucks! It doesn't directly contribute to ousting. *EVERY* pool damage that is done via combat requires a card that is not a combat card to make it happen. Even Hell-for-Leather requires some card to get INTO combat.

Well, combat sucks as an ousting mechanism. That is true. And keep in mind that, like, I was the biggest proponent of rush combat as a winning strategy in the world for a very long time (and have some of the earliest tournament winning rush decks in the TWDA, not to toot my own horn too much). Combat is a very difficult strategy to use as a pure victory mechanism. It can work, but requires a lot of luck in terms of what is sitting next to you to consistently win games and/or tournaments. 'Cause combat is hard. But as I mentioned earlier, I think that is all for the best.

If combat gave you unprecedented minion control (which is already does) *and* was as good at ousting as, like, S+B, it would be the only thing that anyone ever played. As being able to turn off opposing minions like a faucet is both very helpful to your ability to survive in a game *and* remarkably entertaining for a lot of people. If you could do that *and* also oust quickly and efficiently all the time, that would be the whole game.

I think it is reasonable that combat is hard to win with. People still try it--the last time I went to Origins (stupid having a stupid job with a stupid schedule...) and played, like, 5 VTES tournaments in 3 days, I played a couple of Rush decks. And didn't do that hot. 'Cause there are so many things that make dedicated Rush combat work badly (things like !Ventrue with sticks and ANI reactive combat) floating around. Rush decks do great in an environment where most folks have no combat or combat defense at all. But in an environment where a lot of decks have light combat as a sideline (which is a lot easier to do now; see WWS and Target Vitals), pure rush falls apart quickly.

So as a whole, what combat seems to be good at is either being the only combat around and being very dominant or being a light sideline/adjunct in many decks, which is a lot more common these days.

Potence is not a good delivery system. It is a threat, and a decent one, but it is easily countered. Just don't block. Let them jam on red cards. If you're playing rush combat, you're weakening your position by packing rush actions to begin with. Time is never on your side with rush combat.

Potence is a delivery system by virtue of clearing defenders out of the way. Which can work. I'm not a big fan of Bruise and Bleed exactly for the reasons you describe. But rush combat with payload can do fine--I occasionally still win games with a cel/pot thrown junk deck that has enough sideline presence to make 6 or so Legal Manipulations and a Codex (along with Fame) a reasonable ousting mechanism.

Exactly. I know you know all the drawbacks better than most. I think Brutal Influence was a horribly missed opportunity. If the superior version was usable without an Orun, it'd be a good card. I'm personally pretty disappointed with any of the laibon cards which require both disciplines and either sect or aye/orun.

Yeah, that is kind of a drag. I've seen some reasonably effective Brutal Influence decks (monocle+bleed of 12), but the potence is really in there just for the Brutal Influence and reactive Thrown Gates.

But all that is beside the point. Combat is not a payload. Combat is not a delivery system. Combat is incidental to the game. It just plain sucks.

I dunno--I think that is kind of a harsh view. Yeah, pure combat is very difficult to win with. But I see games all the time where adjunct combat makes or breaks the game for someone--blocky decks with guns or ANI that torp folks and win as a result of the minion collapse happens all the time. I won a tournament last year with a POT/dom deck that was, essentially, an old school Bruise/Bleed deck, embarrassingly enough and won by virtue of being able to bleed for 3 with Govern, having a lot of bleed bounce, and then being able to Thrown Gate/Target Vitals when I got blocked and won the final 'cause I torped all of the other guy's vampires.

Combat is a helpful adjunct to a lot of other strategies. And I think it is something that people should not neglect to address most of the time (although I realize that they do, and that big tournaments are won all the time by decks that have zero combat cards in them, but they shouldn't regularly get away with this). But I agree that it is really difficult to use as an ousting mechanism. And often just results in making a giant crater on your side of the table and makes one of the other two players win.

If the combat disciplines actually had decent actions associated with them, you'd see more people try to use those disciplines because they can actually *DO SOMETHING USEFUL OUTSIDE OF COMBAT*. Horseshoes was a step in the right direction, though it doesn't affect pol. More still needs to be done.

Well, that's a whole other kettle of fish. Although as an aside, I think Horseshoes is a horrible card in the same way that Shattering Crescendo is a horrible card--being able to hurt minions that reliably with almost no interaction is problematic. But that is a whole other thing.

bakija wrote:

Well, combat sucks as an ousting mechanism. That is true. And keep in mind that, like, I was the biggest proponent of rush combat as a winning strategy in the world for a very long time (and have some of the earliest tournament winning rush decks in the TWDA, not to toot my own horn too much).

Rush combat used to be better back in the day. As I mentioned in another thread, combat defense is more card efficient than combat offense. Every time a new defensive card comes out, combat becomes worse as a strategy.

I think it is reasonable that combat is hard to win with. People still try it--the last time I went to Origins (stupid having a stupid job with a stupid schedule...) and played, like, 5 VTES tournaments in 3 days, I played a couple of Rush decks. And didn't do that hot. 'Cause there are so many things that make dedicated Rush combat work badly (things like !Ventrue with sticks and ANI reactive combat) floating around. Rush decks do great in an environment where most folks have no combat or combat defense at all. But in an environment where a lot of decks have light combat as a sideline (which is a lot easier to do now; see WWS and Target Vitals), pure rush falls apart quickly.

This feeds into my argument about the types of tactics and their relative strength in the game. Stickmen decks do well in both low and high combat metagames. In a combat-lite metagame, they block then hitback reasonably well and empty out minions. In a combat-heavy metagame, they still block reasonably well and can survive brutal combat monsters. Ventrue antitribu own the ultimate combat hedge fund! (kinda)

But more generally, when there are good, free combat options like WWS and TV, the good decks get VERY GOOD, witness the surge of weenie Auspex when those two cards hit the scene. Cards like Baal's Bloody Talons, Brute Force, Death Seeker, Hell-for-Leather, Lam Into, Lead Fist, Mercury's Arrow, and Street Cred will never see their promise fulfilled when simultaneously cards like Autonomic Mastery, Charismatic Aura, Evil Eye, Force of Personality, Glancing Blow, Loving Agony, No Trace, Rego Motus, Torrent, and Unholy Penance are introduced.

The best way to "make combat better" is to give the combat disciplines things to do which make those disciplines attractive to use on their own merits. They don't all need Governs. But every discipline needs a signature action. Heck, if there were even a Potence action like this:

Action
: Enter combat with any tapped minion.
As above and that minion's controller burns 1 pool if that minion is not ready at the end of combat.

it would be a huge boost. Why doesn't such an action exist?!?

Potence is a delivery system by virtue of clearing defenders out of the way. Which can work. I'm not a big fan of Bruise and Bleed exactly for the reasons you describe. But rush combat with payload can do fine--I occasionally still win games with a cel/pot thrown junk deck that has enough sideline presence to make 6 or so Legal Manipulations and a Codex (along with Fame) a reasonable ousting mechanism.

But the thing is that you still rely on the big two disciplines of Dominate and Presence to actually oust. If one goal of future game development is better balance (and I think it should be), then making the combat disciplines better at things outside of combat would help them more than making them even better at something which pretty much sucks. The marginal benefit from making Potence oust better (directly) is greater than the marginal benefit from making Presence better at S:CE (because combat is incidental and indirectly impacts ousting power).

Combat is a helpful adjunct to a lot of other strategies. And I think it is something that people should not neglect to address most of the time (although I realize that they do, and that big tournaments are won all the time by decks that have zero combat cards in them, but they shouldn't regularly get away with this). But I agree that it is really difficult to use as an ousting mechanism. And often just results in making a giant crater on your side of the table and makes one of the other two players win.

Yes. And that is why I believe that giving combat disciplines better things to do than just fight is great. If Potence, in and of itself, could do some kickass, different things, then "big fist stealth" will actually mean more.

Well, that's a whole other kettle of fish. Although as an aside, I think Horseshoes is a horrible card in the same way that Shattering Crescendo is a horrible card--being able to hurt minions that reliably with almost no interaction is problematic. But that is a whole other thing.

Those two cards still will be explored a lot in the future. I think they have lots of promise, but I do completely agree that inflicting damage outside of combat is problematic. Shadow Twin was never reprinted, probably for this very reason.

Hm...may be time to make a Moncada/Lucita/Aurora Shadow Twin/Freak Drive/Horseshoes deck...

Jeff wrote:

Action
: Enter combat with any tapped minion.
As above and that minion's controller burns 1 pool if that minion is not ready at the end of combat.

It would be a huge boost. Why doesn't such an action exist?!?

Because it blows and would never get played.

Kuta's Face Smash
Action
1 blood
: Enter combat with any tapped minion. That minion's controller burns 2 pool if that minion is not ready at the end of combat.
: As above, but that minion's controller burns 3 pool.

That card would actually get played.

Joscha wrote:

echiang wrote:

Izaak wrote:

d) Running into S:CE as Animalism is ALWAYS bad.

Not 100%. Not if you're using Mind of the Wilds and the fact that the other guy is handjammed on S:CE which is useless against Mind of the Wilds.

Mind of the Wilds
Action Modifier, Animalism & Auspex
[ani][aus] If this action is blocked, this vampire gets an optional maneuver in the first round of the resulting combat, and the blocking minion cannot strike to end combat.
[ANI][AUS] As above, with +1 stealth.

I don't think that MotW helps against S:CE often because a deck playing Combat Ends won't block your minions. Even if you bleed for two I'd let your minion pass because that is better than hit the torpor. I think that card would sit uselessly at your hand and so I wouldn't add it at all to an ani-deck.

Mind of the Wilds certainly has its limitations and I am well aware of the blocking requirement.

I'm just contesting Izaak's 100% number. Even if Mind of the Wilds is only occasionally effective, that should still reduce the number to below 100% (which is an extreme claim and is easily refuted if you can only find a single example that disproves it). "Almost always bad" might be reasonable but "ALWAYS bad?"

KevinM wrote:

Kuta's Face Smash
Action
1 blood
: Enter combat with any tapped minion. That minion's controller burns 2 pool if that minion is not ready at the end of combat.
: As above, but that minion's controller burns 3 pool.

That card would actually get played.

Yes, but it would probably push Potence over the top and make combat too strong. Point is, there *should* exist better cards to deal with deficiencies in the game. Heck, give every combat discipline its own "Deep Song" and see how things go. There was a time when only "the rich got richer" in this game. Hopefully that trend is broken and things will balance out toward the less fortunate a bit more.