question-circle What should be done with Reversal of Fortune?

12 Apr 2012 12:54 #27742 by Poci
That happened me, exactly. When I started, in a casual play (maybe my 4th-5th game or so), I played against a Tupdog deck, and against a RoF deck in the next game. Both decks won their respective games. It was not so much fun, but educational. Yeah, it's like playing against SB in casual games, which is kinda sucks, but happens sometimes. The new players will also encounter those decks and its better in casual plays than in a tournament scene, 2nd time they'll know what to do against it.

I'm not saying about Una that it doesn't win tables, it just doesn't really win tournaments. On Secret library, maybe 3 MonoUna decks won a tournament total (definitely more in fact, but not reported), but that's not too many.

It was discussed that combat is inferior as it is. Tupdog is an exclusion to some extent, a deck that can win almost only with combat.

I know that it's bad to lose 2 players whom you'd worked with to be new players for the game, but those things happen. You're doing a great job in keeping the dutch community alive and you know how hard it is, it's a fact. I'm just simply saying that the game should have more new cards as it is planned rather than ban the already existing (and not entirely gamebreaking) cards.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 Apr 2012 12:55 - 12 Apr 2012 12:56 #27743 by Kushiel

Ankha wrote: I'm not even asking for people to have fun. I'm asking that people may be allowed to play a turn during the game (and not the kind where you lose 10 pool on your first turn because Smiling already has 10 counters when you start to play).


This. I would've simply thanked this post, but I just wanted to add that fun/unfun really aren't relevant issues here. That they literally break the most basic structure of the game (Player A takes a turn, Player B takes a turn, etc) is the issue with the RoF/MN decks, not whether or not they meet any given player's subjective value of fun. As a parallel example, the seat-switching votes weren't banned because of any negative value they had on the fun spectrum, but because they broke another of the most basic foundations of the game.
Last edit: 12 Apr 2012 12:56 by Kushiel.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Amenophobis, Surreal

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 Apr 2012 12:57 #27744 by bakija

Kushiel wrote: It sounds like you're describing it as a card which is really hard to play correctly but wins you the game when you do? That's really bad tech for a game that's mostly built on the accumulation of small effects, like VTES. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong (because I've never seen either of these in actual play), but isn't that the same kind of card as Return to Innocence, different in degree rather than kind?


Kind of? Reversal of Fortune isn't so much a card that you can play "correctly" and then win the game. There are simply too many outside forces that you have no control of. For a Reversal/Madness Network deck to go off, you need to get out a quick weenie Malkavian, get a Madness Network in play, get a Malkavian Justicar vote off, and then start an endless chain of Reversal of Fortunes. All of which can be stymied by any number of common enough defenses (Delaying Tactics, Sudden Reversals, Direct Interventions, enough intercept, more votes on the table than you had hoped for, etc) or simply a bad card draw. So you need to build a complicated, tricksy deck and then have everything in the right place at the right time. I mean, this is a deck that has been in existence since the day Jyhad was originally published, and how many times has such a deck hit the TWDA?

Again, I think when this deck/card *does* go off and works as hoped, it is incredibly bad for the game--playing a 5 player game where 2 of the players don't ever get to have turns is abominable. In an absolute sense, I'd be perfectly happy for it to be banned (along with plenty of other cards that make the game less good), but in a practical sense, I know a lot of people hat the idea of banning anything, and given the difficulty of making this deck go, there are other, more commonly damaging cards I'd like to see get fixed/banned before Reversal of Fortune.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 Apr 2012 13:16 #27746 by Dorrinal
It's low-hanging fruit, though. If Reversal of Fortune were to be banned no one would care and the game would be better off.

:trem:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 Apr 2012 13:23 #27747 by Surreal

Izaak wrote: I have "lost" at least two new players from returning to a tournament three years ago because they both had to sit with an Una deck in two of their three games. These two people decided that tournaments were stupid, unfun and a waste of their time. Only because they had to sit next to Una for 45 minutes. I never heard from them again. This is BAD FOR THE GAME.


You have to think other side too. Very few players want any changes to game or ban any cards (even if that would make sense by game play standards and I agree your reasons to ban Reversal of Fortune). So banning cards and gaining minor improvement might be bad for the game also because it could alienate some players. I also think Vtes hasn't never been so much about attracting new players because it requires so much commitment. It has always been more about pleasing the existing players but that discussion is other topic.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
12 Apr 2012 13:58 #27749 by Kushiel

bakija wrote: Reversal of Fortune isn't so much a card that you can play "correctly" and then win the game.


Yeah, I get now that if action needs to be taken on the card, it's because it falls into the "messes with the fundamentals of the game" category rather than "brokenly overpowered." Thanks. And here's a smiley for you, because I know how much you love them! :laugh:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.148 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum