Limit master cards?
23 May 2012 10:22 #31050
by vtesocrates
Are you complaining about a game mechanic that you don't like or a deck archetype you think is too strong? If the former, suck it up. If the latter, it must be asked whether this is a passing trend (there is always a deck that is seen by some as too strong) or whether the archetype actually is too strong and the rules ought to be changed. Many of us remain unconvinced a rules change is in order because we've seen these other decks come and go and the same kinds of things were said at the time.
Something that rarely gets talked about in vtes is pacing. Pacing is what makes a deck good, great or garbage. Right now the pacing is good for these master-heavy decks. Whether consciously or unconsciously, that will change. I hold that part of the problem is tables where nobody wants to make a move too soon. This lets the MMPA deck play many powerful cards without much fear. Master cards are better than minion cards except for of course during your minion phase. In an environment where the minion phase is diminished (at least for the early game), the MMPA will come out on top.
Take a look at the Girls Will Find... deck. 41/75 masters and you need to influence Aksinya and either Cybele or Nana to have two MPAs. That is a slow-starting deck. How many turns does it need to set up? How many turns before it has a properly-tuned hand and can go forward? And what will it ultimately do? Rush. A single point of agg damage can put down any of its minions. A single stealth is sufficient to ensure a diablerie is successful. A single point of intercept stops any rescue attempt. This deck is good, make no mistake, but it's good because (like any good deck) it exploits holes in the metagame and takes advantage of pacing. I've played tables where this thing would be dead by turn 5.
Replied by vtesocrates on topic Re: Limit master cards?
How/why should I pick these other examples, if I don´t think they are adequate for comparison? Khazar´s is strong. Tupdogs create a crater. This has nothing to do with MMPA:s and generic recursion.If you don't like that example, pick another. Tupdogs were supposedly unbeatable. The same was said of Khazar's Diary decks or really whatever Orian Gissler was playing for a while.
Are you complaining about a game mechanic that you don't like or a deck archetype you think is too strong? If the former, suck it up. If the latter, it must be asked whether this is a passing trend (there is always a deck that is seen by some as too strong) or whether the archetype actually is too strong and the rules ought to be changed. Many of us remain unconvinced a rules change is in order because we've seen these other decks come and go and the same kinds of things were said at the time.
Something that rarely gets talked about in vtes is pacing. Pacing is what makes a deck good, great or garbage. Right now the pacing is good for these master-heavy decks. Whether consciously or unconsciously, that will change. I hold that part of the problem is tables where nobody wants to make a move too soon. This lets the MMPA deck play many powerful cards without much fear. Master cards are better than minion cards except for of course during your minion phase. In an environment where the minion phase is diminished (at least for the early game), the MMPA will come out on top.
Take a look at the Girls Will Find... deck. 41/75 masters and you need to influence Aksinya and either Cybele or Nana to have two MPAs. That is a slow-starting deck. How many turns does it need to set up? How many turns before it has a properly-tuned hand and can go forward? And what will it ultimately do? Rush. A single point of agg damage can put down any of its minions. A single stealth is sufficient to ensure a diablerie is successful. A single point of intercept stops any rescue attempt. This deck is good, make no mistake, but it's good because (like any good deck) it exploits holes in the metagame and takes advantage of pacing. I've played tables where this thing would be dead by turn 5.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- vtesocrates
-
- Offline
- Ancilla
-
Less
More
- Posts: 55
- Thank you received: 40
23 May 2012 10:27 #31051
by Ashur
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
Replied by Ashur on topic Re: Limit master cards?
Well, this isn´t all about top-level play. Of course I think MMPA are unbalanced in that kind of play also, but it get´s especially ugly when say 3 players are good and the other 2 are newbies in a casual game. The MMPA:s cannot be stopped for players who aren´t used to them. The bloat is just too heavy. This is were the unbalance is the worst actually. It´s not fun playing. Actually, in the case of the newbies, it´s bad PR for VTES - what not so long ago was considered the best multiplayer CCG, were any decent sb-deck had a chance, is now the "some überdudes shuffling their decks and the newbies don´t have a clue what´s happening"-game.
Indeed so.Rush combat is very, very hard to play. If you want to win tables that is, and not just make a crater and ruin the day for 1-2 other players.
That is why, for example, out of three Swedish Championships two have been won by such a deck!
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
23 May 2012 10:30 #31052
by Ashur
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
Replied by Ashur on topic Re: Limit master cards?
If this is the case, I am _really_ disappointed in the designer(s). Which is kind of weird, for KoT otherwise is one of my absolute favourite sets.It looks like the design process failed to acknowledge that MMPA decks can afford to play much more Tablets than the decks who would need them just not to run out of cards.
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
23 May 2012 10:38 #31054
by Izaak
My definition of interaction is pretty much that you do something that people can interact with. Stealth/intercept/bounce is interaction as much as smashing a helpless vampire's face in is interaction. The ani rush deck that Hugh played (Girls on Tour) needs a ridiculous amount of turns to start doing something that involves other Meth's.
Nor does the throwing up the availability "discussion" all the time. Or spewing out nonsense like:
I'll tell you how it *actually* works.
You bring out Cybele/Nana or Anson. You then have 2 MPA's. One of those is reserved for either an Ashur Tablet, or a Liquidation or an Anthelios swap. The second is just the regular master phase, where you play Villeins, Pentexes and other stuff depending on what you play. Playing a Sudden on the trifle *cripples* this deck's cardflow. Suddening will always slow them down. Sure, they will probably recycle their Ashurs and Parthenon (that is, of course if you didn't bother to play Uncoiling to get rid of Anthelios) but it slows them down a turn. It forces them into defense another turn.
Of course, at some point during the game, you will probably end up getting a Parthenon in play. This is also the point where your recursion starts kicking and Suddens don't really hurt *that* much anymore. By this time all the "deadweight" is out of your deck/hand an is either on the table or in your ashpile. This is where the decks become very strong.
The trade-off for this is that during the first 6-8 turns it's a actually a very weak deck that basically gives its prey a free game during this time.
Replied by Izaak on topic Re: Limit master cards?
IMO, a significant stealth package is actually designed to avoid table interaction - and head directly to pool loss. Others might say "interactive" is doing something every turn from turn 2 on, even if that interaction is Night Moves bleed that never sees a block. All good, either way, just a question of perspective.
My definition of interaction is pretty much that you do something that people can interact with. Stealth/intercept/bounce is interaction as much as smashing a helpless vampire's face in is interaction. The ani rush deck that Hugh played (Girls on Tour) needs a ridiculous amount of turns to start doing something that involves other Meth's.
"Arguments" like this really don´t help you, if you´re interested in a serious discussion.
Nor does the throwing up the availability "discussion" all the time. Or spewing out nonsense like:
This doesn´t work in my experience. I have 1 Sudden/Wash each turn, they have 3-4 MPA:s.
I'll tell you how it *actually* works.
You bring out Cybele/Nana or Anson. You then have 2 MPA's. One of those is reserved for either an Ashur Tablet, or a Liquidation or an Anthelios swap. The second is just the regular master phase, where you play Villeins, Pentexes and other stuff depending on what you play. Playing a Sudden on the trifle *cripples* this deck's cardflow. Suddening will always slow them down. Sure, they will probably recycle their Ashurs and Parthenon (that is, of course if you didn't bother to play Uncoiling to get rid of Anthelios) but it slows them down a turn. It forces them into defense another turn.
Of course, at some point during the game, you will probably end up getting a Parthenon in play. This is also the point where your recursion starts kicking and Suddens don't really hurt *that* much anymore. By this time all the "deadweight" is out of your deck/hand an is either on the table or in your ashpile. This is where the decks become very strong.
The trade-off for this is that during the first 6-8 turns it's a actually a very weak deck that basically gives its prey a free game during this time.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
23 May 2012 10:57 #31056
by Ashur
Tupdogs and Khazars are decktypes that can be handeled, much like let´s say weenie-POT or Shamblings has been handeled for fifteen+ years. MMPA:s and card recursion are game mechanics. Do you understand the difference between “complaining” about these decktypes and “complaining” about game mechanics which has been extremely altered in the last three years?
Do you see it changing in any direction? How will it change? You mean _everyone_ will start playing PRE-weenies or Vignes? Sorry, that is not how this game works – about 50 % of the people I play with will probably not change their decks a lot – and this has been one of the strong points of Vtes, to be able to show up with a 10 year old deck and still have a chance to win. Is this no longer desirable? (If it was design intent, it´s a sad coincidence WW cancelled the game so that this in my opinion bad intent could be completed.)
Yeah, and if you play Aksinya Daclau and Talbot masters are also kind of ok.
Yeah. It´s a mystery how it, and other MMPA-decks just keep winning. And making the game boring while doing it.
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
Replied by Ashur on topic Re: Limit master cards?
Are you complaining about a game mechanic that you don't like or a deck archetype you think is too strong? If the former, suck it up. If the latter, it must be asked whether this is a passing trend (there is always a deck that is seen by some as too strong) or whether the archetype actually is too strong and the rules ought to be changed. Many of us remain unconvinced a rules change is in order because we've seen these other decks come and go and the same kinds of things were said at the time.
Tupdogs and Khazars are decktypes that can be handeled, much like let´s say weenie-POT or Shamblings has been handeled for fifteen+ years. MMPA:s and card recursion are game mechanics. Do you understand the difference between “complaining” about these decktypes and “complaining” about game mechanics which has been extremely altered in the last three years?
Something that rarely gets talked about in vtes is pacing. Pacing is what makes a deck good, great or garbage. Right now the pacing is good for these master-heavy decks. Whether consciously or unconsciously, that will change.
Do you see it changing in any direction? How will it change? You mean _everyone_ will start playing PRE-weenies or Vignes? Sorry, that is not how this game works – about 50 % of the people I play with will probably not change their decks a lot – and this has been one of the strong points of Vtes, to be able to show up with a 10 year old deck and still have a chance to win. Is this no longer desirable? (If it was design intent, it´s a sad coincidence WW cancelled the game so that this in my opinion bad intent could be completed.)
Master cards are better than minion cards except for of course during your minion phase.
Yeah, and if you play Aksinya Daclau and Talbot masters are also kind of ok.
Take a look at the Girls Will Find... deck. 41/75 masters and you need to influence Aksinya and either Cybele or Nana to have two MPAs. That is a slow-starting deck. How many turns does it need to set up? How many turns before it has a properly-tuned hand and can go forward? And what will it ultimately do? Rush. A single point of agg damage can put down any of its minions. A single stealth is sufficient to ensure a diablerie is successful. A single point of intercept stops any rescue attempt. This deck is good, make no mistake, but it's good because (like any good deck) it exploits holes in the metagame and takes advantage of pacing. I've played tables where this thing would be dead by turn 5.
Yeah. It´s a mystery how it, and other MMPA-decks just keep winning. And making the game boring while doing it.
"My strategy? Luck is my strategy, of course."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
23 May 2012 11:07 #31058
by Nightbringer
Forgive the sarcasm, but if we start making rule changes that allow two newbies with "decent s/b-decks" to have a good chance of beeting three good players with well tuned Tier 1 decks we could start rolling dices. I don´t think causal play with new players should be a foundation for rule changes. It should be the top-level play that determines if something is "broken" and need to be fixed, and in my opinion this is not the case.
That being said, to recruit new players, and I do think VTES need that in the long run, it is probably a bad idea to pick a MMPA deck for the first game. That however is a player issue and not something that is wrong with the game.
Andreas Thomasson
Prince of Linköping
Replied by Nightbringer on topic Re: Limit master cards?
Well, this isn´t all about top-level play. Of course I think MMPA are unbalanced in that kind of play also, but it get´s especially ugly when say 3 players are good and the other 2 are newbies in a casual game. The MMPA:s cannot be stopped for players who aren´t used to them. The bloat is just too heavy. This is were the unbalance is the worst actually. It´s not fun playing. Actually, in the case of the newbies, it´s bad PR for VTES - what not so long ago was considered the best multiplayer CCG, were any decent sb-deck had a chance, is now the "some überdudes shuffling their decks and the newbies don´t have a clue what´s happening"-game.
Forgive the sarcasm, but if we start making rule changes that allow two newbies with "decent s/b-decks" to have a good chance of beeting three good players with well tuned Tier 1 decks we could start rolling dices. I don´t think causal play with new players should be a foundation for rule changes. It should be the top-level play that determines if something is "broken" and need to be fixed, and in my opinion this is not the case.
That being said, to recruit new players, and I do think VTES need that in the long run, it is probably a bad idea to pick a MMPA deck for the first game. That however is a player issue and not something that is wrong with the game.
Andreas Thomasson
Prince of Linköping
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Nightbringer
-
- Offline
- Childe
-
Less
More
- Posts: 11
- Thank you received: 4
Time to create page: 0.113 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
V:TES Discussion
-
Card Balance & Strategy Discussion
- Limit master cards?