Limit master cards?

Forhead wrote:

Usally tends to end up stronger...

Oh, like compared to Otto's Shamblers or Joni's Potence guys?

For the Stockholm play group, I do not think it is a fair assessment that there is a lack of combat or intercept at the tables.

Lönkka wrote:

Forhead wrote:

Usally tends to end up stronger...

Oh, like compared to Otto's Shamblers or Joni's Potence guys?

Joni's win wasn't the usual. Dont take we wrong, he great deserved to win. Shambling hordes is one of those archtypes that I tend to choose over the Joni-style decks. And was (among other archtypes) what I were refering to.

I feel like, about how to counter master heavy decks, cards like sudden reversal and uncoiling are quite irrelevant. It does slow a master deck down, of course, but it's hardly a counter. In the same way that a 75 card deck with 4 bounces is not a counter to a DEM weenie.

If you want to meta game against master heavy decks, and especially decks which rely on Ashurs to create their optimal library, I would recommend a fast deck which destroys (either ousts, kills its minions or create an unkillable setup) the deck before it has a chance to reach its crescendo. You can't create a slow bleeder, with light combat and some blood dolls for bloat to beat an Ashurs deck. You need something that increases in power at the same speed as the Ashurs deck or one that destroys the Ashurs deck before it gets off the ground.

Joni's pot rush is an example of a deck that kills Ashur decks before it gets off the ground and Otto's shambling deck is an example of a deck which can increase in power at the same speed. (Shambling Hordes is an incredibly powerful permanent, and Sudario has the same qualities as Ashurs.) I think this was the cause of their decks' successes (together with intelligent play and experience, of course).

And all these cards are not cards that you generally need 6-9 of to make just about any crap deck into a winner. I´m sure you understand the difference.

Adding 6-9 Ashurs to a crap deck will not make it a winner. It will just make it slower and still crap. You just don't seem to understand there is an actual cost to playing Ashur Tablets. Probably as a result of you never actually playing them.

That all decks should devote about 50 % of their master slots to be able to stop a Big cap vote with MMPA and Tablets, sb with MMPA and Tablets, rush combat with MMPA and Tablets, wall decks with MMPA and Tablets (and so on). Is this a evolution of the Vtes-game that we want? I think not.

Design intent is that certain cards or strategies stop other cards or strategies.

For example:
Playing without bounce is usually a bad idea, unless you have an alternate plan to deal with bleed decks. These plans are, for example, rush or bloat. Alternatively you can just accepting that bleed decks will kill you.

Playing without some light combat is usually a bad idea, unless you have a backup plan for when you happen to run into Nephandus or War Ghoul decks. Backup plans may include extra Majesties, more presses to end or cards like Entracement. Or you can just outright ignore that part of your deck and accept that such decks will kill you.

Similarly, playing without Suddens is not a good idea in general, unless you have a backup plan to deal with Ashur/MMPA decks. These backup plans include rushing a lot or playing a fast deck. You can also choose to not include any Ashur/MMPA tech and accept the fact that such decks will kill you.

How is this different, really?

No of course you can't always counter all strategies in one deck, but that's where guessing the metagame comes in.

But alright, if I´m not allowed to "theorycraft" I can´t say much more on the subject. I guess you are right, being a better player than me.

Cute.