file Welcome to Africa

04 Sep 2012 12:22 #35913 by Surreal
Replied by Surreal on topic Welcome to Africa

Yes, that's very common and also very bad. That strategy would work if the game didn't have a clock. Which it has.


Friendly games in here don't have a time limit so most of the time it is no time limit tables (minus the tournaments). That meta allows different decks and people tends to play slower decks. Interesting question is if all Vtes games should have time limit by default and is game more balanced with time limit? But that is another topic.

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

More
04 Sep 2012 14:13 - 04 Sep 2012 15:24 #35915 by Izaak
Replied by Izaak on topic Welcome to Africa

On the contrary, the only environment good for non-multiacting big cap rush is one that features big caps. Big caps tend to oust with fewer actions than weenies meaning that the actions are bigger. Since bleeding is the most common oust mechanism, big cap bleed usually means big bleeds.


Wait, what?
a) How is this even a relevant response to the bit you quoted, and -
b) In which universe do big caps bleed for more than mid and smallcaps? For how much you bleed has fuckall to do with how big your vampires are and everything to do with how your library is constructed. And spare me the discipline argument, because it doesn't exist.

Bad? If it's required to survive, I'd call it a good strategy.

I played an Al'Muntaquim multirush in Ropecon this year (~70 players) and got almost to the finals with 2GW+7VP. I don't really think that was badly done. And I most definitely play Archon Investigation. Also, my first thing to do each game is to backrush, basically without exceptions. Every game I haven't done that resulted in me being ousted. And my only reaction card was Delaying Tactics.


You going 2-7 with a rush deck by backrushing as a default action, still doesn't make it a good strategy. I've got 3 gamewins (+the tournament) with a freaking Spell of Life deck at the last nationals here, but that doesn't make it a good deck. It just means I got a good meta and a lucky seating and played well enough to make use of the situation.

More relevant: I got my first tournament win with a rush deck without doing a single action to my predator (during the entire day) and with zero AI's in the deck. Clearly, because I won the tournament my strategy is better than yours.

See what I did there?

@Only good combat decks are those with a wall aspect to them.
That's pretty harsh. They're most likely (usually) better than those without any reaction package, but saying that it's the only single approach to combat and winning is pushing it. I'd call it short sighted, even.


What is short-sighted, is calling a "reaction package" a wall aspect.

@Archon Investigation always makes your grand predator win.

This just isn't true! It's weird how some people are so absolute about this! Many combat decks and those without a great reaction module (setites, for example) like it a lot. My predator losing one of his three dominate bleeders doesn't make him lose - far from it. It's still as likely as ever for him to survive, but he can't bleed me as recklessly as he might've done with more minions.


Nobody here is saying AI always makes your grand predator win.

What AI does it one of three things:

1) Sit in your hand uselessly.
2) Blow up one of your predator's heavy bleeders, out of spite, because it only delays the inevitable. In fact, after you using the AI he is 0% likely to play more careful and he has all the incentive in the world to pound on you as hard as he can. Especially since the threat of AI is now gone and since you played it in the first place, so are other defensive possibilities.
3) Nuke huge chuck of your predator's resources for little net gain, settings your grandpredator up for an easy VP and extra pool, while you just managed to hurt yourself in multiple ways.

All of these are less desirable than having a Dreams or any other actually useful master helping you instead.

Playing 1-2 AI's is a total waste of your time, cardslots and it provides you with a false sense of security. It's extremely unlikely to actually help you survive when you need it and does in no way help you win. Yes, occasionally it's really great and helps out a ton, but Vissicitude Poisoning is sometimes really awesome and great as well. This is still no argument to include Vissicitude Poisoning in any deck . Ever.

Interesting question is if all Vtes games should have time limit by default and is game more balanced with time limit?


Should is a big word. Clearly, the game is designed with the time limit in mind and arguably cards and strategies are developed around that.

I always advocate playing with tournament rules in casual games because ultimately it makes you a better player, but groups can do whatever they feel like, obviously.
Last edit: 04 Sep 2012 15:24 by Izaak.

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

More
04 Sep 2012 15:15 #35918 by Lönkka
Replied by Lönkka on topic Welcome to Africa

Izaak wrote: I always advocate playing with tournament rules because ultimately it makes you a better player, but groups can do whatever they fell like, obviously.

Even if you don't use time limit, it dosn't hurt check when the two hour time limit has passed and what the game situation is at that point.

NC, Finland
Finnish :POT: Politics!

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

  • Lönkka
  • Lönkka's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Antediluvian
  • Antediluvian
  • War=peace, freedom=slavery, ignorance=strength
More
04 Sep 2012 16:36 #35935 by Kraus
Replied by Kraus on topic Welcome to Africa

Izaak wrote:

Bad? If it's required to survive, I'd call it a good strategy.

I played an Al'Muntaquim multirush in Ropecon this year (~70 players) and got almost to the finals with 2GW+7VP. I don't really think that was badly done. And I most definitely play Archon Investigation. Also, my first thing to do each game is to backrush, basically without exceptions. Every game I haven't done that resulted in me being ousted. And my only reaction card was Delaying Tactics.


You going 2-7 with a rush deck by backrushing as a default action, still doesn't make it a good strategy.

How so? Staying alive to win is pretty valid in my opinion. I don't think that kind of a deck can work without going backwards first.

I've got 3 gamewins (+the tournament) with a freaking Spell of Life deck at the last nationals here, but that doesn't make it a good deck. It just means I got a good meta and a lucky seating and played well enough to make use of the situation.

More relevant: I got my first tournament win with a rush deck without doing a single action to my predator (during the entire day) and with zero AI's in the deck. Clearly, because I won the tournament my strategy is better than yours.

See what I did there?

:blink:

Okay, I'm not even going to go there... Insults aren't something I like to base conversations on.

@Only good combat decks are those with a wall aspect to them.
That's pretty harsh. They're most likely (usually) better than those without any reaction package, but saying that it's the only single approach to combat and winning is pushing it. I'd call it short sighted, even.


What is short-sighted, is calling a "reaction package" a wall aspect.

Yeah, yeah, fair enough, I worded poorly. I just got the impression that you're thinking you can't play combat competitively without reactions. Granted, I was playing a reaction card as well, but I found other reactions to be redundant (mostly) when playing FOR multirush. It was just a weird notion I gathered from your post, and I thought I'd phrase that I disagree. :)

@Archon Investigation always makes your grand predator win.

This just isn't true! It's weird how some people are so absolute about this! Many combat decks and those without a great reaction module (setites, for example) like it a lot. My predator losing one of his three dominate bleeders doesn't make him lose - far from it. It's still as likely as ever for him to survive, but he can't bleed me as recklessly as he might've done with more minions.


Nobody here is saying AI always makes your grand predator win.

Okay, there was just a lot of implications towards that. My bad if I misunderstood.

What AI does it one of three things:

1) Sit in your hand uselessly.
2) Blow up one of your predator's heavy bleeders, out of spite, because it only delays the inevitable. In fact, after you using the AI he is 0% likely to play more careful and he has all the incentive in the world to pound on you as hard as he can. Especially since the threat of AI is now gone and since you played it in the first place, so are other defensive possibilities.
3) Nuke huge chuck of your predator's resources for little net gain, settings your grandpredator up for an easy VP and extra pool, while you just managed to hurt yourself in multiple ways.

1) Probably most of the time. If you get to use it, though, it's pretty good in my opinion.
2) Yeah, it delays, but it's not the inevitable if you're planned against it. Nuking your Predator's vampires is a tactic, I belive, and I've used it effectively myself. But let's avoid the ultimatums: there's no chance you'll know for sure that in every circumstance there's an absolute 0% probability my Predator will slow down after an AI.
3) I've stated my argument, and I'm saying there's a gain: one less bleeders for coming turns. :)

All of these are less desirable than having a Dreams or any other actually useful master helping you instead.

Playing 1-2 AI's is a total waste of your time, cardslots and it provides you with a false sense of security. It's extremely unlikely to actually help you survive when you need it and does in no way help you win. Yes, occasionally it's really great and helps out a ton, but Vissicitude Poisoning is sometimes really awesome and great as well. This is still no argument to include Vissicitude Poisoning in any deck . Ever.

Well ya, no argument there! :D Basically all clan hosers are just plain bad. It's just a good thing plenty of clans can, and tend to, bleed for 4+ on occasion - and aim for it often, even!

But yeah, anyways, I don't guess we're gonna agree on stuff anyways, save the obvious facts, like that AI is highly situational and it's a costly card. :) There's a proper thread for this presently anyways, so let's continute there if there's any reason to continue.

"Oh, to the Hades with the manners! He's a complete bastard, and calling him that insults bastards everywhere!"
-Nalia De-Arnise

Facebook @ VtES: Joensuu
www.vekn.net/forum-guidelines

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

More
04 Sep 2012 16:46 #35937 by Ohlmann
Replied by Ohlmann on topic Welcome to Africa

Kraus wrote: 3) I've stated my argument, and I'm saying there's a gain: one less bleeders for coming turns. :)


But since either you or your predator will be ousted by then anyway ...

Since it seem to be the main disagreement, I will develop.

To this to matter, you must survive a full round of bleed from your predator. It mean being at 10+ before the AI if you let him one minion, and at more than 15 if you let him two. And thoses are extremely low amount of pool against a powerbleeder anyway, since being at 1 next turn won't exactly bode well for a slow deck like that.

This is just completely unrealistic if your predator is not stupid. And if you burn its last minion with AI, you are extremely likely to just have another predator immediatly.

Conclusion : for your defense, play anything else. Especially something that will allow you to block actions. It will really buy you time unlike AI, and it will be a lot more polyvalent since you can play it against bleed for 3, or vote, or temptation, or anything.

AI is not here to buy you time. It will never buy any acceptable amount of time against a somewhat good player. AI is here to burn your predator vampires, and you ALREADY are good at this in a rush deck.

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

More
04 Sep 2012 17:03 #35940 by Lemminkäinen
Replied by Lemminkäinen on topic Welcome to Africa

Izaak wrote:

On the contrary, the only environment good for non-multiacting big cap rush is one that features big caps. Big caps tend to oust with fewer actions than weenies meaning that the actions are bigger. Since bleeding is the most common oust mechanism, big cap bleed usually means big bleeds.


Wait, what?
a) How is this even a relevant response to the bit you quoted, and -
b) In which universe do big caps bleed for more than mid and smallcaps? For how much you bleed has fuckall to do with how big your vampires are and everything to do with how your library is constructed. And spare me the discipline argument, because it doesn't exist.

First of all, why the abrasive tone? I have been perfectly respectful towards you the whole time. If you are not interested in a polite conversation and exchange of ideas and experiences, let me know and I will stop replying to you.

As for my point - big caps bleed for more if they intend to oust by bleeding, since they can do fewer bleed actions per turn than weenies. If you have six minions, you can oust someone rather nicely by bleeding for two with every minion. If you have two big caps, you won't oust most people by bleeding for two with every minion.

Add to this the fact that big caps tend to (or at least should) have some way of delivering that bleed. With weenies you can overwhelm your prey's defenses through weight of numbers. With big caps you need something else.

Also note that if your main form of defense is removing vampires (as rush decks tend to) then removing a vampire through AI is business as usual.

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

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.133 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum