Compromise on Villein

Joscha wrote:

I have to admit that I find this whole discussion kind of boring.

I'm bored too. Suggest other topic for discussion, we got nothing interesting going here! Mybe I'll be distracted

Returning to the topic - I really don't think, that smth will change in a year - we already got 21 villeins in the EC2010 final. And the nature of the game ensures, that there still be idiotic decks without villeins in TWDA.

Adonai wrote:

I'm saying that it doesn't matter to the game as a whole. There are swings and roundabouts, there are rock to your paper to other's scissors. All opponents are not playing Villein in every deck on every table.

Em, no? There are no "rocks" to villein and there are very few decks, which doesn't need villein (smalcaps, multiple masters with ashurs, that's all?)

Adonai wrote:

elotar wrote:

2. Why more big caps is better 4 the game?

Being run over by 2-3-4 caps in 3-4 turns of play makes people leave the game. Improving large capacity vampires viability was one of the design prerequisites of the last 4-5 sets.

You got some alien logic here - Villein does nothing (additional to MT) against smallcap rush.

Offtop: And generally I disagree with this "design prerequisites". I think anybody can look at Arika and see, where really is a problem of big vampires. Spoiler - they just need more abilities! The road to decrese cost of them is wrong one.

Adonai wrote:

Yes.
More non-pool gain cards are seeing play.
When your master selection is only pool gain, vast swathes of the game become lost. Villein + (other random permanent) is better than the game without the random permanent, which is what was observed when Minion Tap was the only option for quick pool recovery.

OK. We got 1 argument forV: +5-6 "additional" master slots.

elotar wrote:

The question here is "do we need solution for cap&tap?"

Obviously, no. It's been around since day one of the game, and the sky is still firmly in place.

elotar wrote:

If we doesn't need it villein can just be errated to "trifle: move 2 blood" or banned with no real hurt 4 the game.

Your conclusion doesn't follow from your question unless we all agree to your assumption that Villein was introduced to the game in order to stop people from playing Minion Tap. And like I just wrote upthread, there's no indication that it was.

Like Joscha, I'm gonna just drop the mic and be out for a while.

KevinM wrote:

Adonai wrote:

Remember, if you want to know why LSJ did something, you can ask him.

How?

Ask him on BGG, copy/paste the conversation here.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

What is the purpose of Villein

Here is LSJ's answer:
boardgamegeek.com/thread/640121/design-reflections-ndas-expired

Emphasis mine.

Non-existant user wrote:

It is strong enough to play instead of Minion Tap.
It is strong enough to play even when people are not playing Minion Tap.
When played, it weakens Minion Tap and itself.
Its existence makes running Minion Tap or not a slightly pause-giving decision.
It can't be blindly cycled in game, both individually and subsequently, making the number of Villein to run (if at all) a more interesting design decision, while also ensuring play decisions as well.

Non-existant user wrote:

Its existence makes running Minion Tap or not a slightly pause-giving decision.
It can't be blindly cycled in game, both individually and subsequently, making the number of Villein to run (if at all) a more interesting design decision, while also ensuring play decisions as well.

I will go kill myself.