Honest Idea for fixing overly strong master cards!

Demnogonis wrote:

Playing such a game where, say, everybody stealth bleeds doesn't require an ounce of skill or thought from anyone, and it resolves in a mechanical manner. The best player, in this case, needs to be the one who gets the best seat (or card drawing luck since in this case the decks are so similar), because everybody is playing a railroaded coinflip deck.

Another hugely ignorant misunderstanding of the game. You should have been at Origins this year to see your theory demolished in more than one final, so you'd be yanked screaming and kicking into the way that VTES really works.

I do hope that someday your blinders are removed so that your mind can become opened to the joy of complexity that is the infinite-theory CCG that we call VTES.

I specifically play VTES because many of the other games out there appear to be elaborate Mexican standoffs or an overly complicated game of Russian Roulette.

I promise you, if VTES boiled down to "what order you sit" then I'd roll a d6, do something else for 2 hours and come back to roll a d6 again.

Interesting. The argument is focused decks do well against a number of decks, while diversified decks do decently against all decks. Is it really such a big deal if said toolboxes only do decently against a wide variety of deck instead? No deck should ever be a sure fire way to win a game. Having a less offensive toolbox deck lose to a differentiated deck, ie. a deck which gain a lot of pool, doesn't seem so bad to me.

The Girls deck is essentially a toolbox deck in itself...

KevinM wrote:

Yeah, that's why the same players keep racking up win after win in the VTES Hall of Fame, because it's all due to seating and odd card draws.

Those players play so many tournaments that of course they get a lot of wins, and obviously they're good enough to build solid decks and play the game that follows seating.

KevinM wrote:

Another hugely ignorant misunderstanding of the game. You should have been at Origins this year to see your theory demolished in more than one final, so you'd be yanked screaming and kicking into the way that VTES really works.

I do hope that someday your blinders are removed so that your mind can become opened to the joy of complexity that is the infinite-theory CCG that we call VTES.

Yeah, I think differently, it's a shallow game after all.

@ Cyrus : I'm not even sure if toolbox decks suck against bloat decks, it's not really a fact at this point. Could as well be that many of them haven't adjusted for the metagame. However the tournament metagame has changed for certain, and the sort of games we get now are so boring, whatever the reason.

I don't understand why you keep completely ignoring the (valid) opinions of the people that have been playing this game for years at the highest level of competition available for VTES.

Are you REALLY suggesting that people like Hugh, Ben and Erik are ONLY win a lot of tournament games because they play a lot of tournaments? Let me tell you, I've had the privilege of playing against all three of them and their game is just a whole step ahead of yours. They play near flawless, are masters of deception and of course don't play with bad decks.

If VTES would be a complete crapshoot where the deck seating determined the outcome of the game, I can guarantee you there wouldn't have been hundreds (if not thousands) of dedicated players organizing and playing international tournaments of a dead game.