Honest Idea for fixing overly strong master cards!

Generally yes I agree with you. Totally. There are many things in the game I would love to see enhanced or made weaker. In the case of the listed master cards I think the game isn't unbalanced, though they are surely strong.

Besides the usual Sudden Reversal / Uncoiling etc. arguments I have to mention this:

Ashur and/or Liquidation and/or Villein made many decks playable on a tournament level that earlier were too weak. Good examples are decks like:

1. Peter Botos' Rock Cat deck:
Rock Cat

2. Blood Brothers
especially the new group, but also the others need Ashur Tablets. Ben Peal played such a deck at several tournaments here and he achieved a game win at every tournament with the deck. Another player who played Blood Brother without the tablets failed to ever achieve a game win. And he is a very good player, especially with combat decks.

3. Villein is the main reason why big cap vampires are now seen again on tournaments on a regular basis. At least in our metagame.

If I would take the time to check all the TWDA etc., I could surely find more examples. Banning these cards will "destroy" tier1 decks like Girls will.. dekcs, but it would also "kill" many tier2-tierwhatevernumber decks which aren't broken but funny and creative.

I'd prefer Johannes' idea to print/create new cards that have an effect on let's say vampires with a Villein on them. Just keep the balance...

Mephistopheles wrote:

Generally yes I agree with you. Totally. There are many things in the game I woul
Ashur and/or Liquidation and/or Villein made many decks playable on a tournament level that earlier were too weak.

It's quite obvious, that if a card combination is too strong, than putting it into weak deck may make this deck not so weak. But it's not making tournament scene more interesting, cause we really get no more different combat decks with ashurs, we get more ashurs deck with some combat.

Suoli wrote:

Mephistopheles wrote:

Instead of complaining about certain cards just build in anti-tech into your deck. You don't want to put anti tech cards into your otherwise well balanced, sharp, one-trick tourney deck? Well, than don't complain.

You should not assume that whenever someone suggests changes it's because it makes their favorite deck better. Sometimes people really do think that making changes would make the game more enjoyable/diverse/challenging/etc for everyone involved.

This same argument comes up every time someone brings up any sort of concern about game balance. It's very arrogant, naive, and insulting and does nothing to address the specific issue at hand.

I admit that there are reflective and sensible players out there, who carefully analyse cards and their impact on the game. And there were good changes of cards in the past, no doubt about that.
On the other hand we hear all sort of complaints about cards on a regular basis. Often it is a "that is much too strong, I can't do nothing against it, the end is near"-chant which really annoys me. What I like the most of VtES is the possibility to handle every situation. There is NO silver bullet if you don't turn a card into one by ignoring the downsides. A deck relying exclusively on master cards have many other weaknesses. Instead of whining about how strong master cards are use their disadvantages to your favour.

What I like to see is an analysis of what cards have a big impact on the game at the moment AND a creative way to counter it. And the latter is often enough replaced by a "let's change/ban it"-behaviour which, sorry, sucks big time.
Because: There is a guy who comes up with a good idea to have success at the current metagame (for example the scandinavian players with the Girls-deck). Fame to him. The other guys don't adapt to that idea and don't come up with some own ideas to handle that. Of course it is harder to think of a solution than to simply weaken the hated card. But come on, is that the way how it should be? I'm not the most clever deckbuilder myself, but I try my best.

I'm sorry if that POV sounds arrogant and insulting to you.

Joscha wrote:

I admit that there are reflective and sensible players out there, who carefully analyse cards and their impact on the game. And there were good changes of cards in the past, no doubt about that.
On the other hand we hear all sort of complaints about cards on a regular basis. Often it is a "that is much too strong, I can't do nothing against it, the end is near"-chant which really annoys me. What I like the most of VtES is the possibility to handle every situation. There is NO silver bullet if you don't turn a card into one by ignoring the downsides. A deck relying exclusively on master cards have many other weaknesses. Instead of whining about how strong master cards are use their disadvantages to your favour.

The question, to me at least, is whether answering the dominant archetype leads to creative deck building or stagnation. If the only reliable answer (as in doesn't suck against everything else) to Girls is DEM-weenie with The Rising we're looking at a very boring metagame.

What I like to see is an analysis of what cards have a big impact on the game at the moment AND a creative way to counter it. And the latter is often enough replaced by a "let's change/ban it"-behaviour which, sorry, sucks big time.

You shouldn't assume that about other people.

Because: There is a guy who comes up with a good idea to have success at the current metagame (for example the scandinavian players with the Girls-deck). Fame to him. The other guys don't adapt to that idea and don't come up with some own ideas to handle that. Of course it is harder to think of a solution than to simply weaken the hated card. But come on, is that the way how it should be? I'm not the most clever deckbuilder myself, but I try my best.

There are very few viable solutions to Girls. I haven't seen one that isn't boring in the long run.

I'm sorry if that POV sounds arrogant and insulting to you.

I don't mind that you hold that view. But I do find that people are more receptive to my ideas when I keep my preconceptions about others out of the discussion.

What I don't understand is how people jump from "we need to nerf girls" to "we need to nerf masters". Masters are for everyone, and girls won tournaments before Ashur Tablets and Villein. If you really want to nerf the Girls, you should rather wonder what they have and others don't.

My point of view on this is so people who are creative and come up with some tricky decks get punished. I have been away from the game a long time. This is one of the reasons why I left. It started to feel like MtG ,and that when cards or combos looked to strong they got nerfed. The one thing that got me into this game was the multi-player aspect.

I understand that some cards come out and are broken maybe. I just think it has more to do with tourneys than home games. Tourney decks are so focused that most get hosed if their weakness is next to them. If people have to +/- cards from their decks to combat certain cards or combos then so be it.

Take your loss or lumps and adjust your deck don't just say lets change cards or add. I really think that " Johannes' idea to print/create new cards that have an effect on let's say vampires with a Villein on them. Just keep the balance..." is the best way go.

I perfect example is archon investigation. In our area stealth bleed decks were killer because everyone would bleed for more than 3 until that card got played then after that decks got changed so not to lose vampires, check and balance. It then became a choice when I built a bleed deck take a chance and bleed for more than 3 and die or have 5 vamps bleed for 3.