Do you play to win?

vtesocrates wrote:

Also, why in the world would anybody play vtes for any reason other than fun? It's not like anything is at stake!

To be honest, I find rude when peoples play to VtES without trying to win. It's obviously forgiveable when it's because the player play badly, but I must admit that when my grandpredator refuse to rush and bleed my predator to death, ousting me instead, or cross oust me because his boyfriend is my predator, or some other random shenanigans often put on the cheap excuse of "I try to make the game fun", I tend to react badly.

I have fun trying to win. In a multiplayer game, if people act randomly instead of trying to win, they can spoil the fun for other players in addition to twarting their plans. That's one of the thing to recall in the Myrdin post, and something I require from people trying to play with me.

I read Sirlin's articles a long time ago. I decided he and I are radically different people.

He would still be playing a Malk'94 variant in every tournament. It's pretty clearly the most broken 2-discipline combination in the game. It largely reduces the 5 player game to a series of 1:1 duels with your prey, peppered with "I [insert Wake effect] and Deflect." Same deck, 15 times in a row at WoN, for 18 years straight.

Thank God I'm not Sirlin - it might be worse than being Sklansky.

Ohlmann wrote:

vtesocrates wrote:

Also, why in the world would anybody play vtes for any reason other than fun? It's not like anything is at stake!

To be honest, I find rude when peoples play to VtES without trying to win. It's obviously forgiveable when it's because the player play badly, but I must admit that when my grandpredator refuse to rush and bleed my predator to death, ousting me instead, or cross oust me because his boyfriend is my predator, or some other random shenanigans often put on the cheap excuse of "I try to make the game fun", I tend to react badly.

You are describing behavior that is clearly illegal in a tournament. If that happens, don't react badly, just call a judge. Of course it cheapens the game when people don't try to win. That is against the rules or, in other words, cheating. Cheating is not a good way to bring fun to the game.

vtesocrates wrote:

You are describing behavior that is clearly illegal in a tournament. If that happens, don't react badly, just call a judge. Of course it cheapens the game when people don't try to win.

Yes, and the stockholm recall that it does not end in "do not be insane". It's also "try your best to do something that actually work". A conceptual deck that playe every gehenna event, a tzimisce player that refuse to cast vote to help a lasombra player while it would be in its interest, and generally people that don't create their deck and play them intenting to win are problematics.

Note that in this regard there is no difference between tournament and casual play. The RPG is a much better support if you want extreme freedom on what to do ; in VtES, don't waste my time with something that don't work, and play it like if your life were really on the line - which it is supposed to be for the methuselah

Ohlmann wrote:

Yes, and the stockholm recall that it does not end in "do not be insane". It's also "try your best to do something that actually work". A conceptual deck that playe every gehenna event, a tzimisce player that refuse to cast vote to help a lasombra player while it would be in its interest, and generally people that don't create their deck and play them intenting to win are problematics.

(bolded emphasis mine)

It's contrary to the most fundamental nature of a CCG to attempt to enforce PTW at the level of deckbuilding, which makes it fortunate that it's also impossible to do so. You can't know what does and doesn't work without actually trying stuff that's unknown.

There are plenty of fixed-component games out there if you want to play something in which it's guaranteed that everyone will begin the game on equal footing. That CCGs incorporate a design element in their play is a feature, not a bug.

TryDeflectingThisGrapple wrote:

I read Sirlin's articles a long time ago. I decided he and I are radically different people.

He would still be playing a Malk'94 variant in every tournament. It's pretty clearly the most broken 2-discipline combination in the game. It largely reduces the 5 player game to a series of 1:1 duels with your prey, peppered with "I [insert Wake effect] and Deflect." Same deck, 15 times in a row at WoN, for 18 years straight.

Thank God I'm not Sirlin - it might be worse than being Sklansky.

I would argue against this though. While being viable, I do not think malk '94 is the strongest deck a when you weight in meta you'd probably rotate between a couple of tier 1 decks. He also encourages to try around different concepts during casual or training games to widen your understanding as much as possible. Since V:TES is not a game focused on mechanics (although you need to have the fundamentals solid), knowledge of the game, meta and social skill is what will determine your game.