No More Bounce Cards

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Dorrinal wrote:

James:
A new defense card should provide more interesting decisions in deck design than Deflection. Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. Can be fun to play, but not to build. So if your hypothetical card passed that test, I'd be in favor of it.

I'm confused, then.

In the initial post, you say that we shouldn't have more bounce because it would:

"Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type."

But you seem to be happy for new cards that aren't bounce, and which involve interesting deck design/construction/play choices - even if those cards would make the metagame equally as hostile for stealth-bleed.


I think the point I'm getting at is that your justification about hostility for stealth-bleed decks doesn't lead to, or support, a conclusion of "No more bounce." It supports the conclusion "No more useful bleed defences, at all." So I'm not sure what it is you actually want.

Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type.

On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards.

Dorrinal wrote:

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Dorrinal wrote:

James:
A new defense card should provide more interesting decisions in deck design than Deflection. Currently with a "grafted dominate" style of deck you build the deck, then add up to 10 Deflections, and call it good. Can be fun to play, but not to build. So if your hypothetical card passed that test, I'd be in favor of it.

I'm confused, then.

In the initial post, you say that we shouldn't have more bounce because it would:

"Create a hostile metagame for stealth bleed decks, which should be a viable deck type."

But you seem to be happy for new cards that aren't bounce, and which involve interesting deck design/construction/play choices - even if those cards would make the metagame equally as hostile for stealth-bleed.


I think the point I'm getting at is that your justification about hostility for stealth-bleed decks doesn't lead to, or support, a conclusion of "No more bounce." It supports the conclusion "No more useful bleed defences, at all." So I'm not sure what it is you actually want.

Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type.

On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards.

Bullshit, in competetive enviroment with high amount of bounce s&b is still good archetype to play. Especially with those anti-bounce cards of late (hide the mind, touch of clarity)

I would welcome stronger anti-bounce or bounce with restrictions (like, you have to block the bleed and fail it or bounce that reduce the bleed so it's not useful for redirecting bleed for less than 3, or bounce card that "share" the bleed - so TWO meths can block the action and if they fail the amount of pool loss is shared between them in some way).

There are many choices for card design, even for such trivial thing like bounce.

Also, wtf stealth and bleed should be encouraged ? If anything, bruise and bleed should be encouraged and s&b should be discouraged.

Dorrinal wrote:

Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type.

On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards.

How is that different to any of the current qualifiers, like the many we have seen around Sydney, with a large number of Dominate Decks that are all flicking to each other around the place and it just becomes a game of "Who doesn't have the flick in hand?". We've all seen the "Everyone has Flick" game. It's called a Qualifier tournament. So increasing the ability for other decks to pack some kind of flick just means that more decks get the chance to join in the "Flick Roulette".

I don't mind the idea of anti-bounce technology, but the disciplines it gets chosen for must be VERY carefully chosen because we do NOT need clans that already have access to Block Fails to get Flick Fails.

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Dorrinal wrote:

Bounce redirects that pool damage to one's prey. So even the best non-bounce bleed defense doesn't hurt the stealth bleed deck's viability in the same way. In a competitive environment, stealth-bleed is viable. If bounce cards become available such that every competitive deck can play it, I would expect stealth-bleed to become a poor deck type.

On the other hand I'd welcome stronger anti-bounce tech in that metagame. That would require more new cards.

How is that different to any of the current qualifiers, like the many we have seen around Sydney, with a large number of Dominate Decks that are all flicking to each other around the place and it just becomes a game of "Who doesn't have the flick in hand?". We've all seen the "Everyone has Flick" game. It's called a Qualifier tournament. So increasing the ability for other decks to pack some kind of flick just means that more decks get the chance to join in the "Flick Roulette".

I don't mind the idea of anti-bounce technology, but the disciplines it gets chosen for must be VERY carefully chosen because we do NOT need clans that already have access to Block Fails to get Flick Fails.

Um, malkavians ? they have all flick fails and 1 block fails.

Pre-emptive Psychic Paralysis
Action Modifier
Cost 1 Blood
Play when a Bleed action is announced
Minions cannot play reaction cards that require Auspex that would change the target of this bleed.
As above, but reactions that require any discipline.
As above, but younger vampires get -1 Intercept for the duration of this action.



...what?


But seriously, I don't think any other disciplines than Auspex or Dominate need Bounce cards - nor do Bounce need counters as much. Two Wrongs is pretty okay as it is.

Kraus wrote:

Pre-emptive Psychic Paralysis
Action Modifier
Cost 1 Blood
Play when a Bleed action is announced
Minions cannot play reaction cards that require Auspex that would change the target of this bleed.
As above, but reactions that require any discipline.
As above, but younger vampires get -1 Intercept for the duration of this action.



...what?


But seriously, I don't think any other disciplines than Auspex or Dominate need Bounce cards - nor do Bounce need counters as much. Two Wrongs is pretty okay as it is.

That kind of card requires very much thinking and testing to see how it changes game. Anyway -1 intercept is not cool. We need more defensive options against bleed first until we think of nerfing bounce. I don't even want to nerf bounce with those kind of cards. If people would start pack anti bounce, other people would stop using bounce or vice versa. Somebody would have dead cards in deck anyway and person who guess the metagame will win.

I don't want to change metagame so much with fan expansion. Things should go stable at first, maybe bigger changes later when we see how things start rolling with fan expansions. So I would like to see just "safe cards" which doesn't warp metagame too much at first.

EDIT Lost in Translation almost fixed the limited bounce issue but younger vampire thing killed the card. That should had been removed and replaced with only usable by vampire above 4 (or 6) to stop weenie abuse or higher blood cost if bleeder higher capacity.