Lazarus

Ohlmann:
How many tournaments do you play in, where a bleed DOES NOT end up getting flicked AT LEAST two players away?? Dominate Flick is PREVALENT, not RARE. Auspex Flick is usually there when Dominate Flick is not. How much do people graft dominate into a deck "as bleed defence"?

AI on its own has created an environment where in Sydney there is a simple saying "If you're going to bleed for 4, you might as well be bleeding for 10... AI doesn't distinguish". And destroying a vampire can lead to TIME. Your predator has to die before you are under pressure, that TIME might be enough for you to oust your prey and get stuck into the player you claim is going to "get the game win".

Not using AI means I will have no problem ever bringing a powerbleed deck to your Meta. Bring powerbleed to Sydney and you've got a good chance of losing a key vampire or two... because the bigger vampires will be the one targeted by the AIs where possible.

I agree with the fact that redirection is prevalent. I just alway see people doing thing like responsible bleeding, arranging block, redirecting on the original target (by negociation). Don't forget that the two people that are neither your predator or prey are at least in name your ally and at least need you to not fall too early.

And go on, bring powerbleed where I play. I love my predator killing my prey, especially since I can DI the subsequent redirections, unlike the active player. (so can my prey DI my redirection, but it amount to the same result of playing AI usually on your predator, which is often less than ideal).

Powerbleed have a lot more problem than simply AI. They have the redirection problem, that you have actually very few and precious way to avoid. They may be blocked. They may be rushed. They handjam very easily, especially with stealth or combat counter measure. All that make that even without playing any AI in your playgroup they will not be the majority.

And AI work only against this minority. So spending 2+ slot for AI to be sure to have one in hand in the off chance that it's the best move is extremely costly. If you somehow play in a group where the metagame is to have more than half people casually bleeding for 4+, it may be a smart move to play AI, but it's only a very specific metagame concern.

In short, I will stand by a simple statement : AI is a card that don't protect you and don't make you win. It make the victim lose, which will be really rarely be your prey. Spending numerous slot on AI or expecting every deck to do it is strange and suboptimal ; bleeding while taking into account the fact that AI (and deflection) exist is normal, and is far from forbidding powerbleed. After all, Blood Brother only bleed for 1 or 4+, and they can actually win tables.

IMO, there's one big reason why Lucian, The Perfect isn't played more. That reason is AI - even just the overwhelming fear of it keeps him out of the TWDA way more than would ever be expected otherwise. I think that says it all.

Ohlmann wrote:

I agree with the fact that redirection is prevalent. I just alway see people doing thing like responsible bleeding, arranging block, redirecting on the original target (by negociation). Don't forget that the two people that are neither your predator or prey are at least in name your ally and at least need you to not fall too early.

Sometimes letting a cross-table fall is your best long-term move.

And go on, bring powerbleed where I play. I love my predator killing my prey, especially since I can DI the subsequent redirections, unlike the active player. (so can my prey DI my redirection, but it amount to the same result of playing AI usually on your predator, which is often less than ideal).

And why wouldn't your prey be using flicks? Are you going to pack 4+ DIs to try prevent your Prey's flicks?

Powerbleed have a lot more problem than simply AI. They have the redirection problem, that you have actually very few and precious way to avoid. They may be blocked. They may be rushed. They handjam very easily, especially with stealth or combat counter measure. All that make that even without playing any AI in your playgroup they will not be the majority.

And yet, what sorts of decks usually appear at Qualifying tournaments? Malk 94, Las Powerbleed, Gio Powerbleed, Weenie-Dominate, Weenie-Dementation... at a tournament of 20 people... how many decks of those types will you see? I'd bet between 10 and 15. Nearly all of those deck-types will utilise Dominate flick (Weenie-Dem often bloats enough to ignore even the most aggressive predators or might include some Auspex Flick but it is usually limited).

In short, I will stand by a simple statement : AI is a card that don't protect you and don't make you win. It make the victim lose, which will be really rarely be your prey. Spending numerous slot on AI or expecting every deck to do it is strange and suboptimal ; bleeding while taking into account the fact that AI (and deflection) exist is normal, and is far from forbidding powerbleed. After all, Blood Brother only bleed for 1 or 4+, and they can actually win tables.

So all you've said is that you're willing to run the risk of losing a 6+ pool minion to effectively deal 3 pool damage on your prey? Or are you suggesting that all you run is weenie powerbleed, vote or combat?

I can see why people would be afraid that the game balance might shift to one end too sharply with use of Archon Investigation, but I cannot really see it shifting to my grand predator's side as much as some claim. After all, in my point of view a swing of 6 less pool for me balances the table horribly in the wrong direction more than my predator losing one of his four vampires with .

When a powerbleed starts its work it usually has only one direction - forward. Ridding him of his vampires, and leaving only one or two, doesn't drastically lower his chances of survival; at least theoretically his main goal is to get rid of my as soon as possible. I for one feel a lot safer without one more constant bleeder at my back. Moreover, as Juggernaut said, it has often saved me enough time to make an oust for it myself.

And then there's the fact that not everyone plays Dominate, and sometimes even if they play, say, Auspex, there's not going to be 8 bounces - instead I sometimes play only 4 when my main goal is bleeding, maiming, voting or whatever. To many a clan buying some time and ridding your bleeder predator's vampire is a huge deal.

So, while I do not completely disagree with Ohlmann here, I definitely see uses for Archon Investigation for example in deck types like Setites, !Gangrel, TruBru, Brujah, Samedi, etc.

And lastly there's the tension in either convincing your predator that you either have AI in yourhand, saying 'don't you dare bleed me for mroe than 3' when you surely enough don't have one even in your deck, or that you swear you would never play such a card just to burn his reckless vampire. An integral fun factor in VtES.

Kraus wrote:

So, while I do not completely disagree with Ohlmann here, I definitely see uses for Archon Investigation for example in deck types like Setites, !Gangrel, TruBru, Brujah, Samedi, etc.

I don't have time to response to everything, but I want to point out that AI is not unplayable. It's just not an auto-include in multiple in every decks, and consequently basing a card balance on the fact that the majority will play AI is a bad idea.