file Balancing Ashur Tablets

17 Jul 2014 14:41 #63747 by ReverendRevolver

If MMPA-Decks seem to be such a Problem, why not add a Card somewhat like this:

Incompetent Leadership
Unique Master.
Cost: 1 Pool
Only one Incompetent Leadership can be played in a game.
Put this Card in play. While you control this Card you may Play no more than one Master Card during your master Phase.
Tap this Card to cancel a non-out-of.turn
Master Card as it is played (No cost is paid).
If you tap this Card, put a Counter on it and your Predator takes control of it.
Burn this Card when it has 5 Counters.

If the table feels a MMPA Deck is harassing the table, it adds 4 Sudden Reversals
to the Table. It doesnt shut down MMPA per se, but helps to Keep it in Balance.
Not being able to Play more than 1 master Card while you control this Card prevents the MMPA deck to Play it and just Keep it all game.


Silver bullets are never an answer.

We can do one of three things:

Nothing, and see what happens.

Change the next strong card in a problem deck, which is now ashurs, in a way that makes it playable by non problem decks, and less broken in the problem.

Or

Change game rules or 2 library and 5 crypt cards to say you cannot gain any more master phases after you use the one provided by (anson, cybele, isanowyn, huitzilblahblahblah,nana,parthenon, or year of fortune).

Game rules wpuld be "you can onoy gain an additional mpa from one non trifle source a turn"

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
17 Jul 2014 15:12 #63748 by M.Schumacher


Silver bullets are never an answer.


I feel its not a silver bullet. Its viable even if there are no MMMPA decks at the table. I would play it in a dem s&b deck since mpa tend to increase pool rather then reduce it. That way, fewer pool gain by all players lead to less time outs. It beeing useable to contain MMPA decks is merely a nice side effect.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
18 Jul 2014 14:55 #63755 by Wedge
Replied by Wedge on topic Re: Balancing Ashur Tablets
This is a nercopost of a proper augment opposing ashurs. It is more salient any position I could take.

I have never actually seen a proper argument why they [Ashur Tablets] are broken.


Then I offer this for your consideration. It's lengthy, but you asked for a "proper argument."

There are 2 related aspects of library recursion that suggest brokenness.

First, V:tES is a card game. Intimately tied to the definition are common threads: the random draw of objects from a face-down, predefined set and the imperfect knowledge that results from that action.

Second, V:tES is structured for each player using 3 basic resources for play.

- pool as the global resource,
- crypt-based minions to act in one's playspace and
- library cards to connect resources and manipulate the playspace.

Its time to look at how Ashur Tablets can violate both of those fundamental design properties.

Ashur Tablets accesses a fourth resource, the Ash Heap. This resource is not innately available to every player. It seems reasonable to conclude that any player who accesses additional (valuable) resources might gain a strategic advantage.

This 4th resource either develops naturally or can be profitably grown. Beyond the cards used to access this resource, there is no opportunity cost in using it. Arguably, even that cost is offset by the 3 pool gain realized triggering a set of Ashur Tablets.

So far, we're up to free access to a resource not every player has. But since we haven't proven that resources is valuable, it is best to continue.

Some might suggest the Ash Heap is not an independent resource, but is completely redundant with the library. True in definition, not in practice. If Ashur Tablets read "shuffle your Ash Heap. Put 13 randoms cards from your Ash Heap into your Library," then it would be a truely redundant resource and I wouldn't be writing this post.

Selecting 13 tactically appropriate cards to return is a different matter. It significantly reconstructs a deck at point of use. We're using perfect knowledge of cards in the Ash Heap and reliable information about other player's minions and and his Ash Heap to rebuild a deck at point of use.

Ooops. Perfect knowledge (and solid inferences) in a game of imperfect knowledge. That seems like a strategic advantage in the hands of any capable player.

Large-scale recursion impacts card drawing probability. As fewer cards reside in the library, the probability of drawing desired cards (the situationally useful ones recurred) grows. Now we have further optimized the deck to any task immediately at hand.

That's messing with the random nature of drawing from a predefined set. Its not really pre-defined anymore. We're starting to stack the odds in our favor as the library empties.

Even when a deck is perfectly designed for the tasks at hand, variability in draws can affect its ability to perform. either immediately or some point in the future. We call it "clumping." Recursion can smooth variability in past card draws. Hit too many of card "X" in the first 1/4 of the deck......recur as needed to re-balance the set of available objects again.

Wait, isn't that counteracting risk of unfavorable permutations in drawing from a predefined set? And it creates a new set of a more favorable options for subsequent draws? Seems like a double whammy on the whole randomness aspect of the game.

The way I see it, we just ripped the fundamental fabric the game. Two for two now.

In short, hand-selected recursion undermines the reliance on one's library as one of the three primary resources, can smooth variability in draws. In extreme cases, it can transfer the focus of card flow into to "working the Ash Heap."

As an analogy, imagine playing poker and being able to draw your cards from a face-up muck1. Immediately, you transform the probability of "hitting your draw" into a simple function of your ability to reach into the muck.

As the ease of recursion increases, the mechanic becomes increasingly broken. Nothing is easier than Imbued recurring Conviction. Second on the list is Ashur Tablets (MPA only, no clan or discipline requirement).

-Darby.

1 The muck is the agglomeration of discards and folded hands in a game of poker.

The following user(s) said Thank You: Temporis, self biased, Zoroh

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
19 Jul 2014 06:28 - 19 Jul 2014 06:33 #63759 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Balancing Ashur Tablets
While some premises are true, there are so many inaccuracies mixed with wrong logic that I can't say I'm convinced.

In fact, much of Darby's argumentation could be true with a continuous recursion cards such as Waste Management Operation. Not with one-shot Ashur Tablets. Let's see why.

Ashur Tablets accesses a fourth resource, the Ash Heap. This resource is not innately available to every player. It seems reasonable to conclude that any player who accesses additional (valuable) resources might gain a strategic advantage.

Right. (It's also true for Research Area, by the way, if only it was used)

Beyond the cards used to access this resource, there is no opportunity cost in using it. Arguably, even that cost is offset by the 3 pool gain realized triggering a set of Ashur Tablets.

The fact that 3 Ashur Tablets are required is a cost that is omitted here. 1 Ashur Tablets alone does nothing. Not mentioning that up to 2 Ashur Tablets can be removed from the game through the interaction of another player (that means 2 MPA and 2 cards lost -- meaning the 3rd one will not be as useful as it will not make a complete set of 3).

You could put it the other way: the 3 pool would offset the 3 cards and MPA spent, leaving the "opportunity cost" un-offset.

So far, we're up to free access to a resource not every player has. But since we haven't proven that resources is valuable, it is best to continue.

It starts becoming wrong. What does "free access" mean, since you need cards to access it? And what's wrong in the fact that only the player that plays that cards has access to it?

For instance, if I play a titled vampire, I have access to a resource (the votes) that not every player has. But I paid for it, so there's nothing wrong there.

Selecting 13 tactically appropriate cards to return is a different matter. It significantly reconstructs a deck at point of use. We're using perfect knowledge of cards in the Ash Heap and reliable information about other player's minions and and his Ash Heap to rebuild a deck at point of use.
Ooops. Perfect knowledge (and solid inferences) in a game of imperfect knowledge. That seems like a strategic advantage in the hands of any capable player.

"Rebuilding a deck" seems a bit excessive. In a 75-cards deck, supposing you've used already 30 cards, you'll put 12 back in the deck of 45 cards. 12 / 12 + 45 = 21%. Don't get wrong: it only means 1 card out of 5 will be one of the 12 cards put back, that were cards in the deck in the first place. (Maybe a Lost in Crowds I put back because my prey is playing intercept. Or an Ashur Tablets that will cripple my hand until the next master phase.)

The order is totally random, you're putting back cards that were present in the first place. Of course, some cards you won't use anymore won't get back. But how many is that?

Then I find dishonest to use "perfect knowledge" is a sense that is different of the premises. Remember the premises: "the random draw of objects from a face-down, predefined set and the imperfect knowledge that results from that action." In the premises, "imperfect knowledge" means the deck is random. You don't know what cards you'll draw in which order.

Here "perfect knowledge" refers only to the cards you are putting back. It doesn't mean the deck is no longer random. But it's what Darby is suggesting, mixing deliberately two different things.

And Darby continues mixing thing:

Large-scale recursion impacts card drawing probability. As fewer cards reside in the library, the probability of drawing desired cards (the situationally useful ones recurred) grows. Now we have further optimized the deck to any task immediately at hand.
That's messing with the random nature of drawing from a predefined set.

While the first sentence is true (though I disagree on the "large-scale" adjective), putting back cards in the library doesn't change the "random nature of drawing from a predefined set". The set has changed (but so does it when you play cards), but it's still random.

Its not really pre-defined anymore.

Neither it is when someone plays with your cards (Agaitas, Erciyes, the Ravnos card that calls a vote from someone's ash heap), nor when someone remove cards from your hand (Le Din Tho, Revelation) or from your deck (Slaughterhouse).

One will never play exactly all the cards that is in his deck. So the notion of "pre-defined" deck has no strong value in the end. It's not at least the "fundamental design" property Darby want us to believe in.

We're starting to stack the odds in our favor as the library empties.

Indeed. But for something approaching "perfect knowledge", you'd need to empty your library first and then recurse once 13 cards.
Needless to say that with Ashur Tablets, you'll only do it once (unless you've put back 3 Ashur Tablets out of the 12 cards you've put back, leaving you with 9 useful cards -- I'm not sure it's worth the effort) and that you won't get far with 13 cards.

The more the odds are in our favor, the less cards we have in the deck (one of the 3 resources that Darby mentionned), which is not a good thing as it will deplete sooner.

This is where the argumentation could make sense with a card that recurse each turn cards in an empty library: you'd play always with the same card. But it's not true with Ashur Tablets.

Wait, isn't that counteracting risk of unfavorable permutations in drawing from a predefined set? And it creates a new set of a more favorable options for subsequent draws? Seems like a double whammy on the whole randomness aspect of the game.
The way I see it, we just ripped the fundamental fabric the game. Two for two now.

Since when the game is random? Is randomness a "fundamental fabric the game"? The randomness induced by predator/prey relationship and deck order (which is untouched) is only a small part of the deck, mostly balanced by the interactions between players. Unless everyone on the table plays randomly of course...

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 19 Jul 2014 06:33 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
19 Jul 2014 06:39 - 19 Jul 2014 06:42 #63760 by Ankha
Replied by Ankha on topic Re: Balancing Ashur Tablets
BTW, here's the design of Ashur Tablets how I understand it:

Given a deck in 70 cards.
You can build (almost*) the same deck in a different way by playing 60 cards: 57 of the original cards + 3 Ashur Tablets.

The Ashur Tablets will put back 13 cards in the deck (well 12 really), meaning you'll be able to play 70 cards of the deck.** (69 in you have to discard a card when putting back one of the 13 cards in hand).

In the process, you gain 3 pool and 1 card in hand at the expense of using 3 MPA and the risk that someone else plays 3 copies before you.

* almost, because in 57 cards, you'll put less kinder cards such as a Fear of Mekhet, because you have less slots. Ashur works better with repetitive decks with little surprise in them.
** and you have a slight advantage of choosing which cards will come back, and which cards will not.

Prince of Paris, France
Ratings Coordinator, Rules Director
Last edit: 19 Jul 2014 06:42 by Ankha.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
19 Jul 2014 09:15 #63761 by Juggernaut1981
Ankha: To counter some of your analysis of Darby.

In fact, much of Darby's (argument) could be true with continuous recursion cards such as WMO. Not with one-shot Ashur Tablets.

Actually, for WMO to return 13 cards to the library requires at least 13 turns after a !Brujah has reached the ready region. That means it is at least a 14-turn proposition to recycle 13 cards to your library with WMO.

Darby's definitions of "VTES Resources" (as can be seen from other posts) are: Library Cards, Hand Cards, Minions, Pool, Blood/Life. In general Ashheap cards are not resources because once they reach that location, there are comparatively few interactions possible and most commonly it is to remove them from the ashheap out of the game. Allowing people to reuse ashheap cards converts the ashheap into a resource by allowing you to reinvest cards. This is part of the strength in the Liquidation + Ashur Tablets combination, because your cards 'lost' to Liquidation are actually only temporary losses (mostly losses of opportunity).

The fact that 3 Ashur Tablets are required is a cost that is omitted here. ... You could put it the other way: the 3 pool would offset the 3 cards and MPA spent, leaving the "opportunity cost" un-offset.

The resource Darby is speaking of is ashheap cards. There is no opportunity cost in ashheap cards because in general they will remain there for the rest of the game and form part of the game's perfect knowledge source (i.e. you have perfect knowledge of the number of Card X in your ashheap). The opportunity costs all rest with Ashur Tablets, which is true of any other Master card that may be at risk because of others MPA choices.

It starts becoming wrong. What does "free access" mean, since you need cards to access it? And what's wrong in the fact that only the player that plays that cards has access to it?

Free as in 'not locked away' rather than Free as in 'no price'. Darby is suggesting that Ashur Tablets allows us to access a resource that did not previously exist in the game (freeing the resource) and not that Ashur Tablets create a resource without cost.

So your connection with titled vampires is a non sequitur because all players must choose to have crypt cards in their crypt. The power and composition of those crypt cards is not a 'resource' Darby is using for this argument.

"Rebuilding a deck" seems a bit excessive. In a 75-cards deck, supposing you've used already 30 cards, you'll put 12 back in the deck of 45 cards. ... (Maybe a Lost in Crowds I put back because my prey is playing intercept. Or an Ashur Tablets that will cripple my hand until the next master phase.)

When you build a deck you have created a set of probability ratios with a specific mix (i.e. there is X chance of drawing "Combat Card X" in my opening hand). This mix changes by necessity during a game, but that is while the deck is in play, not while the deck is being built. You are turning theoretical chances into measured chances as you play. Ashur Tablets allows you to redraw the probability set while you are also converting your theoretical chances to measured chances; in effect you can build the remainder of the deck to favour certain outcomes while you are playing the deck. This is 'rebuilding the deck'.

When most players test a deck for tournaments, they have a rough version that they play and adjust in and out cards until the deck suits the probabilities and events that appear most commonly. This happens between multiple games and effectively involves changing the probability set for the deck between games. Ashur Tablets allows deck testing changes to be made to a deck while you are playing the deck in a game.

The Perfect Knowledge Darby is speaking of is the composition of your own ashheap, the cards you could put back into your library with Ashur Tablets and how many other copies exist in your Library. The Inferences are the approximate number of copies of cards in an opponents deck based on their ashheap. "A game of imperfect knowledge" is just that... most of the time in VTES you don't know exactly what cards are in someone's hand, someone's library and so on.

While the first sentence is true (though I disagree on the "large-scale" adjective), putting back cards in the library doesn't change the "random nature of drawing from a predefined set". The set has changed (but so does it when you play cards), but it's still random.

See above about adjusting internal probability during play. When another player uses Agaitas, Slaughterhouses, Le Din Tho/Revelations/Precision they are not editing the composition of the deck as it was when you sat down. They are depleting your resources (in all these cases card resources). They are not altering the mix of cards in your library but making those cards unavailable to you. If for instance there was a card which was "Choose a player and remove all copies of a named card from their Library" then that would be one which altered the pre-defined mix of cards.

For something approaching perfect knowledge...

You mean you couldn't count your library cards face down, count how many copies of Majesty/Wash/Sudden Reversal/Immortal Grapple/Voter Captivation/KRC you were putting into the deck and then come up with at least approximate odds for drawing one off the top? You aren't also choosing those cards because you want them to appear more often?



So let's go for counter-tactics and alternative plots with things like Ashur Tablets and other 'continuous recycle' cards. Anthelios.

Anthelios lets me trade a resource in hand for a known resource in my ash-heap. Let's not choose one of the 'screamingly big ticket targets' and instead choose Golconda. Without assuming that I have MMPA...

If I can draw a master, in 2 turns I can play Golconda even if that is the only copy of Golconda in the deck.

If I draw Golconda early and I have Anthelios in the deck, then I can easily discard Golconda knowing that later I will be able to return it to my hand for something else I will find to be a dead card (i.e. Zillah's Valley, Villein, Fear of Mekhet, Fame, etc). My Golconda is in a known location (knowledge of it is perfect) AND I have a known mechanism to gain that resource back at the cost of 1 MPA and a dead master card I would have thrown out in my discard phase. My ashheap Golconda is a useful resource.

If I play multiple Golconda cards in my deck, and I find out that my prey is playing less-than-8-caps, then I can trade my 'dead Golcondas' for something more useful against my prey (Fame, Haven Uncovered, ToGP, etc, etc, etc). Then my Golconda cards are again, a resource instead of a dead card.

If I play cards such as Giant's Blood or Week of Nightmares, that are only playable once per game, I can discard an early copy of the card, intending to bring it back with Anthelios OR instead I can play the card knowing that later in the game I will be able to bring back other useful Masters from my ashheap with the extra Giant's Blood/WoN/etc I put in the deck to mitigate not drawing one early enough in the game. Either path gives me Perfect Knowledge of some sort (I will be able to XYZ...).


Another core component of VTES is resource depletion. You usually deplete your library into your ashheap with few ways to bring it back. Ashur Tablets breaks that aspect of the game quite thoroughly. So does Anthelios but to a lesser extent. If WMO's constant recursion was as powerful as claimed, it seems depressingly absent from TWDA.

:bruj::CEL::POT::PRE::tha: Baron of Sydney, Australia, 418
The following user(s) said Thank You: Temporis

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
Moderators: AnkhaKraus
Time to create page: 0.154 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum