Combat as a strategy

self wrote:

elotar wrote:

It was about MTG. Intensives to be "nice" is one of the cool things of VtES.

okay. The way you posted made me think that this was a commonplace thing in Russian Vtes tournaments.

It kind of seems like some of you want to prove that elotar is chasing people away. Stop circling the wagons for a second and look at the very real problems vtes has.

@mewcat this was the exchange as I read it:

Lönkka wrote:

Or in likely situations do what people usually tend to do and say "Hands for one?"

elotar wrote:

It's very like how legislature in Russia works - "Why we need sane laws and regulations? In absurd situations people can just bribe the government inspector!".

Timo wrote:

Could you explain what you mean regarding vtes ?

elotar wrote:

Just play one game correctly passing window to play DI across the table after each card played.

Tadori wrote:

Play one game of MTG acc. to what you say. You will see exactly the same situation(Im looking at you MTG: Arena ). people are skipping time windows in every game.

elotar wrote:

Actually in my time it was a valid strategy to repeatedly call a judge on such offences to get a free win with inexperienced opponent.

Now I realize that it might appear that I'm unduly hassling Elotar, but that is not my intention. Oftentimes between English being a second language and idioms not translating well, there will be misunderstandings and a lack of understanding. I'm often just trying to figure out what Elotar is trying to say; what point he's trying to get across. As Elotar much more often posts about V:tes and V:tes tournaments, in the case of the above exchange it was unclear to me that he was talking about Magic tournaments instead.

Elotar, I apologize if it seems like I'm ever being unfair to you. I just have a hard time figuring out where you're going with some things and have to ask for some clarification from time to time.

Edit: also, I've been pretty vocal here over the years about my thoughts on various parts of the game and how to improve them. But one thing that we don't see much discussion here on these forums is about how the community as a whole. What makes successful groups successful? what makes unsuccessful groups unsuccessful? What keeps players away from the game and what brings them in and keeps them there?

I realize that i've been more focused on the community aspect of late, but discussing community engagement feels more productive to me than beating dead horses like "the merits and flaws of merging antitribu clans," "standardizing combat steps," or "the impenetrable murk of Independent Titles." your mileage may vary.

self wrote:

Elotar, I apologize if it seems like I'm ever being unfair to you. I just have a hard time figuring out where you're going with some things and have to ask for some clarification from time to t

As personal attacks usually means that there are no valid real arguments I interpret them as an agreement with my position, just combined with inability to state it. So you are fine

As for community building aspects it is, imo, quite connected with "beaten horses" like general problems of the game, including abusive combat. Healthy community have different "roles" which must be filled for it to function. And each of this roles requires different types of people. But all of them should participate in the shared activity. So, when such activity is an overcomplicated card game with availability problems as well as possibility to lose two hours of your life because of something stupid, we got a problem.

If you want an quantifiable parameter - I would reccomend to look at the number of women involved. Communities which manage to maintain parity or something like it thrive, others not so much.

elotar wrote:

[...] quite connected with "beaten horses" like general problems of the game, including abusive combat. Healthy community have different "roles" which must be filled for it to function. And each of this roles requires different types of people. But all of them should participate in the shared activity. So, when such activity is an overcomplicated card game with availability problems as well as possibility to lose two hours of your life because of something stupid, we got a problem.

so, can you spell it out for me? Tell me specifically what combos, strategies, cards, and whatever else you feel is abusive about combat? Show your work.

Tadori wrote:

Play one game of MTG acc. to what you say. You will see exactly the same situation(Im looking at you MTG: Arena ). people are skipping time windows in every game.

Yeah, but it is a PROBLEM in Vtes, because of replacing cards. If you don't let opponent have a chance to play DI, you will replace the card you played, then if they do want to play DI you have to backtrack and you have drawn extra cards (incidentally one of the most illegal things you can do in a magic game)

Skipping time windows in magic is not nearly as bad because you aren't replacing cards.

Honestly, I think a simple solution to the DI and timewindows issue would be for black chantry to simply alter the rules so that DI is played after the played card is replaced. I mean, its gonna be replaced ANYWAY, why not replace it in a way that doesn't cause million gameplay issues. And I mean changing it this way, NOTHING WOULD CHANGE gameplay wise. Its just ???? why not do it. This way, people could just play their cards and there would be no huge issue if you needed to backtrack.

ps. On topic. While I think Elotar has a point somewhere, there are also some language barrier issues at play.

I suspect he is referring to (and I agree) the inherent elements in VTES that can cause a player to "have no game" due to having no minions that can act. In my opinion the LEAST fun situation is when you cannot do anything. This is something that game design should actively try to move away from, and Black chantry has done that, by introducing the pentex change.

Combat can also do this, but I have had no true issues with it yet; I can change my decks to be more durable against combat (In fact my local meta has always been quite conbat-oriented so I have a headstart maybe). Other people can do it too. Adapt your decks! Don't just netdeck TWDA decks from 15 years away and complain that they don't work... Meta changes! Pentex never stopped tupdogs, did it? People who cry end of the world because of pentex change are silly.

pps. I think discussing "player has no game" elements is worth a different thread. This thread was about combat as a viable strategy and wincon.

Bloodartist wrote:

Combat can also do this, but I have had no true issues with it yet; I can change my decks to be more durable against combat (In fact my local meta has always been quite conbat-oriented so I have a headstart maybe). Other people can do it too. Adapt your decks! Don't just netdeck TWDA decks from 15 years away and complain that they don't work...

This works in MTG, but it's fundamentally flawed approach to VtES. While in first one you can play for 10 minutes, lose, than hastily switch couple x4 blocks of cards and play a new game, in VtES you will be loosing for two agonizing hours, the table will be unbalanced so other players will suffer a bad game too, then you will need to solve quite a complicated issue of changing you deck, which rarely takes me less then couple hours and for new player it will take much longer.