The 'Metaban' Project - A rolling ban project for VTES Tournaments

Shockwave wrote:

Sorry, as I said, I very specifically wouldn't look to be drawn into proposing a list of cards, precisely because it turns the debate away from the proposal, and more into an argument of 'what cards would you choose'. It's just too slippery a slope, to my mind when at the start of merely proposing the idea.

I am afraid it is too late for that, since most of the arguments against your proposal are already int he shape of "Hey, look! I designed a terrible ban list!"

1) No need to ban defense cards, they will adapt to the metagame. If offense becomes weaker because of the bans, then good players will put less defense in their decks, and bad players will time out with 0.5VPs.

2) I am not a fan of narrowed themes, because some of the banned decks might be the only thing that keep another deck in check. I would rather build a ban set by picking a couple of key cards in each of your blocks, Aaron, so that the global checks and balances of the game do not change too much, but people have to dust off their overlooked cards.

3) No matter what James says, stealth-bleed decks are easily hurt too. If having to replace Govern with Scouting Mission/Enchant Kindred was not a big deal, then we would see much more PoS stealth/Bleed or Brujah 4-5 instead of Eurobrujah. Kindred Spirits is not easily replaceable either.

Non-existant user wrote:

3) No matter what James says, stealth-bleed decks are easily hurt too. If having to replace Govern with Scouting Mission/Enchant Kindred was not a big deal, then we would see much more PoS stealth/Bleed or Brujah 4-5 instead of Eurobrujah. Kindred Spirits is not easily replaceable either.

And what prove thoses deck are less played because they lack power, as opposed as because there is a strictly better alternative ? If deck A is 1% more powerful than deck B, you can have most player going for deck A, and not just 1% more. And still, having to only use deck B won't really cause problem.

Also of note, stealth bleed is not exactly problematic right now. Sure, it can win a tournament and it's not a steaming pile of shit by any mean. But it's not what is the harder to counter right now, while it can quickly become so.

Lastly, if you believe a good ban list can exist, you may want to provide it or actually explain how to come up with one.

My experience has been that groups that only play with themselves will come up with house rules to deal with things they don't like. That has included not playing any cards besides Jyhad, unofficial card limits, actual card limits, no Events, no Imbued, no repeat "successful" actions, everyone destroys the person who plays a vote deck, etc.

None of the house rules really bother me much. So, I've built many decks for nonstandard play. Further, I've built many decks with self-imposed limitations, especially that only certain sets could be used - this started early when I played all Sabbat decks at conventions and all Jyhad decks in my home game.

As long as you always play with the same people, you can do whatever you want, including effectively ban voting from the game. You will still likely end up with disagreements on what should be allowed and what shouldn't ... unless you have clearly understood restrictions.

No Events is a clearly understood restriction and one I'm completely in favor of. No Imbued is a clearly understood restriction and one I'm completely in favor of. No promo cards is a bit less clear but one I'm completely in favor of.

But, let's say you want to do set limitations. Third Edition only could be interesting, though my experience with it involved playing against standard decks and involved my restricting my card pool, so I didn't really test it. LotN only is not so interesting. KoT has some huge holes - no Blood Doll, uncommon Villein. Jyhad/DS/AH would be different if I wasn't also using 4cl in those decks. I always wanted a Sabbat (the set) only environment, but it has severe problems with only Forced Awakening and no Telepathic Misdirection. These days, SW only would be better, but still no TM.

Anyway, it can all be done. But, I still see problems with someone making the decisions of what is not playable. You still run into problems playing with other groups. The current standard format is open to a vast range of viable decks that a more restrictive format wouldn't have. And, putting restrictions in place is rather artificial in stimulating interest - if people think that only certain decks are viable at the tournament level, they are ignoring all evidence to the contrary and seem to be applying the wrong standard to a multiplayer CCG.

But, eh, whatever. We had a storyline with bloodlines only. Why not a Sabbat (the sect) only, independent only, or Laibon only environment? Why not an environment with only group 4, 5, and 6? Why not an environment with max 20% masters?

Non-existant user wrote:

3) No matter what James says, stealth-bleed decks are easily hurt too. If having to replace Govern with Scouting Mission/Enchant Kindred was not a big deal, then we would see much more PoS stealth/Bleed or Brujah 4-5 instead of Eurobrujah. Kindred Spirits is not easily replaceable either.

Sure, you could weaken stealth bleed. But here's the important question: how would that change manifest in the deck building decisions?

If I was building a non-stealth bleed deck, there's a slight chance I would cut one bounce card or something. If I was building a stealth bleed deck, I would play substitutions for the banned cards. Period. Considering the speed at which the V:TES metagame seems to evolve, maybe in two years a deck that was previously just below the tournament threshold gets over that threshold.

That's a very, very tiny increase in creativity concerning the effort and possible side effects of a ban list. For an actual, gamewide change you would need a very drastic ban list, something like functionally removing stealth bleed from the game. The more I think about this, the more convinced I am that banning cards is the most laborious, ineffective and dangerous possible way to increase metagame creativity at the moment.

Non-existant user wrote:

3) No matter what James says, stealth-bleed decks are easily hurt too. If having to replace Govern with Scouting Mission/Enchant Kindred was not a big deal, then we would see much more PoS stealth/Bleed or Brujah 4-5 instead of Eurobrujah. Kindred Spirits is not easily replaceable either.

With the current card set, you (typically) play the best card you can. Some people might not have the cards, and some people might have a particular set of restritions in mind for themself, but generally so.

Govern is, more or less, better than Scouting Mission. There are some cases for including a bit of both in a deck (e.g. if a local player is known for playing Dark Influences), but generally Govern is very good indeed. So 90% of the time, I'd play Govern in prefer to Scouting Mission. If that's the better deck, then I'll probably play that - because it's better.

Pre (or Pre/Obf) can already match +2 bleed for 1 blood with Legal Manipulations. The issue for Presence is typically not the lack of an action, but the weaker modifiers. To get +3 bleed, Dominate needs 1 card and DOM - Conditioning. It can get to +5 bleed with two. With Command of the Beast, +6. One of those modifiers might be Foreshadowing Destruction, which is free. Aire of Elation isn't generally as good.

Mono-Dominate can also power its own stealth. Bonding is a good card. Dominate Kine is good, but slightly expensive to temper that. Conditioning sees a lot of play in the Eurobrujah, though - the "surprise" factor when people have declined to block is handy. Seduction is also good as "stealth". Presence not so much - Approximation of Loyalty isn't bad, but more expensive. (The superior is interesting, but awkward for bleed modifiers.) Force of Personality is decent, but costs a blood up front. Perfect Paragon is good, but you'd rather have Bonding for bleed.

Of course, any Dominate deck now enjoys the benefit of Deflection - unavailable to Presence. But if you ban Deflection, stealth-bleed gets better. And since the idea is to stop people using "known tricks" (apparently), Deflection is about as known as it gets. How many people start a deck idea from the principle of "Okay, how can I get 8 copies of Deflection in here?"

But ban Govern, Conditioning, Mind Rape and Kindred Spirits, and I can still bleed you for +4 each action (+1 from an action, +2 from Threats, +1 from Command of the Beast), plus that vampire's own bleed modifier (if any), plus stealth. +5 if I can play Foreshadowing superior. (And an extra one if you fancy playing Slaughtering the Herd, but that seems less likely.)

And if we do somehow nuke stealth-bleed hard, other Dominate users get hit hard too. !Ventrue, for example, or Tremere.

AaronC wrote:

Why in the world would anyone suggest banning Immortal Grapple? I don't think anyone has, right?

Why not? kombainas has told us that this should be about preventing people from relying on "known tricks". Immortal Grapple is a very well-known trick, no?

It can also detract from other forms of combat. If you're likely to come across Immortal Grapple a reasonable amount, as well as combat defence, you can get screwed both ways. My melee weapon deck has yet another foil, for example. Theft of Vitae the same. If we're banning known tricks, why not ban that one and make life a little better for those archetypes? (I banned Majesty for that reason too.) Apparently it's okay to just torpedo deck styles (here, Potence close range combat), because I can just call it "shaking up the meta", so I've no need to care about torpedo-ing this one.