Submission - Control of Financial Flows (trifle Sudden)

Reyda wrote:

Sorry but i don't buy your argument. If there was no way to counter some cards, then at some point the game would just amount to "watch me pull my combo as fast as i can". Counterspell -or cards to counter some specific effect are needed for balance's sake.

Perhaps, but do we really need another counterspell? I'd say this game already has enough of those, if not even too many...

Reyda wrote:

Sorry but i don't buy your argument. If there was no way to counter some cards, then at some point the game would just amount to "watch me pull my combo as fast as i can". Counterspell -or cards to counter some specific effect are needed for balance's sake.

Well, I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that canceling cards is boring as hell and a bad mechanic.

But, for the sake of discussion, there are a million viable ways to hose combo decks that don't say "cancel a card". Some of them are explicit, some of them are indirect. The best one is to build a consistent deck that is capable of forcing interaction and take a free vp when the combo deck fizzles and falls on it's face.

Another thought: what is the easiest way for a combo deck to protect it's combo against disruption if not Wash/Sudden against Pentex and Direct Intervention against anything else?

Suoli wrote:

Reyda wrote:

Sorry but i don't buy your argument. If there was no way to counter some cards, then at some point the game would just amount to "watch me pull my combo as fast as i can". Counterspell -or cards to counter some specific effect are needed for balance's sake.

Well, I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that canceling cards is boring as hell and a bad mechanic.

But, for the sake of discussion, there are a million viable ways to hose combo decks that don't say "cancel a card". Some of them are explicit, some of them are indirect. The best one is to build a consistent deck that is capable of forcing interaction and take a free vp when the combo deck fizzles and falls on it's face.

Another thought: what is the easiest way for a combo deck to protect it's combo against disruption if not Wash/Sudden against Pentex and Direct Intervention against anything else?

The need to counterspell cannot be supported to just hise combos. Most combos can be killed by constant revolution, if not other cards.

Suoli wrote:

Reyda wrote:

Sorry but i don't buy your argument. If there was no way to counter some cards, then at some point the game would just amount to "watch me pull my combo as fast as i can". Counterspell -or cards to counter some specific effect are needed for balance's sake.

Well, I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that canceling cards is boring as hell and a bad mechanic.

I'm not sure about this. It definitely adds another layer of stuff though.

But, for the sake of discussion, there are a million viable ways to hose combo decks that don't say "cancel a card". Some of them are explicit, some of them are indirect. The best one is to build a consistent deck that is capable of forcing interaction and take a free vp when the combo deck fizzles and falls on it's face.

By tha way you talk about it "fizzle and falls on it's face", may i deduct that you don't like combo decks ?
Well, everybody has a different opinion. Some combo decks are interesting, they also add something to the game.

Problem is : strong deck also try to avoid interaction.
Whether your deck is a nosferatu royalty where the only stealth card is forgotten labyrinth -which allows to bypass almost all deck playing intercept except for the big Eye (preventing the basinc stealth/intercept interaction ), or a Beast Meld Baltimore purge which again prevents blocking (one of the basic interaction in the game), or no need to search thus far, even the classic unblockable Toreador under grand ball / Zillah/ parity : if you play those cards, it's because you want to keep the interference from the other players as low as possible. Fortunately, there are counters, in form of cards, but also table talk.

But if two of the deck above are in a situation where they are working ok, there is no shame on relying on D.I. or Delaying tactics. Because not much can save you, except counter tactics cards.
That's why imho they are needed because when everything else fails, they may be your last deflectors. It can even move the table in a specific direction, like in "if i hadn't play this D.I. right now, your predator would have 2VP in his pocket. Don't you think it's time to slow him down a bit ?"

Another thought: what is the easiest way for a combo deck to protect it's combo against disruption if not Wash/Sudden against Pentex and Direct Intervention against anything else?

I don't agree. Against a trifle, occasional threat ? Sudden or direct is great, sure. Against real disruption, and table motion they are clearly not enough.

Reyda wrote:

Suoli wrote:

Well, I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that canceling cards is boring as hell and a bad mechanic.

I'm not sure about this. It definitely adds another layer of stuff though.

It adds mechanical complexity (play a card, pause for DI), but not depth.

By tha way you talk about it "fizzle and falls on it's face", may i deduct that you don't like combo decks ?

No, you may not. That would be irrelevant and incorrect. Why even bring it up?

Problem is : strong deck also try to avoid interaction.
Whether your deck is a nosferatu royalty where the only stealth card is forgotten labyrinth -which allows to bypass almost all deck playing intercept except for the big Eye (preventing the basinc stealth/intercept interaction ), or a Beast Meld Baltimore purge which again prevents blocking (one of the basic interaction in the game), or no need to search thus far, even the classic unblockable Toreador under grand ball / Zillah/ parity : if you play those cards, it's because you want to keep the interference from the other players as low as possible. Fortunately, there are counters, in form of cards, but also table talk.

Triple A, Nosferatu Royalty or Purge are not what I would call combo decks. But, again for the sake of discussion, you don't need to cancel cards to beat any of those decks. All of them have some pretty big weaknesses to a strong combat or bleed deck.

But if two of the deck above are in a situation where they are working ok, there is no shame on relying on D.I. or Delaying tactics. Because not much can save you, except counter tactics cards.
That's why imho they are needed because when everything else fails, they may be your last deflectors.

Why do you want to save a player who got himself into a lost position?

It can even move the table in a specific direction, like in "if i hadn't play this D.I. right now, your predator would have 2VP in his pocket. Don't you think it's time to slow him down a bit ?"

This, to me, sounds like an argument against Direct Intervention. A single, 1 pool master that anyone can play should not be able to make such a huge swing in table dynamics. Things like that make the game too random.

Also, block in itself is a counterspell mechanism. That's why forgotten labyrinth or Beast Meld are less problematic than Faerie Ward - and consequently, significantly cheaper, more versatile, and on (relatively) more common discipline.