List of cards to ban

Baronofhilliard wrote:

I have stated before banning Villein is not the right move. There seems to be a lot of people interested in it. It was a bad call to take away the only negative things with Villein. Before you needed to take at least 2 pool or not be able to use it. It is superior to minion tap because it is a trifle and is basically a minion tap that there are fewer of and punishes the use of minion tap which is not a bad thing. A card that good needs something negative about it and the ruling made it too good. This organization just got off the ground. It would be nice to see it start by being active and address this, but I think pride would be too much the factor.

Yes, you keep bringing this up. You should probably know that LSJ didn't make a ruling on how the card worked, he just clarified it for people who'd been playing it wrongly.

For what it's worth, I almost never see anyone play Villein and take less than two blood from a vampire, so I don't think that ruling that it doesn't work as printed would really solve any issues (and would also introduce errata, which is inherently bad).

atomweaver wrote:

I don't think I'm really comfortable with a person who has such a highly distorted meta-game leading the discussion about banning one or another card. You _do_ at least recognize that your play enviornment is far different than the ones that you are seeking to drastically change through these bans, right?

Trust me, if I was counting on our meta, I'll be proposing to ban Torn Signpost

elotar wrote:

If Villein only walpapered MT there will be no powerlevel problems (availability problem will be still here). Unfortunately, by being a trifle, which, generally, means "free", it also walpapered mostly all other blood management options for mid+ cap vamps.

Blood Doll is so much better than Villein for midcap decks. I'd think that you'd understand that, given your combat-heavy metagame.

elotar wrote:

Also, surely I can't predict future...

Then stop trying to solve hypothetical problems.

Its a 10 pool swing early in the game, if you have vote control. Usually, the pool has to be split to get votes from other parts of the table and late in the game, it may still be a 4 pool swing, but its only two damage from the vote and a KRC does more damage.

Robba wrote:

Its a 10 pool swing early in the game, if you have vote control. Usually, the pool has to be split to get votes from other parts of the table

That "usually" isn't anything like a guarantee, though. And even if you're not taking all those beads for yourself, you're still creating a bigger swing on the gamestate than most other vote cards do.

Robba wrote:

and late in the game, it may still be a 4 pool swing, but its only two damage from the vote and a KRC does more damage.

In an endgame, KRC still has less of a swing effect than Parity Shift, despite doing more damage. KRC results in a swing of two (your prey loses three, you lose one) whereas Parity results in a swing of four.

I'm not at all advocating that Parity needs to be changed or banned, mind you, but it's certainly strong.

Baronofhilliard wrote:

This organization just got off the ground. It would be nice to see it start by being active and address this, ...

The V:EKN has been decisive and has addressed this.

See also:
2011 Tournament Rules

www.vekn.net/index.php/tournament-rules

NO CHANGES

This is the perfect, appropriate, timely response.

If history tells us anything, it will tell us that there will be no changes to the tournament rules prior to 2012 as the rules for this year have been set.

So, those agitating for change have 8-10 months to actually make their arguments cogent, cohesive, coherent, and water-tight.

Until then, those that know V:EKN has already done the right thing will just get to ride it out.