What is missing from VtES?

GreyB wrote:

You don't see a problem with guaranteed cheap destruction of equipment?

It still not guaranteed - you can dodge, which is a basic effect of many S:CE cards.

Personnaly If ANI deck will rush me and then play CH to kill Learjet instead of CC+AfB I would laugh and obviously not play S:CE.

And, I think, in general destroying of equipment by spending two cards is not what we are calling "too good" in VtES.

BenPeal wrote:

With something like First Strike, I can see the merit in eliminating it from the rulebook and changing the text of the cards that use it. Sure, it's not a complex rule, but it sees game use in very few instances (in practice, almost exclusively Canine Horde). The effect could be moved out of the rulebook and onto the cards. Perhaps we (the Design Team) could instead make more use of First Strike.

I assume you are someone who has played the game for a very long time. Take a step back for a moment. Pretend you know nothing about the game. You are playing with a group that is very far from tournament level, with new players being brought in constantly. You build a deck around first strike. Your deck does well because nobody in the playgroup is in the mindset of stuffing their decks with S:CE or other things that work better than first strike.

My point is: should proposed fix really be made on the basis of first strike having limited application at the tournament level?

TwoRazorReign wrote:

You build a deck around first strike.

Your deck does well...

Lol

By the way I don't get what your "point" has to do with what Ben has said.

elotar wrote:

TwoRazorReign wrote:

You build a deck around first strike.

Your deck does well...

Lol

By the way your point has absolutely nothing to do with what Ben has said.

Lol! I knew that'd get a laugh!

So, he was saying that perhaps first strike could be removed because it "sees game use in very few instances" and cited Canine Horde. That's only true at the tournament level. It could see more use in less competitive environments. That's my rationale for not changing first strike.

What is missing....

I was always intrested in magic and other ccgs as well and they had a rotation system. I always expected group 1 and 2 to rotate out. Same goes for all cards from start till the first set that released group 3 camarilla vampires. Limitations in deck options give oppertunities to clans and groups you were not previously expecting to be strong. Its worth exploring I think.

Obscure cards. I enjoyed the weirder cards that were released that seemed wallpaper. Most were not usefull yes, but some of them encouraged to think outside the box. Take a balefull doll for example. It has a mediocre effect, but the timing is unique, so it makes you seache for the most exploitable effect. Combined with form of corruption, it becomes a lot stronger. So although i like thebrelease of the new sets, the didnt trigger me to really brainstorm for any exploitations, the use seems so obvious.

So thats about it. For now.

TwoRazorReign wrote:

So, he was saying that perhaps first strike could be removed because it "sees game use in very few instances" and cited Canine Horde.

BenPeal wrote:

With something like First Strike, I can see the merit in eliminating it from the rulebook and changing the text of the cards that use it. ... The effect could be moved out of the rulebook and onto the cards.

I think maybe one of the reason of many "heated arguments" is that people doesn't read what is proposed carefully.