Polskie Forum VTES

Zaloguj się lub zarejestruj.

Zaloguj się podając nazwę użytkownika, hasło i długość sesji
Szukanie zaawansowane  

Aktualności:

Autor Wątek: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach  (Przeczytany 6678 razy)

Manit0u

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1454
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #15 dnia: Styczeń 19, 2016, 09:42:55 pm »

Appolonius + Chameleon = 'nuff said...
Zapisane
Time is precious. Waste it wisely.

Michał!

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 310
    • Zobacz profil
    • http://michalmisztal.blogspot.com/
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #16 dnia: Styczeń 21, 2016, 08:26:12 pm »

Ciekawy wpis na Facebooku, jeśli komuś chce się tyle czytać (całość poniżej): https://www.facebook.com/groups/128015020739575/permalink/492343940973346/

Powstała nawet petycja przeciw nowym banom: https://www.change.org/p/vekn-against-the-banishment-of-old-cards

Hello everybody

It’s happening again! The same thing that happened with Lilith’s Blessing. We are once again going around and scratching the surface of a problem, instead of attacking its core.

Indeed, Anthelios provides resource recycling in such a particular way that makes it very hard for other players to counter. Besides, even though the card is in play for everyone to use, opponents that didn’t optimize their decks for it will take little or no benefit at all from it. As it was mentioned, it also makes it much easier to build and play a Multi Master deck, because it allows you to put more copies of setup cards to make sure they will come in hand in the early game, without worrying about they stack and congest your hand in the late game, since they will be traded for other needed cards through Anthelios.
I guess those were the basic allegations in favor of banishing Anthelios. Forgive me if I forgot any other.

I understand those statements and I will not disagree with then. Indeed, Anthelios does all of those things.

But this is just the surface, not the core problem!

I invite everyone participating in this topic to make an effort to forecast what will be the consequences of the banishment of Anthelios.

I will do this effort for one specific deck archetype, which is the only Multi Master Anthelios abuser deck I play: the D&D, Derange and Dementia deck. In terms of deck building, I will have to redistribute proportions, removing some copies of setup cards (such as Parthenon, Heidelberg Castle and Secure Heaven) and adding copies of the cards that make the core strategy (Malkavian Dementia + Villein + Golconda or Social Ladder). This is no ordinary task! It took me 3 years and 9 versions to reach a balanced, competitive, viable version I’m comfortable playing with. The way I see it, I have 3 options: a) I can give up this deck and use the good, rare, expensive cards in other decks (which I will not do after so much investment); b) I can invest another year in the deck in order to find new working balance (which is probably what I’ll do); or c) since my deck is a short, 60 library cards, version of this archetype, I can add 3 Ashur Tablets, 3 Dreams of the Sphinx and 10 to 15 other cards, without modifying proportions, hopping the additional Tablets will give the necessary amount of recycling and that the additional Dreams will help balance both the increased size of the library and the risk of stacking setup cards in the late game (which is the easy way out I think most people will adopt in their own Multi Master decks). In terms of playing, I will no longer be able to play multiple retaliation Golcondas on a minion who just kicked my Lutz’s ass out to the ash reap while I influence another one, because I’ll have to retain that Golconda to play when I take control of that minion, in around 4 turns. And maybe I’ll discover other setbacks of not having Anthelios in the following year…

My point is: my D&D deck will still be a contender in every table I play and, I guess, so will be every Girls or TGB AAA or Guillaume or any other Multi Master decks, for the very simple reason that the core strength of those decks come from the Multi Master mechanism, in which Anthelios is just a shiny polish on the surface. The banishment of Anthelios will not irreversibly cripple and change those decks; it will only slow then down for a few months. Just as the banishment of Lilith’s Blessing did to decks like Girls and Mono Dominate. Once again, we are just scratching the surface.

If we want to see less Multi Master decks in our tables and in the TWDA; if we want the actions of the vampires to be the protagonists of the game, instead of the actions of the Methuselah; if we think those decks are abusively overpowered and we want bring then down to balance; if we want all this, we must attack the core: we must limit the Multi Master mechanics. To do so, we don’t have to make any radical changes. We already have that solution!!! The text “you get two master phase actions (instead of one)” that cards like Anson, Nana Buruku and Rumors of Gehenna already have. We can’t stack multiple master phase actions with this text. With this text, we can make up to 1 trifle and 2 regular master phase actions. It is the text “you get an additional master phase action” and close variations that cards like Cybele, Huitzilopochtli, Isanwayen and Parthenon have that allow us the obscenity of performing 4 or 5 master phase actions in a single turn, that makes the core strength of Multi Master decks. This is the text we must change if we believe those decks are truly unbalancing and overpowered.

If I get limited to the maximum of 2 or 3 master phase actions, I will be forced to make a very different and radical change in my D&D deck: I will have to modify the proportions between master cards and every other kind of library cards on my deck. Today it has 30 master cards and 30 other library cards. If I keep the same proportion of master cards making just half of the master actions those cards will stack and hand jam. Besides, without the possibility of making 4 or 5 master phase actions, it will have be a completely different deck. I’ll have to lower the overall capacity of my crypt, so I can influence more vampires and have more minion actions to make up for absence of those extra master actions. I will have to put more valuable actions and reactions in the library for those extra minions to perform. This will slow down the speed to spread deranges around the table and the frequency to convert other players vampires into my pool. And since I won’t be able to make that much pool that fast, I will have add resources to defend my pool more effectively. The deck still will be a D&D, but will have to be something more than that in order to survive. It will lost some of the focus on masters in favor to minion actions. It will more like a regular deck. I guess the same thing will happen to other Multi Master decks. The limit of possible master phase actions per turn will force a radical change. They still will be Multi Master decks, but the amount of power granted by the Multi Master mechanics will be significantly reduced.

But the most important question is: why would we want that? I don’t want to play with or against weaker decks. I want to play with and against the strongest possible decks. I want to play against the faster stealthy bleeder, the blood thirstier rusher, the unflinching entrenched wall, the stronger politician, the most consistent turbo, the creepier bringer of the Gehenna and, why not, the trickier multi master. I want to face then all and be better. Those are all strong decks that scare the opponents to the point of making every one cooperate to oust then, or at least consider the possibility. But all of those decks have weaknesses. None of them are invincible.

I don’t want to cripple my opponent’s Multi Master decks. I don’t think this is necessary. I don’t think they are strong enough to justify that. I’ve learned the strengths and weaknesses of most of them. I’ve learned my way around most of them. We all did! We all can list the weakness of those archetypes listed throughout this topic. And this is also true to all of the tier 1 decks. I’m not always playing a deck capable surviving the strength or exploring the weakness of those great proven decks, but what the hell? Shit happens… I don’t want to cripple any of the tier 1 decks. I want to beat them as strong as they can be.

To stick with the Multi Master decks, they all have something in common: they all make the significant sacrifice of being Methuselah oriented decks instead of minion oriented decks. They sacrifice minion cards in order to make room for master cards. Some of them give up actions, some of them have few or no reactions and some of them are weak to combat. Even a Multi Master deck depends on some vital actions or reaction from their minions; if you deprive them from those, they won’t win. Most Multi Master decks depend on some level of setup and, therefore, are vulnerable to large amounts of pool damage in the early game. And so on… We all know those things. We all know how to beat them.

I read a lot of complaining against the “Girls” decks. Back in 2009, a friend started to play one of those and won a lot of games. But in a month or two, we learned how to beat him: we just beat the hell out of those girls; we burned them before their owner could play Golconda and influence them back to play. Since I rarely play with combat decks, I would cooperate with the player who was playing with a combat deck until the girls were no longer a threat. If I can't hurt them, I cooperate with someone who can for as long as it is convenient. I guess this is how you win against every tier 1 deck. I’m sure this is how you win every game of VTES. It’s a multiplayer game… you have to play with the circumstances of every particular table. A tier 1 deck is one of those circumstances. I don’t want to change that. I want to adapt to that.

I see some archetypes of decks making a lot of success in a cyclical basis. Back in 2014 we observed a hype over the Tupdog + Nephandus deck here in Brazil. In 2015 I hosted the National Championship and among the promos and boosters given to every player in attendance there was 1 copy of Gran Madre di Dio. I wanted to enable people to fight back, to terminate one cycle so that other could rise. We can do that against the "Girls" and other Multi Master decks without having to banish such na iconic card.

So, to return to the main topic and wrap everything I said until now:
1 - I don’t believe there is any need to underpower Multi Master deck in such an extreme way as to banish a card.
2 - If there is the need to underpower Multi Master decks, it should be done by putting some sort of limit to the Multi Master mechanics itself. The change of text from “gets an additional MPA” to “gets two MPAs instead of one” is a viable and simple solution.
3 - As far as I can foresee, the banishment of Anthelios will not achieve success in underpowering the Multi Master decks; they will adapt and remain strong.
4 - If the purpose behind the banishment of Anthelios was to limit or to offer a counter to the possibility of recycling and using a master card in the same turn, it should be done by changing the mechanism of Anthelios itself, possibly by transforming it in a minion action instead of a master action.
5 - We just had a new series released! Since the rules team already stated that they will not make changes in the texts of existing cards, they should have joined the design team in an effort to create a new card that could limit Multi Master or limit Anthelios.
6 - Banishing a card should be a last resort reserved only to the worst unfixable case scenario.

I apologize for such a long text and I’m looking forward to continuing this debate in a constructive way.

Best regards

Malk
Archbishop of Belo Horizonte – Brazil.

Pudel

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 2419
  • Retired pro
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #17 dnia: Styczeń 21, 2016, 10:39:16 pm »

Typ niezle bredzi. :D
Zapisane
Cytat: zasłyszane
oczywiście nie ma nic złego w graniu dla przyjemności, sam zagrałem dwie takie gry w 2007

Sprzedaję single - wyślij swój want przez PM/maila/fb.
Selling VTES singles - pm/mail/fb me your wantlist. Paypal accepted.

alek

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 4682
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #18 dnia: Styczeń 21, 2016, 11:07:45 pm »

Mi się nowe bany podobają. Jakoś specjalnie na Antheliosa czy ToGP nie narzekałem. Sam gralem tymi kartami w wielu taliach, ale teskinic za nimi nie będę. Generalnie jestem zdania ze w grze powinno być jak najwięcej interakcji, gra w fazie master powinna być ograniczona do minimum. Nie zgadzam się ze bany powinny być jakas ostatecznoscia, szczególnie w przypadku kart, które nikogo dużo nie kosztowaly. Co do pomyslow wydawania nowych kart, których glownym zadaniem jest kasowanie innych, to jest to jedno z najgorszych podejść do projektowania.
Dodatkowy plus to zmniejszenie downtime'u dla innych graczy, gdy gracz grający master deckiem gra sam ze sobą i co ture zastanawia się co cofnac z antheliosa.
Zapisane

Szewski

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 3523
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #19 dnia: Styczeń 21, 2016, 11:49:15 pm »

moje 69 groszy.

TGP całkiem słuszny ban. Karta łamiąca nogi po prostu i w sumie dobrze

Athelios - jakoś niespecjalnie przeszkadzała w grze ani jakoś nie łamała nóg. W sumie spodziewałem się że coś jej się stanie ale akurat banować po całości nie chciałem. W ogóle nie chciałem nic jej robić :)

Seeds - wiadomo, w *cenzura* tekstu a nie wiadomo o co cho.

Bany generalnie do przyjęcia jedynie polemizować mozna z atheliosem. W sumie to da się przezyc tak czy siak.
Zapisane
Dlaczego jestem bucem?

a) bo usuwam posty z partyzanta korzystając z prawa administracji, które sam sobie nadałem
b) bo  moje poczucie humoru jest wysublimowane i nie takie prostackie jak te, które napotykam w postach, które z partyzanta usuwam
c) i

Manit0u

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1454
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #20 dnia: Styczeń 22, 2016, 03:02:59 am »

Zamiast Antheliosa mogliby zbanować Ashur Tablets. To by się dopiero raban podniósł :P
Zapisane
Time is precious. Waste it wisely.

Migalart

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 517
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #21 dnia: Styczeń 27, 2016, 10:33:57 am »

ja bym jeszcze zbanował giand blood
ta karta to totalny random bost
Zapisane

ToY!

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1403
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #22 dnia: Styczeń 27, 2016, 12:37:34 pm »

to może wogóle  usuńmy fazę master =]
Zapisane
sorry andrzej=]

Manit0u

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1454
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #23 dnia: Styczeń 27, 2016, 06:15:23 pm »

to może wogóle  usuńmy fazę master =]

Zróbmy side-event, gdzie gra się normalnie tylko nie ma fazy master :P

Tyle miejsca nagle bez Pentexa, GB i reszty śmiecia.
Zapisane
Time is precious. Waste it wisely.

ToY!

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1403
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #24 dnia: Styczeń 28, 2016, 10:52:41 am »

ee tam, mam lepszą propozycję
crypt only standard
samą kryptą zagrać ^^
Zapisane
sorry andrzej=]

alek

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 4682
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #25 dnia: Styczeń 28, 2016, 10:58:36 am »

IMO rezygnacja z fazy master mogłaby być krokiem w bardzo dobrym kierunku -> położenia większego nacisku na interakcję między wampirami, a zmniejszenie "pasjansa". Ale to wymagałoby dużego przerobienia wieeeeeelu kart i dorobienia wielu nowych. Póki co ban antheliosa był takim krokiem.
Zapisane

Manit0u

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1454
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #26 dnia: Styczeń 28, 2016, 10:59:33 am »

ee tam, mam lepszą propozycję
crypt only standard
samą kryptą zagrać ^^

Hmmm... Też ciekawe. Beast by wymiatał. Goście z wbudowanym stealthem by mogli namieszać.

Co do banowania fazy master to moim zdaniem wystarczyłoby usunięcie "trifle" i wampów, które dają Ci dodatkową fazę. Każdy wtedy by mógł zagrać dokładnie jednego mastera na turę (z parthenonem 2) i już.
« Ostatnia zmiana: Styczeń 28, 2016, 11:01:05 am wysłana przez Manit0u »
Zapisane
Time is precious. Waste it wisely.

alek

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 4682
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #27 dnia: Styczeń 28, 2016, 12:02:05 pm »

Ja bym poszedł w kierunku ograniczenia w zasadach do możliwości zagrania maks dwóch kart master na turę. Nie trzeba wtedy nic banowac a trifle wciaz bedzie uzyteczne w taliach z jedną fazą master.
Zapisane

klisza

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 565
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #28 dnia: Styczeń 29, 2016, 09:26:00 pm »

Ja bym poszedł w kierunku ograniczenia w zasadach do możliwości zagrania maks dwóch kart master na turę. Nie trzeba wtedy nic banowac a trifle wciaz bedzie uzyteczne w taliach z jedną fazą master.

No to może dajmy możliwość tylko 2 wejść w combat, 2 polityk i 2 bleedów. To wszystko jest częścią mechaniki tej gry, a mam wrażenie że niektórzy zaczynają strzelać banami na ślepo. Mam więcej masterów  w decku to mam mniej combatu/bleedu/polityki/stealthu/interceptu i na tym ta gra polega, a nie na sztucznym osłabianiu jakiś archetypów.

ToGP - ok to naprawdę mocna karta taki gamebreaker, ale wystarczyło zmienić jej wymagania tytułowe i byłaby OK.

Lilith Blessing była trochę przesadzona ale tylko dlatego że została wydana wraz ze storylinem i tam powinna być stosowana, podejrzewam że nikt jej nie testował na masową skalę jaki będzie miała wpływ na grę. Chociaż i tutaj uważam że gdyby zostawić wymóg wyciągnięcia dyscypliny jako warunek użycia mogłaby zostać.
Zapisane

ToY!

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Wiadomości: 1403
    • Zobacz profil
Odp: wrażenia po ostatnich zmianach
« Odpowiedź #29 dnia: Luty 01, 2016, 03:15:52 pm »

mówię Togp to powinni zmienić na requires a Regent i bylby podwójny zysk - dla politk camarillowych ktore wiadomo są ostre, i wzmocnienie regenta <-- ktory jak na unikalny tytul jest słaby na maksa.
Zapisane
sorry andrzej=]