[Deck] Osebo Blocky Fighty
Pat
Created By: Pat Lusk
Description: Another reworking of the starter, to turn it into a flung
junk deck. Massassi and four rush actions to help go forward if the
intercept plan isn't working. (When I actually built it, I added a few more
sewer lids at the expense of a couple Flashes & Psyches, but I don't have
that version of the deck at the computer to post.) Also added 3 Eagle's
Sights.
Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 15, Max: 34, Avg: 6.25)
----------------------------------------------
3 Massassi obf AUS CEL POT QUI 9 Osebo
3 Khalu ani pro AUS CEL POT 7 Osebo
2 Homa AUS CEL POT 6 Osebo
1 Idrissa aus CEL 4 Osebo
2 Ismitta aus cel pot 4 Osebo
1 Kamaria aus pot 3 Osebo
Library: (90 cards)
-------------------
Master (12 cards)
2 Base Hunting Ground
3 Fame
2 Tension in the Ranks
5 Blood Doll
Action (10 cards)
3 Legend of the Leopard
2 Nose of the Hound
2 Bum`s Rush
3 Computer Hacking
Reaction (23 cards)
6 Telepathic Misdirection
6 Quicken Sight
5 Enhanced Senses
6 Forced Awakening
Combat (45 cards)
4 Telepathic Tracking
4 Psyche!
6 Blur
8 Flash
5 Sideslip
6 Taste of Vitae
6 Thrown Sewer Lid
6 Thrown Gate
CthuluKitty
> ----------------------------------------------
> 3 Massassi obf AUS CEL POT QUI 9 Osebo
> 3 Khalu ani pro AUS CEL POT 7 Osebo
> 2 Homa AUS CEL POT 6 Osebo
> 1 Idrissa aus CEL 4 Osebo
> 2 Ismitta aus cel pot 4 Osebo
> 1 Kamaria aus pot 3 Osebo
Wow. You sure do like to double and triple up on vampires. I'm not
quite sure why you feel compelled to do this. Note that there are
plenty of vampires in groups 3 and 4 that have the disciplines you're
using. They don't have to be Osebo to make the cut. For example:
Yvette 3 aus cel Toreador
David Morgan 3 aus pot Malkavian, cornercase
ability
Gengis 3 aus cel pot Brujah, cornercase
disadvantage
Mariano Pamposo 4 aus cel pot !Brujah, Black Hand
And then there are plenty of weenies with one of your disciplines at
basic or superior. Cheap AUS would be really helpful for providing
expendable blockers and bounce. Sadly, Martin Franckel is the only 3
cap with AUS available, and his disadvantage is a bit irritating. It's
too bad Isabel De Leon is Group 2, as she would rock in this crypt.
You could all the way up to 5 for AUS cel with various vampires, but
this shouldn't be necessary. In any case, it won't be hard to
diversify this crypt and reduce your chances of doubling.
> Library: (90 cards)
> -------------------
> Master (12 cards)
> 2 Base Hunting Ground
> 3 Fame
> 2 Tension in the Ranks
> 5 Blood Doll
This isn't a rush combat deck, so you can definitely afford to have
additional master cards. Intercept decks can often afford to spend
time playing very few cards from their hands in case you get jammed. I
wouldn't hesitate to go as high as 15 masters, and the case could be
made for using as many as 18. Also, these masters just don't cut it.
Take out 1 or 2 Fame (it is unique after all), 1 Hunting Ground (also
unique), both Tensions (tremendously overrated card), and consder
cutting down to 3 or 4 Blood Dolls. From there I would add a handful
of Effective Management and/or Discipline masters to make your crypt
more efficient, possibly add in some media locations for extra
intercept, maybe Guardian Angle, etc. It's up to you.
> Action (10 cards)
> 3 Legend of the Leopard
> 2 Nose of the Hound
> 2 Bum`s Rush
> 3 Computer Hacking
Legend of the Leopard is lame. I'd cut it. Also, every single one of
your vampires has aus, so it's hard to see why Bum's Rush is in there
instead of 2 more Nose of the Hound. You can use it to rush untapped
minions, but the immediate replacelement and +1 stealth on NotH more
than make up that. I would also consider at least 1 Pulse of the
Canaille, as it provides permanent +bleed that can really wear your
prey down, especially when you have combat to back up your actions.
And then there's Ancestor's Insight, which would really help your
forward pressure (this card was almost certainly intended for the
Osebo).
> Reaction (23 cards)
> 6 Telepathic Misdirection
> 6 Quicken Sight
> 5 Enhanced Senses
> 6 Forced Awakening
I think you need to diversify your intercept. Instead of 6xQS and 5xES
try 4xQS, 2xES, 3xSpirit's Touch, 2xPrecognition. You can also
consider Melange.
> Combat (45 cards)
> 4 Telepathic Tracking
> 4 Psyche!
> 6 Blur
> 8 Flash
> 5 Sideslip
> 6 Taste of Vitae
> 6 Thrown Sewer Lid
> 6 Thrown Gate
I'm not sure what the 4xTelepathic Tracking are doing in here. Since
you don't have any global combat effects, and your opponent might, more
Psyches would almost certainly be better. And they're free. 6xBlur
seems like a lot for a flung junk approach to combat. When you need to
play a strike card for each strike you make, 3 in a round is very hard
to pull off. I would probably replace all of them with Pursuit, Nimble
Feet, and/or Acrobatics. 8 Flash and 5 Sideslip is v. good. 6xTaste
is likely excessive, but I say this as someone who sees a lot of
celerity and fortitude combat. Consider cutting down on these or
removing them altogether. Ultimately, you'll need to play the deck to
figure out how worth it they are. 6xLid is good. If you want you
could diversify by using Earth Shock and/or Stunt Cycle, but Lid is by
far more favorite range pot strike. Generally speaking, I hate thrown
gate, but maybe it's good in this deck. Other combat cards to think
about are Increased Strength (more damage from pot strikes is a good
thing), Aura Reading (just plain awesome), and Vampiric Speed (a great
way to avoid incoming damage and control the combat). Since you're
running 3xMassassi, and your plan involves going long and playing nasty
strike cards, I would also think about splashing in some QUI combat.
Taste of Death (+Rotschrek?) or Blood Sweat could really ruin someone's
day, and most players won't see it coming.
Overall, I worry that your combat strategy is very card intensive for
not much payoff. You'd probably be better off with Concealed guns and
a splash of thrown junk (the CEL package being quite synergistic with
either), or straight up POT CEL combat with Torn Signpost, Immortal
Grapple, and Blur (with the added bonus of Massassi playing Thin
Blood!).
So there's my comments. Other people will probably tell you almost
exactly the opposite of what I just did. Those people are losers. ;)
I hope you don't think I'm being overcritical of your original design;
I'm just giving you the best advice I can muster.
Jesse
Pat
"CthuluKitty" <vtana...@riseup.net> wrote in message
news:1133139872.5...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> Crypt: (12 cards, Min: 15, Max: 34, Avg: 6.25)
> David Morgan 3 aus pot Malkavian, cornercase
> ability
> Gengis 3 aus cel pot Brujah, cornercase
> disadvantage
> Mariano Pamposo 4 aus cel pot !Brujah, Black Hand
>
It's just a style preference, I would rather take the chance of crypt
duplication while improving my chances of getting the discipline spread I
want.
The first cut was all Osebo, just because they're new and shiny. I put in a
Gengis when I actually built it, but forgot about Mariano. I'll probably
take out Idrissa, since the final build is so reliant on POT/pot.
>> Library: (90 cards)
>> -------------------
>> Master (12 cards)
>> 2 Base Hunting Ground
>> 3 Fame
>> 2 Tension in the Ranks
>> 5 Blood Doll
>
> This isn't a rush combat deck, so you can definitely afford to have
> additional master cards. Intercept decks can often afford to spend
> time playing very few cards from their hands in case you get jammed. I
> wouldn't hesitate to go as high as 15 masters, and the case could be
> made for using as many as 18. Also, these masters just don't cut it.
> Take out 1 or 2 Fame (it is unique after all), 1 Hunting Ground (also
I never play with less than 2 Fame in a deck where it's important. Maybe
it's just a metagame thing, but it's about 90% that Fame will be contested
at some point during the game, so I generally just let the first copy go,
and then re-play it. And if I don't lose one to contesting, I'll probably
lose it to an SR.
The third copy is to, hopefully, play on prey #2. :)
I also have a tendency to play too many masters in combat decks, so I
intentionally kept it to 12 in this first draft. I think it actually crept
up to 13 or 14 when I actually built it. (I believe Dreams went in.)
> unique), both Tensions (tremendously overrated card), and consder
> cutting down to 3 or 4 Blood Dolls. From there I would add a handful
> of Effective Management and/or Discipline masters to make your crypt
> more efficient, possibly add in some media locations for extra
> intercept, maybe Guardian Angle, etc. It's up to you.
>
Tension & Dragonbound are both more dangerous than Fame, in terms of hurting
the wrong person, so I don't tend to combine them, but I usually do include
one or the other in combat decks. All my Dragonbound are in decks now, so
Tension gets the nod this time.
I find Guardian Angel to be too fragile for its cost, because of the lose it
when you go to torpor clause.
>> Action (10 cards)
>> 3 Legend of the Leopard
>> 2 Nose of the Hound
>> 2 Bum`s Rush
>> 3 Computer Hacking
>
> Legend of the Leopard is lame. I'd cut it.
It's mostly there to play with the shiny new card. I would expect I'd go
down to one or maybe two in a final build. Sure, it's kinda cornercase, but
the occasional thrill of stealing a War Ghoul is worth a card slot in casual
play. :)
> Also, every single one of
> your vampires has aus, so it's hard to see why Bum's Rush is in there
> instead of 2 more Nose of the Hound. You can use it to rush untapped
> minions, but the immediate replacelement and +1 stealth on NotH more
> than make up that.
When playing AUS rush (Tremere, Tor/!Tor), I find that people never tap
their Famous minion, so the disadvantage of Bum's Rush is worth having the
chance of attacking the right minion.
>> Reaction (23 cards)
>> 6 Telepathic Misdirection
>> 6 Quicken Sight
>> 5 Enhanced Senses
>> 6 Forced Awakening
>
> I think you need to diversify your intercept. Instead of 6xQS and 5xES
> try 4xQS, 2xES, 3xSpirit's Touch, 2xPrecognition. You can also
> consider Melange.
>
I think the version I actually built had 5 TM, 5 QS, 3 Enhanced, 3 Eagle's
Sight.
>> Combat (45 cards)
>> 4 Telepathic Tracking
>> 4 Psyche!
>> 6 Blur
>> 8 Flash
>> 5 Sideslip
>> 6 Taste of Vitae
>> 6 Thrown Sewer Lid
>> 6 Thrown Gate
>
> I'm not sure what the 4xTelepathic Tracking are doing in here. Since
> you don't have any global combat effects, and your opponent might, more
> Psyches would almost certainly be better. And they're free. 6xBlur
> seems like a lot for a flung junk approach to combat. When you need to
> play a strike card for each strike you make, 3 in a round is very hard
> to pull off. I would probably replace all of them with Pursuit, Nimble
> Feet, and/or Acrobatics.
Good points, a mixture of additional strike cards is probably called for.
> 8 Flash and 5 Sideslip is v. good. 6xTaste
> is likely excessive, but I say this as someone who sees a lot of
> celerity and fortitude combat. Consider cutting down on these or
> removing them altogether. Ultimately, you'll need to play the deck to
> figure out how worth it they are. 6xLid is good. If you want you
> could diversify by using Earth Shock and/or Stunt Cycle, but Lid is by
> far more favorite range pot strike. Generally speaking, I hate thrown
> gate, but maybe it's good in this deck. Other combat cards to think
> about are Increased Strength (more damage from pot strikes is a good
> thing), Aura Reading (just plain awesome), and Vampiric Speed (a great
> way to avoid incoming damage and control the combat).
I thought about Increased Strength but decided to omit for now. Will
probably work some in on the next build, as well as some of the other
suggestions.
> Since you're
> running 3xMassassi, and your plan involves going long and playing nasty
> strike cards, I would also think about splashing in some QUI combat.
> Taste of Death (+Rotschrek?) or Blood Sweat could really ruin someone's
> day, and most players won't see it coming.
>
Or maybe a couple of Truth of Blood to let her bleed for 3. Again, good
candidate for testing in a subsequent version.
> Overall, I worry that your combat strategy is very card intensive for
> not much payoff. You'd probably be better off with Concealed guns and
> a splash of thrown junk (the CEL package being quite synergistic with
> either), or straight up POT CEL combat with Torn Signpost, Immortal
> Grapple, and Blur (with the added bonus of Massassi playing Thin
> Blood!).
>
Mostly I went this route because I don't have a flung junk deck built at the
moment, and why should all those Sewer Lids go to waste? :)
Strictly speaking, guns or close range POT CEL would likely be better.
Thx for the comments, this is good food for thought.
- Pat
CthuluKitty
> duplication while improving my chances of getting the discipline spread I
> want.
Sure. I try to walk the line, and you crossed much further into
duplication territory than I would have. I generally like to have at
least 5 vampires I'm only using 1 of in the crypt, and then 2-3 of the
more key vampires. This way I'm sure pretty sure I'll see the vampires
I need, but run little risk of only getting 2 guys in my opening crypt
draw.
> The first cut was all Osebo, just because they're new and shiny. I put in a
> Gengis when I actually built it, but forgot about Mariano. I'll probably
> take out Idrissa, since the final build is so reliant on POT/pot.
Good call I think. AUS cel would be nice for bounce, but aus CEL with
no pot isn't getting you very far with this build.
> I never play with less than 2 Fame in a deck where it's important. Maybe
> it's just a metagame thing, but it's about 90% that Fame will be contested
> at some point during the game, so I generally just let the first copy go,
> and then re-play it. And if I don't lose one to contesting, I'll probably
> lose it to an SR.
>
> The third copy is to, hopefully, play on prey #2. :)
I see what you're saying, but I still find 3 copies of a unique master
a bit crazy. 2 should be sufficient.
> I also have a tendency to play too many masters in combat decks, so I
> intentionally kept it to 12 in this first draft. I think it actually crept
> up to 13 or 14 when I actually built it. (I believe Dreams went in.)
That can be a problem for sure, but since this deck is so
reaction-heavy (hardly a pure combat deck) you can afford more masters
than could a standard pot rush deck. Personally, I'd almost always
rather have 2 Master cards in hand during my Master Phase than 0, since
MPAs are a resource I don't like to waste. When you're playing this
type of deck, jamming on 2-3 masters isn't that huge a problem either.
If your whole turn is just to play a master, blood manage, and wall up
you're not necessarily losing any momentum. When other players see you
do this, they'll more likely assume that you're sitting on reactions
than master jammed, and they'll be afraid to take actions you can
block/bounce.
Obviously this kind of tactic runs into problems at tournaments (you
can search my list of posts for various rants on the 2 hour time
limit), but it can be very effective in normal games. If you are
playing in a tournament, and you need to do this, make sure to poke any
players taking too much time with a sharp stick. Aim for the eye.
It's my general impression that idiotically or intentionally slow play
causes time outs far more often than these kind of wall tactics.
> Tension & Dragonbound are both more dangerous than Fame, in terms of hurting
> the wrong person, so I don't tend to combine them, but I usually do include
> one or the other in combat decks. All my Dragonbound are in decks now, so
> Tension gets the nod this time.
I was initially very excited about Tension and DBound, but having seen
them played I am less than overwhelmed. I generally wouldn't bother
with them at all.
> I find Guardian Angel to be too fragile for its cost, because of the lose it
> when you go to torpor clause.
Yeah, I agree. It was just a card that came to mind when I was listing
things off. I suppose GA can be good in low combat metagames, but this
is entirely speculative as I have never encountered such a thing.
> > Legend of the Leopard is lame. I'd cut it.
>
> It's mostly there to play with the shiny new card. I would expect I'd go
> down to one or maybe two in a final build. Sure, it's kinda cornercase, but
> the occasional thrill of stealing a War Ghoul is worth a card slot in casual
> play. :)
Ok. I'd still cut it down to 1. I often like to use these
cornercase-but-awesome cards, but 1 is really all you can afford.
> When playing AUS rush (Tremere, Tor/!Tor), I find that people never tap
> their Famous minion, so the disadvantage of Bum's Rush is worth having the
> chance of attacking the right minion.
But BR is at no stealth, so if your opponents are smart enough not to
tap the Famous minion, they're surely also smart enough to leave a
blocker. Maybe 3 and 1? I still prefer 4xNose.
> I think the version I actually built had 5 TM, 5 QS, 3 Enhanced, 3 Eagle's
> Sight.
That's better. I would still include Spirit's Touch, since your combat
strategy really wants maneuvers.
> I thought about Increased Strength but decided to omit for now. Will
> probably work some in on the next build, as well as some of the other
> suggestions.
I wouldn't include more than 2 or 3. It's the kind of card you only
want from time to time, but when the time comes (and it will) to do 5
damage with a Lid you'll be glad you did it.
> Or maybe a couple of Truth of Blood to let her bleed for 3. Again, good
> candidate for testing in a subsequent version.
Awesome idea. I forgot about that card. Getting bled for 3 and having
to discard 2 random cards if you block is really scary when the
incoming vampire can kick your ass.
> Mostly I went this route because I don't have a flung junk deck built at the
> moment, and why should all those Sewer Lids go to waste? :)
I suppose that's as good a reason as any. Personally, I put Lids in
all my potence decks, so they're hardly going to waste (though I do
have tons of them still collecting dust).
> Strictly speaking, guns or close range POT CEL would likely be better.
I'm glad we agree on this.
> Thx for the comments, this is good food for thought.
No problem. Good luck with the Osebo.
Pat
>> Mostly I went this route because I don't have a flung junk deck built at
>> the
>> moment, and why should all those Sewer Lids go to waste? :)
>
> I suppose that's as good a reason as any. Personally, I put Lids in
> all my potence decks, so they're hardly going to waste (though I do
> have tons of them still collecting dust).
>
I generally use Earthshock for my "casual" ranged strike in a POT deck,
since it can be used up close and combos with Torn Signpost. I hate getting
stuck at close with nothing but a sewer lid in hand.
This might be because I tend to prefer POT-FOR/Disarm close range combat, so
I don't tend to have as many maneuvers available as a POT-CEL deck.
- Pat
CthuluKitty
> since it can be used up close and combos with Torn Signpost. I hate getting
> stuck at close with nothing but a sewer lid in hand.
The long range only clause on Lid is a bit annoying, but I still prefer
it 100% above Earthshock. I've had this argument on the news group
before with Peter Bakija, and despite what seems to be a general
consensus that I'm wrong I still stick to it in practice as well as
rhetoric. My main objection to Earthshock is that it costs blood,
which is extremely precious in a combat oriented deck. Perhaps this is
less the case in the big wide world of low combat meta-games, where
Taste of Vitae is rumored to be an efficient way to recoup lost
counters. As I've said before, I have absolutely no experience with
such a thing. At one point I was briefly swayed by the arguments for
ES, and tried replacing the Lids in one of my potence-wielding decks.
After 1 game I realized that this was a stupid idea altogether, and put
the lids back in.
As for the argument that ES gives you synergy with Torn Signpost, I
think this a flawed line of reasoning. Whether you play an Earthshock
or a Lid, the Signpost is out of your hand and in play, and nothing
that either card can do will change that fact. The pertinent question
is not whether ES stacks with TS, but whether this actually makes it
better. Sure you might feel that your TS has not been "wasted" if you
play ES over Lid, but that's silly, and only of benefit
psychologically. The Signpost out of your hand. It's gone. So don't
worry about it. Assuming that you did play a TS and then watch your
opponent go long, let's compare the effects of these two strikes at
both pot and POT.
pot:
Earthshock costs 1 blood to inflict 2 undodgeable damage (not usable
against a minion with flight)
Lid is free and does 3 damage.
POT:
Earthshock costs 1 blood to inflict 4 undodgeable damage (not usable
against a minion with flight)
Lid is free and does 3 damage, with an optional press.
Now, it's pretty clear the Lid is miles better in the inferior version
of this scenario. I don't even think I need to justify that claim.
At the superior, Earthshock might appear better, as it inflicts 1 more
damage and is not dodgeable. However, it still costs 1 blood. We can
assume that the +1 damage is a balanced payoff for paying 1 blood.
This is analogous to the difference between Undead Strength and Pushing
the Limit (both of which I feel pale in comparison to Mighty Grapple).
The leftover difference is between the undodgeability (and cornercase
disadvantage) of ES versus the inherent press from Lid. Some people
really seem to like the undodgeable thing. I agree that it's good, but
I really prefer the press. Note that the press from Lid arguably gives
you better synergy with your Torn Signpost than the +1 damage from ES,
since you'll have a whole new round to whack your opponent with 3
stregth (and Disarm?).
So I feel like the synergy with Torn Signpost is pretty well debunked,
at least for me. The other supposed advantage-playing the card at
close is in my view narrowly more than useless. I would rather do
almost anything than pay 1 blood for a slightly limited Scorpion Sting.
Ostensibly, the main use for this is to cycle. I would really rather
just wait until my discard phase than waste the blood. Furthermore,
you can't play ES under Immortal Grapple, which I assume every potence
is going to include in fairly high numbers (as far as I'm concerned,
it's the best reason to play potence). So that's out the window as
well.
There you have my argument that Lid is better than Earthshock.
Hopefully this gets read by some other people, because I put way more
time into it than I should have. ;0
> This might be because I tend to prefer POT-FOR/Disarm close range combat, so
> I don't tend to have as many maneuvers available as a POT-CEL deck.
That's funny because the deck I tried ES in and hated it was a DOM FOR
POT deck with Lazverinus and Ignazio Giovanni (where the +strength
should have made ES even better, but didn't).
Jesse
pd...@lightlink.com
CthuluKitty wrote:
> The long range only clause on Lid is a bit annoying, but I still prefer
> it 100% above Earthshock. I've had this argument on the news group
> before with Peter Bakija,
That's 'cause earth Shock is awsome!
> and despite what seems to be a general
> consensus that I'm wrong I still stick to it in practice as well as
> rhetoric. My main objection to Earthshock is that it costs blood,
> which is extremely precious in a combat oriented deck.
That is certainly a problem in, say, a deck with not a lot of Taste of
Vitae or a lot of weenie minions--like, I wouldn't use Earth Shock in a
Hembrientas Menor deck, as there just isn't enough blood floating
around. But in a deck that has mid cap minions and/or a lot of Taste,
Earth Shock is fantastic.
> Perhaps this is
> less the case in the big wide world of low combat meta-games, where
> Taste of Vitae is rumored to be an efficient way to recoup lost
> counters. As I've said before, I have absolutely no experience with
> such a thing.
???
I use Taste in high combat environments all the time. It works fine.
> As for the argument that ES gives you synergy with Torn Signpost, I
> think this a flawed line of reasoning. Whether you play an Earthshock
> or a Lid, the Signpost is out of your hand and in play, and nothing
> that either card can do will change that fact. The pertinent question
> is not whether ES stacks with TS, but whether this actually makes it
> better. Sure you might feel that your TS has not been "wasted" if you
> play ES over Lid, but that's silly, and only of benefit
> psychologically.
I think you are missing the important part of the TS + ES synergy
concept--Earth Shock is good for synergizing with TS in decks that
generally want close range, but usually have a few manuvers anyway
(i.e., a standard IG based rush deck with a handfull of Behind
You/Flash/Fake Out). Earth Shock does a good job of replacing manuvers
in that sort of deck 'cause you play the Signpost before you manuver.
If they manuver out, you can then either:
A) Manuver back and hope they don't have another manuver in deck "A"
B) Earthshock instead, assuming that most folks aren't going to
manuver/S:CE, but instead most will manvuer/dodge or manuver/gun in
deck "B"
> POT:
> Earthshock costs 1 blood to inflict 4 undodgeable damage (not usable
> against a minion with flight)
> Lid is free and does 3 damage, with an optional press.
>
> Now, it's pretty clear the Lid is miles better in the inferior version
> of this scenario. I don't even think I need to justify that claim.
Correct. So don't have inferior potence.
> At the superior, Earthshock might appear better, as it inflicts 1 more
> damage and is not dodgeable. However, it still costs 1 blood.
Which isn't much to pay to totally hose the CEL gun monkey who thinks
he's all slick manuvering to long and playing Acrobatics with his
Assault Rifle.
> So I feel like the synergy with Torn Signpost is pretty well debunked,
> at least for me.
Again, the whole point is:
A) Play light manuvers in a close range TS based rush deck
or
B) Play Earth Shock in a close range TS based rush deck
Not
C) Play Torn Signpost in a long range Earth Shock deck.
-Peter
CthuluKitty
> > it 100% above Earthshock. I've had this argument on the news group
> > before with Peter Bakija,
>
> That's 'cause earth Shock is awsome!
Yeah, well, Thrown Sewer Lid is awesomer!
> ???
> I use Taste in high combat environments all the time. It works fine.
I have a feeling that when you say "high combat metagame" it means
something quite different from when I say "high combat metagame". As I
understand it, Boston is considered a very high combat meta, and I've
yet to see anything there nearly as brutal as what we have here in
western Massachusetts. When you can reliably anticipate that either
your damage is going to be prevented or avoided somehow, or that you're
minion will be sent to torpor, Taste is just not that awesome. It can
still be used, but it's going to either get played for 1 or 2, or stick
in your hand for a very long time before you'll get any more out of it.
> I think you are missing the important part of the TS + ES synergy
> concept--Earth Shock is good for synergizing with TS in decks that
> generally want close range, but usually have a few manuvers anyway
> (i.e., a standard IG based rush deck with a handfull of Behind
> You/Flash/Fake Out). Earth Shock does a good job of replacing manuvers
> in that sort of deck 'cause you play the Signpost before you manuver.
> If they manuver out, you can then either:
>
> A) Manuver back and hope they don't have another manuver in deck "A"
>
> B) Earthshock instead, assuming that most folks aren't going to
> manuver/S:CE, but instead most will manvuer/dodge or manuver/gun in
> deck "B"
Thanks for pointing out the merits of long range POT strikes in grapple
decks for those who don't know what we're talking about. Try rereading
those last 3 paragraphs replacing every instance of "Earthshock" with
"Thrown Sewer Lid" and you'll find, or at least I found, that
everything holds true in almost exactly the same way. Presumably, when
people say that ES synergizes with the Signpost they mean that it's
based on strength, and I just don't feel that this factor is
significant. You haven't addressed my argument on this point at all.
> Correct. So don't have inferior potence.
Sometimes, even in a deck that focusses on POT, some of your minions
will have pot because they're cheaper, because they have the right
discipline spread in some harder to reach decks (such as dom pot for),
or because they have awesome specials that make up for the discipline
inferiority (Christianus Lionel springs to mind). Ideally, every card
will be played by a vampire who can use its superior but that's often
not the case.
> Which isn't much to pay to totally hose the CEL gun monkey who thinks
> he's all slick manuvering to long and playing Acrobatics with his
> Assault Rifle.
I think we agree that this is the chief advantage of ES over Lid. In
my experience, however, the press has come in handy far more often.
> Again, the whole point is:
>
> A) Play light manuvers in a close range TS based rush deck
>
> or
>
> B) Play Earth Shock in a close range TS based rush deck
>
> Not
>
> C) Play Torn Signpost in a long range Earth Shock deck.
Right. I know that. Thanks again for educating the unenlightened
audience. The point I was trying to make is that Lid often has better
synergy with TS than ES does (and it's free). Aside from mentioning
the undodgeability, which I'm willing to concede is quite good, you
haven't provided much argument to the contrary.
On another note, I find that splitting up the response to maneuvers
between maneuvers of your own and ranged strikes can be quite
profitable, especially when the maneuvers come tied to other effects
such as intercept (Spirit's Touch, Quicken Sight, Instinctive Reaction
etc.), damage prevention (Unflinching Persistence), rushes (Bum's Rush,
Nose of the Hound, Ambush), additional strikes (Pursuit), presses
(Flash), dodge (Behind You), or stealth (Swallowed by the Night). That
way you can use the maneuvers to try to control range depending on what
you have available and what kind of enemy you're facing, and you can do
things at either range. If you're out of Immortal Grapples and you're
enemies aren't maneuvering you can go long yourself to unload the
ranged strikes jamming your hand. This approach is more useful for
Lids than ES of course, since Lid is ranged only.
pd...@lightlink.com
> I have a feeling that when you say "high combat metagame" it means
> something quite different from when I say "high combat metagame".
Heh heh. It's funny when people are newish.
> Thanks for pointing out the merits of long range POT strikes in grapple
> decks for those who don't know what we're talking about. Try rereading
> those last 3 paragraphs replacing every instance of "Earthshock" with
> "Thrown Sewer Lid" and you'll find, or at least I found, that
> everything holds true in almost exactly the same way.
Well, except that Sewer Lid only does 3 damage and gets dodged. You
could play the Signpost, watch them manuver to long, and throw a Sewer
Lid, wherein the Signpost is mostly dead, or you could play the Earth
Shock for more damage that can't be dodged, which is actually quite
handy, especially against Cel based defenses that tend to trump close
range Pot combat. The likelyhood of people manuvering to long and
dodging is pretty high, generally speaking (as opposed to not
manuvering at all and just getting killed). The manuver/S:CE isn't that
likely in a general sense. A manuver/dodge/gun or something isn't that
unlikely in a general sense.
The only disadvantage of Earth Shock is the blood cost. If you think it
is unlikely to pay off, sure, use the lid. But the 1 blood cost is not
that unlikely to pay off significantly against foes with Celerity. And
if you can Taste at all, you can pay for the cost.
> Right. I know that. Thanks again for educating the unenlightened audience.
No need to get testy.
> The point I was trying to make is that Lid often has better
> synergy with TS than ES does (and it's free). Aside from mentioning
> the undodgeability, which I'm willing to concede is quite good, you
> haven't provided much argument to the contrary.
You play the TS, and it gives you the extra damage. The Press from the
Lid might be handy, sure, but against an opponent with celerity (the
most likely situation where you need the ranged strike in the first
place), the press is unlikely to succeed, and the Lid is likely to be
dodged.
The assumption I am making here is that the most likely problem that
the close range Pot deck is going to run into is celerity--the celerity
deck can out manuver you, out press you, and can probably dodge your
ranged strike (think Count Germaine with an Assault Rifle or some
Assamite nightmare). A solid, non-dodgeable ranged strike as a back up
is going to have considerable payoff in this situation.
Sure, other decks can manuver too. Someone who uses a gun to manuver
can't dodge, at which point the extra damage (4 vs 3) is significant.
Someone with Obf playing, say, Gemini's Twin (a common form of combat
avoidance these days) is manuvering and dodging. Yes, the Lid press can
be handy, but if you can press successfully, you are probably winning
the fight anyway. At which point the difference is mostly moot.
Lid is much more of a main line offense in, say, a pot/CEL thrown junk
deck where you don't have reliable POT and generally rely on additional
strikes for the killing (get to long, dodge, Blur, fling a couple
lids)--in this sort of instance, the inferior 3 damage is huge, and the
lack of a press isn't usually an issue (due to reliance on Psyche). The
lack of undodgeability isn't an issue as you can get around dodges with
additional strikes.
Where ES shines is as an adjunct to POT based, close range combat,
where you can't rely on, say, celerity to help you out. The
undodgeability is very significant, and the blood cost (assuming
reliable Taste) isn't much of an issue.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
> I have a feeling that when you say "high combat metagame" it means
> something quite different from when I say "high combat metagame".
As an actual aside to address this part of this post, no, really, I
understand what you mean by "high combat metagame".
> As I
> understand it, Boston is considered a very high combat meta, and I've
> yet to see anything there nearly as brutal as what we have here in
> western Massachusetts. When you can reliably anticipate that either
> your damage is going to be prevented or avoided somehow, or that you're
> minion will be sent to torpor, Taste is just not that awesome.
See, if you can reliably anticipate this, why play combat at all? Why
not simply play serious anti-combat trump and avoid the whole issue?
> It can
> still be used, but it's going to either get played for 1 or 2, or stick
> in your hand for a very long time before you'll get any more out of it.
Yes, in a really high combat environment, Taste is not as good as it
could be. So you don't play combat in an environment like that. Trump
the trump.
In a large, blind tournament, however, you are less likely to run into
such serious combat or combat defense, generally speaking. The Taste
pays off.
-Peter
CthuluKitty
> not simply play serious anti-combat trump and avoid the whole issue?
In part it's a matter of taste, but it's also a matter of practicality.
When a majority of decks you're likely to go up against really want to
see combat happen, and will do what they need to to make sure it does,
it becomes somewhat inefficient to devote the amount of space necessary
to truly protect your minions. You can always expect that at various
points in the game, sometimes more often than others, you're going to
get blocked, or block someone else, or get rushed. If you can get away
with pure defense in combat and focus on your other main strategy
that's fine (Ventrue in particular exceed at this). However, you might
as well turn combat into an oppurtunity and pack some offense as well.
Many of the best combat cards, especially in this kind of environment,
double as both offense and defense. To name a few cards that do this:
Indomitability, Stutter Step, Sidestrike, Aura Reading, Horrid Form,
Theft of Vitae, Drawing out the Beast, etc.
> In a large, blind tournament, however, you are less likely to run into
> such serious combat or combat defense, generally speaking.
This is an interesting phenomenon. People go to tournaments expecting
a low combat metagame, so they build their decks with that in mind.
When they all get there, lo and behold, it's a low combat metagame.
Many people would argue that this is because competitive decks will not
use a lot of (or any) combat. I think it has more to do with a self
perpetuating myth about competitive play.
Defender of Ra
Based on the above, I can only see Earthshock being viable where Dodge
is strong or dominant. Not just often seen, but inevitable. If I know
one in five of my peers runs Dodges every game, that still doesn't
really do it for me -- that doesn't justify Earthshock, imo. (Stress
the "opinion" part of that acronym.) The press draws out another combat
card from the victim, so even if you're dry on combat cards you still
have a chance to draw more maneuvers, etc. from their hand. I think the
press, in addition, has better synergy with effects that restart
combat. There's a risk of cycling your victim's hand to his advantage,
but more likely you'll draw out all of the "dance away" stuff and leave
him stuck with Masters/Actions/Reactions.
A detail: I see a lot of Fortitude here, so that creates a bias. I want
longer combats so I can get my licks in, rather than strikes that cost
me blood.
-- DoR
pd...@lightlink.com
CthuluKitty wrote:
> In part it's a matter of taste, but it's also a matter of practicality.
> When a majority of decks you're likely to go up against really want to
> see combat happen, and will do what they need to to make sure it does,
> it becomes somewhat inefficient to devote the amount of space necessary
> to truly protect your minions.
But see, that's the trick--if you *know* you are going to run into a
lot of combat, then playing a lot of combat defense ceases to be a
problem--in a general sense, combat defense has a reasonably high
opportunity cost (sure, 20 Majesties is a good combat defense, but if
no one ever blocks you or Rushes you, they just jam your hand to
death). If you regularly see a lot of combat, trump everyone with some
sort of Ventrue Dom/For bleed deck--normally, having 15 Rolling with
the Punches might be a bad idea, but if you can always expect to get in
a fight, they'll flow like water, foiling your opponents, and you can
still bleed them for 6 an action.
Back in the day, when Ithaca was a nightmarish whirling testbed for
Rush technology, everyone would be playing the trumpier combat deck
(IG/POT topped by CEL/POT topped by POT/FOR etc), and whenever he got
sick of getting Decapitated, Josh Duffin would pull out a completely
combat free, defense heavy bleed deck, which, under normal
circumstances would choke to death on its own defense. But in the crazy
combat environment, it swept every game, 'cause the combat decks only
defense was killing it, and it had so much Majesty and/or Skin of
Steel, it never worked.
> You can always expect that at various
> points in the game, sometimes more often than others, you're going to
> get blocked, or block someone else, or get rushed. If you can get away
> with pure defense in combat and focus on your other main strategy
> that's fine (Ventrue in particular exceed at this). However, you might
> as well turn combat into an oppurtunity and pack some offense as well.
Sure. But as you note, you could also just play the Ventrue and tool
everyone with DOM/FOR. I mean, like, brutal combat is cool and all, but
in an environment where everyone is either playing it or expecting it,
it doesn't work so well.
> This is an interesting phenomenon. People go to tournaments expecting
> a low combat metagame, so they build their decks with that in mind.
> When they all get there, lo and behold, it's a low combat metagame.
> Many people would argue that this is because competitive decks will not
> use a lot of (or any) combat. I think it has more to do with a self
> perpetuating myth about competitive play.
Nah. It's 'cause Dominate S+B *still* is the most effective strategy
for winning. I play brutal Rush combat in tournaments all the time.
Sometimes I do well ('cause there isn't much other combat). Sometimes
not--at last year's NERQ, I was playing weenie POT/dom Rush, and got
tooled, 'cause every other person at the tournament was playing a lot
of hit back or guns, likely 'cause of the Boston crowd. If I had been
playing a bleed and defense heavy deck, I would have been gold (most of
the other combaty decks were less focused than mine--a lot of, like,
Euro Brujah toolboxy stuff with not a lot of Immortal Grapple or
whatever where a lot of S:CE would have been killer). But I was playing
very focused Rush combat which does really well against non combat
decks, but not real well against folks who can hit back for 3-5 when I
IG them, or can regularly manuver to long range. And even in an
environment like that, with a lot of combat decks, a combat heavy deck
didn't win.
Combat can win, and win handily (I won the, what, 2001 NERQ with my
same old Nosferatu Rush deck; The next NERQ was won by a Laszvernus
multi-Rush deck). But it is still easier to do well in a tournament
with just a plain old S+B deck. So when considering the environment of
a tournament, you can play, like, a deck that can win, or a deck that
can beat the deck that can win (S+B or Rush) or whatever. If you throw
Rock at the right time, you can win.
At Origins this last year, in the Friday 3R+F tournament, there was a
lot of fighty type decks, and I won with a defensive, ANI Aid from
Bats/Carrion Crows block deck--it wasn't real fast, and due to the
abundance of fighty and toolboxy decks, it had time to set up, and the
reliable 3 ranged damage coming out of weenie vampires wore down the
combaty decks. So it did well. The next day, however, in the Qualifier,
everyone (mostly the same people) was playing speed bleed, and the
tournament was won by a bleedzooka Stanislava deck.
Sometimes Rock wins. Sometimes not.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
Defender of Ra wrote:
> Based on the above, I can only see Earthshock being viable where Dodge
> is strong or dominant. Not just often seen, but inevitable.
You could look at it that way. I tend to think, however, that the
undodgability of the ES is most useful in the situations where you are
going to end up using the ES in a close range POT based deck
anyway--when your opponent has Celerity. Against Fortitude, say, they
probably aren't manuvering away from you anyway (if someone has
reliable Fortitude, why are they going to long range? Why aren't they
just staying at close, ignoring your damage, and hurting you back?)
Against Celerity, the situation most likely to result in someone going
to long and being able to out manuver you if you have a handfull of
manuvers instead, they are also likely to dodge ('cause half the cards
in celerity let you dodge).
Again, I'm not suggesting that Earth Shock should be used in, like, a
CEL/pot thrown junk deck or anything (whereGates, Lids and a handfull
of Stunt Bikes are the way to go), as Lids are clearly superior in a
situation where you have celerity yourself ('cause you can get around
dodges with additional strikes). Earth Shock, however, is very solid in
a deck that wants to be at close range, is already playing the Torn
Signposts, and has a choice between a handfull of (likely not celerity
based) manuvers or a handfull of backup ranged strikes, just in case.
The ES is, I will continue to argue, superior to the Lid in this
instance. Specifically 'cause it can't be dodged, and it does more
damage due to the Torn Signpost which you were playing anyway, and is
most useful in the situations that are most likely to foil you (running
into a celerity based combat defense).
-Peter
Matthew T. Morgan
> The ES is, I will continue to argue, superior to the Lid in this
> instance. Specifically 'cause it can't be dodged, and it does more
> damage due to the Torn Signpost which you were playing anyway, and is
> most useful in the situations that are most likely to foil you (running
> into a celerity based combat defense).
Earthshock works at close range. It's a superior card to Thrown Sewer Lid
in a deck that wants to fight at close range. They're great when someone
wants to run away. They work even if nobody does.
Matt Morgan
CthuluKitty
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> CthuluKitty wrote:
> > In part it's a matter of taste, but it's also a matter of practicality.
> > When a majority of decks you're likely to go up against really want to
> > see combat happen, and will do what they need to to make sure it does,
> > it becomes somewhat inefficient to devote the amount of space necessary
> > to truly protect your minions.
>
> sort of Ventrue Dom/For bleed deck--normally, having 15 Rolling with
> the Punches might be a bad idea, but if you can always expect to get in
> a fight, they'll flow like water, foiling your opponents, and you can
> still bleed them for 6 an action.
Sure. That's one way to trump certain kinds of combat, and I'd be
willing to bet I could win some games doing it. I was recently
consdering revisting the good old Law Firm, but Dave Clooney beat me to
the puch. I might still do it (though sadly all of my 2nd Trads are in
an Anneke deck that disappeared when I moved 6 months ago). Of course,
every trump has its trump. Some of the obvious problems the above
strategy could encounter would be bounce or dedicated blocking (dealing
with blockers is a major reason to do some damage in combat IMO), or
anti-fortitude combat. Both of these already show up from time to time
in our metagame.
> Back in the day, when Ithaca was a nightmarish whirling testbed for
> Rush technology, everyone would be playing the trumpier combat deck
> (IG/POT topped by CEL/POT topped by POT/FOR etc), and whenever he got
> sick of getting Decapitated, Josh Duffin would pull out a completely
> combat free, defense heavy bleed deck, which, under normal
> circumstances would choke to death on its own defense. But in the crazy
> combat environment, it swept every game, 'cause the combat decks only
> defense was killing it, and it had so much Majesty and/or Skin of
> Steel, it never worked.
Good for Josh. Every now and then you'll find a way to break your
metagame, and when you do it always makes you feel pretty darn clever.
I'm sure if he kept playing the same deck people would come up with
ways to stop it. (Did this happen?) When it gets right down to it,
the multi-player aspect of Jyhad makes it very difficult to build the
"the best deck", though there still seems to be a fair amount of
unwarranted drooling over the uber-l33t TWDA decks. Fortunately, this
isn't nearly as bad here as it is among players of "that other game".
> Sure. But as you note, you could also just play the Ventrue and tool
> everyone with DOM/FOR. I mean, like, brutal combat is cool and all, but
> in an environment where everyone is either playing it or expecting it,
> it doesn't work so well.
You could, but you certainly don't have to, and it's not the only--or
even necessarily the best--way to win.
> Nah. It's 'cause Dominate S+B *still* is the most effective strategy
> for winning.
It certainly is effective. I won't argue with you there. On the other
hand, I think the way people plan for tournaments has the effect of
making it even more effective. Of recent note in this regard is the
appearance of weenie/midcap AUS wall as a top-tier tournament deck. My
feeling is that such a strategy would fair rather poorly around where I
play, but the high stealth, low-combat environment really gives it a
place to shine.
>I play brutal Rush combat in tournaments all the time.
> Sometimes I do well ('cause there isn't much other combat). Sometimes
> not--at last year's NERQ, I was playing weenie POT/dom Rush, and got
> tooled, 'cause every other person at the tournament was playing a lot
> of hit back or guns, likely 'cause of the Boston crowd. If I had been
> playing a bleed and defense heavy deck, I would have been gold (most of
> the other combaty decks were less focused than mine--a lot of, like,
> Euro Brujah toolboxy stuff with not a lot of Immortal Grapple or
> whatever where a lot of S:CE would have been killer). But I was playing
> very focused Rush combat which does really well against non combat
> decks, but not real well against folks who can hit back for 3-5 when I
> IG them, or can regularly manuver to long range. And even in an
> environment like that, with a lot of combat decks, a combat heavy deck
> didn't win.
Interestingly enough, when a metagame moves more towards heavy combat
it strikes me that dedicated potence grapple decks (at least those with
fortitude) are the first to disappear. These kinds of balls-out rush
strategies are very well adapted to low-combat environements where
they'll find a lot of soft targets, but can collapse pretty quickly
when people are prepared to deal with them.
> Combat can win, and win handily (I won the, what, 2001 NERQ with my
> same old Nosferatu Rush deck; The next NERQ was won by a Laszvernus
> multi-Rush deck). But it is still easier to do well in a tournament
> with just a plain old S+B deck.
Now, do you literally mean it's "easier", as in requiring less effort
and intelligence? Or do you mean that a good S+B deck is more likely
to win than a good whatever-else deck? I'd be more inclined to agree
with the former. (And yes, I have played stealth bleed plenty of
times, and in different ways--I'm currently looking into doing a
neo-Kiasyd bleed deck)
> At Origins this last year, in the Friday 3R+F tournament, there was a
> lot of fighty type decks, and I won with a defensive, ANI Aid from
> Bats/Carrion Crows block deck--
I'm tinkering around with a similar concept right now. I've got the
whole pantheon of 1 and 2 cap ani weenies (G2/3) with 3-6 caps coming
from the Nos and !Nos and 2 copies of the almighty Cailean holding the
top end. The focus is mainly on animalism combat, with less amounts of
obf and pot tossed in for good measure. There's a good bit of
intercept and untap, some stealth, and a handful of Computer Hacking.
So far it's always worked well. Even if I don't win I always make my
presence felt. Since you're the Nosferatu newsletter guy I could send
a current list if you're at all interested.
> Sometimes Rock wins. Sometimes not.
I hear that's true in LARPs as well.
Ankur Gupta
> undodgability of the ES is most useful in the situations where you are
> going to end up using the ES in a close range POT based deck
> anyway--when your opponent has Celerity. Against Fortitude, say, they
I think you've made a decent case that celerity-based combat beats
potence's versatility meter. In that sense, ES is superior to the lid,
since it restricts an opponent's options for resisting damage while being
playable (cyclable) at close or long range. The play of ES at close
precludes a cycle of an IG, and tends to require more Taste support than
lids. Lids are dead in hand unless at long range, though significantly
more useful when looking at pot combat instead of POT combat. Tradeoff.
However, the Lid *does* restrict an opponent's options for resisting
damage and does increase damage potential (just as ES does). Forgetting
the extra 1 damage (for the moment), ES is useful to defeat a dodge. The
lid is also useful when defeating a dodge, by pressing. It is possible
that a celerity deck will be able to foil a press, but they must. For
decks that aren't celerity-based and can't utterly control combat the way
they wish, a press defeats both damage prevention and a dodge, by virtue
of its press. You've got your damage for next round cardlessly, since
these examples all assume you've laid a TS earlier.
Dodges are more common at long range; let's go ahead and assume that for
your sake (even though CEL gun decks have to maneuver on their own if they
want to dodge). ES helps defeat dodges at long range. At close, you have a
grapple (since this is a pot/POT IG deck).
However, there are many solutions at long range that cause problems for ES
that the Lid can handle. For an opponent playing Gemini's Mirror, they may
elect to play the card at superior (say gaining maneuvers some other way),
in which case an additional strike is needed (granted by a press). The lid
press can also be played defensively against Thaumaturgy, which is
increasingly popular now. Press if you think they can't maneuver to walk
you down, grab them, and beat them, or use the press to run the hell away
from the nasty evil fire-y thing. (Note that if they didn't maneuver, you
killed them at close before the press step.)
Most damage prevention is single-round also, and is fairly commonly played
at long range. In fact, the number of cel/for vampires gives new
possibilities of prevention at long. Gangrel prevent at long range with
ani/for combat. Ahrimanes do too. There are many other deck types that are
preventing damage at long range. Unflinching Persistence shows up in a
number of decks here (metagame consideration), as a means to handle both
maneuvering (to avoid a big hit) with some transient damage prevention.
All in all, I'd say damage prevention is as prevalent (possibly more or
less depending on metagame) as dodging for decks that you'll be fighting
at long range. For celerity decks that shoot you a bunch, I actually like
Stunt Cycle. (Yeah, I know I'm weird.) Free damage prevention for potence,
and burn a blood off of the opposing minion (or hit for 4)? Sign me up.
Moreover, for the canonical deck you're talking about (namely, CEL-based
combat, presumably based around guns), dodging isn't all that likely on
the first strike of a round. They'll probably maneuver with their gun. If
they feel the need to fear your mojo, they'll be spending a card to
maneuver away and a card to dodge. If the card to dodge isn't acrobatics,
they need *yet another* card to hurt you. (If the card was acrobatics,
you've already hit them for 1 and they can only shoot you once.) You've
spent one card, namely the Lid. If you rushed them, they don't bother
dodging if you played ES as your strike -- they just shoot you. Heck in
this sense, the Lid is damage prevention because they'll dodge! :)
To continue the example in a non-silly manner, even if they maneuvered
with Flash and press out of your lid, they've spent a lot of resources to
foil you -- in particular 2-3 cards. Though the ES will hit them, they
won't bother with all that work to avoid your strike if they see that you
are running ES. They'll just gun you down. They may bother when you play
lids. Running a CEL deck out of combat cards is good for your next rush.
If they forge on ahead without worrying about avoiding your mojo, the lid
strikes me as a better deal due to its press and requiring less of my
blood. If I'm in torpor because of the blood cost on ES, I can't taste its
cost back.
By the way, a good way to get that pesky gun deck is to Lid them, press,
and then break the gun over their prissy little heads. Fractured Armament
is great stuff, and ES can't do that for you either. :)
> dodges with additional strikes). Earth Shock, however, is very solid in
> a deck that wants to be at close range, is already playing the Torn
> Signposts, and has a choice between a handfull of (likely not celerity
> based) manuvers or a handfull of backup ranged strikes, just in case.
I do agree that Earth Shock is very solid in such decks, but I don't think
it's a clear choice over Lids. I think it depends on what you'd rather
beat. For gunning dodge monkeys, they've got to maneuver on their own
without using the gun if they want to dodge your first strike. I see that
*rarely*. Just a curiosity, who else do you see dodging at long?
> The ES is, I will continue to argue, superior to the Lid in this
> instance. Specifically 'cause it can't be dodged, and it does more
> damage due to the Torn Signpost which you were playing anyway, and is
> most useful in the situations that are most likely to foil you (running
> into a celerity based combat defense).
Celerity-based combat defense? Who plays celerity-based combat defense?
Most decks I see with celerity also happen to have presence. I'd figure
they'd use flashes and majesties if anything. . . . Am I missing
something? Is there any real set of vampires that depend on celerity for
defense?
Ankur Gupta
Prince of West Lafayette
Ankur Gupta
So, why are they superior? Their cycleability at close range is very
handy, I grant you. It depends on what you'd like to beat; Lids are a more
offensive tool in a close-combat fighty deck than ES. That's my
contention. In fact, I'd argue that they even have non-cornercase
defensive utility (which I did in the aforementioned post). I've got a
somewhat detailed post about this in this thread; your comments are
welcome.
That such a card is a bit harder to cycle in the absence of maneuvers is
regrettable, but may be a valid design choice when building a deck.
(Especially since it precludes a different card cycle, namely Immortal
Grapple.) The number of Lids/ES may have something to do with how willing
you are to not see a counter to a long-range deck. You can't pack too many
Lids into a close-combat deck; you may be able to put a couple more ES
than that, but still not too many. And to boot, ES requires a bit more
card support in the "Taste" department. And, you may opt to actually put
in, say, a high ground or three to handle cycleability of Lids.
I don't think the issue is at all clearly ES over Lids. I'd argue Lids
over ES, in the current combat landscape. However, even in such a case, ES
has its place in the aforementioned close-combat potence deck. I'm just
not sure that it's as useful an offensive tool as Lids are.
Defender of Ra
> Celerity-based combat defense? Who plays celerity-based combat defense?
I had a silly deck made of "leftover" cards built around titled
Toreador, votes, guns -- and more Maneuvers than any deck should have.
When rushed, Manuever _out_of_hand_ (not with the gun's Maneuver), then
dodge with an additional strike. The deck was unique -- I don't think
I've seen anything that worked like it did. It was also very stupid
(for reasons you can imagine).
I think, _generally_ speaking, ES is inferior to Sewer Lid, but they
are not mutually exclusive. I haven't tried it, but this discussion
suggests to me that a deck might benefit from running both. If you're
running Storage Annex and other card-control effects, it might be worth
it. Again, this is all theory. Worse, I'm not a huge Potence fan, so
it's theory I won't be testing soon. :-) But it would be nice, in the
same game, to Press down a Tremere deck and ES a Stutter Stepper. Is
there a ratio between the two cards that could work?
Ankur Gupta
> regrettable, but may be a valid design choice when building a deck.
> (Especially since it precludes a different card cycle, namely Immortal
The "it" in the last sentence above is intended to be ES. "Such a card" is
a Lid. Stupid pronouns.
Ankur Gupta
>
> not mutually exclusive. I haven't tried it, but this discussion suggests
> to me that a deck might benefit from running both. If you're running
> Storage Annex and other card-control effects, it might be worth it.
> Again, this is all theory. Worse, I'm not a huge Potence fan, so it's
> theory I won't be testing soon. :-) But it would be nice, in the same
> game, to Press down a Tremere deck and ES a Stutter Stepper. Is there a
> ratio between the two cards that could work?
Yes, I think that a healthy mix is best. I personally would prefer (in a 6
card package, fairly standard for this sort of thing):
4 Lids
2 ES
or
3 Lids
1 High Ground (!)
2 ES
or
2 Lids
1 Stunt Cycle
1 High Ground
2 ES
The high ground is cool tech, because it gives you chance to beat another
potence deck with low blood. Drop a TS. If he does too, run away and throw
something at him. Then press and get nasty. Oh, also hope that he doesn't
throw something at you. :)
Seems like I think that 2 ES makes sense. Depending on metagame choices,
I'd also consider expanding the package to 8 cards by adding 1 High Ground
and 1 Stunt Cycle to any ordering with High Ground already, or adding 1
High Ground and either 1 ES (or another HG) for the setup without any
initial HG.
pd...@lightlink.com
Ankur Gupta wrote:
> However, the Lid *does* restrict an opponent's options for resisting
> damage and does increase damage potential (just as ES does). Forgetting
> the extra 1 damage (for the moment), ES is useful to defeat a dodge. The
> lid is also useful when defeating a dodge, by pressing. It is possible
> that a celerity deck will be able to foil a press, but they must.
Sure, but again, the big issue is the celerity. If someone Flashes to
long, they already likely have the press from the Flash. You fling a
lid, they dodge, you press, they press to end. If it had been an Earth
Shock, they'd have taken damage already.
> Celerity-based combat defense?
Celerity based defense in the sense of "I have Celerity, I can
manuver," I didn't really mean a specifically celerity based combat
defense.
-Peter
Ankur Gupta
>> damage and does increase damage potential (just as ES does). Forgetting
>> the extra 1 damage (for the moment), ES is useful to defeat a dodge.
>> The lid is also useful when defeating a dodge, by pressing. It is
>> possible that a celerity deck will be able to foil a press, but they
>> must.
>
> Sure, but again, the big issue is the celerity. If someone Flashes to
> long, they already likely have the press from the Flash. You fling a
> lid, they dodge, you press, they press to end. If it had been an Earth
> Shock, they'd have taken damage already.
Sure. This is the *one* scenario in which ES pays off. Is it really that
frequent that a celerity deck will maneuver and dodge without using the
gun? Would they try to dodge you if you played ES as your strike instead?
Wouldn't they instead elect to shoot you twice and taste?
Also, Lids have many other uses than just in this case, which are arguably
better. . . see also damage prevention. It seems that a big part of your
contention is that damage prevention doesn't happen at long range, which
seems to be just as likely (perhaps moreso) than dodging at long range.
>> Celerity-based combat defense?
>
> Celerity based defense in the sense of "I have Celerity, I can manuver,"
> I didn't really mean a specifically celerity based combat defense.
Can you point me to a deck style that intends to defend itself with
Celerity without guns? And if with guns, do most of these decks really
pack Flashes as a mainstream card instead of Pursuits/Psyches? Even if
they do, are these particular scenarios (decks that can maneuver, dodge,
and press out *reliably*) more frequent than decks that can only do two of
those three and suffer on the third? And can ES defeat damage prevention?
Not getting irritated, though it may sound that way. I just feel as if you
rather missed the thrust of my earlier post.
pd...@lightlink.com
CthuluKitty wrote:
> Now, do you literally mean it's "easier", as in requiring less effort
> and intelligence? Or do you mean that a good S+B deck is more likely
> to win than a good whatever-else deck? I'd be more inclined to agree
> with the former. (And yes, I have played stealth bleed plenty of
> times, and in different ways--I'm currently looking into doing a
> neo-Kiasyd bleed deck)
I mean easier in the sense that it reliably gets VPs. Rush decks, even
in the best situation, say, tend to get maybe 3 VPs due to the obtusity
of the strategy, and often fall on their face with 0 or 1 VP. S+B decks
(or unblockable bleedzooka deck or whatever) tend to win bigger when
they win, and tend to either get zero VPs (by getting shut down early)
or a lot of VPs (by not). So with, say, a combat deck, you are working
hard to get a 1/3 table win and your first VP to gear up is often a
struggle, decks that bleed a lot, regardless of the delivery system,
aren't so struggly.
> I'm tinkering around with a similar concept right now. I've got the
> whole pantheon of 1 and 2 cap ani weenies (G2/3) with 3-6 caps coming
> from the Nos and !Nos and 2 copies of the almighty Cailean holding the
> top end. The focus is mainly on animalism combat, with less amounts of
> obf and pot tossed in for good measure. There's a good bit of
> intercept and untap, some stealth, and a handful of Computer Hacking.
> So far it's always worked well. Even if I don't win I always make my
> presence felt. Since you're the Nosferatu newsletter guy I could send
> a current list if you're at all interested.
Sure--give it a whirl.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
Matthew T. Morgan wrote:
> Earthshock works at close range. It's a superior card to Thrown Sewer Lid
> in a deck that wants to fight at close range. They're great when someone
> wants to run away. They work even if nobody does.
Also a very strong point. Yeah, you can't ES at close when you have
grappled someone, but in a pinch, if you are at close and without
grapple, the ES is still playable, and still foils the dodge.
And again, just to be clear--I'm not claiming that ES is more effective
than Lid in a long range deck. Just that it is more effective than a
small handfull of lids in an otherwise close range deck. Given the
choice, in a generally close range combat deck, of a small number of:
-Manuvers
-Lids
-Earth Shocks
I'd probably go with the Earth Shock most of the time. For reasons
detailed at length elsewhere in this thread.
-Peter
CthuluKitty
> in a deck that wants to fight at close range. They're great when someone
> wants to run away. They work even if nobody does.
If by a card "working" you mean that you can cycle it for the cost of 1
blood and a crappy effect, then yeah Earth Shock works at close. I
personally would rather just wait and discard than waste blood in this
way. I've already made my argument against the utility of ES at close
range, but I'll repeat it briefly in case anyone missed it. I'm aware
that these points have already been made:
1) You cannot play Earthshock under immortal grapple, which severely
limits the number of circumstances in which you'll be able to use it at
close.
2) It costs a blood, and does something that Scorpion Sting does for
free.
3) Potence has so many better things to do at close, and if you're
running short range POT strikes (the best being Mighty Grapple), you'll
want to play those instead of ES. All of the other options here
(except strikes to destroy equipment) are viable under IG.
4) It costs a blood! Depending on metagame, combat decks may have a
very difficult time throwing away their blood counters so haphazardly.
I'll give some ground here and agree that Earth Shock is better in some
circumstances, and if you're specifically preparing for those
circumstances it's a better choice for your deck. I won't agree that
"it's a superior card to Thrown Sewer Lid in a deck that wants to fight
at close range" as you say, because that's not always true, and in my
experience it's the exact opposite.
Matthew T. Morgan
> 1) You cannot play Earthshock under immortal grapple, which severely
> limits the number of circumstances in which you'll be able to use it at
> close.
Lid also doesn't combo with Immortal Grapple, nor does it combo with Torn
Signpost or Fists of Death. Earthshock goes nicely with those. Lid
requires you to be at long range. Earthshock works the same at long or
close.
> 2) It costs a blood, and does something that Scorpion Sting does for
> free.
Incorrect. Scorpion Sting is not a ranged strike.
> 3) Potence has so many better things to do at close, and if you're
> running short range POT strikes (the best being Mighty Grapple), you'll
> want to play those instead of ES. All of the other options here
> (except strikes to destroy equipment) are viable under IG.
Clearly I'm not putting Earthshock into a deck because I want to play it
as a close-range potence strike. I'm putting it in my deck to punish
minions who outmaneuver mine. That it's playable at close range is a
bonus and makes me prefer it to Lid.
> 4) It costs a blood! Depending on metagame, combat decks may have a
> very difficult time throwing away their blood counters so haphazardly.
My metagame can get pretty fighty, but I can usually find the blood to
spare for an Earthshock. Prevention, Tastes, hunting ground, etc. If I'm
in a situation where I've only got one blood and I'm fighting someone
nasty, then I think my guy is probably going to torpor empty anyway.
> I'll give some ground here and agree that Earth Shock is better in some
> circumstances, and if you're specifically preparing for those
> circumstances it's a better choice for your deck. I won't agree that
> "it's a superior card to Thrown Sewer Lid in a deck that wants to fight
> at close range" as you say, because that's not always true, and in my
> experience it's the exact opposite.
Funny thing about experiences is that they're often different. I've put
Earthshock into every potence deck I've made since the card was released.
I've had great success with it.
Matt Morgan
pd...@lightlink.com
> 1) You cannot play Earthshock under immortal grapple, which severely
> limits the number of circumstances in which you'll be able to use it at
> close.
You can't play lid at close range at all. Which sets the number of
circumstances in which you'll be able to use it at close to zero. Earth
Shock is not going in the deck specifically to be used at close range,
no. But that it *can* be used at close is certainly an advantage over
lid--once and a while, you'll be at close, you won't have an IG, and
being able to play the ES is going to be handy. That will never be the
case with a lid. Ever.
> 2) It costs a blood, and does something that Scorpion Sting does for
> free.
Except it is also a ranged strike. And uses a discipline that you are
already using.
> 3) Potence has so many better things to do at close, and if you're
> running short range POT strikes (the best being Mighty Grapple), you'll
> want to play those instead of ES. All of the other options here
> (except strikes to destroy equipment) are viable under IG.
You don't have the ES in the deck to use at close range. You have the
ES to occasionally kill folks at long range too, rather than trying to
out manuver them. But it also can be used at close in a pinch. Lid does
the same thing, but ES has some significant advantages over the Lid.
Apparently, you disagree. What are you gonna do?
> 4) It costs a blood! Depending on metagame, combat decks may have a
> very difficult time throwing away their blood counters so haphazardly.
Lots of things cost a blood. A good, damaging ranged strike that can't
be dodged seems a very reasonable thing to spend a blood on. Especially
as you can often Taste it back. If the loss of the 1 blood is going to
get you killed, you were probably getting killed anyway. Most of the
time, not so much, though. And if the 1 blood spent means that you
don't get killed by Count Germaine dodging and then Blurring with an
Assault Rifle at long range? Seems like a reasonable trade to me.
-Peter
pd...@lightlink.com
> Sure. This is the *one* scenario in which ES pays off. Is it really that
> frequent that a celerity deck will maneuver and dodge without using the
> gun?
The issue is that it is the situation that will kill you. If they
manuver with the gun, the Lid or the ES are pretty interchangeable,
except that the ES can do an extra point of damage (assuming a TS
first, which is the kind of deck that I'm assuming we are talking
about). At which point the difference is minimal. But if they do
manuver/dodge/blur/gun, which certainly happens and certainly kills you
if you have a Lid, you might just come out on top with the ES. The 1
blood cost on a card that you have a small handfull of doesn't seem
like a reasonable insurance against a situation that isn't that
uncommon and totally trumps you otherwise?
> Also, Lids have many other uses than just in this case, which are arguably
> better. . . see also damage prevention. It seems that a big part of your
> contention is that damage prevention doesn't happen at long range, which
> seems to be just as likely (perhaps moreso) than dodging at long range.
It is certainly possible that folks prevent damage at long range (i.e.
manuver to long and then prevent). I haven't seen it much. I can't see
how it happens all that often--unless you are playing some sort of uber
combat trump deck, you generally don't run into that so much. I accept
that it is certainly a possibility, but I'm not holding my breath to
see a lot of it. Manuvers and dodges? I see that all the time. In all
sorts of environments. The few times I have seen a deck that regularly
manuvers to long range and then prevents damage, the Lid isn't going to
help either--they can prevent all your damage and press to end anyway.
> Can you point me to a deck style that intends to defend itself with
> Celerity without guns?
A deck with Celerity and potence. It manuvers to long range. It dodges.
It additional strikes with a lid. With a Lid, you probably die. With
the ES, you might very well both end up dead. A better plan than just
you ending up dead.
> And if with guns, do most of these decks really
> pack Flashes as a mainstream card instead of Pursuits/Psyches?
Flash is still card voted most likely to be used. Pursuit and Psyche
are incredibly common, yeah, but I'm yet to live in a world where Flash
isn't common as dirt.
> Not getting irritated, though it may sound that way. I just feel as if you
> rather missed the thrust of my earlier post.
No, no. Got it.
-Peter
CthuluKitty
> Signpost or Fists of Death. Earthshock goes nicely with those. Lid
> requires you to be at long range. Earthshock works the same at long or
> close.
Lid can combine very well with Torn Signpost and Fists of Death because
you get a press which you can use to continue combat. This is
certainly within the same general level of usefulness as inflicting the
+1 damage you get by using Earthshock.
> > 2) It costs a blood, and does something that Scorpion Sting does for
> > free.
>
> Incorrect. Scorpion Sting is not a ranged strike.
I know that. Pay attention to context and don't try to distort what
I'm saying. I was specifically referring the usefulness of cycling ES
at close range, not it's overall value in all circumstances.
> Clearly I'm not putting Earthshock into a deck because I want to
play it
> as a close-range potence strike. I'm putting it in my deck to punish
> minions who outmaneuver mine. That it's playable at close range is a
> bonus and makes me prefer it to Lid.
Again, that's obvious. I never said you were putting in Earthshock to
use it as close range. All I'm saying is that in my view the ability
to play the card at close is next to useless, and you'd be better off
discarding it.
> If I'm in a situation where I've only got one blood and I'm fighting someone
> nasty, then I think my guy is probably going to torpor empty anyway.
As far as I know, most games of Jyhad last longer than a single round
of combat. The point of avoiding blood cost cards isn't just that they
might get you torporized (this is fairly minor really), but that once
you spend the blood it's gone for the rest of the game, regardless of
what your opponent does in combat (unless you Taste it back, which is
possible to varying degrees depending on metagame). That counter could
be used for all sorts of other things such as playing cards, rescuing
vampires, healing damage later on, or converting into pool.
> Funny thing about experiences is that they're often different. I've put
> Earthshock into every potence deck I've made since the card was released.
> I've had great success with it.
That's fine. I'm not maintaining that the Lid is always better. I'm
objecting to the notion, as you phrased it, that "[Earthshock] is a
superior card to Thrown Sewer Lid in a deck that wants to fight at
close range". This is not universally true.
Ankur Gupta
> manuver with the gun, the Lid or the ES are pretty interchangeable,
> except that the ES can do an extra point of damage (assuming a TS first,
> which is the kind of deck that I'm assuming we are talking about). At
> which point the difference is minimal. But if they do
> manuver/dodge/blur/gun, which certainly happens and certainly kills you
> if you have a Lid, you might just come out on top with the ES. The 1
> blood cost on a card that you have a small handfull of doesn't seem like
> a reasonable insurance against a situation that isn't that uncommon and
> totally trumps you otherwise?
"That isn't uncommon" is our point of contention. I think you're
exaggerating the presence of decks that maneuver *and* dodge *and* press
out. As a consequence, you're absolutely ignoring the benefit of defeating
damage prevention that only Lid provides. You can prefer to defeat dodge
over damage prevention if you wish. I'd rather beat a deck that can't
reliably deal with presses, either due to lack of maneuvers (grapple in
next round), lack of dodges at long range, or lack of presses out. Seems
useful in a great many more situations.
Lots of decks foil a deck of this sort. Why focus on only one style? A
deck that devotes the time to stopping you from hitting them (with a
dodge, a maneuver, and a press) are probably not going to be hitting you
back.
>> Also, Lids have many other uses than just in this case, which are
>> arguably better. . . see also damage prevention. It seems that a big
>> part of your contention is that damage prevention doesn't happen at
>> long range, which seems to be just as likely (perhaps moreso) than
>> dodging at long range.
>
> It is certainly possible that folks prevent damage at long range (i.e.
> manuver to long and then prevent). I haven't seen it much. I can't see
> how it happens all that often--unless you are playing some sort of uber
> combat trump deck, you generally don't run into that so much. I accept
Uncommon to see ani/for paired up? Or .44/for? Or cel/for? Or pot/for? Or
whatever/for? There are lots of decks that fight with fortitude, and
several fight at long range. How can you ignore these deck types?
> that it is certainly a possibility, but I'm not holding my breath to see
> a lot of it. Manuvers and dodges? I see that all the time. In all sorts
> of environments. The few times I have seen a deck that regularly
> manuvers to long range and then prevents damage, the Lid isn't going to
> help either--they can prevent all your damage and press to end anyway.
Which kind of decks? Which cards give maneuvers and dodges consistently?
Gemini's? Ok, take another one out of them by pressing. Watch them burn
all their blood. Then kill em, *and* run them out of defenses for the
future. What else? I can't imagine celerity decks that will dedicate 15ish
cards to defeating your deck. They have to play two cards, at the very
least. Most decks of that sort would need to play 3. It's just not
terribly likely.
> A deck with Celerity and potence. It manuvers to long range. It dodges.
> It additional strikes with a lid. With a Lid, you probably die. With the
> ES, you might very well both end up dead. A better plan than just you
> ending up dead.
Are these scenarios popular enough to corner-case the use of a lid in a
close-combat potence deck in favor of ES? What about a gun deck that opts
to dodge and maneuver and press out without ever striking? (To strike
also, you'd need 3 cards or only strike once. . . essentially saving
damage taken.)
>> And if with guns, do most of these decks really pack Flashes as a
>> mainstream card instead of Pursuits/Psyches?
>
> Flash is still card voted most likely to be used. Pursuit and Psyche are
> incredibly common, yeah, but I'm yet to live in a world where Flash
> isn't common as dirt.
You must live in a different world than I do. Flash just doesn't show up
in many of the games I've played in say, the last 2 years. In fact, press
combat tends to defeat most decks that I see.
>> Not getting irritated, though it may sound that way. I just feel as if
>> you rather missed the thrust of my earlier post.
>
> No, no. Got it.
I guess you see damage prevention as significantly more cornercase than I
do at long range. Other forms of damage prevention also include Flesh of
Marble, Leathery Hide, Leather Jackets, and Visceratika. Horrid Form,
Apparition, and Skin of the Adder may also need multiple strikes to
defeat. Gemini's Mirror is rarely reliable in decks that play with that
card. I'm sure there are lots and lots of damage prevention effects that
I'm missing. How again is long-ranged damage prevention + maneuver
marginal compared to dodging, maneuvering, and pressing out?
pd...@lightlink.com
> "That isn't uncommon" is our point of contention.
Likely.
> I think you're
> exaggerating the presence of decks that maneuver *and* dodge *and* press
> out.
They don't show up all that often. But when they do, they totally kill
you, and the inclusion of the ES tends to help out in that situation.
The difference between the Lid and the ES is:
-ES defeats dodge/Lid gives you a press.
-ES costs a blood/Lid is free.
-ES can be played at close/Lid can't
For my money, the blood cost is mostly irrelevant--I'm not playing
enough ES that it stacks up, and when the ES pays off, the blood cost
seems very reasonable; the Dodge/Press is a wash, really--I prefer the
undodgeability to the press for various reasons, but in any case, a
wash; the ability to play the ES at close if necessary is pure gravy.
Yeah, ok, sometimes ES is foiled by flight. But not enough to worry
about it.
> Lots of decks foil a deck of this sort. Why focus on only one style?
'Cause it is easy to solve that problem with the ES. Or at least make a
good stab at it.
> Uncommon to see ani/for paired up? Or .44/for? Or cel/for? Or pot/for? Or
> whatever/for? There are lots of decks that fight with fortitude, and
> several fight at long range. How can you ignore these deck types?
'Cause they don't show up that much. Maybe they'll start showing up a
lot now, and my point will fall apart. But my experience to this date
indicates that decks that both reliably manuver to long range and
prevent damage at the same time are pretty few and far between. They
tend to either not manuver and prevent or manuver and not prevent much.
And again, in a situation where someone can realiably go to long and
prevent damage, they also either probably can foil a press (due to
Indomitibility or Flash), or they are going to kill me outright anyway,
and neither a Lid or a ES is going to make any difference at all.
> Which kind of decks? Which cards give maneuvers and dodges consistently?
Flash; Pursuit; Sidestrike; Sideslip. I see these all that time. In all
sorts of decks.
> You must live in a different world than I do.
Clearly.
> I guess you see damage prevention as significantly more cornercase than I
> do at long range.
I do.
I see lots of damage prevention. Just not that much of it at long
range. And when I do see it at long range, it is likely going to kill
me outright, and the press from the Lid isn't going to save me. Such
that the advantages of the ES (foil dodge, can do more damage; can't be
dodged; can be played at close range in a pinch), in situations that it
is useful, outweigh the disadvantages (costs a blood; no press).
-Peter
Defender of Ra
> Ankur Gupta wrote:
> > "That isn't uncommon" is our point of contention.
>
> Likely.
>
> > whatever/for? There are lots of decks that fight with fortitude, and
> > several fight at long range. How can you ignore these deck types?
>
> 'Cause they don't show up that much.
We are in different worlds. Fortitude is the lynchpin of more defensive
decks I've seen so far than any other method. Leather jackets are
pretty common, too. Give me For over a Dodge any day of the week.
Others seem to agree. Dodge just isn't in aggressive decks that I see,
save for Stutter and -- the big one -- Tremere. And you will WANT that
press, to end, when you see a warlock Dodging.
> But my experience to this date
> indicates that decks that both reliably manuver to long range and
> prevent damage at the same time are pretty few and far between. They
> tend to either not manuver and prevent or manuver and not prevent much.
My Tremere deck does that all the time. And it presses like mad. Flack
or Leather or both, move to long, steal or burn. Blowing off 3 blood
definately helps slow the Thefts down. Nailing me for 2 damage and
burning yourself for 1 does *nothing* for you as I've Thefted 2. And I
can fashion defend (burn a Leather) if I care to.
> And again, in a situation where someone can realiably go to long and
> prevent damage, they also either probably can foil a press (due to
> Indomitibility or Flash),
Or you're going to want to foil *their* press -- does anyone play
Tremere in your area much?
And just because someone has the cards to foil a press doesn't mean you
shouldn't do it. In fact, it's all the more reason to. If I have a
defensive prey and I play a card which causes him to dump a card that
can be used to either Maneuver or Press, I'm happy. Chances are he
dumps two: one to maneuver, one to cancel my Press. Shall he drop a
third to prevent damage? Good. Eventually, he's going to run out of
red.
Everything can be countered. Attrition is inevitable without a god-pull
or a crap pull (from your foe) or both.
> > I guess you see damage prevention as significantly more cornercase than I
> > do at long range.
>
> I do.
>
> I see lots of damage prevention. Just not that much of it at long
> range. And when I do see it at long range, it is likely going to kill
> me outright, and the press from the Lid isn't going to save me. Such
> that the advantages of the ES (foil dodge, can do more damage; can't be
> dodged; can be played at close range in a pinch), in situations that it
> is useful, outweigh the disadvantages (costs a blood; no press).
I see lots of damage prevention and I see Maneuvers both. And in an
environment where Temptation and Form and Theft of Vitae are popular,
I'm loathe to use blood-costing effects wtihout due cause, as well. I
have, with presses, run a For deck down by drawing streams of blood
stemming from its controller's use of strike-damage prevention. Clumsy,
but it worked. Several copies of Soak could have won it for him.
TSL has another advantage. I think the higher base damage plus Press
can more likely lead to a kill than Earthshock -- this has been my
experience. Maneuvering to long and losing 3 blood when the "close
combat" deck manages to fight is a bit unpleasant. Getting Pressed
afterwards means I might have to write off the minion. I've never been
threatened by Earthshock; it just seems to have less potential to kill.
If I can convince three of the next five people I sit down with to run
Dodges, things may change.
Of course, if everyone starts running Assamites, the Violation of
Trusts might g--.
Erm. No. But the principle is there.
-- DoR
pd...@lightlink.com
Defender of Ra wrote:
> We are in different worlds. Fortitude is the lynchpin of more
defensive
> decks I've seen so far than any other method.
I see fortitude all the time. Just not ranged fortitude that much.
And really, I'm not talking about expectations of *my* playgroup. I'm
talking about the game environment as a whole, as typified by large
riegonal tournaments. If, say, I go to the NER Qualifier in January, it
seems likely that I won't run into much in the way of ranged damage
prevention. It is possible I am wrong, and it is possible that the new
set will change all of this. But my experience with competetive play as
a whole tells me that ranged damage prevention doesn't come up all that
much. Fortitude at close? Sure. Lots of Fortitude at close. And with
presses from a dozen or more Indomitibilities. But decks that can both
reliably manuver *and* reliably prevent damage tend to either be:
A) Combat trump monsters (say, Alastor Stanislava with an AR and 15
Psyches) that are going to kill a close range Rush deck regardless of
the ranged strikes in their hand, but don't do so hot in terms of
winning games.
B) Not real good decks in general, as they have an awful lot of combat
defense and not a lot of much else.
It is certainly possible that folks are getting good mileage out of,
say, weenie CEL with !Gangrel and Leathery Hide or Cel/For/X combat
decks. But I'm not seeing them tearing up the pea patch.
> My Tremere deck does that all the time. And it presses like mad.
Why is it not foiled by Majesty?
> Or you're going to want to foil *their* press -- does anyone play
> Tremere in your area much?
Not as a successful combat deck, no. Tremere combat is foiled by both
common combat defense (S:CE) and common combat offense (IG or
additional strike). I see a lot of Tremere decks, both locally and
competetively, but mostly, their combat is restricted to manuver to
long and Taste, and that is the end.
-Peter
Matthew T. Morgan
>> Lid also doesn't combo with Immortal Grapple, nor does it combo with Torn
>> Signpost or Fists of Death. Earthshock goes nicely with those. Lid
>> requires you to be at long range. Earthshock works the same at long or
>> close.
>
> Lid can combine very well with Torn Signpost and Fists of Death because
> you get a press which you can use to continue combat. This is
> certainly within the same general level of usefulness as inflicting the
> +1 damage you get by using Earthshock.
Sure, if you get to play it.
>>> 2) It costs a blood, and does something that Scorpion Sting does for
>>> free.
>>
>> Incorrect. Scorpion Sting is not a ranged strike.
>
> I know that. Pay attention to context and don't try to distort what
> I'm saying. I was specifically referring the usefulness of cycling ES
> at close range, not it's overall value in all circumstances.
The usefulness in cycling Earthshock at close range is not that it's a
sooper-dooper close range strike. The usefulness in cycling Earthshock at
close range is that you don't have to wait for your discard phase to see a
new card. Also, it's +1 damage in a pinch. Certainly there are better
ways to beat up people and foil dodge at close range, but the option is
there.
> > Clearly I'm not putting Earthshock into a deck because I want to
> play it
>> as a close-range potence strike. I'm putting it in my deck to punish
>> minions who outmaneuver mine. That it's playable at close range is a
>> bonus and makes me prefer it to Lid.
>
> Again, that's obvious. I never said you were putting in Earthshock to
> use it as close range. All I'm saying is that in my view the ability
> to play the card at close is next to useless, and you'd be better off
> discarding it.
Perhaps, but sometimes it just won't do to wait around for the discard
phase, Barrens isn't available, etc. Cards that cycle easily are, in
general, better than cards that don't. I have discarded Earthshocks
because nobody was running away. I have also played Earthshocks at close
range to cycle them.
>> If I'm in a situation where I've only got one blood and I'm fighting someone
>> nasty, then I think my guy is probably going to torpor empty anyway.
>
> As far as I know, most games of Jyhad last longer than a single round
> of combat. The point of avoiding blood cost cards isn't just that they
> might get you torporized (this is fairly minor really), but that once
> you spend the blood it's gone for the rest of the game, regardless of
> what your opponent does in combat (unless you Taste it back, which is
> possible to varying degrees depending on metagame). That counter could
> be used for all sorts of other things such as playing cards, rescuing
> vampires, healing damage later on, or converting into pool.
Or it can be Tasted back because the Earthshock did 4+ damage. Like I
said, I've never had any trouble paying for Earthshocks and I've never
regretted the blood cost.
>> Funny thing about experiences is that they're often different. I've put
>> Earthshock into every potence deck I've made since the card was released.
>> I've had great success with it.
>
> That's fine. I'm not maintaining that the Lid is always better. I'm
> objecting to the notion, as you phrased it, that "[Earthshock] is a
> superior card to Thrown Sewer Lid in a deck that wants to fight at
> close range". This is not universally true.
So what? The same can be said of any opinion offered here. "Blood Doll
is one of the strongest master cards in the game." One could contrive of
a metagame where that just wasn't true. My experience has shown
Earthshock to be a great option for close-range combat decks to have a way
to strike out at those who go to long. Is that better?
Matt Morgan
Defender of Ra
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> Defender of Ra wrote:
> > My Tremere deck does that all the time. And it presses like mad.
>
> Why is it not foiled by Majesty?
Thoughts Betrayed, and, against a defensive deck, I rely on multiple
methods of reentering combat to drain combat cards out of the hand of
my opponent.
> > Or you're going to want to foil *their* press -- does anyone play
> > Tremere in your area much?
>
> Not as a successful combat deck, no. Tremere combat is foiled by both
> common combat defense (S:CE) and common combat offense (IG or
> additional strike). I see a lot of Tremere decks, both locally and
> competetively, but mostly, their combat is restricted to manuver to
> long and Taste, and that is the end.
TB nixies all of that save Celerity, and I only am intimidated by
Celerity that can kill me quickly despite Thefts and survive the second
round aggravated. If IG is popular, I prefer grapple-blockers to adding
more Maneuvers since an IG deck will deal with a Maneuver to long
(which is why we're discussing Thrown Sewer Lid in the first place).
Finally, Fast Reaction and similar effects work in this context. If you
attack the compulsive need to maneuver to long, and or give the deck an
additional angle of attack (voting power or somesuch) I don't see the
problem. The ability to counter For is significant.
pd...@lightlink.com
Defender of Ra wrote:
> Thoughts Betrayed, and, against a defensive deck, I rely on multiple
> methods of reentering combat to drain combat cards out of the hand of
> my opponent.
TB is certainly a way to foil all sorts of things. But it is expensive
and requires DOM. Meaning that your vampires are generally huge and
slow, which makes for a dubious combat deck, lest you be a multi-rush,
meaning you need fortitude as well, and then you are spiraling wayyy
out of control.
TB is a good card in theory, but I'm yet to see a deck that really gets
milage out of it *and* is good in a general "I can win games" sense.
-Peter
Ankur Gupta
>
> Why is it not foiled by Majesty?
I think Telepathic Tracking has a lot to do with that.
> Not as a successful combat deck, no. Tremere combat is foiled by both
> common combat defense (S:CE) and common combat offense (IG or additional
> strike). I see a lot of Tremere decks, both locally and competetively,
> but mostly, their combat is restricted to manuver to long and Taste, and
> that is the end.
I don't think these Tremere decks were necessarily well-built. Putting in
the threat of agg or a hugely crippling strike (or even pre-strike) along
with a nice amount of Apportations and some Telepathic Trackings makes for
a deck that defeats all sorts of stuff -- damage prevention, presses,
dodges, combat ends, hitback at close or long (as long as it's not agg).
And, it's true that Tremere "mostly" maneuver and Taste, but they can
fairly reliably kill a minion with press combat.
Serenading the Kami has given a nice, *very nice* boost to the usual torn
signpost paradigm, since you can telepathic tracking to defeat combat
ending and beat damage prevention at close with blood rage/fury.
Ankur Gupta
> and requires DOM. Meaning that your vampires are generally huge and
> slow, which makes for a dubious combat deck, lest you be a multi-rush,
> meaning you need fortitude as well, and then you are spiraling wayyy out
> of control.
Though I agree that TB is expensive, it's not all that hard to get DOM/THA
on midcaps, if I recall correctly. Dominate has the side benefit of
bloating and you know, ousting, as well, so it's not a total loss even at
dom (and may be worth skill cards). For a Tremere deck, you do not require
fortitude for multi-rush. . . Rutor's Hand is a more than adequate
replacement for a fistful of freaks. Uniform conceptualization according
to a "metagame" tends to lead preclude non-wonky solutions such as these
in-clan options I'm presenting here. See also Telepathic Tracking as an
alternative, where AUS/THA is significantly more popular. And these
vampires also tend to have dom. . . as midcaps. And can rush with Nose of
the Hound if you wish. Seems significantly stronger than the standard pot
rush deck to me. YMMV.
> TB is a good card in theory, but I'm yet to see a deck that really gets
> milage out of it *and* is good in a general "I can win games" sense.
I've seen a very good deck based around Lazvernius and TB that makes
people cry. I mean like, weep tears of sadness. Openly. And as a side
benefit, it wins games too.
Kalessin
> I don't think these Tremere decks were necessarily well-built. Putting in
> the threat of agg or a hugely crippling strike (or even pre-strike) along
> with a nice amount of Apportations and some Telepathic Trackings makes for
> a deck that defeats all sorts of stuff -- damage prevention, presses,
> dodges, combat ends, hitback at close or long (as long as it's not agg).
> And, it's true that Tremere "mostly" maneuver and Taste, but they can
> fairly reliably kill a minion with press combat.
Not to speak about Blood Fury AND Soul Burn (yes, Soul Burn, I know
most people around here consider's it to be lame, but it has given me
wonderful results, specially in a weapon heavy meta -- lots of .44
magnums, you know --, "so... you move to long with the inbuilt maneuver
from your gun ?? wicked face here ").
Splash one every now and then and most gun-wielding players will think
twice before blocking you, or bleeding you, for what that matters.
And if your meta is too fortitude heavy, Thaumaturgy works wonders...
at least you'll have some serious fun watching the faces of the other
guys while they wonder how they will get rid of their "prevent damage"
cards if you keep BFing, SBing, and Thefting them :)
Cheers,
Andrés.
pd...@lightlink.com
Ankur Gupta wrote:
> I think Telepathic Tracking has a lot to do with that.
Possibly. But much like TB, it is harder to utilize than one would
think. Much like a TB based deck, I've yet to see a really good TT
based deck. I accept that they exist, but still, haven't seen one in
action.
> I don't think these Tremere decks were necessarily well-built.
I accept that it is possible to make a solid Tremere combat deck. But
the inherrent flaws with Tremere combat are such that you can certainly
make a good killer combat deck with them, but those decks can't
actually win games so much. I've seen plenty of good Tremere decks, but
again, they aren't super fighty.
> Putting in
> the threat of agg or a hugely crippling strike (or even pre-strike) along
> with a nice amount of Apportations and some Telepathic Trackings makes for
> a deck that defeats all sorts of stuff -- damage prevention, presses,
> dodges, combat ends, hitback at close or long (as long as it's not agg).
Sure, but they don't win games so much.
> And, it's true that Tremere "mostly" maneuver and Taste, but they can
> fairly reliably kill a minion with press combat.
Certainly. But not so much and win games at the same time. Combat decks
that can both reliably torporize *and* win games tend to either be
weenie-ish or multi-rush-ish. Tremere THA/AUS or THA/DOM tend to be
neither.
> Serenading the Kami has given a nice, *very nice* boost to the usual torn
> signpost paradigm, since you can telepathic tracking to defeat combat
> ending and beat damage prevention at close with blood rage/fury.
I've seen some pretty effective Serenading Pot/Tha decks that can kill
pretty well. But they also don't win so much.
-Peter
Ankur Gupta
>
> Possibly. But much like TB, it is harder to utilize than one would
> think. Much like a TB based deck, I've yet to see a really good TT based
> deck. I accept that they exist, but still, haven't seen one in action.
How is it hard to utilize? Combat will either end (allowing the use of TT
at superior), or presses will happen, at which point it can be used for a
blood to give both a press and a maneuver in the next round. And an
advantage of Psyche/TT over IG is that once they're out of defense,
they're out of defense for a while. It's more reactive than pro-active,
which is what you want in a nicely-flowing combat deck -- reactions to
their defensive measures.
>> I don't think these Tremere decks were necessarily well-built.
>
> I accept that it is possible to make a solid Tremere combat deck. But
> the inherrent flaws with Tremere combat are such that you can certainly
> make a good killer combat deck with them, but those decks can't actually
> win games so much. I've seen plenty of good Tremere decks, but again,
> they aren't super fighty.
What flaws are so insurmountable that one couldn't build a 30 card kill
package? Serenading + TT is very similar to Torn + Grapple. Same payload,
roughly speaking. In addition, the Tremere combat beats damage prevention,
which potence doesn't deal with as well.
>> Putting in the threat of agg or a hugely crippling strike (or even
>> pre-strike) along with a nice amount of Apportations and some
>> Telepathic Trackings makes for a deck that defeats all sorts of stuff
>> -- damage prevention, presses, dodges, combat ends, hitback at close or
>> long (as long as it's not agg).
>
> Sure, but they don't win games so much.
Maybe I should play with ya. :)
>> And, it's true that Tremere "mostly" maneuver and Taste, but they can
>> fairly reliably kill a minion with press combat.
>
> Certainly. But not so much and win games at the same time. Combat decks
> that can both reliably torporize *and* win games tend to either be
> weenie-ish or multi-rush-ish. Tremere THA/AUS or THA/DOM tend to be
> neither.
Sure, but multi-rushish-ness exists with Tremere.
>> Serenading the Kami has given a nice, *very nice* boost to the usual
>> torn signpost paradigm, since you can telepathic tracking to defeat
>> combat ending and beat damage prevention at close with blood rage/fury.
>
> I've seen some pretty effective Serenading Pot/Tha decks that can kill
> pretty well. But they also don't win so much.
I can imagine why. Gerrymandering pot on Tha decks makes them a bit too
big. If you instead do AUS/THA (which naturally occurs), you'll have solid
midcaps *and* be able to get multiple actions, all without devoting too
much to your strategy.
pd...@lightlink.com
Ankur Gupta wrote:
> And these
> vampires also tend to have dom. . . as midcaps. And can rush with Nose of
> the Hound if you wish. Seems significantly stronger than the standard pot
> rush deck to me. YMMV.
Ya'd think so. Yet I'm not seeing them win anywhere. And weenie pot
Rush still does ok.
> I've seen a very good deck based around Lazvernius and TB that makes
> people cry. I mean like, weep tears of sadness. Openly. And as a side
> benefit, it wins games too.
Sure. That is Lasvernus who has all the important skills and +2 hand
damage. And multi-rushes. And not a Tremere.
-Peter
Ankur Gupta
>> with Nose of the Hound if you wish. Seems significantly stronger than
>> the standard pot rush deck to me. YMMV.
>
> Ya'd think so. Yet I'm not seeing them win anywhere. And weenie pot Rush
> still does ok.
That's largely because they're weenies and less so because they have a
good payload with respect to the Tremere though. I think I should have
said, "comparable payload to standard potence rush combat".
>> I've seen a very good deck based around Lazvernius and TB that makes
>> people cry. I mean like, weep tears of sadness. Openly. And as a side
>> benefit, it wins games too.
>
> Sure. That is Lasvernus who has all the important skills and +2 hand
> damage. And multi-rushes. And not a Tremere.
Yeah, this example was to illustrate a use for TB, rather than a way to
justify Tremere combat. Nevertheless, when you can approximate
Lazvernius's strengths with Serenading the Kami and you're using the same
support cards (TB and/or TT), one can make a reasonable assertion that
Tremere could work. I am not however making such an assertion. :)
Peter D Bakija
> That's largely because they're weenies and less so because they have a
> good payload with respect to the Tremere though. I think I should have
> said, "comparable payload to standard potence rush combat".
Yah--see, one of the big problems with Tremere combat is that it requires
mid-cap vampires (5+ for THA/AUS; 6+ for THA/DOM) to go anywhere. Which is
slow and unweildy if you are committing most of your deck to fightyness.
Which is why I'm still not seeing that many good Tremere fighty decks, even
now that Telepathic Tracking is easier to get. Like the mechanisims are all
there to make such a deck. I'm just not seeing them in circulation and doing
well. Maybe that will all change soon. Xian?
> Yeah, this example was to illustrate a use for TB, rather than a way to
> justify Tremere combat.
Oh, sure--TB is all sorts of good, if you can make it work. But it usually
requires something crazy, and often there is a better way to do what it does
(i.e Lasvernus can just IG folks...).
> Nevertheless, when you can approximate
> Lazvernius's strengths with Serenading the Kami and you're using the same
> support cards (TB and/or TT), one can make a reasonable assertion that
> Tremere could work.
Lasvernusz's main strength (other than his wildly appropriate discipline
spread) is his permanent +2 hand damage. Lasvernuszssazz with a single IG is
all you really need most of the time, which means a lot more room for other
useful cards.
> I am not however making such an assertion. :)
Heh. Reasonable :-)
Peter D Bakija
pd...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/pdb6
"So in conclusion, our business plan is to sell hot,
easily spilled liquids to naked people."
-Brittni Meil
CthuluKitty
like going through the last 10 posts to find the relevant quotations.
I'll try to be general.
Having tried Tremere offensive combat numerous times in various ways, I
can more or less say for sure that it does not work, or is at least
incredibly tricky. Tremere combat is excellent as a sideline tactic or
enabling sub-strategy, but it is very hard to make it stand on its own.
I think the best way to utilize the Tremeres' combat abilities a a
main line is in an intercept combat deck. The cost of getting auspex
and thaumaturgy is too high to just go throwing minions willy nilly
into fights, but it is perfectly reasonable--indeed a bargain--for
solid defensive strategies. Having aus THA at 3, AUS tha at 3 and 4,
and 2 x THA AUS at 5 is just an amazing concentration of a discipline
combo at the low end. The only 2 disciplines that seem easier to slap
together for such a low cost (off hand anyhow) would be pre CEL, or
maybe DEM obf. The absurd amount of blood management the Tremere have
access to, and the Chantry, make this kind of wall strategy very
viable. Once you get rolling, you can bloat by the bucketful without
even doing anything, and then start bleeding like nuts, holding your
few copies of Conditioning for when you know they'll pay off. A
sideline benefit is that you can often do better in combat on the
reacting end, because your opponent declares everything first. It's
slow, but it works.
Thoughts Betrayed and Telepathic Tracking look like good ideas, but I
haven't yet found them very useful because, you guessed it, they cost
blood. In general, I just don't like combat cards to cost me blood.
My basic philosophy is that I only want to spend blood on a card if I
know for sure that it will pay off. I'm perfectly willing to spend a
counter for Deflection, Freak Drive, Conditioning, etc. because I can
be reasonably sure that these cards will do what I want them to do. I
don't want to spend a blood to watch my opponent play damage
prevention; I want the damage to connect if I'm going to pay for it.
pd...@lightlink.com
> Having tried Tremere offensive combat numerous times in various ways, I
> can more or less say for sure that it does not work, or is at least
> incredibly tricky.
Say it loud, brother!
> Tremere combat is excellent as a sideline tactic or
> enabling sub-strategy, but it is very hard to make it stand on its own.
Can I hear "Amen"?
> I think the best way to utilize the Tremeres' combat abilities a a
> main line is in an intercept combat deck. The cost of getting auspex
> and thaumaturgy is too high to just go throwing minions willy nilly
> into fights, but it is perfectly reasonable--indeed a bargain--for
> solid defensive strategies.
Agreed--Tremere intercept fightly combat works pretty well--you have
defensive angles covered (block damaging actions; bounce bleeds as
needed), and if your opponent evades your killing combat, you are
usually ok; the killing in the deck is an opportunistic sideline where
the main survival aspect of the deck is intercept.
But then, you can make the best intercepty deck in the world, and you
still have to contend with the problems of intercept decks (i.e. you
don't win games with 2VP if your prey gets 3VPs...)
-Peter
Xian
Heh.
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> CthuluKitty wrote:
> > Having tried Tremere offensive combat numerous times in various ways, I
> > can more or less say for sure that it does not work, or is at least
> > incredibly tricky.
>
> Say it loud, brother!
It's incredibly tricky. And trumped by "good" combat.
> > Tremere combat is excellent as a sideline tactic or
> > enabling sub-strategy, but it is very hard to make it stand on its own.
>
> Can I hear "Amen"?
Very true.
Cthulhu Kitty wrote:
> > I think the best way to utilize the Tremeres' combat abilities a a
> > main line is in an intercept combat deck. The cost of getting auspex
> > and thaumaturgy is too high to just go throwing minions willy nilly
> > into fights, but it is perfectly reasonable--indeed a bargain--for
> > solid defensive strategies.
I'd disagree here. Intercept combat is the most *obvious* way to try
to make it work.
Bruise & bleed has been far more effective for me in practice, at both
local and national levels. Seduction +
Threats/Foreshadowing/Conditioning with some relatively solid combat to
back it up can be pretty good. Perfect Clarity helps, but isn't
necessary. Revelations is good too.
There's this rumor that using Dominate sometimes means you don't lose.
Also, you can pretty easily make a short chain combat THA package.
Theft + Apportation/Movement of the Mind satisfies most of the SCC
requirements. It doesn't effectively deal with Dodge/SCE, but if you
really want, you can handle that to some extent with either Telepathic
Tracking, Thoughts Betrayed, or Perfect Clarity. Generally, you're
just better off trying to steal two and let the combat end, using Walk
every once in a while to make others fear your combat.
[snip Peter agreeing with CK]
Peter wrote:
> But then, you can make the best intercepty deck in the world, and you
> still have to contend with the problems of intercept decks (i.e. you
> don't win games with 2VP if your prey gets 3VPs...)
Yeah, here's the problem with intercept...how does it oust? I mean,
sure, you can make a Smiling Jack deck and intercept and win with it.
There are a couple of other options, but mostly, it's difficult to win
with intercept & combat. It's a little disappointing that the new
auspex card is Laibon only, and I have yet to really experiment with
Anima Gathering, but generally, DOM makes ousting a lot easier.
Xian
surprised neither of the Kristoffs have taken Tremere/Jack as their
next challenge...
Ankur Gupta
> Heh.
I invoke. . . PIKACHU!!!
Ok, since you guys are getting all big-gunny on me, I'm going to have to
make the mid-cap multi-rush Tremere AUS/THA deck and crush people with it.
Be forewarned. . . I might end up being wrong. And that might just end the
world.
Let the battles begin.
<goes off to build the deck>
CthuluKitty
> local and national levels. Seduction +
> Threats/Foreshadowing/Conditioning with some relatively solid combat to
> back it up can be pretty good. Perfect Clarity helps, but isn't
> necessary. Revelations is good too.
I find the bruise and bleed can be a good tactic in many situations,
but that it doesn't really pay off as an overarching strategy for a
deck to rely on. The main problem is that you need to get through both
your prey's combat and bleed defense cards before you start doing
damage. If your prey can bounce/reduce, that's what will happen. If
your prey can fight, that's what will happen. If your prey can neither
bounce or fight, what the hell is going on? I can see how Revelations
helps here.
> Also, you can pretty easily make a short chain combat THA package.
> Theft + Apportation/Movement of the Mind satisfies most of the SCC
> requirements. It doesn't effectively deal with Dodge/SCE, but if you
> really want, you can handle that to some extent with either Telepathic
> Tracking, Thoughts Betrayed, or Perfect Clarity. Generally, you're
> just better off trying to steal two and let the combat end, using Walk
> every once in a while to make others fear your combat.
I agree. This really has proven to be the most effective form of Thaum
combat that I've tried. I also like to include a few copies of Blood
Rage/Fury since is hoses equipment and fortitude, and Theft can't
torporize vampires.
> Yeah, here's the problem with intercept...how does it oust? I mean,
> sure, you can make a Smiling Jack deck and intercept and win with it.
> There are a couple of other options, but mostly, it's difficult to win
> with intercept & combat. It's a little disappointing that the new
> auspex card is Laibon only, and I have yet to really experiment with
> Anima Gathering, but generally, DOM makes ousting a lot easier.
There are plenty of ways to win with intercept. Sweeping is very
difficult, but a good intercept deck at right table can easily take
3vp. The main thing you're looking to do is hold you prey down by
blocking enabling actions (and occasionally bleeds via Eagle's
Sight--political decks will tend to get screwed really hard) while
building up your base of permanents for an attrition-based endgame.
Crosstable players will inevitably oust some people, and then you have
a pretty good shot at controlling the table when it's down to 3
players. It's not the easiest way to win for sure, but it can be done.
As has been said before, it's not as though walling up means you're not
putting pressure on your prey. You're still stopping hunts, rescues,
votes, blood/pool gain actions, and bouncing bleeds to your left.
Various media locations allow you to share intercept, and this can be a
good way to help your grandprey slow down your prey's offense,
especially if that happens to be bleeding.
Xian
> > Bruise & bleed has been far more effective for me in practice, at both
> > local and national levels.
>
> but that it doesn't really pay off as an overarching strategy for a
> deck to rely on. The main problem is that you need to get through both
My experience has shown differently, but sometimes that's how it goes,
I guess.
Then again, it could just fit my playstyle better than other options,
as a certain M. Morgan has suggested.
> your prey's combat and bleed defense cards before you start doing
> damage. If your prey can bounce/reduce, that's what will happen. If
> your prey can fight, that's what will happen. If your prey can neither
> bounce or fight, what the hell is going on? I can see how Revelations
> helps here.
Revelations gets rid of bounce or wake, or whatever you need it to.
Seduction lets you pick your fights, if your prey has one obviously
fighty vampire.
Reducing doesn't really help a lot when you're regularly bleeding for 3
(or more if you're feeling frisky) per action.
Some decks just don't have an efficient way to deal with both combat
and bleed at once. Large vote decks frequently have trouble. Decks
with lots of minions are the most difficult to deal with. Especially
weenie Auspex or allies.
[Theft/maneuver]
> I agree. This really has proven to be the most effective form of Thaum
> combat that I've tried. I also like to include a few copies of Blood
> Rage/Fury since is hoses equipment and fortitude, and Theft can't
> torporize vampires.
I generally find that I don't need to torporize vampire regularly, if
the vampires are low on blood, they have to hunt, or they just don't
want to get into combat anyway.
Though some copies of Walk of Flame never hurt.
> There are plenty of ways to win with intercept.
Well, I know that. :) I've won with intercept plenty, including
netting a Tremere win in the most recent Storyline tournament.
Intercept is great and all, but since it is by definition reactive, it
can become complicated to manage a win (and manage the table right). I
generally prefer to move forward is all.
Not that a sweep is ever necessary to make a deck good. I've been
trying to become more patient with my game recently, taking cues from
certain notable V:tES players. Which has lead to me playing a lot more
intercept-y decks, as well as more toolboxy decks. But there's a
certain satisfaction that comes with repeatedly bleeding with most of
your minions every turn. :)
Xian
perfect clarity?
Xian
> Ok, since you guys are getting all big-gunny on me, I'm going to have to
> make the mid-cap multi-rush Tremere AUS/THA deck and crush people with it.
> Be forewarned. . . I might end up being wrong. And that might just end the
> world.
Ankur, I've got some thoughts about this, and I've meant to build one,
but I never get around to it, what with all the forgetting to build
crazy decks, and not really building any decks much.
> Let the battles begin.
Let's discuss. :)
Xian
thus the crappy Sascha Vykos^ deck for the 2nd day of the NAC
CthuluKitty
> and bleed at once. Large vote decks frequently have trouble. Decks
> with lots of minions are the most difficult to deal with. Especially
> weenie Auspex or allies.
The trouble I see with bruise+bleed is that your prey doesn't need to
deal with both bleed and combat. He can deal with whichever one he's
best suited to. Of course, everyone runs out of bounce, so I suppose
your prey will have to block eventually. You can benefit by including
the occasional rush (Nose of the Hound?) for when you really want to
pick a fight, because your hand is full of combat cards instead of
bleed modifiiers.
> I generally find that I don't need to torporize vampire regularly, if
> the vampires are low on blood, they have to hunt, or they just don't
> want to get into combat anyway.
I think the Blood Rage angle works better with intercept, so I can see
why you wouldn't need it. The ability to block mandatory hunt actions
and send vampires to torpor (negating fortitude, which I see a lot) is
very cool. Weather Control works even better for this, but is more
specialized. I've been tossing around the idea of Cryptic
Mission+intercept in order to exactly that though: CM vampires down to
0, block the hunt and torporize with WC. Ousing power comes from
getting lots of bleeders out and playing the occasional Conditioning.
I doubt it would win much, but it might be fun.
> Though some copies of Walk of Flame never hurt.
I usually use 2. The oppurtunity to use them always seems to come up
eventually.
> Not that a sweep is ever necessary to make a deck good. I've been
> trying to become more patient with my game recently, taking cues from
> certain notable V:tES players. Which has lead to me playing a lot more
> intercept-y decks, as well as more toolboxy decks. But there's a
> certain satisfaction that comes with repeatedly bleeding with most of
> your minions every turn. :)
Toolbox can work if you know how to read the table and get the most out
of every card. It's certainly not as easy to play as "I tap out
bleeding every turn", but it works. Combat is a very powerful enabler
for toolbox decks, since it can happen as the result of so many
different scenarios, both active and reactive.
Xian
> The trouble I see with bruise+bleed is that your prey doesn't need to
> deal with both bleed and combat. He can deal with whichever one he's
> best suited to. Of course, everyone runs out of bounce, so I suppose
Yes, for a little while, this is true. Really though, a lot of bruise
& bleed is picking the right targets, and confusing your prey about
when you want them to block and when you want them to do something
else. Action modifiers to increase the bleed makes it harder to figure
out when they should block and when they shouldn't, obviously. Perfect
Clarity, of course, reduces the possibility that the bleed will be
bounced. Of course, it costs 2 blood, but is frequently worth it.
> your prey will have to block eventually. You can benefit by including
> the occasional rush (Nose of the Hound?) for when you really want to
> pick a fight, because your hand is full of combat cards instead of
> bleed modifiiers.
A few rush actions are a must. Nose of the Hound is a good choice for
the Tremere, yes.
> I think the Blood Rage angle works better with intercept, so I can see
> why you wouldn't need it. The ability to block mandatory hunt actions
> and send vampires to torpor (negating fortitude, which I see a lot) is
Agreed.
> very cool. Weather Control works even better for this, but is more
> specialized. I've been tossing around the idea of Cryptic
> Mission+intercept in order to exactly that though: CM vampires down to
> 0, block the hunt and torporize with WC. Ousing power comes from
> getting lots of bleeders out and playing the occasional Conditioning.
> I doubt it would win much, but it might be fun.
I've had much better luck with Cryptic Mission + intercept + Smiling
Jack. Weather Control is mostly unnecessary, as if they're hunting,
they have to pay for Jack out of their pool. Good times..
Then again, I also built a Cryptic Mission/Foul Blood deck and managed
to win with it once (out of like 2 or 3 tries), so YMMV.
Xian
on a Jack kick lately
Ankur Gupta
>> Ok, since you guys are getting all big-gunny on me, I'm going to have to
>> make the mid-cap multi-rush Tremere AUS/THA deck and crush people with it.
>> Be forewarned. . . I might end up being wrong. And that might just end the
>> world.
>
> Ankur, I've got some thoughts about this, and I've meant to build one,
> but I never get around to it, what with all the forgetting to build
> crazy decks, and not really building any decks much.
Ok.
>> Let the battles begin.
>
> Let's discuss. :)
You're on. Tremere can definitely fight now. :)
firstco...@aol.com
> at least you'll have some serious fun watching the faces of the other
> guys while they wonder how they will get rid of their "prevent damage"
> cards if you keep BFing, SBing, and Thefting them :)
Yeah, keep BFing them.
"Don't block this action, or I'll BF you."
-- Brian
(a game for mature audiences)
Dorrinal Blackmantle
pd...@lightlink.com wrote:
> Defender of Ra wrote:
(snip)
> > My Tremere deck does that all the time. And it presses like mad.
>
> Why is it not foiled by Majesty?
Offensive Tremere combat can run Telepathic Tracking to foil S:CE.
It's their best option due to its synergy with Walk of Flame.
> > Or you're going to want to foil *their* press -- does anyone play
> > Tremere in your area much?
>
> Not as a successful combat deck, no. Tremere combat is foiled by both
> common combat defense (S:CE) and common combat offense (IG or
> additional strike). I see a lot of Tremere decks, both locally and
> competetively, but mostly, their combat is restricted to manuver to
> long and Taste, and that is the end.
Tremere combat often loses to good offensive combat but thanks to
Telepathic Tracking (now two in the Osebo starter!) and the "can't
prevent this" aspect to Theft of Vitae, common combat defenses don't
hold up so well anymore.
--
Dorrinal Blackmantle
Chronicler of Clan Tremere
Dorrinal Blackmantle
CthuluKitty wrote:
> I'm snipping a bunch of stuff from this discussion, and I don't feel
> like going through the last 10 posts to find the relevant quotations.
> I'll try to be general.
>
> Having tried Tremere offensive combat numerous times in various ways, I
> can more or less say for sure that it does not work, or is at least
> incredibly tricky. Tremere combat is excellent as a sideline tactic or
> enabling sub-strategy, but it is very hard to make it stand on its own.
So you're saying it can't stand alone as the primary strategy, as in a
Potence rush deck? Agreed.
> I think the best way to utilize the Tremeres' combat abilities a a
> main line is in an intercept combat deck. The cost of getting auspex
> and thaumaturgy is too high to just go throwing minions willy nilly
> into fights, but it is perfectly reasonable--indeed a bargain--for
> solid defensive strategies. Having aus THA at 3, AUS tha at 3 and 4,
> and 2 x THA AUS at 5 is just an amazing concentration of a discipline
> combo at the low end.
As Peter has pointed out, intercept-combat has enough problems of its
own. For that reason I would use roughly the same crypt (dom/AUS/THA)
in a bruise-and-bleed strategy. In my experience it's won many more
games than intercept-combat. What's the AUS for? Telepathic
Misdirection and Telepathic Tracking -- that's about all you need.
(snip other disciplines)
> The absurd amount of blood management the Tremere have
> access to, and the Chantry, make this kind of wall strategy very
> viable. Once you get rolling, you can bloat by the bucketful without
> even doing anything, and then start bleeding like nuts, holding your
> few copies of Conditioning for when you know they'll pay off. A
> sideline benefit is that you can often do better in combat on the
> reacting end, because your opponent declares everything first. It's
> slow, but it works.
It does work. Don't forget Burst of Sunlight + Rotschreck, unless
Abombwe is getting popular around there ;)
> Thoughts Betrayed and Telepathic Tracking look like good ideas, but I
> haven't yet found them very useful because, you guessed it, they cost
> blood. In general, I just don't like combat cards to cost me blood.
> My basic philosophy is that I only want to spend blood on a card if I
> know for sure that it will pay off. I'm perfectly willing to spend a
> counter for Deflection, Freak Drive, Conditioning, etc. because I can
> be reasonably sure that these cards will do what I want them to do. I
> don't want to spend a blood to watch my opponent play damage
> prevention; I want the damage to connect if I'm going to pay for it.
Thoughts Betrayed is too expensive, but Telepathic Tracking is just
what you need for a deck looking to drop a Walk of Flame. Theft of
Vitae more than recoups the cost; it counters S:CE and Rotschreck; it
has amazing synergy with Walk of Flame (and other second-round cards,
but they're too bad to consider playing). And if you're absoutely
certain that they'll prevent your aggravated damage, just steal two
more blood :)
Defender of Ra
The reason why Tremere is viable is that it trumps so many other combat
options. Combat vs. combat leads to nasty results, generally, but when
it's Tremere vs. some other combat type, my money is generally on the
Tremere. At least, when there are some Leather Jackets involved here
and there.
And if you're continuously putting pressure on your prey's blood, you
undermine the ability to bounce. (And, with Dom, nothing stops you from
bouncing yourself.)
Tremere brusie/bleed has the same problems any other bruise/bleed does,
save for the ability to penetrate Fortitude and several other combat
defenses. Intercept also allows you to smash vote decks (or extort them
into voting in your direction!) -- not many combat decks can pull that
off. Tremere is less direct than most combat decks. But the ability to
splash in bounce and vote, alongside natural intercept, gives it
options they don't have.
And Thoughts Betrayed ruins many opposing combat decks as well.
Pat
news:1133488715.3...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Almost forgot to mention: NSA Trio. That has been a great help.
>
Really? I think I've seen it have an impact on maybe one combat since it
came out. It seems like either the pred or the prey of the player who plays
NSA Trio burns it within a turn or so of it coming out.
I've always found it odd that NSA Trio is so easy to get rid of, while Dr.
Marisa, which has a much more powerful effect IMO, is impossible to get rid
of (short of ousting her controller, of course).
- Pat
Defender of Ra
Pat wrote:
> Really? I think I've seen it have an impact on maybe one combat since it
> came out. It seems like either the pred or the prey of the player who plays
> NSA Trio burns it within a turn or so of it coming out.
I run few copies and get it out late. The later it comes out, the more
painful it is. Plus, we're high combat: it only hoses a few at a time.
It's wonderful when it's your predator that's ending combat.
> I've always found it odd that NSA Trio is so easy to get rid of, while Dr.
> Marisa, which has a much more powerful effect IMO, is impossible to get rid
> of (short of ousting her controller, of course).
There is, unfortunately, no Event counter for a extant event -- which I
find surprising, given the power of a global effect. I hope that this
is remedied *soon*, and in a variety of ways -- everyone should be able
to deal with Events, regardless of decktypes. But, as to the specific
card you mentioned, effects like that have a quality I've seen in other
games. I think of it this way: Immunity to Wounds = Death. If you put
out something that hurts everyone, and the only way to kill it is to
kill you, expect the table alliances to change if your peers are even
remotely political.
-- DoR
salem
<rules...@hotmail.com> scrawled:
>There is, unfortunately, no Event counter for a extant event -- which I
>find surprising, given the power of a global effect. I hope that this
>is remedied *soon*, and in a variety of ways -- everyone should be able
>to deal with Events, regardless of decktypes.
I think you'll find this is Not To Be.
salem
http://www.users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/VtES/index.htm
(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
Pat
news:8pn1p19fjvuv7vvpr...@4ax.com...
> On 2 Dec 2005 11:37:59 -0800, "Defender of Ra"
> <rules...@hotmail.com> scrawled:
>
>>There is, unfortunately, no Event counter for a extant event -- which I
>>find surprising, given the power of a global effect. I hope that this
>>is remedied *soon*, and in a variety of ways -- everyone should be able
>>to deal with Events, regardless of decktypes.
>
> I think you'll find this is Not To Be.
>
Not really. DoR was talking about a way to remove "extant events," i.e.,
those that are in play, not a "cancel as played" effect like Not To Be.
We have Black Hand Ritual to get rid of Gehenna events. It's reasonable to
limit the Hand to burning Gehenna events for thematic purposes, but in terms
of game play, it'd be nice if they could also burn Gummint events.
Since Gummint events seem to be somewhat in line with the concept of
influence in the RPG (my well-connected Prince calls his buddy Marisa at the
CDC, and she arranges for that nasty Sabbat pack to be caught hunting),
maybe a PA card callable by any vampire would be a good thematic means of
burning those events. Can you hook us up in the next expansion, LSJ? :)
- Pat
salem
<patrick.l...@comcast.nyetspam.net> scrawled:
>"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:8pn1p19fjvuv7vvpr...@4ax.com...
>> On 2 Dec 2005 11:37:59 -0800, "Defender of Ra"
>> <rules...@hotmail.com> scrawled:
>>
>>>There is, unfortunately, no Event counter for a extant event -- which I
>>>find surprising, given the power of a global effect. I hope that this
>>>is remedied *soon*, and in a variety of ways -- everyone should be able
>>>to deal with Events, regardless of decktypes.
>>
>> I think you'll find this is Not To Be.
>>
>
>Not really. DoR was talking about a way to remove "extant events," i.e.,
>those that are in play, not a "cancel as played" effect like Not To Be.
ah, my bad. I was reading a little too quick and sort of focussed on
the last sentence "everyone should be able to deal with Events,
regardless of decktypes". and Not To Be handles both gehenna and
non-gehenna events.