Sleeves
Jozxyqk
Even though the card-back-upside-down issue doesn't bother me that much,
I've got a few 3E cards so far that are horribly mis-cut. The latest
example is that, when opening a !Tremere starter last night, I found a copy
of Frondator whose name looked like "rondator". Cut off by a half-centimeter
or so, front-and-back, along with that extra thick black margin on the right
side...
I have no real experience playing with sleeves. I use them rarely, but
they're always fresh sleeves, which cause cards to slide all over the place.
But I feel like, at this point, I'm going to have to learn to love them, and
break them in.
So...
A couple of questions:
1) What is a good quality brand of sleeves I should buy? I don't need any
fancy colors or anything, but it might be nice to have something "unique" (at
least for the crypt).
2) Since it looks like I'm going to have to be sleeving a lot now, is there
any good place I can order sleeves in bulk (but not *ridiculously* large
orders)?
Thanks.
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
> I have no real experience playing with sleeves. I use them rarely, but
> they're always fresh sleeves, which cause cards to slide all over the place.
> But I feel like, at this point, I'm going to have to learn to love them, and
> break them in.
In my experience, this sliding ceases to occur after a few games using
them no matter the quality of the sleeves. And I don't have sweaty
hands :)
You get used to it after a while, it conserves (is it the right verb?)
cards and makes shuffling easier.
> So...
> A couple of questions:
> 1) What is a good quality brand of sleeves I should buy? I don't need any
> fancy colors or anything, but it might be nice to have something "unique" (at
> least for the crypt).
I usually go for opaque, colored sleeves for the crypt and regular,
transparent ones for the library. Since the opaque ones are usually a
little bigger and sturdier, it makes for a nice contrast when you're
carrying the whole deck together. Even if both crypt and library cards
get mixed up somehow, you can tell what's what even if blindfolded, by
touch alone.
(which introduces a new variation to the game, the blind fight :D)
> 2) Since it looks like I'm going to have to be sleeving a lot now, is there
> any good place I can order sleeves in bulk (but not *ridiculously* large
> orders)?
> Thanks.
I cannot help with this really, except for mentioning most sleeves sold
here are from UltraPro. Never had a single sleeve from them to tear
open while handling the cards. We know a non-gaming local store that
manufactures plastic packages for a lot of things - from customized
bags for malls to sleeves for telephone card collectors - and sometimes
we buy sleeves there by the thousands via pre-order, you just need to
give the size you want. But these sometimes are fragile enough to tear
open. So I guess that's why most gaming stores just import and resell
UltraPro products.
Fabio "Sooner222" Macedo
Orpheus
UYydnSrTeao9j53Y...@comcast.com...
> So, sadly, I think I'm going to have to learn to love card sleeves.
> Even though the card-back-upside-down issue doesn't bother me that much,
> I've got a few 3E cards so far that are horribly mis-cut. The latest
> example is that, when opening a !Tremere starter last night, I found a
copy
> of Frondator whose name looked like "rondator". Cut off by a
half-centimeter
> or so, front-and-back, along with that extra thick black margin on the
right
> side...
Bummer ! Does it comfort you to know you weren't the only one ? On the other
side, a player had 2 War Ghouls in the Tzim starter...
> I have no real experience playing with sleeves. I use them rarely, but
> they're always fresh sleeves, which cause cards to slide all over the
place.
> But I feel like, at this point, I'm going to have to learn to love them,
and
> break them in.
lol. After that heated discussion about the french requirements on sleeves,
I think quite a few people will see the advantages of it... Thanks 3rd Ed ?
No, not quite. [Should I invest in the sleeves market ?]
> So...
> A couple of questions:
> 1) What is a good quality brand of sleeves I should buy? I don't need any
> fancy colors or anything, but it might be nice to have something "unique"
(at
> least for the crypt).
Ultra Pro is good. The silver dot which used to cover some disciplines in
Cam Ed (if I'm not mistaken) doesn't bother at all with the new layout.
The best-looking sleeves often aren't the most enduring, as they're composed
of 2 layers that might separate during shuffling. But they're so
niiiiiice...
Of course I recommend anything with skulls, zombies, of mummies on it, but
that might just be my necromantic tastes. ;-)
On the other hand, Ultra Pros just go by 50, while Dragon Shield includes
somewhere near 115, so it will require just one pack for crypt + library,
which is good for us ain't it ? They're just a little less good-looking, so
I guess it all depends on how much you want to spend and the size of your
libraries...
Wouldn't know about 2) so I won't bother.
Hope that helps,
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".
The Drummer, in Planetary.
Dr Jester
Jozxyqk ha scritto:
> So, sadly, I think I'm going to have to learn to love card sleeves.
> Even though the card-back-upside-down issue doesn't bother me that much,
> I've got a few 3E cards so far that are horribly mis-cut. The latest
> example is that, when opening a !Tremere starter last night, I found a copy
> of Frondator whose name looked like "rondator". Cut off by a half-centimeter
> or so, front-and-back, along with that extra thick black margin on the right
> side...
The prevoius replies are good enough for your problem. Personally I
prefer Ultradeck ones in the end, after so much shuffle testing with my
decks.
But here (in Italy) we were thinking on wath it seems to me a real
problem, for the upcoming EC2006 in Turin... the card-back-upside-down
issue could be a problem i deck building as it could be used for
well... draft cheating? (as for Jyhad issue in mixing them with other
VTES cards). I guess there will be some hard time for the judges... or
not?
Dr Jester
Christian Perron
EC2006 organizator
Orpheus
Well my friends, I think there are 2 possible attitudes :
- not care about it and assume most people either won't cheat or will get
caught doing it
- assume that cheating is an issue and you have to prevent it to the
greatest extent, and go the same way as we went in big french events : make
opaque sleeves mandatory for the Championship.
That last option could prove unpopular to some, but might be easier for you,
and will show your seriousness on the issue (players really wanting to cheat
could use Jyhad cards, but now with 3rd Ed mistakes it just might be too
tempting for weak spirits).
If you go that way, if I may give a few advice :
1) announce it in advance, all over and clearly
2) have a stand selling sleeves on the tournament (you probably will anyway)
3) include in your budget or organisation some sets of sleeves to lend to
the players who really, sincerely won't be aware of that rule and won't have
9 euros to spend on something that will protect their cards.
Of course, you might want to ask players on your italian forum how they
would react to such a proposition.
Yours,
Orpheus
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> - assume that cheating is an issue and you have to prevent it to the
> greatest extent, and go the same way as we went in big french events : make
> opaque sleeves mandatory for the Championship.
>
Or you could not freak out and do something reasonable like keep an eye
open for suspicious play.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
Dr Jester
My dear,
that's was quite my idea: put a clear advise on the official event
website about the mandatory use of sleeves for the event. It will
simplify life to us (organizator and judges) and avoid unpleasant
episode as for newbies or sunday players. I rised the problem in our
italian forum, but someone told me: "WW will not approve suche a
choiche!"
So now it's true or the WW, aware of his bad luck on 1st 3rd ed.
printing, would allow this for EC2006? It's possible to force the
players in this way on a such big and important event?
Let me know...
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> On the other hand, Ultra Pros just go by 50, while Dragon Shield includes
> somewhere near 115, so it will require just one pack for crypt + library,
> which is good for us ain't it ? They're just a little less good-looking, so
> I guess it all depends on how much you want to spend and the size of your
> libraries...
>
I never understood why some VtES players are so keen on having their
libraries have the same backs as their Crypts - I mean, there's a
reason WW and WotC gave them different backs.
I bought several pairs of UltraPro sleeve packs, including 2 gold ones.
That gives me 100 gold sleeves, which is plenty for 8 decks.
Orpheus
includes
> > somewhere near 115, so it will require just one pack for crypt +
library,
> > which is good for us ain't it ? They're just a little less good-looking,
so
> > I guess it all depends on how much you want to spend and the size of
your
> > libraries...
> >
>
> I never understood why some VtES players are so keen on having their
> libraries have the same backs as their Crypts - I mean, there's a
> reason WW and WotC gave them different backs.
Oh, I usually put different sleeves on my crypts and librairies !! And so do
most of the players I know. But if we buy, say, a pack A and a pack B of
sleeves, we can put A on deck 1's library and deck 2's crypt, and pack B on
1's crypt and 2's library, so we use all the sleeves and cover everything,
yes ? With Ultra pros, it works only if you have 88 library cards or less
(and aren't playing Tupdogs lol).
> I bought several pairs of UltraPro sleeve packs, including 2 gold ones.
> That gives me 100 gold sleeves, which is plenty for 8 decks.
You can also go that way, if you want all your crypts to be covered in the
same sleeves, which I personnaly don't like.
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
My story doesn't happen in the sound of the notes
but in the silence between them.
That is where the magic happens.
Echo
Orpheus
> printing, would allow this for EC2006? It's possible to force the
> players in this way on a such big and important event?
From what has been established in another thread, I think it's the head
judge's prerogative to make such a choice.
LSJ said : " That said, if one's environment has an intolerable level of
those with a desire to cheat, then taking measures to thwart them is
acceptable
and should be appreciated by those with a desire to compete. "
And someone quoted :
"1.2. Necessary Tournament Materials
Players must bring the following items to a tournament in order to
participate:
* Any materials specifically required [....] by the tournament
organizer."
So I guess the choice is all yours. ;-p
--
Orpheus
Nearly made it to LSJ's Killfile !!
Dr Jester
Orpheus ha scritto:
Good to know, thanks!
Now, as a loveable Tzimisce as I am, I'll "suggest" it for the event...
no one likes to tell me no! ;-P
I think that'll be annoying perhaps for some players, but easier and
better for all... than stopping the games and arguing about the number
of Jyhad, VTES or VTES 3rd Ed. cards in a deck... I know there's
someone waiting for this moment at the table... ;)
Fred Scott
> Orpheus ha scritto:
>> And someone quoted :
>> "1.2. Necessary Tournament Materials
>>
>> Players must bring the following items to a tournament in order to
>> participate:
>>
>> * Any materials specifically required [....] by the tournament
>> organizer."
>>
>> So I guess the choice is all yours. ;-p
>
>
> Now, as a loveable Tzimisce as I am, I'll "suggest" it for the event...
> no one likes to tell me no! ;-P
I'm still skeptical that this passage is intended to mean that
organizers can make just requirements up and spring them on players.
("Each player will bring the head of Yak on seven foot long
pole and carry it with him at all times...") If it does, then
there needs to be an orderly provision for advertising such
unusual requirements. It should NEVER EVER happen that a player
can take the time and trouble to show up at a card tournament he
saw advertised on the official schedule, innocent of any knowledge
that his mono-styled card backs require card sleeves, and not be
allowed to play for lack of them and the inability to obtain
them on the site. And, in some cases, money certainly makes a
difference too. One type of card backs sold at the retailer where
we had our prerelease cost $10 for 100! $10 extra for a single
constructed tournament is likely a shock for the average college
student.
So are the organizers prepared to supply free card sleeves to one
and all?
Fred
Orpheus
> >> And someone quoted :
> >> "1.2. Necessary Tournament Materials
> >>
> >> Players must bring the following items to a tournament in order to
> >> participate:
> >>
> >> * Any materials specifically required [....] by the tournament
> >> organizer."
> >>
> >> So I guess the choice is all yours. ;-p
> >
> > Good to know, thanks!
> >
> > Now, as a loveable Tzimisce as I am, I'll "suggest" it for the event...
> > no one likes to tell me no! ;-P
>
> I'm still skeptical that this passage is intended to mean that
> organizers can make just requirements up and spring them on players.
> ("Each player will bring the head of Yak on seven foot long
> pole and carry it with him at all times...")
It would be nice. At least the one metting the requirements would win. ;-)
> If it does, then
> there needs to be an orderly provision for advertising such
> unusual requirements.
Totally agreed.
> It should NEVER EVER happen that a player
> can take the time and trouble to show up at a card tournament he
> saw advertised on the official schedule, innocent of any knowledge
> that his mono-styled card backs require card sleeves, and not be
> allowed to play for lack of them and the inability to obtain
> them on the site.
Of course.
> And, in some cases, money certainly makes a
> difference too. One type of card backs sold at the retailer where
> we had our prerelease cost $10 for 100! $10 extra for a single
> constructed tournament is likely a shock for the average college
> student.
>
> So are the organizers prepared to supply free card sleeves to one
> and all?
The options would be : you don't have to put opaque sleeves if you don't
play either Jyhad or 3rd Ed cards ; but I doubt the 3rd Ed part will be met,
as many players will have included new library cards / reprints. And
cheating might not even be on purpose : we all have brains, if we only
tweaked a deck to include, let's say, some Wash and 1 Yawp Court, then
seeing a card backward will give a good indication on what we'll get. And
that's bad.
But yes, the organisation will have to announce it in advance, announce it
on site when the players confirm their inscriptions, and eventually lend
some sleeves to players who don't want to buy any. But on such an important
even I think that insuring the quality of the event is more important than
all the rest...
Just my 2 sleeved eurocents,
Duncan O'rpheus, of the O'rpheus clan from the scottish highlands.
CthuluKitty
> them no matter the quality of the sleeves. And I don't have sweaty
> hands :)
> You get used to it after a while, it conserves (is it the right verb?)
> cards and makes shuffling easier.
How do sleeves make shuffling easier? I've found that the fastest and
most reliable way to shuffle a deck is the classic bridge shuffle,
which is more or less impossible with sleeves on. Are people you play
with so concerned with card preservation that they won't shuffle this
way? Do people with smaller hands (mine are rather large) have trouble
with 90 card bridge shuffles? I guess I'm just confused by this last
statement, because I've always hated shuffling with sleeves.
Hellbent
shufling with sleves is pretty easy, once you get the knack for it.
Cut the deck, take half and place it above the other half so the edges
are fitting into each other. Wiggle it, just a little bit. Bam.
Shuffled.
Jay Kristoff
"Dr Jester" wrote:
> that's was quite my idea: put a clear advise on the official event
> website about the mandatory use of sleeves for the event. It will
> simplify life to us (organizator and judges) and avoid unpleasant
> episode as for newbies or sunday players. I rised the problem in our
> italian forum, but someone told me: "WW will not approve suche a
> choiche!"
>
> So now it's true or the WW, aware of his bad luck on 1st 3rd ed.
> printing, would allow this for EC2006? It's possible to force the
> players in this way on a such big and important event?
>
> Let me know...
My understanding is that you have the option to require sleeves.
I very much hope that you do not exercise that option. I don't
sleeve my decks, and I hope never to have to. If someone is
suspected of cheating because of card-back arrangement (as I
was at EC 2003) then those issues can be handled on a case
by case basis. In my case, I simply don't care which direction
my cards face when they go into my discard pile. I don't even
think about it. My hope following the 3rd Ed. printing error is
that players and judges grow to expect unsleeved cards facing in
both directions in players' libraries. To those who are tempted
to cheat: do it the legal way with Tusk, The Talebearer.
Jay Kristoff
Ankur Gupta
> much hope that you do not exercise that option. I don't sleeve my
> decks, and I hope never to have to. If someone is suspected of cheating
> because of card-back arrangement (as I was at EC 2003) then those issues
> can be handled on a case by case basis. In my case, I simply don't care
> which direction my cards face when they go into my discard pile. I
> don't even think about it. My hope following the 3rd Ed. printing error
> is that players and judges grow to expect unsleeved cards facing in both
> directions in players' libraries. To those who are tempted to cheat: do
> it the legal way with Tusk, The Talebearer.
>
> Jay Kristoff
My understanding is that there's a golf clap coming on. . . .
<golf clap>
Ah, there it is.
Seriously. Play the game.
Ankur
Orpheus
I have no idea what a bridge shuffle is, but yes, it's easy with sleeves,
you can put 2 packs of cards together without risking to ruin your cards -
at the very worst you can ruin a multi-layered sleeve, which isn't as bad
as, say, the Golconda inside.
--
Orpheus
> I very much hope that you do not exercise that option. I don't
> sleeve my decks, and I hope never to have to.
Why in hell is that ?
> If someone is
> suspected of cheating because of card-back arrangement (as I
> was at EC 2003) then those issues can be handled on a case
> by case basis.
With sleeves there never would have been an issue. When P2 Brouillet made it
to the finals of the first official Franch Championship (2002 ?) he was
asked to put sleeves on his deck because it included a random number of
Jyhad cards (and many of them were of one category, I think, like masters :
it was before CE and some important cards hadn't been reprinted !). It came
as a total surprise to us, but the orga gave him some sleeves and it went
very well.
> In my case, I simply don't care which direction
> my cards face when they go into my discard pile. I don't even
> think about it. My hope following the 3rd Ed. printing error is
> that players and judges grow to expect unsleeved cards facing in
> both directions in players' libraries. To those who are tempted
> to cheat: do it the legal way with Tusk, The Talebearer.
Unfortunately, Jay, that isn't the only difference. Please compare the
colors on 3rd Ed with any other expansion and tell me you don't see an
immediate difference (it especially shows on the Deckmaster logo, as Reyda
pointed out during the pre-release)...
Ankur Gupta
>> go into my discard pile. I don't even think about it. My hope
>> following the 3rd Ed. printing error is that players and judges grow to
>> expect unsleeved cards facing in both directions in players' libraries.
>> To those who are tempted to cheat: do it the legal way with Tusk, The
>> Talebearer.
>
> Unfortunately, Jay, that isn't the only difference. Please compare the
> colors on 3rd Ed with any other expansion and tell me you don't see an
> immediate difference (it especially shows on the Deckmaster logo, as Reyda
> pointed out during the pre-release)...
The question here is intent, Orpheus. If someone intends to cheat then
only it is a problem. The reason I'm surprised by the suggested
requirement is that the notion of someone cheating at vtes is kind of
lame.
Seriously, whoever you people are, quit being lame.
Play the game.
Ankur
Fred Scott
"Orpheus" <orphe...@DEADSPAMfree.fr> wrote in message news:45004625$0$27250$636a...@news.free.fr...
>> > Orpheus ha scritto:
>> >> And someone quoted :
>> >> "1.2. Necessary Tournament Materials
>> >>
>> >> Players must bring the following items to a tournament in order to
>> >> participate:
>> >>
>> >> * Any materials specifically required [....] by the tournament
>> >> organizer."
>> >>
>> >> So I guess the choice is all yours. ;-p
>> >
>> > Good to know, thanks!
>> >
>> > Now, as a loveable Tzimisce as I am, I'll "suggest" it for the event...
>> > no one likes to tell me no! ;-P
>>
>> I'm still skeptical that this passage is intended to mean that
>> ("Each player will bring the head of Yak on seven foot long
>> pole and carry it with him at all times...")
>
> It would be nice. At least the one metting the requirements would win. ;-)
The point is, I don't believe the suggestion you communicated to Christian
Perron and that he responded by stating their group would consider is
something they're allowed to do.
>> If it does, then
>> there needs to be an orderly provision for advertising such
>> unusual requirements.
>
> Totally agreed.
>
>> It should NEVER EVER happen that a player
>> can take the time and trouble to show up at a card tournament he
>> saw advertised on the official schedule, innocent of any knowledge
>> that his mono-styled card backs require card sleeves, and not be
>> allowed to play for lack of them and the inability to obtain
>> them on the site. And, in some cases, money certainly makes a
>> difference too. One type of card backs sold at the retailer where
>> we had our prerelease cost $10 for 100! $10 extra for a single
>> constructed tournament is likely a shock for the average college
>> student.
>>
>> So are the organizers prepared to supply free card sleeves to one
>> and all?
>
> The options would be : you don't have to put opaque sleeves if you don't
> play either Jyhad or 3rd Ed cards ;
That's different than the real rules, however.
> but I doubt the 3rd Ed part will be met,
It's not in any way necessary for 3E cards. 3E card backs are identical
to other VtES card backs. Players should not be allowed to "mark" 3E
or any other types of cards by permitting them to be the only one(s)
oriented in a certain direction in their stack of library cards. So the
front-to-back reversal thing completely orthagonal to this issue. It's
just that players might be well-advised to use opaque card backs with
their 3E-combined decks so as not to give away cards in their hands by
holding them "upside-down" from their opponents' perspectives.
> But yes, the organisation will have to announce it in advance,
The problem I find with the "announce it in advance" concept is
that organizers often don't consider the players' point of view. They'll
do something like sticking some little notice up on their website a week
ahead of time - forgetting that many players had discovered all the
information they (thought they) needed to know about an event long before
then and have no reason to check the organizer's website just before
leaving for an event. To really "announce it in advance", organizers
need to announce all requirements players need to know about from
the very beginning. They can't be changing the rules after the first
wave of information has already gone out or they'll miss people.
IMO, it's far too late for this year's EC to be considering new rules
or changes in the format unless they're prepared to make all the
arrangements to deal with players who show up never having heard of
the change. I suppose you could argue that it would be OK if they
made sure card sleeves were offered for a fairly modest price or
for free. But that's about as generous as I'd be with the concept.
Fred
Jay Kristoff
"Orpheus" wrote:
> > My understanding is that you have the option to require sleeves.
> > I very much hope that you do not exercise that option. I don't
> > sleeve my decks, and I hope never to have to.
>
> Why in hell is that ?
I don't want to spend the time putting sleves on my decks.
I don't want to spend the time taking sleves off my decks.
I don't like the way the sleves hurt my baby-soft hands.
I don't want to spend the money.
I don't want to encourage further production of plastic.
I don't want to find a new carrying case in which sleeved decks fit.
I don't want any more required accesories in order to play V:TES.
I like the rawness of playing without sleeves.
While your messing with sleeves, I'm designing new ways to oust you.
> > If someone is
> > suspected of cheating because of card-back arrangement (as I
> > was at EC 2003) then those issues can be handled on a case
> > by case basis.
>
> With sleeves there never would have been an issue. When P2 Brouillet made
it
> to the finals of the first official Franch Championship (2002 ?) he was
> asked to put sleeves on his deck because it included a random number of
> Jyhad cards (and many of them were of one category, I think, like masters
:
> it was before CE and some important cards hadn't been reprinted !). It
came
> as a total surprise to us, but the orga gave him some sleeves and it went
> very well.
I am in the process of purging Jyhad cards from my collection.
> > In my case, I simply don't care which direction
> > my cards face when they go into my discard pile. I don't even
> > think about it. My hope following the 3rd Ed. printing error is
> > that players and judges grow to expect unsleeved cards facing in
> > both directions in players' libraries. To those who are tempted
> > to cheat: do it the legal way with Tusk, The Talebearer.
>
> Unfortunately, Jay, that isn't the only difference. Please compare the
> colors on 3rd Ed with any other expansion and tell me you don't see an
> immediate difference (it especially shows on the Deckmaster logo, as Reyda
> pointed out during the pre-release)...
I don't care if players can tell from what set cards come by their backs.
I just want to play and win; without sleeves, and without cheating.
Jay Kristoff
Rehlow
I don't think you cheat Jay, but I want to play out a scenario here ...
So your library and crypt are unsorted as regard to card orientation,
right? When you draw a card into your hand, if the card was upside down
in the library, do you keep it upside down in your hand? I try to keep
my library facing the same way, so I don't have to flip cards when I
draw them into my hand, but I will if a card is the wrong direction.
Now if you play with a mixture of 3rd Edition and non-3rd Edition
cards, someone watching you closely can tell by card orientation of
your library and then if you flip your card going into your hand if you
just drew a 3rd Edition card. Is it a big deal? Probably not. There are
a lot of cards it could be, but it is a little bit of information. I
hope to continue to be able to play this game without sleaves. If the
card quality is as low as I have read, I would switch to sleaves to
preserve my cards before doing it to prevent cheating.
Later,
~Rehlow
Jay Kristoff
"Rehlow" wrote:
> I don't think you cheat Jay, but I want to play out a scenario here ...
>
> So your library and crypt are unsorted as regard to card orientation,
> right? When you draw a card into your hand, if the card was upside down
> in the library, do you keep it upside down in your hand? I try to keep
> my library facing the same way, so I don't have to flip cards when I
> draw them into my hand, but I will if a card is the wrong direction.
> Now if you play with a mixture of 3rd Edition and non-3rd Edition
> cards, someone watching you closely can tell by card orientation of
> your library and then if you flip your card going into your hand if you
> just drew a 3rd Edition card. Is it a big deal? Probably not. There are
> a lot of cards it could be, but it is a little bit of information. I
> hope to continue to be able to play this game without sleaves. If the
> card quality is as low as I have read, I would switch to sleaves to
> preserve my cards before doing it to prevent cheating.
Starting at this year's NAC, I plan to occasionally hold non-3rd Ed. cards
upside-down in my hand. Let the good times roll.
Jay Kristoff
Fred Scott
news:Pine.LNX.4.63.06...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu...
> My understanding is that there's a golf clap coming on. . . .
>
> <golf clap>
>
> Ah, there it is.
What the hell is a golf clap?
Would I need a shot of penicillin?
(And no, shocking though it may seem, I've read the
newsgroup for many years but I've never seen the term
defined. =8-O )
Fred
Fred Scott
news:El_Lg.631$131...@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
> Starting at this year's NAC, I plan to occasionally hold non-3rd Ed. cards
> upside-down in my hand. Let the good times roll.
Starting with next year's Powerbase: LA, I play to occasionally hang upside-
down from Mike Curtois's ceiling and hold 3E cards right side up.
I don't think it will do anything for my game but at least it'll make
a few of those guys look up from their hands while they're rolling over
me like a speed bump.
Fred
("Hey, you up there! Bleed for 9!"
*sigh* "No block.")
Ankur Gupta
>>
>> <golf clap>
>>
>> Ah, there it is.
>
> What the hell is a golf clap?
It's one of those rich-people-folk half-claps made at a golf course when
you score a "4" or something. It's usually followed by the phrase of
"cheerio" or "good show" or "narf".
Ankur
Damnans
I totally agree with Jay. There is absolutely no need for card sleeves
to be required in any tournament, since the current tournament rules
already address that issue, as does the Judge's Guide:
TOURNAMENT RULES
4.1. Cards Allowed
All cards in a player's deck must be genuine Vampire: The Eternal
Struggle or Jyhad cards.
If Jyhad and Vampire: The Eternal Struggle cards are both used, in
order to prevent a significant advantage, all cards from the Jyhad or
Vampire: The Eternal Struggle card sets must be of sufficiently mixed
card type - that is, Master cards must appear with both Jyhad and V:TES
card backs (or at least three different card types must have Jyhad
backs).
JUDGE'S GUIDE
32. Marked Cards - Observable Pattern
Definition:
A player's cards are marked with a pattern to the types of cards
that are marked. If a player is using opaque sleeves, they are taken
into consideration instead of the actual cards. If a player is using
clear sleeves, both the card and sleeve are taken into consideration.
Example:
(A) A player in a tournament has Jyhad-backed reaction cards in an
otherwise all V:TES-backed library.
(B) A player in a tournament has four Kiss of Ra in her deck, all
of which are in card sleeves that have a slight bend in one corner.
Philosophy:
The potential for advantage is high when there is a pattern to the
markings. Therefore the penalty must be significant. Please note this
penalty still assumes that the cards are marked unintentionally. Refer
to section 160 - Cheating, if the judge believes that the cards were
marked intentionally.
Penalty:
Game loss.
--
Damnans
http://www.almadrava.net/damnans
http://www.vtes.net
http://es.groups.yahoo.com/group/vteshispania/
Churchy La Femme
Jay Kristoff wrote:
> I don't want to encourage further production of plastic.
Bah! Plastic is 100% recyclable unlike all the trees being cut down to
make the cards in the first place.
Robert Scythe
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote:
> You get used to it after a while, it conserves (is it the right verb?)
> cards and makes shuffling easier.
I believe you want 'preserves'.
Jay Kristoff
"Churchy La Femme" wrote
Bah! The cards are recyclable as well. The cards are bio-degradable,
whereas
the sleeves are not. I don't want to encourage further production of
plastic,
and I don't want to be forced to use sleeves.
Bah!
Jay Kristoff
Pat
news:UYydnSrTeao9j53Y...@comcast.com...
> So, sadly, I think I'm going to have to learn to love card sleeves.
> Even though the card-back-upside-down issue doesn't bother me that much,
> I've got a few 3E cards so far that are horribly mis-cut. The latest
> example is that, when opening a !Tremere starter last night, I found a
> copy
> of Frondator whose name looked like "rondator". Cut off by a
> half-centimeter
> or so, front-and-back, along with that extra thick black margin on the
> right
> side...
>
> they're always fresh sleeves, which cause cards to slide all over the
> place.
> But I feel like, at this point, I'm going to have to learn to love them,
> and
> break them in.
>
> So...
> A couple of questions:
> 1) What is a good quality brand of sleeves I should buy? I don't need any
> fancy colors or anything, but it might be nice to have something "unique"
> (at
> least for the crypt).
>
Ultra-Pro, as others have stated, is the best balance between price &
quality, IMO. Dragonshield is okay in a pinch, but I find they split easier
than the U-P's, especially if you try to riffle shuffle them, like I do.
U-P also has a lot of amusing pictures and patterns for possible crypt use,
as well as all the solid colors you could ever want for library use.
> 2) Since it looks like I'm going to have to be sleeving a lot now, is
> there
> any good place I can order sleeves in bulk (but not *ridiculously* large
> orders)?
>
This combo pack is a reasonable start from Potomac:
http://www.potomacdist.com/detail.asp?ItemId=upmpb
Although you get 150 of the each color, when 100 of each would be better for
V:TES.
If you want to standardize on some color for all your libraries, say
Jozxyqk's Own Matrix Green, you could go with something like this:
http://www.potomacdist.com/detail.asp?ItemId=upmgdpb
But speaking from experience, if you're going to sleeve, it's handy to have
lots of different colors, so that you can more easily tell your decks apart
from one another when they're in a cardboard sleeve box.
- Pat
Orpheus
> only it is a problem. The reason I'm surprised by the suggested
> requirement is that the notion of someone cheating at vtes is kind of
> lame.
>
> Seriously, whoever you people are, quit being lame.
>
> Play the game.
>
> Ankur
Of course we agree Ankur : cheating is lameness incarnate.
As is colluding.
I've seen collusions (a lot) at big events all over Europe, and have
sometimes suspected cheating.
Cheaters are lame. So let's not give them weapons to ruin our games, right ?
Ankur Gupta
>> make the cards in the first place.
>
> Bah! The cards are recyclable as well. The cards are bio-degradable,
> whereas the sleeves are not. I don't want to encourage further
> production of plastic, and I don't want to be forced to use sleeves.
Not to mention that the production of sleeves uses up raw materials other
than just those used in the production of plastic.
A hearty "bah!" for the fire.
Ankur
Ankur Gupta
>
> As is colluding.
>
> I've seen collusions (a lot) at big events all over Europe, and have
> sometimes suspected cheating.
>
> Cheaters are lame. So let's not give them weapons to ruin our games,
> right ?
Um, no. Let's not assume by default that everyone present at a tournament
is cheating. Let's all instead
<say it with me now>
Play. The. Game.
Cheaters will always find a means to cheat. They can mark their sleeves.
The only way to defeat cheaters is to beat the hell out of them in the
parking lot. If there is no parking lot, get creative.
Ankur
CEO of the Play. The. Game. Organization
Meej
Orpheus wrote:
> Cheaters are lame. So let's not give them weapons to ruin our games, right ?
Wait, you mean like something that's very easy to subtly mark, passed
off as a measure to prevent cheating, so that people are far less
vigilant about suspicious behavior because there's a very false sense
of security? Such as mandatory sleeves?
Seriously, if people are going to cheat mandatory sleeving for everyone
won't make it harder for them to do so. If anything, it'll make it
easier. You can mark sleeves, you know, and it's a lot less obvious
(and probably a lot more accurate) than using selective card backs or
orientations to identify things.
Heck, I knew someone back in my M:tG days who was opposed to shiny
sleeves *at all* because he was able to get information about the next
face-down card from the reflection off the sleeve below, just by
getting a little tilt to the second card when he picked up the top one.
(IE, every time he drew a card, he knew what the new top card was, or
at least something about it.) He didn't play like that, just knew how
to do it and watched out for it.
So if you want to sleeve your own cards, fine. If you want to ask
someone you're suspicious of to sleeve, or to de-sleeve, fine. But
convincing an entire tournament that you've alleviated cheating by
*requiring* something that in reality makes it *easier* to cheat *more
subtly*, you're either deluding yourself a whole lot, or you're just
full of it.
- D.J.
librarian
Damnans wrote:
> Jay Kristoff wrote:
> > "Dr Jester" wrote:
>
> TOURNAMENT RULES
> 4.1. Cards Allowed
>
> All cards in a player's deck must be genuine Vampire: The Eternal
> Struggle or Jyhad cards.
>
Problem solved. 3rd Edition cards aren't legal.
best -
chris
haha
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> But speaking from experience, if you're going to sleeve, it's handy to have
> lots of different colors, so that you can more easily tell your decks apart
> from one another when they're in a cardboard sleeve box.
>
or in Anniversary Tins.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew, who could use 2 more tins to hold decks.
Fred Scott
"Gregory Stuart Pettigrew" <gpett...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1157689847.6...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Pat wrote:
>> But speaking from experience, if you're going to sleeve, it's handy to have
>> lots of different colors, so that you can more easily tell your decks apart
>> from one another when they're in a cardboard sleeve box.
>>
>
> or in Anniversary Tins.
or in Anniversary Tins with silly paintings on the top!
Fred Scott
"Gregory Stuart Pettigrew" <gpett...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1157689847.6...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>> But speaking from experience, if you're going to sleeve, it's handy to have
>> lots of different colors, so that you can more easily tell your decks apart
>> from one another when they're in a cardboard sleeve box.
>>
>
> or in Anniversary Tins.
or in Anniversary Tins with silly paintings on the top!
Damnans
They are legal, since 3rd Edition cards are genuine VTES cards.
GENUINE
b : actually produced by or proceeding from the alleged source or
author <the signature is genuine>
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/genuine
Dr Jester
Yes there're a clear rule about handling cheating or cards allowance in
a deck or cards marking. It's not a problem, during a game, to pause
the table, check the "suspicious" deck and apply or not penalties...
but my intent in this matter was to give all of you an easier and less
suspicious game for the EC2006 Event. It's not funny to loss time or
break time just because someone suspect that an opposing deck has
marked cards (i.e. by marker or use of Jyhad/3rd Ed. cards). But so...
After reading so much disagree on the matter, I doubt (Oprheus this's a
kind of democracy I think... ;) ) we'll choose the mandatory sleeves
option, but for sure you'll be warmely invited to use them, for game
fun and more cheat avoiding gameplay...
But the problem still remain for future events, I suppose...
Dr Jester
Christian Perron
EC2006 Organizator
x5m...@gmx.de
> After reading so much disagree on the matter, I doubt (Oprheus this's a
> kind of democracy I think... ;) ) we'll choose the mandatory sleeves
> option, but for sure you'll be warmely invited to use them, for game
> fun and more cheat avoiding gameplay...
>
> But the problem still remain for future events, I suppose...
Christian, my experience from tournaments is, the more a judge makes a
hazzle about unimportant things like sleeves, leaving the play area
etc.the more mistakes are made with the important things. I still
prefer the univisible judge who ist there when needed. To get a warning
because i didnt announced an unspoken deal (happened to me) is for me
boosting the ego of the judge.
So i have to agree to Ankur. Play the game.
Frank (who made about three decisions at the whole german qualifier and
still had no cheater)
Dr Jester
I agree with all of you in the matter... Let's play and I hope in a
fair play most of all!!! We're preparing our judges at the best we can
(but they're still human after all...).
So no mandatory sleeves, as I said, perhaps if you use 'em it's better
for your cards, first of all and for a less suspicious gameplay... but
I hope in a lot of gentleman players at the tables in the EC2006! :-)
So now it's time for deck building! See you all very soon...
Dr Jester
Christan Perron
EC2006 Organizator
James Coupe
Jester <drjest...@gmail.com> writes:
>After reading so much disagree on the matter, I doubt (Oprheus this's a
>kind of democracy I think... ;) ) we'll choose the mandatory sleeves
>option, but for sure you'll be warmely invited to use them, for game
>fun and more cheat avoiding gameplay...
The biggest problem, as others have said, is the idea that mandatory
sleeves reduces the problem. It doesn't. Sleeves are way, way easy to
mark, and when a sleeve costs a very small amount (a few cents) to
replace, you're probably much more inclined to mark the sleeve - tear
the corner, twist a corner, score a line down the back that's visible if
you shift your head relative to the light-source, a few crumbs slip into
the sleeve which can be felt with a light touch etc. - than try anything
with the 10 dollar War Ghoul you just bought on Ebay.
If there are still problems (or the perception of problems), then
obviously you still need to do something about it. The first thing is
checking for it properly. Take decks off players, check the backs,
check the sleeves. Do it between rounds. If there are people who have
been caught in the past, check them (and make sure to include it in your
tournament report), but check other people too. A judge cannot allow
himself to be vindictive, of course, but a judge is employed to use
their judgement - and if the #1 Cheater in the world turns up who's been
ejected from tournaments on every continent, a judge does not have to be
dumb to that knowledge. Similarly, many judges will hover around tables
with new players (or players they don't know), or players they know have
a suspect understanding of some rules, or near controversial decks[0],
in much the same manner, as a preventative measure.
If the problem still goes on and/or the tournament is a really big one
(e.g. continental qualifier, nationals etc.) it might be appropriate to
semi-randomly unsleeve some sleeved decks, shuffle the deck, then re-
sleeve them, or randomly sleeve some unsleeved decks from the judge's
supply (preferably worn and non-slippy, but randomly shuffle the deck
and sleeves before use). This might be particularly appropriate for the
final round, where the number of players involved is much lower and so
you know you should only need so many sleeves (making it easier to
plan!), but you might also want to allocate some time for that between
rounds/during tournament prep.
A judge could also do similar in any cases where he felt a deck was
possibly marked, but unintentionally (e.g. a slightly worn card from 3rd
Edition, an accidental spillage of coke during the first round that
clipped Arika and Queen Anne only etc.)
When some of the bigger tournaments already make sure that they do lots
of random deck checks between rounds against deck lists, thorough
shuffles by judges, and similar preparation before the finals, this
wouldn't necessarily be entirely out of line.
However, just making players mandatorily sleeve their cards makes
cheating easier, and gives a false sense of security. If you're playing
with cheaters, they will still cheat.
[0] I've been known to hover around tables where I've heard the words
"Hidden Lurker" come up, for example, as players *still* get that wrong,
12 years on.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
Orpheus
> > > My understanding is that you have the option to require sleeves.
> > > I very much hope that you do not exercise that option. I don't
> > > sleeve my decks, and I hope never to have to.
> >
> > Why in hell is that ?
>
> I don't want to spend the time putting sleves on my decks.
> I don't want to spend the time taking sleves off my decks.
This I can understand, although there is a raw pleasure in doing that too.
More of the masturbating sort, maybe. ;-)
> I don't like the way the sleves hurt my baby-soft hands.
Urm...
> I don't want to spend the money.
> I don't want to encourage further production of plastic.
> I don't want to find a new carrying case in which sleeved decks fit.
> I don't want any more required accesories in order to play V:TES.
> I like the rawness of playing without sleeves.
> While your messing with sleeves, I'm designing new ways to oust you.
Although you're a much better player than I, know that my Skull sleaves are
of magical portent and will help me oust YOU. ;-)
The reasons why I like sleeves :
- they really help keeping the cards in good condition much longer (and I
like cards that feel mint years later)
- they allow you to play on less than clean tables, so you can have nice
game sessions where you also eat and drink with your friends without
wondering if your deck will come out intact
- they [the ones I choose] are aesthetically pleasant, and even come in
necromacing themes
- they also make shuffling without hurting your cards much easier
- and of course they take out all possibility of seeing if your cards have
Jyhad (or now 3rd Ed) backs
> I am in the process of purging Jyhad cards from my collection.
Not everyone can do that. And what are you replacing them with, 3rd Ed ?
Those pose the same problem over again now.
> I don't care if players can tell from what set cards come by their backs.
> I just want to play and win; without sleeves, and without cheating.
So do I, and that why I like it that other players can't cheat either.
More global answer in other post.
Looking forward to playing with you again IRL, Jay, even if you don't have
nice-looking sleeves. ;-)
Orpheus
don't believe that's true. I don't believe there are many real hardcore
cheaters in the Jyhad world.
But I do believe there are many "opportunists", who think it isn't wrong if
they take out one less counter than they should, if they forget the loss
from Fame or Anarch Revolt, etc. Very, very few of those players will risk
actually marking their sleeves or doing anything that could be really
reproached to them. But if they, say, have all their Deflections with Jyhad
backs and only new Master cards from 3rd Ed, they might be tempted to take a
look. The same way you might be tempted to look at your prey's cards if he
keeps showing them to you, as opposed with trying to see his hand. Or the
same way that if you draw one more card and see it by accident without
anyone seeing it, you'll have to choose between replacing it on top of your
library (and taking into account that info or not) or telling everyone.
So there are degrees in cheating, and I really believe that, although you
all are right that hardcore cheaters (I don't think I met more than 2 in my
gaming experience) will always find a way, sleeving the cards goes a
looooong way to prevent "occasional" or "opportunist" cheating. And seeing
all the possibilities of slipping down that road that 3rd Ed proposes, I
really believe that it's important to plan counter-measures for such an
important tournament.
As you know from another thread : we've been doing it for most major events
here, and nobody died from it.
As for the extra cost : 9 euros in a lifetime ain't that much compared to
all we already spend on cards and storing accessories, is it ?
--
Orpheus
-----------------------
I'm dead serious ! Well, mostly dead...
Orpheus
YEAH, let's put all our cards in the fire !!!
Duh ?
Alias
I really don't know what are all of you discussing here (I am replying
to particular post only to keep context).
As for the serious reasons, I dont know if somebody mentioned that
already (a sane person can't read whole thread like this), but sleeves,
assuming that a playgroup uses a lot of different ones (really not a
problem. so many color and texture choices), really help a lot
regarding ownership of the cards. No more guessing, to whom the
forgotten Fame or Disarm or Anarch Troublemaker could belong.
If you play in a pub, at least a Czech style pub, where beer flows like
a river, sleeves are simply a must. minor spills here and there, and in
a month, your cards resemble used beer mats. This leads me to a
suspicion, that all the sleeve haters are some stupid prohibition
water-drinkers, who dwell only in game stores (I call it geek stables).
And obviously don' t own a cat. My cat once, when she was a kitty,
pissed in my card box, where I had my !Torrie deck. I tell you, it's
better to throw away few sleeves than a pile of Art Scams and Embraces.
Or to throw away the cat.
As for the serious reasons, I dont know if somebody mentioned that
already (a sane person can't read whole thread like this), but sleeves,
assuming that a playgroup uses a lot of different ones (really not a
problem. so many color and texture choices), really help a lot
regarding ownership of the cards. No more guessing, to whom the
forgotten Fame or Disarm or Anarch Troublemaker could belong.
Orpheus
> "Rehlow" wrote:
>
> > I don't think you cheat Jay, but I want to play out a scenario here ...
> >
> > So your library and crypt are unsorted as regard to card orientation,
> > right? When you draw a card into your hand, if the card was upside down
> > in the library, do you keep it upside down in your hand? I try to keep
> > my library facing the same way, so I don't have to flip cards when I
> > draw them into my hand, but I will if a card is the wrong direction.
> > Now if you play with a mixture of 3rd Edition and non-3rd Edition
> > cards, someone watching you closely can tell by card orientation of
> > your library and then if you flip your card going into your hand if you
> > just drew a 3rd Edition card. Is it a big deal? Probably not. There are
> > a lot of cards it could be, but it is a little bit of information. I
> > hope to continue to be able to play this game without sleaves. If the
> > card quality is as low as I have read, I would switch to sleaves to
> > preserve my cards before doing it to prevent cheating.
Agreed. As an aside, the torn cards look less bad once sleeved (talking pure
eye pleasure here, the Toreador way), not to mention that torn cards are
more easily markable without drawing attention ("what, that white spot in
the corner ? Can't help it if 3rd Ed is shit, and I don't have that many
Golcondas !!").
> Starting at this year's NAC, I plan to occasionally hold non-3rd Ed. cards
> upside-down in my hand. Let the good times roll.
Mate, you're one sick maniac !! lol
Next, Jay is so good at VTES that he asks other players to draw randomly
from his hand the cards he plays...
--
Orpheus
-------------------------
"You'll regret being so damn abusive when the electric UFO gods transphase
in from dimension ten to appoint me manager of the universe".
The Drummer, in Planetary.
>
> Jay Kristoff
>
>
Jozxyqk
> Although you get 150 of the each color, when 100 of each would be better
> for V:TES.
150 of each color sounds good to me.
102 of each color would be "perfect", so you can use 90 of them for one deck,
and 12 for another deck's crypt*.. But with 150 there's plenty of "broken
sleeve replacement" room, and room to sleeve tupdog crypts :)
This sounds good. For some reason, I thought people would not recommend
Ultra Pro *shrug*
(* Although I might mix-match that with some of the pretty-artwork-but-lower-
quality sleeves for crypts, since they're less susceptible to damage).
Anyway, thanks for your advice, and for actually responding to my question
instead of the derail.
I am not going to start using sleeves because I *like* them, nor because
I care if you think I'm cheating.. it's just in anticipation that there
are more Horribly Miscut cards than just my copy of Frondator... :)
Orpheus
> > I totally agree with Jay. There is absolutely no need for card sleeves
> > to be required in any tournament, since the current tournament rules
> > already address that issue, as does the Judge's Guide:
> >
> > TOURNAMENT RULES
> > 4.1. Cards Allowed
> >
> > All cards in a player's deck must be genuine Vampire: The Eternal
> > Struggle or Jyhad cards.
> >
> > If Jyhad and Vampire: The Eternal Struggle cards are both used, in
> > order to prevent a significant advantage, all cards from the Jyhad or
> > Vampire: The Eternal Struggle card sets must be of sufficiently mixed
> > card type - that is, Master cards must appear with both Jyhad and V:TES
> > card backs (or at least three different card types must have Jyhad
> > backs).
"Sufficiently mixed" is the key here. What about players who just don't have
those big Master Rares in anything but Jyhad ? People were already
complaining about the difficulty of informing players that they should
sleeve their decks, now you must inform them that they have to change their
decks because all their Rare Masters are Jyhad ? And what if they begin play
with such a deck, unaware ? Game loss ? No : sleeves. Let's not waste the
time and energy where players complain about possible cheating and say :
"all decks including 3rd Ed or Jyhad cards must be sleeved".
Totally agreed.
> After reading so much disagree on the matter, I doubt (Oprheus this's a
> kind of democracy I think... ;) )
I don't. ;-) You know, vampires, all that jazz... Seriously, whatever needs
to be done must be done. Also, this forum isn't representative of the
european majority, you'll notice that many americans expressed their
opinions, among whom maybe 3 will show up at the tournament (no offense
intended : on many subjects, americans and europeans don't react the same
way, that's all). Did you ask on the italian forum ? I know french players
won't see a problem there at all. Damnans expresses his own opinion, but
what do the spanish as a whole think ? And the german / austrian ? The Swiss
play as we do, at least some of the Belgians are used to it too. I wouldn't
know for more faraway european countries, but the ones mentionned above will
represent a great part of the people present at your event, it might be nice
to know what they think : if you really care about a majority it should be
that of the players intending to come to your event !!
> we'll choose the mandatory sleeves
> option, but for sure you'll be warmely invited to use them, for game
> fun and more cheat avoiding gameplay...
And players who are warned about it and are reaaaaally allergic can always
choose to play neither Jyhad nor 3rd Ed, although that would seem silly to
me compared to the simple act of sleeving their decks for the event (maximum
3 decks, possibly only one set of sleeves bought).
> But the problem still remain for future events, I suppose...
Yes it does.
Orpheus
> Perron and that he responded by stating their group would consider is
> something they're allowed to do.
They are. It's been done before, including in the presence of Steve or
Stewart Wieck.
> > The options would be : you don't have to put opaque sleeves if you don't
> > play either Jyhad or 3rd Ed cards ;
>
> That's different than the real rules, however.
Than the "fixed" rules, yes, but it can be added.
> > but I doubt the 3rd Ed part will be met,
>
> It's not in any way necessary for 3E cards. 3E card backs are identical
> to other VtES card backs.
No they're not. They are of lighter tint and therefore look a little
"brighter". Feel free to check and tell me what you think.
> Players should not be allowed to "mark" 3E
> or any other types of cards by permitting them to be the only one(s)
> oriented in a certain direction in their stack of library cards. So the
> front-to-back reversal thing completely orthagonal to this issue.
You really think players will bother with putting their 3rd Ed cards the
wrong way in their decks ? And then reversing them when they come in their
hands, showing everyone that they do ?
> It's
> just that players might be well-advised to use opaque card backs with
> their 3E-combined decks so as not to give away cards in their hands by
> holding them "upside-down" from their opponents' perspectives.
Yes, but the same goes with the card on top of your library. Which means a
lot of cards over the game.
> > But yes, the organisation will have to announce it in advance,
>
> The problem I find with the "announce it in advance" concept is
> that organizers often don't consider the players' point of view. They'll
> do something like sticking some little notice up on their website a week
> ahead of time - forgetting that many players had discovered all the
> information they (thought they) needed to know about an event long before
> then and have no reason to check the organizer's website just before
> leaving for an event. To really "announce it in advance", organizers
> need to announce all requirements players need to know about from
> the very beginning. They can't be changing the rules after the first
> wave of information has already gone out or they'll miss people.
I understand, but then the part about "efficiently mixed" with Jyhad backs
that IS in the rules is very badly known in some parts. And what ratio is
considered "sufficiently mixed" ?
And the logical adaptation that should be made concerning 3rd Ed isn't "yet"
in the rules but should be. The problem is the same as with Jyhad, although
a little more subtle.
> IMO, it's far too late for this year's EC to be considering new rules
> or changes in the format unless they're prepared to make all the
> arrangements to deal with players who show up never having heard of
> the change. I suppose you could argue that it would be OK if they
> made sure card sleeves were offered for a fairly modest price or
> for free. But that's about as generous as I'd be with the concept.
It could be done. Also, players who register before the tournament could
have a mail sent to them including that information, and it would solve much
of the communication problem.
Orpheus
> hazzle about unimportant things like sleeves, leaving the play area
> etc.the more mistakes are made with the important things. I still
> prefer the univisible judge who ist there when needed.
Mate, you're giving the best "pro-sleeves" argument ever here !! Yes, if
judges don't have to bother about "is he cheating with his 3rd Ed or Jyhad
cards" they can take care of real issues. Which is exactly why our national
judges chose to make sleeves mandatory. And they judge well now. ;-)
> To get a warning
> because i didnt announced an unspoken deal (happened to me) is for
> me boosting the ego of the judge.
That's another matter, that could be discussed thoroughly (again).
> So i have to agree to Ankur. Play the game.
I don't follow your reasonning here. Mine is : sleeve your decks, less worry
about cheating, and play the game !!
> Frank (who made about three decisions at the whole german qualifier
> and still had no cheater)
I don't understand what you mean there.
Dr Jester
As you said some posts before, my idea in using mandatory sleeves was
to avoid minor annoiaces to judges about using mixing cards type in
decks. There will be a lot of other matter of discussions in the EC2006
that these seems the easiest problem to solve from right now to keep
judges' minds focused on their true mission!
After all there're a lot of good reasons to use sleeves for own decks:
- they let you keep track of your cards on the table
- they let you protect the cards fro enviroment accidents and shuffling
routine
- they let you express your personality with much different patterns
- they aren't so expensive after all and you need just one set for
these tournament event
- they keep the cards in mint/near mint condition, so you can trade 'em
for they real value
- they avoid marking cards problem (yes there's still marking sleeve
problems, but that's really lamer)
We probably should ask for European opinion in matter, using some polls
in the various national forums... but I think it'll take so much
times... a lot of people like to do 'Bastian Contrario'! (i.e. to be
always against all, no matter)
I hope that almost all the players will come with sleeves... and that's
the best way to solve the problem and to avoid time consuming check
operations at the tables.
I'll check our italian forums on the matter.
Orpheus
> to particular post only to keep context).
>
> As for the serious reasons, I dont know if somebody mentioned that
> already (a sane person can't read whole thread like this),
I agree lol. I had to because I was implicated in the subject, and I had to
answer most of those arguments, but I won't have the time to do this
everytime, and already had to drop such a conversation after dozens of
posts... Anyway, I feel like everything has been said by both "sides" on the
issue now. But your input is interesting.
> but sleeves,
> assuming that a playgroup uses a lot of different ones (really not a
> problem. so many color and texture choices), really help a lot
> regarding ownership of the cards. No more guessing, to whom the
> forgotten Fame or Disarm or Anarch Troublemaker could belong.
Exact. I have on occasion either lost or gotten a misplaced card, the
sleeves always helped find the truthful owner.
> If you play in a pub, at least a Czech style pub, where beer flows like
> a river, sleeves are simply a must. minor spills here and there, and in
> a month, your cards resemble used beer mats. This leads me to a
> suspicion, that all the sleeve haters are some stupid prohibition
> water-drinkers, who dwell only in game stores (I call it geek stables).
Lol. I think I'd like to play in Czechy. ;-)
> And obviously don' t own a cat. My cat once, when she was a kitty,
> pissed in my card box, where I had my !Torrie deck. I tell you, it's
> better to throw away few sleeves than a pile of Art Scams and Embraces.
> Or to throw away the cat.
lol. That was funny. My cat prefers to play with the counters and loose them
everywhere, and get on / under my Heroclix maps, occasionally ripping them
apart. But my other cat has thrown up on my cards on occasion, and I'm
rather glad they were sleeved (or cried if they were not...) !!
> As for the serious reasons, I dont know if somebody mentioned that
> already (a sane person can't read whole thread like this), but sleeves,
> assuming that a playgroup uses a lot of different ones (really not a
> problem. so many color and texture choices), really help a lot
> regarding ownership of the cards. No more guessing, to whom the
> forgotten Fame or Disarm or Anarch Troublemaker could belong.
Man, you're caught in a Temporis loop !! That's baaaad...
--
Orpheus
---------------
"When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the
dunces are in a confederacy against him."
Jonathan Swift
Dr Jester
Never considered the Sleeves question that way... :-)
Not to consider che chemical colors used for printing cards... are them
bio-degradable?
All those tress being cut, let me ponder the idea to stop buying
vtes... ;)
John P.
"Alias" <ransom...@seznam.cz> wrote in message
news:1157710320.0...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> I tell you, it's
> better to throw away few sleeves than a pile of Art Scams and Embraces.
> Or to throw away the cat.
Naw, you're delusional. Throw away the cat. :)
> As for the serious reasons, I dont know if somebody mentioned that
> already (a sane person can't read whole thread like this), but sleeves,
> assuming that a playgroup uses a lot of different ones (really not a
> problem. so many color and texture choices), really help a lot
> regarding ownership of the cards. No more guessing, to whom the
> forgotten Fame or Disarm or Anarch Troublemaker could belong.
If I am not using sleeves, when something like a fame
comes up I try to tuck it inside a Rigid card protector.
Try telling me you forgot it wasn't yours and accidentally
shuffled that in!.
-John P.
Winnipeg
atomweaver
news:4500b9ae$0$15649$626a...@news.free.fr:
>> The question here is intent, Orpheus. If someone intends to cheat
>> then only it is a problem. The reason I'm surprised by the suggested
>> requirement is that the notion of someone cheating at vtes is kind of
>> lame.
>>
>> Seriously, whoever you people are, quit being lame.
>>
>> Play the game.
>>
>> Ankur
>
> Of course we agree Ankur : cheating is lameness incarnate.
>
> As is colluding.
>
> I've seen collusions (a lot) at big events all over Europe, and have
> sometimes suspected cheating.
>
> Cheaters are lame. So let's not give them weapons to ruin our games,
> right ? --
My $0.02 is; what weapon..? Lets take a different track, and look at exactly
what information is being denied the cheating player, by forcing everyone to
sleeve their decks.
Take it to its iterative extreme; say Francois the Super-Cheater (FtSC)
develops a method to mark every unsleeved card in his deck, such that he can
_specifically_ identify his top card at will, with a glance. This is, simply
put, basically the equivalent of having an Elder Library on the table (or Tusk).
So you know what the next card in your deck is... big f-ing deal! What a lame
effect to be "buying" with your cheating ways, given the "play and replace"
nature of VTES card-flow... It costs an MPA and a pool to get that same effect
in-game! The pathetic reward to risk ratio here makes FtSC one of the stupidest
cheaters in the world.
...and whats to keep FtSC from just cleverly marking his sleeves instead of his
cards? As a Judge, you _still_ have to be on the lookout for unfair play,
sleeves or no sleeves. A mandatory sleeve policy seems to be merely a placebo,
something to make you _think_ you're addressing cheating.
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
atomweaver
news:1157714130.8...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> Never considered the Sleeves question that way... :-)
>
> Not to consider che chemical colors used for printing cards... are
> them bio-degradable?
>
Largely they are, yes. Organic molecules, many derived from renewable
resources, like soy beans and castor oil. Ink pigments tend to be mineral
in nature, though mostly benign in the environment.
> All those tress being cut, let me ponder the idea to stop buying
> vtes... ;)
Trees are a renewable resource (and an atmospheric scrubber before
harvesting). Petroleum (Plastic sleeves) is not. Sheesh, does a gas-
guzzling American have to teach you enviro-Euros these things? ;-) Buy
more VTES, buy less sleeves...
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
(...contributed to eliminating 500 mtons of VOCs and HAPs in industrial
coatings, fiberglass composites, and inks this year. Estimated career-long
tally of ~6,000 mtons of VOCs and HAPs eliminated.)
Orpheus
> >
> > Not to consider che chemical colors used for printing cards... are
> > them bio-degradable?
> >
> Largely they are, yes. Organic molecules, many derived from renewable
> resources, like soy beans and castor oil. Ink pigments tend to be mineral
> in nature, though mostly benign in the environment.
>
> > All those tress being cut, let me ponder the idea to stop buying
> > vtes... ;)
>
> Trees are a renewable resource (and an atmospheric scrubber before
> harvesting). Petroleum (Plastic sleeves) is not. Sheesh, does a gas-
> guzzling American have to teach you enviro-Euros these things? ;-) Buy
> more VTES, buy less sleeves...
Although I get your point, I think that VTES cards are, not unlike Laura
Palmer, wrapped in plastic too. The boosts wrappers don't appear too natural
to me, and the new starts now include 2 plastic wrappers in the cardboard
box.
I can understand people making such drastic choices as to "not buy any
plastic", but I really think it's a bad arguments here, as the same players
who oppose to buy a few packs of sleeves obviously buy all kinds of plastic
in their everyday lives, including VTES wrappers. And was there such a fuss
about buying tones of plastic dice for RPGs ?
My excuses to all those who really don't buy any plastic and also respect
the environment at 100 %, I really admire those, as my small efforts must
not go above 10% of what I could really do if I totally got into it (and
didn't buy anymore VTES, or, much worse... Heroclix !!).
Ankur Gupta
> if they take out one less counter than they should, if they forget the
> loss from Fame or Anarch Revolt, etc.
"Opportunists" are cheaters. Straight and simple. They are just willing to
cheat when there's virtually no chance of being caught. That doesn't
exactly change their moral fiber. And, such a person will derive a benefit
from any of a number of foreseen or unforeseen scenarios if the chance
presents itself.
I fail to see how this is dramatically different from creating such
scenarios to begin with. "Oops, I counted out 38 pool instead of 30. I
noticed it, but since I did it accidentally a long while ago, I guess I
won't bother to fix it."
That, my friend, is cheating.
> So there are degrees in cheating, and I really believe that, although
> you all are right that hardcore cheaters (I don't think I met more than
> 2 in my gaming experience) will always find a way, sleeving the cards
> goes a looooong way to prevent "occasional" or "opportunist" cheating.
It's cheating.
> And seeing all the possibilities of slipping down that road that 3rd Ed
> proposes, I really believe that it's important to plan counter-measures
> for such an important tournament.
Those counter-measures are inherent in the individual decisions that each
player makes: if you're gonna cheat, no counter-measure can catch all such
transgressions before they occur.
> As for the extra cost : 9 euros in a lifetime ain't that much compared to
> all we already spend on cards and storing accessories, is it ?
That's hardly an acceptable justification for artificially inflating a
tournament cost, especially when the reason for it is distrust of the
players who are playing the game.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Ankur Gupta
> have those big Master Rares in anything but Jyhad ?
Simple! Put in non-big masters that are also from the Jyhad set. In all
likelihood, a large percentage of your cards are coming from Jyhad sets
anyway.
> People were already complaining about the difficulty of informing
> players that they should sleeve their decks, now you must inform them
> that they have to change their decks because all their Rare Masters are
> Jyhad ?
These constraints are clearly written in the VEKN tournament rules. Sleeve
requirements are something that have to be checked individually for each
tournament. If I bring a deck that is valid according to VEKN rules, I do
not expect to require changes to that.
> And what if they begin play with such a deck, unaware ? Game loss ?
A player's responsibility is to bring a valid deck to the tournament.
> Let's not waste the time and energy where players complain about
> possible cheating and say : "all decks including 3rd Ed or Jyhad cards
> must be sleeved".
That, unfortunately stops neither the "hardcore" cheater nor the
"opportunistic" one. I'm strongly tempted to bring a deck that's sleeved
in 7 different colors, all sufficiently mixed. I dare any judge to
challenge that I haven't satisfied the rules.
> And players who are warned about it and are reaaaaally allergic can
> always choose to play neither Jyhad nor 3rd Ed, although that would seem
> silly to me compared to the simple act of sleeving their decks for the
> event (maximum 3 decks, possibly only one set of sleeves bought).
Or the simple act of not cheating. Your choice really.
>> But the problem still remain for future events, I suppose...
>
> Yes it does.
In as much as cheating itself does, sure.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Orpheus
> > if they take out one less counter than they should, if they forget the
> > loss from Fame or Anarch Revolt, etc.
>
> "Opportunists" are cheaters. Straight and simple. They are just willing to
> cheat when there's virtually no chance of being caught. That doesn't
> exactly change their moral fiber. And, such a person will derive a benefit
> from any of a number of foreseen or unforeseen scenarios if the chance
> presents itself.
Agreed.
> I fail to see how this is dramatically different from creating such
> scenarios to begin with. "Oops, I counted out 38 pool instead of 30. I
> noticed it, but since I did it accidentally a long while ago, I guess I
> won't bother to fix it."
>
> That, my friend, is cheating.
Yes, of course ! But it's easier to "let go". Some players might not have
your moral standards and will more easily "slip" than outright cheat. Of
this I am sure, and there have been discussions about it on some forums,
where it appears clearly that someone's moral ground is somebody else's
stomping ground. Whether you like it or no has no sway on the matter.
> > So there are degrees in cheating, and I really believe that, although
> > you all are right that hardcore cheaters (I don't think I met more than
> > 2 in my gaming experience) will always find a way, sleeving the cards
> > goes a looooong way to prevent "occasional" or "opportunist" cheating.
>
> It's cheating.
Are you caught in a Temporis loop too ? ;-)
> > And seeing all the possibilities of slipping down that road that 3rd Ed
> > proposes, I really believe that it's important to plan counter-measures
> > for such an important tournament.
>
> Those counter-measures are inherent in the individual decisions that each
> player makes: if you're gonna cheat, no counter-measure can catch all such
> transgressions before they occur.
You're only giving me the best argument to reduce all such occurances. Put
sleeves on 3rd cards.
> > As for the extra cost : 9 euros in a lifetime ain't that much compared
to
> > all we already spend on cards and storing accessories, is it ?
>
> That's hardly an acceptable justification for artificially inflating a
> tournament cost,
9 euros or dollars, say, a YEAR inflates ONE tournament ?! Oh come on,
you'll enjoy your sleeves after a while. Some of them even have naked women
on them. ;-) How much does a Playboy centerfold costs ?
> especially when the reason for it is distrust of the
> players who are playing the game.
Man, you're distorting the truth. The reason for it is to allow the "players
who are playing the game" to play it under the best conditions, without
having to deal with asshole cheaters. Nuff said.
> Ankur
> Play. The. Game.
Yes. And give the players the best and cleanest possible play environments.
Cover these 3rd Ed atrocities and Jyhad antiquities.
--
Orpheus
Nearly made it to LSJ's Killfile !!
Ankur Gupta
> backs that IS in the rules is very badly known in some parts. And what
> ratio is considered "sufficiently mixed" ?
This is an unnecessary hurdle. How about "evenly distributed"?
> And the logical adaptation that should be made concerning 3rd Ed isn't
> "yet" in the rules but should be. The problem is the same as with Jyhad,
> although a little more subtle.
It's the same logical leap.
> It could be done. Also, players who register before the tournament could
> have a mail sent to them including that information, and it would solve
> much of the communication problem.
What about people who come spontaneously? Will you turn them away?
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Ankur Gupta
> judges don't have to bother about "is he cheating with his 3rd Ed or
> Jyhad cards" they can take care of real issues. Which is exactly why our
> national judges chose to make sleeves mandatory. And they judge well
> now. ;-)
. . . You mean like "whether they're cheating with opaque sleeves?
>> So i have to agree to Ankur. Play the game.
>
> I don't follow your reasonning here. Mine is : sleeve your decks, less
> worry about cheating, and play the game !!
Reasoning which is (unfortunately) wrong.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> Yes there're a clear rule about handling cheating or cards allowance in
> a deck or cards marking. It's not a problem, during a game, to pause
> the table, check the "suspicious" deck and apply or not penalties...
> but my intent in this matter was to give all of you an easier and less
> suspicious game for the EC2006 Event.
Suspecting everyone automatically makes for a more suspicious game.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
Ankur Gupta
> avoid minor annoiaces to judges about using mixing cards type in decks.
> There will be a lot of other matter of discussions in the EC2006 that
> these seems the easiest problem to solve from right now to keep judges'
> minds focused on their true mission!
If it worked, I think you might have a point. Sadly, it guarantees
nothing.
> After all there're a lot of good reasons to use sleeves for own decks:
> - they let you keep track of your cards on the table
> - they let you protect the cards fro enviroment accidents and shuffling
> routine
> - they let you express your personality with much different patterns
> - they aren't so expensive after all and you need just one set for
> these tournament event
> - they keep the cards in mint/near mint condition, so you can trade 'em
> for they real value
> - they avoid marking cards problem (yes there's still marking sleeve
> problems, but that's really lamer)
The above reasons can't be forcibly pushed onto players. For the last
reason, there could be similar "unintentional" marked opaque sleeves. For
example, you have a subconscious tendency to fiddle with your reaction
cards. That fiddling bends one corner of the sleeves more than usual. You
notice this. You tell no one, because you're clearly using sleeves and
therefore not cheating.
> I hope that almost all the players will come with sleeves... and that's
> the best way to solve the problem and to avoid time consuming check
> operations at the tables.
Except that it's not.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
atomweaver
news:450176c4$0$12820$626a...@news.free.fr:
>> > Never considered the Sleeves question that way... :-)
>> >
>> > Not to consider che chemical colors used for printing cards... are
>> > them bio-degradable?
>> >
>> Largely they are, yes. Organic molecules, many derived from
>> renewable resources, like soy beans and castor oil. Ink pigments
>> tend to be mineral in nature, though mostly benign in the
>> environment.
>>
>> > All those tress being cut, let me ponder the idea to stop buying
>> > vtes... ;)
>>
>> Trees are a renewable resource (and an atmospheric scrubber before
>> harvesting). Petroleum (Plastic sleeves) is not. Sheesh, does a
>> gas- guzzling American have to teach you enviro-Euros these things?
>> ;-) Buy more VTES, buy less sleeves...
>
> Although I get your point, I think that VTES cards are, not unlike
> Laura Palmer, wrapped in plastic too. The boosts wrappers don't appear
> too natural to me, and the new starts now include 2 plastic wrappers
> in the cardboard box.
>
Aye. So you're buying boosters in packaging thats needed to deliver
them, and then re-buying sleeves to put them back in plastic..?
Just to note, yeah, the whole thing doesnt' really add up to a lot. I
was being a bit tongue-in-cheeky. Take all the VTES in the world, and
sleeve it with plastic... a couple dozen SUVs putting 10-15 tons/year of
carbon in the air would likely out-pace the sleeves, in terms of annual
petroleum consumption.
> I can understand people making such drastic choices as to "not buy any
> plastic", but I really think it's a bad arguments here, as the same
> players who oppose to buy a few packs of sleeves obviously buy all
> kinds of plastic in their everyday lives, including VTES wrappers. And
> was there such a fuss about buying tones of plastic dice for RPGs ?
>
As far as packaging goes, VTES boosters are pretty well-packaged, from
an environmental standpoint. Vacuum metallized films are very
lightweight (low mass ratio of plastic), economical, and generally good
at protecting their contents. Starters are even better (paper carton,
cello-wrapped interior, less plastic with more cards).
> My excuses to all those who really don't buy any plastic and also
> respect the environment at 100 %, I really admire those, as my small
> efforts must not go above 10% of what I could really do if I totally
> got into it (and didn't buy anymore VTES, or, much worse... Heroclix
> !!). --
Other choices we make have a _much_ greater impact than choices in
buying recreational products like VTES, or sleeves to go with them. Get
a card with good fuel economy... Keep your car usage to a minimum
reasonable level... If you have to replace a
heater/boiler/furnace/large appliance, buy the most energy-efficient
model you can afford. Keep your thermostat down a few degrees in the
winter... Take shorter showers. Keep your electrical consumption down
by turning off unneeded/unused applicances and lights. Buy from
companies that have these same habits.
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Shade
Alias wrote:
> If you play in a pub, at least a Czech style pub, where beer flows like
> a river, sleeves are simply a must. minor spills here and there, and in
> a month, your cards resemble used beer mats.
I can confirm this happens in New Zealand and the UK as well :-) I'm
not sure of the relative stickyness factor between Czech, New Zealand,
and UK beer but I can say the New Zealand beer is better. That's
possibly not all that relevent to this discussion but it's a useful
point anyhow.
> And obviously don' t own a cat. My cat once, when she was a kitty,
> pissed in my card box, where I had my !Torrie deck. I tell you, it's
> better to throw away few sleeves than a pile of Art Scams and Embraces.
Tell me about it! By some miracle I just lost about a dozen commons
when this happened to me and after that my decks went into a separate
box and the rares went into a folder.
> Or to throw away the cat.
Hmmm.
> As for the serious reasons, I dont know if somebody mentioned that
> already (a sane person can't read whole thread like this), but sleeves,
> assuming that a playgroup uses a lot of different ones (really not a
> problem. so many color and texture choices), really help a lot
> regarding ownership of the cards. No more guessing, to whom the
> forgotten Fame or Disarm or Anarch Troublemaker could belong.
One of the guys in our group had the genius idea of just putting a
little post-it type sticker on his cards when he plays them so you
can't forget. But sleeves work too :)
Simon
Ankur Gupta
> plastic", but I really think it's a bad arguments here, as the same
> players who oppose to buy a few packs of sleeves obviously buy all kinds
> of plastic in their everyday lives, including VTES wrappers. And was
> there such a fuss about buying tones of plastic dice for RPGs ?
The presence of one occurrence of a bad thing is not justification for
another occurrence of a bad thing.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> But I do believe there are many "opportunists", who think it isn't wrong if
> they take out one less counter than they should, if they forget the loss
> from Fame or Anarch Revolt, etc. Very, very few of those players will risk
> actually marking their sleeves or doing anything that could be really
> reproached to them. But if they, say, have all their Deflections with Jyhad
> backs and only new Master cards from 3rd Ed, they might be tempted to take a
> look. The same way you might be tempted to look at your prey's cards if he
> keeps showing them to you, as opposed with trying to see his hand.
Heh. I've politely asked many a prey to stop showing me their hand.
After all, it's illegal to show someone your hand. But it's still
easier to opportunistically cheat by using marked sleeves than marked
cards, so your point remains moot.
> Or the
> same way that if you draw one more card and see it by accident without
> anyone seeing it, you'll have to choose between replacing it on top of your
> library (and taking into account that info or not) or telling everyone.
>
There is a fine line here. I usually weigh the estimated time it will
take to draw my next replacement with the estimated time that it will
take to shuffle my library.
> As for the extra cost : 9 euros in a lifetime ain't that much compared to
> all we already spend on cards and storing accessories, is it ?
sleeves don't last a lifetime. I've been lucky that my Deck Protector
Metallized Sleeves have lasted since '02.
Ankur Gupta
> have your moral standards and will more easily "slip" than outright
> cheat. Of this I am sure, and there have been discussions about it on
> some forums, where it appears clearly that someone's moral ground is
> somebody else's stomping ground. Whether you like it or no has no sway
> on the matter.
Sure, but if sleeving cards actually addressed that issue, I would be more
likely to fall into your arguments.
>>> And seeing all the possibilities of slipping down that road that 3rd
>>> Ed proposes, I really believe that it's important to plan
>>> counter-measures for such an important tournament.
>>
>> Those counter-measures are inherent in the individual decisions that
>> each player makes: if you're gonna cheat, no counter-measure can catch
>> all such transgressions before they occur.
>
> You're only giving me the best argument to reduce all such occurances.
> Put sleeves on 3rd cards.
That counter-measure can be thwarted. Therefore, I submit that it's not a
counter-measure at all. For those who "slip", they might be tempted to
mark sleeves in a tournament with a "false sense of security". More subtle
changes can be made to sleeves, such as scraping shiny cards at different
angles. The kind of crap that no one can see.
And since one man's moral ground is another man's stomping ground. . . .
>> That's hardly an acceptable justification for artificially inflating a
>> tournament cost,
>
> 9 euros or dollars, say, a YEAR inflates ONE tournament ?! Oh come on,
> you'll enjoy your sleeves after a while. Some of them even have naked
> women on them. ;-) How much does a Playboy centerfold costs ?
The point is that the requirement pre-supposes cheating on the part of all
participants, not the 9 Euros. (Though that's not completely
insignificant.)
>> especially when the reason for it is distrust of the players who are
>> playing the game.
>
> Man, you're distorting the truth. The reason for it is to allow the
> "players who are playing the game" to play it under the best conditions,
> without having to deal with asshole cheaters. Nuff said.
Translation: To guarantee the best conditions, we have to make sure that
asshole cheaters can't cheat. To that end, we'll assume that every player
is and enforce rules to that effect. Moreover, the measures we take are
easily thwarted and don't deter the target audience from gaining an
advantage anyway.
I think that is pretty accurate.
> Yes. And give the players the best and cleanest possible play
> environments.
If only it were true.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Fred Scott
news:450147f9$0$26983$626a...@news.free.fr...
>> The point is, I don't believe the suggestion you communicated to Christian
>> Perron and that he responded by stating their group would consider is
>> something they're allowed to do.
>
> They are. It's been done before, including in the presence of Steve or
> Stewart Wieck.
"It's been done before." is not an argument nor an endorsement. I wasn't
there so I don't know. I'm just saying that finding this passage in the
rules and using it to mean that organizers can make up any rule they want
is absurd and problematic. How can any player ever know that they're
bringing the right stuff or enough stuff to a tournament?
>> > The options would be : you don't have to put opaque sleeves if you don't
>> > play either Jyhad or 3rd Ed cards ;
>>
>> That's different than the real rules, however.
>
> Than the "fixed" rules, yes, but it can be added.
Sorry, I disagree.
>> > but I doubt the 3rd Ed part will be met,
>>
>> It's not in any way necessary for 3E cards. 3E card backs are identical
>> to other VtES card backs.
>
> No they're not. They are of lighter tint and therefore look a little
> "brighter". Feel free to check and tell me what you think.
I think they're close enough that people shouldn't be getting paranoid
about it. As many others have pointed out, there are small differences
in many of the expansion. Here's just one more. So what?
>> Players should not be allowed to "mark" 3E
>> or any other types of cards by permitting them to be the only one(s)
>> oriented in a certain direction in their stack of library cards. So the
>> front-to-back reversal thing completely orthagonal to this issue.
>
> You really think players will bother with putting their 3rd Ed cards the
> wrong way in their decks ? And then reversing them when they come in their
> hands, showing everyone that they do ?
No. I thought you were referring to the front-to-back orientation of the
3E cards, as that's the only thing truly different about them. I was
just saying it didn't matter, either.
>> > But yes, the organisation will have to announce it in advance,
>>
>> The problem I find with the "announce it in advance" concept is
>> that organizers often don't consider the players' point of view. They'll
>> do something like sticking some little notice up on their website a week
>> ahead of time - forgetting that many players had discovered all the
>> information they (thought they) needed to know about an event long before
>> then and have no reason to check the organizer's website just before
>> leaving for an event. To really "announce it in advance", organizers
>> need to announce all requirements players need to know about from
>> the very beginning. They can't be changing the rules after the first
>> wave of information has already gone out or they'll miss people.
>
> I understand, but then the part about "efficiently mixed" with Jyhad backs
> that IS in the rules is very badly known in some parts.
Hey, at least it's posted and consistent. If players can't read the
tournament rules before going to a tournament then how do you expect them
to read a tournament organizer's website or discover from any other source
of information that sleeves are required? Your position makes no sense.
> And what ratio is considered "sufficiently mixed" ?
It's judgement. The essential point is, how much information can a player
gleen from seeing the cardback in the library?
> And the logical adaptation that should be made concerning 3rd Ed isn't "yet"
> in the rules but should be. The problem is the same as with Jyhad, although
> a little more subtle.
That's never going to happen. I don't think you're going to convince anyone
that 3E cardbacks warrant such treatment.
>> IMO, it's far too late for this year's EC to be considering new rules
>> or changes in the format unless they're prepared to make all the
>> arrangements to deal with players who show up never having heard of
>> the change. I suppose you could argue that it would be OK if they
>> made sure card sleeves were offered for a fairly modest price or
>> for free. But that's about as generous as I'd be with the concept.
>
> It could be done.
No, it can't. It's already too late, given that many will not look at
another source of information between now and the EC.
> Also, players who register before the tournament could
> have a mail sent to them including that information, and it would solve much
> of the communication problem.
That doesn't solve the problem of people who already have reservations and
know when and where to show up but don't plan to pre-register. That's
my point: you keep trying to solve a problem that can't totally be solved.
In order to get the information out, it has to be there from the start.
Fred
Dr Jester
Ankur Gupta wrote:
> > As you said some posts before, my idea in using mandatory sleeves was to
> > avoid minor annoiaces to judges about using mixing cards type in decks.
> > There will be a lot of other matter of discussions in the EC2006 that
> > these seems the easiest problem to solve from right now to keep judges'
> > minds focused on their true mission!
>
> If it worked, I think you might have a point. Sadly, it guarantees
> nothing.
After all I'm not looking for a perfect solution or I'd look, first of
all, for perfect players! or not? It's just a way to reduce cheating or
time loss checking problems, before they happen... it'll not solve all
the problem, but better than do nothing at all IMHO.
> > After all there're a lot of good reasons to use sleeves for own decks:
> > - they let you keep track of your cards on the table
> > - they let you protect the cards fro enviroment accidents and shuffling
> > routine
> > - they let you express your personality with much different patterns
> > - they aren't so expensive after all and you need just one set for
> > these tournament event
> > - they keep the cards in mint/near mint condition, so you can trade 'em
> > for they real value
> > - they avoid marking cards problem (yes there's still marking sleeve
> > problems, but that's really lamer)
>
> The above reasons can't be forcibly pushed onto players. For the last
> reason, there could be similar "unintentional" marked opaque sleeves. For
> example, you have a subconscious tendency to fiddle with your reaction
> cards. That fiddling bends one corner of the sleeves more than usual. You
> notice this. You tell no one, because you're clearly using sleeves and
> therefore not cheating.
Yeah for sure or use some infra red marker with special pair of
glasses... too James Bond play? Maybe, but we cannot prevent
everything... we try to reduce cheat gaps... if some one happens to
cheat without no one to know, good for him... we're playng vtes, not
Pokemon :P
>
> > I hope that almost all the players will come with sleeves... and that's
> > the best way to solve the problem and to avoid time consuming check
> > operations at the tables.
>
> Except that it's not.
We're disussing it and trying to get European feedback about it...
let's see... Maybe it'll be mandatory in the end...
>
> Ankur
> Play. The. Game.
Play the game of course...
Dr Jester
Fred Scott wrote:
> "Orpheus" <orphe...@DEADSPAMfree.fr> wrote in message
> news:450147f9$0$26983$626a...@news.free.fr...
> >> > But yes, the organisation will have to announce it in advance,
> >>
> >> The problem I find with the "announce it in advance" concept is
> >> that organizers often don't consider the players' point of view. They'll
> >> do something like sticking some little notice up on their website a week
> >> ahead of time - forgetting that many players had discovered all the
> >> information they (thought they) needed to know about an event long before
> >> then and have no reason to check the organizer's website just before
> >> leaving for an event. To really "announce it in advance", organizers
> >> need to announce all requirements players need to know about from
> >> the very beginning. They can't be changing the rules after the first
> >> wave of information has already gone out or they'll miss people.
> >
> > I understand, but then the part about "efficiently mixed" with Jyhad backs
> > that IS in the rules is very badly known in some parts.
>
> Hey, at least it's posted and consistent. If players can't read the
> tournament rules before going to a tournament then how do you expect them
> to read a tournament organizer's website or discover from any other source
> of information that sleeves are required? Your position makes no sense.
>
> Fred
You're right nor EC organization neither WW can be responsable for
players not reading the rules, the other rulings or the tournament
specail features... if a player will come with a Dramatic Upheaval in
his deck, who's fault then? If I write on the official EC website, in
the page for pre-registration and send again a reminder in the
confirming e-mails e the following one (bold, big, blinkig words)...
what's the matter if he still refuse to read and understand?
You don't know or read the laws, are you excused for breaking them?
I think that with so much time, a bit of organization in supplying
sleeves at the tournament (perhaps lending them) and a lot of
INFORMATION before, it'd be possible... but if WW says NO, that close
the argumentations here.
Ankur Gupta
> all, for perfect players! or not? It's just a way to reduce cheating or
> time loss checking problems, before they happen... it'll not solve all
> the problem, but better than do nothing at all IMHO.
I fundamentally disagree with your contention that it will reduce
cheating.
>> The above reasons can't be forcibly pushed onto players. For the last
>> reason, there could be similar "unintentional" marked opaque sleeves.
>> For example, you have a subconscious tendency to fiddle with your
>> reaction cards. That fiddling bends one corner of the sleeves more than
>> usual. You notice this. You tell no one, because you're clearly using
>> sleeves and therefore not cheating.
>
> Yeah for sure or use some infra red marker with special pair of
> glasses... too James Bond play? Maybe, but we cannot prevent
> everything... we try to reduce cheat gaps... if some one happens to
> cheat without no one to know, good for him... we're playng vtes, not
> Pokemon :P
Right. That's *exactly* the reason you don't need to resort to tactics
that are at best insulting and ineffective against any true threat to fair
play. Furthermore, you might make the issue worse: some people will walk
into this "highly sterilized, cheat-free environment" and not notice
cheating, thus giving cheaters more freedom.
Cheating is more difficult to detect with sleeves.
Just assume that everyone is there to play the game and focus on judging.
Random spot checks ought to catch whatever transgressions you intend to
catch.
>> Except that it's not.
>
> We're disussing it and trying to get European feedback about it... let's
> see... Maybe it'll be mandatory in the end...
Sigh.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Dr Jester
Ok.. it's the EC after all, the biggest torunament in the year in
Europe... for sure it'll be a suspicious, problematic, judges consuming
game... ;)
Ankur Gupta
> Europe... for sure it'll be a suspicious, problematic, judges consuming
> game... ;)
Or, it could be fun, competitive, and full of brilliant play.
You set the tone. It's your choice really.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Fred Scott
news:1157728482.5...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Fred Scott wrote:
>> "Orpheus" <orphe...@DEADSPAMfree.fr> wrote in message
>> news:450147f9$0$26983$626a...@news.free.fr...
>> > that IS in the rules is very badly known in some parts.
>>
>> Hey, at least it's posted and consistent. If players can't read the
>> tournament rules before going to a tournament then how do you expect them
>> to read a tournament organizer's website or discover from any other source
>> of information that sleeves are required? Your position makes no sense.
>
> players not reading the rules, the other rulings or the tournament
> specail features... if a player will come with a Dramatic Upheaval in
> his deck, who's fault then? If I write on the official EC website, in
> the page for pre-registration and send again a reminder in the
> confirming e-mails e the following one (bold, big, blinkig words)...
> what's the matter if he still refuse to read and understand?
> You don't know or read the laws, are you excused for breaking them?
The problem is that your website is not an official source of tournament
rules. That's my problem with the whole concept Orpheus is trying to
sell: there is already one and only one source of tournament rules - the
VEKN tournament rules document. You're correct that players need to take
the responsibility of reading them and understanding them. Having done
that, that should be all they're required to do. They should not be required
to go find your website and read it as well in order to know how to
prepare for a tournament - to say nothing about continuing to read it week
after week JUST IN CASE there are any changes at the last minute!
And WHERE on your website is a player supposed to go to be sure he's found
your special rules?!? Especially since tournament organizers are
notoriously DISorganized about how they convey such information. It
could be anywhere - on the first page in huge, underlined letters or on
some little link on the registration page that nobody notices. How would
I know if I've searched enough?
Sorry, I don't think this concept works.
> I think that with so much time, a bit of organization in supplying
> sleeves at the tournament (perhaps lending them) and a lot of
> INFORMATION before, it'd be possible... but if WW says NO, that close
> the argumentations here.
If you're prepared to provide the sleeves, especially as loaners for free,
then I'd be a lot less inclined to see any problem caused. I'm still
skeptical about the meaning of the rule Orpheus quoted. I'd like to get
that issue clarified.
Fred
Dr Jester
Ok, I got your point of view and I think that loaning sleeves for free
could be a way to make mandatory ruling less forcing on the players
that truly dislike them. And for sure we'll put the statement about it
CLEARLY where it cannot be avoided to read (perhaps also in the same
Decklist document). After all, with sleeves read to be loan for free,
also the more distract player can provide to it before the tournament
start.
About rules meaning, well, it's better to wait official clarification,
that's always the last word on the matter.
Dr Jester
It's impossible to satisfy everybody... but we're doing our best about
it.
Let's see what will be in the end
Dr Jester
Maybe we'll never solve the problem... I've to tell I'm more concerned
on checking Decklists and decks at the moment. That'll be a real
torment... -_-
Blooded Sand
thing.....
You make a REALLY BIG sign that you put at the entrance. you also hand
out a form that evryone entering the competition has to sign. These two
things both state that if you are caught cheating, you will be tied to
a chair and forced to watch "Power Rangers" Episodes 1-98345658. Twice.
Then, once your mind has been reduced to a blob of quivering jelly, you
will have the privilege of watching your "hosts" auction of ALL of your
cards that you brought with you. Proceeds to go towars even more prizes
for the honest players that win.
Sorted?
Ankur Gupta
> on checking Decklists and decks at the moment. That'll be a real
> torment... -_-
Good luck with that. I usually just collect decklists and possibly
randomly check a few. If you're on the final table, I do a comprehensive
check of the deck against its list. I did this for the GLQ a couple of
years ago, so it works even for big and important tournaments.
Ankur
Play. The. Game.
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> Ok, I got your point of view and I think that loaning sleeves for free
> could be a way to make mandatory ruling less forcing on the players
> that truly dislike them.
I'm not so sure. The added time it will take to verify that the free
sleeves you're giving me aren't marked plus the time it takes to
install and remove them from my sleeves seems much more of a hassle
than the fact that I should already be considered prepared for the
tournament to begin with.
XZealot
Orpheus wrote:
> > Christian, my experience from tournaments is, the more a judge makes a
> > hazzle about unimportant things like sleeves, leaving the play area
> > etc.the more mistakes are made with the important things. I still
> > prefer the univisible judge who ist there when needed.
>
> Mate, you're giving the best "pro-sleeves" argument ever here !! Yes, if
> judges don't have to bother about "is he cheating with his 3rd Ed or Jyhad
> cards" they can take care of real issues. Which is exactly why our national
> judges chose to make sleeves mandatory. And they judge well now. ;-)
Just one question, If the national judges chose to make sleeves
mandatory to prevent cheating, then are you saying that as a nation you
are all cheaters?
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
Tetragrammaton
news:Pine.LNX.4.63.06...@fiordland.cs.duke.edu...
>> After all I'm not looking for a perfect solution or I'd look, first of
>> all, for perfect players! or not? It's just a way to reduce cheating or
>> time loss checking problems, before they happen... it'll not solve all
>> the problem, but better than do nothing at all IMHO.
>
> I fundamentally disagree with your contention that it will reduce
> cheating.
>
>>> The above reasons can't be forcibly pushed onto players. For the last
>>> reason, there could be similar "unintentional" marked opaque sleeves.
Hello,
as a former magician and card trickster, i can tell you for sure that is
harder to
mark plastic opaque sleeves than cards with 3 different printed backgrounds.
Period
>>> For example, you have a subconscious tendency to fiddle with your
>>> reaction cards. That fiddling bends one corner of the sleeves more than
>>> usual. You notice this. You tell no one, because you're clearly using
>>> sleeves and therefore not cheating.
>>
>> Yeah for sure or use some infra red marker with special pair of
>> glasses... too James Bond play? Maybe, but we cannot prevent
>> everything... we try to reduce cheat gaps... if some one happens to cheat
>> without no one to know, good for him... we're playng vtes, not Pokemon :P
>
> Right. That's *exactly* the reason you don't need to resort to tactics
> that are at best insulting and ineffective against any true threat to fair
> play. Furthermore, you might make the issue worse: some people will walk
> into this "highly sterilized, cheat-free environment" and not notice
> cheating, thus giving cheaters more freedom.
>
Taking a measure against would be cheating (given the 3 different card
backgrounds) is better than taking no measure at all against it.
Furthemore, handling the checks for decks constructed with
three different printed background sets would be harder at best.
> Cheating is more difficult to detect with sleeves.
Untrue, unless you play with marked sleeves, that is equal
to play with marked un-sleeved cards - only difference lies in that
with 3 different background there will be less trouble and pain
to check would be marked sleeves, and not three different
backgrounds.
<snip>
regards
Emiliano, v:ekn Prince of Rome
Fred Scott
news:IkmMg.13405$6Z1....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
> Hello,
> as a former magician and card trickster, i can tell you for sure that is
> harder to mark plastic opaque sleeves than cards with 3 different printed
> backgrounds. Period
> Taking a measure against would be cheating (given the 3 different card
> backgrounds) is better than taking no measure at all against it.
I can appreciate your point of view as someone who knows about the
subject of marking cards. I just wanted to point out that the second
statement above is not an absolute. It depends on how likely one
thinks it is that people will try to cheat and on how one values the
freedom to not play with card sleeves. In short, your mileage may vary.
Fred
James Coupe
Jester <drjest...@gmail.com> writes:
>We're disussing it and trying to get European feedback about it...
>let's see... Maybe it'll be mandatory in the end...
If cheating is a problem, mandatory sleeves, if anything, make the
problem worse; people think the problem is solved, and cheaters have an
easier time cheating. Why do you want to make the problem worse?
If cheating isn't a problem, what at you trying to achieve with this?
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
James Coupe
<jfeu...@eecs.tufts.edu> writes:
>150 of each color sounds good to me.
>102 of each color would be "perfect", so you can use 90 of them for one deck,
>and 12 for another deck's crypt*.. But with 150 there's plenty of "broken
>sleeve replacement" room, and room to sleeve tupdog crypts :)
You probably want 110 or so - a few spares, and the problem I've had of
50 sleeves meaning something close to 50 (up or down) with some sets.
150 is overkill, but not a huge problem.
Kevin M.
>
> What the hell is a golf clap?
Fred, I swear to G-d you say these ridiculous things just to convince the
rest of us that you aren't as old as you really are. ;)
Kevin M., Prince of Las Vegas
"Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles
you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*
"Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier
Kevin M.
> Now for a general response to all those who say "cheaters will
> cheat". I don't believe that's true. I don't believe there are many
> real hardcore cheaters in the Jyhad world.
How do you stop cheating in the following ways, which you will be unable
to detect or prevent, and which are far more powerful than mere 'card
issues':
a. Influencing out a minion I already have in play, on purpose
b. Starting with 31 (or 32) pool
c. Clock-watching when there is very little time left
d. Table-talking when there is very little time left
e. "Accidentally" showing a card
f. Etc.
So, by the argument presented by the 'major' EU tournament organizers,
everyone should be assumed to be trying to cheat in these ways and they
should all be disallowed somehow, yes?
Judge at every table, then, eh?
Kevin M., Charter Member of the "Play. The. Game." Assn.
Orpheus
> to detect or prevent, and which are far more powerful than mere 'card
> issues':
>
> a. Influencing out a minion I already have in play, on purpose
What's the use ? Lose pool ?
> b. Starting with 31 (or 32) pool
Nicely ask players to put their pool 5 by 5, it helps a great deal. In some
tournies judges officially "encouraged" this and it worked quite well - not
only against cheating but also against unvoluntary mistakes, which can
happen too.
> c. Clock-watching when there is very little time left
There is a rule against stalling. Judges are there to enforce rules.
> d. Table-talking when there is very little time left
There is a rule against stalling. Judges are there to enforce rules.
> e. "Accidentally" showing a card
You're a big boy, it's up to you to take it into account or not. That's the
kind of cheating that will help you more often than not.
> f. Etc.
You just have to ad lib. ;-)
> So, by the argument presented by the 'major' EU tournament organizers,
> everyone should be assumed to be trying to cheat in these ways and they
> should all be disallowed somehow, yes?
Velly funny doctol Jones. Not in anyway accurate or close to anything I
suggested, though.
> Judge at every table, then, eh?
In big events, Judges go round and round, sometimes stay at tables for a
while, and are available whenever needed. We had wonderful judgements at
this year's french Open and Championship.
Hope that helps,
--
Duncan O'rpheus, of the O'rpheus clan from the scottish highlands.
Fred Scott
news:1dvMg.9367$cw.1213@fed1read03...
> Fred Scott <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>>
>> What the hell is a golf clap?
>
> Fred, I swear to G-d you say these ridiculous things just to convince the
> rest of us that you aren't as old as you really are. ;)
Well, it turns out the thing actually has to with, *choke* URG, GOLF!
That explains it: I don't involve myself in activities that have a
serious chance of BORING people to death!
Fred
(Now if had to do with the Clap, that'd be more interesting...)
Tetragrammaton
"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:2$aCF2Yjr...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk...
> In message <1157727762....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Dr
> Jester <drjest...@gmail.com> writes:
>>We're disussing it and trying to get European feedback about it...
>>let's see... Maybe it'll be mandatory in the end...
>
> If cheating is a problem, mandatory sleeves, if anything, make the
> problem worse; people think the problem is solved, and cheaters have an
> easier time cheating.
Why ? - Chaters would get just an hard time trying to cheat,
at least in respect of marking opaque sleeves.
Sure, people would be still vigilant in game matters (pools, card drawing
etc).
>Why do you want to make the problem worse?
Mandatory sleeves won't worse the problem -
they would just make marking of cards harder,
that's all.
regards
Emiliano
Kevin M.
>> How do you stop cheating in the following ways, which you will be
>> unable to detect or prevent, and which are far more powerful than
>> mere 'card issues':
>>
>> a. Influencing out a minion I already have in play, on purpose
>
> What's the use ? Lose pool ?
Good to know that you are unaware of how this may help me.
>> b. Starting with 31 (or 32) pool
>
> Nicely ask players to put their pool 5 by 5, it helps a great deal.
> In some tournies judges officially "encouraged" this and it worked
> quite well - not only against cheating but also against unvoluntary
> mistakes, which can happen too.
No, I won't put my pool in 5 x 5 sections. It is all in one pile, and you
can count it out as you please.
Oh, I also won't stop using pennies, which, of course, I stack.
>> c. Clock-watching when there is very little time left
>
> There is a rule against stalling. Judges are there to enforce rules.
>
>> d. Table-talking when there is very little time left
>
> There is a rule against stalling. Judges are there to enforce rules.
Try and enforce it when there are only 30 seconds left and I am "thinking"
about my next move, in order to get the 0.5vp.
>> e. "Accidentally" showing a card
>
> You're a big boy, it's up to you to take it into account or not.
> That's the kind of cheating that will help you more often than not.
Exactly.
>> So, by the argument presented by the 'major' EU tournament
>> organizers, everyone should be assumed to be trying to cheat in
>> these ways and they should all be disallowed somehow, yes?
>
> Velly funny doctol Jones. Not in anyway accurate or close to anything
> I suggested, though.
EXACTLY as you specified, in that you do not force at the point of a gun
all kinds of additional "rules" to cover every scenario which you assume
players to be doing; rather, you let the players play the game and add
these rules 'as needed'.
James Coupe
<nos...@none.com> writes:
>
>"James Coupe" <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:2$aCF2Yjr...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk...
>> In message <1157727762....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Dr
>> Jester <drjest...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>We're disussing it and trying to get European feedback about it...
>>>let's see... Maybe it'll be mandatory in the end...
>>
>> If cheating is a problem, mandatory sleeves, if anything, make the
>> problem worse; people think the problem is solved, and cheaters have an
>> easier time cheating.
>
>Why ? - Chaters would get just an hard time trying to cheat,
>at least in respect of marking opaque sleeves.
>Sure, people would be still vigilant in game matters (pools, card drawing
>etc).
As demonstrated by this thread, there are a hell of a lot of people who
think that sleeves somehow stop you having a marked deck. The reverse
is true.
Now, the cheaters who wanted to cheat using sleeves before can carry on
cheating as before. However, the general level of awareness of even the
possibility of cheating goes down as a bunch of people who haven't even
thought about the problem suddenly think it's gone away.
>>Why do you want to make the problem worse?
>
>Mandatory sleeves won't worse the problem -
>they would just make marking of cards harder,
>that's all.
I submit this thread in general as evidence that too many players think
that sleeves stop you marking a deck, lowering the chance of it being
thought about, let alone detected.
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
Robert Scythe escreveu:
> Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote:
>
> > You get used to it after a while, it conserves (is it the right verb?)
> > cards and makes shuffling easier.
>
> I believe you want 'preserves'.
There. Thanks :) One of those situations where the verb in local
language is very similar to an English verb but the latter doesn't
sound quite right.
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Dr Jester
them hard time. If you're a really trickster or CIA Agent, may be you
can use some kind of almost invisible marker on the sleeves... but if
no one knows, I think it'd be almost impossible for a judge to find
out...
We're, however, asking WW for an official answer about the possibilty
for us to make the sleeves mandatory, just to know if we're disccusing
on nothing! ;)