BL Rarity Sucks (Opened 2 boxes)
PeterM
after opening 2 boxes (15 to be exact) plus the 4 boosters in the
draft, I am shocked at the number of commons and uncommons I got.
U1 vampires. I got as many as 5 (Ublo-Satha) to NONE for Saxum, Wolf
Valentine, Jerry, Ilse, Erinyl!!! That's ridiculous after 2 boxes
IMNSHO.
U2 cards, ranged from as little as 2 in a few cases to 7-8.
C1 cards. the numbers ranged from 4-8 total after 2 boxes. so 2-4 C1
cards per box? doesn't seem common to me.
C2 cards. ranged from 8-14 or so again considering 2 boxes.
The other main observation I had was I opened the boxes and left the
cards in order as they were in the booster. As I began to sort the
cards, I noticed I was getting A LOT of *certain* cards, and very
little of others. By the time I was halfway through sorting and "into
the second box" I more or less noticed the reverse trend, luckily
starting to get more of the cards I wasn't getting.
IOW I believe I opened about a box and got 1, maybe 2 Repulsions (U1),
but by the time I was finished I had 6. Ditto for Missing Voice. 2-3
Initally, by the end 8.
What's up with that?
Halcyan 2
>cards in order as they were in the booster. As I began to sort the
>cards, I noticed I was getting A LOT of *certain* cards, and very
>little of others. By the time I was halfway through sorting and "into
>the second box" I more or less noticed the reverse trend, luckily
>starting to get more of the cards I wasn't getting.
>IOW I believe I opened about a box and got 1, maybe 2 Repulsions (U1),
>but by the time I was finished I had 6. Ditto for Missing Voice. 2-3
>Initally, by the end 8.
>
>What's up with that?
Didn't we also see a lot of this in Sabbat War or something? A lot of the cards
seemed to be clumped (alphabetically) so you'd have all the cards for some part
of the alphabet (say A-G) but would have like nothing from some other parts
(N-U).
Halcyan 2
pallando
"PeterM" <pete...@icqmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:5802b3d0.01120...@posting.google.com...
> Well frankly I'm dissapointed. While I expected to be missing rares,
> after opening 2 boxes (15 to be exact) plus the 4 boosters in the
> draft, I am shocked at the number of commons and uncommons I got.
>
>
> What's up with that?
there is a good strategy against this phenomenon. open a lot of boxes. i
don't mean buy a lot of boxes. just pool yours with those of one, two or
three friends. open all the boxes and split up the cards as evenly as
possible. in this way you'll get a near perfect distribution of cards.
if you want to be on the safe side make sure that the boxes come from more
than on case. i'm not sure it really makes a difference but it is fairly
easy to do.
we openened 10 boxes in this way. after that we had 144 R1 cards which is
exactly 40% of the rares. the number of R1 per box was a steady 14 or 15.
there were usually 10 or so of each U1 and about twice that number of each
U2.
of course this method won't deliver you a number of rares that is divisible
through any number of participants. but it works well for commons and
uncommons, and gives you a good starting position for the rares. there will
be some leftover rares but i'm sure everyone can devise a strategy to split
up those cards.
last but not least opening boosters and sorting cards is so much more fun if
done in a group. "hey, look at this cool card, it ..."
regards
pallando
Flux
> Didn't we also see a lot of this in Sabbat War or something? A lot of the cards
I'll tell you one thing I already saw in BL that reminds me of SW: I've seen a couple of boosters with only
10 cards, at least one with 12, and one with one of the commons replaced by what appears to be a
Rumble Robots promo misprint...
Flux
Carsten isselhorst
>
> Well frankly I'm dissapointed. While I expected to be missing rares,
> after opening 2 boxes (15 to be exact) plus the 4 boosters in the
> draft, I am shocked at the number of commons and uncommons I got.
>
I opened only 1 box and i was surprised that i got all commons and
uncommons as well as 30 different rares, so I think that there isn't so
much clumping. It seems the cards are distributed well ( or I had good
luck :) ).
One has to see if the distribution is really a problem by the time when
a lot of displays have been opened.
Callan O'Donohoe
seemed that some boxes were predisposed towards some bloodlines and their
cards than others.
apart from that the mix of cards is much better than DS.
"PeterM" <pete...@icqmail.com> wrote in message
news:5802b3d0.01120...@posting.google.com...
PeterM
>
> Didn't we also see a lot of this in Sabbat War or something? A lot of the cards
> seemed to be clumped (alphabetically) so you'd have all the cards for some part
> of the alphabet (say A-G) but would have like nothing from some other parts
> (N-U).
That's pretty much what I noticed. Though I'm not sure if it was
alphabetically related, I still find it unbelievable I'm missing 5
uncommon vamps after 2-plus boxes. That's just not cool.
Aaron
> last but not least opening boosters and sorting cards is so much more fun if
> done in a group. "hey, look at this cool card, it ..."
Opening boxes in a group also can have a very good cost/effect for all
people involved, as we found out at gencon. After playing a sealed
event, we had 1 box of VTES and 4 people. At first we thought there
were going to be problems dividing them up(all drafts should be
re-drafted if time allows. That keeps people from drafting out all
the rares. When you are done, gather all the rares and re-draft them
for fairness)
After we pulled out all the rares, we put it to who had the most VP in
the tournament. The 3 of us then pulled 1 rare at a time. Well since
different people wanted different cards it ended up being a great
deal. If possible I will open boxes in a group again.
Imagine you get 3 people together, and buy 3 boxes of bloodlines.
Open one and take out the rares. I go first and we rotate till they
are all gone. Now I have 1/3 of a box. But the real great thing is,
I'm trying to get Blood brothers and gargoyles, while someone else is
trying to draft samedi and Trujah, and the other guy wants baali and
Kiasid. After 3 boxes, you all have strong decks, and not as much
junk. Works well for collectors trying to get 3-4 cards from a set or
new players. Usually they can trade 1-2 of their rare picks for
double their regular uncommons/commons. Giving them more to play
with, and me less to carry around. Look for friends with different
agendas, and it will work out well.
Aaron
James Coupe
<roans...@yahoo.com> writes:
>"pallando" <pall...@gmx.at> wrote:
>> last but not least opening boosters and sorting cards is so much more fun if
>> done in a group. "hey, look at this cool card, it ..."
>
>Opening boxes in a group also can have a very good cost/effect for all
>people involved, as we found out at gencon. After playing a sealed
>event, we had 1 box of VTES and 4 people.
What has long been a useful way of combating the fact that all
mechanical randomisation processes have some inadequacies is to go along
and buy your box with friends. If you're each buying a box, buy three
boxes between the three of you (say). Then dole out roughly one third
of the boosters from each box, so you each get the right amount in the
end.
--
James Coupe When correctly viewed
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D Everything is lewd
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 I could tell you things about Peter Pan
13D7E668C3695D623D5D And the Wizard of Oz, there's a dirty old man
Sorrow
> mechanical randomisation processes have some inadequacies is to go along
> and buy your box with friends. If you're each buying a box, buy three
> boxes between the three of you (say). Then dole out roughly one third
> of the boosters from each box, so you each get the right amount in the
> end.
Except that this problem has cropped up in Sabbat War, was still evident
in Final Nights and we're starting to hear about the same thing happening
in Bloodlines. While I will admit that there can be mechanical failure some
times, you would think that measures would have been taken to reduce the
probability of this happening.
I don't know about you, but when I opened the boxes of Final Nights I
purchased (2 boosters, 1 starter), I ended up with roughly the following:
15 each of 8 or 9 different, distinct, commons
8 each of 4 or 5 different, distinct, commons
4 each of 5 or 6 different, distinct, uncommons
2 each of 1 or 2 different, distinct, uncommons
1 each of 6 or 7 different, distinct, uncommons
wtf?
With such crappy distribution, there was no way in hell that I was going to
go out and buy more boosters. I ended up filling out my collection and
getting the cards (common through rare) from secondary markets. It was
surprising to me that I couldn't even get a full set of *commons*. It wasn't
_that_ large of an expansion. If this continues, it won't be worth it for me
to get even a box for future expansions and just get *all* the cards I need
from the secondary market. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels
this way. In the end, this is only going to hurt WW. They *really* need
to get this rectified...
Sorrow
---
"Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War.
Our war is a spiritual war. Our depression is our lives."
- Tyler Durden
freakdrivr
Peter (Prince of Toronto) and I bought 4 boxes between us - (144 rares) fine...
between us we're still missing 5 cards. that's pretty insane...
jds
Halcyan 2
>8 each of 4 or 5 different, distinct, commons
>4 each of 5 or 6 different, distinct, uncommons
>2 each of 1 or 2 different, distinct, uncommons
>1 each of 6 or 7 different, distinct, uncommons
>
>wtf?
>With such crappy distribution, there was no way in hell that I was going to
>go out and buy more boosters. I ended up filling out my collection and
>getting the cards (common through rare) from secondary markets. It was
>surprising to me that I couldn't even get a full set of *commons*. It wasn't
>_that_ large of an expansion. If this continues, it won't be worth it for me
>to get even a box for future expansions and just get *all* the cards I need
>from the secondary market. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels
>this way. In the end, this is only going to hurt WW. They *really* need
>to get this rectified...
Really? I thought Final Nights was pretty good. I bought a single box of
boosters and ended up with an entire set of all the common and uncommon cards
so that was pretty cool. Now as for the rares... =P
Halcyan 2
Curevei
>fine...
>
>between us we're still missing 5 cards. that's pretty insane...
No, it isn't. Putting aside the actual probability calculations and just
approximating, 4 boxes is about right (rounding off to the nearest box) for a
set like FN that had 46/8 to get close to or to complete a set with no trading.
Bloodlines bears little resemblance to FN.
Anyone completing a set just by opening up 4 boxes got lucky.
"He's a ... he's a reverse vampire. They ... they crave the Sun."
Shaun McIsaac
> Well frankly I'm dissapointed. While I expected to be missing rares,
> after opening 2 boxes (15 to be exact) plus the 4 boosters in the
> draft, I am shocked at the number of commons and uncommons I got.
>
> U1 vampires. I got as many as 5 (Ublo-Satha) to NONE for Saxum, Wolf
> Valentine, Jerry, Ilse, Erinyl!!! That's ridiculous after 2 boxes
> IMNSHO.
> What's up with that?
That's nothing. I opened a box and 1/5th of the cards are *USELESS*
to me b/c I didn't pull enough Salubri or *any* True Brujah.
Money^H^H^H^H^HWhite Wolf, in their infinite accounting wisdom, made
all the scarce vampires rare as well, so you need to open around 3
boxes to get enough Trujah/Salubri to make a competitive deck using
Obeah or Temporis. If you don't, a good 1/5th of the BL cards are
going to be useless. The standard discipline versions of cards
requiring temporis largely aren't worth playing (exhibit A, rewind
time - 2 blood to reduce a bleed by 1? Blood doll back twice and
you're 1 blood better, without an untapped pre vamp). You can use The
Stranger Among Us to reduce the need for Scarce vamps in the crypt,
but this means playing multiple copies of card (to ensure you see it)
that isn't useful the second time you draw it. It would be like
playing 5 of a particular HG. Your deck might need that first one but
2-5 rather suck. Alternatively you can play 4-5 of the scarce
vampires, which gives you a good chance of seeing one in the opening
crypt. The scarce mechanic keeps you from playing more, but that's
fine.
That mechanic, when combined with only having 3 Trujah to begin with,
would have been enough to keep people from playing a crypt with a
single BL clan. Making the vampires rare too means that you either:
A) Spend a *lot* on packs. At least $150 to get the three scarce
clans.
B) Don't bother with BLs. About 20% of the cards are useless before
you read their text.
Sets like this make the game *VERY* unfriendly to new players. It
reminds me a lot of the early runs of the 1st Star Wars CCG. There
were many cards in that game that required Darth Vader, Luke, Obi Wan,
(aka the "mains"). People who weren't interested in plunking down
more than $200 didn't stand the slightest of chances of being able to
play decks based on those cards, because the mains were of course
rare. Thankfully, BLs avoided one of the pitfalls of Star Wars in
that the BL cards aren't way more powerful than those of the other
sets.
I do hope there is improvement in the Camarilla set.
Stefan Ferenci
cards only 3 times is a sign of
a bad distributed set and a rarity scheme that was created to rip people
off.
stefan
"Curevei" <cur...@aol.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:20011204142246...@mb-ft.aol.com...
Mark Allen
got all the rares. Even more shock was that I got exactly what the
bloodlines checklist said I should get ie. one per sheet, two per sheet. My
numbers check out perfect. I think you just got a bad 'packing order' of
boosters.
"PeterM" <pete...@icqmail.com> wrote in message
news:5802b3d0.01120...@posting.google.com...
Derek Ray
smci...@onesourcecorp.com (Shaun McIsaac) mumbled something about:
>That's nothing. I opened a box and 1/5th of the cards are *USELESS*
>to me b/c I didn't pull enough Salubri or *any* True Brujah.
This surprises me, actually. I have two boxes en route; it'll be
curious to see what sort of distribution I hit.
>Money^H^H^H^H^HWhite Wolf, in their infinite accounting wisdom, made
Now I *KNOW* V:TES is doing well. People are pissing and moaning about
money and cost. It simply isn't a "real" CCG, oops, TCG, if someone
isn't bitching about how the parent company isn't out to screw everyone.
Welcome back to the big time, V:TES. =)
Just like online Quake is full of auto-aim bots, and anyone who kills
you must be using one, right? Or all backgammon programs "clearly"
override the random number generator to get exactly the rolls they need
at the right time.
>all the scarce vampires rare as well, so you need to open around 3
Currently, I'm delighted with the idea.
I would much rather see the scarce vamps rare, than have them be
uncommon and me sitting staring at six to eight copies of Blanche Hill.
I will NEVER need more than four copies of her (or any scarce vamp) --
and I will probably do fairly well with only 2 copies of each, as I can
plug Blanche and Matthias in to avoid duplication (just in case I want
to bring a second scarce vamp out, or get mine burned via Force of Will
or something).
>boxes to get enough Trujah/Salubri to make a competitive deck using
>Obeah or Temporis. If you don't, a good 1/5th of the BL cards are
>going to be useless. The standard discipline versions of cards
>requiring temporis largely aren't worth playing (exhibit A, rewind
>time - 2 blood to reduce a bleed by 1? Blood doll back twice and
Serves you right for trying to make a Rewind Time deck in the first
place, doesn't it? Lesson: overfocussing your deck is not always the
correct approach.
And I will disagree with you on at least three cards: Renewed Vigor's
inferior-out is equivalent to basic Restoration. This action is never
BAD. Spirit Marionette's inferior-out reads "bleed at +1", which also
is never bad. Repulsion's inferior-out kicks ass for Presence, and can
always be freely cycled.
Of course, I just listed a bunch of Obeah cards, didn't I? Oops.
Anyway, the point still holds, as the Salubri are ALSO scarce.
I suggest waiting until you have more than just exhibit "A" available.
>you're 1 blood better, without an untapped pre vamp). You can use The
>Stranger Among Us to reduce the need for Scarce vamps in the crypt,
I wouldn't go THAT far, although one or two copies included in a deck is
probably a good idea.
>but this means playing multiple copies of card (to ensure you see it)
>that isn't useful the second time you draw it. It would be like
>playing 5 of a particular HG. Your deck might need that first one but
>2-5 rather suck. Alternatively you can play 4-5 of the scarce
>vampires, which gives you a good chance of seeing one in the opening
>crypt. The scarce mechanic keeps you from playing more, but that's
>fine.
This is the approach I will/would use, and it works rather effectively
(4/12 works out to about 86% chance of getting one in your opening
crypt; well out of the reach of anything except astonishing bad luck).
>That mechanic, when combined with only having 3 Trujah to begin with,
>would have been enough to keep people from playing a crypt with a
>single BL clan. Making the vampires rare too means that you either:
>A) Spend a *lot* on packs. At least $150 to get the three scarce
>clans.
Disposable income. CCGs are a "luxury" game. Their market isn't the
starving artist types, it's the "gamer" crowd, most of whom have
obnoxiously lots of disposable income.
>B) Don't bother with BLs. About 20% of the cards are useless before
>you read their text.
I don't know about you, but most of the cards I saw at the pre-release
had an inferior-out that was either:
A) identical to an existing effect for that discipline (Renewed Vigor,
inferior-out requires Fortitude, identical to Restoration), or
B) a completely new effect for that discipline (Absorb the Mind,
inferior-out requires Dominate, "Strike: Dodge")
This doesn't strike me as "useless" by a long shot.
>Sets like this make the game *VERY* unfriendly to new players. It
Sets like this are not intended for new players. New players should go
spend their money on Sabbat War, or V:TES/Jyhad boxes, or even Final
Nights. Or the new Cammie set, when it finally gets here.
These are intended as "support" for existing clans. One would expect
that one would have some of the existing clans FIRST.
--
Derek
...Vampire Squirrel has come to bite your nuts!
GreySeer
> starving artist types, it's the "gamer" crowd, most of whom have
> obnoxiously lots of disposable income.
Don't know about that, they just tend to be obsessive I think. You know,
buying boxes of bloodlines and then having to live off pot noodles for a
month :)
> >B) Don't bother with BLs. About 20% of the cards are useless before
> >you read their text.
>
> I don't know about you, but most of the cards I saw at the pre-release
> had an inferior-out that was either:
>
> A) identical to an existing effect for that discipline (Renewed Vigor,
> inferior-out requires Fortitude, identical to Restoration), or
>
> B) a completely new effect for that discipline (Absorb the Mind,
> inferior-out requires Dominate, "Strike: Dodge")
>
> This doesn't strike me as "useless" by a long shot.
Most of them have inferiors of "normal" disciplines that either give them
something they don't have ( like a Dominate dodge ) or isn't quite as good
as an existing card that you would use but is still useful. Psychomacia at
pre does the same as, but isn't as good as Change of Target. The BL
discipline versions also seem to be geared towards not needing a lot of them
either or at least enabling you to reduce the number of cards required to
support it. Nose of the Hound being a good example. If you use it's spi or
SPI you need fewer manuver cards.
> >Sets like this make the game *VERY* unfriendly to new players. It
>
> Sets like this are not intended for new players. New players should go
> spend their money on Sabbat War, or V:TES/Jyhad boxes, or even Final
> Nights. Or the new Cammie set, when it finally gets here.
>
> These are intended as "support" for existing clans. One would expect
> that one would have some of the existing clans FIRST.
A few of the BL are playable on their own, but yes, generally they are meant
to support other clans, which I think it does well.
X_Zealot
> you read their text.
I love this comment. Not only have you hit the nail on the head, but I
think you have sold yourself short. I think that all the cards from VTES in
all the expansions are 100% useless before you read their text. In fact,
if you are illiterate, then you can't play VTES. This would probably
explain why there is such a high play ratio of European players to American
players. Please for heaven sake, Read the Cards!! This might be the reason
you are having such a hard time with bloodlines. I hope this helps.
Comments Welcome,
Norman S. Brown, Jr.
XZealot
Archon of the Swamp
GreySeer
news:6ViP7.88636$8n4.6...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
You implying that a lot of Americans are illiterate, I'll agree with that :)
Hmm, I might try getting foreign language versions of cards ( do they make
em? ) just to confuse everyone :)
David
I bought 5 boosters yesterday, one of them had 14 cards (5 vampires),
another one 8 cards (no vampire) and one 10 cards (missing an unco),
the last two boosters had 11 cards !!!!!!!!
Bad luck or what ?!?
It sucks
Tetragrammaton
news:uokq0usql7rhkunno...@4ax.com...
> In message <8f507d2e.01120...@posting.google.com>,
> smci...@onesourcecorp.com (Shaun McIsaac) mumbled something about:
> Now I *KNOW* V:TES is doing well. People are pissing and moaning about
> money and cost. It simply isn't a "real" CCG, oops, TCG, if someone
> isn't bitching about how the parent company isn't out to screw everyone.
> Welcome back to the big time, V:TES. =)
One thing is to have a "real" CCG. The other is to open boosters
and find less cards than you expected to find in those boosters.
That's happened the 7 times, when me and a friend of mine opened
a box of SW boosters (actually, missing all the rares in those boosters and
some of the uncommons).
So you would do better believing and put more care about
all of these "pissing & moaning", since in "real" CCG these nasty things
don't happen, usually.
Or, at least, don't happen more than once.
But, as i read from other players on this thread,
with BL we're going to get blatant errors in distribution of cards in
booster again..
And, to aother point, with "real" CCG, one doesn't get a cavalcade of
all-looking-the-same-vampires, painted
by the same artist, to spare money and keeping low the cost, but so HIGH the
% of rarities
in the whole sets.
> Just like online Quake is full of auto-aim bots, and anyone who kills
> you must be using one, right? Or all backgammon programs "clearly"
> override the random number generator to get exactly the rolls they need
> at the right time.
This is not the point.
You're dealing with sincere players' observations as with
senseless children's cry.
This is not a good approach, i think.
Just my thought
Emiliano
Ps: and I play Unreal Tournament only, Quake sucks...;)
<snip>
Ben Peal
- Ben Peal, Prince of Boston
fu...@mindstorm.com
Halcyan 2
I agree that the distribution really sucks!
It's rather annoying when you open a booster pack, and among the 7 common
cards, you end up with 3 copies of the same card!
And even within my box of BL, I ended up with many duplicate rares. I never had
that problem with SW or FN (I guess the R2's are really R2's then).
I am glad I ended up with a decent amount of the scarce vampires though. 1
Nagaraja, 2 Trujah, and 2 copies each of 2 Salubri (2 x Matthias, 2 x Miriam).
Besides the Salubri duplicates, I did end up with quite a handful of duplicate
rares, which was rather annoying. 2 Basilisk's Touch, 2 Echo of Harmonies, 2
Herald of Topheth, etc.
BTW: #1. Does superior Echo of Harmonies bypass any title restrictions that
vote card may have?
#2. I'm a little confused about Falcon's Eye and the whole "normal prey,
predator, or target restrictions" thingy. Is it just like Eagle's Sight?
LSJ
> BTW: #1. Does superior Echo of Harmonies bypass any title restrictions that
> vote card may have?
No. You have to meet the requirements (clan, title, sect, whatever). And you
pay the cost (if any). And you get the inherent vote (which counts as your
1 PA vote).
> #2. I'm a little confused about Falcon's Eye and the whole "normal prey,
> predator, or target restrictions" thingy. Is it just like Eagle's Sight?
Yes, except that blocking is non-optional.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Jon Stahler
"Mark Allen" <alle...@home.com> wrote in message
news:2wgP7.1210$iO6.9...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
> Strange. I had completely the opposite experience. I opened 3 boosters
and
> got all the rares. Even more shock was that I got exactly what the
> bloodlines checklist said I should get ie. one per sheet, two per sheet.
My
> numbers check out perfect. I think you just got a bad 'packing order' of
> boosters.
>
rares (and didn't expect to), I did get one each of the Trujah, Nagaraja,
and was only one short for a complete Salubri run. In fact, I'm really only
a few rares away from a complete set (about 10 shy).
Granted, I only got 5 Slaughterhouses, but still...how many do I really
need.
(Here's the comment that will undoubtedly get me in a lot of trouble here)
(Some of) You people b!+ch too much...just enjoy the game (and trade, trade,
TRADE!!!).
Derek Ray
"Tetragrammaton" <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> mumbled something
about:
>"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:uokq0usql7rhkunno...@4ax.com...
>> In message <8f507d2e.01120...@posting.google.com>,
>> smci...@onesourcecorp.com (Shaun McIsaac) mumbled something about:
><snip>
>
>> Now I *KNOW* V:TES is doing well. People are pissing and moaning about
>> money and cost. It simply isn't a "real" CCG, oops, TCG, if someone
>> isn't bitching about how the parent company isn't out to screw everyone.
>> Welcome back to the big time, V:TES. =)
>
>One thing is to have a "real" CCG. The other is to open boosters
>and find less cards than you expected to find in those boosters.
>That's happened the 7 times, when me and a friend of mine opened
>a box of SW boosters (actually, missing all the rares in those boosters and
>some of the uncommons).
That is the fault of the printer, not the fault of WW. I'm sure that
issue has long since been resolved (by WW either finding another
printer, or bitching to the current printer such that those errors do
not happen again). I'm sorry that you got screwed by the printer, but
I'm sure it came as a surprise to WW as well.
Blaming the game for an incompetent printing company is just about as
dumb as it gets.
>So you would do better believing and put more care about
>all of these "pissing & moaning", since in "real" CCG these nasty things
>don't happen, usually.
Horseshit.
>Or, at least, don't happen more than once.
Unbelievable Horseshit.
>But, as i read from other players on this thread,
>with BL we're going to get blatant errors in distribution of cards in
>booster again..
It's called "random distribution being truly random". I had strange
distribution in FN too -- I got NONE of certain R2s, R1s, etc. Did I
whine? No, I just traded, and I'm VERY happy with what I have right
now.
>And, to aother point, with "real" CCG, one doesn't get a cavalcade of
>all-looking-the-same-vampires, painted
>by the same artist, to spare money and keeping low the cost, but so HIGH the
>% of rarities
>in the whole sets.
There is a certain logic to using Shy for so much of the art,
unfortunately; he's done a lot of Vampire art in the past for WW, and
he's apparently popular among the V:tM crowd. The artwork being the
same then becomes an additional marketing tool.
I personally think he needs to wake up and discover "color" and
"texture", and so do a lot of people, but we could well be in the
minority.
>> Just like online Quake is full of auto-aim bots, and anyone who kills
>> you must be using one, right? Or all backgammon programs "clearly"
>> override the random number generator to get exactly the rolls they need
>> at the right time.
>
>This is not the point.
Really? I think it is, myself. "Wah, we can't get all the rares and
make a complete set for only $100! Waaaaahhh!"
If it were that easy, what would be the point?
>You're dealing with sincere players' observations as with
>senseless children's cry.
>This is not a good approach, i think.
You can be sincerely senseless as well as just sincere, too.
X_Zealot
>
> You implying that a lot of Americans are illiterate, I'll agree with that
:)
>
I wish this was a joke, believe me; it is not.
XZ
James Coupe
<lor...@yahoo.com> writes:
>>But, as i read from other players on this thread,
>>with BL we're going to get blatant errors in distribution of cards in
>>booster again..
>
>It's called "random distribution being truly random". I had strange
>distribution in FN too -- I got NONE of certain R2s, R1s, etc. Did I
>whine?
I've just been out and bought my first boxes.
I'll sit down and do a chi-squared test on the rares, if anyone's
bothered.
Gomi no Sensei
James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
>I've just been out and bought my first boxes.
>
>I'll sit down and do a chi-squared test on the rares, if anyone's
>bothered.
Please do.
gomi
pronounces it 'CHEE-squared' just to annoy the wife
--
Blood, guts, guns, cuts
Knives, lives, wives, nuns, sluts
Joshua Duffin
"Gomi no Sensei" <go...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:9ulkpf$17v$1...@panix1.panix.com...
> In article <HddlcNxF...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk>,
> James Coupe <ja...@zephyr.org.uk> wrote:
>
> >I've just been out and bought my first boxes.
> >
> >I'll sit down and do a chi-squared test on the rares, if anyone's
> >bothered.
>
> Please do.
>
> gomi
> pronounces it 'CHEE-squared' just to annoy the wife
It amuses me to think that your wife can be annoyed by that.
:-)
You're going to do a chi-squared test on your own
distribution too, right gomi?
Josh
and what if it doesn't look random from the test? we
already know it's not, truly...
Frederick Scott
>
> In message <klhs0u0hmlk8sujnj...@4ax.com>, Derek Ray
> <lor...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>But, as i read from other players on this thread,
> >>with BL we're going to get blatant errors in distribution of cards in
> >>booster again..
> >
> >It's called "random distribution being truly random". I had strange
> >distribution in FN too -- I got NONE of certain R2s, R1s, etc. Did I
> >whine?
>
> I've just been out and bought my first boxes.
>
> I'll sit down and do a chi-squared test on the rares, if anyone's
> bothered.
Sheesh, I got my degree too long ago. I can't even begin to remember
what this is.
But if it's a way of testing randomness of events/distribution (as the
context suggests), please do. I'd love to see how the Bloodlines
distribution stacks up.
I think the expectations and preferences of most players is that the
distribution actually be non-random - in terms of being biased towards
having as few copies of each type of card within each box as possible
for the rarity level of that card. Players might be seeing real clumping
but I wouldn't be totally surprised if they were just seeing true
randomness and are disappointed with it.
Fred
Shaun McIsaac
> In message <8f507d2e.01120...@posting.google.com>,
> smci...@onesourcecorp.com (Shaun McIsaac) mumbled something about:
>
> >That's nothing. I opened a box and 1/5th of the cards are *USELESS*
> >to me b/c I didn't pull enough Salubri or *any* True Brujah.
>
> This surprises me, actually. I have two boxes en route; it'll be
> curious to see what sort of distribution I hit.
> >Money^H^H^H^H^HWhite Wolf, in their infinite accounting wisdom, made
><flames deleted>
Yah, fuck you too.
> >all the scarce vampires rare as well, so you need to open around 3
> Currently, I'm delighted with the idea.
>
> I would much rather see the scarce vamps rare, than have them be
> uncommon and me sitting staring at six to eight copies of Blanche Hill.
> I will NEVER need more than four copies of her (or any scarce vamp) --
When was the last time you played a serious deck with "six to eight"
copies of one vampire? Or even five?
> >boxes to get enough Trujah/Salubri to make a competitive deck using
> >Obeah or Temporis. If you don't, a good 1/5th of the BL cards are
> >going to be useless. The standard discipline versions of cards
> >requiring temporis largely aren't worth playing (exhibit A, rewind
> >time - 2 blood to reduce a bleed by 1? Blood doll back twice and
> Serves you right for trying to make a Rewind Time deck in the first
It hadn't crossed my mind to make a deck based around a card that cost
2 blood for a clan that doesn't have particularly great blood gain
(though the assembly is rather nice). However I wouldn't mind being
able to play a domain of evernight or RT in a deck. They're neat
cards. I think I should be able to use them.
> place, doesn't it? Lesson: overfocussing your deck is not always the
> correct approach.
Who's said anything about focusing? I'm not going to include even 1
copy of a card I can't play. Packing in cards you consistently can
not use isn't toolboxing, it's bad deck design.
> And I will disagree with you on at least three cards: Renewed Vigor's
> inferior-out is equivalent to basic Restoration. This action is never
> BAD.
Unfortunately for that argument, restoration is crap too IMO. You're
pitching a card for 1 blood (at inferior). If that was good then so
is ascendance. Perhaps you were thinking of Rapid Healing? The only
saving grace here is that if it's blocked there's no free lunch as
there is with the leave torpor action.
> Spirit Marionette's inferior-out reads "bleed at +1", which also
> is never bad.
Never was a scouting mission fan myself, though this is an improvement
over a "restoration". The Obeah off clan cards are considerably
better than the Temporis ones, so far as I've seen.
> Repulsion's inferior-out kicks ass for Presence, and can
> always be freely cycled.
Which pre clan was short on manuevers?
> Of course, I just listed a bunch of Obeah cards, didn't I? Oops.
> Anyway, the point still holds, as the Salubri are ALSO scarce.
> I suggest waiting until you have more than just exhibit "A" available.
I do, however I have no intention of going over more than that.
> >That mechanic, when combined with only having 3 Trujah to begin with,
> >would have been enough to keep people from playing a crypt with a
> >single BL clan. Making the vampires rare too means that you either:
> >A) Spend a *lot* on packs. At least $150 to get the three scarce
> >clans.
>
> Disposable income. CCGs are a "luxury" game. Their market isn't the
> starving artist types, it's the "gamer" crowd, most of whom have
> obnoxiously lots of disposable income.
A) In case you haven't noticed, there is a recession going on.
B) Of the few dozen regulars in our area, the majority are college
students -- 96% of all college students know how to stretch $4.37 into
5 meals -- you figure it out.
C) When you go to truly large tournament (minimum 200 players), you
still don't see an overwhelming number of people with cash falling out
of their wallets.
D) Imposing start up costs are *NOT* a good way to get more people
into the game.
> >B) Don't bother with BLs. About 20% of the cards are useless before
> >you read their text.
>
> I don't know about you, but most of the cards I saw at the pre-release
> had an inferior-out that was either:
>
> A) identical to an existing effect for that discipline (Renewed Vigor,
> inferior-out requires Fortitude, identical to Restoration), or
Which means that they are *still useless* if you can't use the BL
discipline, because the cards they mimic do have a superior that you
can use for another, potentially greater, effect. Spirit Marionette
is orders of magnitude weaker than Scouting Mission if you have at
least some DOM and no obeah.
> B) a completely new effect for that discipline (Absorb the Mind,
> inferior-out requires Dominate, "Strike: Dodge")
There's already a S:D for dom minions. It's called dodge. The "do
not replace" line is largely unimportant. There are a few truly new
effects, and even less you'd want to play for just the off clan
inferior.
> >Sets like this make the game *VERY* unfriendly to new players. It
> Sets like this are not intended for new players. New players should go
> spend their money on Sabbat War, or V:TES/Jyhad boxes, or even Final
> Nights. Or the new Cammie set, when it finally gets here.
*mumbles something about portal and starter*
Well this is a wonderful attitude if you want to keep the game
relegated to a relatively tiny market with no more than a few 100
players worldwide. I for one wouldn't mind seeing tournaments that
draw more than 32 players on a regular basis. I also wouldn't mind it
if people would drop the elitist attitude, but I'm not holding my
breath.
Jason Bell
"Derek Ray" <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote
>
> Really? I think it is, myself. "Wah, we can't get all the rares and
> make a complete set for only $100! Waaaaahhh!"
>
> If it were that easy, what would be the point?
Wow.
That's as crushing an indictment of V:tES and CCG's in general
as I've ever heard.
- Jason Bell
Jason Bell
"Tetragrammaton" <nospam_a...@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> Just my thought
>
> Emiliano
>
> Ps: and I play Unreal Tournament only, Quake sucks...;)
Ha, I think I've seen you on UT as Tetragrammaton.
I'm mere mortal, in case you remember seeing me.
- Jason Bell