The Next VTES set is named....
Atom Weaver
"Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
listed on the preorder form, starters are not.
Begin Wild Conjecture
Ready...Steady...GO!
Regards,
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
brokenstep
"Atom Weaver" <atomw...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1134004792.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
IT"S ABOUT VAMPIRES1111
brokenstep
Name Withheld
> news:1134004792.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > The latest White Wolf Quarterly lists the name of the next VTES set;
> >
> > "Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
> > listed on the preorder form, starters are not.
> >
> > Begin Wild Conjecture
> >
> > Ready...Steady...GO!
I think it sounds like more Gehenna related stuff. Since it was the Year of
Reckoning and all.
My guess.
Neil
Defender of Ra
Atom Weaver wrote:
> The latest White Wolf Quarterly lists the name of the next VTES set;
>
> "Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
> listed on the preorder form, starters are not.
God I hate Gehenna. And Caine. It was a very, very useful little bit of
stupidity back inna date, but WW simply doesn't have a handle on the
concept of a myth. Do you realize that Dark Ages was a *better*
sourcebook because even though Caine's myth was omnipresent, Caine
himself was *not* so the game was playable without vast amounts of
inane plot devices and sanctimonious bs? But I digress.
The Reckoning line in WW was about Hunters. The line presented Hunters
in a rather implausible way as they never had the wherewithal to
organize formally. They were a recent phenomenon, I think brought on by
Gehenna. There is no good reason why they were isolated from Mages as
they have similar abilities -- I think they are all Awakened beings.
(If you don't know WW canon, feel free to ignore this). It made up many
stupid powers for them that did not in any way flow in harmony with any
other systems in WW, but that's how they always work. But the premise
was good: mortals destroying kindred because kindred were bad.
Sometimes they destroy other stuff too, but mostly kindred.
(N.B. The Hunter book, though awful, did kill Wraith, I understand it,
and Wraith was a paragraph's worth of premise then thousands of pages
of suckage, so Hunter did have something going for it.)
Actually, I think this could be a very good set. If the set is about
hunters, it's about allies. Allies could use more support, imo, and
offer a variety of interesting concepts. And mortals really should be
slapping down kindred more often in game; we wouldn't even need the
Masquerade if mortals couldn't do that.
A repeated note to WW: create a way, availible via multiple methods
(Master, action, etc.) to rid the world of an in-play Event. We already
need this, but if the next set *is* about allies, The Unmasking is
going to go from interesting to goddamn nightmare.
Of course, that can be fun in its own right.
-- DoR
antero
> The latest White Wolf Quarterly lists the name of the next VTES set;
>
> "Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006.
You gotta be kidding. 6 months from LoB, which is larger set than the
previous two, and there has been 9 months between the previous
expansions.
It has kind of twisted logic, though. Make expansions half as big as
previous, and make the time between expansions percentually that much
shorter.
...I guess that the next set after Nights of Reckoning will be the The
Hour of Gargantuan, release in July 2006, having 900 or so cards in it
:(
unforgiver
expansion only 6 months after another (very big) set ?? What about 9
months period? ? I don't really like this :(
DamselO...@interia.pl
Previously when the new Vtes' expansion was printed EVERYBODY were
waiting and enjoyin' with "Uff MAN! We'll have the NEW expansion !!!
Uaa I can't wait any longer!! "
and right now I'm affraid it's gonna be more and more similiar to
Lo5R or Magic ( due not the unbalance but the seriously cash-powering
effects )
HEY YOU GUYS ABOVE !!! MANY PLAYERS ARE ANGRY!!!!
caliban
agzocgud
Hunter is new type of minion. It´s not a vampire, it´s not a ally,
it´s a hunter.
They may also be a new way to put these into play.
/Mathias
LSJ
The nine months window is the period between full expansions.
For instance, the 10th anniversary tins were a "between full
expansions" release.
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
Defender of Ra wrote:
> Atom Weaver wrote:
> > The latest White Wolf Quarterly lists the name of the next VTES set;
> >
> > "Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
> > listed on the preorder form, starters are not.
>
> God I hate Gehenna. And Caine. It was a very, very useful little bit of
> stupidity back inna date, but WW simply doesn't have a handle on the
> concept of a myth. Do you realize that Dark Ages was a *better*
> sourcebook because even though Caine's myth was omnipresent, Caine
> himself was *not* so the game was playable without vast amounts of
> inane plot devices and sanctimonious bs? But I digress.
Do you think so? Dark Ages (at least in its first edition) had not one,
but two books of myth (Erciyes Fragments and Revelations of the Dark
Mother, as opposed to the Book of Nod). Most of the plots used in
Vampire Revised has its roots there. Both the Giovanni and Transilvania
Chronicles beginned around the Dark Ages release, and had the first two
books based on the Dark Ages plotlines - not to mention that they set
stage for future plot devices used in Revised as well.
I didn't read the *revised* Dark Ages line (that one who expanded into
Inquisitors and such), but all I read *about* the line mentions a new
plot device, the War of Princes. Admitelly, it seems to have far more
supplements on Roads and Citybooks than plot-driven books, so maybe
your take on the matter is the fairest. But speaking of the early Dark
Ages line, I see it as the main pool from which most of Gehenna plots
were spawned.
> The Reckoning line in WW was about Hunters. The line presented Hunters
> in a rather implausible way as they never had the wherewithal to
> organize formally. They were a recent phenomenon, I think brought on by
> Gehenna.
Hunter: the Reckoning is like that.
The Year of the Reckoning books presented at least one book for each
gameline (even Wraith: the Oblivion) detailing how mortals deal with
the monsters. In some, the mortals are mostly of the "gifted" sort, but
the general stance is that each book will not cover hunters only. Up to
this moment, we don't know if the set will be based on Hunter: the
Reckoning or the Year of the Reckoning line in general. I hope it's the
latter case - I'm not too fond of god-imbued Hunters spawned from
nowhere as a plot device either.
Though one could argue that this does little difference in light of
VTES rules; any ally released will be far from powerful anyway (if for
nothing else, because they *are allies*, not regular crypt cards), no
matter if it's based on Hunters as in H:tR or regular
mortals/mediums/government goons etc. as in previous supplements. (from
now on, I'll use Hunters with capital H to refer to the latter case).
There is no good reason why they were isolated from Mages as
> they have similar abilities -- I think they are all Awakened beings.
> (If you don't know WW canon, feel free to ignore this). It made up many
> stupid powers for them that did not in any way flow in harmony with any
> other systems in WW, but that's how they always work. But the premise
> was good: mortals destroying kindred because kindred were bad.
> Sometimes they destroy other stuff too, but mostly kindred.
I recall H:tR had a supplement on each supernatural type as the Hunters
view them. Walking Dead for wraiths/risen, Moonstruck for the
werewolves and so on. But everyone I know that played H:tR seems to
believe that the most common foe for the Hunters are the walking dead.
Maybe it's just a personal preference these players/Storytellers share
in common, but I the impression stuck on me.
> Actually, I think this could be a very good set. If the set is about
> hunters, it's about allies. Allies could use more support, imo, and
> offer a variety of interesting concepts. And mortals really should be
> slapping down kindred more often in game; we wouldn't even need the
> Masquerade if mortals couldn't do that.
I don't know if this conforms to existing Masquerade canon. The
Masquerade exists not because any mortal can "slap down" Kindred at
will; it exists because mortals are out there in far superior numbers -
at a 1:10.000 ratio if I remember correctly. Once you get the whole
humanity to set about finding and hunting vampires, then there'll be no
Kindred to tell the tale. The Inquisition worried the Kindred not
because any given individual Inquisitor could enter town and slay alone
every vampire he'd encounter, but because the mere presence of
officials from the order would inspire the locals to search, pinpoint
and set fire on their kindred masters' bodies and havens. And even
then, most of the time it was a result of other vampires' betrayals -
elders throwing neonates "into the fire" so they could gain time to
relocate/reform their ways with more subtetly.
Even the Hunters on H:tR were not that powerful or efficient. Most of
their tactics involve gathering together and striking a single target a
time. They couldn't deal with a horde of Sabbat war cannon fodder, per
example. Or even a single Black Hand or Assamite assassin.
I prefer VTES to abide to that notion - I'm pretty happy with the power
level assinged to most allies in the CCG so far.
> A repeated note to WW: create a way, availible via multiple methods
> (Master, action, etc.) to rid the world of an in-play Event. We already
> need this, but if the next set *is* about allies, The Unmasking is
> going to go from interesting to goddamn nightmare.
> Of course, that can be fun in its own right.
> -- DoR
I don't think it would make that much sense. Gehenna Events are there
to represent global issues that affect anyone and are, for the most
part, cosmic shifts. I don't think any vampire, minion or Methuselah,
should have the power to get rid quickly and easily of such situations.
If he or she could, he or she should be able to win the Jyhad with no
more than a couple of gestures with his or her hand.
You could argue that Events should not have been released at all, but
that's another issue. Going back to power level and playability, I find
the Unmasking to be a poor example of how game-shattering an Event
could be. It grants fixed intercept for more than one minion, sure -
but it gives that permacept to minions which, for the most part, can't
get it transient intercept anywhere else. Not to mention that they are
way easier to get rid of in general (let's forget the dedicated War
Ghoul deck for a while).
All the other potentially game-shattering events require either a heavy
setup or concede its benefits to all players. So most of the time, I
see event-based decks backfiring due to multiple events hard
requirements and extra clauses; decks which include a couple of events
for enhancing the main strategy, but that sometimes end up being foiled
by their own cards (Anthelios and Conquest of Humanity are good
examples of this); or decks relying on one event but that require even
further setup (such as a Wormwood-based Corruption deck, which ends up
needing tons of event just to remove counters from Wormwood). In all
the games I've seen events played, if someone got too screwed up by
them, it was clear that deckbuilding issues were also to blame (such as
a deck that depends too often on hunting to recoup blood being foiled
by Restricted Vitae); when not, focus choice were key to the problem,
and that deck would be screwed up anyway if he had a different predator
(such as weenie vote decks hosed by Nightmares Upon Nightmares, but
they could be screwed up by a number of cards/strategies anyway, from
heavy stealth bleed to Cryptic Mission Machines to other weenie decks).
That noted, let's remember in-play Events have an "easy", global way to
leave the table: oust the player controlling them. If the player
manages to put Events in the table and survive any onslaught, you can't
blame the Events on that. Blame his or her predator's poor ousting
power. :D
best,
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Giovanni Newsletter Editor in absentia
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote:
> Defender of Ra wrote:
> > Atom Weaver wrote:
> > > The latest White Wolf Quarterly lists the name of the next VTES set;
> > >
> > > "Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
> > > listed on the preorder form, starters are not.
> >
> > God I hate Gehenna. And Caine. It was a very, very useful little bit of
> > stupidity back inna date, but WW simply doesn't have a handle on the
> > concept of a myth. Do you realize that Dark Ages was a *better*
> > sourcebook because even though Caine's myth was omnipresent, Caine
> > himself was *not* so the game was playable without vast amounts of
> > inane plot devices and sanctimonious bs? But I digress.
>
> Do you think so? Dark Ages (at least in its first edition) had not one,
> but two books of myth (Erciyes Fragments and Revelations of the Dark
> Mother, as opposed to the Book of Nod). Most of the plots used in
> Vampire Revised has its roots there. Both the Giovanni and Transilvania
> Chronicles beginned around the Dark Ages release,
> I didn't read the *revised* Dark Ages line (that one who expanded into
> Inquisitors and such),
AAAGH. "used in... has", "beginned", "line who expanded"...
Forgive me for the awful lot of errors. :P Hope I could get my point of
view across anyway.
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
jnew...@difsol.com
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo wrote:
> I recall H:tR had a supplement on each supernatural type as the Hunters
> view them. Walking Dead for wraiths/risen, Moonstruck for the
> werewolves and so on. But everyone I know that played H:tR seems to
> believe that the most common foe for the Hunters are the walking dead.
> Maybe it's just a personal preference these players/Storytellers share
> in common, but I the impression stuck on me.
This is quite accurate. By far, risen and wraiths were the most common
H:tR foes, primarily because the Hunters were of sufficient power to
actually handle them, whereas it took a particularly lucky and skilled
group of Hunters to tackle a vampire of even moderate power, but also
because thematically the game needed cannon fodder for the Hunters to
fight before they could deal with the arch-nemesis and his foul plot.
> I don't know if this conforms to existing Masquerade canon. The
> Masquerade exists not because any mortal can "slap down" Kindred at
> will; it exists because mortals are out there in far superior numbers -
> at a 1:10.000 ratio if I remember correctly. Once you get the whole
> humanity to set about finding and hunting vampires, then there'll be no
> Kindred to tell the tale. The Inquisition worried the Kindred not
> because any given individual Inquisitor could enter town and slay alone
> every vampire he'd encounter, but because the mere presence of
> officials from the order would inspire the locals to search, pinpoint
> and set fire on their kindred masters' bodies and havens. And even
> then, most of the time it was a result of other vampires' betrayals -
> elders throwing neonates "into the fire" so they could gain time to
> relocate/reform their ways with more subtetly.
Quite right. Mortals can't take vampires in anything close to a fair
fight, but they *can* tear down your haven at noon and watch you fry.
They don't, because they don't believe in vampires.
> Even the Hunters on H:tR were not that powerful or efficient. Most of
> their tactics involve gathering together and striking a single target a
> time. They couldn't deal with a horde of Sabbat war cannon fodder, per
> example. Or even a single Black Hand or Assamite assassin.
> I prefer VTES to abide to that notion - I'm pretty happy with the power
> level assinged to most allies in the CCG so far.
True in general, though vampires do tend to underestimate Imbued
Hunters, primarily because the Imbued didn't exist prior to the
Reckoning. It gave an in-game excuse for the villains to make classic
villain mistakes - they simply didn't know what they were dealing with.
John
pd...@lightlink.com
DamselO...@interia.pl wrote:
> and right now I'm affraid it's gonna be more and more similiar to
> Lo5R or Magic ( due not the unbalance but the seriously cash-powering
> effects )
>
> HEY YOU GUYS ABOVE !!! MANY PLAYERS ARE ANGRY!!!!
Oh, for the love of punk rock. It is likely a small expansion, and it
is coming out 6 months after the last expansion. Why are we freaking
out?
-Peter
David Zopf
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote in message
news:1134045732....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Yeah, I seem to recall you or someone else at WW talking about the
difficulty of keeping VTES on the distributor and retailer's "radar" with a
9 month release schedule... If the alternating product is something modest
in size, I think all is good. I was having a bit of a tough time
considering another product release so close to the 900 pound gorilla that
is LoB. A little hunter/ally addendum expansion sounds tasty...
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
unforgiver
Day of reckoning isn't a full expansion? Maybe it's a half expansion?
No? A third?
AFAIK 10th was a bunch of reprints, not new stuff...
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
Not to mention that maybe it's good to review one's own notions of
"many".
*And* speaking on others' behalf (many others or not, all angry or not)
is hardly a good tactic to get a point considered.
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
ANCILLA
Oh. We are a legion.
I bet he was speaking on behalf of those many who are furious, and not
on behalf of those who do not give a damn, or, actually, love the idea.
Let us not be formal in this area.
Nyateneri
k ..
many is not 'all' .. after all ;) I've meant few of our local
playgroups ..
And I've talked about this with lots of other players right now and
not even one of them was happy or even neutral about the new expansion
..
and I know it'll never be a representative group and that wasn't my
intention to speak for players as a whole .. I was just posting
opinions gathered about the new expansion .. and the thing I'm
concerned with is that they were not divided ..
ANCILLA
And he meant quite a few, I bet.
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
ANCILLA wrote:
> Oh. We are a legion.
As you wish. I don't doubt that. I just don't think that numbers are
all-important. Even statistics can be misinterpreted, what about
*supposed* numbers.
> I bet he was speaking on behalf of those many who are furious, and not
> on behalf of those who do not give a damn, or, actually, love the idea.
Two camps where I don't belong (three counting with the "furious" one),
in case it was not clear enough yet.
I just prefer to wait for more information before crying out and
pointing to real or imaginary friends who would supposedly think as I
do, and claim I'm their spokesperson.
> Let us not be formal in this area.
Again, as you (and the supposed legion) wish.
I just doubt that it is an efficient way to get a point across.
Not to mention I don't think it is wise to hurry against something we
don't know jack about. Let the info build up on the issue. A name and a
"not full expansion" official seal can mean a lot of things still.
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Nyateneri
"Again, as you (and the supposed legion) wish.
I just doubt that it is an efficient way to get a point across. "
and again that was not my intention .. it was just trying to show
our opinion ( maybe 'caps lock' lead to that ]; ) .. and the legion ;D
is a really big part of our vtes national scene ..
de gustibus non disputandum est either ;) And I don't want to
convince anyone just trying to point that not every one is ntr or happy
:)
"Not to mention I don't think it is wise to hurry against something
we
don't know jack about."
Yes you are correct in here .. but I thought about the general idea of
printing new stuff in such a short period of time ( even I'm not a
collector I know few of my pals who were stunned ;) )
ANCILLA
> I just doubt that it is an efficient way to get a point across.
It would definitely be much better if they come, and swarm the group
them-selves.
>A name and a "not full expansion" official seal can mean a lot of things still.
It can, in deed.
Screaming Vermillian
Atom Weaver wrote:
> The latest White Wolf Quarterly lists the name of the next VTES set;
>
> "Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
> listed on the preorder form, starters are not.
NOR, huh? I doubt the truth of this. I mean, its only true in the rare
occasion when both A and B are false.
~SV
David Zopf
<pd...@lightlink.com> wrote in message
news:1134050323.0...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Umm... Because its teh Inturweb? Seriously, though, Peter. You know as
well as I that there are a *legion* of people who are competing to be the
first to bitch about this, that, or the other thing, whenever _anything_
about VTES is announced. However, I believe that comments about VTES
becoming more like Magic should be treated the same as citing Hitler in any
other usenew argument; the person who mentions it first, automatically
loses. ;-)
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
ANCILLA wrote:
> > I just doubt that it is an efficient way to get a point across.
>
> It would definitely be much better if they come, and swarm the group
> them-selves.
Still, even this group is hardly an accurate representation of what all
the player base thinks.
See, I don't want to be neither devil's advocate NOR a troll about the
news :D. Count on me to publicly complain a little if NOR is to be a
150-card set with mostly new cards - I didn't even receive the new
Legacies cards yet, and I doubt I'll have used half of the new ones up
to April. But not now - it could be anything from a 150-card set with
100 reprints I don't need to a 100-card set with 50 reprints where all
cards are common or Rares and not a single new vampire, which makes it
easier to dig in short time. Either way, we'll know it soon.
> >A name and a "not full expansion" official seal can mean a lot of things still.
> It can, indeed.
That's what bothers me. Why bother about something we don't know jack
about yet? Speculation on the contents are expected by fans, but
otherwise it seems like building a nuclear shelter below home because
Bush said India has weapons of mass destruction ;D
best,
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
Fabio 'Sooner' Macedo
Nyateneri wrote:
> "Again, as you (and the supposed legion) wish.
> I just doubt that it is an efficient way to get a point across. "
>
> and again that was not my intention .. it was just trying to show
> our opinion ( maybe 'caps lock' lead to that ]; ) .. and the legion ;D
> is a really big part of our vtes national scene ..
As said, I don't doubt it. And I must admit I have a bias against
anything expressed in caps ;D So don't mind if I sound a little harsh.
That's not the outright intention, I can assure.
> "Not to mention I don't think it is wise to hurry against something
> we
> don't know jack about."
>
> Yes you are correct in here .. but I thought about the general idea of
> printing new stuff in such a short period of time ( even I'm not a
> collector I know few of my pals who were stunned ;) )
That I concur. Personally, I know I won't have the money to spend in a
full-fledged set so soon. Maybe if it is something small you can
complete by splitting a box, as DaveZ suggested on WW's forums.
best,
Fabio "Sooner" Macedo
ANCILLA
whine, and moan. Let's wait for more data from White Wolf. But let us
be full of expectations, and demanding to get only the best of the best.
Jeroen Rombouts
"Defender of Ra" <rules...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:1134016836.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> (N.B. The Hunter book, though awful, did kill Wraith, I understand it,
> and Wraith was a paragraph's worth of premise then thousands of pages
> of suckage, so Hunter did have something going for it.)
>
wrong forum for it, but I disagree: Wraith's setting and background was,
IMO, the best of the OWOD. It had playability issues, though.
Jeroen Rombouts
"LSJ" <vte...@white-wolf.com> schreef in bericht
news:1134045732....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So this one's going to be a small expansion? That means we'll have to wait
longer for the Group 4 Sabbat clans to be filled out? :(
Fred Scott
I don't know about 'freaking out'. But six months is too soon to be
pushing a new expansion after Legacies. Hell, nine months is too soon
but it seemed like a reasonable enough compromise. I wish they'd
stick to it and not print things faster than players can buy them and
absorb them into collections and playing strategies. People have a
right to be angry.
Fred
Fred Scott
Could you explain the nature of the hair that's being split here?
I don't recall the use of "full" as an adjective in describing
the window between expansions. I suppose I could have missed it
or perhaps missed an element in the discussion of this over the
years but this is the first time I've seen anyone use that
distinction.
I suppose if this is going to be some very limited expansion like
TAE***, that might mitigate things somewhat. But I'd like to
understand exactly what White Wolf is thinking before making up
my mind.
(*** - Using the definition that if a product expands the number
of different named cards available for play, it's an 'expansion'.)
Fred
The Lasombra
<nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>People have a right to be angry.
People have a right to be stupid.
Anyone getting angry at this point is also taking advantage of that
other right.
Fred Scott
news:vkYlf.3472$fO5...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> Umm... Because its teh Inturweb? Seriously, though, Peter. You know as well as I that there are a *legion* of people who are
> competing to be the first to bitch about this, that, or the other thing, whenever _anything_ about VTES is announced.
Huh?!? I thought that was our job.
> However, I believe that comments about VTES becoming more like Magic should be treated the same as citing Hitler in any other
> usenew argument; the person who mentions it first, automatically loses. ;-)
I don't know. It's not the same thing. I can see where people would think
it's an overused argument but, unlike fears of Hitler's reanimation, it's
not a totally groundless fear. Some of us love to hate Magic because it
has certain obvious problems as a CCG and for whatever reasons, stupidity
or commercial strategy, WotC refuses to fix them. So it seems to me that
at least a little bit of paranoia that White Wolf is moving VtES towards
the same practices that will duplicate some of the Magic's problems is in
order. And pumping out too many cards too quickly is one of the prime ones.
Fred
Fred Scott
news:t7ogp1t9801joogu8...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:24:04 -0700, "Fred Scott" wrote:
>
>>People have a right to be angry.
>
> People have a right to be stupid.
>
> Anyone getting angry at this point is also taking advantage of that
> other right.
And people have a right to their opinions as well. But it makes
for more interesting discussion when they give reasons for their
opinions instead of just posting them as groundless assertions.
Fred
The Lasombra
>But six months is too soon to be
>pushing a new expansion after Legacies. Hell, nine months is too soon
>but it seemed like a reasonable enough compromise.
I cannot disagree more.
VTES sales are flat for an expansion after 4-5 months.
New expansions are required to rekindle interest and purchases.
White Wolf is a business, I am a business.
We must make money to continue to be in business.
Product sitting on shelves does not make money.
Cycling inventory (selling out and replenishing) is the key to making
money in retailing. When your inventory stops cycling, you must
introduce new products.
I would have welcomed Legacies of Blood 2 months earlier.
I look forward to April with hope and pleasure.
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
Now also featuring individual card sales and sales
of booster and starter box displays.
ANCILLA
Thanks for your appreciation.
I really could not care more.
ANCILLA
The Lasombra wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:24:04 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
> >But six months is too soon to be
> >pushing a new expansion after Legacies. Hell, nine months is too soon
> >but it seemed like a reasonable enough compromise.
>
> I cannot disagree more.
>
> VTES sales are flat for an expansion after 4-5 months.
>
> New expansions are required to rekindle interest and purchases.
>
> White Wolf is a business, I am a business.
>
> We must make money to continue to be in business.
>
Players are not business, however.
They are those who decide whether those businesses continue or not.
And they might simply get tired of new expansions.
So better be nice to them, or they will help your business end.
The Lasombra
<nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>>>People have a right to be angry.
>> People have a right to be stupid.
>> Anyone getting angry at this point is also taking advantage of that
>> other right.
>And people have a right to their opinions as well. But it makes
>for more interesting discussion when they give reasons for their
>opinions instead of just posting them as groundless assertions.
Investing negative emotions in something that will not affect you in
any way for 6 more months and will then only affect you if you choose
to invest in it (or your competition does) is stupid.
I am not really interested in the discussion, only in stopping the
stupidity.
Rejoice that the card designers had enough material to think they
could put another set together so quickly!
Rejoice that the game company is advertising product for your game to
retailers so that new players can get interested in the game by
product being on store shelves!
Rejoice that the game company is making enough money on their products
that they are willing to gamble on an additional expansion at all!
Rejoice that members of the online community brought this wonderful
news to your attention! (Thanks AtomWeaver!)
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
Archivist to great deck builders.
http://ArchonOfTheSwamp.tripod.com
http://BlueDevilVTES.tripod.com
http://ColumbusVTES.tripod.com
http://Legbiter.tripod.com
http://UniqueMasterOfVTES.tripod.com
http://VTESOrgPlay.tripod.com
The Lasombra
<anc...@vampirethemasquerade.com> wrote:
>Players are not business, however.
>They are those who decide whether those businesses continue or not.
>And they might simply get tired of new expansions.
>So better be nice to them, or they will help your business end.
Adding new expansions is being nice to them.
Providing continued support for the game is the ultimate gamble for
the game company and the card designers.
They believe you will buy some of the new set, regardless of when it
is released. I agree with them. It is my experience that people like
new things, and will like this new expansion when it is in their
hands.
Alternately, you will quit buying cards for 1 set and continue to play
the game.
You are never harmed by new cards being introduced.
Anger is stupid.
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
Your best online source for information about V:TES.
ANCILLA
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:50:49 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
> Investing negative emotions in something that will not affect you in
> any way for 6 more months and will then only affect you if you choose
> to invest in it (or your competition does) is stupid.
>
> I am not really interested in the discussion, only in stopping the
> stupidity.
>
> Rejoice that the card designers had enough material to think they
> could put another set together so quickly!
>
> Rejoice that the game company is advertising product for your game to
> retailers so that new players can get interested in the game by
> product being on store shelves!
>
> Rejoice that the game company is making enough money on their products
> that they are willing to gamble on an additional expansion at all!
>
> Rejoice that members of the online community brought this wonderful
> news to your attention! (Thanks AtomWeaver!)
>
>
>
>
> Carpe noctem.
>
> Lasombra
> Archivist to great deck builders.
>
Your attitude is so instrumental.
And where is the romaticism?
Those long periods of waiting and thinking what the next set will be
like. Those hours-long divagations. Those plans for things
unimaginable.
And, as it is, I have not even managed to grasp the last expansion, and
they come out with something new. It's visible business, indeed. And
I'd like it to have some facade, something which would make the players
forget it's all about the money.
pd...@lightlink.com
ANCILLA wrote:
> And, as it is, I have not even managed to grasp the last expansion, and
> they come out with something new.
???
They aren't coming out with somthing new for *five months*. Which is a
pretty long time, really. You'll have managed to grasp the last
expansion by then.
> It's visible business, indeed. And
> I'd like it to have some facade, something which would make the players
> forget it's all about the money.
???
You can forget anything you want. This game is a buisness. They need to
make money for it to be viable. If the buisness model they need to
sustain buisness includes a major expansion every 9 months and a minor
expansion every 6 months, then that is what they need to do. Luckily,
however, the buisness that is this game is a good one, so it all works
out.
-Peter
ANCILLA
p...@lightlink.com wrote:
> Which is a
> pretty long time, really. You'll have managed to grasp the last
> expansion by then.
I will, yes. But I would like to have to wait.
> You can forget anything you want. This game is a buisness. They need to
> make money for it to be viable. If the buisness model they need to
> sustain buisness includes a major expansion every 9 months and a minor
> expansion every 6 months, then that is what they need to do. Luckily,
> however, the buisness that is this game is a good one, so it all works
> out.
>
> -Peter
Well, I do not want to remember this on buying my cards.
I want it to be a spiritual adventure.
Not an exchange - my money for some pleasure from WW.
pd...@lightlink.com
ANCILLA wrote:
> Well, I do not want to remember this on buying my cards.
> I want it to be a spiritual adventure.
Uhhh, ok?
> Not an exchange - my money for some pleasure from WW.
But that is exactly what you are doing--giving someone money for
entertainment. Would you somehow be fooled that this was not the case
if you gave them more money in 8 months instead of 6 months?
Like, I wouldn't want another huge exapansion in 6 months, no. But it
seems perfectly reasonable for there to be a wee one in 6 months.
-Peter
ANCILLA
This might do.
But I'm afrid they want to make it two a year, indeed.
And I do not like the idea.
(Yes, it's all up to liking or not, after all.)
The slower it goes, the longer VTES will stay around,
and I want it to last as long as possible.
I fear the downpour.
It showers the players with even more they might need,
but disappears shortly after.
Emmit Svenson
unforgiver wrote:
> In April 2006 ?! So early? What are the reasons of prining a new
> expansion only 6 months after another (very big) set ?? What about 9
> months period? ? I don't really like this :(
Then just wait until July to buy cards from the NoR set. Voila! A nine
months' delay between sets. Then wait until the April following to by
cards from the post-NoR set. Voila! Another nine months' delay.
The only reason to object to a quick release of the next set is if
there's not enough time to design and playtest it properly. We won't
know if that's the case until the set is release. Until then...
The Lasombra
<anc...@vampirethemasquerade.com> wrote:
>The slower it goes, the longer VTES will stay around,
This is unsupported bullshit.
VTES will stay around as long as there are players, either new ones or
old die hards.
Expansion speed can help gain new players. In the long run, new
players are more important to the health of the game.
Fred Scott
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:50:49 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
>>>>People have a right to be angry.
>
>>> People have a right to be stupid.
>
>>> Anyone getting angry at this point is also taking advantage of that
>>> other right.
>
>>And people have a right to their opinions as well. But it makes
>>for more interesting discussion when they give reasons for their
>>opinions instead of just posting them as groundless assertions.
>
> Investing negative emotions in something that will not affect you in
> any way for 6 more months and will then only affect you if you choose
> to invest in it (or your competition does) is stupid.
Sure. But this doesn't qualify as that.
It seems to be a common mistake to think that CCG products are like
other game products but that's not so. If Milton Bradley comes out with
a new version of "Clue" with a few changes two months after I bought
their latest version, I don't have to care. That doesn't affect me
or the value of the game set I bought. But if White Wolf comes out
with new cards in their CCG a few months after I just got done sinking
money into their last expansion, that DOES affect me. I may not be
forced to buy the new cards myself, but I have to play the guys who
bought the new cards - unless I want to consign myself and the
collection of cards I've invested in up to this point to some
dead-end house-rules version of the game.
Pretending a new expansion is all opportunity and no downside is
complete bullshit. You have the option to ignore new cards but to do
so places you at a disadvantage. I'm not saying this is a reason
there should never be expansions. But don't pretend it makes no
difference to people who don't choose to buy in.
> Rejoice that the card designers had enough material to think they
> could put another set together so quickly!
I won't comment on design issues in VtES. But this was exactly the
reason I quit spending a ton of money on Magic cards every year.
Not only did they pump out new cards faster than was any fun to try
integrating in a game sense, but BECAUSE they pumped out cards so
fast, the card design sucked. Not enough real origianl ideas, not
enough time to play test, not enough time to turn around mistakes
that had to be redesigned so that the redesigned versions could be
properly play tested. The lack of time to market showed.
> Rejoice that the game company is advertising product for your game to
> retailers so that new players can get interested in the game by
> product being on store shelves!
>
> Rejoice that the game company is making enough money on their products
> that they are willing to gamble on an additional expansion at all!
Yes, I understand their upsides. But at what point is it too much?
And the pretension that people don't have a right to have an honest
negative reaction about this is just wrong.
Fred
Fred Scott
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:24:04 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
>>But six months is too soon to be
>>pushing a new expansion after Legacies. Hell, nine months is too soon
>>but it seemed like a reasonable enough compromise.
>
> I cannot disagree more.
>
> VTES sales are flat for an expansion after 4-5 months.
>
> New expansions are required to rekindle interest and purchases.
I'm not sure what your argument is suppose to be. That the measure
of what's best for the game is to keep sales, dollar-for-dollar on
some kind of constant level as the weeks and months go by? Is so,
that is naive on a bunch of different levels. If you publish so
many cards, players can't keep up and feel bled for money, you're
going to drive frustated players out of the game. It happens. It's
why I'm not giving WotC any of my money for Magic cards any more.
The only issue is, how much is too much.
IMHO, every six months is too much. Your milage may vary, I'm
sure. But that's what I think.
> I would have welcomed Legacies of Blood 2 months earlier.
...and I would have preferred it three months later at a
minimum. How many different strategies and themes I haven't
had a chance to play myself or against is just insane. More
new cards far sooner than we've had a chance to play the old
cards we already own. For my purposes, there's nothing good
about another new expansion just six months from now.
Fred
Fred Scott
"Emmit Svenson" <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1134065969....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> unforgiver wrote:
>> In April 2006 ?! So early? What are the reasons of prining a new
>> expansion only 6 months after another (very big) set ?? What about 9
>> months period? ? I don't really like this :(
>
> Then just wait until July to buy cards from the NoR set. Voila! A nine
> months' delay between sets.
Cool. That'll work. Except of course, we need everybody else's
agreement not to play the cards for another three months as well.
Otherwise, it's not really like a nine month delay.
So...can we get that agreement?
Everybody?
John Flournoy
...no, there wouldn't be any longer wait, since the wait for such a
full expansion would be identical before this set or after it - 9
months from the last full expansion (or 9 months after that, maybe).
If this is a small release, that's just a few cards in the interim of
the schedule, not a push-back of future expansions (since LSJ is
reiterating 9 months between full expansions, and implying this doesn't
count as one.)
-John Flournoy
Cecil
David Zopf wrote:
> Umm... Because its teh Inturweb? Seriously, though, Peter. You know as
> well as I that there are a *legion* of people who are competing to be the
> first to bitch about this, that, or the other thing, whenever _anything_
> about VTES is announced. However, I believe that comments about VTES
> becoming more like Magic should be treated the same as citing Hitler in any
> other usenew argument; the person who mentions it first, automatically
> loses. ;-)
Hitler _was_ pro expansion....
Think about it.
Cecil
PS: I am looking forward to the new set, just not looking forward to
justifying another large purchase of them with my wife.
***JediMike***
unforgiver wrote:
> In April 2006 ?! So early? What are the reasons of prining a new
> expansion only 6 months after another (very big) set ?? What about 9
> months period? ? I don't really like this :(
6 Months is WAY too soon to release ANY expantion. There was never any
distintions made like "execept small expantions" when we were told WW
schedule for releasing expantions were going to be 9 month periods. I
beleive this puts a tremendious strain on a majority of players, both $
and absorbtion of previous material. But I understand that WW is a
company that wants to make money and so they will continue selling to
it's market, 9 month statment or not. I'm sure they have the right to
change there release scheudle at will, but I believe they should tell
us without the flim/flam.
One new card expands the game, SELL me that card and I'll call it an
expantion.
Don't get me wrong, I am grateful for WW keeping our game alive, I just
know I won't be able to fully ingest this last expantion for at least 9
months.
That said, Jeff preorder me 4 boxes!
***JediMike***
David Zopf
"Fred Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message
news:5g%lf.1135$Ev.100@fed1read06...
>
> "Emmit Svenson" <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1134065969....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> unforgiver wrote:
>>> In April 2006 ?! So early? What are the reasons of prining a new
>>> expansion only 6 months after another (very big) set ?? What about 9
>>> months period? ? I don't really like this :(
>>
>> Then just wait until July to buy cards from the NoR set. Voila! A nine
>> months' delay between sets.
>
> Cool. That'll work. Except of course, we need everybody else's
> agreement not to play the cards for another three months as well.
Why is that? There's been a near-zero escalation across all of the VTES
product released. We can safely assume that this trend will continue. If
someone has the coconuts available to buy a new set, and you don't, its not
like you're going to win less as a result...
> Otherwise, it's not really like a nine month delay.
>
Its Better(tm)... Its a product release which is Individually Customized to
the exact economics of each consumer! Wow!!! Thats service for you!
;-)
DZ
AW
Fred Scott
> "Fred Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message news:5g%lf.1135$Ev.100@fed1read06...
>> "Emmit Svenson" <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1134065969....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>> months' delay between sets.
>>
>> Cool. That'll work. Except of course, we need everybody else's
>> agreement not to play the cards for another three months as well.
>
> Why is that? There's been a near-zero escalation across all of the VTES
> product released.
So what? It's the real world, we're talking about here. It doesn't
matter what the "escalation" is, other peoples' cards affect my
play. They affect the metagame and the additional choice allows for
improvement in certain types of decks. Cut it any way you like,
"waiting until July to buy the new cards" is NOT like pretending
there's a nine-month delay unless everybody doesn't play the new
cards. So let's stick to the real issues and not some pretentious,
make-believe way of looking at things.
Fred
The Lasombra
<nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>> I would have welcomed Legacies of Blood 2 months earlier.
>...and I would have preferred it three months later at a
>minimum. How many different strategies and themes I haven't
>had a chance to play myself or against is just insane.
And three more months would have changed all of that for you?
Doubt walks in doing jumping jacks.
New strategies stopped being explored in Kindred Most Wanted 3 months
after it was released.
Trophy? Dismissed as to much work for no increased winning.
Weenie independents? Embraced wholeheartedly.
Other new things? Not so much really.
As a player, I would have welcomed Legacies 6 months earlier.
As a business owner, I would have welcomed it 4 months earlier when
sales of KMW singles disappeared.
When people are buying singles from a set, they are still actively
exploring it. When that dries up, on a global scale, then it is time
for something new.
I sell over 70% of my singles to players in other countries. When the
whole world stops investing in a set, it tells you something about the
set. It also tells you it is time for a new one.
Carpe noctem.
Lasombra
Your best online source for information about V:TES.
ANCILLA
refering to. I want time to have a look at everything in detail. I do
not want to devour the cards and the ideas. I want it to be a
step-by-step process. And you are approaching the whole thing purely
from the perspective of a salesman who wants a profit - the higher the
better.
jnew...@difsol.com
No, he's not really. Not that it bothers you to say so.
ANCILLA
I would like to hope he is not, but I can see his conclusions are not
one of a person willing to celebrate every encounter of his life. And I
would like to celebrate each and every card, and I won't have the time
necessary. Don't know about you, but I am taking cards from boosters
one after another, just to make the moment last longer. I do not want
to have fun, and return to the real life. I want to be able to think
about the new ideas day after day. It might take three months in the
net, it might take three months for the serious customers buying plenty
of cards before the release or immediately afterwards, but there are
some who would like to perform the very same reseach for nine months,
but at a much slower pace. And I can see plenty of people rioting, for
diverse reasons, though, probably. But still.
Fred Scott
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:48:12 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
>>> I would have welcomed Legacies of Blood 2 months earlier.
>
>>...and I would have preferred it three months later at a
>>minimum. How many different strategies and themes I haven't
>>had a chance to play myself or against is just insane.
>
> And three more months would have changed all of that for you?
Over multiple expansions, yes. It adds up.
> Doubt walks in doing jumping jacks.
Well, doubt's pretty flabby and probably needs the exercise
anyway.
> New strategies stopped being explored in Kindred Most Wanted 3 months
> after it was released.
Is this the same game we're talking about where I'm constantly
reminded that new and killer uses for cards are invented years
after those cards came out? You know, the Succubus Club,
Temptation of Greater Power and all that.
Doubt is frenetically doing jazzercise, now.
> As a player, I would have welcomed Legacies 6 months earlier.
> As a business owner, I would have welcomed it 4 months earlier when
> sales of KMW singles disappeared.
>
> When people are buying singles from a set, they are still actively
> exploring it. When that dries up, on a global scale, then it is time
> for something new.
Single sellers - at least the ones I deal with - sell singles from
every expansion. I see plenty of KMW singles get auctioned off and
some of them go for plenty. Granted, it isn't the feeding frenzy
that occurs in the first couple of months but if it weren't profitable,
they wouldn't do it.
> I sell over 70% of my singles to players in other countries. When the
> whole world stops investing in a set, it tells you something about the
> set. It also tells you it is time for a new one.
Oh, gawd, where do I start?
No. It just means that there's some market for the game and that
you're a more economical and/or complete seller than is available in
their own country.
Really, I'm not sure what this statistic has to do with anything.
You could have sold three cards in three months to Americans and seven
cards to customers outside the U.S. That would give the same result.
Of course, I expect there to be _some_ singles sales and I'm glad
you do good business, inside or outside the U.S. But how popular
singles sales are in a CCG is function of a lot of things, of which
the overall popularity of the game is also a big one. I would hope
you can see past the notion that what's good your singles sales at
any given moment is necessarily good for the game in the long run.
It might or might not be. Singles sales will always peak within a
couple months of an expansion and then fall off but that doesn't
mean it's a good thing for there to be a peak going on during every
minute of every day. If you drive two-thirds of the population out
of the game by overprinting, there will still be peaks. Would you
like there to be constant single sales peaking out if the peak was
one third of what a peak is now? Is that helpful in the grand
scheme of things?
Fred
Fred Scott
news:1134079295.4...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> jnewqu...@difsol.com wrote:
>> ANCILLA wrote:
>> > And you are approaching the whole thing purely
>> > from the perspective of a salesman who wants a profit - the higher the
>> > better.
>>
>> No, he's not really. Not that it bothers you to say so.
>
> I would like to hope he is not, but I can see his conclusions are not
> one of a person willing to celebrate every encounter of his life.
Trust me, Jeff does enough to promote the game that I wouldn't believe
his opinions are profit-motivated. And if they were, he does so much
to promote the game that I wouldn't begrudge him that kind of an interest,
anyway.
Fred
James Coupe
DamselO...@interia.pl writes:
> and right now I'm affraid it's gonna be more and more similiar to
>Lo5R or Magic ( due not the unbalance but the seriously cash-powering
>effects )
>
> HEY YOU GUYS ABOVE !!! MANY PLAYERS ARE ANGRY!!!!
Hint: you don't know any of the contents of the set. It's quite
possible that White Wolf aren't "cash-powering" anything. Because, you
know, you don't know anything other than the name of the expansion and a
release date.
Why get angry when you know nothing?
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
James Coupe
***JediMike*** <Jedi...@rebelscum.net> writes:
>6 Months is WAY too soon to release ANY expantion. There was never any
>distintions made like "execept small expantions" when we were told WW
>schedule for releasing expantions were going to be 9 month periods.
Actually, consider the full meaning of:
<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/5741c8
0b54f703f5>
It's not an "expansion" in fact. We will announce the details of
this small, celebratory release after Gehenna's release.
Whilst it goes on to re-confirm the standard nine months pattern for
expansions, it is clear that some things deviate from this and are not
counted as "proper" expansions.
CthuluKitty
> stupidity back inna date, but WW simply doesn't have a handle on the
> concept of a myth. Do you realize that Dark Ages was a *better*
> sourcebook because even though Caine's myth was omnipresent, Caine
> himself was *not* so the game was playable without vast amounts of
> inane plot devices and sanctimonious bs? But I digress.
I have to agree with you here, though only in part. I began playing
V:tM during its second edition, during which time Gehenna was still
thought of as a prophecy. Different groups had their own
interpretations of when Gehenna would come, what the signs of it would
be, if those signs were present, or if Gehenna was a ridiculous myth
altogether. I personally liked this take on the World of Darkness much
more than what WW did in 3rd edition. The situation in Mage was even
worse IMO.
> (N.B. The Hunter book, though awful, did kill Wraith, I understand it,
> and Wraith was a paragraph's worth of premise then thousands of pages
> of suckage, so Hunter did have something going for it.)
Maybe I'm way too goth for my own good, because I really liked Wraith.
The trouble with Wraith is that required a very serious, intelligent
group of roleplayers who know each other well. I'm not aware of many
such role playing groups existing, which explains the widespread
popularity of games like Dungeons and Dragons.
Fred Scott
news:17huI75o...@gratiano.zephyr.org.uk...
> In message <1134071608.3...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> ***JediMike*** <Jedi...@rebelscum.net> writes:
>>6 Months is WAY too soon to release ANY expantion. There was never any
>>distintions made like "execept small expantions" when we were told WW
>>schedule for releasing expantions were going to be 9 month periods.
>
> Actually, consider the full meaning of:
# It's not an "expansion" in fact. We will announce the details of
# this small, celebratory release after Gehenna's release.
>
> Whilst it goes on to re-confirm the standard nine months pattern for
> expansions, it is clear that some things deviate from this and are not
> counted as "proper" expansions.
Sure. I'm not sure what your point is. They first suggested there
would be a nine-month window and then - with this post - they carved
out an exception to that rule. I'm sure Nights of Reckoning will be
some other exception to the rule or maybe it will turn out to be
the same one, I don't know. Either way, it's not what they
originally said they'd said they'd do and that, I think, is the point.
To be clear, I'm not all that pissed (and I'd guess Mike isn't, either)
about what amounts to be a 10-card expansion. I just think it's a
little more straightforward to just admit, "OK, it's a tiny little
expansion that wasn't really what we were talking about when we agreed
to go nine months between expansions." That, to me, is better than
the 1984-ish, "this-is-not-an-expansion" way of handling the matter.
Now, all of sudden, the distinction is being between a "full" and
(presumably) a not-so-full expansion. That's seems a bit lame
considering they haven't even brought in Bill Maher yet to formally
announce to announce the new rule. (AFAIK.)
Fred
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> could put another set together so quickly!
>
> retailers so that new players can get interested in the game by
> product being on store shelves!
>
> Rejoice that the game company is making enough money on their products
> that they are willing to gamble on an additional expansion at all!
>
> news to your attention! (Thanks AtomWeaver!)
>
For the Lord God Omnipotent Reigneth. Hallelujah. Hallelujah.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
The Lasombra
<nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>> I sell over 70% of my singles to players in other countries. When the
>> whole world stops investing in a set, it tells you something about the
>> set. It also tells you it is time for a new one.
>Oh, gawd, where do I start?
Phoenix would be good.
>No. It just means that there's some market for the game and that
>you're a more economical and/or complete seller than is available in
>their own country.
Absolutely.
>Really, I'm not sure what this statistic has to do with anything.
>You could have sold three cards in three months to Americans and seven
>cards to customers outside the U.S. That would give the same result.
I sell over $2,000 worth of cards every week.
I have a very good idea of what sells and where.
Welcome to my world.
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> Here´s my guess:
>
> Hunter is new type of minion. It´s not a vampire, it´s not a ally,
> it´s a hunter.
>
> They may also be a new way to put these into play.
>
"Hunter" is already a (potential) subtype of "Mortal" Allies, comprised of
Carlton Van Wyck, Gregory Winter, Jake Washington, Muddled Vampire Hunter,
Neighborhood Watch Commander, and Wendell Delburton.
Fred Scott
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 15:14:26 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
>>> I sell over 70% of my singles to players in other countries. When the
>>> whole world stops investing in a set, it tells you something about the
>>> set. It also tells you it is time for a new one.
>>No. It just means that there's some market for the game and that
>>you're a more economical and/or complete seller than is available in
>>their own country.
>
> Absolutely.
>
>>Really, I'm not sure what this statistic has to do with anything.
>>You could have sold three cards in three months to Americans and seven
>>cards to customers outside the U.S. That would give the same result.
>
> I sell over $2,000 worth of cards every week.
>
> I have a very good idea of what sells and where.
Fine. That's great! But it still doesn't mean what you're claiming it
means: that "it's time for a new one." It just means you sell $2,000
worth of cards every week. (Pause. Damn, that IS pretty good!) It
means there's a huge cluster-fuck of people wanting singles, especially
after a new release. That says nothing whatsoever about the optimal
way of timing releases, though.
Fred
salem
<nos...@no.spam.dot.com> scrawled:
>So it seems to me that
>at least a little bit of paranoia that White Wolf is moving VtES towards
>the same practices that will duplicate some of the Magic's problems is in
>order. And pumping out too many cards too quickly is one of the prime ones.
I seem to recall many a long thread on the timing of expansions over
the years WW has had the game, and the majority of players seemed to
want 8-12 month gaps between sets.
And WW (steve maybe?) agreed and said that was going to be their plan
(i think they settled on "about 9 months", or something like that).
Now they've apparently dropped that plan (at least for this
expansion), and are yet to tell us why.
Perhaps we should be waiting for some sort of statement/media release,
rather than just looking at a catalog, and _then_ bitch and moan about
how it's not long enough to digest all the LoB cards/strategies, etc.
:)
salem
http://www.users.tpg.com.au/adsltqna/VtES/index.htm
(replace "hotmail" with "yahoo" to email)
salem
<nos...@no.spam.dot.com> scrawled:
>I suppose if this is going to be some very limited expansion like
>TAE***, that might mitigate things somewhat.
Tenth Anniversary .......Egads?
LSJ
> And WW (steve maybe?) agreed and said that was going to be their plan
> (i think they settled on "about 9 months", or something like that).
>
> Now they've apparently dropped that plan (at least for this
> expansion), and are yet to tell us why.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/4d1249d18ed9ca81
The nine months window is the period between full expansions.
For instance, the 10th anniversary tins were a "between full
expansions" release.
--
That is my story, be it bitter or be it sweet.
Keep a little and let a little come back to me.
LSJ (vtesr...@TRAPwhite-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep (remove spam trap to reply)
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
Ector
The Lasombra wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:24:04 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote:
>
> >People have a right to be angry.
>
> People have a right to be stupid.
>
> Anyone getting angry at this point is also taking advantage of that
> other right.
I completely agree with this! Complaining about VTES expansions that
come out "too often" is incredibly stupid. Personally, I would be happy
to see a new set every six months without any restrictions on its size.
New sets demonstrate players that the game is alive, and bring new
opportunities. Eeach pre-release is a holiday.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the complaining people:
Honestly, guys, you'd better think twice before posting such complains.
What did somebody say about Magic? Hey guys, I'm a person that wasted 7
years trying to spread Magic in Belarus, so I know better why it's
still in miserable state here. There are only two reasons: constant
"rotations" (read "robbing players") and printing a tremendous
percentage of crap cards. Nobody ever complained about too many new
sets! These two reasons forced me to stop playing Magic at all, and I
moved to VtES.
Look, are you going to lose any cards you have? No. Are you going to be
robbed with the completely unusable crap in your boosters? I don't
think so. What the hell are you complaining about, then?
Sure, you can't just ignore the new set, and you're likely to be
"forced" to purchase some boosters and/or singles. Is there anything to
complain about? Our players are the most poor in the world, but we're
always happy to know about the new VtES set. Why? Because each player
has a fixed sum of money he can spend on the cards, and the new sets
just provide him more choices.
Remember, we AREN'T talking about Magic or some other
"super-mega-professional" game where you simply MUST have some cards to
be competitive - almost any player can choose one viable deck theme and
build the deck. The difference between rich players and poor players is
that rich players can build MORE different decks. Most our players have
just one "tournament" deck and some "funny" decks, and they are happy.
If somebody won't be able to afford all the cards he'd like to have -
well, he would have to choose the cards he would need most, and the
apperance of the new set would provide him more choices. There is
absolutely nothing to complain about!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there is something to complain about the new sets, it's the absence
of many commons from Legacies in TheLasombra's inventory :) We failed
to get precious cards for the Gargoyles twice, alas, and many our
players still want more Majesties :)
Yours,
Ector
Derek Ray
> Oh. We are a legion.
A legion of exactly how many? Three? Four? Ten?
> I bet he was speaking on behalf of those many who are furious, and not
> on behalf of those who do not give a damn, or, actually, love the idea.
> Let us not be formal in this area.
No, LET us be formal. Because otherwise all we are doing is listening
to some fucking whiners. If the fucking whiners think they have an
actual valid complaint, let them try to articulate it coherently, and
state it in a fully described manner; at that point, if it is valid, it
can then be addressed.
However, if we are only to be subjected to fucking whining without any
specifics, then the fucking whiners can go fuck themselves.
Let's go over the announcement again:
"Nights of Reckoning" is listed for release in April 2006. Boosters are
listed on the preorder form, starters are not."
What does this announcement tell us?
-- It will be named Nights of Reckoning.
-- It will be released in April 2006.
-- It will contain booster packs.
What does this announcement NOT tell us?
-- Size of the expansion
-- Number of new cards in the expansion
-- Number of reprints in the expansion
-- Clans/sects that will be included in the expansion
-- Effect of the expansion on gameplay
So wouldn't you, given these FACTS, be forced to admit that breaking
into hysterical fears over this announcement is, in fact, a little
premature and entirely overdone?
Of course you would.
All the crying I've seen on this thread from the fucking whiners is
based on ASSUMPTIONS about things that were not stated in the
announcement. So get bent and for godsake, SHUT UP. Nobody really
wants to listen to all the fucking whining.
--
Derek
sath...@o2.pl
LSJ wrote:
> salem wrote:
> > And WW (steve maybe?) agreed and said that was going to be their plan
> > (i think they settled on "about 9 months", or something like that).
> >
> > Now they've apparently dropped that plan (at least for this
> > expansion), and are yet to tell us why.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/4d1249d18ed9ca81
>
> The nine months window is the period between full expansions.
>
> For instance, the 10th anniversary tins were a "between full
> expansions" release.
LSJ we know your mantra already but you don't quote the topic Salem
mentions just redirect us to your mantra.
It hardly brings anything constructive to the discussion.
Sathriel
sath...@o2.pl
Derek Ray wrote:
> ANCILLA wrote:
> > Oh. We are a legion.
>
> A legion of exactly how many? Three? Four? Ten?
>
> > I bet he was speaking on behalf of those many who are furious, and not
> > on behalf of those who do not give a damn, or, actually, love the idea.
> > Let us not be formal in this area.
>
> No, LET us be formal. Because otherwise all we are doing is listening
> to some fucking whiners. If the fucking whiners think they have an
> actual valid complaint, let them try to articulate it coherently, and
> state it in a fully described manner; at that point, if it is valid, it
> can then be addressed.
>
> However, if we are only to be subjected to fucking whining without any
> specifics, then the fucking whiners can go fuck themselves.
Pissed or not I don't think you should call anyone bad names Derek,
especially here. Just a thought.
Sathriel
sath...@o2.pl
Ector wrote:
> I completely agree with this! Complaining about VTES expansions that
> come out "too often" is incredibly stupid. Personally, I would be happy
> to see a new set every six months without any restrictions on its size.
> New sets demonstrate players that the game is alive, and bring new
> opportunities. Eeach pre-release is a holiday.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To the complaining people:
> Honestly, guys, you'd better think twice before posting such complains.
> What did somebody say about Magic? Hey guys, I'm a person that wasted 7
> years trying to spread Magic in Belarus, so I know better why it's
> still in miserable state here. There are only two reasons: constant
> "rotations" (read "robbing players") and printing a tremendous
> percentage of crap cards. Nobody ever complained about too many new
> sets! These two reasons forced me to stop playing Magic at all, and I
> moved to VtES.
Ector look at the Split-Personality in your post:
Expansions that come "too often" are not bad for VTES but MtG scene is
not developing in Belarus because of rotation and crap cards (caused by
expansions that come out "too often").
And once again to Derek I think:
Those who coplain do not complain about any of the unstated facts.
There are just complaining about the one stated fact - the nesxt
expansion is coming out in April.
With respect
Sathriel
David Zopf
"salem" <salem_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eudip1h683b339hbg...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:48:31 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> scrawled:
>
>>So it seems to me that
>>at least a little bit of paranoia that White Wolf is moving VtES towards
>>the same practices that will duplicate some of the Magic's problems is in
>>order. And pumping out too many cards too quickly is one of the prime
>>ones.
>
> I seem to recall many a long thread on the timing of expansions over
> the years WW has had the game, and the majority of players seemed to
> want 8-12 month gaps between sets.
>
> And WW (steve maybe?) agreed and said that was going to be their plan
> (i think they settled on "about 9 months", or something like that).
>
> Now they've apparently dropped that plan (at least for this
> expansion), and are yet to tell us why.
Steve Wieck offered some reasons two years ago;
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad/msg/a165fadcff7b49da?dmode=source
> Perhaps we should be waiting for some sort of statement/media release,
> rather than just looking at a catalog, and _then_ bitch and moan about
> how it's not long enough to digest all the LoB cards/strategies, etc.
>
..? But that would be the reasonable, rational, and fair thing to do. and
this is the Interweb.
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
David Zopf
> Rejoice that members of the online community brought this wonderful
> news to your attention! (Thanks AtomWeaver!)
>
Aiding my VTES bretherin Infuses my Being with Purpose... ;-)
DZ
AW
David Zopf
> "David Zopf" <david...@snetx.net> wrote in message
> news:4f0mf.3553$4o7...@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
>> "Fred Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message
>> news:5g%lf.1135$Ev.100@fed1read06...
>>> "Emmit Svenson" <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1134065969....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Then just wait until July to buy cards from the NoR set. Voila! A nine
>>>> months' delay between sets.
>>>
>>> Cool. That'll work. Except of course, we need everybody else's
>>> agreement not to play the cards for another three months as well.
>>
>> Why is that? There's been a near-zero escalation across all of the VTES
>> product released.
>
> So what? It's the real world, we're talking about here. It doesn't
> matter what the "escalation" is, other peoples' cards affect my
> play.
Accomodating that effect can be done by reading this newsgroup and the
online card text, if you choose not to invest in a set. You buying the
cards yourself isn't necessary (assuming a continued trend of no
escalation). Therefore, waiting until a time when buying the next set is a
convenience is certainly a reasonable thing to do.
> They affect the metagame and the additional choice allows for
> improvement in certain types of decks. Cut it any way you like,
> "waiting until July to buy the new cards" is NOT like pretending
> there's a nine-month delay unless everybody doesn't play the new
> cards. So let's stick to the real issues and not some pretentious,
> make-believe way of looking at things.
Don't pretend like you didn't recognize the tongue-in-cheek nature of my
"customized release" comment, Fred. You cannot fool me anymore...you are
waaay smarter than that.
DZ
AW
Derek Ray
> Derek Ray wrote:
>>
>> However, if we are only to be subjected to fucking whining without any
>> specifics, then the fucking whiners can go fuck themselves.
>
> Pissed or not I don't think you should call anyone bad names Derek,
> especially here. Just a thought.
This is funny on a number of levels. "Especially here"? What's so
special about here?
But frankly, there's too much mollycoddling of the fucking whiners
happening in this world today anyway. Slap those bitches upside the
head and let 'em rough it out -- AS IF something not perfect with the
latest expansion of your favorite CCG was anything remotely resembling
"rough". Tell that to the guy behind the counter at McDonald's, or
stocking shelves at Wal-Mart, and see how much sympathy you get.
If the naughty words get his attention and/or hurt his feelings, GOOD.
He's long overdue for a backhanded dose of reality anyway.
--
Derek
insert clever quotation here
Derek Ray
> Those who coplain do not complain about any of the unstated facts.
> There are just complaining about the one stated fact - the nesxt
> expansion is coming out in April.
But is there anything inherently wrong with that? So we get new cards
in April. So what? What's the problem here?
Until you know something, ANYTHING else about the contents of the
expansion, all yours or anyone's complaints are is just a bunch of hot
air based on assumptions.
John Flournoy
sath...@o2.pl wrote:
> And once again to Derek I think:
>
> Those who coplain do not complain about any of the unstated facts.
> There are just complaining about the one stated fact - the nesxt
> expansion is coming out in April.
>
> With respect
With equal respect: Nothing has been stated factually (yet) to indicate
that "Nights of Reckoning" is an "expansion" - it _is_ some sort of
release for VTES that comes in boosters, and LSJ has implied that it is
not a "full expansion". But neither the original post about the info in
the quarterly, nor any comment from a person in a position to know, has
said factually that NoR has anything new and/or expanding in it.
For all we know factually at this point, it could be a collection of
nothing but reprints.
> Sathriel
-John Flournoy
David Zopf
<sath...@o2.pl> wrote in message
news:1134141818....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Those who coplain do not complain about any of the unstated facts.
> There are just complaining about the one stated fact - the nesxt
> expansion is coming out in April.
>
You comment doesn't address Derek's point, which (without the explitives)
was; Complaints based on a release date _alone_ are baseless. Without
having a clue as to the content of Nights of Reckoning, complaining is
premature. Is NoR ten new cards? Is it fifty? Is it five hundred? We
don't know.
If the issue you raise is being unable to integrate new cards into game
play, because of their rate of release, then one would presume that knowing
the _quantity_ of new cards would be a necessary and critical piece of
knowledge in supporting your objections... The number of new cards, (and
the plans for how many additional new cards will appear in the near future
after NoR) is the best (only?) direct measure of the magnitude of your
issue. You simply don't have that piece of information, which is a key
reason why all of this complaining looks so spurious to your detractors.
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
bspaul
> But is there anything inherently wrong with that? So we get new cards
> in April. So what? What's the problem here?
Well,
I can see the different sides of this discussion. If WW wants to pump
out more cards on a shorter time frame (and you do not agree with this
release schedule), I can only see one option available to players.
Don't buy any. Derek is right that when April arrives with a new set,
there is no law that says you have to buy any. No sense to worry about
it now.
Personally, I have to agree with some of the previous posters that I am
starting to feel the MTG "funk" starting to creep into VTES. It
started back with KMW and the CE changes in reprint "policies". Plus
LoB did not reduce my worries.
What I wonder is if the constantly used rationale of "new sets bring
new players into the game" is actually working? In my limited corner
of the world, I do not see an increase of new players. In fact, I
believe any increase in new players is balanced by a fading out of
older ones (and I do consider myself an older player). Personally, I
was/am not happy with the release schedule and contents of LoB.
Therefore I did not purchase my normal order of a new VTES set
(typically a box of starters and four booster boxes). Thus I wonder
how many new players this order represents? Maybe an average of three
new players would order that amount of product, total? Plus what about
the loyalty factor? How many new players turn into longer term
players? To me most new players show up, perhaps purchase $100 worth
of cards and usually fade away after a couple of months. Meanwhile,
the veteran players drop $250 each expansion year after year as long as
they don't fade away. I guess that my math may be off but I just don't
see the logic in the more expansions = more new players. I also look
at some numbers from the last five years and wonder when we are going
to see the results of all these new sets, when it comes to an increased
player base. It seems to me the year after year this game just slides
along. Never growing to large numbers yet never fully fading away.
But perhaps I only have a limited perspective and things are different
somewhere around the country/globe.
Finally, the part I find most funny is when previous posters complain
that the time between releases is too short-but then want to preorder
four boxes of it anyways. It must be that evaporating UV coating smell
that is so addicting...
Ben Spaulding
NorthEast Region, USA
Ector
sath...@o2.pl wrote:
> Ector look at the Split-Personality in your post:
>
> Expansions that come "too often" are not bad for VTES but MtG scene is
> not developing in Belarus because of rotation and crap cards (caused by
> expansions that come out "too often").
>
Where do you see any "split-personality"? Does "rotation" mean the same
as "new sets" for you? Please think a bit. If WotC tell you that each
large set means a rotation, would you struggle against printing new
sets to avoid the rotation? They could print their sets without any
rotations and still have a good profit. Don't tell me they couldn't.
Yours,
Ector
LSJ
> Personally, I have to agree with some of the previous posters that I am
> starting to feel the MTG "funk" starting to creep into VTES. It
> started back with KMW and the CE changes in reprint "policies".
Eh?
What MtG creep was found in KMW?
What changes in reprint quote-policies-unquote were made in CE?
Derek Ray
> Derek Ray wrote:
>> But is there anything inherently wrong with that? So we get new cards
>> in April. So what? What's the problem here?
>
> Well,
>
> I can see the different sides of this discussion.
What sides?
There's the side that says "There will be cards available in boosters in
April for a set called Nights of Reckoning". We can safely assume at
least some of those cards will be new. That's one side.
There's also a side tilting at windmills they themselves have set up in
order to push themselves further into hysterics. I guess that yes,
technically, that's a different side, but it's not one I ever want to be
associated with. I prefer rational people.
> If WW wants to pump
> out more cards on a shorter time frame (and you do not agree with this
> release schedule),
...Of course, there's nothing to currently agree or disagree with, other
than "Some cards will come out in April. They have a name."
I suppose you can choose to disagree that ANY number of cards greater
than 0 should come out in April. You are welcome to that opinion; just
let me know when the sky finishes falling.
> Don't buy any. Derek is right that when April arrives with a new set,
> there is no law that says you have to buy any. No sense to worry about
> it now.
That was Peter Bakija who said that, actually.
> Personally, I have to agree with some of the previous posters that I am
> starting to feel the MTG "funk" starting to creep into VTES. It
Yeah, me too. Except I'm starting to smell it on the players, instead.
David Zopf
"bspaul" <bspa...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:1134146034.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Derek Ray wrote:
>> But is there anything inherently wrong with that? So we get new cards
>> in April. So what? What's the problem here?
>
> Well,
>
> I can see the different sides of this discussion. If WW wants to pump
> out more cards on a shorter time frame
Are they doing this? How do you conclude that from the information we have?
Lets bring some facts to this, shall we?
Here is the release schedule, and number of new cards, going back to Final
Nights:
Date Number of New Cards Expansion
6/2001 162 FN
12/2001 196 BL
8/2002 115 CE
5/2003 128 AN
11/2003 146 BH
5/2004 150 GH
12/2004 10 TAE
2/2005 162 KMW
11/2005 200 LoB
*4/2006 ? NoR
Number of new cards, by year of release
2001: 358
2002: 115
2003: 274
2004: 160
2005: 362
Looks pretty tame to me. LoB puts us up to the level of release that we saw
back in 2001 (appropriate, considering how much extra you have to make in
order to have enough for each Bloodline). Note, too, that the time spread
between KMW and LoB is 3 months _longer_ than that between FN and BL.
Each year with significant new card releases ('01, 03, 05) is followed by a
somewhat lighter year of releases ('02, 04).
Time between releases in months
FN -> BL 6
BL -> CE 8
CE -> AN 9
AN -> BH 6
BH -> GH 6
GH -> TAE 7
TAE -> KMW 3 (*GH -> KMW 10)
KMW -> LoB 9
LoB -> NoR 5
If trends continue, then the set after NoR will appear sometime in the
August-October '06 timeframe, and when the new card count of _that_ set is
combined with NoR, it will amount to (I'll forecast) 120 to 175 new cards,
total.
Frankly, I can see the problem, too, with inconsistent releases. If WW can
settle this down to an "exery six months" release, and smooth out the number
of cards per year (say to around 200-250), I think we'd all be a bit better
off, retailers and players alike. I recognize, though, that the needs of
each expansion can impact this, along with things like Gehenna, where they
wanted to time the release with other product lines.
> (and you do not agree with this
> release schedule), I can only see one option available to players.
> Don't buy any. Derek is right that when April arrives with a new set,
> there is no law that says you have to buy any. No sense to worry about
> it now.
>
"This release schedule" has not yet shown itself to be any different than
the release schedule under which we've been currently been buying for at
least 5 years.
> Personally, I have to agree with some of the previous posters that I am
> starting to feel the MTG "funk" starting to creep into VTES.
Hitler liked MtG...
> It started back with KMW and the CE changes in reprint "policies".
That timeframe covers three years of releases...
> Plus
> LoB did not reduce my worries.
>
> What I wonder is if the constantly used rationale of "new sets bring
> new players into the game" is actually working?
The argument is "regular release of new sets keeps VTES on game store
shelves". The 'bringing new players into the game' is an indirect
consequence of that, which hopefully holds true.
> In my limited corner
> of the world, I do not see an increase of new players. In fact, I
> believe any increase in new players is balanced by a fading out of
> older ones (and I do consider myself an older player).
This is because the growth of the game relies so heavily on volunteer
advocates, such as the VEKN Princes. In places without a VEKN Prince, there
is usually an informal "ring leader" in the same role. I'd rather this
burden were shifted back to the retailers somewhat. If a different release
schedule helps to do that, it should be done. Someday, i'd like to stroll
into a town, and pick up a game of VTES with the locals.
> Personally, I
> was/am not happy with the release schedule and contents of LoB.
Please be more specific. Release schedule; LoB came nine months after KMW,
which in turn was released 10 months after Gehenna. By content, are you
referring to the reprint policy, or the new cards?
> Finally, the part I find most funny is when previous posters complain
> that the time between releases is too short-but then want to preorder
> four boxes of it anyways. It must be that evaporating UV coating smell
> that is so addicting...
>
Arrgh! "Evaporating" and "UV coating" are mutually exclusive terms...
Regards,
DaveZ
Atom Weaver
Ector
bspaul wrote:
> Derek Ray wrote:
> > But is there anything inherently wrong with that? So we get new cards
> > in April. So what? What's the problem here?
>
> Well,
>
> I can see the different sides of this discussion. If WW wants to pump
> out more cards on a shorter time frame (and you do not agree with this
> release schedule), I can only see one option available to players.
> Don't buy any. Derek is right that when April arrives with a new set,
> there is no law that says you have to buy any. No sense to worry about
> it now.
You may refuse to buy new cards, but I'll try to get the best of them,
as the most players will do. Again, new card sets are never "offending"
to me, and I will never complain about them. BTW, I'm completely sure
that most of the complaining people will WAIT for the new set a few
months later :)
> Personally, I have to agree with some of the previous posters that I am
> starting to feel the MTG "funk" starting to creep into VTES. It
> started back with KMW and the CE changes in reprint "policies". Plus
> LoB did not reduce my worries.
Looks like you've missed the major point of creating new cards in VtES.
New cards are usually designed for the new clans or new game
strategies, without making the existing strategies "too good". If you
don't like to play something new and just trying to enhance existing
decks, you are likely to overlook most benefits. Actually, KMW and LoB
are quite good sets (though I wasn't too happy about reprinting old
cards as Rares), and I'm completely sure that we'll see many Tier 1
decks using these cards.
> What I wonder is if the constantly used rationale of "new sets bring
> new players into the game" is actually working? In my limited corner
> of the world, I do not see an increase of new players.
But I expect a lot of new players in MY limited corner of the world :)
Starter decks from Legacies are so good that our players are waiting
for months to get them!
> In fact, I
> believe any increase in new players is balanced by a fading out of
> older ones (and I do consider myself an older player). Personally, I
> was/am not happy with the release schedule and contents of LoB.
> Therefore I did not purchase my normal order of a new VTES set
> (typically a box of starters and four booster boxes). Thus I wonder
> how many new players this order represents? Maybe an average of three
> new players would order that amount of product, total? Plus what about
> the loyalty factor? How many new players turn into longer term
> players?
Trust me, they are doing their job right. We are all novices in Minsk,
Belarus, and we were jumping for joy when we got the first info about
the Legacy Starters. Now we'll finally get some Parthenons, Guardian
Angels, Freak Drives, and a lot more! The new clans are very
interesting, too.
Speaking about the 'loyalty factor': the most 'loyal' newbie is a
newbie that can win at least sometimes and has clear plans about
upgrading his deck or building another deck. New starters are going to
attract a lot of newbies, for sure.
> To me most new players show up, perhaps purchase $100 worth
> of cards and usually fade away after a couple of months. Meanwhile,
> the veteran players drop $250 each expansion year after year as long as
> they don't fade away. I guess that my math may be off but I just don't
> see the logic in the more expansions = more new players.
Well, there is no straight logic in it :) But newbies really like new
expansions. They don't feel themselves "obliged" to buy any cards, but
the new opportunities are great for them.
And let me tell you that your math is flawed. Real fanatics (like me)
spend on the cards all money they can! "Investing" in VtES is similar
to keeping your money in a Swiss bank - no rotations, no robbery, your
cards are going to play FOREVER. Investing in Magic, for instance, is
similar to spending money on the vacations: you just lose them for the
short period of joy :)
> I also look
> at some numbers from the last five years and wonder when we are going
> to see the results of all these new sets, when it comes to an increased
> player base. It seems to me the year after year this game just slides
> along. Never growing to large numbers yet never fully fading away.
> But perhaps I only have a limited perspective and things are different
> somewhere around the country/globe.
VtES is a game for clever people, and most 'common' people just find it
'too complicated'. Unfortunately, percentage of clever people isn't
likely to grow :)
> Finally, the part I find most funny is when previous posters complain
> that the time between releases is too short-but then want to preorder
> four boxes of it anyways. It must be that evaporating UV coating smell
> that is so addicting...
>
Now you've got the REAL point of their complain: they cannot even think
about missing a new VTES set! :) Though purchasing more cards in
shorter period of time may be difficult for some players, most of them
will be happy to get such opportunity.
Yours,
Ector
XZealot
> LSJ we know your mantra already but you don't quote the topic Salem
> mentions just redirect us to your mantra.
>
> It hardly brings anything constructive to the discussion.
I would tell you to "SHUT YER PIE HOLE!" because you're bitching for no
apprent reason is in no way constructive.
So...."TAKE YOUR PIE GRUBBING FINGERS OFF THE KEYBOARD!"
ANCILLA
Derek Ray wrote:
> ANCILLA wrote:
> > Oh. We are a legion.
>
> A legion of exactly how many? Three? Four? Ten?
A legion of exactly 5 battalions.
People in Poland are not that obsessed with exact numbers and points of
reference.
> > I bet he was speaking on behalf of those many who are furious, and not
> > on behalf of those who do not give a damn, or, actually, love the idea.
> > Let us not be formal in this area.
>
> No, LET us be formal. Because otherwise all we are doing is listening
> to some fucking whiners. If the fucking whiners think they have an
> actual valid complaint, let them try to articulate it coherently, and
> state it in a fully described manner; at that point, if it is valid, it
> can then be addressed.
Let me remind you what The Lasombra wrote yesterday.
He wrote: Anger is stupid.
You missed that, did you.
James Coupe
sath...@o2.pl writes:
>LSJ wrote:
>> The nine months window is the period between full expansions.
>>
>> For instance, the 10th anniversary tins were a "between full
>> expansions" release.
>
>LSJ we know your mantra already but you don't quote the topic Salem
>mentions just redirect us to your mantra.
>
>It hardly brings anything constructive to the discussion.
In fact, it indicates that the set isn't intended to be a full expansion
and so the "OMG THEY'RE FLOODING THE MARKET WITH CARDS OMG OMG OMG OMG
OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG THEY'RE SO EVIL OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG
THE WORLD ENDS TOMORROW OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG LSJ IS SATAN" line
of thinking is deeply misguided.
Since the Tenth Anniversary tins are given as an example of a not full
expansion, one could surmise that a similar (but potentially different)
sort of release is planned.
--
James Coupe
PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR.
EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING.
13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
James Coupe
sath...@o2.pl writes:
>Expansions that come "too often" are not bad for VTES but MtG scene is
>not developing in Belarus because of rotation and crap cards (caused by
>expansions that come out "too often").
You're confusing M:tG with V:TES too easily.
- Set rotations force you to buy new sets to remain competitive. Your
old cards stop being playable.
- Set rotations often introduce a new mechanic(s) that you must master
to remain competitive.
- New mechanics are often explorer over several releases for the same
set, so you have to buy each of several sets to explore that new
mechanic properly.
In short, you have to buy cards if you want to carry on playing under
the set rotation rules.
In V:TES, that's almost never been the case. Yes, there have been a
couple of occasions where a specific card existed that you really had to
have to compete well - most of which are limited to Ancient Hearts /
Dark Sovereigns. Specifically, I'd list Tomb of Rameses III, Thoughts
Betrayed and Return to Innocence as killer "YOU MUST BUY THIS SET"
cards, once the true abuses of them were well-understood. And each of
these cards was handled once LSJ and WW were able to do so.
Now, assume that you're a player who has a competitive set of decks from
back in the day when you only had Jyhad/V:TES, Dark Sovereigns, Ancient
Hearts and Sabbat to choose from. Can you name any set from White Wolf
that has forced you to buy new cards to remain competitive? Not a set
that has provided new options that could make another strategy more
competitive, just one that you would absolutely need to buy cards from
or DIE IN A HEAP.
Whilst there has been a little tinkering with the rules, the only
substantial new addition is Events and - due to their nature - many,
many decks have trouble coping with them. (This is such that a number
of us have requested new and versatile ways of handling them, myself
included.)
And a good number of truly strong decks from the WotC sets can stand up
to decks even today. Malk Stealth and Bleed has many good options, as
does a solid Ventrue Law Firm, or a Ventrue Obfuscate deck. I've seen
[1/2] Nosferatu Prince decks do very well, and Toreador intercept / gun
decks do rather nicely. Anson heavy master decks are still possible.
The Gangrel Domi/Protean Stanislava / Ingrid Rossler Mind Rape / Grave
Robbing / Bleedzooka Claw deck is still a very strong deck, without too
much modification. You could still put together a strong weenie deck
with Caitiff, Pander and any 2 or 3 cap vampires you had lurking around,
depending on what you wanted to do - weenie vote, weenie bleed etc.
What sets have you been forced to buy to keep up? What decks that you
have have suddenly become worthless due to White Wolf printing new
expansions?
ANCILLA
Now, you did some vital research.
Let's skip the periods and do it your way.
In fact, we can already see an increase in cards released. But, yes,
there is the year 2001. A huge amount of cards was released those days.
And there are those inconsistances you mention, which can hardly be
avoided. Agreed. But wouldn't you agree that anything more than the
said 175 for 2006 would be a visible sign that WW is actually
deliberately increasing the annual number of cards released?
I am sure this is exactly the case.
Besides a 7-10-9 structure is what I managed to get used to, and what I
like. While now the players are about to experience a new 9-5-5, or so,
structure. Not a good idea; and why? Because I would simply like to see
less cards being released. I feel better with the slow pace of life.
Fred Scott
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:34:42 -0700, "Fred Scott"
> <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> scrawled:
>
>>I suppose if this is going to be some very limited expansion like
>>TAE***, that might mitigate things somewhat.
>
> Tenth Anniversary .......Egads?
Tenth Anniversary Edition.
Fred
Fred Scott
>
> "Fred Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message news:Gl0mf.1141$Ev.452@fed1read06...
>> "David Zopf" <david...@snetx.net> wrote in message
>> news:4f0mf.3553$4o7...@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
>>> "Fred Scott" <nos...@no.spam.dot.com> wrote in message news:5g%lf.1135$Ev.100@fed1read06...
>>>> "Emmit Svenson" <emmits...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1134065969....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> Then just wait until July to buy cards from the NoR set. Voila! A nine
>>>>> months' delay between sets.
>>>>
>>>> Cool. That'll work. Except of course, we need everybody else's
>>>> agreement not to play the cards for another three months as well.
>>>
>>> Why is that? There's been a near-zero escalation across all of the VTES
>>> product released.
>>
>> So what? It's the real world, we're talking about here. It doesn't
>> matter what the "escalation" is, other peoples' cards affect my
>> play.
>
> Accomodating that effect can be done by reading this newsgroup and the online card text, if you choose not to invest in a set.
I think you're missing the point. This is just bickering over the claim
that waiting until July to buy the cards is "just like a nine months'
delay between sets". I posted to say that was bullshit and it is
bullshit. So I don't see why it makes a difference to start
discussing how people can adapt. Each person already knows how he or
she prefers to adapt to increasing numbers of cards in the game without
others paternalistically listing all the options. The issue is whether
it's a good thing that they be forced to adapt sooner rather than later.
It would be more constructive to stick to that issue rather than trying
to change it.
>> They affect the metagame and the additional choice allows for
>> improvement in certain types of decks. Cut it any way you like,
>> "waiting until July to buy the new cards" is NOT like pretending
>> there's a nine-month delay unless everybody doesn't play the new
>> cards. So let's stick to the real issues and not some pretentious,
>> make-believe way of looking at things.
>
> Don't pretend like you didn't recognize the tongue-in-cheek nature of my "customized release" comment, Fred. You cannot fool me
> anymore...you are waaay smarter than that.
Actually, I was more responding to Emmit's comment than your's. In any
case, humor or not, both comments seem pointed and it was the point to
which I was responding.
Fred
Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
> What sets have you been forced to buy to keep up? What decks that you
> have have suddenly become worthless due to White Wolf printing new
> expansions?
>
I'm not among the Doomsayers, but I too feel that April is too early. Part
of that is play reasons, I've only really been able to explore one new
card from KMW - True Love's Face. Now, I have ideas for several things I
could do with LoB at our tournament next week, but for metagame reasons,
I'm unsure if I'll be able to use any of them. So for cardbase reasons, I
feel that April is too early.
Then there's the matter of cost. The number of cards I want per set is
fixed. The more sets that come out, the more cards I want. The faster the
sets come out, the less likely it is that I'll be able to buy the amount I
want, the more likely it is I'll stop playing altogether. So for money
reasons, I feel that April is too early. Unless LSJ wants to come up and
join our picket line.
--
- Gregory Stuart Pettigrew
The Lasombra
<ethe...@sidehack.gweep.net> wrote:
>The faster the sets come out, the less likely it is that I'll be able to buy the amount I
>want, the more likely it is I'll stop playing altogether.
You can't buy cards, so you will stop playing with cards you have
already spent money on?
Ironic consumerism, in the flesh (or the aether).