Re: Remember: No Titles for Lena
- From: "Pat" <patrick.lusk.nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 23:49:00 -0500
"CthuluKitty" <vtanarchist@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1139017287.192385.95430@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Here's my Pander deck that won me so many friends and, sadly, only 0GW 3
VP,
in Providence.
Yeah, it sure wasn't pleasant to play next too, but that's the game
sometimes. Sorry if I vented my rage in any inappropriate or
unsportsmanlike way in round 2.
No need to apologize, you handled what had to be a frustrating situation
just fine.
Although given that there were three decks with Dominate at the table, and
the fifth featured Alexandra, I don't feel any compunction to apologize
myself. I think we were all playing proven strong deck archetypes.
Nothing special, although the Kaymakli Nightmares can be very nice if
played
at the right moment in the early game. In the end game, it cycles for
free
with little or no effect.
The Nightmares is a cool card. Ironically, it helped me quite a bit
(well...it didn't really since 0 vp is 0 vp no matter how you cut it),
since it cycled my crypt into weenies. Prior to Kaymakli getting
played, I had Cailean in my uncontrolled region and I was hoping to
bring him out. Doing so would have a complete disaster that game.
I debated whether to play it or not, but I felt it was worthwhile to slow
down Chris for a turn or two. He had 5 pool on one vamp, so I figured he
probably wouldn't get anybody out right away if I played it. If Chris had
gotten somebody out, I wouldn't have played it on my 2nd turn.
But you're right, it did put you in a better position to defend yourself.
Not sure why it's currently sitting at 87 cards... I know I gave Johannes
a
Life in the City for LSJ to autograph at GenCon, but I have no idea what
happened to the other 2 cards. They were probably a Crusade and a KRC.
A deck like this hardly needs to be at 90 cards anyhow. Many of the
Legacy decks in the TWDA have much fewer.
True, certainly, although I like to play it at 90, just to squeeze in a few
utility cards like Kin Seg, SR, Disputed Territory, etc., while not
impairing my ability to draw consistent early Crusades and KRCs.
I think what makes this deck so sleezy (Pat called it as much himself,
so I'm not trying to insult anyone) is not just that it does a lot of
pool damage with weenies. The real sleeze is that it lacks any kind of
defense or alternate method of play, which means that if anyone does
anything to stop it--rushing it, blocking it, outvoting, etc.--it is
forced to make a heavy-handed deal or just get crushed. My sense is
that while they're certainly not illegal (nor should they be as there's
no practical way to make them so), nobody likes to play in games where
2 other players agree to a table splitting deal.
My version of the Pander deck, if it's rolling well, can defend itself by
Con Boon bloating, but that is pretty much the only defense. (Others may
have better defense in the archetype, so I'm not speaking of anything other
than mine.)
Table-splitting sucks if you're part of the silent majority who gets
screwed, but it seems to happen all too frequently in the big tournaments,
and not just by vote decks.
Second round of 05 GenCon NAC, first day, second round. The two combat decks
were carving up the table by the third turn. As it turned out, I had just
enough defense and fast bleed to sneak 1 VP before getting smooshed, but
otherwise, the two fighty decks owned the table.
Decks like this
almost guarantee that such deals will take place (didn't you make a
similar VP deal in another round, or am I making that up?).
I have no idea what you're talking about. I may have accidentally ousted my
predator in round 1... twice... and then accidentally gotten a withdrawal
VP...
Okay, you deserve a serious response. Here's the quick version:
Nick Watkins with Malk/!Malk dem bleed preying on
Ben from Maine with Osebo block/fight preying on
Me with Pander preying on
Scott Gomes with anarch Undue Influence & serpentis toolbox preying on
John Eno with blocky Tremere/!Tremere
I hit Scott hard early, but Ben got out Homa and started blocking me a lot.
A LOT. (I had Pentexed him for one turn, but of course, it was immediately
burned by Scott. Then the blocking started.)
John got out Kij, Nick got out Korah. Scott bled a lot and gained a lot of
Undue pool and Blood Doll pool and also corrupted one of my Archbishops with
the anarch corruption card. Ben had Massassi and Homa with Pulses and was
refusing to rush backward, despite getting quite a bit of pressure from
Nick. Nick had Rachel out, and Ben was apparently fearful of agg poke.
Oh, yeah, Scott Tempted one of my guys and let John torpor him, so John was
clearly not doing me any favors either.
John was mostly trying to block Scott's Undue bleeds, so he was fairly
defensive at this point. Ben's 6 sitting bleed would have done me in
quickly, so I made a deal with Nick to get Rachel's votes on my KRCs. (The
Prisci were in a standoff, so Rachel plus my votes were enough to out vote
Scott's stolen voters.)
I ousted Ben backward when he was caught out of intercept. (He seemed to be
jamming on Pulses, he discarded a bunch of them with Dreams.) Nick was
continuing to support my votes, but he was catching a lot of pressure from
John's bleeds and long range combat and was eventually ousted by John.
Scott agreed to give me a withdrawal VP in exchange for helping him kill
John; he still got the GW that way, and I'd have died to John without the
deal, so I think it was the best outcome for both Scott and me.
- Pat
.
- References:
- [Deck] Remember: No Titles for Lena
- From: Pat
- Re: Remember: No Titles for Lena
- From: CthuluKitty
- [Deck] Remember: No Titles for Lena
- Prev by Date: Re: Remember: No Titles for Lena
- Next by Date: Re: Tournament in Pittsburgh
- Previous by thread: Re: Remember: No Titles for Lena
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
