Re: Public playtesting?
- From: ashur@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 02:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
On 3 Okt, 15:10, Chris Berger <ark...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 3, 6:47 am, as...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I just don´t get why the guy writes stuff that has nothing to do with
the issue. AND could be taken as an insult! Obviously I am taking this
serious, I am not "out of my mind" or "bing silly", and he knows that.
He just want´s to make me feel bad, instead of showing strong
arguments.
But what kind of arguments would you make against someone that says
"Dominate is the worst discipline in the game, it's virtually
unplayable. I have no idea why anyone would even think about using
dominate." or "Voter Captivation is so cornercase. You have to get a
vote to pass, and how many times do you actually see votes passed?
Having to get the whole table to agree is not worth it."
And who say this? I don´t say this! It would help if you bothered to
read my posts, instead of trying to pin these quotes on me (or what
you are trying to do, I´m not sure).
This person
is obviously playing a different game than you, or, alternately, is on
crack. Crack so good it makes you wanna slap your mama. I don't know
what game you're playing, or what your definition of useless is, but
discounting every card that isn't obviously better than everything
that already exists is just silly.
It´s not what this is about. It´s about if the card is ever worth
putting in a deck at all. And the "colourful slang" is totally a waste
of time. Just go with "I think you are wrong", followed by some solid
arguments.
Lost in Translation is a good
card. It can basically go in any deck that doesn't have DOM or AUS
and has a big vampire to use it. It's not great, but bounce is huge.
It's defense + offense, and having it without a discipline requirement
is game-changing.
My experience is that I have never seen anyone use Lost in
Translation, and I have only seen it in one decklist of a winning deck
on the net. On those grounds I cannot see why I should deem it as a
good card.
If we can't agree on that, then I don't see how we
can reconcile your feeling that LotN is mostly unplayable wallpaper
and mine (and I believe Peter's as well - though I don't want to
overstate his position) that it's one of the better sets that White
Wolf has put out.
Again, bother to write my posts and don´t put words in my mouth. I
have never said that LotN is "mostly unplayable Wallpaper". On the
contraty, I have said that it is a good set.
Leave it now, Ben Peal want this thread to die.
Ben Peal ain't the boss of me. Or Peter. Or, presumably, you. I
hope that Peter will continue to post non-stop until this thread
reaches 2000 posts. If it pisses off someone, Ben Peal or otherwise,
all the better! ;)
That was my point. All the people who think they are moderators here
don´t understand what a newsgroup is about, I guess.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Peter D Bakija
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Peter D Bakija
- Re: Public playtesting?
- References:
- Public playtesting?
- From: ashur
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Peter D Bakija
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: ashur
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: James Coupe
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: wumpus
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: ashur
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Peter D Bakija
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: ashur
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Peter D Bakija
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Petri Wessman
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: ashur
- Re: Public playtesting?
- From: Chris Berger
- Public playtesting?
- Prev by Date: Re: Public playtesting?
- Next by Date: Re: Public playtesting?
- Previous by thread: Re: Public playtesting?
- Next by thread: Re: Public playtesting?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
