NEW YORK CITY VTES LEAGUE RULES (UPDATED for 2013!)
Introduction: So what do you do when you have a small play group, not many tournaments and are trying to make things not stagnant for your players? You start up a league that's what! This is a description of what the New York City VTES league rules will be. Other people are free to use this idea, or hopefully use this idea to spice up this great game in other ways.
Disclaimer: This is not a "official" tournament in terms of VEKN records and rulings. This is an exercise to have fun while being competitive and hopefully to encourage my New York players to try out new decks.
Background: The New York VTES crew is about 8 consistent players and 6 inconsistent players. We play every Wednesday and Friday. It is a good group of people with interesting decks and varying play styles. Okay, enough of this, on to the League!
LEAGUE RULES
The rules are simple.
OVERALL RULES
1) First person to Five Game Wins (GW) wins the league.
2) If someone gets a GW, THAT PERSON Victory Points (VP) in that game are NOT counted.
3) If someone gets VPs but does not get a GW, those points ARE COUNTED.
4) Half points (.5) are not counted.
5) If the is NO game win, then Victory Points (VP) are counted.
6) FIVE Victory Points equal one Game Win
7) In 6 player game (see below), X effects (ex: Conservative Agitation, Parity Shift, Slave Auction) are capped at 5.
8) When a deck has won a Game win (not due to 5VP = 1GW), that deck cannot be played again BY THAT PERSON for the rest of the League.
RULES IN TEST
1) No 3-player league games
2) 4 player - time limit: 1 hour 30 minutes
3) 5 player - time limit: 2 hours
4) 6 player - time limit: 2 hour 30 minutes
5) 1 League game per day per player
Common questions asked in development:
1) Q: Why have a league?
A: To add a bit of competitiveness with some actual prizes.
2) Q: Why only to 5 Game Wins?
A: I want the leagues to be short, to test out some League rules and to get prizes in the hands of the people who play. If someone wins early... okay next League! So far in the first two leagues we have averaged about 4 months, which for me this is just about right.
3) Doesn't the people who go to Wed and Fri games have an advantage?
A: Technically... yes. But the purpose of the League is to encourage people to play. And the person who plays the extra day still needs to win of course.
4) Q: Are you still going to have tournaments?
A: Yes. A smaller tournament is in the works but I want to try and get out of towners to come.
5) Q: What is the prize support?
A: Currently the prize support is 10 packs. In addition, for those who RSVP AND show up (obviously) for a night of gaming will get a bonus random pack. The winner of the league can choose to trade 1-pack for a rare (not-super rare) of my collection.
6) Q: Why allow 6 player games?
A: Because I don't want to penalize people for showing up. RULE: If we have 7 players, 1 person will play two games but can only win on one table (decided randomly and hidden to that player).
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Deck Design and the Engine that Could
Marching thus at night, a battalion is doubly impressive. The silent monster is full of restrained power; resolute in its onward sweep, impervious to danger, it looks a menacing engine of destruction, steady to its goal, and certain of its mission.
-- Patrick MacGill
Deck Design and the Engine that Could
Hello all, for this blog I decided to do something different. Over the last year (ever since the last NAC 2012) or so I have had many discussions with various excellent players about deck design. I have gone over many people decks and discussed their thought processes about their ideas.
I was holding off on writing this particular blog because I wanted to really solidify my thoughts on it. It wasn't until a recent conversation and how the core of a deck is really an "engine" (will get more into that below) that a lot of thoughts snapped into place and I wanted to share it with the rest of you.
We have to start off with a couple of premises and key terms in order for you to relate to my analogies.
- Your Deck (Library/Crypt) is your "Machine". It is the tool in which you play the game To Win.
- In order to win, you have to remove Pool from the table. After much discussion, the two main ways to do that is Bleed and Vote. So these are the Two types of Machines. Bleed Machine and Vote Machine. [As stated in previous blog, other methods of Pool loss (example: Fame) is a "Backup Machine"]
- In order for your machine to run, you need an Engine. The 3 classic Engines are Stealth, Intercept, and Combat Engine. Variations can usually fit under one of those categories (example: Tap and Bleed).
So to be put simply, the better your Engine, the better your Machine will run.
Examples:
Consider some of the decks that are popular but just struggle to work.
Stealthy decks - don't ever want to get caught. A common problem is that there is TOO much stealth and one cannot draw the cards needs to actually win.
Intercept Wall - Block it all! But games can go to time.
Rush Combat decks - your torpor your targets, but after a couple of rescues, you can run out of juice.
So what happens here? Here the designer focused so much on the Engine, that he didn't focus on the Machine idea that the deck was supposed to do, i.e. remove pool.
How can this help you?
There are many guidelines in order to have a good deck design. This is just another methodology that I think can aid some of you.
When making your deck, consider the following:
[After deciding "theme" (key vamp, clan, card, etc) of course]
1) Is my Machine* a Bleed or Vote machine?
2) What is my Engine to make my machine work?
3a) What cards/decks, cause my Machine to fail?
3b) Does my Engine have an answer for it?
3c) Are those cards/decks likely to be seen?
* Now, some of you are already asking, "but there are other ways to remove pool" This is true! Fame, Enticement, Anarch Revolt are just some examples. But I stand pretty strongly that these alternate methods are Supplements to the two main Machines. I call them a "Backup Machine" and they do have their place. For the price of a few card slots, one not has a smaller additional way to remove pool, in case there is a kink in the main machine. But a common problem for deck design is when someone tries to make the Backup Machine the main machine. The simple example is the rush combat decks with Fame and Tension in the Ranks. Those two cards might be enough to get a VP but no so well in getting a Game Win.
Conclusion:
So these are just my musings on how I'm going to treat deck design from now on. I already see flaws in some of my decks and I play to adjust them accordingly. Hopefully people reading this blog entry will take the same considerations into their decks. If anyone wishes to comment and discuss I would be happy to do so.
Adam Hulse
-- Patrick MacGill
Deck Design and the Engine that Could
Hello all, for this blog I decided to do something different. Over the last year (ever since the last NAC 2012) or so I have had many discussions with various excellent players about deck design. I have gone over many people decks and discussed their thought processes about their ideas.
I was holding off on writing this particular blog because I wanted to really solidify my thoughts on it. It wasn't until a recent conversation and how the core of a deck is really an "engine" (will get more into that below) that a lot of thoughts snapped into place and I wanted to share it with the rest of you.
We have to start off with a couple of premises and key terms in order for you to relate to my analogies.
- Your Deck (Library/Crypt) is your "Machine". It is the tool in which you play the game To Win.
- In order to win, you have to remove Pool from the table. After much discussion, the two main ways to do that is Bleed and Vote. So these are the Two types of Machines. Bleed Machine and Vote Machine. [As stated in previous blog, other methods of Pool loss (example: Fame) is a "Backup Machine"]
- In order for your machine to run, you need an Engine. The 3 classic Engines are Stealth, Intercept, and Combat Engine. Variations can usually fit under one of those categories (example: Tap and Bleed).
So to be put simply, the better your Engine, the better your Machine will run.
Examples:
Consider some of the decks that are popular but just struggle to work.
Stealthy decks - don't ever want to get caught. A common problem is that there is TOO much stealth and one cannot draw the cards needs to actually win.
Intercept Wall - Block it all! But games can go to time.
Rush Combat decks - your torpor your targets, but after a couple of rescues, you can run out of juice.
So what happens here? Here the designer focused so much on the Engine, that he didn't focus on the Machine idea that the deck was supposed to do, i.e. remove pool.
How can this help you?
There are many guidelines in order to have a good deck design. This is just another methodology that I think can aid some of you.
When making your deck, consider the following:
[After deciding "theme" (key vamp, clan, card, etc) of course]
1) Is my Machine* a Bleed or Vote machine?
2) What is my Engine to make my machine work?
3a) What cards/decks, cause my Machine to fail?
3b) Does my Engine have an answer for it?
3c) Are those cards/decks likely to be seen?
* Now, some of you are already asking, "but there are other ways to remove pool" This is true! Fame, Enticement, Anarch Revolt are just some examples. But I stand pretty strongly that these alternate methods are Supplements to the two main Machines. I call them a "Backup Machine" and they do have their place. For the price of a few card slots, one not has a smaller additional way to remove pool, in case there is a kink in the main machine. But a common problem for deck design is when someone tries to make the Backup Machine the main machine. The simple example is the rush combat decks with Fame and Tension in the Ranks. Those two cards might be enough to get a VP but no so well in getting a Game Win.
Conclusion:
So these are just my musings on how I'm going to treat deck design from now on. I already see flaws in some of my decks and I play to adjust them accordingly. Hopefully people reading this blog entry will take the same considerations into their decks. If anyone wishes to comment and discuss I would be happy to do so.
Adam Hulse
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)