- And a munchkin I am. =D /Bjorne I ll do anything to win, tralalala. On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 02:53:32 -0000, Leviticus DarksydeMessage 1 of 12 , Mar 8 2:04 AMView SourceAnd a munchkin I am. =D
"I'll do anything to win, tralalala."
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 02:53:32 -0000, Leviticus Darksyde
> But as I keep telling you people, I CAN'T USE CARDS I DON'T HAVE. I
> don't have Sorry, Wrong Number, so I can't use it.
> And if you look closely, I do have plot cancelers in a good majority
> of my decks. Plus, Gnomes of Bavaria does bring brute force to
> bear. So do Illegal Aliens, and Ross Perot's Thirst for Power.
> Truth be told, ANY MUNCHKIN CAN PLAY A POWER DECK. A REAL player can
> win with a so-called weaker deck, if he has the guts, the subtlety,
> and the brains. If you HAVE to play a power deck to win, then it's
> the DECK that's winning, not YOU. If you can't win with a particular
> deck, maybe the deck isn't the problem. In some cases, you have to
> make deals with other players that will give you an advantage.
> Sometimes you have to play weak and pathetic to get the other players
> to underestimate you, and leave you alone to grow (just don't
> overplay it, or you will be attacked). And don't forget, the nail
> that sticks up gets hammered down. If you look too powerful, the
> other players will combine against you.
> If you can get the cards when you want them, fine, but DON'T BE DUMB
> WITH THE CARDS IF THE PLAY'S NOT THERE! Mistakes can kill you just
> as easily as a weak deck.
> And, as I keep saying, THESE DECKS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN STONE. If you
> need to make subtle changes to make the deck better, DO IT! Just
> don't come crying to me that you can't win with a particular deck,
> because I'll just laugh at you and call you a munchkin!
> *Leviticus Darksyde*
> Yahoo! Groups Links
- Hi Leviticus, well, I guess I m a munchkin too. Like Björne. :) ... At the risk of inviting more SENTENCES IN CAPS, this strikes me as slightly naive. IMO,Message 2 of 12 , Mar 10 7:05 AMView SourceHi Leviticus,
well, I guess I'm a munchkin too. Like Björne. :)
>A REAL player can win with a so-called weaker deck, if he has theAt the risk of inviting more SENTENCES IN CAPS, this strikes me as
>guts, the subtlety, and the brains.
slightly naive. IMO, there are definately decks that are just too
weak to win (I could build you one in 2 minutes :). Similarly there
are decks that are very very strong.
Consider this beautiful (but not perfect) classic:
7 group deck: New York, Mafia, Clone Arrangers, Cyborg Soldiers,
Cyborg Soldiers, Cyborg Soldiers, Flying Saucer.
36 plot deck: 36 SMWNMTK.
Turn One: ATO Mafia. Bavaria token to ATO Saucer. Discard from deck
to ATO Cyborgs (on NY).
Turn Two: ATO Clone Arrangers as puppets of NY. Bavaria token to ATO
Cyborgs for Clone Arrangers. Discard from deck to ATO Cyborgs on
With NYs special ability, thats 50 power on turn 2.
Plus you can cancel 4 plot plays with discards from deck on turn 1.
And you can cancel 2 more on turn 2.
Mind you, I'd NEVER play this deck.
But if nothing bounces, it is sickeningly powerful.
- Degenerate decks are easy, if you have the cards to build one. Yes, there ARE decks that are too weak to win, but there are also decks that are deceptivelyMessage 3 of 12 , Mar 10 5:10 PMView SourceDegenerate decks are easy, if you have the cards to build one.
Yes, there ARE decks that are too weak to win, but there are also
decks that are deceptively strong (they look weak in the beginning,
but become Powerful as the game goes along).
Sure some of my decks could use some fine tuning, but that's why I
prefer to put them in Geocities rather than post them here, so I can
make changes as I feel necessary.
And some of these decks are really not meant for tournament play,
anyway. However, some of them CAN be, with a little fine tuning. I
think you're quick to dismiss them all because they don't contain
Assassins or SubGenius cards. Your so-called Decks of the Week are
evidence of that. I have yet to see ONE that's built on all cards
from the original set.
All I'm asking is you at least TRY some of them before dismissing
them outright. Fine tune then as you see fit. You might be
- Yes, I ve looked at your decks. Look, nobody is taking a swing at you here. Björne merely said that where he usually plays, he wouldn t want to show up withMessage 4 of 12 , Mar 11 1:50 AMView SourceYes, I've looked at your decks.
Look, nobody is taking a swing at you here.
Björne merely said that where he usually plays, he wouldn't want to
show up with one of your decks _as printed_. The same goes for me.
Nobody said that they sucked, that the themes weren't cool, or that
they couldn't be tweaked to fit different environments.
And I quite like reading a cool themed deck.
>Yes, there ARE decks that are too weak to win, but there are alsoAnd I was just saying that power is a relative thing.
>decks that are deceptively strong (they look weak in the beginning,
>but become Powerful as the game goes along).
Your chances do depend on what your opponents show up with.
If anyone shows up with a turn 3 winner, there may not be time
for 'the game to go along'.
>I think you're quick to dismiss them all because they don't containI'm merely saying that with more options (i.e. cards) comes more
>Assassins or SubGenius cards.
power. For example, doing a place deck is a _lot_ easier with
It is also worth noting that there are some cards in the later sets
that you need to be aware of _if_ you play against decks that might
include them. (For example, Assassins has 2 yellow NWOs that hurt
>Your so-called Decks of the Week are evidence of that. I have yetWhy would I restrict myself from available cards?
>to see ONE that's built on all cards from the original set.
The DotW is about interesting legal decks.
Someone else might submit a deck with just the basic set, and it
might become a DotW winner, but I don't create such decks myself.
But as DotWs are supposed to be playable in the current legal
environment, such decks need to be aware of any "crippler" cards.
BTW, if you want to see inspiring basic set decks, you could visit
the DotW archive. The first 20 or so decks use strictly cards from
the basic set.
- Thanks for clearing that up. But one thing I keep saying, these decks are not written in stone. If you have Assassins/SubGenius cards that will make themMessage 5 of 12 , Mar 11 4:54 PMView SourceThanks for clearing that up.
But one thing I keep saying, these decks are not written in stone.
If you have Assassins/SubGenius cards that will make them better, go
ahead and use them. I don't mind.
Also, you're not restricted to how many Plots you can duplicate
(you're not playing at my house). The only reason that rule is in
place is because of the limited supply of cards I have. (You
probably have more decks than I have cards). If you feel some Plots
are more useful than others, duplicate them.
I have an idea for a Communist/Green anti-Corporate deck, but it
requires certain cards I don't have, so I can't build it (yet).
My Ross Perot deck can be won in three turns or less if the right
cards come up, but don't be dumb with the cards if the play's not
there. Also, two of my UFO decks bring a lot of Power to the table,
as does The Tobacco Lobby, and a revised Zurich deck I call The Money
Deck. Each of these can be fine tuned to suit your style of play.
And if you have x copies of The Stars Are Right, you can churn out
all those Magic Resources in Technomagic without breaking a sweat.
Sure, anyone can built a degenerate Bavaria deck with six or seven
copies of New York. But I won't let them in my games. Why? Because
that means they brought in outside cards, and I don't want them
getting mixed up with my cards as the game progresses (During a game,
card tend to change hands). It's a pain in the ass when the game is
over, determining whose cards are whose. So we play with the one (2x)
deck, where you can build your 45 card deck from. All you would have
to do then is return the cards when the game is over.
And sure, if I had the cards, I could show up with a deck full of
SMWNMtK's, Hoaxes, Sorry, Wrong Numbers, and S & L Scams, but where's
the fun in that? Sure it might be good for Tournament play if you're
serious about winning that prize money, but if you're just playing at
home with a group of friends, it takes all the fun out of it. And if
the game isn't fun, what's the point?