VEKN MALKAVIAN NEWSLETTER, June 2002 - On Time Issue A Letter from the Editor: Before I get into the meat of the newsletter-- a little announcement. I've decided that this will be my last Malkavian Newsletter. I'm still very involved in the game, and plan on remaining so. And I still really enjoy reading all the clan newsletters, and think that they are a great vehicle for the delivery of interesting ideas and V:TES wisdom. But, after 12 months and 11 newsletters, I feel like I've said most everything I have to say on the subject of playing the mad Malks, and my V:TES thoughts are moving in other directions. For anyone who's been reading along for the past year, and especially those who've offered their feedback and submissions, thanks for tuning in. I hope you've enjoyed reading these half as much as I've enjoyed writing them. With the Camarilla set coming out summer the Malks are sure to number of new members and new toys (and a new discipline?). I hope someone else will step up to offer a fresh perspective and carry the baton. *sob* *sob* I'll miss you guys... *big hug*... Right. Back to the newsletter. Strategy Thoughts: 2 Hour Time Limit One fundamental difference between casual play and tournament play is the fixed time limit in tournament rounds. This little nuance hasn't (to my knowledge) undergone much investigation, but it can have a significant impact on differences between good tournament and casual decks, and also on who ends up winning the game. (Note: No, this topic may not be that relevant to the abundance of non-tournament-playing players. But, maybe, thinking about the implications of table-speed and aggressive play will help at any table. So, read on.) There was a time when I didn't give much thought to the 2 hour time limit. Before the game wins rules came into effect the table sweep was king. A fast-forward deck that focused on firepower over staying-power just had to catch one table napping to pick up 5 VP and a ticket to the finals, even if it pooped out in the other 2 prelim rounds. Its not that these tactics no longer work. But the fast decks can expect tougher competition in the finals, and staying-power often wins in the end. Furthermore, under Game Wins a table sweep has less value. Two table wins are often required to assure a spot in the top 5. Consistency counts. Thinking along these lines, combined with my thoughts on postures and table dynamics (see the February newsletter lovingly archived at: http://www.thelasombra.com/newsletter/malkavian_february_2002.htm ...plug, plug) has got me making decks that are a bit slower out of the gate, pack a solid defense, and may not generate a lot of forward firepower until the midgame. This playstyle, combined with a little wallification of our local meta-game, means the games can go a little slower. So there's another factor that must be accounted for: the 2 hour time limit. The bottom line is this: A good tournament deck needs to be able to survive and reliably oust 2 people in 2 hours. That wall deck that refuses to die, and slowly grinds down its prey, isn't going to cut it. Just bloating and surviving doesn't cut it. Ousting your prey and hanging in there doesn't cut it. You need to get 2. You've got 2 hours to do it. The flip side of that is that you really only need to get 2 ousts (and survive). Everything else is gravy. After the first 2 you can either be the last one standing, or even play conservatively and wait for the time to run out to get the table win. And you have a full 2 hours to do it in. If your deck doesn't switch on until 40 minutes into the round, its ok -- so long as you can still get your 2 within the next 80 minutes. The 2 hour limit has implications for deck construction. The .44 or Hunting Ground can really pay off in the casual endgame. The 80 card deck might run out. But remember the clock. You deck only needs to last until time is called. Your permanent investments need to pay off in the first 2 hours. When the whistle blows, the round is over, and all that counts was who got ousted and who didn't. When you're testing your deck for tournament play, keep an eye on the clock. Where did the game stand at the 2 hour mark? Sometimes its not so much who wins, but when. During the game, there are also a few things you can do to put time on your side. There is a direct relationship between the number of players who stay in the game, and the number of turns you are going to see. Many players work to "stabilize" the table, damaging the biggest threat, to keep VPs out of other peoples hands. The problem is that if nobody gets ousted the game will run slowly, and you won't have as many turns to play. By the one hour mark you should have a sense of the table's dynamic. Ask yourself, is this table in danger of going to time? If nobody's demise is imminent then you've got trouble. Remember: you need 2! Someone needs to fall soon, preferably your prey. But it doesn't help to keep your cross-table pal or predator in the game just so you can all go to time. Let people fall. The game will move much faster when its down to 3 (or 2) players. Hopefully, that will give you time to get your mojo working. I've been to one or two tournaments where the final comes around and the organizer says: "Well, they're not going to kick us out of here right away. So, let make it a 3 hour final round." I have mixed feelings about this. A game that goes to the end, especially if its a tournament finals, is much more satisfying than one that times out. So, even if my 80 card deck (and/or my pool supply) runs out at the 140 minute mark, I'm hesitant to complain about the extended time. But, for all the reasons listed above, the time limit does matter. If you know about it before hand, a 3 hour final *might* be worth planning for by bumping the deck up the 90 cards and/or adding a Hunting Ground or other long term investment. I would ask that tournament organizers consider the time available beforehand, and include the length of the final in the tournament announcement. If the game can go more than 2 hours, there are good reasons to be ready for it. Do what you can to put time on your side. Deck: You're Not In Our Club! This little deck is designed to exploit the stackability of Camarilla Segregation while using Anatole's dementation to make sure everyone (but you) has a non-Camarilla vampire. Play multiple Camarilla Segregations. Derange the vampires of Camarilla players. When this pisses off the table and they all come at you, use intercept and obedience to hold them off. Wait for the table to start dying and then Kindred Restructure to pick up the pieces. Crypt: 12 Leandro x2 Lucian x3 Gilbert Duane x2 Gregor Anderseen x2 Anatole x3 Library: 80 Masters: 18 Andeluvian Awakening Anarch Revolt Smiling Jack the Anarch Minion Tap x6 Creepshow Casino Info Highway x2 Dementation The Barrens Fragment of the Book of Nod Maddness Network x2 Metro Underground Mionion: 62 Dementation: 4 Derange x4 Dominate: 14 Obedience x12 Deflection x2 Auspex: 10 Telepathic Misdirect x3 Eagle Sight x4 Enhanced Senses x3 Obfuscate: 13 Forgotten Labrynth x7 Lost in Crowds x4 Elder Impersionation x2 Reaction: 6 2nd Tradition x4 WWEF x2 Action: 13 Judgment: Camarilla Segregation x9 5th Tradition x4 Political: 2 Kindred Restructure x2 The end. Thanks for reading. -Ben Swainbank