What should be done with Reversal of Fortune?

TorranceCircle wrote: I think he was being facetious. I don't think he really thinks Malks have a hard time winning. Sometimes communicative intent is lost on the internet. I hope he was being facetious

I think Surreal have understood that ; what he disagree is that Madness Network help the winning strategy for malkavian (usually said to be S+

Nevermind, Ohlmann to the rescue. I wonder if the cancel-button still submits?

Some data:

Total number of decks in TWDA with...

Reversal of Fortunes: 2 (10 and 12 out of 60 cards)
Madness Network: 41 (median = 3)


There are 7 Madness Networks in each of the TWDs with Reversal of Fortunes.


Combo decks are fragile. They are annoying and typically lock down the game when they work, but they are easily defeated.

Both victories for Reversal of Fortunes came in tournaments held in Paris(22 and 24 player sizes). This suggests to me it is a local phenomenon. That doesn't mean it can be annoying to deal with such a situation for the locals, but it probably doesn't warrant banning at this time.

I know there are folks in Los Angeles who are trying to make it work in tournaments, but it hasn't happened yet. It would be enlightening to hear from anyone who is trying to break it, but is not having success as to their motivations.

Jeff Kuta wrote:
I know there are folks in Los Angeles who are trying to make it work in tournaments, but it hasn't happened yet. It would be enlightening to hear from anyone who is trying to break it, but is not having success as to their motivations.

I was at another table during a tournament in L.A. I heard a lot of moans and groans coming from the table where the R0F deck was being played. The deck didn't win but it was the most talked about.

Ohlmann wrote:
I think Surreal have understood that ; what he disagree is that Madness Network help the winning strategy for malkavian (usually said to be S+

It appears I was the one who misunderstood. I am writing a paper about communicative intent and, lately, I see everything through that lens.

I think MN alone does help stealth bleed, in the same way that enkil cog does. You can set up to bleed on your predators turn then bleed again on your turn. Effectively doubling your stealth bleed actions.

I also think Anka was right when he said, "Playing alone with no interaction from the other players is not the spirit of VTES."

TorranceCircle wrote: I think MN alone does help stealth bleed, in the same way that enkil cog does.

The amount of infrastructure needed to actually defend the Network is non-trivial, though, and does have a significant impact on the raw effectiveness of the stealth/bleed parts of the deck. There's a reason why weenie DEM and vanilla stealth/bleed decks win more than MN decks.