Most Interesting Decks to Play

Izaak wrote:

I generally find toolboxes and bruise bleed decks the most fun to play. Mainly because then you at least have a chance to beat what comes against you,

This is an interesting perception, as both toolbox and B/B decks are inconsistent at what they do while creating the false sense of being able to deal with more different scenario's. This is simply false. Yes, occasionally your toolbox deck does its card-order magic and you find yourself sweeping a difficult table, but on average, however, your actual good deck will gather more VPs on every table.

You might not have noticed but the EC was won by a toolbox deck this year so they might just be better than what you give them credit for.

ReverendRevolver wrote: Im kinda insulted that almost veryone elses statements were mocked, but not mine.

Combat ! Toolbox! Mock! Mock! Mock! Mock! Mock! Mock! I hope that helps.

ReverendRevolver wrote: The next agro deck i consider will use everything it can to wreck mmpa decks.

I feel this way too. I am thinking of making a 18 sudden reversal deck.

Count Orlok wrote: Clearly, there is a divide between competitive and interesting decks. While a Malk '94 stealth bleed might be powerful, it isn't all that thrilling to play after awhile.

So what decks do you find the most interesting to play?

I really love playing ally decks. There's something about the difference but alliance between vampires and dinky minions that I find really compelling. It can be a delicate balancing act getting them out, but once the horde has assembled, I get no greater pleasure than watching them sack Rome. My particular favorite are Samedi Reanimated Corpses.

Have you considered Ian Forestall with Reanimated Corpses and Nocturns?

TorranceCircle wrote:

ReverendRevolver wrote: The next agro deck i consider will use everything it can to wreck mmpa decks.

I feel this way too. I am thinking of making a 18 sudden reversal deck.

That is not a bad idea for more than the stated reason....

Izaak wrote:

I generally find toolboxes and bruise bleed decks the most fun to play. Mainly because then you at least have a chance to beat what comes against you,

This is an interesting perception, as both toolbox and B/B decks are inconsistent at what they do while creating the false sense of being able to deal with more different scenario's. This is simply false. Yes, occasionally your toolbox deck does its card-order magic and you find yourself sweeping a difficult table, but on average, however, your actual good deck will gather more VPs on every table.

I also found this comment comment-worthy. (Actually your entire post is quite interesting.)

As Klaital pointed out, Grinder decks are toolbox decks. It just occurred to me that since "toolbox" is perjorative, they had to find a way to talk about competitive toolbox decks, and thus they came up with "grinder." Also Nana Buruku w/weenie Animalism.

I guess I have a reputation for playing toolbox decks, but to me there is no such thing. There are three things that a successful deck should do: 1. oust, 2. defend, and 3. build to endgame. If you take a blatantly balanced approach to these three elements, some people cry "Toolbox!" Those people think that you are better off building a focused deck that will get you to the finals for sure if you hit the correct meta.

A toolbox deck, or a "balanced" deck, as I like to call it, can't assure you of anything. However, a balanced deck may succeed in any meta. That is the advantage. It requires skill, knowing your strategy, and having a rigorous combat plan.

Maybe the scorn for toolbox decks come from decks that are badly balanced. When I play a "toolbox" deck, I am less concerned with "card-order magic" and more concerned with my plan of action. What was my plan for defending from X? What was my plan for ousting? What was my plan for building and controlling the table? My defense, offense, building, and combat cards should come up in the correct measure so that I always have a good chance of drawing what I need.

If you rely on "card-order magic" to solve a particular problem, you don't have a toolbox deck. You have a theme deck. I like this clan (like Brujah) so I am doing what the clan seems to do well (B/. "Oh, if I can just draw the one Legwork and Elder Intervention I put in my deck I can block this stealth bleeder." "Oh, if I can just draw my one Kevlar Vest, I can get past this Thetmes deck." That's not a toolbox - that's just bad deckbuilding.

When toolbox first started getting thrown around, it was often applied to decks that had no coherent plan for how to win but rather just did a variety of things. I became a believer in the idea that a toolbox deck should still be "cored" on some strategy, that the versatility wasn't the point but the add on.

Actually, I may be misreading Izaak's comments, but the 60% coherent plan, 40% not boring stuff is along the lines of what a toolbox deck should be, though not to say we are talking about the same things. He may be talking about 40% tech or side strategy that wouldn't make the deck any more versatile.

Over time, I've changed views a bit. A pure, "good stuff" deck might have no coherent strategy but succeed based upon the power of small amounts of Govern, Conditioning, KRC, bounce, WWS, whatever where there's no coherent plan but you also aren't playing bad cards.

Still, something like "I play everything this clan can play" decks or "I'm sure people will block my bleeds of 2 for when I unload Burning Wraths and then Perpetual Care them out of the game" decks are not toolbox so much as they are incoherent.