Parity Shift poll and discussion

Izaak wrote: Let's keep this discussion about Parity Shift and not about KRC.

If vote decks without Parity Shift were strong, you'd see more of them. We don't, therefore vote decks without Parity Shift are not competitive (enough).

Last 10 decks with political cards in them in twda show that 5 of them used parity shifts, and only 2 of them (one with 4 political actions, one with 3) have parity shift as political card played in highest quantities (2 each of those).

Izaak wrote:

and many reasons to play princes (papillon, traditions).

Neither of these have anything to do with a vote deck.

1st tradition have something, last i heard it was political action. It was to show you that there are reasons to play camarilla outside parity shift.

The only change I agree with is setting X to 3. I believe any other change would make the game worse. Weakening Prince decks makes non-Prince political decks more powerful but only relative to Prince decks! For the better of the game I would rather see more tier 1 non-Camarilla vote deck types.

*Sigh*

Last 10 decks with political cards in them in twda

Yes, because if you play 1 random Anarchist Uprising you are a vote deck, right? I actually went through the trouble of checking the first 10 actual political decks.

1) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011mos is not a vote deck.
2) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011atse plays Parity Shift
3) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011cjdfb is a Highly specialized Recursion // Honor the Elders vote deck and would get hurt by using Parity Shift due to its absurd poolgain
4) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011jr3sfs plays Parity Shift
5) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011asjcq is not a vote deck
6) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011comssjc I'll give you this one (although: 2R+F)
7) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011ano plays Parity Shift
www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011uknat is not a vote deck, but does play Parity Shift anyway
9) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011npbdvs Lutz / push / cap/ Villein is a somewhat specialized type of votedeck, but sure, this one doesn't use Parity Shift and probably shouldn't.
10) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011ecfcq is not a vote deck, but plays Parity Shift anyway.
11) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011ddlmno plays Parity Shift
12) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011ddlmno plays Parity Shift
13) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011sac is a highly specialized "Summon History IC member" deck
14) www.thelasombra.com/decks/twd.htm#2011ffqjdfb plays Parity Shift

10 political decks
- 2 are specialized vote decks with a trick that doesn't work with Parity Shift
- 1 is a massive bloat deck that usually sits at 20+ pool and thus gets hurt by using Parity Shift.
- 1 is an actual vote deck without Parity Shift (or votepush for that matter, and it has 9 Governs, inherent +bleed and stealth too)
- 6 are Camarilla centered vote decks with varying amounts of Parity Shift.

Now tell me that Parity Shift isn't an important cog in a vote deck.

Also, you're not missing the point:

It was to show you that there are reasons to play camarilla outside parity shift.

Nobody is saying Camarilla is only used for Parity Shift. I'm saying, that there is no reason whatsoever to play a *vote* deck that is not Camarilla, unless you have some superspecialized vote deck such as the ones I mentioned in mind.

Therefore, my believe is that Parity Shift is an important card for "generic" vote decks to be as competitive as bleed decks.

Weakening Prince decks makes non-Prince political decks more powerful only relative to Prince decks!

This is pretty spot-on.

Izaak wrote: The thing is, I don't think generic vote decks without Parity Shift (ie, Sabbat vote decks) are very competitive.

That's 'cause they don't have Parity Shift.

If Parity Shift was less stupidly powerful (once per game, once per meth, whatever), generic vote decks without Parity Shift would be perfectly competitive.

bakija wrote:

Izaak wrote: The thing is, I don't think generic vote decks without Parity Shift (ie, Sabbat vote decks) are very competitive.

That's 'cause they don't have Parity Shift.

If Parity Shift was less stupidly powerful (once per game, once per meth, whatever), generic vote decks without Parity Shift would be perfectly competitive.

Only relative to Parity Shift decks. The correct answer is to give non-Parity Shift decks a Parity Shift.

Dorrinal wrote: Only relative to Parity Shift decks. The correct answer is to give non-Parity Shift decks a Parity Shift.

Well, except that vote decks without Parity Shift are already perfectly viable. It is just that they seem not worth playing without Parity Shift, simply 'cause they don't have Parity Shift. 'Cause if you can use Parity Shift, you should. As it is that stupidly powerful.

Remove (or limit) Parity Shift from the equation, and all other vote decks look much more attractive.

Sabbat decks can make perfectly viable vote decks that only suffer 'cause they can't use Parity Shift. The Sabbat vote decks aren't inherently bad. They just are not as good as Camarilla vote decks. 'Cause of no Parity Shift. Downpower Parity Shift, and Sabbat vote decks look more competitive. Yeah, Camarilla vote decks become less good. But that is ok. As Parity Shift is too powerful anyway. And non Camarilla vote decks become more attractive, as they don't suffer (as much) from not having Parity Shift.