Brewers Corner: Swedish Champion

Less than a week left to the Swedish Nationals held in Örebro, bleedcapitol of, dare I say, the world.

So many thoughts rush through my head.

What deck to play?

What will the meta be?

Whats a realistic goal. To win? To get to the final? To avoid becomming Apache Jones again?

Can you choose decks based on your what you want to achieve? When you look at some decks I can think "this might win a table or two, but can it win a final table?"

A perfect example of this is a weenie presence deck. Out of three tables it will likely sweep one and get you a couple of more vp:s since your first prey will almost always have a really tough start, but I have very seldom, if ever, seen one win a final table. Is this deck type a good choice for an ECQ? If your primary goal is to qualify and everything beyond that is a bonus then I would say yes, but if it is to win the whole thing, then I would not see this deck type as an option. This doesn´t feel promising for the Nationals.

Should I go with the staple deck?

I mean the standard formula where turn 2 you get your first guy at cap 7-8. Turn 3 govern down and get your next guy. Turn 4 both your minions govern down and turn 5 you should bleed for 24 and get your first vp. The strategy is naturally supported by eurostealth and Dreams in the master package and multi act (Ven/!ven) or stealth (Gio/Las/Mal g 1-2). The deck is hardly innovating, but it does get vp:s and gw:s.

I can go over the top with a glass canon like al-Muntahir bleeds for 16, Una or some turbo Baron or Nergal Soulgem brew. These kinds of decks are, in my mind, decks that very seldom win a final table since usually all the other finalists know what you are playing and if you get to do your thing(tm) they wont win. Pentex from your grand prey is not an option you should discard when sitting down on a final table with a deck like that.

The Ashurs-Liquidation trick is still strong, but it doesn´t have the same put through as it used to have, since most players have understood it´s strength and it´s weaknesses. And as Myrdin have already written about the master hate is running rampant in Stockholm, and it´s spreading. I expect to see alot of that in Örebro as well and that presents a big problem for this kind of deck.

Last year I played a royalty kind of deck with Malgorzata and crypt acc. In my first game there was 28 votes on the table after the first IC was Golconda:d. Is there soemthing as bad in V:tes when you sit down at a table with a deck that is really focused on one thing and the table and your position on it more or less prohibits you from doing just that thing? Maybe I should try to avoid that trap this year.

The first time that I played the Swedish Nationals I had a toolboxy bleed deck with one Demonstration, two Fear of Mekhet and three Framing an Ancient Grudge and needed either card in all three of my games and didn´t draw them fast enough. What was the lesson I can learn from that?

The second year I played a Helena wall deck that lacked enough forward motion to make an impact in the meta that year.

So after these experiences playing toolbox or wall are usually options I discard in larger tournaments. Even if you get the table you usually doesn´t get more than 3 vp:s which means you almost need vp:s in all games, and not counting that you will be dead by seating(tm) at at least one table is a bit too optimistic. Oh well, I have two more days to brew.

One thing is sure though: It´s going to be a blast!

Hope to see you there.

Tomas

Never respect thine elders

We all have them. Every single playgroup have a player, or a few players, that play more, are better, and will most likely have a bigger chance of winning the current game then others on the table. In Stockholm we are blessed with quite a few very good players. The majority of the players have been playing forever and the newer ones are doing very good. But still there are games where that player is more likely to win.

And then there are the players who not only have been playing forever, but also have been playing together forever. Based on years and years of earlier experience playing with these people one has a tendency to play slightly different, talking different, and to some extent acting different when one of the others is someone you have been playing with since 1994. I would like to call this a form of respect, or fear or admiration, which might give that player an advantage against the others.

The combination of the above is something that I believe is a big reason that some of the players around the world keep on winning game after game after game.

One example is me, Randal Rudstam. I have been playing for a very long time, not 1994 but still, and I’m a pretty good player. The years I lack with the really old players I make up with the fact that I have been demoing this game to a lot of beginners and teaching them how to play. This gives me a advantage – people are evolving and sees me less and less as an authority figure, but it is still there and I can see it once in a while.

Another example is a man named Erik Torstensson. He a very good friend of mine and a very, very good player – some would say he is the best player having won two of the biggest international turnaments there are. His extensive playing and years of tournament wins gives him a very special position when sitting down at a table of V:tES. He has a lot of respect of the Swedish V:tES community, and that and the fact that he is a immensely good player grants him a lot of gamewins.

In my case I can´t really complain much – one does like to win right? – but I have on several occasions been irritated, not at Erik himself, but at games where Erik has been, in my opinion, handed the win by others that could have gone for the oust or not taken that deal which gave Erik the game. But as with Erik I can see how others that I play with could be less happy with me at a table and a player or two who respects me a little too much.

The lesson of the day is that past experiences and accomplishments, teaching the game to other included, is no reason to assume a player currently is playing at his or her best. This game is a lot about being up to date with meta and slaking, i.e not playing for a while, does lessen your skill.

I try to never assume a player will be better than me or treat him or her any differently just because I know the player has done well in the past.

/Randyman