To Tim:

Support of a Path to Victory and the cards working well together (my #1 and #2s), when taken in a vacuum, have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a deck is "strong" or "weak" in terms of a win/loss record. IMO, there are elements to a deck's design that *must* be included in order for a deck design to be considered effective in the #1 and #2 criteria. Yes, the level of support or how well the cards work together can (and sometimes does) directly impact a deck's win/loss record (that record basically defines how strong or weak it is), but this doesn't mean that it should or even has to be viewed this way. And just because a deck falls in balance in terms of weak or strong, does not mean the design is good.

The very definition of a path to victory demands that the path be supported, otherwise there's not really a path to begin with. The deck's strength or weakness in terms of win/loss record has very little to do with the path to victory and the support of said path. Now, if we're talking values, such as attack values, DD values, movement values, etc, then absolutely I think the design directly impacts the strength or weakness of a deck's performance. But I wasn't talking about that. I'm talking about the design elements themselves (the presence or absence of movement, card draws, etc) and how those elements work together (or against each other). Those things are critical to a deck's design, and critical to the way I evaluate deck designs.

I am completely flabbergasted that you would consider those elements "irrelevant" to a deck design. I definitely do not understand the statement "Irrelevant if we're not assuming we're designing a strong deck." I'm not assuming Vader's deck has to be strong at all. I'm only assuming that the cards should work well together and that the PtV be well supported. Jango's cards work really well together, but his deck isn't strong. Han's deck has a very well supported PtV, but because the strength of the deck is wrapped up in a single card, his deck's strength is tied to luck more often than not, and therefore his overall win/loss record would imply that Han's is a weak deck. See what I mean here?

Now, to address Tim's specific points about the PtV (thanks for putting it all together in one easy to read thread...I get your perspective much better now):

On your first point, I wholeheartedly disagree that his basic deck and ATE support his path to victory (HP, sure, at least for Vader he has the highest in the game!...his minors are a different story though). A red deck is not the right deck for an "attrition" path IMO. An attrition path requires a long game, which requires a lot of staying power. So, in that regard, Green is the right choice, or even Blue...you've got to have some defense for an attrition path (and Hasbro got it right with Emp). But, yeah, I agree with Roman. ATE does not strike fear into me as an opponent any longer. I do not agree that it helps support the attrition path, because like Roman, in my play circle the card ends up being nothing more than an A3. And it never keeps people from NOT going right after Vader from the get-go. Maybe this is a strategic reason, but if the design is intended to put a strong card in the deck to keep people from attacking Vader without defense to back it up...well...it isn't working in my play circle.

Your second point is basically a rehash of ATE keeping people away from Vader, but the sub-point of DSD healing Vader I also disagree with. Pretty much everyone has complained about how ineffective an A3 DSD is at healing, so this argument doesn't really hold up. You could maybe make the argument that it was *intended* to support the PtV, but in reality, it doesn't. I also don't agree that Wrath and TD "support" the path...those cards ARE the path....(see my points below for more on that).

The third point about YSANC supporting the path I only halfway agree with. Roman already said it, but seeing your opponent's hand to setup ATE is not really helping much and it's a waste of an action. Pulling Special Card DD and movement *does* help and I will concede that point. But, the card is completely ineffective against someone like Maul for example (he's a rare case), and could support the path more directly if it included power combats, or contained random discards or pulled some defense cards or something. So does it support the PtV, yes...but does it do it very well? No.

Your fourth point I will get to last. But your fifth point is an interesting one. While it is true that Choke and DSD support the path, I've already said that in practice DSD is ineffective (so much so that it can be considered to NOT support the path), it is when you combine all three cards together, that they don't' work well as a set. When taken individually and out of context, sure I'll agree that they support the PtV, but when taken together in the context of Vader's deck, they work against each other, *especially* in 1 vs 1 games. And that is key to my evaluation of Vader's deck as having a "poor design".

The fourth idea you posted "...it has a single path to victory supported by all of his talents" is one I don't agree with. As stated above, I feel ATE does not work to support the PtV, because I don't agree that it accomplishes anything to keep opponent's at bay. While I am willing to concede that that DSD supports the path to victory, I will not concede that it is effective at doing so. And finally, while Choke and DSD may support the PtV when considered individually and out of context, I feel that when you take them together and within the context of a deck that relies on a card like Wrath to win (and a deck without movement, defense or adequate healing), they work against each other and are in reality very poor support of the PtV (support maybe, but very ineffective support). In a deck where you kill off minors (in a game where the major character can then heal when minors are dead), it totally offsets any advantage Vader might have had with DD.

So, no, I don't agree with you that "all of his talents" support his PtV. First of all, I think we're getting off track as to what the whole "Path to Victory" thing even means. The deck has some cards that make up the "Path to Victory" and the other cards that are support for said path. If we go with the attrition model, then surely Throw Debris and Wrath are the PtV, while the rest of the deck supports this path. I get it, he has a healing attack and a discarding card to help prolong his game, as well as a card that is *supposed* to keep opponents at Bay allowing him to draw up. And Choke can exist either as a part of the PtV (depending on who his opponent(s) is/are), or as support for the Path. If you agree with that breakdown, then at least we're on the same page there. The last step is to argue over how effective the support cards are. And Roman and I are saying ATE and DSD are so bad as support that they literally *don't* support the path, and I am adding that Choke, when taken in the context of Wrath + DSD, is redundant and works against those cards thereby making it bad support for a card like Wrath, mainly in 1 vs 1 games.

So, I absolutely think this deck design is poor. I am willing to concede that most of the deck supports the PtV if it will get the arguments to stop, but I absolutely cannot concede that the deck design is "good", and that the PtV is "well" supported, as most of the other Hasbro decks are. It just isn't a good deck design.

Darth Trumpetus...trumpeter of fury.