Vampires Devotion feel defenseless in some matchups

+
Recently CDPR tried to give a boost to Vampires, one of the most underplayed archetypes in MO which at some point seemed it was good in the past. The two cards released seemed powerful and fun, specially Unseen Elder, which got an extra-effect if you run a Devotion list. So MO cards where the first I crafted. I went with a Caparace list to put Unseen Elder and its copy (with Caranthir) out of removal range.

The deck was almost not bad at all. The problem showed when I queued into a Kelly deck. I can say without a shadow of a doubt, that this is a 100% lost game if you're running a devotion list. Not 99, it's an autolose if the Kelly player knows what he's doing. I mean, apart from getting quite a ton of removal and having almost no units or veiled units that gives 0 targets, when they drop defender+kelly there is nothing you can do apart from losing. Some could argue that you can add cards like Bruiser or Drowner to move Kelly, but these two cards are antisynergetic with a Vampire deck so you need to tech for just a few matchups which makes your deck really worst. Also, devotion removal like Parasite or Imlerith Wraith is insufficient to deal with these. The only chance is keeping your purify card for defender, then move Kelly. But anyway your getting no units from them to bleed, there are just no points.

Isnt that a bad design or just intended? I stopped playing Vampires same moment I was queued into such a binary match. I mean, I am ok with matches my list is not favoured, but come on, give a chance, that's just unwinnable.

Conclusion: Vampires really need better tools to defend these matchups, allowing some of the existing vampire card to move units and maybe getting better devotion removal options. It's totally normal that people are not playing them the way it is right now.
 
Last edited:
Agreed that Vampires are not quite there yet, however the organic package (Whispess: Tribute + Parasite + Crimson Curse + Feast of Blood) works quite well, while synergizing with Vampires and giving them easy answers to Defenders (Tribute + 1 copy of Feast of Blood already means that you should open ~75% of the time into one of your cheap purifies).
The issues are Veil and unitless/low-unit count decks and the fact that Vampires are completely reliant on being able to mass bleed targets.

One solution would be to give Monsters tools that play for average points and swarm on the opponent's side as well (similar to spies).
 
Hmmh vampires main value driver is bleeding. It´s definitely an engine deck You can play a strategy to focus on multi-bleed and use Orianna (+Caranthir?) or Unseen Elder (+Caranthir) to get the most of your bleeding.
Vampire is by far not a control deck, like Ketullis + Carapace is usually. Of course vampires heavily suffer when they run into Veil heavy deck and Ketullis + Carapace is by definition veil heavy. (Same do poison/lock decks).

From my persepective it´s the nature of the game that if specific decks run into specific decks there is a high probability of win and loose.

Regarding your remarks:

- Vampires are fine as they are (still far away from tier 0) but playable. When you get the right cards and your opponents has no answer, you can make an awesome engine with Orianna and or Unseen Elder

- If you want to buff the archetype, I would tackle the following cards:
a) Protofleder: From my perspective still to high value and completely antisynergic (as you want many units to bleed and not one unit to bleed a lot). One could live with the antisynergy but this should be compensated via lower provision costs
b) Dettlaff van der Eretein: His deploy is strong, but his passive is questionable.
c) Katakan: Completey subordinate cards in all archetype (vampire, thrive, deathwish)
d) Feast of Blood: would change to: Purify and damage an enemy unit by 4.
If you control a Vampire, also give it Bleeding for 2 turns. => Almost same value but more removal potential

General recommendation:
- Use defender to protect your engine
- Use Caranthir to double your engine
- Due to the lack of control outnumbering the opponent engine must be the right strategy
- Consider Blood Scent as a leader to get the most of your Orianna/Unseen Elder
- Also Gael can be a great card. Gael into Golyat can mean upto 16 points (2 for the damage (1 dmg goes to bleeding)), 4 for the body, 10 for the self boost) + summoning of hopefully strong passive units.
 
Previously Vampires were below T3, now they are T2. A serious improvement, but simply not there to compete vs. T1 decks. The fact that they are considerably unfavored against certain matchups (mostly Veil) is not a big issue in my opinion.

The problem showed when I queued into a Kelly deck. I can say without a shadow of a doubt, that this is a 100% lost game if you're running a devotion list. Not 99, it's an autolose if the Kelly player knows what he's doing.
Yes, this is true. Is it a huge issue though? I doubt it. At least I never had problems with having 1-2 heavily unfavored matchups with decks. As long as those decks do not dominate the meta (which is definitely not the case with Kelly), it won't cause you too many losses directly.

Some could argue that you can add cards like Bruiser or Drowner to move Kelly, but these two cards are antisynergetic with a Vampire deck so you need to tech for just a few matchups which makes your deck really worst.
Now here I fully disagree with you though. This really isn't about "some could argue" - if you want to be able to compete vs certain cards in the game, you HAVE TO invest into tech cards (be those resets, locks, moves or purifies). Playing a Devotion deck does not mean you can disregard these tech options. In a massively greedy meta, maybe, but in one that relies on active, on-deploy reaction to cards, this is just not the case.
So yes, including a Bruiser and/or a Taskmaster (or Queen of the Night / Feast for Vampires) is highly advisable.

On a more constructive note, I'd welcome two cards for the Monster/Vampire package:

1. A card that makes your Bleeds ignore Veil and Purify. An Artifact for example (for harder removal). I believe that would certainly give Vampires the edge to face less "unwinnable" matchups and place them in an overall more powerful position.

2. A unit that has an order (countdown: 1) to remove bleeds from units and turn it inot direct damage of the total bleed amount, which can be then used to damage a unit with that amount in that turn. This would be a very versatile tool for Vampires to further capitalize on extra/overbleeding.
 
From my persepective it´s the nature of the game that if specific decks run into specific decks there is a high probability of win and loose.

Regarding your remarks:

- Vampires are fine as they are (still far away from tier 0) but playable. When you get the right cards and your opponents has no answer, you can make an awesome engine with Orianna and or Unseen Elder

High probability of loosing would be if you had some chance, the problem the Kelly example said vs Devotion Vamps you got 0 chances on same skill level. When there is a matchup you got no chances, no excuse, it's a bad idea to play it.
Well, or maybe there is some chance, I just stopped playing since it felt a bit absurd. After it, I was going to add a bruiser to the list, but I thought about it, why "suffer" when you can just play much balanced decks from other factions with some unfavoured but winnable matchups. And seeing vampires gameplay seems the general opinion.

One solution would be to give Monsters tools that play for average points and swarm on the opponent's side as well (similar to spies).
This seems not a bad idea, some B plan against Veiled units or unitless decks.

Yes, this is true. Is it a huge issue though? I doubt it. At least I never had problems with having 1-2 heavily unfavored matchups with decks. As long as those decks do not dominate the meta (which is definitely not the case with Kelly), it won't cause you too many losses directly.


Now here I fully disagree with you though. This really isn't about "some could argue" - if you want to be able to compete vs certain cards in the game, you HAVE TO invest into tech cards (be those resets, locks, moves or purifies). Playing a Devotion deck does not mean you can disregard these tech options. In a massively greedy meta, maybe, but in one that relies on active, on-deploy reaction to cards, this is just not the case.
So yes, including a Bruiser and/or a Taskmaster (or Queen of the Night / Feast for Vampires) is highly advisable.

On a more constructive note, I'd welcome two cards for the Monster/Vampire package:

1. A card that makes your Bleeds ignore Veil and Purify. An Artifact for example (for harder removal). I believe that would certainly give Vampires the edge to face less "unwinnable" matchups and place them in an overall more powerful position.

2. A unit that has an order (countdown: 1) to remove bleeds from units and turn it inot direct damage of the total bleed amount, which can be then used to damage a unit with that amount in that turn. This would be a very versatile tool for Vampires to further capitalize on extra/overbleeding.
Is it a huge issue? yes, for me it is, an autolose match should never exist in the game, it's discouraging. Then people whines because only the same decks are being played. It's normal, you go for a deck which is as balanced as possible for all the possible matchups.
It's fine, if we have to invest into a movement tech card in that deck, then maybe boost the outdated Drowner to 4 provision or give movement as an ability to some vampire card, that would not be unbalanced and would feel better than adding the random Bruiser.
 
High probability of loosing would be if you had some chance, the problem the Kelly example said vs Devotion Vamps you got 0 chances on same skill level. When there is a matchup you got no chances, no excuse, it's a bad idea to play it.
Well, or maybe there is some chance, I just stopped playing since it felt a bit absurd. After it, I was going to add a bruiser to the list, but I thought about it, why "suffer" when you can just play much balanced decks from other factions with some unfavoured but winnable matchups. And seeing vampires gameplay seems the general opinion.

To be honest when specific decks play against and we assume that the players get their needed win condition cards it´s almost guaranteed that one player wins.
E.g. you play a row boost strategy (SC dwarfs, NR witchers; MO Viy) vs Yrden. If you play bleeding/lock/poison heavy vs Veil. If you play control heavy/damage heavy decks vs SC no targets. It´s just the nature of the game.
Even with strong decks specific circumstances can lead to almost autoloss. Imagine your Eist is summoned via Ihuarraquax in round 1?

Further remark regarding to vampires. The worst potential match up is for me probably NG assimilate/
Imposter+ thirsty dames. Why? They can easily use your bleeding tools plus Unseen Elder against you and thirsty dames get intense value.

If you face many Kelly decks (which for some weird issues I do not encounter much) I would recommend you the following:
- Imlerith's Wrath is a nice control option for Kelly especially if you have a tall Orianna
- Feast of Blood can be used to depurify the defender
- Drowner is also a reasonable move option (but still thinks that it does not fit into vampire)
 
Recently CDPR tried to give a boost to Vampires, one of the most underplayed archetypes in MO which at some point seemed it was good in the past. The two cards released seemed powerful and fun, specially Unseen Elder, which got an extra-effect if you run a Devotion list. So MO cards where the first I crafted. I went with a Caparace list to put Unseen Elder and its copy (with Caranthir) out of removal range.

The deck was almost not bad at all. The problem showed when I queued into a Kelly deck. I can say without a shadow of a doubt, that this is a 100% lost game if you're running a devotion list. Not 99, it's an autolose if the Kelly player knows what he's doing. I mean, apart from getting quite a ton of removal and having almost no units or veiled units that gives 0 targets, when they drop defender+kelly there is nothing you can do apart from losing. Some could argue that you can add cards like Bruiser or Drowner to move Kelly, but these two cards are antisynergetic with a Vampire deck so you need to tech for just a few matchups which makes your deck really worst. Also, devotion removal like Parasite or Imlerith Wraith is insufficient to deal with these. The only chance is keeping your purify card for defender, then move Kelly. But anyway your getting no units from them to bleed, there are just no points.

Isnt that a bad design from CDPR or just intended? I stopped playing Vampires same moment I was queued into such a binary match. I mean, I am ok with matches my list is not favoured, but come on, give a chance, that's just unwinnable.

Conclusion: Vampires really need better tools to defend these matchups, allowing some of the existing vampire card to move units and maybe getting better devotion removal options. It's totally normal that people are not playing them the way it is right now.
Why not include Curse of Corruption or Scorch in your deck? It should be pretty useful removal while you have your vampires who are typically not too tall.
 
@StanislavOZZO Because he want's to keep the devotion ability from the Unseen Elder. I honestly always hated devotion as a concept as I don't see anything fun in limiting my freedom of deck design in such a way. But I don't think it's horrible, I just never play those cards cuz I don't find them fun.

I just think that buffing Nekurat and giving the Unseen Elder veil tag (or 1 more power) would be good, but also if they were to switch the Devotion bonus with the passive + 2 random bleeding (on non-bleeding targets) cause let's be honest you only want the Elder for his ability to speed up the Bleeding process which is locked behind Devotion tag, if the speed-up was guarranteed but 2 bleeding was devo bonus it's be much easier to include him in the deck.

Also a complete rework for Katakan, this card just doesn't properly fit into any deck, I mean it binds 3 completely different tags (Thrive, Vampire, Deathwish) into one illogical package that just has no real synergy with anything in particular.
Also make Fleder get vitality boost on enemy turn too if there is Blood Moon on the opposite row. :D
Do these and vampires would be all set. Nothing more is required.

- Now as for always losing to a certain deck... that's just Gwent for you, no way around it. :] Tis what I've come to expect.
Keltulus decks get moved down without mercy by decks with a lot of tall removal.
 
Last edited:
Just one more remark: MO Vampire is to my mind playable.

Already won against current Tier 0/1 decks like Eist and SY crownsplitters with line pockets.
 

Guest 4375874

Guest
Just one more remark: MO Vampire is to my mind playable.

Already won against current Tier 0/1 decks like Eist and SY crownsplitters with line pockets.
what does that even mean. Eist isn't busted because you beat it? What rank are you....How many wins vs losses? I would absolutely love to see that match because vampires are at a disadvantage against an Eist deck
Post automatically merged:

The problem isn't so much Vampires but MO as a whole. Devotion puts it at a significant disadvantage when you realize MO relies heavily on tall play when so many factions have tall removal without breaking devotion. The devs need more, better mechanics for MO. We just saw SK get a deathwish unit so they are not above adding other mechanics to factions but for some reason MO cannot go beyond just thrive or dominance. That said, it's the same situation other factions face with Viy. Too many binary interactions in the game
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DRK3

Forum veteran
I definitely understand the complaints by the OP.

And its curious, my Devotion vampire deck did run the purify vampire, and also the cheap WH move unit, and i've been against a Kelly deck and still got crushed, it really is unwinnable, even if you counter Kelly, because all your bleeds are worthless and you have no tall punishment.

I dont think we can generalize vampires into devotion vampires though. You arent forced to play devotion, and a non-devotion vampire list might be better suited for the meta. Like its widely known, MO is the faction with the least amount of control, so you do get the feeling you're helpless against dangerous cards your opponents play, while devotion SK or NR dont suffer the same fate.

Devotion decks are easier to build but they're not necessaribly better, and despite the recent buff with new devotion cards, i still think in general non-devotion is better than devotion.
 
While I'm usually not a fan of this approach I think they should give Dettlaff: Higher Vampire's current ability to a new card and replace it with "Destroy a bleeding unit".
That the Higher Vampire has zero synergy with vampires has always struck me as odd.
One could argue that it's just a more limited VVM at that point, but it has a higher body and MO has an easier time applying bleeds.

I also think Armored Arachas' ability should be on a vampire unit instead.
 
what does that even mean. Eist isn't busted because you beat it? What rank are you....How many wins vs losses? I would absolutely love to see that match because vampires are at a disadvantage against an Eist deck
Post automatically merged:

The problem isn't so much Vampires but MO as a whole. Devotion puts it at a significant disadvantage when you realize MO relies heavily on tall play when so many factions have tall removal without breaking devotion. The devs need more, better mechanics for MO. We just saw SK get a deathwish unit so they are not above adding other mechanics to factions but for some reason MO cannot go beyond just thrive or dominance. That said, it's the same situation other factions face with Viy. Too many binary interactions in the game

Pro Rank...you need a long round 3 and luck to make your engines work protected Unseen Elder + Caranthir + Orianna.
 

Guest 4375874

Guest
Recently CDPR tried to give a boost to Vampires, one of the most underplayed archetypes in MO which at some point seemed it was good in the past. The two cards released seemed powerful and fun, specially Unseen Elder, which got an extra-effect if you run a Devotion list. So MO cards where the first I crafted. I went with a Caparace list to put Unseen Elder and its copy (with Caranthir) out of removal range.

The deck was almost not bad at all. The problem showed when I queued into a Kelly deck. I can say without a shadow of a doubt, that this is a 100% lost game if you're running a devotion list. Not 99, it's an autolose if the Kelly player knows what he's doing. I mean, apart from getting quite a ton of removal and having almost no units or veiled units that gives 0 targets, when they drop defender+kelly there is nothing you can do apart from losing. Some could argue that you can add cards like Bruiser or Drowner to move Kelly, but these two cards are antisynergetic with a Vampire deck so you need to tech for just a few matchups which makes your deck really worst. Also, devotion removal like Parasite or Imlerith Wraith is insufficient to deal with these. The only chance is keeping your purify card for defender, then move Kelly. But anyway your getting no units from them to bleed, there are just no points.

Isnt that a bad design or just intended? I stopped playing Vampires same moment I was queued into such a binary match. I mean, I am ok with matches my list is not favoured, but come on, give a chance, that's just unwinnable.

Conclusion: Vampires really need better tools to defend these matchups, allowing some of the existing vampire card to move units and maybe getting better devotion removal options. It's totally normal that people are not playing them the way it is right now.
If it helps, this is the vampire devotion deck I used to get back to pro.

I don't think I faced a single Kelly on the way but it helps to keep feast of blood handy (along with Whispess). Between Imlerith's wrath and Bruiser you should be able to disable Kelly before too much damage is done.
 
If it helps, this is the vampire devotion deck I used to get back to pro.
Probably will try on casual, looks fun! And I hope this threat gets some visibility and they buff devotion MO as they deserve, as I expected TLG didn't include it in the meta report, not even Tier 3.

BTW I read in the description that you got to tier 0 with the list. You sir, are brave, lol.
 

Guest 4375874

Guest
Probably will try on casual, looks fun! And I hope this threat gets some visibility and they buff devotion MO as they deserve, as I expected TLG didn't include it in the meta report, not even Tier 3.

BTW I read in the description that you got to tier 0 with the list. You sir, are brave, lol.
lol yea it's pretty tough against decks that require a binary response as you mentioned in your post. Kelly is one...Viy, Ball and Eist etc. I don't ever use Heatwave, Scenarios or Echo's in my decks because they are the worst things to happen to the game but even if I wanted to I'd have to most likely break devotion to use them effectively and that's the dilemma. This deck has provided me with enough consistency to get by but it can feel like an uphill battle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The problem with Monsters is that after the Carapace nerf and the Overwhelming Hunger nerf (and the other factions getting better) they simply don't have the points to keep up while still having the lowest amount of control tools.
No control is fine if you can at least slam some points but even Gerni thrive lists get ultra-outpointed now, the powercreep is very real. Medium point/low control MO has no way to compete with high point/high control meta decks.
I don't know how to fix this, maybe start by reverting the Overwhelming Hunger nerf. Carapace change is fine, but the OH one made no sense imo
 
Ok... I'm sorry... What/who is Kelly? I really feel like I should know that, but I'm getting the feeling it's a nickname for some card that I'm not familiar with :)
 

Guest 4375874

Guest
Ok... I'm sorry... What/who is Kelly? I really feel like I should know that, but I'm getting the feeling it's a nickname for some card that I'm not familiar with :)
Keltullis
Post automatically merged:

The problem with Monsters is that after the Carapace nerf and the Overwhelming Hunger nerf (and the other factions getting better) they simply don't have the points to keep up while still having the lowest amount of control tools.
No control is fine if you can at least slam some points but even Gerni thrive lists get ultra-outpointed now, the powercreep is very real. Medium point/low control MO has no way to compete with high point/high control meta decks.
I don't know how to fix this, maybe start by reverting the Overwhelming Hunger nerf. Carapace change is fine, but the OH one made no sense imo
Honestly the Carapace nerf didn't make sense either. They said they changed it because of Ciri Dash....one card that isn't even particularly competitive in a MO deck. Maybe instead of nerfing the leaders they could just change the actual cards that were problematic. OH decks are now solely reliant on Viy while killing every other deck. Makes zero seense.
 
If it helps, this is the vampire devotion deck I used to get back to pro.

I don't think I faced a single Kelly on the way but it helps to keep feast of blood handy (along with Whispess). Between Imlerith's wrath and Bruiser you should be able to disable Kelly before too much damage is done.
Having relatively few Thrive options, what was you experience, how much did the Winter Queen / Red Riders combo contribute?
Wasn't it sometimes clunky?
Post automatically merged:

The problem with Monsters is that after the Carapace nerf and the Overwhelming Hunger nerf (and the other factions getting better) they simply don't have the points to keep up while still having the lowest amount of control tools.
No control is fine if you can at least slam some points but even Gerni thrive lists get ultra-outpointed now, the powercreep is very real. Medium point/low control MO has no way to compete with high point/high control meta decks.
I don't know how to fix this, maybe start by reverting the Overwhelming Hunger nerf. Carapace change is fine, but the OH one made no sense imo
Arachas Swarm is low Tier1, at worst high Tier2 in the current meta. Viy is (unfortunately) getting back as expected, there were several players in the qualifiers too who brought a Viy deck (Redrame for example). Keltullis works almost as fine since the minor nerf to Carapace (which was, in all honesty, needed to tone down the Ciri interaction).
Gerni thrive is relatively weak right now, Force of Nature does the job better for that archetype.
Blood Scent, as discussed above, is around Tier3 for the moment.
Post automatically merged:

They said they changed it because of Ciri Dash....one card that isn't even particularly competitive in a MO deck.
Ciri Dash was extremely competitive (still is) in Carapace Keltullis. You could say she was... Binary. :beer:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom