I'm not Clubbing Around

published Aug 26, 2015 | | |
Card draw simulator
Odds: 0% – 0% – 0% – 0% more
Derived from
None. Self-made deck here.
Inspiration for
None yet

madscience 154

This is all theory at this point. I'm just trying to find something that catches my eye. With Specks, the starting rock is not the end of the world, and with Travis, you get another chance to dig for a good starting hand.

The goal, is to skirt around shootouts until you can get Jen, or a stud set up with a weapon. You will probably need to go all in on shootouts for a few turns, which means judge = let them discard the guy first turn.

Will be looking to update the deck as I get time with it in my hands.

5 comments
Aug 26, 2015 tbowers13

You're running Mechanical Horse over Asyncoil Gun in a Clubless deck? What's the point of going clubless for just 1x R&D Ranch and Elander?

Aug 26, 2015 madscience

At this point, yes. I'm not running Asyncoil. I hate Asyncoil. If I wanted to do that, I'd just run clubs, and use shotguns, and actually kill people.

It's more about Elander than anything else at this point.

I'm not sold on just the one R&D. this is just v1.0 of the idea. but "my" idea will never include asyncoil.

Aug 26, 2015 tbowers13

Even if you don't use the ability on Asyncoil its still +2 bullets and turns Jen into a 4 stud. If you're going to accept the serious handicap of not running clubs I would think you'd want to include the cards that are really good so long as you don't pull a club for their ability. Only running 6 weapons seems kinda hit or miss too since Jen really wants a gun to maximize her bullets.

Also, why so many dudes and so few gadgets?

Aug 27, 2015 madscience

If I want the bullets, then I would run HWG, and have an ability that I don't hate.

The deck is currently as tight value wise as it can get, to help precipitate pulling shootout hands. If you sort the deck by value, you will see that on 8, 9, and K, there are currently 12 cards. The most you can pack into a deck, when not using all 4 suits.

Like I said, this is just "theory" at this time. I don't have the deck together. It's just here, staring at me, something I can mull over, and work with.

The problem with Asyncoil is that the card is just not good. It's not as good as it's non gadget counterpart.

It has a higher cost to get into play. It's going to cost you a booted dude (or the use of your home ability to not have a booted dude), and a pull to get into play.

One it's in play, if you want to use it, you have to pull again. Succeed the pull, and you can then discard, not ace, a dude.

If you want to go with that strategy, then you should, by all means, play shotguns.

While I agree that right now, there may be too few guns, the answer isn't removing the horses, and running Asyncoils. The answer would be to alter the deck values, and run HWG AND horses.

I'm not saying that this is the final version. I even say at the very end of my initial writeup, that this is the base, and that I'll be updating it as time allows.

Aug 27, 2015 tbowers13

I feel that Asyncoil has a much lower cost to get into play than shotgun. You can use William Specks ability to play it for free rather than paying 3gr for shotgun, and it has a low enough difficulty on the skill check that you can reliably use the Gadgetorium home ability to unboot your mad scientist and gain 1gr. You really want to use Gadgetorium's ability every turn i possible to get that extra gr. So as I see it Asyncoil with William in play costs absolutely nothing, in fact it actually makes you 1gr when playing it with the Gadgetorium ability. So for the same shoppin action you can either play Shotgun for -3gr or play Asyncoil for +1gr, which is a net gain of 4 gr. Sure it discards rather than aces the dude, but that often makes very little difference unless you have cards in play that benefit from acing someone or you're trying to permanently get rid of Stephen Wiles/Bobo. Otherwise it amounts to the same thing unless they happen to draw that dude after cycling their deck and have the money to play him/her. I'm hoping that I'm not annoying you, just trying to debate the merits of this, that and the other thing.