I agree with Woad 100%. gadgets just feel like marginal improvements over non-gadget goods, and with a SIGNIFICANT extra cost associated.
Gadgets can work as additional cards in a deck that isn’t focused on them (auto-revolver or holy wheel gun) but it’s not a deck type in and of itself.
I think Gadgets are in good shape, I’d call it Tier 2 right now. I have a Morgan Weenie-Stud build which works great. Looking forward to figuring out how to use Pasteur wisely, but that’s another deck. I’m pretty opposed to “one super unit” builds since everyone and their mother runs unprepared, and that card wrecks super unit builds to where they’re not viable in the least.
My LD Gadget Build right now is in a little rougher shape, doesn’t quite work as well as regular LD shooter with the bounty hunting element. I’m more splashing gadgets currently, but we’ll see how it goes.
This week’s Dan ramble involves Louis. I’m hoping to have it up this evening. (Ir doesn’t really involve gadgets though, just a fun way to abuse his ability)
There are a number of holes in the current gadget pool in my opinion.
1 lack of anti cheating. This really hurts rhe clubless / club light decks
2 no call out mechanism for gadgets (arsenal excluded)
I’d also like to see more interactive gadgets, ones you discard to affect the opponents, such as a ghost grenade.
The poster further up is spot on with the difference between Morgan and Dogs.
Morgan is definitely dudes that need gadgets to perform and use economy post equipped such as flamethrowe, Dogs have fgadgets to support their dudes, but less economy to power them.
My Gadgetarium deck is full of bullet-reducing effects, anti-cheatin’, and call-out mechanisms. It’s all clubs, of course, but it works just fine. What you’re talking about is more like holes in clubless gadget decks, but hey, nodoby ever said they will work 
Why?? tell us!! pleeeaaase!
I actually said clubless / club light in my post 
[quote=“mplain, post:20, topic:24, full:true”]
What I mean is that a surprise is always better than an open threat. In that way Bounty Hunter is better than The Arsenal’s ability, and any anti-cheatin’ action is better than a Quickdraw Handgun. They can make a move when you have an action in hand, or they can hinder when you actually don’t. [/quote]
I think this is a pretty common misconception. A surprise can make a more obvious change to the game state than a more subtle and open threat. For example you can spring a Bounty Hunter on someone you lured out of position and then discard/ace them, costing your opponent Influence on the board.
However, if by having an open threat available on the board I can force an advantageous board position that nets me more income or denies my opponent income I can achieve a similar effect. If your BH aces Irving Patterson taking 2 Influence off the board and my open threat of the Arsenal denies my opponent 4-5 income so they can’t play the 2 Influence dude they have in their hand…is one really better?
If you don’t prefer that kind of long-game I can understand why you don’t really like The Arsenal that much. It is very much a subtle outfit in terms of overall effect, it is not flashy in any way whatsoever.
The QDH is similar. Sure, almost no player will ever be hit by it unless they have no choice because they see it coming BUT it has a really strong effect by just being there. Your opponent may force themselves down to a legal 3oaK instead of a cheatin’ FH because of it’s presence. That will net you the same effect (or possibly better) than actually hitting them with a Coachwhip! or the like.
Sure, of course. Which is why I specifically stated earlier, “That all comes down to board awareness and smart play.” Your opponent knows what you have aaaand you know that your opponent knows what you have. Act accordingly 
It also means that it disrupts your opponents preferred plays, again giving a stronger board position.
Furthermore someone could cheat based on you having a qdh expecting that cheating action and you play a different one from hand…
Yep.
“hahahahaha cheating flush, do you want to take my crap hand rank”
“nah, i’ll just coachwhip your dude”
QDHG makes mid range shooting rank decks cocky because they think that’s your cheating answer
Ok - so just a quick revivival of this discussion.
After NTB I have tried to build a no clubs deck (with 4 clubs ;)) - and it is working fine. However, my deck lacks some kind of finisher. I can do good in shootouts, electrostatic gun and ectoplasmic calcifier works great. A telepathy helmet protects my back and I can jump on a pinto to get back in the fight and use Vitality Tonic or the like to survive and win the movement game.
However there is no real finisher for these kinds of decks. You build up - but how do you finish? Anyone have any answers? Or are we still missing a link?
I’m running Kidnappin’ in my Gadgetorium deck to snipe influence, but it obviously isn’t clubless I also run 1 or 2 Election Day Slaughter to force people to face up to my tooled up scientists or face the consequences, but it’s fighting for a slot with Point Blank, which can be pretty brutal with Flamethrower.
It’s not a great deck, however, and might as well concede on the spot to Landslide.
I’m still not sure that there are strong enough card effects to entice me into clubless. The huge limitation on your draw structure alone means that you need a very heavy incentive to go that way, and I’ve not seen anything convincing enough yet.
What, what? Where did you find those? Imported from Classic? 
Doh…
Asyncoil Gun and Bio-charged neutraliser that is! Nothing to see here… Move on…
I think the trick at this point is to go club-lite, not clubless. Without reliable ways to generate jobs/callouts with gadgets (aside from the Arsenal) it is too easy for your opponent to turtle. Warren Graves in NAN should help mitigate the risks of packing a few key clubs for MCC at least.
[Teaser] For those considering club-light, this expansion is going to make your day
Exactly my point. However, I hope there will be another way of forcing shootouts/finishing the game than kidnappin’/ambush/EDS.
I hope for a gadget with a job 
I’ve been playing against a friends club-absent deck a few times. It’s not a bad deck, but it definitely fails to start sometimes. Other times he’s swimming in money and it sings (Mechanical Horse + Louis + Money to have more moves than you can deal with). I’m glad to hear there’s more Experimental(?) stuff coming up…
But on the other hand I can’t imagine having clubs in that deck since the punishment for failing is absolutely brutal. With skill checks you can get away with having a few failing values since the downside of failing isn’t so bad, but when you lose a guy and all his attachments it’s a lot more painful.
I do hope that Design makes some of the “mishap” mechanics a little less brutal in the future. Having the gadget blow-up, sending the dude home booted, etc. Rather than losing entire dudes, deeds, and with them all of their attachments.
I feel the brutal mishaps are a bit ham-fisted in terms of directing deck building design. Risks in play influence deckbuilding, but when the risks are so high you more-or-less take the decision out of the hands of the player from any practical perspective.
I’d like to see something along the lines of Vitality Tonic, but instead of saving a dude from being aced it saves them from a gadget explosion. “If this dude is discarded as the result of a pull, send that dude home booted instead. Discard all of their attached cards.”
Mine isn’t quite working fine yet! I would be interested in comparing decks.