Author Topic: The Wilderness  (Read 887 times)

Offline Jeremystair

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
The Wilderness
« on: June 24, 2018, 06:07:05 PM »
+1
I did not come up with the idea of the card but I do like the card so I thought I would make it. JD (kariusvega) Came up with the idea. I would have loved to have Daniel's sword as the icon but I couldn't remove the R without it looking bad. So Daniel if you post the sword without the R in it that would be awesome.



« Last Edit: June 24, 2018, 06:16:58 PM by Jeremystair »

kariusvega

  • Guest
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2018, 06:21:06 PM »
0
Field of Battle card

eliminates chumps and begins in play stabilizes a splash based meta

Offline Master Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Fearless #BanSam
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2018, 06:56:50 PM »
-1
Very much against anything actually restricting players from playing cards in their deck (HSR, HHI, etc). Very much like cards that allow players to play cards for a cost (Dull LS, Music Leader, etc). This falls into the former, so I really don't like it.

If you want to completely destroy a splash-meta, you almost have to institute some sort of brigade deck-building rule change at this point (for characters at least; Enhancements are fine). As in, no more than 4 good brigades for Heroes and no more than 4 for EC, or something like that. I'm not saying I'm in favor of this (I'm not sure if I would be), but that's how I see this problem going away. Restricting players from attacking with possibly their favorite Hero simply because it's too small, from the start of the game, is awful and doesn't lead to creative decks imo.
Absentmindedly glancing at this unimpressive signature fills you with determination.

Offline Jeremystair

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2018, 07:15:36 PM »
0
I kind of agree with you with the restricting players but since they made even more restrict abilities in this last set I don't think that it's ever going to go away so we might as well use it for good to get rid of all the chump blocks.

kariusvega

  • Guest
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2018, 07:34:59 PM »
+1
Restricting players from attacking with possibly their favorite Hero simply because it's too small, from the start of the game, is awful and doesn't lead to creative decks imo.

So do meta centralizing cards and strategies

kariusvega

  • Guest
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2018, 07:39:26 PM »
+1
Here are more Field of Battle cards:

The Wilderness- devotion
The World- Protect decks from search abilities. Restrict players from drawing outside of draw phase.
The Heart- Only humans may enter battle
Kingdom of Heaven- each time your angel enters battle you may draw one. Protect angels from dominants.
Sheol- Demons gain protection from discard by humans.
The Body of Christ- Protect lost souls from evil cards.
The Deep- Restrict each player to playing only 5 dominant cards this game.

I would probably only admit 1 or 2 of these per rotation to keep it fresh and dynamic
« Last Edit: June 24, 2018, 07:43:59 PM by kariusvega »

Online Gabe

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 9991
  • From Moses to the prophets, it's all about Him!
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Land of Redemption
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2018, 08:05:49 PM »
-1
Master Q is correct that we don’t like to restrict players in ways that never let them play their cards, but instead prefer to add a “cost” or “penalty” for strong abilities. When we use restrict abilities, cards like the “Vindicated” Lost Soul and Fall of Man are examples of what we feel is healthy for the game.
Have you visited the Land of Redemption today?

Offline Jeremystair

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2018, 08:33:34 PM »
+1
Well until something like this is made chump blocks will always be the best defense. I'm also pretty certain that this is not the way Redemption defense it is supposed to be.

Offline Asahel24601

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 624
  • #MakeRedGreatAgain
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2018, 08:44:18 PM »
0
Well until something like this is made chump blocks will always be the best defense. I'm also pretty certain that this is not the way Redemption defense it is supposed to be.
At risk of sounding rude, what's wrong with Babel in this regard, besides that you have to draw/search for it? It negates most chumps and doesn't hurt most single-brigade focused decks ability to play all that badly, if at all. I get that it's an ultra rare, and therefore wouldn't be in every deck, but I don't think we need a new card that basically forces players to build their decks a certain way to avoid not being able to have a chance is a good idea.

Offline Jeremystair

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2018, 08:55:45 PM »
0
Because Babel is basically Colosseum all over again and we see how that worked out. Oh and don't forget that they made the humble lost soul that cannot be negated that makes your chump blocks work anyways. Also with this new Old Testament meta why not throw Jericho in every deck you build if you're running chump blocks.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2018, 09:05:26 PM by Jeremystair »

Offline Kevinthedude

  • Tournament Host
  • *****
  • Posts: 1677
  • Yo
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2018, 09:52:43 PM »
0
Well until something like this is made chump blocks will always be the best defense. I'm also pretty certain that this is not the way Redemption defense it is supposed to be.

There are some strong counters to chump that I haven't seen people utilizing.

Offline The Guardian

  • Playtester, Redemption Elder
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11749
  • The Stars are coming out...
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2018, 12:20:08 AM »
0
Babel seems flimsy, but in my early experience that has not been the case.

I'm beginning to wonder how strong a Coliseum/Babel combination might be... 8)
Fortress Alstad
Have you checked the REG?
Have you looked it up in ORCID?

kariusvega

  • Guest
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2018, 07:24:29 AM »
0
All a defense has to do when you can deck out turn 3 or 4 is stall a few times. Typically the decks running heavy counters get run circles around. Uzzah and Firefoxes are and should be in every deck along with Christian Martyr and one version of Falling Away. Typically they wind up blocking.

What's more consistent, hoping I get 2 or 3 cards that can get me to other counters before focusing on actually rescuing souls or having 5 cards that get me half way through my deck turn 1 all while building momentum to win the game by rescuing?

We already have cards that restrict players from playing their cards haha look at Moses he is effectively tc restrict in many cases and now liner is banned

Coney was nerfed because even with half a set of cards that counter it, it was still determined to be too fast to counter.. Not to mention became the scapegoat of its defense which has dominated consistently for years



Offline Master Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Fearless #BanSam
    • -
    • Midwest Region
Re: The Wilderness
« Reply #13 on: June 25, 2018, 10:23:37 AM »
+2
Babel has worked pretty well for me so far in stopping Uzzah/Fire Foxes. Humble LS is simple enough to deal with that's it's a non-issue. If you're relying on a LS for your defense, you're bound to be disappointed. If anything, the perfect example of something restrictive that I believe would be balanced enough to put in play from the start of the game would be Coliseum. The other examples sound about 50% right (Sheol, Body of Christ, Kingdom of Heaven) and 50% wrong (The World, The Heart, The Deep).

We already have cards that restrict players from playing their cards haha look at Moses he is effectively tc restrict in many cases

Moses is a cost/benefit in that he also prevents your own. Moses is a check against decks like Rev Music which rely on a lot of TC searching to work effectively. He doesn't stop you from playing cards in battle, the only place that really matters.

Not to mention became the scapegoat of its defense which has dominated consistently for years

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. ;)

I don't recall anyone crying foul at the chump defense of Coney. That kind of thing has been around for years. That wasn't what made the deck broken at all, as evidenced by how utterly ineffective that same defense would be against the CoL. FBTN alone counters the chump defense quite well, and a well-timed Ends add to battle can work around Uzzah and Fire Foxes (assuming there are still LS in the deck). Some popular Heroes even protect the LS (Abigail and Japheth) so Uzzah and Fire Foxes have to work harder in some cases. Clay has Miraculous Handkerchiefs, which I know you've used. In short, there are many good ways around those guys that most decks will be able to build at least one in and not have it hurt the overall consistency of the deck.

FF isn't unbalanced imo. Just don't trigger it (as hard as that is to do). Uzzah, on the other hand, I would say is a problem. Out of all the cards in the game, there are very few I would say are actually bad for the game (Uzzah - free, nigh unrespondable block, Haman's Plot - CBN discard up to and any 3 characters/skews deck-checking at Nats, Samuel - enables the fastest decks/absurd set up with throne, AutO - worst speed enabler with Sam/CBN bulletproof Gideon) because of how unbalanced and abusive they are. Taking just those cards out of the pool would do heaps for the game, and that's only four, and the only ban that would likely affect all decks would be Uzzah.

Granted, I'm not calling for more bans anytime soon. I'm just waiting with bated breath for people to realize how much better the game would be without some of the more troublesome cards. :angel:
Absentmindedly glancing at this unimpressive signature fills you with determination.