Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => New Card Ideas => Topic started by: BubbleBoy on February 02, 2012, 05:03:07 PM
-
I've seen a few ideas for territory-class characters in the gallery submissions thread, and I'm wondering what the rules are for this unofficial card type. Is it that the entire ability activates both when it's played and when it enters battle unless stated otherwise? (And in the case of ongoing abilities, the ability remains active regardless of entry into/exit from battle until a phase change after the character has been discarded?)
-
IMHO, territory-class characters would be terrible for the game. I thought the idea was to promote more battles? If territory-class characters are able to activate special abilities during the prep phase, more strategic setup will be done at that time. Players won't battle unless they have activated all their meta-counters in previous phases, so that they know they are guaranteed to win the battle. B-O-R-I-N-G.
Oh, and yeah, it would promote speed. Reason enough to nix the idea. ::)
-
IMHO, territory-class characters would be terrible for the game. I thought the idea was to promote more battles? If territory-class characters are able to activate special abilities during the prep phase, more strategic setup will be done at that time. Players won't battle unless they have activated all their meta-counters in previous phases, so that they know they are guaranteed to win the battle. B-O-R-I-N-G.
Oh, and yeah, it would promote speed. Reason enough to nix the idea. ::)
There has been a little discussion of TC characters among the playtesters, and while we are wary of the possibilities, the most likely scenario if they ever come to be is that they would become the standard for characters with abilities that last while in play (like Esther, Judas, Aaron, etc.), much like TC enhancements became the standard for placed enhancements. I personally like games that involve more strategic setup. I think if done right, TC characters would be an interesting addition, but I don't think they'll be made anytime too soon.
-
The idea of territory-class characters is like an axe. Using an axe on a tree to get firewood is good. Using an axe on your annoying cousin is bad. The best ideas for TC characters I've seen (or proposed, not pretending I'm not biased) are the ones with "while in play" type SA's, or the Deacons which have moderately weak abilities but draw to replace themselves to make Deacons speed-viable without giving them a ton of drawing.
My understanding for how TC Characters would work is that their SA activates upon entering play only, and remains active while in play. Those with SA's that are supposed to activate when they enter battle should be few and far between, but specify that they do in the SA itself.
-
IMHO, territory-class characters would be terrible for the game. I thought the idea was to promote more battles? If territory-class characters are able to activate special abilities during the prep phase, more strategic setup will be done at that time. Players won't battle unless they have activated all their meta-counters in previous phases, so that they know they are guaranteed to win the battle. B-O-R-I-N-G.
Oh, and yeah, it would promote speed. Reason enough to nix the idea. ::)
There has been a little discussion of TC characters among the playtesters, and while we are wary of the possibilities, the most likely scenario if they ever come to be is that they would become the standard for characters with abilities that last while in play (like Esther, Judas, Aaron, etc.), much like TC enhancements became the standard for placed enhancements. I personally like games that involve more strategic setup. I think if done right, TC characters would be an interesting addition, but I don't think they'll be made anytime too soon.
But we're all human. Adding another layer of complexity increases the chances of another TGT, SitC, Thaddeus,...or dare I say, ANB. You KNOW a broken card will be released no matter how hard the playtesters test for loopholes.
What you can do during prep phase:
Place a character (cross or dragon icon) into your territory.
Place an artifact, covenant, or curse face down in your artifact pile.
Activate an artifact, covenant, or curse by placing an artifactit face up on your artifact pile (limit once per turn).
Place a site into your territory.
Place a Lost Soul into a site.
Set aside a character.
Return a character from your set-aside area and place it back into your territory.
Place a weapon-class enhancement on a warrior-class character in your territory.
Place a fortress on the table as described on the fortress. At this time its special ability becomes active.
Place or remove a card in a fortress as described on the fortress.
Play a territory-class enhancement.
[Play a territory-class character?]
What you can do during the battle phase:
Start a battle.
You'll scare away all the RLKs and VOGs to go play checkers. Years ago, I suggested a card type that would stay in the battlefield and only be active during the battle phase. I partly regret that suggestion, yet I would like THAT more than another prep phase activation.
If I didn't want to play against an opponent, I could always play solitaire.
[/rant]
-
Things you can do in your prep phase:
Play any card except Enhancements that are neither healing, set-aside, or Territory class.
How is that complicated?
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
Really?? :o How so?
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
Really?? :o How so?
Well you are aware that after the battle starts there's a whole series of events involved that follow. Playing enhancements, using character special abilities, both of which do many many different things, play dominants, sometimes leading to starting a new battle or even a new turn. There's a lot more that goes on in the battle phase that you said. Nice try.
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
Really?? :o How so?
Well you are aware that after the battle starts there's a whole series of events involved that follow. Playing enhancements, using character special abilities, both of which do many many different things, play dominants, sometimes leading to starting a new battle or even a new turn. There's a lot more that goes on in the battle phase that you said. Nice try.
Dude. Really? C'mon.
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
Really?? :o How so?
Well you are aware that after the battle starts there's a whole series of events involved that follow. Playing enhancements, using character special abilities, both of which do many many different things, play dominants, sometimes leading to starting a new battle or even a new turn. There's a lot more that goes on in the battle phase that you said. Nice try.
Dude. Really? C'mon.
You're still in the battle phase? You are doing them IN the battle phase? I don't see how it's so easy for you too list all the thing you do DURING the battle phase and then compare it to only how you START the battle phase. Your argument makes no sense.
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
Really?? :o How so?
Well you are aware that after the battle starts there's a whole series of events involved that follow. Playing enhancements, using character special abilities, both of which do many many different things, play dominants, sometimes leading to starting a new battle or even a new turn. There's a lot more that goes on in the battle phase that you said. Nice try.
Dude. Really? C'mon.
You're still in the battle phase? You are doing them IN the battle phase? I don't see how it's so easy for you too list all the thing you do DURING the battle phase and then compare it to only how you START the battle phase. Your argument makes no sense.
I was actually helping you out by bolding, italicizing, underlining and enlarging a key point in your previous response.
-
If we play the way STAMP thinks we do, then every rescue attempt is successful.
/And I thought he didn't like speed...
-
I think the battle phase is a bit more complicated then "start a battle"...
Really?? :o How so?
Well you are aware that after the battle starts there's a whole series of events involved that follow. Playing enhancements, using character special abilities, both of which do many many different things, play dominants, sometimes leading to starting a new battle or even a new turn. There's a lot more that goes on in the battle phase that you said. Nice try.
Dude. Really? C'mon.
You're still in the battle phase? You are doing them IN the battle phase? I don't see how it's so easy for you too list all the thing you do DURING the battle phase and then compare it to only how you START the battle phase. Your argument makes no sense.
I was actually helping you out by bolding, italicizing, underlining and enlarging a key point in your previous response.
Let me point out something in your argument. It doesn't make sense. According to your argument the only thing that you can do in the battle phase is start it. That's not true and you know it. There is a lot that goes on in the battle phase and most of the game of redemption occurs in the battle phase.
-
If we play the way STAMP thinks we do, then every rescue attempt is successful.
/And I thought he didn't like speed...
Well, I apologize but I don't think about how any of you play. For some of you that may come as a slight hit to your egos. ::)
I only know how I play and the players with whom I have played, and the fun factor needle keeps going the opposite way of where the red line is. ;)
Let me point out something in your argument. It doesn't make sense. According to your argument the only thing that you can do in the battle phase is start it. That's not true and you know it. There is a lot that goes on in the battle phase and most of the game of redemption occurs in the battle phase.
Please list for me ALL the things a player can do during the battle phase IF a battle is not started.
-
Here's an apples-to-apples comparison:
What you can do during the prep phase - End your upkeep phase
What you can do during the battle phase - Start a battle
-
If we play the way STAMP thinks we do, then every rescue attempt is successful.
/And I thought he didn't like speed...
Well, I apologize but I don't think about how any of you play. For some of you that may come as a slight hit to your egos. ::)
I only know how I play and the players with whom I have played, and the fun factor needle keeps going the opposite way of where the red line is. ;)
Let me point out something in your argument. It doesn't make sense. According to your argument the only thing that you can do in the battle phase is start it. That's not true and you know it. There is a lot that goes on in the battle phase and most of the game of redemption occurs in the battle phase.
Please list for me ALL the things a player can do during the battle phase IF a battle is not started.
If a battle is not started, there is no battle phase. That does not mean that nothing occurs during the battle phase after you start the battle which is exactly what you said, let me quote it below just so you can see exactly what you said again.
What you can do during the battle phase:
Start a battle.
[/rant]
The battle phase requires the most strategy of any part of the game, it's the only way you can win the game, if you really think that the prep phase is somehow the "main phase" of redemption you are playing the game wrong and I can see why you aren't having any fun.
-
Here's an apples-to-apples comparison:
What you can do during the prep phase - End your upkeep phase
What you can do during the battle phase - Start a battle
I think there was a bad worm in the apple you ate.
I know because I learned something during my college days on spring break trips to Mexico.
;)
...{a bunch of text}...
Allow me to simplify the discussion:
Brother Bear - My name is Koda (multi-language) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9Xdkm7d5Ps#)
-
It frustrates me that a lot of people completely hate the idea of territory class characters for no specific reason beyond disliking the idea. I actually think Pol had an extremely clever idea with his Leviathan card, and it would be a good chance of pace beyond the possibility of the usual "ongoing abilities" use that most people think of.
-
I think the point was that the only thing you can do in the Battle Phase is have the battle itself, and that while it has been the keystone of Redemption gameplay for pretty much its whole lifespan, the number of things you can do in the Prep Phase has become quite large, and is already encroaching on the Battle Phase. In that light, adding another type of character that does stuff outside of battle would just add more stuff to the Prep Phase, and possibly, pull more attention away from the Battle Phase.
It's a delicate balance to strike, and I don't have a solid answer on what is the absolute right answer, but I think the idea has more value than the way it may have been phrased.
-
Back when I first posted my idea for Territory Class Characters (I don't know of any other posted ideas of it at the time) the idea I had in mind was it would only work for continuous abilities.
My original idea was Jezebel
Special Ability: Protect evil characters in your territory from discard if an artifact depicting an idol is in play. If blocking discard a good prophet in play.
Basically the continuous ability would be active all the time, and the instant ability would only work during battle (I would always have it written just to be clear) but I would want it as a general rule for card design (except maybe on very rare cases in which case it would say when it triggers, such as when coming in play or when a dominant is played or whatever)
I think they would be good for increasing the battle phase (by having characters protected upon entering play or by allowing a CBP evil ability that gets around by the numbers and characters that could negate fortresses or characters without having to enter battle (such as Garden Tomb or Thaddeus)
Yes if done badly we could have another Garden Tomb, Thaddeus or even ANB, but I think (so long as they were done well and used sparingly) we could keep better balance.
-
Let's remember that we got ANB, TGT, Thad AND NJ without any TC characters. The problem isn't innovation in card types, but rather glitches in playtesting.
-
I don't see why TC characters could ever be a bad idea. More complexity and options if done right is a good thing. A very good thing.
-
I think the point was that the only thing you can do in the Battle Phase is have the battle itself, and that while it has been the keystone of Redemption gameplay for pretty much its whole lifespan, the number of things you can do in the Prep Phase has become quite large, and is already encroaching on the Battle Phase. In that light, adding another type of character that does stuff outside of battle would just add more stuff to the Prep Phase, and possibly, pull more attention away from the Battle Phase.
It's a delicate balance to strike, and I don't have a solid answer on what is the absolute right answer, but I think the idea has more value than the way it may have been phrased.
+1
Awhile ago, one of the best T2 players around, Mr. Ross Zipcode, revealed his main playing strategy: conflict avoidance. His decks were designed such that EVEN when he did do something during the battle phase, the idea was to get the battle over quickly. He also stressed how important it was to play cards that would inhibit your opponent from making rescue attempts. The bottom line was that the less that was done during the battle phase, the better. Territory-class cards are basically just a way of activating a ton of artifacts. Sun Tzu urged careful preparation before battle so that the battle is won before it's fought. That's where we're headed.
Shoot, maybe I should use that strategy in real life? I need to be carefully prepared before I go talk to that lost soul because I want to make sure they get saved 100% of the time. I've gotta keep my average up.
[/dripping sarcasm]
-
That's an incredibly smart way of playing, and Sun Tzu is right. I think more in Prep than I do in battle. Most of the time, when I enter battle, I know exactly how it'll play out. If I can restrict my opponent from making a rescue attempt, my defense is doing it's job.
-
Almost every high-tier deck utilizes a strategy to help prevent the opponent from being able to do anything during the Battle Phase. FBTNB is self-explanatory, TGT and Gardensciples use TGT, Disciples, in the mid-to-late game, use Thad; really, Genesis and some variations of Sam are the only very commonly used themes that don't have the intention - whether the user is conscious of it or not - to shut down a defense as the main strategy of the deck. I'm still not that experienced in the T2 meta, but in the T1 meta, most people already engage in "conflict avoidance" to win. Blind dislike of territory-class characters shows a distinct lack of imagination and fear that adding such an idea will inevitably break the game, despite the fact that territory class enhancements have struck a great balance between being useful without overpowered (though admittedly, these are the exception - most territory class enhancements aren't worth using at all).
-
(though admittedly, these are the exception - most territory class enhancements aren't worth using at all).
Most likely, this is what will happen with TC characters.
-
That's an incredibly smart way of playing, and Sun Tzu is right. I think more in Prep than I do in battle. Most of the time, when I enter battle, I know exactly how it'll play out. If I can restrict my opponent from making a rescue attempt, my defense is doing it's job.
It's how the "best" become the best. Hall of Fame rallying cry - "We don't need no stinkin' battles!"
Blind dislike of territory-class characters shows a distinct lack of imagination and fear that adding such an idea will inevitably break the game, despite the fact that territory class enhancements have struck a great balance between being useful without overpowered (though admittedly, these are the exception - most territory class enhancements aren't worth using at all).
I'm guessing you weren't trying to make me laugh, but I'm rolling! :rollin:
You, sir, are on my list of "faves" on the boards. :)
I'm just a small voice out here in the NW wilderness. ;)
-
I'm confused why I'm making you laugh, but excited at the prospect of winning a medal or something.
-
I'm confused why I'm making you laugh, but excited at the prospect of winning a medal or something.
When I read your post I was imagining walking into a NE tournament with a white cane and dark sunglasses acting all crotchety. Then I thought of the irony that I had that much imagination. ;D
You'll have to gain momentum to get into the medal round, though, as there are others you'll have to pass, e.g. YMT, MJB, Polarius, Kittens, etc. ;)
-
most people already engage in "conflict avoidance" to win. Blind dislike of territory-class characters shows a distinct lack of imagination and fear that adding such an idea will inevitably break the game
Especially if TC characters were all ECs. And if they were with abilities like "Cannot be ignored", which would decrease the conflict avoidance of TGT/Gardensciples.
-
most people already engage in "conflict avoidance" to win. Blind dislike of territory-class characters shows a distinct lack of imagination and fear that adding such an idea will inevitably break the game
Especially if TC characters were all ECs. And if they were with abilities like "Cannot be ignored", which would decrease the conflict avoidance of TGT/Gardensciples.
Exactly. There are some great, obvious ideas that would help balance out the meta (your example of Cannot Be Ignored abilities is perfect), on top of some really clever ideas ala Pol's Leviathan.
-
Glad to see I'm making an impact somewhere, but I still don't understand why you don't like TCCs. Could you rephrase your arguments for me?
-
most people already engage in "conflict avoidance" to win. Blind dislike of territory-class characters shows a distinct lack of imagination and fear that adding such an idea will inevitably break the game
Especially if TC characters were all ECs. And if they were with abilities like "Cannot be ignored", which would decrease the conflict avoidance of TGT/Gardensciples.
We could finally unbreak TGT!
-
Glad to see I'm making an impact somewhere, but I still don't understand why you don't like TCCs. Could you rephrase your arguments for me?
Who are you talking to?
-
Glad to see I'm making an impact somewhere, but I still don't understand why you don't like TCCs. Could you rephrase your arguments for me?
Who are you talking to?
STAMP, I got instaposted.
most people already engage in "conflict avoidance" to win. Blind dislike of territory-class characters shows a distinct lack of imagination and fear that adding such an idea will inevitably break the game
Especially if TC characters were all ECs. And if they were with abilities like "Cannot be ignored", which would decrease the conflict avoidance of TGT/Gardensciples.
We could finally unbreak TGT!
And break all the hosts minds when you negate the ability that allowed them to enter battle in the first place.
-
And break all the hosts minds when you negate the ability that allowed them to enter battle in the first place.
at which point you have the chance to actually do something to counter it unlike the current where if you don't have 2 ECs of the same brigade, hand them a soul.
-
HELLO!! TGT was designed to counter the broken defense Sir Nobody and others were using. I can only assume by recent track record that any counter created for TGT will also break something else. I'm a scientist, Jim! I look at the data. ;)
-
That's not the way Redemption works. Only offensive cards can break the game. The standalone defense was good, and it was centralizing, but it wasn't broken because it could never rescue a LS. TGT is great and centralizing and can win Lost Souls.
-
That's not the way Redemption works. Only offensive cards can break the game. The standalone defense was good, and it was centralizing, but it wasn't broken because it could never rescue a LS. TGT is great and centralizing and can win Lost Souls.
Well that's just not true. If they release a 1/1 multi-brigade EC who's protected from opponents CBN, that is broken. Defensive cards can mostly definitely break the game.
-
That really illustrates my point. You have to go to pretty ridiculous levels with evil to break the game. You don't have to get all that ridiculous on offense.
-
That really illustrates my point. You have to go to pretty ridiculous levels with evil to break the game. You don't have to get all that ridiculous on offense.
Sure you do; look at what kinds of cards are broken, or at least overpowered right now. The theory behind TGT is that it would encourage people to play larger defenses, however, they gave TGT the ability to be played ridiculously fast, especially with Gardensciples, and as such, it's easy to draw and set up TGT before your opponent can set up their defense, and thus, it's strong. With Disciples, Thad could be balanced, except Disciples are so fast it's not hard to set up your Disciples in a handful of turns, allowing you to walk in. Angel Under the Oak is a CBN D2 with the ability to search for and produce a CBN protected 6/6 hero with access to a CBN battlewinner, along with searching for another hero that starts a large banding chain, who is theoretically overpowered all his own. It does take work for an offensive card to be broken.
-
I see that as more the nature of offense, and further confirms my point. TGT isn't that ridiculous, but it's broken. Angel isn't that ridiculous, but it's broken. Can you point to any similar examples on defense?
Furthermore, anytime Evil gets anywhere near broken, it's stomped down next set. Creeping Deceiver was as near broken as evil gets last year, but this year they made Sites easy pickings and character negation all over the place. Same with Manasseh, and then we got an errata for Golgotha with the express purpose of making Manasseh weaker. TGT has been broken for years.
-
HELLO!! TGT was designed to counter the broken defense Sir Nobody and others were using. I can only assume by recent track record that any counter created for TGT will also break something else. I'm a scientist, Jim! I look at the data. ;)
You'll notice that there have been plenty of things created to counter TGT, and none of them were gamebreaking. Golgatha maybe, but like Pol said, it was to stop Manny in T1 and ridiculous recursion in T2.
-
HELLO!! TGT was designed to counter the broken defense Sir Nobody and others were using.
It may have been, but it totally didn't work. Sir Nobody's offense was WAY bigger than the most popular defense of today's top players (RDT's standalone). Both Sir Nobody's and RDT's are standalone from a variety of brigades, so the problem hasn't improved, but gotten worse.
If we want people to play with defense, I am becoming more and more convinced that no cards that we make will change things significantly. What we need is a longer time limit, or a gamerule that really hurts speed (like "Gifts of the Magi").
-
Seeded cards would work, too.
-
HELLO!! TGT was designed to counter the broken defense Sir Nobody and others were using.
It may have been, but it totally didn't work. Sir Nobody's offense was WAY bigger than the most popular defense of today's top players (RDT's standalone). Both Sir Nobody's and RDT's are standalone from a variety of brigades, so the problem hasn't improved, but gotten worse.
If we want people to play with defense, I am becoming more and more convinced that no cards that we make will change things significantly. What we need is a longer time limit, or a gamerule that really hurts speed (like "Gifts of the Magi").
So has anyone from the other side ever considered something new for the BATTLE phase?
-
HELLO!! TGT was designed to counter the broken defense Sir Nobody and others were using.
It may have been, but it totally didn't work. Sir Nobody's offense was WAY bigger than the most popular defense of today's top players (RDT's standalone). Both Sir Nobody's and RDT's are standalone from a variety of brigades, so the problem hasn't improved, but gotten worse.
If we want people to play with defense, I am becoming more and more convinced that no cards that we make will change things significantly. What we need is a longer time limit, or a gamerule that really hurts speed (like "Gifts of the Magi").
So has anyone from the other side ever considered something new for the BATTLE phase?
We get new cards for the battle phase every year. They're called Enhancements and Characters. Sometimes we ever get dominants.
-
HELLO!! TGT was designed to counter the broken defense Sir Nobody and others were using.
It may have been, but it totally didn't work. Sir Nobody's offense was WAY bigger than the most popular defense of today's top players (RDT's standalone). Both Sir Nobody's and RDT's are standalone from a variety of brigades, so the problem hasn't improved, but gotten worse.
If we want people to play with defense, I am becoming more and more convinced that no cards that we make will change things significantly. What we need is a longer time limit, or a gamerule that really hurts speed (like "Gifts of the Magi").
So has anyone from the other side ever considered something new for the BATTLE phase?
We get new cards for the battle phase every year. They're called Enhancements and Characters. Sometimes we ever get dominants.
Women's - new card type, Site, activates in prep; can be used in battle phase (usually only multi-colored)
Warrior's - new card types, Artifact and Fortress, activate in the prep phase
Patriarch's - new card type, Covenant, activates in prep and battle (but rarely used in battle)
King's - new card classes, warrior and weapon, primarily used to pre-load in prep phase and hold
Priest's - new card type, Curse, evil version of Covenant (let's face it, they're both glorified Artifacts)
Thesaurus ex Preterus - new card class for enhancements, territory, activates in prep and discard phases
While I applaud the effort to make new card types and classes impactful for the battle phase, they've fallen short most of the time, while making the prep phase the "power" phase in the game. LOL, before Warriors it was all about the back and forth battles, but they were considered boring because it was just numbers. Warriors saved the game, but signaled the decline of the back and forth battle phase. Side battles were the single best invention for the battle phase but were neutered because of brokenness.
Seriously, if I had a choice of "fixing" side battle brokenness (which promote lots of battling) versus TGT brokenness (which promotes solitaire), I'd take side battles everyday.
-
The average deck contains less than 10 Territory class enhancements and artifacts. the majority of a players deck, and of the game, are still characters and enhancements that activate in the battle phase. Just because you can do a wider VARIETY of things during the prep phase does not mean you inherently do MORE in the prep phase. Most of my prep phases are spent putting down characters to send in to battle.
-
The reason the battle phase doesn't get anything new is because it has what it needs already. The prep phase is what needed more stuff to do so it got more cards.
And keep in mind almost every card you play in your prep phase it usually for the purpose of eventually winning battles, so really everything new that comes into the prep phase will affect the battle phase.
-
The average deck contains less than 10 Territory class enhancements and artifacts. the majority of a players deck, and of the game, are still characters and enhancements that activate in the battle phase. Just because you can do a wider VARIETY of things during the prep phase does not mean you inherently do MORE in the prep phase. Most of my prep phases are spent putting down characters to send in to battle.
This Nats T1 2P 1st place deck (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/complete-decks/nats-t1-2p-1st-place/msg434272/#msg434272) contains 52 cards of which 22 are primarily used in the battle phase, and only then for speed and walk-ins for lost souls.
The reason the battle phase doesn't get anything new is because it has what it needs already. The prep phase is what needed more stuff to do so it got more cards.
And keep in mind almost every card you play in your prep phase it usually for the purpose of eventually winning battles, so really everything new that comes into the prep phase will affect the battle phase.
Correction: "...for the purpose of eventually winning battles without actually fighting..."
-
I count 32. 8 of the "other" are list soul so that makes 40 and there are also 4 cards that are used in the battle Phase about half the time. So thats 36 out of 52 - 8 (lost souls really don't count for either phase) = 36/44 = 82%. You're right that IS unbalanced we need more prep phase cards.
-
I count 32. 8 of the "other" are list soul so that makes 40 and there are also 4 cards that are used in the battle Phase about half the time. So thats 36 out of 52 - 8 (lost souls really don't count for either phase) = 36/44 = 82%. You're right that IS unbalanced we need more prep phase cards.
Please tell me you get someone else to do your taxes. :P
-
I counted 33 cards that are used (or at least find the most use) during the battle phase in that deck. What do you propose be added to the game that is usable in the battle phase that we don't already have, beyond neutral characters? You can correct me if I'm wrong STAMP, but I think your problem with the game is less that there's too much in the prep phase, and more than the old way the battle phase would work (with both sides potentially playing two or three enhancements before someone finally lost) has all but completely finished.
-
I counted 33 cards that are used (or at least find the most use) during the battle phase in that deck. What do you propose be added to the game that is usable in the battle phase that we don't already have, beyond neutral characters? You can correct me if I'm wrong STAMP, but I think your problem with the game is less that there's too much in the prep phase, and more than the old way the battle phase would work (with both sides potentially playing two or three enhancements before someone finally lost) has all but completely finished.
I don't have problems. I see trends. I provide feedback to bad trends. For a generation that prefers to waste away their days playing first-person shooter games, I find it comical that they might prefer a strategy that avoids direct confrontation at all.
-
Where is my math wrong stamp? 16 characters 8 enhancement used exclusively in the battle phase, 1 used mostly in the battle phase, 3 fortresses all of which focus on the battle phase (TGT ingores, Herod's temple saves your heros, PO gives you a character to block/potentially get around TGT) CM, Grapes, and AOTL are used 90% of the time in battle (100% for Grapes) Harvest Time is usually used following burial or at the beginning of the battle phase to turn a battle challenge in to a rescue attempt. 16+8+1+3+4+1=32/44=.819=82%
Edit: Did STAMP just turn in to the cranky grandfather in the corner of the nursing home that rambles on about "back in my day..." It isn't just our generation that likes to play video games, 53% of adults play them the most avid among them being seniors (source (http://www.marketingcharts.com/interactive/nearly-all-us-teens-53-of-adults-play-video-games-7114/)) and actually it makes perfect sense. Just like in redemption, when you play an FPS the goal is to get the most kills while dying the fewest times therefore you want to maximize kills while minimizing the opportunities they have to kill you. I WISH Call of Duty had a TGT equivalent.
-
I get somewhere around 26 cards.
Either way, this whole "discussion" is kind of ridiculous. I'm pretty tired of older members talking about how they don't like the direction the boards or the game are going. I've literally never read any post that I can remember in which Stamp has admitted he was incorrect about his opinions about the game or the direction in which it is going. At some point, that makes you sound either like a know it all or a whiner. Consider how much you vocalize displeasure with the boards and some posters, you should really stop contributing to that displeasure. Even your tagline "voice of reason" suggests you are the king answer man. You fairly consistently comment that young 'uns don't know what they are saying, and then don't explain why they don't know. How is that a positive contribution to a discussion? You only post one liners half the time. How does that contribute anything to discussions?
I realize Sauce is the same way, and I love Sauce. The difference is, Sauce virtually never wants to be taken seriously. You seem to want to be taken seriously and then do nothing to promote that image and get upset when you aren't taken seriously.
I don't have problems. I see trends. I provide feedback to bad trends. For a generation that prefers to waste away their days playing first-person shooter games, I find it comical that they might prefer a strategy that avoids direct confrontation at all.
We can only play those games because of your generation. I find it comical that the oldest person in this thread that I noticed is acting the most immature that he isn't getting his way.
-
I don't have problems. I see trends. I provide feedback to bad trends. For a generation that prefers to waste away their days playing first-person shooter games, I find it comical that they might prefer a strategy that avoids direct confrontation at all.
Just because you see trends that you think are bad, doesn't make them bad trends. Just because you hold an opinion doesn't make it law. I actually find your comment about "a generation that prefers to waste away their days..." to be personally insulting.
-
I've actually spent more time in this debate in the past couple days than on playing video games. a lot more. I played madden for an hour today. The rest of the time I've been doing homework/other work/cleaning.
-
Did STAMP just turn in to the cranky grandfather in the corner of the nursing home that rambles on about "back in my day..."
Have to. CountFount and MJB don't get on the boards often enough. ;D
I've literally never read any post that I can remember in which Stamp has admitted he was incorrect about his opinions about the game or the direction in which it is going.
Hahahahahahahaha!!!! Has ANYONE admitted they were incorrect about their opinions??! :laugh:
Just because you see trends that you think are bad, doesn't make them bad trends. Just because you hold an opinion doesn't make it law. I actually find your comment about "a generation that prefers to waste away their days..." to be personally insulting.
If you're the 1 out of 10 that isn't then I applaud thee. Now turn to the other 9 and tell'em Stamp is insulting THEM. ;)
I've actually spent more time in this debate in the past couple days than on playing video games. a lot more. I played madden for an hour today. The rest of the time I've been doing homework/other work/cleaning.
{...Stamp, ol' man, you need to be more subtle...they might catch on to your ulterior motive...}
-
So has anyone from the other side ever considered something new for the BATTLE phase?
As someone else who appreciates the back-and-forth of a fun battle, I'm interested in what creative suggestions you would have for such a card-type.
And let's cool down with the statements that threaten to turn what could be a constructive thread into personal attacks (accusing the young of wasting their days, accusing the middle-aged of being cranky). Consider this a warning to both sides.
-
I was using the last post more to show that contrary to popular belief I, a 19 year old male, don't spend all that much time on video games. My total hours so far this year (since january first not in the last 365 days) probably totals to less than 20 hours, and over half of those hours are RTS related (because yes that is a video game). STAMP, I bet if you remember back to when you were a kid the older generation made a bunch of generalizations about your generation that weren't true, just like the notion that all my generation does is play video games isn't true either.
-
I've literally never read any post that I can remember in which Stamp has admitted he was incorrect about his opinions about the game or the direction in which it is going.
Hahahahahahahaha!!!! Has ANYONE admitted they were incorrect about their opinions??! :laugh:
I could go through Chronic Apathy's posts (just as an example, since a recent discussion he was in came to my mind) and find several opinions/statements he has taken back/revised/etc. If I thought you'd change your mind, I might link them here, but I won't waste my breath.
Just because you see trends that you think are bad, doesn't make them bad trends. Just because you hold an opinion doesn't make it law. I actually find your comment about "a generation that prefers to waste away their days..." to be personally insulting.
If you're the 1 out of 10 that isn't then I applaud thee. Now turn to the other 9 and tell'em Stamp is insulting THEM. ;)
I "waste" some of my days shooting people on Call of Duty. Does that mean that I am wasting my life? Not at all. I would post examples of how I am not wasting my life, but in this Christian circle, I am leery it would easily be construed as being prideful.
I've actually spent more time in this debate in the past couple days than on playing video games. a lot more. I played madden for an hour today. The rest of the time I've been doing homework/other work/cleaning.
{...Stamp, ol' man, you need to be more subtle...they might catch on to your ulterior motive...}
Here's a great example of you being condescending and not helping anyone promote discussion. Check back here when you can engage in intelligent conversation without resorting to double entendres and other sarcastic remarks to veil your motives and points. It isn't helping anyone.
Thanks for not responding to any of my substantive criticism, by the way.
-
So has anyone from the other side ever considered something new for the BATTLE phase?
As someone else who appreciates the back-and-forth of a fun battle, I'm interested in what creative suggestions you would have for such a card-type.
And let's cool down with the statements that threaten to turn what could be a constructive thread into personal attacks (accusing the young of wasting their days, accusing the middle-aged of being cranky). Consider this a warning to both sides.
A. I've already made my suggestions and they were thoroughly ignored...even more so since the whole unredeemable captured demon thingy. ;)
B. I call a spade a spade. So did Jesus. :thumbup: By all means lock the thread if you feel the need, but I think there's a good dialogue going on. Not every conversation has to be like it's in Mr. Rogers neighborhood.
I was using the last post more to show that contrary to popular belief I, a 19 year old male, don't spend all that much time on video games. My total hours so far this year (since january first not in the last 365 days) probably totals to less than 20 hours, and over half of those hours are RTS related (because yes that is a video game). STAMP, I bet if you remember back to when you were a kid the older generation made a bunch of generalizations about your generation that weren't true, just like the notion that all my generation does is play video games isn't true either.
Then I know if I ever go to a NE tournament I'll have the privilege of having interesting and constructive chats with you, Chronic and Kittens whilst the other chuckleheads are playing their video games. Does Roy come to your tournaments? I believe I would very much enjoy a multiplayer game with the 5 of us. :)
Oh, the older generation was correct about many things when I was a kid...we just never admitted it and really didn't realize it until we were older. Don't worry, enjoy your youth. There'll be plenty of time to consider it through a wiser lens later in life. ;)
I've literally never read any post that I can remember in which Stamp has admitted he was incorrect about his opinions about the game or the direction in which it is going.
Hahahahahahahaha!!!! Has ANYONE admitted they were incorrect about their opinions??! :laugh:
I could go through Chronic Apathy's posts (just as an example, since a recent discussion he was in came to my mind) and find several opinions/statements he has taken back/revised/etc. If I thought you'd change your mind, I might link them here, but I won't waste my breath.
Interesting how you chose someone else's example...do you have one of yourself? ::)
I "waste" some of my days shooting people on Call of Duty. Does that mean that I am wasting my life? Not at all. I would post examples of how I am not wasting my life, but in this Christian circle, I am leery it would easily be construed as being prideful.
No need. You're probably right that I might not agree with your reasons. Then again, I might. Crazier things have happened. :)
{...Stamp, ol' man, you need to be more subtle...they might catch on to your ulterior motive...}
Here's a great example of you being condescending and not helping anyone promote discussion. Check back here when you can engage in intelligent conversation without resorting to double entendres and other sarcastic remarks to veil your motives and points. It isn't helping anyone.
Thanks for not responding to any of my substantive criticism, by the way.
So I won't respond. Rather, I'll apologize to you. I very much enjoy that you are a fun and challenging adversary in fantasy sports and would hate to lose that. :thumbup:
Look, everyone, this isn't Sunday school. Grown-up conversations can touch on sensitive subjects (even non-Church subjects), but that doesn't mean it can't be a valuable conversation.
-
I think this has gone beyond being constructive (or answering my initial question), and I'm tired of listening to this conversation, so I'm locking this.