Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Open Forum => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Warrior_Monk on August 17, 2010, 01:04:02 AM
-
to stop hijacking this thread (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=22837.msg358537;boardseen#new)
Actually california style makes a whole lot of sense with Evil on one side and good on the other. so if the PTB Do mandate a style, I think it should be California style...
But I woldnt hold my breath about mandating a specific style because all you have to do is ask your opponent what they have showing and they have to tell you.
why not just the style as shown in the rule book?
1. it an get confusing when EC's are converted and then sometimes "slip" back down to the EC level,
2. having to move your heros out of the way every time you block.
3. Artifacts getting lost in all the Fortress/art/discard clutter that happens around the draw pile.
4. Bigger decks need more room to spread out.
5. ...should I keep going?
1: evil convert cards? name 5. now name 1 that is played frequently.
2: this is a problem of table size. we don't have that problem at our playgroup. ultimately, the space turns out the same.
3: I don't remember where the artifacts are in CA style, so I can't comment. with a set style, it shouldn't be a problem.
4: how does CA style solve this?
5: please.
mandating a style would become an uproar though. people don't like change.
-
I'll just repeat myself to make the point abundantly clear to future readers of this thread:
Why not just have a unified standard? i.e. the rulebook
P.S. Was 87% an arbitrary picked number or scientific poll?
-
I'll just repeat myself to make the point abundantly clear to future readers of this thread:
Why not just have a unified standard? i.e. the rulebook
it'd be nice if the PTB would set up a mandatory placement of cards.
why not just the style as shown in the rule book?
I said it first! >:c
-
I'm pioneering my own style
Deck goes face down in opponent's territory
Heroes go face up on top of deck so they are flush
Evil characters go face up on the bottom of the deck so they are flush
Lost souls I've rescued go on the bottom of my deck so they are perpendicular
Lost souls in my LOB go on the top of my deck so they are perpendicular
I hold items set aside in my hand
My opponent holds cards removed from the game in his hand
Fortresses go on the top of my deck at a 45 degree angle
Artifacts go on the bottom of my deck at a 45 degree angle
My hand is placed under a table leg beings it is a wobbly table
EDIT: My discard pile will be on the table next to me. If something is placed in my territory (IE: ABOM) I just throw it and let it land wherever. That is its spot.
-
Nice Quote confusion there, Ring Wraith.
-
Nice Quote confusion there, Ring Wraith.
fixed.
-
Ok, now I didn't say it first. Darn.
-
So...being from CA and from the contingent that uses the rule book layout, I wish we could call the "alternative" layout something other than CA style. I think that even at Bryon's tournaments lately, the "alternative" style is in the minority.
I do have to admit that even after playing against it for years, it is still somewhat disorienting and you can get confused about where some things are kept. And it's much more difficult in multiplayer where there's less space at the table with most people sitting at an off angle so that people on either side of them can't see their hands.
Mike
-
1. it can get confusing when EC's are converted and then sometimes "slip" back down to the EC level,
1: evil convert cards? name 5. now name 1 that is played frequently.
I was talking about converting evil characters soooo.
The word spreads, sanctifying faith, repentance, preaching the truth, fishers of men, A new creation, repentance and restitution, meeting the messiah, Holy grail, ...
-
I'm pioneering my own style
Deck goes face down in opponent's territory
Heroes go face up on top of deck so they are flush
Evil characters go face up on the bottom of the deck so they are flush
Lost souls I've rescued go on the bottom of my deck so they are perpendicular
Lost souls in my LOB go on the top of my deck so they are perpendicular
I hold items set aside in my hand
My opponent holds cards removed from the game in his hand
Fortresses go on the top of my deck at a 45 degree angle
Artifacts go on the bottom of my deck at a 45 degree angle
My hand is placed under a table leg beings it is a wobbly table
EDIT: My discard pile will be on the table next to me. If something is placed in my territory (IE: ABOM) I just throw it and let it land wherever. That is its spot.
Brutally Honest plays with his LOB up in his hat.
I don't care if you use a different style of play, as long as you clearly explain what everything is. For now, I just go by the rulebook.
Though it really ticks me off when people have a massively disorganized territory.
-
"Though it really ticks me off when people have a massively disorganized territory." does sloppy count? or everything outta place?
-
If you've ever played me, you'll notice that I'm super organized.
Sloppy's ok, as long as you clearly defined where everything is.
-
DOES THIS PICTURE BOTHER YOU!?!? LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT THE CARDS.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi692.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv289%2Fbriangabe%2FOther%2FChaos.jpg&hash=c2ea2a6b715c4a158242b44a7d0993a8405ff343)
-
I hav always played CA style, and i didnt even kno wut CA style was until midwest regionals when someone i played was like "What's going on in ur territor-...oh ur playing CA style" It's just always made sense to me. Cuz the Heroes are on one side with the LoR separated from the EC's who are on the other side who are guarding the LoB. Arts and forts are in the middle right above the discard pile. Actually one guy asked me if i could move my Holy Grail out of the battlefield lol
-
"Though it really ticks me off when people have a massively disorganized territory." does sloppy count? or everything outta place?
Dude Clift's cousin has to be the messiest person I've ever played against if you're messier than him I will punch you right then and there at the table. Because, Clift's cousin was this close "" to being punched. He sat there just thinking to time out (illegal) and I could hardly tell his cards apart. Yet somehow due to my crazy draw hge won the t2 game 7-1 and I had just gone against Mr. Hiatus 7-6 (though he was nice enough to let me get 6 instead of 5)
-
does heros on top of each other count as messier? I'm good at makeing terratory pile up.
-
What's wrong with the layout of RTS? Seems easy to find everything quickly. I don't know most of the new cards too, so it's great to be able to click on them and read them, haha.
Daniel
:thumbup:
-
DOES THIS PICTURE BOTHER YOU!?!? LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT THE CARDS.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi692.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv289%2Fbriangabe%2FOther%2FChaos.jpg&hash=c2ea2a6b715c4a158242b44a7d0993a8405ff343)
*facetable*
-
1. it can get confusing when EC's are converted and then sometimes "slip" back down to the EC level,
1: evil convert cards? name 5. now name 1 that is played frequently.
I was talking about converting evil characters soooo.
The word spreads, sanctifying faith, repentance, preaching the truth, fishers of men, A new creation, repentance and restitution, meeting the messiah, Holy grail, ...
I was referring to the "slipping back down" part.
that was a fun game. I ran out of heroes and had him locked out. never thought I'd need a CoF...oops.
-
My territory can get somewhat messy, but I try to keep everything separate, I think my style was a mix of what was in the redemption rulebook and yugioh (yes I took my style from a game that has very different card types and rules). But if someone is confused they can ask me, I almost always know whats going on.
-
The only time something bothered me with an opponent's cards was one who put his redeemed souls in the back row and his Land of Bondage off to the side.
I generally use the rulebook setup, and if space gets tight I stack heroes/ECs by brigade so that their names can be seen. I always let an opponent see a card in my territory if they ask, and will even point out what I have if they play a card that can affect one of mine. (I'm not exactly the most cutthroat player in the Redemption world, though, so take that into account.)
-
could somebody post pictures of both styles?
-
Here's the rulebook diagram:
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.redemptionreg.com%2FREG%2FImagesExt%2Fimage308_1.jpg&hash=137789597de2a94878d814bd3024247129e60d39)(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.redemptionreg.com%2FREG%2FImagesExt%2Fimage308_2.jpg&hash=68b16fdb67908a8901966ae6b9e6c625b3b7aa88)
Fortresses need to be stacked so they can all be seen. I usually spread them out.
-
Cali style:
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.redemptionca.com%2FTips%2Fvariations%2FCaliStyle.jpg&hash=d6b1fc27b37dbcd03314e94cbfbf39281382ce65)
Rawrlolsauce style:
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.artsjournal.com%2Fdewey21c%2Fhouse-of-cards.jpg&hash=abb4c554adf208486d8c0433da17291e69169677)
-
Is that a Type 2 deck? ;D
-
Apparently they don't use fortresses in CA. ::)
-
Apparently they don't use fortresses in CA. ::)
fortresses generally play to territory or set aside.
-
Apparently they don't use fortresses in CA. ::)
Thats actually because that was made before forts :p
I play cali style except I put forts, setaside stuff, arts and rescued souls on the far right. I find doing it that way makes things less jumbled.
-
Fortresses need to be stacked so they can all be seen. I usually spread them out.
Real Redemption players juggle them.
-
At nationals this year, I didn't see a single person playing their cards in the exact style listed in the rulebook. Everyone has their own unique style. There were PILES of heroes here and spread out fortresses there, and forts and sites and artifacts vertical, and decks horizonatal, and discard piles far from decks, and redeemed souls on opposide side of decks (or even on top of deck boxes) rather than above the deck, etc.
On multiple occasions, I saw ECs that were half in the hero row and half in the EC row, and it was impossible for me to tell if they had been converted or not. I also saw a couple battles going on where it was impossible to determine which heroes were actually in battle, since the hero row was sloppily arranged and was scattered so far forward on the table. There were heroes in battle that were no closer to the field of battle than the ones in territory.
In 2-player games, it makes much more sense to me to play CA style. There is a CLEAR distinction when an EC gets converted. There is a clearer distinction between territory and field of battle. There is more room in the field of battle.
In multi-player, I still prefer CA style, though its benefits are not as obvious.
It is disorienting to not know whether a character is converted or not, and to not know if a character is in battle or not, and to not know whether a lost soul is rescued or not. All of those are clarified with CA style. The "standard" style (which is a misnomer if ever there was one) requires deep tables and careful neatness on the part of all players to avoid confusion.
-
If the illustration above says anything about CA style, I don't see how one requires a table more or less "deep" than the other. Both seem to require you be able to stack your cards three-plus deep (how does that image make it more clear that a Hero has been pushed out into battle? It seems prone to the same sloppy execution as the rulebook layout) and puts your Arts, Forts and set-asides wherever you can make space for them.
People also neglect the power of the "tap". My unoccupied Sites are off to one side and turned sideways so it is immediately clear that they are a). not a Lost Soul and b). not occupied. My Redeemed Souls are in a fanned stack and turned sideways so that can also be seen at a glance. Even my removed cards, rather than try and find some weird place to put them, I put them under my discards, face-down and turned sideways for a clear distinction.
In addition, I always mark my converted characters with colored stones anyway, because knowing their alignment is one thing but keeping track of their brigade is difficult no matter where you stick your Heroes. So my opponents should be able to tell the converted state of any of my characters at a glance.
-
I'v been saying this for years. I think it saves space 2 lines instead of 3.
-
It's (arguably) only 2/3 as deep, but it is twice as long because you're not stacking your Heroes over your ECs.
-
My layout for the last 13 or so years has been the following (adding sites, artifacts and fortresses as they started existing):
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv242%2Ftimmierz%2FRedemptionLayout.jpg&hash=995b43eb929e9e3a981d60c94feb8c6a37c8f6f9)
I always keep my territory as gridlike as possible, because that's how I roll. There isn't any confusion when your territory is neat; the ones next to the artifacts are Heroes, the ones next to the Fortresses are ECs (and those converted characters often have some bead or token on them anyways).
-
and to not know whether a lost soul is rescued or not.
I will argue this point until the cows come home, And honestly it is one of the biggest problems that I have with CA style -
Both lost and redeemed souls are on the same level - Almost every other style of play that I have seen has these two on different levels, even if you do something different with your other cards I feel redeemed souls should always be forward of lost souls.
-
Can we all atleast agree that my style is the best and the only reason not to use it is due to the fact you're a bad player that doesn't want to wreck my style's awesomesaucenessitude.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi708.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww83%2FI_Am_Rawrlolsauce%2FRawrStyle.jpg&hash=17e50be4a5c6f6a2f011909f3e4374a62c9b582a)
-
It looks great. There's just one problem. You're not wearing a fez.
=> -1.
-
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi708.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww83%2FI_Am_Rawrlolsauce%2FDerpfez.jpg&hash=9768b468aabfabd53de4227fcf6af797ba001c46)
My final opinion on the matter is this: We shouldn't man date anyone. Except Morgan Freeman. <3.
-
My version of Cali style plays only a little bit different. My arts and forts are in front of my deck and my LoR is behind my heroes. Sauce i do not like ur style, Ringwraith used it and my team lost the game bcuz i didnt know he had an artifact up (unknown nation) it was behind his 150 card deck...we would hav won that game 3-2. :(
-
Absolutely nothing should go behind the deck, ever. End of story. I don't have anything behind my deck in my image. That is actually my biggest problem with California style. I've never played someone that used California style, but I have played people who had their LOB behind their deck. On small tables it isn't a big deal, but on normal sized tables their deck will obstruct my view until they deck out beings I'm 3 feet tall.
And I play Ring Wraith irl at almost every tournament. My style is different than his I'm pretty sure.
-
The only thing that might be behind my deck is my removed from the game pile.
I have my deck to my right, my discard pile is in front of it, my set aside is on the right of my deck with my Land of Redemption above it.
I keep my artifact pile to the left of my deck then my fortresses are to the left of that, possibly pile if they don't have any contents, and then unoccupied sites in a pile beside that (unless they have a relevant special ability) and then my land of bondage is beside that.
Then in the row above that are my heroes and evil characters (heroes are on the right with evil characters on the left) and the field of battle is in the third row from me.
It sounds like a need a very wide table, and it can get very difficult if my set aside area is small, but usually it works. My Land of Bondage and land of Redemption are on opposite corners of my play area, the issue with converted characters I solve by, for example, putting a converted evil character on the far side of my heroes.
I think I've been playing with that style for too long to change it, so I wouldn't suggest mandating a specific style (just make sure players are keeping track of their own stuff and hopefully making it organized enough for your opponent to tell whats going on)
-
And I play Ring Wraith irl at almost every tournament. My style is different than his I'm pretty sure.
we have the same style. I like it a lot.
-
Redemption needs big tables. 'Nuff said. Byron, you never saw me in action? (crazy hat guy). I'm a super stickler about card location.
I might try some of these on for size, they at least make sense.
-
I still think that man dating is wrong considering 90% of the board members are male. Why is everyone avoiding that point?
-
How would we decide which format to use? vote on it?
-
I still think that man dating is wrong considering 90% of the board members are male. Why is everyone avoiding that point?
-
How would we decide which format to use? vote on it?
I doubt a vote will ever solve anything around here, and there's clearly a sample bias.
I still think that man dating is wrong considering 90% of the board members are male. Why is everyone avoiding that point?
If you're a man, and you're dating, it's your choice. I'll stick to courting myself.
-
and to not know whether a lost soul is rescued or not.
I will argue this point until the cows come home, And honestly it is one of the biggest problems that I have with CA style -
Both lost and redeemed souls are on the same level - Almost every other style of play that I have seen has these two on different levels, even if you do something different with your other cards I feel redeemed souls should always be forward of lost souls.
Redeemed souls are with the heroes, on the right side of the deck, and turned sideways (to show they are no longer lost, but are redeemed, and thus hangin' out with the heroes).
Lost souls are with the evil characters, on the left side of your deck, and vertical.
There has never been an issue at our tournaments about knowing whether a lost soul was redeemed or not for someone who was using CA style.
How would we decide which format to use? vote on it?
There is no standard way, and there doesn't need to be one. What one person likes does not match what another prefers, etc. Just pay attention to the cards on the table. If you have a preference as a judge, you can teach new players to place things in a certain way, and you will have near uniformity at your little gatherings.
What is going to be great is that, when Redemption online happens, you can choose to see your opponent's cards in whichever arrangement you like.
-
There has never been an issue at our tournaments about knowing whether a lost soul was redeemed or not for someone who was using CA style.
I've had trouble in multi-player games at your tournaments and have occasionally made "rescue attempts" at people's rescued Lost Souls only to find out that i was really making a Battle Challenge since they had no Lost Souls in their LOB. The thing I've had the second most trouble with is sometimes missing an artifact that a player had active.
Now that I've played against CA style so often, I don't have trouble any more in 2-player games. It's only multi that occasionally gets me. Something about everybody's cards getting so close and people sitting at off angles to the sides of the table. But I have to admit the first few times I played against CA style it was very disorienting.
What is going to be great is that, when Redemption online happens, you can choose to see your opponent's cards in whichever arrangement you like.
This is one of the features that I'm most excited about implementing. A CA style player can see all territories in CA style while their opponents that use standard style can see all of the territories in standard style.
Mike
-
I think people should keep their stuff organized and easier to look at and find everything and attack. To purposely mess up your cards to try to confuse your opponent is just lame. If you gotta do that to win, that's just sad.
Daniel
8)
-
What is going to be great is that, when Redemption online happens, you can choose to see your opponent's cards in whichever arrangement you like.
And it'll be looking straight down, with no table angle to deal with.
-
Redemption needs big tables. 'Nuff said. Byron, you never saw me in action? (crazy hat guy). I'm a super stickler about card location.
I might try some of these on for size, they at least make sense.
I may have to battle you for title of "crazy hat guy" ;) (Yay for crazy hats! Do you have many crazy hats? Or just one really epic one?)
If the illustration above says anything about CA style, I don't see how one requires a table more or less "deep" than the other. Both seem to require you be able to stack your cards three-plus deep (how does that image make it more clear that a Hero has been pushed out into battle? It seems prone to the same sloppy execution as the rulebook layout) and puts your Arts, Forts and set-asides wherever you can make space for them.
People also neglect the power of the "tap". My unoccupied Sites are off to one side and turned sideways so it is immediately clear that they are a). not a Lost Soul and b). not occupied. My Redeemed Souls are in a fanned stack and turned sideways so that can also be seen at a glance. Even my removed cards, rather than try and find some weird place to put them, I put them under my discards, face-down and turned sideways for a clear distinction.
In addition, I always mark my converted characters with colored stones anyway, because knowing their alignment is one thing but keeping track of their brigade is difficult no matter where you stick your Heroes. So my opponents should be able to tell the converted state of any of my characters at a glance.
Yay for characters and Tap!
Btw: Best way to defeat all layouts. Ask about cards you are unsure of.
-
I have many hats. It's a shame Nats was only three days, so I could only wear three
-
the KC group had the best hats ever.
-
DOES THIS PICTURE BOTHER YOU!?!? LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT THE CARDS.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi692.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fvv289%2Fbriangabe%2FOther%2FChaos.jpg&hash=c2ea2a6b715c4a158242b44a7d0993a8405ff343)
I played a kid that "organized" his cards like that. He needed MEDICATED! And by the end of the game, so did I
-
well your territory was just as MESSY
-
How would we decide which format to use? vote on it?
Has it been decided that we need an official arrangement?
-
How would we decide which format to use? vote on it?
Has it been decided that we need an official arrangement?
that's what this thread was supposed to be about in the first place...
I'd vote for it. It solve lots of confusion.
-
I'd vote that we need one. Cue ten more pages of debate...
-
How would we decide which format to use? vote on it?
Has it been decided that we need an official arrangement?
that's what this thread was supposed to be about in the first place...
I'd vote for it. It solve lots of confusion.
But if we don't follow the rule, who's gonna know, and what are they gonna do about it!?
;D
-
I vote against it, why play in a style that is confusing to you?
-
I vote against your vote.
-
I have many hats. It's a shame Nats was only three days, so I could only wear three
I KNOW! Isn't that sad? :( I love weird hats ^_^ I gotta get up to 31 so I can have one for every day of the month.
I vote against your vote.
Yeah well, I negate your vote with "Florida Recount"
-
Yeah well, I negate your vote with "Florida Recount"
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zmangames.com%2Fboardgames%2Ffiles%2F1960%2FRecount.jpg&hash=062b3b9c9d9426f31bf278fe05e4705cab34d5c2)
This is why I love boardgames.
-
*jaw drops* that's a real card?
-
Which is why 1960 is one of the best 2-player board games around.
-
thats a strange card
-
Which is why 1960 is one of the best 2-player board games around.
Yes, but who'd want to try to get Nixon elected?
-
I vote against it, why play in a style that is confusing to you?
because soon it will become familiar, rather than playing against mountains of different styles that are confusing to you.
-
Yes, but who'd want to try to get Nixon elected?
The vote was significantly closer than I think you realize through the fog of history, and in a lot of ways was one of the single most significant elections of the 20th century.
In addition to which, up to the point of his resignation from office, he was the only man elected twice to the Vice Presidency and twice to the Presidency. The stigma of political scandal is that you will only be remembered for the way you left office, and you become a poster child for corruption in American politics. But in the long view of his life before and after his presidency as well as during, he was a significant political force over a period of four decades. After all, the other political metaphor to come from his presidency is that of Nixon going to China, an expression significant enough to find its way into a Star Trek movie. ;)
-
Fortunately my history teacher was nice enough to ignore the big test and teach us about the accomplishments of the Presidents during the Vietnam war (other than the war).
Do they have a pre-debate "Remember to Shave" card?
-
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv102%2Fw0rf47%2Fpic264596.jpg&hash=55b20769ec548083a62e1ad5f589f0e5e14d9e11)
-
Now I really want to try this game
-
I have many hats. It's a shame Nats was only three days, so I could only wear three
I KNOW! Isn't that sad? :( I love weird hats ^_^ I gotta get up to 31 so I can have one for every day of the month.
I vote against your vote.
Yeah well, I negate your vote with "Florida Recount"
*Tucks "Hanging Chad" away in case another vote needs to be negated...
-
*sneaks "related to governor of disputed state" into wallet*
-
Now I really want to try this game
I have this game,. LOVE it. I keep trying to talk my wife into playing it again!
-
YOU HAVE IT?!?!?
Okay, next tournament one of us hosts, the other must bring 1960/Queen's Gambit, and we must play both.
-
And I'll show up out of the blue.
-
YOU HAVE IT?!?!?
Okay, next tournament one of us hosts, the other must bring 1960/Queen's Gambit, and we must play both.
Queens Gambit! Level of epix.
-
YOU HAVE IT?!?!?
Okay, next tournament one of us hosts, the other must bring 1960/Queen's Gambit, and we must play both.
Deal. I have only played once but I loved it. It is surprisingly difficult to get Kennedy to win from what I can see. Nixon starts with some pretty significant advantages. And it is awesome how realisitic the game is and how it weaves actual historical events into the gameplay. As a history buff, I just gush over this game.
-
So if I recall my list of obligations correctly, I need to play both 1960 and Queen's Gambit with Matt Archibald, I need to play Twilight Struggle with Matt Brinkman, I need to play Starcraft with Josh Kopp and all comers, and naturally Mark Underwood and I must gin up as many multi-player Epic Duels games as we can manage. Am I forgetting anyone at this point?
It's to the point where I'm going to have to schedule a weekend as the Annual Redemption National Un-Tournament, whereby we all get together and play all these games other than Redemption together.
-
"Though it really ticks me off when people have a massively disorganized territory." does sloppy count? or everything outta place?
Dude Clift's cousin has to be the messiest person I've ever played against if you're messier than him I will punch you right then and there at the table. Because
Man, you should have seen Clift at the GA state at booster draft, when we were done drafting our cards! He had all of his cards in a huge pile, and all messy! Lol!
-
"Though it really ticks me off when people have a massively disorganized territory." does sloppy count? or everything outta place?
Dude Clift's cousin has to be the messiest person I've ever played against if you're messier than him I will punch you right then and there at the table. Because
Man, you should have seen Clift at the GA state at booster draft, when we were done drafting our cards! He had all of his cards in a huge pile, and all messy! Lol!
I'v drafted with him. he ain't sloppy.
-
So if I recall my list of obligations correctly, I need to play both 1960 and Queen's Gambit with Matt Archibald, I need to play Twilight Struggle with Matt Brinkman, I need to play Starcraft with Josh Kopp and all comers, and naturally Mark Underwood and I must gin up as many multi-player Epic Duels games as we can manage. Am I forgetting anyone at this point?
It's to the point where I'm going to have to schedule a weekend as the Annual Redemption National Un-Tournament, whereby we all get together and play all these games other than Redemption together.
Add me to that Starcraft list. And sign me up for the Un-Nats!
-
So if I recall my list of obligations correctly, I need to play both 1960 and Queen's Gambit with Matt Archibald, I need to play Twilight Struggle with Matt Brinkman, I need to play Starcraft with Josh Kopp and all comers, and naturally Mark Underwood and I must gin up as many multi-player Epic Duels games as we can manage. Am I forgetting anyone at this point?
It's to the point where I'm going to have to schedule a weekend as the Annual Redemption National Un-Tournament, whereby we all get together and play all these games other than Redemption together.
a little battlestar galactica, bang!, and memior '44 thrown in for good measure wouldn't hurt ;)
-
Battlestar would be so epic. I totally need to get that game.
-
Don't forget Monopoly! *ducks*
-
banned
-
on topic, we have 3 for mandating, and 1 against. unless Metal Psalm is against, I wasn't sure by his post...
-
Against here.
-
I'd be for it so as long as it is Morgan Freeman.
I'd also be for forcing people to use a certain card layout so as long as I don't have to change mine to a great extent.
-
I'd be for it so as long as it is Morgan Freeman.
I'd also be for forcing people to use a certain card layout so as long as I don't have to change mine to a great extent.
Ditto. I'm for it as long as it's mine
-
So if I recall my list of obligations correctly, I need to play both 1960 and Queen's Gambit with Matt Archibald, I need to play Twilight Struggle with Matt Brinkman, I need to play Starcraft with Josh Kopp and all comers, and naturally Mark Underwood and I must gin up as many multi-player Epic Duels games as we can manage. Am I forgetting anyone at this point?
It's to the point where I'm going to have to schedule a weekend as the Annual Redemption National Un-Tournament, whereby we all get together and play all these games other than Redemption together.
a little battlestar galactica, bang!, and memior '44 thrown in for good measure wouldn't hurt ;)
I also forgot I promised to teach you to play Cribbage.
-
on topic, we have 3 for mandating, and 1 against. unless Metal Psalm is against, I wasn't sure by his post...
I'm against
I say mandate that cards are visible and otherwise up to the discretion of the judge
-
I'm against
I say mandate that cards are visible and otherwise up to the discretion of the judge
+1
-
So if I recall my list of obligations correctly, I need to play both 1960 and Queen's Gambit with Matt Archibald, I need to play Twilight Struggle with Matt Brinkman, I need to play Starcraft with Josh Kopp and all comers, and naturally Mark Underwood and I must gin up as many multi-player Epic Duels games as we can manage. Am I forgetting anyone at this point?
It's to the point where I'm going to have to schedule a weekend as the Annual Redemption National Un-Tournament, whereby we all get together and play all these games other than Redemption together.
a little battlestar galactica, bang!, and memior '44 thrown in for good measure wouldn't hurt ;)
I also forgot I promised to teach you to play Cribbage.
Ah, nothing like Cribbage.
-
I played that a long time ago, I really liked it. Can't remember the rules for the life of me now.
Random fact of the day: Cribbage is the one game one is allowed to bet money on in British pubs.
-
I played that a long time ago, I really liked it. Can't remember the rules for the life of me now.
Random fact of the day: Cribbage is the one game one is allowed to bet money on in British pubs.
Now tell me,What in the name of Gabe is Cribbage?
-
Cribbage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cribbage)