Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => Topic started by: Warrior_Monk on January 14, 2015, 12:26:59 AM
-
Not so hypothetical situation.
Player A: 3 Souls
Player B: 3 Souls
Player C: 4 Souls
Player D: 1 Soul
Let's suppose we're playing booster draft. Top table. Winner wins, if you get second you'll take 4th.
You are Player A. It is your turn. Player B has 2 souls in land of bondage, Player A has 1. Player B has no ECs in territory, his hand size is 8. Player C has a few mediocre (O.T.) heroes in territory. You rescue against Player B with an N.T. hero. Player B blocks with Emperor Claudias. You have Abraham's Servant to Ur.
Question A: Do you play Abraham's Servant to Ur?
Question B: Was Player B justified in blocking?
-
Question A: Do you play Abraham's Servant to Ur?
Yes. Getting to 4 should be your goal so you get a clear 2nd in the event Player B cannot stop Player C. After all it is not Like Emperor Claudius can be counted on to stop (even mediocre) OT heroes.
Question B: Was Player B justified in blocking?
Yes. It is not like Emperor Claudius can be counted on to stop (even mediocre) OT heroes.
-
Made a few tweaks.
-
After tweaks I would stick with yes and yes.
Player B should only block you if he has another block he can pull out against player C in the event you somehow kill Claudius. You should assume that Player B is playing rationally (i.e., that he has another block for C), so you should take the LS if you can.
-
If Player C is Justin Alstad, you definitely defeat Claudius to get your 4th because you can reasonably assume that Justin isn't going to be stopped by Claudius. 8)
-
You always have to win the soul. You can't afford to lose another turn where people will have to block.
I think the block depends on hand composition. If I had a different combo I was planning on using to block the other player that I felt is more foolproof (like Black character and Babel), maybe that's fine. He could also be blocking to ensure he is second, even in a tie.
-
Did player B have any battle-winners in his hand?
-
Did player B have any battle-winners in his hand?
Unknown, you're Player A.
-
Did player B have any battle-winners in his hand?
Unknown, you're Player A.
He probably did with 8 cards in his hand.
-
If Player C is Justin Alstad, you definitely defeat Claudius to get your 4th because you can reasonably assume that Justin isn't going to be stopped by Claudius. 8)
If Player D is Justin Alstad, you immediately play the Falling Away you were lucky enough to pull from your Women pack on him. 8)
-
First, Player B should definitely block if they have a shot at blocking both, since they are tied for second currently and would lose that going by not blocking. By blocking and with a successful rescue, they have sole possession of second. They should also be working to actually win the game, which they go a long way towards by keeping someone at 3 and getting to 4. A beefcake wins a lot of battles on his own, no fault in making that block.
Player A needs to play Servant, probably, but that's up to them. B has 10 cards to block C with, and A needs to win souls to keep pace.
There's just too much going on in a Booster game to assume anything that late in the game, and everyone has to play for themselves to win, not another player to lose. Get whatever points you can from the table.
-
Has anyone played (and who) got and played SoG/NJ?
-
Has anyone played (and who) got and played SoG/NJ?
This is Booster draft (even if the title doesn't indicate it), so the odds of getting a SoG are fairly low (as in almost non-existent) for the tournament.
-
Oh, I forgot about that, sorry.
-
If Player C is Justin Alstad, you definitely defeat Claudius to get your 4th because you can reasonably assume that Justin isn't going to be stopped by Claudius. 8)
If Player D is Justin Alstad, you immediately play the Falling Away you were lucky enough to pull from your Women pack on him. 8)
*UPDATED*
12 upvotes in this entire thread and 9 of them are for this post... :doh:
:giveup:
-
I was Player B in this situation. I was pressing my advantage because an easy block here would mean that I might be able to get into a solid second place should I be able to rescue, and then being one block away from winning the game. Now, I had absolutely no back up, though I was hoping to draw into something, and didn't have any gold enhancements anyway.
So this is why I wish I could table talk. Had I been able to table talk, I would have answered the "WHY ARE YOU BLOCKING?!" "YOU BETTER HAVE ANOTHER BLOCK IN HAND" with resounding "I don'ts." to further press my advantage. Whether he would have believed me or not remains to be seen, and that's the fun of multiplayer and table talk. The game is getting into your opponent's head.
In the end, I didn't draw anything, and Player C had the rescue anyway, but I knew when I made that play that it was counter to standard Redemption procedure and thought it was an interesting situation with no necessarily correct answer.
-
If Player D is Justin Alstad, you immediately play the Falling Away you were lucky enough to pull from your Women pack on him. 8)
Justin can't get to 5 if you never let him get to 1.
-
If Player C is Justin Alstad, you definitely defeat Claudius to get your 4th because you can reasonably assume that Justin isn't going to be stopped by Claudius. 8)
If Player D is Justin Alstad, you immediately play the Falling Away you were lucky enough to pull from your Women pack on him. 8)
I'm keeping track of everyone who upvoted that post. There will be no mercy for any of you, in any category we may end up playing in... :maul:
-
In the end, I didn't draw anything, and Player C had the rescue anyway, but I knew when I made that play that it was counter to standard Redemption procedure and thought it was an interesting situation with no necessarily correct answer.
I agree there is no correct answer, but I definitely agree with you that it was the best play for you to try and win.
Now, would I have been on you had I been A? Of course ;D But we each need to win the game for ourselves and it doesn't matter if someone else loses because we took the option that left us a better chance to win.
-
I would have definitely blocked, player A may not have had anything good.
-
I think the only reason I wouldn't block a NT Hero with Claudius (in Player B's position) was if I had more Gold defense left in my deck and I had a reasonably chance to draw some on my turn in an effort to stop Player C.
If I know that Player C has OT options available and my Claudius is just stand-alone, then I might as well block Player A and attempt to take sole possession of second place on my turn.
-
I think the only reason I wouldn't block a NT Hero with Claudius (in Player B's position) was if I had more Gold defense left in my deck and I had a reasonably chance to draw some on my turn in an effort to stop Player C.
Oh, so this is Apostles Claudius! I thought that it was TEC! :doh:
-
Assuming we're in an all or nothing situation, I would say that yes, you do have to play Servant here. Even though you may be eliminating Player B's best block, you need to focus on your own rescues as you're very unlikely to make it through two more full rounds.
I don't think Player B is justified in blocking unless they have some way of knowing that they cannot stop Player C regardless or you have a better block saved. Fourth place doesn't mean anything, so you should be attempting to win. By potentially using up your best block (or at the very least, showing it to Player C so he can plan for it), you are reducing your chances of winning.
-
Assuming we're in an all or nothing situation, I would say that yes, you do have to play Servant here. Even though you may be eliminating Player B's best block, you need to focus on your own rescues as you're very unlikely to make it through two more full rounds.
I don't think Player B is justified in blocking unless they have some way of knowing that they cannot stop Player C regardless or you have a better block saved. Fourth place doesn't mean anything, so you should be attempting to win. By potentially using up your best block (or at the very least, showing it to Player C so he can plan for it), you are reducing your chances of winning.
By the same logic, Player A is reducing their chances of winning by rescueing the soul because you are hindering the very person that you're depending on.
-
Assuming we're in an all or nothing situation, I would say that yes, you do have to play Servant here. Even though you may be eliminating Player B's best block, you need to focus on your own rescues as you're very unlikely to make it through two more full rounds.
I don't think Player B is justified in blocking unless they have some way of knowing that they cannot stop Player C regardless or you have a better block saved. Fourth place doesn't mean anything, so you should be attempting to win. By potentially using up your best block (or at the very least, showing it to Player C so he can plan for it), you are reducing your chances of winning.
By the same logic, Player A is reducing their chances of winning by rescueing the soul because you are hindering the very person that you're depending on.
That is because the player he was attacking was nub headed enough to block him instead of saving his block.
-
Assuming we're in an all or nothing situation, I would say that yes, you do have to play Servant here. Even though you may be eliminating Player B's best block, you need to focus on your own rescues as you're very unlikely to make it through two more full rounds.
I don't think Player B is justified in blocking unless they have some way of knowing that they cannot stop Player C regardless or you have a better block saved. Fourth place doesn't mean anything, so you should be attempting to win. By potentially using up your best block (or at the very least, showing it to Player C so he can plan for it), you are reducing your chances of winning.
By the same logic, Player A is reducing their chances of winning by rescueing the soul because you are hindering the very person that you're depending on.
Wouldn't it make sense to have one less soul on the table. For instance what I have a burial promo and wanna play it block the winning player from getting to the 1 soul you available. However if you block me from getting the second soul in you LoB burial is worthless.
-
Wouldn't it make sense to have one less soul on the table. For instance what I have a burial promo and wanna play it block the winning player from getting to the 1 soul you available. However if you block me from getting the second soul in you LoB burial is worthless.
I'm not going to think about someone pulling a promo dominant in a TexP pack given that being an extremely unlikely event (I'm also talking real packs and not Lackey). I'm going to give myself the best chance to take points away from the table for me and not worry about what others need out of the same table to place.
-
Essentially what it comes down to are the odds of a given event happening. What are the odds you don't follow through with the rescue and then you manage to go through two more full rounds, where you're the only one picks up souls? A lot worse than the odds that the person you're rescuing against has another block, and you can make a successful rescue next turn.
-
I personally pulled 2 burials from TXP at Nats in NY. . . The burial promo does exist within real life TXP packs.