Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => Topic started by: LukeChips on December 03, 2014, 09:49:23 AM

Title: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on December 03, 2014, 09:49:23 AM
Do you guys think that Shipwreck will make the top cut in most competitive decks, even with lampstand still widely used? Also the older version was way better than the updated one!
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: The Guardian on December 03, 2014, 05:08:20 PM
Since it won't directly lead to winning a rescue attempt or making a successful block it's easy to think that it won't make the dominant cut in the top decks. However, I remember when DoN first came out, I didn't think it would have that much of an impact. Wrong. I remember when Mayhem was made, I didn't think it would be that good. Wrong. I finally learned my lesson and fully expected Vain Philosophy to be a game-changer (which it is) and for Strife to be sneaky good in the right type of deck. I think Shipwreck will be most similar to Strife in that it will be sneaky good in the right type of deck.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Red on December 03, 2014, 06:04:26 PM
Since it won't directly lead to winning a rescue attempt or making a successful block it's easy to think that it won't make the dominant cut in the top decks. However, I remember when DoN first came out, I didn't think it would have that much of an impact. Wrong. I remember when Mayhem was made, I didn't think it would be that good. Wrong. I finally learned my lesson and fully expected Vain Philosophy to be a game-changer (which it is) and for Strife to be sneaky good in the right type of deck. I think Shipwreck will be most similar to Strife in that it will be sneaky good in the right type of deck.
I'd argue that Shipwreck is DoN level good right now.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: yirgogo on December 03, 2014, 06:15:47 PM
I would argue that it is better, since it can take care of Naz, and in competitive decks they are better able to get rid of Lamptstand than Naz, and I would say that it will show up much more often in competitive decks then DoN.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: The Guardian on December 03, 2014, 07:05:57 PM
I would argue that it is better, since it can take care of Naz, and in competitive decks they are better able to get rid of Lamptstand than Naz, and I would say that it will show up much more often in competitive decks then DoN.

A fair point, but you also have to consider C. Phillippi.

Bottom line, Shipwreck is definitely good enough to be used in top decks, which will only serve to increase variety in dominant choices.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: yirgogo on December 03, 2014, 08:53:56 PM
I would argue that it is better, since it can take care of Naz, and in competitive decks they are better able to get rid of Lamptstand than Naz, and I would say that it will show up much more often in competitive decks then DoN.

A fair point, but you also have to consider C. Phillippi.

Bottom line, Shipwreck is definitely good enough to be used in top decks, which will only serve to increase variety in dominant choices.

I have more often seen Nazareth in a deck on its own rather than with other NT sites, so I believe that even though Cesaria Phillipi will be annoying, it won't affect it as much as Lampstand affects even more DoN.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Redoubter on December 03, 2014, 08:56:23 PM
Everyone keeps pointing at Nazareth.

That's not going to be Wrecked nearly as much as Herod's Temple (so long as the lights are off).
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: ChristianSoldier on December 03, 2014, 09:01:11 PM
That's not going to be Wrecked nearly as much as Herod's Temple (so long as the lights are off).

That's why God commanded the Israelites to keep the lamps lit.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: yirgogo on December 03, 2014, 09:02:56 PM
Yes, forgot about that!

I Also think along with increased power in dominants, much less experimental decks will be made based on single fortresses, which will give the new fortresses less potential in single decks, which will force players to be more creative (I hope).
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: JDS on December 03, 2014, 09:38:07 PM
I think Shipwreck is really cool, especially since it's been a while since a powerful Dominant shook up of the metagame, plus I agree it will be more difficult for people to rely on any one card and that could breed creativity.  [irrelevant comment that seemed designed to instigate controversy removed] The Dominant cap also continues to lead to increasingly interesting deck choices.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Drrek on December 03, 2014, 10:32:28 PM
I think Shipwreck is really cool, especially since it's been a while since a powerful Dominant shook up of the metagame,

Vain Philosophy wasn't THAT long ago.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: TheHobbit13 on December 03, 2014, 10:59:33 PM
Hard to say. How many people used vain that made top cut?
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Redoubter on December 03, 2014, 11:04:01 PM
Hard to say. How many people used vain that made top cut?

Well...we have decks posted from Nats this past season, and First (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/national-tournament-winners/2014-t1-2p-1st-place/) and Third (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/national-tournament-winners/2014-t12p-3rd-place-'flexbone'/) place both used it at least.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Chris on December 04, 2014, 02:53:22 AM
I'm fairly certain I used it, and if I didn't, I almost did. It's a great card.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on December 04, 2014, 10:36:13 AM
Is shipwreck better than DoN?
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Redoubter on December 04, 2014, 10:52:28 AM
Is shipwreck better than DoN?

I'm going to argue yes.  Artifacts in general harm your opponent less than fortresses and sites, in my experience.  Sure, there are plenty of times that an artifact is stopping you from doing something, but more often Naz, Herod's Temple, and similar cards are more bothersome to deal with.

Artifacts are generally squishier, with more that can target them.  Far less targets sites/fortresses, and nothing quite so spectacularly as Shipwreck.  So it fills a bigger need for cards that are, IMO, more powerful.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on December 04, 2014, 11:24:40 AM
With that in mind, when I get it I might put it in my deck, I don't know what I would take out though? :-\
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Redoubter on December 04, 2014, 02:56:19 PM
With that in mind, when I get it I might put it in my deck, I don't know what I would take out though? :-\

The wonders of dom cap :) I like it more and more as additional useful doms keep getting printed.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on December 04, 2014, 03:30:36 PM
lol, me to. Was dom cap made when the I/j deck came out?
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Praeceps on December 06, 2014, 04:38:37 PM
I believe it came out with Mayhem and Grapes back in TxP, could be wrong though.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Master Q on December 06, 2014, 06:06:57 PM
I believe it came out with Mayhem and Grapes back in TxP, could be wrong though.

I am fairly certain the Dom cap was implemented in the middle of the 2011-2012 season.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on December 06, 2014, 08:23:56 PM
that sounds right, someone told me they made it when the i/j ecks came out.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: kariusvega on January 27, 2015, 12:59:59 PM
If you play Shipwreck to negate and discard an occupied opponent's Raider's Camp and there are heroes in your opponent's Raider's Camp are they released to your opponent's land of bondage to be treated as lost souls or do they go back to your territory? If they are treated as lost souls what would be the best way to handle occupied Raider's Camp here generally speaking?
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: browarod on January 27, 2015, 01:13:08 PM
Cards generally follow whatever card is holding them so if you use Shipwreck on a Raiders' Camp holding captured characters the characters would be discarded as well.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on January 27, 2015, 01:34:28 PM
Cards generally follow whatever card is holding them so if you use Shipwreck on a Raiders' Camp holding captured characters the characters would be discarded as well.
Hmm my strategy will have to be improved....
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: kariusvega on January 27, 2015, 01:38:17 PM
Thank you for this response I'm also wondering if Daniel (Promo) enters battle who "Negates special abilities on Fortresses" does it negate Raider's Camp and return captured heroes to territories? Or does he have the opportunity to rescue a lost soul while your opponent has an occupied Raider's Camp which is then being negated?
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on January 27, 2015, 01:46:31 PM
Thank you for this response I'm also wondering if Daniel (Promo) enters battle who "Negates special abilities on Fortresses" does it negate Raider's Camp and return captured heroes to territories? Or does he have the opportunity to rescue a lost soul while your opponent has an occupied Raider's Camp which is then being negated?
Yes, he negates raider camp. I think the character then return to territory.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: browarod on January 27, 2015, 01:49:33 PM
Negating a card does not go back in time and undo everything it's ever done (at least in the case of cards out for longer than the battle, like fortresses), it only negates things that have happened in the same phase. Daniel, therefore, does not undo all the captures RC has done in the past, he just prevents it from capturing or releasing anything during that battle phase. Any already-captured characters would remain in the fortress and RC cannot be used to release anything instead of surrendering a Lost Soul if Daniel wins the rescue attempt.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on January 27, 2015, 01:54:49 PM
 :POpps, I was wrong.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Redoubter on January 30, 2015, 11:44:45 AM
Negating a card does not go back in time and undo everything it's ever done (at least in the case of cards out for longer than the battle, like fortresses), it only negates things that have happened in the same phase. Daniel, therefore, does not undo all the captures RC has done in the past, he just prevents it from capturing or releasing anything during that battle phase. Any already-captured characters would remain in the fortress and RC cannot be used to release anything instead of surrendering a Lost Soul if Daniel wins the rescue attempt.

This is all true, but to expound, any heroes captured in the same phase go back to the player's LoB because the ability that moved them was negated.  Otherwise, it completed in another phase as Browarod pointed out and cannot be negated; therefore, they follow the card to discard.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on January 30, 2015, 11:53:13 AM
Negating a card does not go back in time and undo everything it's ever done (at least in the case of cards out for longer than the battle, like fortresses), it only negates things that have happened in the same phase. Daniel, therefore, does not undo all the captures RC has done in the past, he just prevents it from capturing or releasing anything during that battle phase. Any already-captured characters would remain in the fortress and RC cannot be used to release anything instead of surrendering a Lost Soul if Daniel wins the rescue attempt.

This is all true, but to expound, any heroes captured in the same phase go back to the player's LoB because the ability that moved them was negated.  Otherwise, it completed in another phase as Browarod pointed out and cannot be negated; therefore, they follow the card to discard.
Which  phase would it be completed in?
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: Redoubter on January 30, 2015, 12:33:59 PM
Which  phase would it be completed in?

A previous battle phase on a different turn, for example.  Or if you play Shipwreck in your discard phase, then the preceding battle phase is a "previous phase".

Once a phase ends, anything that completed in it is CBN.
Title: Re: Shipwreck Question
Post by: LukeChips on January 30, 2015, 12:39:13 PM
Which  phase would it be completed in?

A previous battle phase on a different turn, for example.  Or if you play Shipwreck in your discard phase, then the preceding battle phase is a "previous phase".

Once a phase ends, anything that completed in it is CBN.
Ok, I didn't know the CBN part.
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal