Author Topic: The end of Redemption....or a resurgence? (Read 8492 times)

JSB23 · « **Reply #25 on:** June 09, 2014, 08:04:25 PM »

Redemption is losing players faster than it's gaining them.

If you really think the new set is the start of a "resurgence," then please explain how adding a new brigade will attract new people.

Chris · « **Reply #26 on:** June 09, 2014, 08:06:56 PM »

It's a moot comparison. The new set is being released the same way TxP and Disciples were, meaning you won't draft more than four new cards. Even if clay didn't exist, the new set still wouldn't make much of an impact offensively. We have no idea what cards are going to be released at Nats this year, so there's no reason to speculate about how drafting blue cards would have made a huge difference in draft, because there's simply no way to tell. That is a huge departure from the 15 card packs dominated by teal and orange that were released in 2006. Oh, and 2006 was pre-tins, which drastically shifted how we approach booster draft today. Comparing the introduction of teal with the introduction of clay, especially when we have next to no information on how developed clay will be out of the box is ridiculous.

Quote

If you really think the new set is the start of a "resurgence," then please explain how adding a new brigade will attract new people.

A good portion of the drop off of people playing Redemption can be attributed to no non-starter being released in three years. Releasing a 150 card set is an excellent step towards revitalizing the game.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #27 on:** June 09, 2014, 08:19:41 PM »

I will say that releasing a new set has the possibility of giving life to new decks and strategies that could revitilize playgroups and bring more people into it, however it also could very easily increase the complexity barrier for new players, and it will most likely not decrease it, so it may not help all that much in the long run.

While I don't personally like the new brigade, I don't think it will have a short term negative impact on the number of players or the health of the game, since none of the other new brigades did, they were also packed in revolutionary sets (Warriors and Priests) both of which had things that were very good for the game so it is hard to tell whether it was helped by the introduction of new brigades or they were revolutionary in spite of it.

JSB23 · « **Reply #28 on:** June 09, 2014, 08:26:39 PM »

Quote from: Chris on June 09, 2014, 08:06:56 PM

A good portion of the drop off of people playing Redemption can be attributed to no non-starter being released in three years.

I don't think so.

Redemption has had problems with attendance and sales since Disciples, and if a delay between sets was the biggest factor, then why didn't we see similar loss of players between the release of Angel Wars and Priests?

Even if the new set allows the game to recover to pre-hiatus levels of attendance (which I highly doubt), you're still not bring in new people. In fact, the massive increase in complexity over the last few sets has made it even harder for a new player to get into the game.

DDiceRC · « **Reply #29 on:** June 09, 2014, 08:27:57 PM »

A new "boxed booster" may have even less of an impact on Booster Draft than previously mentioned, since many tournaments, especially at lower levels, use tins and foil packs to keep the cost down. Using TxP/Disc/EC ramps up the cost significantly, so I (for one) seldom use them, Neither NE Regionals nor NJ States will use them, so I can try to make the tournaments as affordable as possible.

(As an aside, I would love to see a return to "classic" draft, with just foil packs. It was more random, but required a certain level of skill to draft well. And it didn't come down to who got lucky and got the "power" tin in whatever the current set was.)

Chris · « **Reply #30 on:** June 09, 2014, 09:05:18 PM »

JSB, you're right. Best just give up on the game now.

Daniel · « **Reply #31 on:** June 09, 2014, 09:18:50 PM »

Quote from: JSB23 on June 09, 2014, 08:26:39 PM

Quote from: Chris on June 09, 2014, 08:06:56 PM
A good portion of the drop off of people playing Redemption can be attributed to no non-starter being released in three years.

I don't think so.

Redemption has had problems with attendance and sales since Disciples, and if a delay between sets was the biggest factor, then why didn't we see similar loss of players between the release of Angel Wars and Priests?

Even if the new set allows the game to recover to pre-hiatus levels of attendance (which I highly doubt), you're still not bring in new people. In fact, the massive increase in complexity over the last few sets has made it even harder for a new player to get into the game.

Complexity? Really? Redemption is fairly simple especially compared to most card games today.

Sadness · « **Reply #32 on:** June 09, 2014, 10:11:45 PM »

Several points to make:
1) I've always liked the teal brigade. The tins adding to their strengths.
2) Unless booster Draft has changed majorly since I last played in 2012, you rarely played with less than 2 good/evil brigades. Sometimes however just one card from a 3rd brigade could win you the round.
3) One of Redemption ' s weaknesses has always been lack of being out there. Most secular card/comic stores don't carry it, few Christian/religious stores do. Those that do often don't carry the starter decks or tins. Lifeway and Mardels are the Christian stores near to me. Mardels hasn't carried Redemption since 2011 and Lifeway only carries the Angel Wars and Unlimited packs.
4) Folks are always dropping hobbies when funds are tight. When the funds are back up again some will return.
5) My opinion only- the new format lost us some players. However with the new format we may start seeing more of the younger generation showing up (that's the 8-13 yr olds).
6) Remember this discussion when there's Nats next year (wherever it is) and see how many folks we got.
7) I just saw a ad for something called CreationFeast. Perhaps someone can set up a booth there and promote the game, with Rob ' s permission of course.

Master KChief · « **Reply #33 on:** June 09, 2014, 10:43:36 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on June 09, 2014, 08:02:38 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on June 09, 2014, 07:53:10 PM
I believe the discussion at hand is the validity of drafting a 'viable' alignment in Teal or Orange strictly from Priests.

Maybe I missed what someone else said, but I never said anything of the sort.

No one is claiming that is what you said. I am insisting this was the discussion I was having from the very start with my concerns about Clay in limited.

Quote

I said that you could draft it into your booster decks and have it be useful from the start (pre-tins that added Teal support).

Cool. I understand that. And I further elaborated for clarification that drafting Teal or Orange as an actual cohesive brigade and not just splash stand-alone strictly from Priests alone was simply not a viable strategy at the time Priests was released. I have already outlined the various reasons why. At the pace Redemption goes, it takes years to fully flesh out a brand new brigade that will actually be competitive against other brigades in limited formats. I have seen zero reason at all to believe this would be an exception for Clay, especially with a far smaller card pool than what Priests had.

Quote

No one makes a single-brigade booster deck that works, so if you are holding the brigade to a higher standard than any other for 'success' then that is what is leading to your error.

No one said mono-anything works. I have no idea where you even pulled this from.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #34 on:** June 09, 2014, 10:48:10 PM »

Booster Draft is largely irrelevant to new card creation IMO.

I don't see a resurgence in Redemption happening unless something drastic happens. I was excited when the starter decks came out, but nothing happened. There are some fundamental issues that need to be addressed first. I'm not sure this is the time or place for that though. I don't think the game/card design has anything to do with it.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #35 on:** June 09, 2014, 11:09:55 PM »

Quote from: Daniel on June 09, 2014, 09:18:50 PM

Quote from: JSB23 on June 09, 2014, 08:26:39 PM
Quote from: Chris on June 09, 2014, 08:06:56 PM
A good portion of the drop off of people playing Redemption can be attributed to no non-starter being released in three years.

I don't think so.

Redemption has had problems with attendance and sales since Disciples, and if a delay between sets was the biggest factor, then why didn't we see similar loss of players between the release of Angel Wars and Priests?

Even if the new set allows the game to recover to pre-hiatus levels of attendance (which I highly doubt), you're still not bring in new people. In fact, the massive increase in complexity over the last few sets has made it even harder for a new player to get into the game.
Complexity? Really? Redemption is fairly simple especially compared to most card games today.

Which card games are you referring to? Redemption is definitely more complex than Pokemon (but of course that's a particularly simple card game), My knowledge of Yu-Gi-Oh! is very outdated, but from what I remember Redemption is more complex than it, at least as far as difficulty to get into it. Magic the Gathering is the only one I know that might be more complex, however that is only when you consider the eternal formats and possibly modern (and it can be in casual depending on the card pools available). Finally when you add the difficulty to find obscure rulings in Redemption compared to these other games you might see why it's difficult to get new players into the game.

Master KChief · « **Reply #36 on:** June 09, 2014, 11:16:06 PM »

Quote from: Westy on June 09, 2014, 10:48:10 PM

Booster Draft is largely irrelevant to new card creation IMO.

Why should this not hold true for other competitive formats but apply towards limited formats?

Isildur · « **Reply #37 on:** June 09, 2014, 11:30:45 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on June 09, 2014, 11:16:06 PM

Quote from: Westy on June 09, 2014, 10:48:10 PM
Booster Draft is largely irrelevant to new card creation IMO.

Why should this not hold true for other competitive formats but apply towards limited formats?

Redemption was created with Type I in mind and to a large extent is the primary focus of the game. Even Type II gets the short end of the stick when it comes to testing.

Master KChief · « **Reply #38 on:** June 09, 2014, 11:39:42 PM »

Type 2 is what I was referring to largely outside of Type 1. What reasons are there Redemption card design cannot accommodate multiple competitive formats?

JSB23 · « **Reply #39 on:** June 09, 2014, 11:44:39 PM »

Quote from: Daniel on June 09, 2014, 09:18:50 PM

Complexity? Really? Redemption is fairly simple especially compared to most card games today.

Hardly.

Out of all the games I've played, I'd say Redemption is by far the most complex.

The basic structure and gameplay, are both very simple, however everything after that is ridiculously complex.
In order to play at any decent level, you need to know nineteen years worth of cards. Sure, blue packs are mostly garbage, but if you don't know how the doubler works, you're out of luck.
Heck, at this point you pretty much need to play with the REG open, since half the cards don't do what's printed on them.
And don't even get me started on the tangled mess we have, instead of a real set of rules.

Quote from: Master KChief on June 09, 2014, 11:39:42 PM

What reasons are there Redemption card design cannot accommodate multiple competitive formats?

Theoretically it's possible to balance two competitive formats. However, the design team hasn't been able to do it.

Chris · « **Reply #40 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:01:12 AM »

Redemption card design does accommodate multiple competitive formats, despite the extra amount of testing and planning that inherently goes into that. Very few other CCGs attempt to balance two completely different rule sets into their card design, and the fact that Redemption has managed to do it for so long with such a small selection of volunteers is impressive. That said, not every decision has to be in the interest of every format, especially when there are seven of them right now. I don't think most people treat Booster as seriously as they do other categories, if only because it's not really possible to spend a year planning out every facet of a deck and there's no real meta. If people don't treat open categories as seriously as they do closed categories, why should the playtesters prioritize open categories over closed categories? Even if I'm wrong about that, there's still no evidence to suggest that Booster is negatively impacted by a new brigade. Furthermore, I'm still not sure why everyone is complaining when complaining isn't going to accomplish anything.

Quote from: Westy on June 09, 2014, 10:48:10 PM

I don't see a resurgence in Redemption happening unless something drastic happens. I was excited when the starter decks came out, but nothing happened. There are some fundamental issues that need to be addressed first. I'm not sure this is the time or place for that though. I don't think the game/card design has anything to do with it.

Keep in mind that the Starter Decks and the tin did little to alter the meta last year. We had high hopes because we assumed there would be a more drastic shift, when in fact the decks that many people played (including the both of us) weren't very different from what they would have been otherwise. I do agree there are other problems that need to be addressed, a new large-ish set is the first step in my opinion.

Quote

Theoretically it's possible to balance two competitive formats. However, the design team hasn't been able to do it.

T2 players can feel free to correct me here, but I'm under the impression that both formats are healthier than they've been in years. There's a general consensus among the T1 players I've talked to that it's a fairly balanced meta with a lot of options, and I've gotten a positive impression from T2 players as well.

The Guardian · « **Reply #41 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:07:00 AM »

Quote

Theoretically it's possible to balance two competitive formats. However, the design team hasn't been able to do it.

Which format is suffering?

It's certainly not T2, which has more viable deck strategies than it ever has.

Quote

Even Type II gets the short end of the stick when it comes to testing.

I can assure you this is not the case. Going back to the original FooF set, I can think of two cards that I think got overlooked when it comes to T2 potency: Samaritan Water Jar (should have been a once per game ability) and Assyrian Siege Army (should have been unique). While certain other cards have needed to be balanced with new counters, that kind of meta evolution is what keeps the game fresh and fun.

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #42 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:11:13 AM »

Every game ebbs and flows from time to time. I honestly think that Redemption is poised for a huge surge of interest and involvement.

Chris · « **Reply #43 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:15:37 AM »

Quote from: uthminister [BR] on June 10, 2014, 12:11:13 AM

Every game ebbs and flows from time to time. I honestly think that Redemption is poised for a huge surge of interest and involvement.

At least you're praying for that with crossed fingers and toes, as much money as you're sinking into the game.

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #44 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:17:48 AM »

Simply an investment in the future.

The Guardian · « **Reply #45 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:28:03 AM »

Another thing to consider is that as a Christian CCG, Redemption essentially has zero competition. I'm not in any way implying that means it can get away with a lesser quality product, but I do believe it means that there is a place for it as long as there are Christians who enjoy CCGs. (And not to forget the many non-Christians who have been or are currently a part of this game and its community.)

galadgawyn · « **Reply #46 on:** June 10, 2014, 12:35:51 AM »

Or a lot of type 2 decks.

Quote

I don't see a resurgence in Redemption happening unless something drastic happens.

Maybe. I think something like having a well designed computer version that has varying AI and enhanced reliable online play would be that kind of drastic change. I can dream.

Quote

There are some fundamental issues that need to be addressed first

I would really like to know what you think these are or what drastic change you think could be possible.

Quote

Another thing to consider is that as a Christian CCG, Redemption essentially has zero competition.

and yet it has had considerable difficulty in getting wide support from Christian churches, schools, etc. It is one of those areas that has a lot more potential than has ever been realized. In certain circles it is because it is a card game and if it was a board game it wouldn't have the same problem. Not sure how to get past some of the prejudicial attitudes for promoting the game.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #47 on:** June 10, 2014, 01:00:19 AM »

Closed categories shouldn't affect card design. I don't even think closed categories should be official though...

Master KChief · « **Reply #48 on:** June 10, 2014, 01:00:36 AM »

Quote from: Chris on June 10, 2014, 12:01:12 AM

Very few other CCGs attempt to balance two completely different rule sets into their card design...

The big CCG's that have limited play most certainly do. MtG most recently devoted an entire expansion towards limited in addition to always having every constructed block heavily designed with limited in mind. Yugioh has its line of Battle Packs specifically designed towards limited play. If that is what you meant by 'very few' CCGs, then you are most certainly correct.

Quote

That said, not every decision has to be in the interest of every format, especially when there are seven of them right now.

My position is if a game offers a competitive format, it should make great strides to ensure all of its bases are covered in terms of balancing. I do agree that seven is a bit excessive...

Quote

I don't think most people treat Booster as seriously as they do other categories, if only because it's not really possible to spend a year planning out every facet of a deck and there's no real meta.

...but I do not agree limited is not a 'serious' category. There are other skills associated with draft/sealed that do not apply with constructed play. And yes, there is no meta, but that is mainly due to no standardized card pool with each limited event.

Quote

If people don't treat open categories as seriously as they do closed categories, why should the playtesters prioritize open categories over closed categories?

Again, its a matter of perspective. If a game company offers a format in a competitive tournament format with players vying for prizes, what gave you the indication some people, if not most, do not take limited formats 'seriously'?

Quote

Even if I'm wrong about that, there's still no evidence to suggest that Booster is negatively impacted by a new brigade.

I have attested the impact Priests circa 2006 has had on limited play as well as the reasons outlined why is pretty solid evidence.

Quote

Furthermore, I'm still not sure why everyone is complaining when complaining isn't going to accomplish anything.

I'm not entirely certain why people complain about people complaining when it accomplishes nothing, but people still do it.

Isildur · « **Reply #49 on:** June 10, 2014, 03:03:21 AM »

Quote from: The Guardian on June 10, 2014, 12:07:00 AM

Quote
Even Type II gets the short end of the stick when it comes to testing.
I can assure you this is not the case. Going back to the original FooF set, I can think of two cards that I think got overlooked when it comes to T2 potency: Samaritan Water Jar (should have been a once per game ability) and Assyrian Siege Army (should have been unique). While certain other cards have needed to be balanced with new counters, that kind of meta evolution is what keeps the game fresh and fun.

Didn't you just prove my point?.......

News:

Author Topic: The end of Redemption....or a resurgence? (Read 8492 times)

Chris

Chris

Daniel

Warrior_Monk

Chris

Chris

Warrior_Monk