Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Unofficial Tournaments => Playgroup and Tournament Central => Redemption March Madness => Topic started by: Bryon on March 04, 2012, 10:26:26 AM
-
Which is the better "aiah" hero?
Isaiah (FF2)
Benaiah (Ki)
-
Isaiah. Simple FBTN is pretty easy to stop. Isaiah+Call+ King Hezzy isn't.
-
'Simple' FBTN still wrecks meta defenses.
-
'Simple' FBTN still wrecks meta defenses.
KoT, Gomer, Plot, and PotW all stop Benaiah.
-
'Simple' FBTN still wrecks meta defenses.
KoT, Gomer, Plot, and PotW all stop Benaiah.
The best FBTN decks use a lot of banding, which in turn will stop all of those things.
-
'Simple' FBTN still wrecks meta defenses.
KoT, Gomer, Plot, and PotW all stop Benaiah.
PotW dropped out of meta defenses after RoA came out.
-
Benaiah is in a Samuel deck, so he's better.
-
He is? o.O
-
He is? o.O
Arguably the best ones.
-
Isaiah will win
-
He is? o.O
Arguably the best ones.
Really? Better than The Angel Under the Oak (RA2) and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite (RA2)?
-
He is? o.O
Arguably the best ones.
Really? Better than The Angel Under the Oak (RA2) and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite (RA2)?
I didn't mean he was the best card, I meant he's in what are arguably the best Sam decks.
-
He is? o.O
Arguably the best ones.
Really? Better than The Angel Under the Oak (RA2) and Ishmaiah the Gibeonite (RA2)?
I didn't mean he was the best card, I meant he's in what are arguably the best Sam decks.
Ahh, I misunderstood. I still need to try an Isaiah+Hezzy splash in my Sam deck though…
-
Certainly do not see how Benaiah brings more synergy to the theme.
-
Certainly do not see how Benaiah brings more synergy to the theme.
All you do is take a regular red Sam band, remove Sam and Armorbearer, and add Ben or Ira. There's so little difference between the d7 Sam bands and FBTNB it's crazy.
-
Isaiah, because of his multiple enhancements and abilities and the angels that band to him that are CBN and you can use Hidden Treasures with him w/ spiritual warfare and other enhancements...
-
Isaiah. He's one of two characters in the game (as far as I know) who can draw 9+. Also, he's a beast.
-
He can't draw 9+? his sa limits to three?
-
He can't draw 9+? his sa limits to three?
Unfortunately my phone doesn't allow me to do the cool display thing thats all the rage, but I'm sure someone can. Needless to say, Isaiah has no limit. So if you can get four Angel of His Presence, four Seraphs, and a Seraph with a Live Coal out you can draw 9. I guess if you use the band to blue instead you could draw 12, but LC has other advantages.
For.those.who aren't aware, the other.character who can draw that can draw that many is The Woman of Thebez. I think she can draw up to 16 if you and your opponent both have multiple Gib Delegates when you use Babel.
-
Isaiah (FF2)
Yeah Isaiah is a boss. Love draw the mass draw in the end game of an T2 Isaiah deck.
-
Isaiah because that's the book of the Bible I'm reading. Hezzy's a boss in Redemption and the OT.
-
Isaiah is totally overrated. With his Call on him he'd get the win, but voting on the merits of the Heroes themselves, FbtN is better.
-
Isaiah is totally overrated. With his Call on him he'd get the win, but voting on the merits of the Heroes themselves, FbtN is better.
Tell that to Samson and Gideon. Support cards have to be taken into account.
-
I wouldn't vote for Samson or Gideon either.
-
Another thing that I don't hear mentioned often with Isaiah... he can make a 9/11 that is protected from EVERYTHING. CBN.
-
I wouldn't vote for Samson or Gideon either.
Samuel then. Hands down one of the worst heroes without support.
-
I wouldn't vote for Samson or Gideon either.
Samuel then. Hands down one of the worst heroes without support.
Most heroes are bad without support. Samuel has a CBN banding ability and the ability to d8 in T1. Not to mention the fact that he can be searched for.
-
I wouldn't vote for Samson or Gideon either.
Samuel then. Hands down one of the worst heroes without support.
Most heroes are bad without support. Samuel has a CBN banding ability and the ability to d8 in T1. Not to mention the fact that he can be searched for.
That was my point. Samuel himself is not that good. Everything Samuel touches turns to gold. So then, we have to take into account support cards.
-
Samuel himself is a +3, has CBN banding, stops Horses, has 2 very useful Brigades and identifiers, and good initiative. He's one of the best Heroes in the game even without all the support.
-
Strictly speaking, with no support, Sam is one of the worst. With a little support, he comes one of the best, and with a lot of the support (and based solely on the support) he's arguably the best.
-
Well, with no support the best hero in the game is this one (FF). If you put Sam in a deck with no Green or Gold enhancements, nobody for him to band to, no Judge's Seat and no Davids or Sauls, of course he'd be a bad card, but that's really an absurd level of not counting support.
-
TSA would be better. Having no support for your heroes doesn't mean your opponent won't have any support for their ECs.
-
The point remains the same.
-
You can vote based on zero support (TSA wins!) or "best with a little support" or all the way to "best with every card in the deck built around that particular hero."
How you base your vote is up to you.
-
Well, with no support the best hero in the game is this one (FF). If you put Sam in a deck with no Green or Gold enhancements, nobody for him to band to, no Judge's Seat and no Davids or Sauls, of course he'd be a bad card, but that's really an absurd level of not counting support.
With no support, there is no way Susanna would have won last time. a 1/1 that basically draws one or puts the top card under the deck really isn't that special.
-
Well, with no support the best hero in the game is this one (FF). If you put Sam in a deck with no Green or Gold enhancements, nobody for him to band to, no Judge's Seat and no Davids or Sauls, of course he'd be a bad card, but that's really an absurd level of not counting support.
With no support, there is no way Susanna would have won last time. a 1/1 that basically draws one or puts the top card under the deck really isn't that special.
But she's got a great personality. ;)
-
Well, with no support the best hero in the game is this one (FF). If you put Sam in a deck with no Green or Gold enhancements, nobody for him to band to, no Judge's Seat and no Davids or Sauls, of course he'd be a bad card, but that's really an absurd level of not counting support.
With no support, there is no way Susanna would have won last time. a 1/1 that basically draws one or puts the top card under the deck really isn't that special.
But she's got a great personality. ;)
I don't know, her personality seems flat as cardstock to me.
-
I don't think Susanna should have won last time. But most people vote on the merits of the characters with regard to the deck they're used in rather than on their own merits, so whoever wins is unlikely to actually be the best Hero.
-
The reason Susie won last year is because everyone went, "Wait! We don't want Thad to win!" Likewise, Manny only won because everyone went, "Wait! Goliath is untested! He can't win!"
-
I think that Manny > Goliath.
Why exactly didn't we want Thad to win?
-
Maybe in this meta, but last year, Goliath deserved the win except for maybe Uzzah. We didn't want Thad to win because he's Thad.
-
Thad was the best hero by far in t2, but he wasn't nearly as good in t1.
-
He's still good in T1. I was rooting for him all the way.
We didn't want Thad to win because he's Thad.
Begging the question much?
-
He was decent, but certainly not the best. Top 4 at best.
-
Thad was lucky that he was really hyped up. He shouldn't have made it out of Purple. John should have won that brigade.
-
Or Phillip.
-
Or Phillip.
I agree that Phillip was the best, but I didn't expect him to win. John was really good and very popular, so he had more of a chance.