Author Topic: New Jerusalem is not going to be banned at this time. (Read 17761 times)

SirNobody · « **Reply #100 on:** July 12, 2009, 12:54:25 AM »

Hey,

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 10, 2009, 04:41:22 PM

I'm not advocating banning either one, just pointing out that when the 5 LS to win rule was made, there was no NJ, and soon after there was a FA. Now, there is both NJ and GoyS but the LS requirement is the same.

For the record, Falling Away and New Jerusalem were released at the same time.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

Arch Angel · « **Reply #101 on:** July 12, 2009, 11:16:46 AM »

I though Falling Away came out in Womens, before New Jerusalem in Warriors?

robm · « **Reply #102 on:** July 12, 2009, 11:31:51 AM »

Falling Away did come out before New Jerusalem.

I don't think it should ever be banned. I have won and lost games with and with out NJ. There are some games that you just don't need to use it or other that you never draw so you lose 5 to 3 the next turn.

Lawfuldog · « **Reply #103 on:** July 12, 2009, 11:36:30 AM »

I'm not going to read all of the 7 pages in this thread, since I'm making the assumption that the same statements are solely being restated.

Just to put in my thoughts:

-I like the fact that there are no banned cards in Redemption, it gives more of a sense of freedom and a sort of flexibility when deck building. (Albeit not much, but it is still there)

-You have to take into account that New Jerusalem will ONLY work if used with your own Son of God. People are making it sound as if the second you draw it, you get a free Lost Soul.

-People say New Jerusalem cannot be countered, but that's not true. You can play Falling Away before they get GoYS/LotS and it becomes as if they never played New Jerusalem. You can play Confusion to discard Son of God which then makes the New Jerusalem completely useless. I don't see Altar of Ahaz as a card I would use in many decks, but it would in fact stop New Jerusalem. Even to be more simple, just play with a decently strong defense (doesn't have to be big, just strong) and be able to stop a few rescue attempts. Fact is, SoG+NJ only gets you 2 Lost Souls, they STILL have to make THREE successful rescue attempts. Sure AotL is an easy one, but Unknown Nation and several other cards can even stop that. There's also a chance that you only have one lost soul out that they have access to, which you can just drop Burial on it and their AotL was useless.

To sum up, New Jerusalem is by far not a game breaker. I've made competitive decks that had three dominants (CM, DoN, AotL) and it in fact did really well due to having all of that extra room for offense/defense.

The Schaef · « **Reply #104 on:** July 12, 2009, 12:19:51 PM »

Quote from: Arch Angel on July 12, 2009, 11:16:46 AM

I though Falling Away came out in Womens, before New Jerusalem in Warriors?

New Jerusalem was a special promo card during the Womens release. You had to buy some CD to get it. In Warriors it was re-released as a promo in other packages, mostly starter gift sets.

robm · « **Reply #105 on:** July 12, 2009, 09:12:09 PM »

Thats right forgot about that.

Korunks · « **Reply #106 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:19:27 AM »

And lets not forget that AotL is NOT a guaranteed rescue, if I had a nickle for each time I successfully defended against an AotL RA I could almoooost buy a box of TexP

lightningninja · « **Reply #107 on:** July 13, 2009, 02:23:53 PM »

I doubt that. You've blocked a total of $2,400 rescues when they use AOTL? Cause I haven't even made that many rescues...

Korunks · « **Reply #108 on:** July 13, 2009, 02:32:51 PM »

A box of TexP is $120

lightningninja · « **Reply #109 on:** July 13, 2009, 02:37:00 PM »

Yes, but you only get a nickel for every block.

Korunks · « **Reply #110 on:** July 13, 2009, 02:43:01 PM »

there I modified the original post, to a stretchy almost. better? I got confused cause you said $2400 worth of blocks not 2400 blocks

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #111 on:** July 13, 2009, 06:50:07 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on July 13, 2009, 09:19:27 AM

And lets not forget that AotL is NOT a guaranteed rescue, if I had a nickle for each time I successfully defended against an AotL RA I could almoooost buy a box of TexP

It almost is a for sure ls, and if I know it won't be I don't play it.

Korunks · « **Reply #112 on:** July 13, 2009, 06:57:35 PM »

Yeah but I can think of at least two ways to stop it off the top of my head, Banding EC's and Priests Judas Iscariot. I am sure there are more ways

lightningninja · « **Reply #113 on:** July 13, 2009, 07:03:16 PM »

Madness, Unknown Nation, cm, sog/nj, burial, unholy writ, and others.

Korunks · « **Reply #114 on:** July 13, 2009, 07:08:55 PM »

thanks ninja I knew there were more

Egyptian · « **Reply #115 on:** July 13, 2009, 07:24:52 PM »

Having read many of the posts I favor the idea of going to 6 LS rescued and a 60-card deck. Weakens NJ, but wouldn't have to ban it, and makes for more strategy in my view. I do think 5 LS is too short. AoTL is usually (but not always) one rescue, SoG+NJ is two, and an early Captain or Strong Angel, and that's 4 already. You throw in all pre-block ignores that are prevalent nowadays and one can win a game pretty quick.

On the flip side I don't like having to hold SoG in my hand, and give the opponent a lost soul because I'm waiting for NJ. Would love to be able to play SoG defensively more often. I could just take out NJ, but that puts me at a significant disadvantage.

So all these factors considered, I like the idea of a slightly longer game (say 1 hour), 6 LS rescued, and bumping up to a 60-card / 7 LS deck.

-EgYPTIAn

The Guardian · « **Reply #116 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:42:08 PM »

Quote

So all these factors considered, I like the idea of a slightly longer game (say 1 hour), 6 LS rescued, and bumping up to a 60-card / 7 LS deck

I think we know what you meant, but it would be 8 LS, not 7.

Ironica · « **Reply #117 on:** July 14, 2009, 03:12:10 PM »

Though I would like to see the LS count go up to six/60 card deck, there is a major downside that I haven't read yet. What will happen to all the starter boxes that have 50 card decks? It would be impossible to win against the ones that have burial (and also illegal because of the 10 less cards).

I'm actually hoping that in 2010, a new starter set comes out. If it does, then they can impliment the change and have starter decks for beginners that meet the new requirements.

The Guardian · « **Reply #118 on:** July 14, 2009, 03:22:04 PM »

I thought about that as well. First of all, for Sealed deck, we can keep the game to 5 LS. There's no need to worry about NJ unless a host actually has enough Warrior packs to let people use those...I don't see that happening.

Furthermore, realistically, no one should need to be using just a starter deck for a regular T1 2P tournament. It would be fairly simple for the host (or even better, a more advanced player) to give/lend 10 extra cards for a player to use in his deck if all he has is a starter deck. Not to mention the fact that if he has a full starter deck, he can move some of the cards over from the starter he isn't using like the evil dominant, a Lost Soul and the multi enhancements. That's like 4 cards right there, so he would just need a couple extras to get to 60.

Outside of regular tournament play, players can still play just to 5 if they wish for a shorter game. The "60/6" rule could become an "optional advanced rule" that simply becomes the norm like name on name bonus.

Korunks · « **Reply #119 on:** July 14, 2009, 03:27:39 PM »

Quote

Outside of regular tournament play, players can still play just to 5 if they wish for a shorter game. The "60/6" rule could become an "optional advanced rule" that simply becomes the norm like name on name bonus.

I like the Optional Advanced Rule option, that way If a tournament host wished not to they don't have to use it, its official if they do want to use it, and players can use or ignore it as they wish. I really like this idea better than changing the game's core rules.

everytribe · « **Reply #120 on:** July 14, 2009, 08:45:54 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on July 14, 2009, 03:22:04 PM

Outside of regular tournament play, players can still play just to 5 if they wish for a shorter game. The "60/6" rule could become an "optional advanced rule" that simply becomes the norm like name on name bonus.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #121 on:** July 14, 2009, 10:01:43 PM »

Quote from: everytribe on July 14, 2009, 08:45:54 PM

Quote from: The Guardian on July 14, 2009, 03:22:04 PM
Outside of regular tournament play, players can still play just to 5 if they wish for a shorter game. The "60/6" rule could become an "optional advanced rule" that simply becomes the norm like name on name bonus.

To add even more strategy to the game, while balancing the dominant, there should be a good evil balance rule. That would help to clear up alot of issues and make for balanced gameplay, enhancimg the battle phase.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #122 on:** July 14, 2009, 10:04:18 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on July 14, 2009, 10:01:43 PM

To add even more strategy to the game, while balancing the dominant, there should be a good evil balance rule. That would help to clear up alot of issues and make for balanced gameplay, enhancimg the battle phase.

Because right now, T2 has such an excellent battle phase.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #123 on:** July 14, 2009, 10:06:15 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on July 14, 2009, 10:04:18 PM

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on July 14, 2009, 10:01:43 PM
To add even more strategy to the game, while balancing the dominant, there should be a good evil balance rule. That would help to clear up alot of issues and make for balanced gameplay, enhancimg the battle phase.

Because right now, T2 has such an excellent battle phase.

I think you need to calm down. Okay! . If it aint broke don't fix it.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #124 on:** July 15, 2009, 10:03:01 AM »

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on July 14, 2009, 10:06:15 PM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on July 14, 2009, 10:04:18 PM
Quote from: TheHobbit13 on July 14, 2009, 10:01:43 PM
To add even more strategy to the game, while balancing the dominant, there should be a good evil balance rule. That would help to clear up alot of issues and make for balanced gameplay, enhancimg the battle phase.

Because right now, T2 has such an excellent battle phase.

I think you need to calm down. Okay! . If it aint broke don't fix it. giggity giggity giggity

I'm not even sure you know what "giggity" means.

News:

Author Topic: New Jerusalem is not going to be banned at this time. (Read 17761 times)

The Schaef

TheHobbit13

Ironica

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13