Author Topic: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics (Read 12664 times)

galadgawyn · « **Reply #100 on:** May 15, 2012, 04:07:47 PM »

Quote

I think jmhartz hit it on the head, aside from chump blocking and stand alone the power difference between offense and defense is too great. I know historically we have always wanted offense stronger to avoid timeouts, but I think the gap has grown too much. I also know theologically we have wanted defense weaker because God triumphs over evil. But speaking strictly from a game perspective I think defense's just need to be beefed up.

I agree with Mark here. Strategically, defenses can be just as strong or stronger than offenses with the current cards. I have a heavy defense deck that I've been winning with more than 75% of the time. The issue is the time limit for defense decks. The best odds of avoiding a time out go with using a speed deck.

The other problem with using a heavy defense is that your offense is so small that when it becomes time to rescue and win, you risk getting shut out yourself. You need cards that can help you get to 5. A defense that can target both opponents offense and defense help out immensely which I've seen with using Gates of Samaria.

So I think if you make more defensive cards that can help your offense/defense or target opponents offense/defense then larger defenses will be more viable. There is also a lot of Sriptural support for this since God repeatedly uses people to accomplish good in spite of them being evil.

The other thing needed to make defenses viable against all the CBN battlewinners is some more options to add an evil character to battle. I've had an opponent in one battle play AoC, Angel of the Lord, and Valley of Salt and still not get the lost soul. Because those kinds of abilities can be very strong you have to be careful. Maybe a few cards that only add if the opponent plays a CBN card?

megamanlan · « **Reply #101 on:** May 15, 2012, 04:23:20 PM »

I don't think the 'add to battle' cards are too useful... I still think that there are several ways to stop TGT using older cards.

Chris · « **Reply #102 on:** May 15, 2012, 04:26:30 PM »

Quote from: SirNobody on May 15, 2012, 03:47:49 PM

Hey,

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 14, 2012, 05:39:29 PM
But answer me this, Nobody, if speed counters are one set behind, how do you explain Gardenciples still being dominant, arguably even better than Sam decks?

The Garden Tomb was designed to be very effective against small defenses. As long as most players still use small defenses The Garden Tomb will continue to be dominant. Disciples was the dominant speed strategy of last year. In order for it to fall out of favor with players, something else has to come along that is better.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

If the first part of this was true, why is TGT still very good in T2, where large defenses are a must? If the latter half is really the logic the playtesters are using, it's no wonder we end up with unbalanced sets every year.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #103 on:** May 15, 2012, 04:30:51 PM »

TGT remains broken because it makes no distinction between a small defense and a large defense that just got destroyed.

megamanlan · « **Reply #104 on:** May 15, 2012, 07:42:01 PM »

TGT doesn't exactly 'destroy' large offenses too much, they just set everyone and their brother (or sister, uncle, lost cousin, kid and everyone in every other game being played) aside until they can just walk past ur defense. The irony is that a good card shuts them down.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #105 on:** May 15, 2012, 07:44:29 PM »

Quote from: megamanlan on May 15, 2012, 07:42:01 PM

TGT doesn't exactly 'destroy' large offenses too much, they just set everyone and their brother (or sister, uncle, lost cousin, kid and everyone in every other game being played) aside until they can just walk past ur defense. The irony is that a good card shuts them down.

Well, if they drop AoCP on the turn before, then you MUST put down two evil characters or else TGT lets them walk right in.

The idea behind TGT was good, but the execution wasn't.

megamanlan · « **Reply #106 on:** May 15, 2012, 07:57:59 PM »

That's why I have CP and Protect Forts. Either way, I keep my Characters in territory and AoCP doesn't affect set-aside.

Drrek · « **Reply #107 on:** May 15, 2012, 08:07:17 PM »

Quote from: megamanlan on May 15, 2012, 07:57:59 PM

That's why I have CP and Protect Forts. Either way, I keep my Characters in territory and AoCP doesn't affect set-aside.

Yeah every large defense and their cousin has a protect fort of some kind. AoCP isn't this magical clear defense card it used to be. 'He is Risen,' on the other hand, is still that magical clear defense card (and when paired with Faith in our High Priest, its really just unfair to large defenses.)

megamanlan · « **Reply #108 on:** May 15, 2012, 08:33:47 PM »

Yep, but like I said, Cov. W/ Abe stops that cold, its actually ironic how a good card damages TGT more then a lot of the evil cards.

Korunks · « **Reply #109 on:** May 15, 2012, 08:57:00 PM »

Quote from: galadgawyn on May 15, 2012, 04:07:47 PM

I agree with Mark here. Strategically, defenses can be just as strong or stronger than offenses with the current cards. I have a heavy defense deck that I've been winning with more than 75% of the time. The issue is the time limit for defense decks. The best odds of avoiding a time out go with using a speed deck.

The other problem with using a heavy defense is that your offense is so small that when it becomes time to rescue and win, you risk getting shut out yourself. You need cards that can help you get to 5. A defense that can target both opponents offense and defense help out immensely which I've seen with using Gates of Samaria.

See I think defenses need to be strong with out having to be bulky, You can run a very powerful medium size offense, but to really lay the hurt down you need to dedicate at least 2/3rds of your deck to defense, and then your only shot is too have a defense that helps your offense. There are not too many of those style defenses in redemption, which was my point defenses need to be stronger.

Quote from: galadgawyn on May 15, 2012, 04:07:47 PM

So I think if you make more defensive cards that can help your offense/defense or target opponents offense/defense then larger defenses will be more viable. There is also a lot of Sriptural support for this since God repeatedly uses people to accomplish good in spite of them being evil.

The other thing needed to make defenses viable against all the CBN battlewinners is some more options to add an evil character to battle. I've had an opponent in one battle play AoC, Angel of the Lord, and Valley of Salt and still not get the lost soul. Because those kinds of abilities can be very strong you have to be careful. Maybe a few cards that only add if the opponent plays a CBN card?

This is pretty much agreeing with what I said, defense needs more stuff to truly succeed.

megamanlan · « **Reply #110 on:** May 15, 2012, 09:25:47 PM »

there!

Jmbeers · « **Reply #111 on:** May 16, 2012, 11:11:03 AM »

I slightly disagree, I play a very competitive Royalty/Babylonian deck that is very balenced where my offense makes my deffense faster and my deffens picks apart my opponents defense.

megamanlan · « **Reply #112 on:** May 16, 2012, 12:31:14 PM »

My Deck does that too, but the majority don't.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #113 on:** May 16, 2012, 01:07:59 PM »

Quote from: Chris on May 15, 2012, 04:26:30 PM

Quote from: SirNobody on May 15, 2012, 03:47:49 PM
Hey,

Quote from: Minister Polarius on May 14, 2012, 05:39:29 PM
But answer me this, Nobody, if speed counters are one set behind, how do you explain Gardenciples still being dominant, arguably even better than Sam decks?

The Garden Tomb was designed to be very effective against small defenses. As long as most players still use small defenses The Garden Tomb will continue to be dominant. Disciples was the dominant speed strategy of last year. In order for it to fall out of favor with players, something else has to come along that is better.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

If the first part of this was true, why is TGT still very good in T2, where large defenses are a must? If the latter half is really the logic the playtesters are using, it's no wonder we end up with unbalanced sets every year.

The ignore is pretty useless in T2, at most it just kills Uzzah. TGT is good in T2 because an enormous CBN band is hard to beat, especially with Herod's Temple, and He is Risen is too strong. Gloria in Excelsis Deo is impressive too.

Professoralstad · « **Reply #114 on:** May 16, 2012, 03:04:51 PM »

Sauce hit the nail on the head. Being able to use He is Risen! 1-2 times per game (as in T1) is incredibly powerful. The ability to essentially use He is Risen! every battle (use Consider the Lilies to recur it, use it to win the battle and band in Gabriel, use Gabriel to recur Consider the Lilies, rinse and repeat) plus the uber powerful CBN band is what makes TGT offenses good in T2.

megamanlan · « **Reply #115 on:** May 16, 2012, 03:22:23 PM »

Either way, I've found ways to stop them.

Cactus Game Design Message Boards

News:

Author Topic: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics (Read 12664 times)

galadgawyn

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Chris

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Lamborghini_diablo

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Lamborghini_diablo

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Drrek

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Korunks

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Jmbeers

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Rawrlolsauce!

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

Professoralstad

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics

megamanlan

Re: Proposed Deck building T1 rule change: multiple Generics