Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Official Rules & Errata => Ruling Questions => Topic started by: Jmbeers on May 07, 2012, 12:09:57 AM
-
How would type 1 be affected by allowing a player to have 2 of an Identical but Generic character per every 50 cards.
I personally think this could open the game up to better defenses but would it be too much of a boost to defense?
-
It would be so fun to see Assyrians rock T1. I'm probably against the idea, but I'm curious what other people have to say.
-
Yes it would probably make Assyrians a Tier 1 defense but would make demos and magicians better and give Pharisees and Sadducees a boost.
-
I think it could be fun
Jerome we should play some games that allow that when I get home and we could offer a little better opinion on the topic
Faith ain't easy to understand 1 bird in the bush beats 2 in your hand
-
Legion already does this type of thing, and I don't feel like it is overpowered.
I support this, as I've always been a fan of generics.
-
It depends on what the limit is. If it's a limit of 2 I'm for it, if it's a limit of anything more than that I'm against it.
-
I was actually thinking 2 for the first 50 and then you may add one for the next 50 like how it is right now. It would look like this.
50 cards: 2 generics
100 cards: 3 generics
150 cards: 4 generics
-
That I could go for.
-
I'd support this idea.
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
Trembling Demon is Generic.
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
Trembling Demon is Generic.
Yes and there are many ways to deal with him: discarding an enhancement or any FBTN Hero for two.
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
Trembling Demon is Generic.
Yes and there are many ways to deal with him: discarding an enhancement or any FBTN Hero for two.
Holy of Holies deals with both of those ways.
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
Trembling Demon is Generic.
Yes and there are many ways to deal with him: discarding an enhancement or any FBTN Hero for two.
Holy of Holies deals with both of those ways.
Then we would be putting another rarely used card back into circulation like Disciples did with CoT. Having two of them isn't that big of a deal. And I thought we wanted to slow down offenses?
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
Trembling Demon is Generic.
Yes and there are many ways to deal with him: discarding an enhancement or any FBTN Hero for two.
Holy of Holies deals with both of those ways.
Then we would be putting another rarely used card back into circulation like Disciples did with CoT. Having two of them isn't that big of a deal. And I thought we wanted to slow down offenses?
Trembling Demon isn't that unused, but I don't think it matters. I like this idea, and I'm going to propose it for ROOT.
-
As long as we keep it restricted to generics, I think it would be great. Defense could use a boost that's not a chump block and this could do it.
Trembling Demon is Generic.
Yes and there are many ways to deal with him: discarding an enhancement or any FBTN Hero for two.
Holy of Holies deals with both of those ways.
Then we would be putting another rarely used card back into circulation like Disciples did with CoT. Having two of them isn't that big of a deal. And I thought we wanted to slow down offenses?
HoH+Trembling Demon isn't an obscure combo. And it's definitely a "chump" block.
But it's probably not that big of a deal.
-
Trembling Demon isn't that unused, but I don't think it matters. I like this idea, and I'm going to propose it for ROOT.
I meant Holy of Holies was unused, sorry for the confusion. I probably should have said underused, as well. And I'm all for trying this in ROOT.
And TD can be ignored in a fair few ways: TGT, Zeb, WS, 3 Nails...
-
Trembling Demon isn't that unused, but I don't think it matters. I like this idea, and I'm going to propose it for ROOT.
I meant Holy of Holies was unused, sorry for the confusion. I probably should have said underused, as well. And I'm all for trying this in ROOT.
And TD can be ignored in a fair few ways: TGT, Zeb, WS, 3 Nails...
Holy of Holies isn't that unused either since the two generally go hand in hand. Especially in this meta.
-
So true. I really think that this should be tried in ROOT, I'm liking this more and more.
-
Because Speed decks need more Sabbath Breakers. :P
On the flipside, Panic Demons would get a boost ::)
-
I don't really expect people would add extra Sabbath Breakers.
I would expect more trembling demons, more Proud Pharisees and more Generic Assyrians.
-
I don't really expect people would add extra Sabbath Breakers.
I would expect more trembling demons, more Proud Pharisees and more Generic Assyrians.
Why wouldn't they?
-
What is CoT? I coudn't find it in the Abbreviations and Acronyms
-
What is CoT? I coudn't find it in the Abbreviations and Acronyms
Crown of Thorns.
-
Should've known that that since it's in my deck. :laugh:
Also I think the rule won't change that much cause all it'll really do is add more defense which is better
-
I don't really expect people would add extra Sabbath Breakers.
I would expect more trembling demons, more Proud Pharisees and more Generic Assyrians.
Why wouldn't they?
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fr0oBq.jpg&hash=dfa1206ba781d03ff167192af8d52d1bb77f7d40)
-
I agree, it gives some more stuff to Defense and also gives some actual use to Generics in T1.
-
I love this idea and it makes a lot of sense. I mean why not since you can have up to four on the field at once in type 2 why can't we have atleast two in type 1 builds? My question is what about dual colored genetics in type one if this rule was applied? If this was applied would they be limited to one?
-
I wouldn't know, I believe the thought was for it to be only for Single-Color Generic Characters.
-
Honestly if this rule ever took off and got interest I'd leave a technicality like this up to the play testers.
-
I love this idea and it makes a lot of sense. I mean why not since you can have up to four on the field at once in type 2 why can't we have atleast two in type 1 builds? My question is what about dual colored genetics in type one if this rule was applied? If this was applied would they be limited to one?
I'd say single color only, less rules messed with, the easier it would be to test and explain.
-
I wouldn't mind too much.
-
Your actually limited to 2 multi colored characters per deck. I think that would be fine. So you could have let's say 2 Astorlogers in a 50 card deck but still only 2 in a 100 card deck or 150 card deck.
-
Hey,
This thread belongs in the Game Play Variations forum not the ruling questions forum.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Redemption rules would be more appropriate than game play variations. This is a proposal for a rule change not a variation.
-
Your actually limited to 2 multi colored characters per deck. I think that would be fine. So you could have let's say 2 Astorlogers in a 50 card deck but still only 2 in a 100 card deck or 150 card deck.
This is incorrect. T1 rules state that only one multi-colored character is allowed per deck, regardless of deck size. T2 allows for multiple multi-brigade cards.
-
At first I was like, "that would make some stuff OP!" and then I remembered that defense can never be OP in T1.
-
This rule would help Watchful Servant decks too, which is probably a good thing.
Are there any other generic Heroes that this would be a boost to?
-
x2 Israelite Archer would be fun.
Oh yeah and PoC is generic.
-
2x PoC would be real fun. ;)
Fortunately 2x PoC isn't game-breaking, and neither is 2x Israelite Archer for that matter.
-
There are a few offense this rule would help but as a whole it is leaning far in the favor of defense.
-
I'd still like to see it enacted.
-
It seems like almost everyone looking at this post has really liked the idea. I'd be happy to see an elder run a poll on the topic if this continues to pick up traction. (and in the odd chance that the rule really was taken seriously the 2 month delay for the new set could give play testers some time to try it out and possibly implement the rule for next season)
-
Hey,
It seems like almost everyone looking at this post has really liked the idea. I'd be happy to see an elder run a poll on the topic if this continues to pick up traction. (and in the odd chance that the rule really was taken seriously the 2 month delay for the new set could give play testers some time to try it out and possibly implement the rule for next season)
As an elder, speaking only for myself, if you want two copies of a card per 50 cards in your deck, play type 2. I'm 95% sure this will never be officially supported. It pushes Type 1 too much towards Type 2.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I can hear that, (and am working on gathering enough cards to play T2) but I simply put this concept on the table because Something has to be done about the extreamly defensive light state of T1.
I don't care what the change is, I don't care how it happens, and I don't care who comes up with the plan. I just want to see something change. The SoG/NJ targeting rules and Dom cap were a step in the right direction but I'm still looking for more. (Call me greedy :P)
-
The difference is that most players already like this rule. It's not going to harm the game that much to do anything that was harmful to the integrity of the game.
-
I'm all for this rule. It'd make the Heretics nearly viable. I love the idea of seeing more balanced decks more often.
-
I agree.
-
Hey,
It seems like almost everyone looking at this post has really liked the idea. I'd be happy to see an elder run a poll on the topic if this continues to pick up traction. (and in the odd chance that the rule really was taken seriously the 2 month delay for the new set could give play testers some time to try it out and possibly implement the rule for next season)
As an elder, speaking only for myself, if you want two copies of a card per 50 cards in your deck, play type 2. I'm 95% sure this will never be officially supported. It pushes Type 1 too much towards Type 2.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
This is actually a reasonable way to possibly encourage more defense in T1, since it gives defenses a huge push without really doing the same for offenses (for the most part). I would rather see this at least playtested than risk the playtesters putting out a broken card in one of the many attempts to compensate for broken cards in the past.
-
I'm all for this rule. It'd make the Heretics nearly viable. I love the idea of seeing more balanced decks more often.
amen to that
-
Hey,
This is actually a reasonable way to possibly encourage more defense in T1
Something has to be done about the extreamly defensive light state of T1.
A lot of players enjoy playing offensive heavy decks. Either that play style jives with their personality, or they feel they are able to win more games with that sort of deck, or something. The lack of defense in Type 1 is not because there is a lack of viable defensive cards, but rather because the players choose not to use them. In order to convince the players that like to play offensive heavy to use more defense we have to give them defensive cards that are excessively powerful, but if we do that players that like using defense are able to build decks that completely shut people down, and that's a worse result than not enough defense.
We could make a rule that players are required to include X defensive cards in their deck, but then players (1) don't get to build the deck the way they want to, and (2) will likely find a way to use evil cards to help their offenses (chump blockers for choose the blocker, characters that draw or take out opponent's evil characters) so it won't make the average deck any more defensive.
I believe that reducing the amount of extra cards that players can reasonably draw over the course of a game will cause balanced decks to win more game against offensive heavy decks which will cause some players to move away from playing offensive heavy decks towards playing more balanced decks. Unfortunately the other elders don't seem to agree with me, and agree or not, it may be too late anyway.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I believe that reducing the amount of extra cards that players can reasonably draw over the course of a game will cause balanced decks to win
Which is why I for one, as well as several other members of the forums advocate a rule to hurt decking out since that would harm the 50 card speed decks that draw like crazy.
I personally would advocate something like this: "The first time a player has no cards in his deck to draw, remove one lost soul form his land of Redemption and place it in owner's territory"
-
Hey,
Which is why I for one, as well as several other members of the forums advocate a rule to hurt decking out since that would harm the 50 card speed decks that draw like crazy.
I personally would advocate something like this: "The first time a player has no cards in his deck to draw, remove one lost soul form his land of Redemption and place it in owner's territory"
In my experience it is more likely that a player decks out against a turtle deck than when playing a speed deck.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I disagree w/ u SirNobody, because with the small defenses, I feel that I should be running a mini-defense or else I'm not a really good player. And I bet there are others out there that feel like that too, which will do the very thing that u wish to stop. I'd rather see at least some more defense for T1, especially it costs too much for most players to go to T2 instead.
-
Tim, I disagree with you entirely. The lack of defense in Type 1 is because with any more than ten cards on defense, the deck starts to lose efficiency. The game has become a victim of power creep, as many people have claimed in the past, and the main problem, aside from drawing, is the incredible amount of CBN cards in the game. No matter how good a 20 card defense I put together is, it won't matter when Sam's Edict, Authority of Christ (p), Bravery of David, Genesis enhancements (with Joseph), and several others are all CBN and thus, I have no consistent way to stop them. CBN banding is almost as bad, with MMoJ and Samuel. Multiple people (including myself) have tried to come up with balanced or defense heavy decks that are effective, and the best I've heard anyone do with a balanced or defense heavy deck is about 50%. Considering the fact that most of these people can do much, much better than 50% using a speed deck, there's evidence to suggest that the problem doesn't lie with the players, rather, it lies with the cards, and my assumption is that most people would agree with that analysis.
-
In my experience it is more likely that a player decks out against a turtle deck than when playing a speed deck.
I find that true too, but is implementing a rule that promotes larger decks that often favor defense a bad thing? I think not.
-
I agree w/ Chris' analysis. This is a good way to say it, and is partly why players feel like they are not good players if they aren't playing those kinds of decks.
-
I play lots of defense. I do NOT question whether I am a good player or not. You don't HAVE to follow the crowd to have talent, or self-esteem.
As for the main reason for speed decks to dominate T1, it really isn't because of the cards OR the players. It is really all because of one thing, and that is the time limit on games. Defense CAN shut down even the best offenses with the cards that are already available. However, in live tournaments, the 1 hour (or less) time limits on games makes it so that those decks can't win before timing out.
This has been basically proven in ROOT. But ROOT has longer time limits, and that deck wouldn't be able to do as well if it did. So if you like to play defense, then join ROOT. And unless time limits change at live tournaments, then either play defense anyway and even though you'll lose, at least you'll have fun. Or cave in and play speed like most everyone else.
-
Then let the few (like myself) who play defense have 2 generics :)
-
Hey,
I feel that I should be running a mini-defense or else I'm not a really good player.
I've never used a speed deck or a mini-defense. Are you saying I'm not a good player?
with any more than ten cards on defense, the deck starts to lose efficiency.
I couldn't disagree more. Speed decks are far less efficient than a well built balanced deck. When the speed deck wins, it is because it uses draw abilities to get a card advantage and overwhelms the opponent with the quantity of cards, not the efficiency of them.
the main problem ... is the incredible amount of CBN cards in the game. No matter how good a 20 card defense I put together is, it won't matter when Sam's Edict, Authority of Christ (p), Bravery of David, Genesis enhancements (with Joseph), and several others are all CBN and thus, I have no consistent way to stop them. CBN banding is almost as bad, with MMoJ and Samuel.
I have not played competitively since Nationals. That being said, there are ways to get around CBN battle winners. CBN protect (Judas Iscariot), Instead the battle winner (Herod's Temple), or just don't give them the chance to play it (Uzzah). There are ways to deal with CBN banding. Don't let them into battle (Household Idols), send them out of battle (Goliath), or use battle winners that remove them all from battle (Nebuchadnezzar's Pride). As the cards that speed decks use to win their "almost impossible to stop" rescues change, you have to come up with new and different ways to stop them, but the ways to stop them do exist.
Multiple people (including myself) have tried to come up with balanced or defense heavy decks that are effective, and the best I've heard anyone do with a balanced or defense heavy deck is about 50%.
I haven't played competitively yet this year, but historically I probably win at least 75% of the games I play, and I've always played a balanced deck.
I don't know how many times Andrew Wester used his defensive heavy deck at nationals, but out of 10 rounds he only lost 1 game.
It may be easier to win with a speed deck, but it's definitely not the only way to win.
As for the main reason for speed decks to dominate T1, it really isn't because of the cards OR the players. It is really all because of one thing, and that is the time limit on games.
The time limit is a hindrance to defensive heavy decks. It is not a significant hindrance to balanced decks.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
I'm not saying that anyone actually is a bad player, I'm just saying that it makes players feel like they're missing out on something when everyone runs a 6-card nearly unstoppable defense. Now for players like myself, who hate playing meta, we try to find ways to destroy meta decks (which I have been doing an play job at) that's one thing. But if you compare to someone that maybe doesn't know the meta or just likes to go to tournaments, that's the kind of player that would feel discouraged or left out when he gets trampled by opponents running an insanely annoying theme, which players could find better ways to beat if they had other cards (like more generics) at their disposal.
-
Offensive heavy is more efficient than balanced. card flow IS efficiency.
-
If we're talking about letting T1 decks have more generics in them, why not just expand upon the "Legion identifier" by printing new characters (or reprints) with something similar? It doesn't even always have to be 4 per 50 either, it could be 2 or 3 depending on the relative power of the card and whatever theme(s) it fits into. That way judges/hosts don't have to learn yet another change about deck-building game rules, instead the quantity you can have is right there on the card for easy reference when counting.
:2cents:
-
If we're talking about letting T1 decks have more generics in them, why not just expand upon the "Legion identifier" by printing new characters (or reprints) with something similar?
I like this idea and will keep it in mind for future cards :)
-
My problem with the current meta is this.
Speed is running rampant yeah? Let's print some more counters for it right? Wrong. The only true way to counter speed is with more speed. You can have all your nice counters in your deck, but unless you have the same amount of drawing cards in your deck, you won't get them until it's too late.
Playing defense just slows you down even more, unless it's a speed defense. The game has turned into a race to 5 between two glass cannon speed decks. I feel that if rule changes were made to slow down drawing, then we might actually see some more defense being used.
-
+1 Which is why I hold to the below statement as the best solution to the problems with the meta.
Which is why I for one, as well as several other members of the forums advocate a rule to hurt decking out since that would harm the 50 card speed decks that draw like crazy.
I personally would advocate something like this: "The first time a player has no cards in his deck to draw, remove one lost soul form his land of Redemption and place it in owner's territory"
-
To be honest, I don't think that would do much. You have to hit drawing itself, not decking out.
Maybe a hard limit of how many cards you can draw per turn?
*EDIT*
This change would be a bit *too* drastic, but I wonder how differently the game would play if all draw abilities were removed. Maybe a few people could try this as an optional rule and see just how different the game becomes?
-
Hey,
Speed is running rampant yeah? Let's print some more counters for it right? Wrong. The only true way to counter speed is with more speed. You can have all your nice counters in your deck, but unless you have the same amount of drawing cards in your deck, you won't get them until it's too late.
I think the counters that we print for speed are reasonably effective. The problem is that we print cards that stop the speed that was popular in the previous year and at the same time print a new version of speed to be used the next year. The counters to speed are always a year behind. If we didn't print any search or draw abilities in the next three years I believe speed would lose whatever edge it has.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
Mark, I still disagree that heavy defense is as good as heavy offense, even if the time limit was larger. You mentioned ROOT, so I'll do the same: The very first month, even though the meta wasn't developed, Randall won with a speed deck. The following month, I won using speed decks. I don't recall what Kirk played the month he won, but it was at least on the offensive side of balanced. Alex won last month using speed. That's 4/6 months where speed ended up winning a particular month of ROOT, and the only two that it didn't, you were the person who won. I contend that in the right hands, defense heavy can be effective, but that's still a 2/3 ratio where speed was the best, even though defense heavy was played by multiple players.
Tim, RBD is still the most effective anti-speed card in the game except perhaps Nazareth, and that's from Priests. The problem with anti-speed cards is that you have to draw them to use them, which necessitates using speed. A game rule is the only thing that will fix it, outside of overpowered cards that wreck the meta entirely. I'm not sure how you can claim that balanced decks are effective this year when you yourself have said you haven't played competitively yet.
-
The problem is that we print cards that stop the speed that was popular in the previous year and at the same time print a new version of speed to be used the next year.
Why is speed still getting new cards? If we could shut down speed entirely, the game would become much more varied and interesting. Games would become a battle of strategies, rather than a race to five.
-
Hey,
Tim, RBD is still the most effective anti-speed card in the game except perhaps Nazareth, and that's from Priests.
RBD is the most specifically anti-speed card, but it is far from the best anti-speed card. Darius' Decree is/was a more important anti-speed card for it's time, when speed's drawing was almost entirely off of set-asides. The anti-draw lost soul was amazing until the recent flood of character abilities that draw.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
...when speed's drawing was almost entirely off of set-asides.
...until the recent flood of character abilities that draw.
Again, not pointing fingers at anybody, but what is the reason for the constant addition of new ways to draw?
-
To be honest, I don't think that would do much. You have to hit drawing itself, not decking out.
I disagree, I think that hurting decking out would go a long way to discourage speed, at the very least you would probably see more 56-57 cards decks (which tend to be more on the balanced side of things) and less 51 Sam decks.
-
That's 4/6 months where speed ended up winning a particular month of ROOT, and the only two that it didn't, you were the person who won.
I actually was playing Geneptians (a speed variant deck) the 4 months that speed won ROOT (practicing for live tourneys with time the shorter time limits). The only 2 months that I played defense-heavy, I came in 1st place. That's pretty good evidence that defense CAN win if given enough time to do so.
The problem with anti-speed cards is that you have to draw them to use them, which necessitates using speed. A game rule is the only thing that will fix it
I agree with this. The best 3 that I've heard are 1) a longer time limit, 2) a "Gifts of the Magi" gamerule, and 3) a deckout penalty rule (specifics to be determined).
-
Speaking strictly as a former Pokemon player/trainer, the deck-out rule significantly reduces the urge to draw and search relentlessly. There can be no better deterrent.
...when speed's drawing was almost entirely off of set-asides.
...until the recent flood of character abilities that draw.
Again, not pointing fingers at anybody, but what is the reason for the constant addition of new ways to draw?
I also would like to know why there have been so many drawing abilities added in recent sets when we already knew Speed was an issue.
-
I think it was intended to balance the meta by giving a bunch of different brigades ways to draw (like how red got Ishmaiah and Gold got Sam) unfortunately all those new cards just happened to combine perfectly to make what we know as 'sam decks.'
Note this is purely conjecture
-
I think it was intended to balance the meta by giving a bunch of different brigades ways to draw (like how red got Ishmaiah and Gold got Sam) unfortunately all those new cards just happened to combine perfectly to make what we know as 'sam decks.'
Note this is purely conjecture
+1.
The irony is that mono Gold and Red is still pretty low tier.
-
If it weren't for either Angel under the Oak or Samuel, this set would have been more or less ok. 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?
-
I have a proposition for all future sets:
If an ability draws cards, it MUST have a cost. There are too many free draws in the game.
OR
If an ability draws cards, it must do NOTHING else. There are too many cards that draw and have other uses, such as heroes or interrupt, draw, and play next enhancement.
OR
Just stop printing cards that draw. We have enough.
-
As a former Yugioh Player, speed is still used, if ur going to play Exodia but most 'speed' decks aren't just drawing, it's more on getting your base characters out and fast, (usually by searching) but they can win well too.
-
As a former Yugioh Player, speed is still used, if ur going to play Exodia but most 'speed' decks aren't just drawing, it's more on getting your base characters out and fast, (usually by searching) but they can win well too.
Yugioh =/= Redemption
And just because it is useful, doesn't mean they are needed. These abilities are taking over the game and meta completely. Also, there are plenty of searches that can also be 'speedy' (see: Isaiah-maiah).
-
I don't mind searches as long as they're kept in check. They only look for specific cards, and NOTHING else.
Draws let you pull your entire deck faster.
-
Draws let you pull your entire deck faster.
Deck-out Rule! Deck-out Rule!
-
The point is that the game-rule stopped speed to an extent. I'm not saying Yugioh and Redemption are the same or even similar, it's just that it's an example of where it shut down speed just a little.
-
Deck-out Rule! Deck-out Rule!
And a +1 for you...
The point is that the game-rule stopped speed to an extent. I'm not saying Yugioh and Redemption are the same or even similar, it's just that it's an example of where it shut down speed just a little.
Which game rule are you referring to? You had mentioned searches before, and I was responding to that. Game rule for Yugi-Oh is that if you deck, you lose, if that's what you're referring to, yes. That won't be implemented in Redemption, for obvious reasons.
-
I was using Yugioh as an example of what a Deck-out rule can do to damaging extreme speed, not suggesting that rule for Redemption, but one that does have a punishment. Another thing that can be done is making Draw cards not draw so much or have greater costs for drawing, (like Hand Destruction in Yugioh, "All players may Discard 2 from Hand to Draw 2.")
-
My problem with deck-out rules is that it rewards decks that thin out the opponent's deck/wait them out.
We just need to hit drawing, nothing else.
-
Another thing that can be done is making Draw cards not draw so much or have greater costs for drawing, (like Hand Destruction in Yugioh, "All players may Discard 2 from Hand to Draw 2.")
The problem is we actually have that card (and it's CBN, no less):
The Generous Widow (RA)
Type: Hero Char. • Brigade: Yellow • Ability: 2 / 2 • Class: None • Special Ability: All players must discard two cards from hand and draw two cards. Cannot be negated.
And cards like this would just use Gifts of the Magi to let the player using it draw more than the opponent. That's what happens now.
-
Mark, fair enough; I'll concede that perhaps defense heavy is as viable as speed with longer time limits, but that will never be possible because bigger tournaments, especially Nats, takes enough time as it is. Even adding 15 minutes to a 10 round Nats potentially adds two and a half hours to the total play time, and when it's stretching for 6-8 hours as it is, that's simply too much. I was originally a supporter of extending the time limit to an hour, and even now, from a gameplay prospective, I support it, but logistically, I don't like it. A deck out rule remains the best option in my opinion, since it does something without fundamentally altering the game too much, which I worry would happen with any rules that specifically target drawing (limiting it per turn, the GotM rule you're so fond of, or some other negative consequence when you draw). Of all the proposed suggestions (aside from two generics per deck), a deck out rule is my favorite suggestion.
Tim, as far as I'm aware, Darius' Decree wasn't used at all in the season following TxP, and it was only used in the season following Disciples specifically because of Fishing Boat. At least a handful of players, including myself, experimented with it a lot this season, and from everyone I've heard of, the idea was eventually dropped because set-aside drawing wasn't as prevalent this season. Aside from the possibility of Nazareth, what is better anti-speed than RBD?
-
My problem with deck-out rules is that it rewards decks that thin out the opponent's deck/wait them out.
We just need to hit drawing, nothing else.
Nearly all of which are negate-able and I know that Yugioh actually has a theme like that, but it doesn't do well, and if normal Egyptians make a come-back there are already plenty of ways to shut down Deck D/C'ding.
Actually Yugioh has a card worse then that... Appropriate
"Each time Opponent draws card by a card effect, Draw 2." it's a continueous trap and u can have at a time. So I play Hand Destruction, and my Opponent draws 2, But I draw 2+2+2+2 for a grand total of 8 cards plus I can do that 2 more times and during my opponents turn.
-
If it weren't for either Angel under the Oak or Samuel, this set would have been more or less ok.
Really, the drawing of a Sam deck should have been no surprise. Sam draws based on non-Gold heroes. Also, why does Ishmaiah draw based on OT heroes? He should have been printed to draw on Red WC heroes or something like that.
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?
Because TGT is the most broken non-dominant ever? Maybe the most broken card ever? So many failed counters printed...
TGT/Disciples both have:
One amazing battlewinner (AoCP/HiR) with other battlewinners
One massive CBN band (MMoJ/Philip)
ITB + drawing + play next (Words/Reach)
Drawing via set-aside (First Fruits/Pentecost)
Access to TGT
Ways to stop chump blockers (James/John/Joanna)
Seriously, I'm trying to imagine what cards would have to be printed for TGT not to be top-tier. It's NEVER going to happen by making weaker offensive themes stronger. It will have to happen by making all defenses better.
-
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.
-
But speaking strictly from a game perspective I think defenses just need to be beefed up.
I've been saying that for 3 years. :P
-
But speaking strictly from a game perspective I think defenses just need to be beefed up.
I've been saying that for 3 years. :P
That would be nice.
On the original topic, instead of the 2 per 50 rule, how about more reprints of generic cards (like the sadds/pharisees, etc)?
-
For TGT, HHI, RbD, Cov. W/ Abe (I think everyone forgets this, No EC's can be set-aside) and then Gab the other nasty Enhancements like AoCP/MLaMG, and big defenses stop TGT too. Part of the reason why there aren't an insane amount of counters for them already, and an opponent can't stop all of them.
-
Hey,
Tim, as far as I'm aware, Darius' Decree wasn't used at all in the season following TxP, and it was only used in the season following Disciples specifically because of Fishing Boat. At least a handful of players, including myself, experimented with it a lot this season, and from everyone I've heard of, the idea was eventually dropped because set-aside drawing wasn't as prevalent this season. Aside from the possibility of Nazareth, what is better anti-speed than RBD?
Darius' Decree was used in my deck in the season following TxP. Darius' Decree's effect was more based on it's existence than it's use. The risk of someone using Darius' Decree against you made players pull back on how freely they used draw set-asides. There was a significant drop in the use of draw set-asides the year after Darius' Decree came out.
As far as better than RBD, the anti-draw lost soul. While the anti-draw lost soul doesn't stop Heroes that draw or CBN drawing, it does stop a lot of drawing, and the cost of using it is very small (the only thing you lose is whatever effect your next best lost soul would have had). RBD on the other hand does stop more drawing, but the cost of taking up my artifact pile is a price I'm not willing to pay.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
The anti-draw LS is all but useless. Most-if-not-all drawing comes from characters, the FbtN LS is in basically every deck, and really the only things it stops are Sabbath Breaker, Reach and the occasional Proud Pharisee.
-
Hey,
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. A lot of players believe Sam decks are better. With the very small number of cards we print each year (especially last year) it is hard to create very many better options, so the very best decks tend to remain top 5 decks for several years.
Tschow,
Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly
-
So how does that jive with speed counters being a year behind? Are they actually five years behind?
-
In order for it to fall out of favor with players, something else has to come along that is better.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is power creep.
Rather than replace something overpowered with something that's even MORE overpowered, find a way to take that overpowered strategy down a notch.
-
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?
-
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.
-
Hey,
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.
-
TGT remains broken because it makes no distinction between a small defense and a large defense that just got destroyed.
-
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.
-
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.
-
That's why I have CP and Protect Forts. Either way, I keep my Characters in territory and AoCP doesn't affect set-aside.
-
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.)
-
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.
-
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.
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.
-
+1 there!
-
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.
-
My Deck does that too, but the majority don't.
-
Hey,
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.
-
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.
-
Either way, I've found ways to stop them.