Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => Strategies and Combos => Topic started by: uthminister [BR] on April 16, 2015, 10:48:30 AM
-
What enables AUTO abuse? Samuel...David or Saul...Gideon...? Just wanting a list because I think a set rotation (like mentioned in the Land of Redemption article) might nerf some of the issue. If we split everything pre-Priests and everything Priests forward, would that take care of any of the current overuse of AUTO?
-
Wouldn't it be better to just ban one card, auto, rather than effectively ban everything pre-priests? I personally much prefer counters
-
I split this off into it's own topic rather than hijack the card creation thread. I think this is a great discussion to have. We can't accurately understand how to solve a problem until we understand all the components.
-
@jesse: Banning everything pre-Priests is not what we are talking about. It is about splitting the card pool and competitive play into two different categories. All cards would still be legal for play but not together (thinking in Type-1 only). That might even provide an inroad for players who used to play a long time ago to get back into the game without the idea of a huge investment right off the bat.
@everyone: Just a thought but would like a good list of what enables AUTO?
-
@everyone: Just a thought but would like a good list of what enables AUTO?
Here's a start. I'm sure others can add to this.
Wheel Within a Wheel
Angelic Guidance
Jair
Samuel
Gideon
Samuel's Edict
Simeon (Wa)
Moses
To a lesser degree:
Birth Foretold
Samson
Ehud
Jephthah
Jacob
-
Westy mentioned Jacob banding to AutO banding to Moses for a two card draw plus a 14/13 fight by the numbers (in the biggest band topic).
AutO Gideon is the biggest IMO the ability to protect Gideon against opponents CBN + draw 2 cards is huge. Especially with unstoppable cards like Samuel's edict. Right now there are only two cards that I can think of that have regardless of protection (seek and destroy/stone of thebez). If combined with things like josiah's covenant, there is no way to get rid of either of them (without regardless of protection or negating Josiah's covenant).
However mainly it is his versatile ability to exchange to a gold hero in deck territory hand or discard pile that makes AutO so powerful. Especially with such powerful judges like Ehud, Jepthah, Jair, and Samuel. I don't see banning cards or limiting what can be used with what as a good way to stop AutO. Both solutions will propbably end up making AutO useless. I don't like the idea of punishing people who have specifically sought out specific cards to make a good strategy. I would rather make a counter card that makes it possible to stop AutO but to not make him useless.
I haven't played in tourney's so I haven't seen many of the AutO combos so I'll leave a list to someone else.
Never mind Gabe just posted a list.
-
jephtha belongs on Gabe's list
Honestly Auto isn't that terrible if you have to draw him. However you don't have to draw him. WWW and Angelic Guidance pull him out and both of those cards fit super easy into decks that use AUTO. Add the fact that Zaddok's Annoints can get him and if your deck is built right you can have auto turn 1 in 50% or more of games.
I feel like the issue revolves more around cost free search abilities that are so easily playable.
50 card decks are optimal because it lets you get to power sooner. If it was allowed people may go as low as 25-30 card decks. Since its not the next best thing is rip through your deck as fast as possible to get to the best rescues. auto does that better then any other hero in the game and he is easily tutored by the 3 most used utility cards in the game.
-
How much silver is usually in AutO decks? Angel with the Secret Name I see, but other than him and Samuel I don't see many to play off WWW and Angelic Guidance?
-
How much silver is usually in AutO decks? Angel with the Secret Name I see, but other than him and Samuel I don't see many to play off WWW and Angelic Guidance?
Take a look at the to placing deck lists from Nationals over the past three years. There are many good examples there of how top players abuse AUTO.
-
win or whine trying
2014 t1 2p winner where is auto in that deck? lol
-
How much silver is usually in AutO decks? Angel with the Secret Name I see, but other than him and Samuel I don't see many to play off WWW and Angelic Guidance?
If someone is using The Deck instead of straight Judges, you will frequently find Seraph W/ Live Coal, Captain of the Host, Michael, and/or The Strong Angel in the deck. Additional Green heroes commonly include Aaron (used in both Judges and The Deck), David, Isaiah, and/or Daniel.
-
What enables AUTO abuse? Samuel...David or Saul...Gideon...? Just wanting a list because I think a set rotation (like mentioned in the Land of Redemption article) might nerf some of the issue. If we split everything pre-Priests and everything Priests forward, would that take care of any of the current overuse of AUTO?
do you mean abusing auto with foreign wives? lol and fortify site?
-
The problem with auto is that it works in the early game (+2) and the late game (bullet proof Gid when defense is set up).
win or whine trying
2014 t1 2p winner where is auto in that deck? lol
That's an interesting point because the last three national champions didn't use auto.
-
Multiple counters have been printed but haven't changed the prevalence of AUTO. I'm doubtful that printing more counters is the answer. The problem with counters is that they have to be used in opposing decks and then drawn early enough to matter.
Assuming something is done about AUTO:
If an errata is issued - does removing CBN from AUTO fix the problem?
If a rule change is issued - does limiting each player to 1 draw/search ability per turn fix the problem? Does it cause other problems?
That's an interesting point because the last three national champions didn't use auto.
That's just one of 5 constructed categories. Other category winners did use AUTO. He was in over 50% of the reported decks that placed in the top 3 every year since his release.
-
That's just one of 5 constructed categories. Other category winners did use AUTO. He was in over 50% of the reported decks that placed in the top 3 every year since his release.
Son of God was in 100%.
I don't see this issue here.
-
Son of God was in 100%.
I don't see this issue here.
Feel free to start your own thread to discuss the dominants used in every deck. Or do a podcast. ;)
-
Son of God was in 100%.
I don't see this issue here.
Feel free to start your own thread to discuss the dominants used in every deck. Or do a podcast. ;)
I'm just calling double standard here. Everybody hates AutO because he's a draw card, but cards like SoG and even Foreign Wives to an extent are just as popular (and OP).
Maybe I will though. We're planning on doing another one this weekend and we need a topic.
-
FTR I brought up the Dominants in my article as well. But I think each card is it's own problem and warrants it's own discussion and solution.
I'm less likely to call Foreign Wives a problem at this point. I don't see her used nearly as much.
-
AUtO is so powerful because his ability reads "Draw 2. Become any gold judge. If you choose Gideon, protect from opponents. CBN." Any judge in territory gains "draw 2" on their ability, and as pointed out there is so much to search him out and he has his own search. I have personally abused him to great effect in T2.
However...we have counters already to all of these points. RBD, Nazareth, Hezzy's Ring, FW, and so on. While he is by far the most powerful hero (IMO and many others'), I'm not sure there isn't a lot out there already to hold him down. Some of it just isn't being used as much or extensively.
On fixes, I do not want to see an errata to take away CBN, just because I'm not a fan of having to undo exchanges and cascade negate beyond that. Though printed counters always have the issue that speed counters require speed to obtain before you can counter the speedy decks.
-
Assuming something is done about AUTO:
AUtO is so powerful because his ability reads "Draw 2. Become any gold judge. If you choose Gideon, protect from opponents. CBN." Any judge in territory gains "draw 2" on their ability, and as pointed out there is so much to search him out and he has his own search.
The how about modifying the base Draw ability itself?
When a player draws cards from a special ability on a card he controls, he must discard 1 card from the top of his deck for every two cards drawn (rounded down). Lost Souls are put into play instead.
There you go, you simply fix for AUtO by nerfing speed.
-
Assuming something is done about AUTO:
AUtO is so powerful because his ability reads "Draw 2. Become any gold judge. If you choose Gideon, protect from opponents. CBN." Any judge in territory gains "draw 2" on their ability, and as pointed out there is so much to search him out and he has his own search.
The how about modifying the base Draw ability itself?
When a player draws cards from a special ability on a card he controls, he must discard 1 card from the top of his deck for every two cards drawn (rounded down). Lost Souls are put into play instead.
There you go, you simply fix for AUtO by nerfing speed.
This is an absolutely awful rule that randomly punishes you for drawing. Redemption is very much a game where getting unlucky in a card discarded from the top of deck can ruin you, and having this random discard built into drawing is awful. In addition this massively hurts drawing , while leaving searches perfectly alone, when they are just as bad.
As another note, drawing is not bad for the game. Drawing helps games go faster, which is good. What is bad is costless drawing, like what AuTO has.
-
This is an absolutely awful rule that randomly punishes you for drawing.
I agree with the second half of your statement. This is a rule that definitely punishes you for drawing.
Redemption is very much a game where getting unlucky in a card discarded from the top of deck can ruin you, and having this random discard built into drawing is awful.
No one is forcing you to use cards with a multiple-card draw special ability. If losing a card at random concerns you, simply do not put AUtO or Matthew or... into your deck. Viola' not a problem for you.
As another note, drawing is not bad for the game. Drawing helps games go faster, which is good. What is bad is costless drawing, like what AuTO has.
Modifying the draw ability, as I proposed means there would no longer be such a thing as "costless drawing."
-
I split this off into it's own topic rather than hijack the card creation thread. I think this is a great discussion to have. We can't accurately understand how to solve a problem until we understand all the components.
Is it contradictory to say speed increases the fun of this game (which it absolutely does) and then say nerf speed as if auto is the only speed card? Lol
-
Why are we considering AuTo a problem? Of all of the cards we are claiming to be broken why AuTo? A ban would be a horrendous idea that would cause a terrible slippery slope. If you ban AuTo you need to ban Isaiah/Joseph/Thad/TGT. Then we have some progress.
-
It all started with Gabe, AutO and bacon... :o
-
Why are we considering AuTo a problem? Of all of the cards we are claiming to be broken why AuTo? A ban would be a horrendous idea that would cause a terrible slippery slope. If you ban AuTo you need to ban Isaiah/Joseph/Thad/TGT. Then we have some progress.
None of the other 3 cards listed have had nearly the same play rate as auto the last 3 years. Isaiah and Joseph are fine. Although I believe Thad and TGT are two of the worst cards in the game and I'm all for a TGT ban they havnt been in 50%+ decks for the last 3 years and id wager that at top levels you see 4-5 AUTO's to 1 TGT.
-
Why are we considering AuTo a problem? Of all of the cards we are claiming to be broken why AuTo? A ban would be a horrendous idea that would cause a terrible slippery slope. If you ban AuTo you need to ban Isaiah/Joseph/Thad/TGT. Then we have some progress.
None of the other 3 cards listed have had nearly the same play rate as auto the last 3 years. Isaiah and Joseph are fine. Although I believe Thad and TGT are two of the worst cards in the game and I'm all for a TGT ban they havnt been in 50%+ decks for the last 3 years and id wager that at top levels you see 4-5 AUTO's to 1 TGT.
You don't understand. If you ban Auto one of those cards would take his place in an instant. Also, AUTO does not cause a NPE so why ban it? No matter how many decks play it you can still play good games with AUTO decks. We should focus on playing good games. Also, greeks have a super strong match up with Judges. AUTO isn't a problem.
-
Why are we considering AuTo a problem? Of all of the cards we are claiming to be broken why AuTo? A ban would be a horrendous idea that would cause a terrible slippery slope. If you ban AuTo you need to ban Isaiah/Joseph/Thad/TGT. Then we have some progress.
Exactly why ban any cards?? There are so many that are already effective. The whole point of the game is to rescue lost souls! Is it not effective to do so? That is the fun of the game. If you want someone to slump over then play magic. You draw 1 per turn. That is the whole appeal of this game to magic players, you start by drawing 3.
Here is the difference between this game and every other game this game is considered an alternative to(which this game is completely it's own): In this game you offer life in a land of redemption. In the other games, you kill your opponent. Enough said. Haha
-
Redemption is very much a game where getting unlucky in a card discarded from the top of deck can ruin you, and having this random discard built into drawing is awful.
No one is forcing you to use cards with a multiple-card draw special ability. If losing a card at random concerns you, simply do not put AUtO or Matthew or... into your deck. Viola' not a problem for you.
If you want to ban cards, ban cards. Don't institute a horrid rule that in effect bans them, and ruins perfectly fine cards.
-
Why are we considering AuTo a problem? Of all of the cards we are claiming to be broken why AuTo? A ban would be a horrendous idea that would cause a terrible slippery slope. If you ban AuTo you need to ban Isaiah/Joseph/Thad/TGT. Then we have some progress.
None of the other 3 cards listed have had nearly the same play rate as auto the last 3 years. Isaiah and Joseph are fine. Although I believe Thad and TGT are two of the worst cards in the game and I'm all for a TGT ban they havnt been in 50%+ decks for the last 3 years and id wager that at top levels you see 4-5 AUTO's to 1 TGT.
You don't understand. If you ban Auto one of those cards would take his place in an instant. Also, AUTO does not cause a NPE so why ban it? No matter how many decks play it you can still play good games with AUTO decks. We should focus on playing good games. Also, greeks have a super strong match up with Judges. AUTO isn't a problem.
Yeah why not just implement more cards like auto to different brigades let people do what they want to do? Black is slow. Red is slow. There are more slow brigades than fast. That is all this thread is really highlighting is that more people want to go faster. Who wants to watch a drag race with slow cars? Draw more cards. People like drawing cards. Why not add more draw cards all around to give everyone more speed to win faster and play more games. Gabe even said his pod cast the tournaments last a long time, lock out decks are a drain. I mean come on how much more contradictory can we get here?
Bottom line, speed is fun. Roller coasters are fun. Drawing is fun. Faster games = more fun games for a younger audience which is going to encourage more people to play the game.
The only thing that could make this game better than more drawing cards is an online scripted environment where kids can play the cards (Hearthstone has this and so does a ton of other .99 mobile apps) instead of searching the boards for rulings. This game is simple enough to be fun, but you have to let it be and you have to make it so that all of the lost souls in real life can see
-
Redemption is very much a game where getting unlucky in a card discarded from the top of deck can ruin you, and having this random discard built into drawing is awful.
No one is forcing you to use cards with a multiple-card draw special ability. If losing a card at random concerns you, simply do not put AUtO or Matthew or... into your deck. Viola' not a problem for you.
If you want to ban cards, ban cards. Don't institute a horrid rule that in effect bans them, and ruins perfectly fine cards.
I don't want to ban cards; I want to nerf speed. The problem isn't with individual cards. The issue lies with the warping effect of card draw on the game.
-
Redemption is very much a game where getting unlucky in a card discarded from the top of deck can ruin you, and having this random discard built into drawing is awful.
No one is forcing you to use cards with a multiple-card draw special ability. If losing a card at random concerns you, simply do not put AUtO or Matthew or... into your deck. Viola' not a problem for you.
If you want to ban cards, ban cards. Don't institute a horrid rule that in effect bans them, and ruins perfectly fine cards.
I don't want to ban cards; I want to nerf speed. The problem isn't with individual cards. The issue lies with the warping effect of card draw on the game.
First of all, why does speed need to be nerfed so badly? Most people play balanced decks, and major tournaments still have every round go to timeouts.
Second of all, you aren't just trying to nerf speed, you are trying to make an very unfun, and very randomly punishing rule for no real reason.
The rule as you have proposed is unnecessary, unfun, and would be a major reason to quit the game if it was ever implemented. Thank goodness it never will.
-
Why are we considering AuTo a problem? Of all of the cards we are claiming to be broken why AuTo? A ban would be a horrendous idea that would cause a terrible slippery slope. If you ban AuTo you need to ban Isaiah/Joseph/Thad/TGT. Then we have some progress.
None of the other 3 cards listed have had nearly the same play rate as auto the last 3 years. Isaiah and Joseph are fine. Although I believe Thad and TGT are two of the worst cards in the game and I'm all for a TGT ban they havnt been in 50%+ decks for the last 3 years and id wager that at top levels you see 4-5 AUTO's to 1 TGT.
You don't understand. If you ban Auto one of those cards would take his place in an instant. Also, AUTO does not cause a NPE so why ban it? No matter how many decks play it you can still play good games with AUTO decks. We should focus on playing good games. Also, greeks have a super strong match up with Judges. AUTO isn't a problem.
Yeah why not just implement more cards like auto to different brigades let people do what they want to do? Black is slow. Red is slow. There are more slow brigades than fast. That is all this thread is really highlighting is that more people want to go faster. Who wants to watch a drag race with slow cars? Draw more cards. People like drawing cards. Why not add more draw cards all around to give everyone more speed to win faster and play more games. Gabe even said his pod cast the tournaments last a long time, lock out decks are a drain. I mean come on how much more contradictory can we get here?
Bottom line, speed is fun. Roller coasters are fun. Drawing is fun. Faster games = more fun games for a younger audience which is going to encourage more people to play the game.
The only thing that could make this game better than more drawing cards is an online scripted environment where kids can play the cards (Hearthstone has this and so does a ton of other .99 mobile apps) instead of searching the boards for rulings. This game is simple enough to be fun, but you have to let it be and you have to make it so that all of the lost souls in real life can see
There is definitely some truth to this, decks need to be able to keep up with the meta to be be fun. But the game would be pretty boring if every theme did the same thing, it may solve the "almost every deck uses AUTO" problem, but replace it the just as bad "every theme is identical" problem.
Secondly "Speed" is most definitely not fun for everyone. In fact, I would probably find the game very boring if everyone played speed or if every game was short. I play for the long games where my choices and strategies determine whether or not I can crack my opponents defence before he cracks mine (can you tell I play T2?) But on the other side I'm creative and like to design and build decks I can call my own, rather than play X theme or Y deck because they have the best cards.
Bottom line, speed is fun. Roller coasters are fun. Drawing is fun. Faster games = more fun games for a younger audience which is going to encourage more people to play the game.
I am really not sure what you mean by this. What do you want Redemption to look like? Because when I read this, it sounds like you want to take everything I love out of Redemption to make it more appealing to people who will play it a couple of times before getting bored and moving on. I hope I'm misunderstanding you.
-
The rule as you have proposed is unnecessary, unfun, and would be a major reason to quit the game if it was ever implemented. Thank goodness it never will.
For this you would quit the game?
As I said before, all you would need to do is choose to *not* include any cards with a multi-card draw ability and you would be completely unaffected by the rule change. Are you really saying that you cannot conceive of how Redemption could be fun without including draw cards in your deck?
-
The rule as you have proposed is unnecessary, unfun, and would be a major reason to quit the game if it was ever implemented. Thank goodness it never will.
For this you would quit the game?
As I said before, all you would need to do is choose to *not* include any cards with a multi-card draw ability and you would be completely unaffected by the rule change. Are you really saying that you cannot conceive of how Redemption could be fun without including draw cards in your deck?
For me the answer is yes. Games that go 45-50 min are not as much fun. When I play with Jerome we have balanced decks and we play very fast. We still get to 25-30 minutes a lot of the time. Playing slow or new players in this balance meta is not fun and almost always goes long or to timeout. If a game rule made drawing abilities unplayable then the game would be unplayable. Whoever lucks into SoG NJ wins the time out. Over and over and over and over.
-
The rule as you have proposed is unnecessary, unfun, and would be a major reason to quit the game if it was ever implemented. Thank goodness it never will.
For this you would quit the game?
As I said before, all you would need to do is choose to *not* include any cards with a multi-card draw ability and you would be completely unaffected by the rule change. Are you really saying that you cannot conceive of how Redemption could be fun without including draw cards in your deck?
For me the answer is yes. Games that go 45-50 min are not as much fun. When I play with Jerome we have balanced decks and we play very fast. We still get to 25-30 minutes a lot of the time. Playing slow or new players in this balance meta is not fun and almost always goes long or to timeout. If a game rule made drawing abilities unplayable then the game would be unplayable. Whoever lucks into SoG NJ wins the time out. Over and over and over and over.
Exactly. Doesn't the box of I/J starter decks say ages 7 and up? Don't kids want to have fun? I do. Do you know how long the average child's attention span is these days? I have kids. I'm trying to teach children in my neighborhood and there has to be fun ways to see how it can be entertaining itself
-
Totally with Josiah and Blake on this one
-
Totally with Josiah and Blake on this one
Jay's in too.
-
Totally with Josiah and Blake on this one
Jay's in too.
Which is why I support counters instead of banning or "punishments." Counters may not stop AutO completely or even at all, but there are ways out there. Use Golden Cherubim, get foreign wives problem solved. We don't want to punish speed we want to put enough defense out there that players have equal opportunities to win the game. I love diversity in redemption let's make all decks equally viable or at least more so.
-
Agree that there should be no game rule that alters the way draw works or explicitly 'punishes' it.
The hand limit was put in place to deal with game-breaking combos, but drawing by itself is not game-breaking. We have counters, people don't use them. More counters will be printed, people probably still won't use those. You have to speed to get to the counter anyway, but regardless we will always reach a balance where speed is still used more. And if we did something specifically to AUtO, something else will just take its place in the eyes of those who hate speed (Angelic Guidance, anyone?).
If we want to decide what the worst thing is for the game, I'll say pre-block ignore every time. Not being able to participate in the battle phase is one of the worst things possible because it reduces interaction, encourages bland and unoriginal decks, and is decidedly unfun. If anything needs to change it is that.
Speed is an issue in every game (reaching a balance of speed to counters). But it isn't something that is warranting such drastic measures.
-
If we want to decide what the worst thing is for the game, I'll say pre-block ignore every time. Not being able to participate in the battle phase is one of the worst things possible because it reduces interaction, encourages bland and unoriginal decks, and is decidedly unfun. If anything needs to change it is that.
Urim and Thummim is easily one of the most anti-skill cards in the game, if not the most.
-
That and Que yes especially when you tower him.
I'm sorry did you want to play freedom?
-
If we want to decide what the worst thing is for the game, I'll say pre-block ignore every time. Not being able to participate in the battle phase is one of the worst things possible because it reduces interaction, encourages bland and unoriginal decks, and is decidedly unfun. If anything needs to change it is that.
+1 totally
-
If we want to decide what the worst thing is for the game, I'll say pre-block ignore every time. Not being able to participate in the battle phase is one of the worst things possible because it reduces interaction, encourages bland and unoriginal decks, and is decidedly unfun. If anything needs to change it is that.
Urim and Thummim is easily one of the most anti-skill cards in the game, if not the most.
Agreed look at hand abilities are easily the worst thing in Redemption. Knowing the result of every possible rescue attempt you can make before entering battle (sure you can always assume some things w/o look at hand abilities but its never 100%). Cards like Sorrow of Mary, Tibbers, and Angelic Guidance that have look at hand abilities in addition to other abilities are too much. Though I don't see a problem with AUTOwon Kenobi. He is my only hope.
-
Totally with Josiah and Blake on this one [about draw cards being the bee's knees--mjb]
Jay's in too.
Just make sure what all y'all are voting for here...
Draw cards use to make up less than 2% of all cards with SA prior to Priests. This has climbed to about 10% of every set from FoOF on. Judging from what is written above, it appears that the designers are giving the existing player base what they want. It would be difficult to argue, however, that preferentially creating draw cards has lead to a healthier state of the game.
-
Totally disagree with that too.
There is more variety in viable decks now, than at any other time in the games history. We play more balanced decks now than at any point in the games history, if that's not healthy I don't know what is
-
There is more variety in viable decks now, than at any other time in the games history. We play more balanced decks now than at any point in the games history, if that's not healthy I don't know what is
Since this set? Because top 3 t1 last year was the same light defense. If its since this set there's just not enough tournament evidence to prove your point.
-
I had 19 cards of offense, 17 defense, not really sure why you think I was playing defense light
-
I guess numbers wise your right but I would never really call a pharisee defense balance because of all the support it give to your offense, which is the point of playing it. Also my defense was smaller and I believe Zach's was too.
-
Totally disagree with that too.
Totally disagree with what? The numbers are what the numbers are.
There is more variety in viable decks now, than at any other time in the games history. We play more balanced decks now than at any point in the games history, if that's not healthy I don't know what is
Just to be clear, I was responding specifically to the claim that more draw == more fun == more players. Do you think having 60 players playing the premier game (T1-2P) at the premier tournament (Nationals) is a sign that the game is thriving?
-
I love how passionate people are about this game!
-
I love how passionate people are about this game!
I think this is because the Redemption Community has created an extremely close relationship between players and designers (like when the playtesters ask what we would think of X change) which has made regular players feel very much a part of making the game. Because of this, I think, we feel very invested in the game because we have helped shape it. We are passionate about it because it's our game. I don't think you can ask for a much more loyal fanbase than Redemption has.
-
Totally disagree with that too.
Totally disagree with what? The numbers are what the numbers are.
My disagreement isn't with your numbers, I'm sure they're correct - My disagreement lies with the conclusion that you draw from them.
There is more variety in viable decks now, than at any other time in the games history. We play more balanced decks now than at any point in the games history, if that's not healthy I don't know what is
Just to be clear, I was responding specifically to the claim that more draw == more fun == more players. Do you think having 60 players playing the premier game (T1-2P) at the premier tournament (Nationals) is a sign that the game is thriving?
I don't think that's a good argument, there are a number of factors far beyond simple gameplay mechanics that contribute to the decline of player numbers at nationals.
Furthermore, despite their only being 60 players in T1, I would argue that the quality of games played was higher last year than at previous nationals.
-
Yeah quality was a lot better.
-
Just to be clear, I was responding specifically to the claim that more draw == more fun == more players. Do you think having 60 players playing the premier game (T1-2P) at the premier tournament (Nationals) is a sign that the game is thriving?
This is just a ridiculous and ludicrous statement. The decline of number of players in the game is due to many other issues than the printing of draw cards.
-
For reference:
T12P Top Decks (1st-3rd)
2014:
1st - Good - 24 - Evil - 16 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 19 - Evil - 18 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 21 - Evil - 18 - Auto? - YES
2013:
1st - Good - 18 - Evil - 19 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 23 - Evil - 17 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 23 - Evil - 13 - Auto? - NO
2012:
1st - Good - 20 - Evil - 17 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 27 - Evil - 13 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 24 - Evil - 19 - Auto? - YES
2011: (Note, Pre-Auto, and Pre-Domcap)
1st - Good - 28 - Evil - 11
2nd - Good - 29 - Evil - 9
- Note, Andrew Played 2 decks, I'm not sure how many rounds for each.
3rd - Good - 24 - Evil - 13
3rd - Good - 13 - Evil - 39
-
For reference:
T12P Top Decks (1st-3rd)
2014:
1st - Good - 24 - Evil - 16 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 19 - Evil - 18 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 21 - Evil - 18 - Auto? - YES
2013:
1st - Good - 18 - Evil - 19 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 23 - Evil - 17 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 20 - Evil - 11 - Auto? NO
2012:
1st - Good - 20 - Evil - 17 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 27 - Evil - 13 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Data Unavailable - Jonathan Greeson, not sure breakdown, but he had Auto
2011: (Note, Pre-Auto, and Pre-Domcap)
1st - Good - 28 - Evil - 11
2nd - Good - 29 - Evil - 9
- Note, Andrew Played 2 decks, I'm not sure how many rounds for each.
3rd - Good - 24 - Evil - 13
3rd - Good - 13 - Evil - 39
Justin Sangrillo placed third. Not Maly. http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/redemption_tournament_rankings_2013.php http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/deck-building-and-design/3-t1-2p-decks-from-nationals-2013/
-
Duh, I knew that.... I'll fix that momentarily
-
Just to be clear, I was responding specifically to the claim that more draw == more fun == more players. Do you think having 60 players playing the premier game (T1-2P) at the premier tournament (Nationals) is a sign that the game is thriving?
This is just a ridiculous and ludicrous statement. The decline of number of players in the game is due to many other issues than the printing of draw cards.
Because you would know? Enlighten us.
-
Just to be clear, I was responding specifically to the claim that more draw == more fun == more players. Do you think having 60 players playing the premier game (T1-2P) at the premier tournament (Nationals) is a sign that the game is thriving?
This is just a ridiculous and ludicrous statement. The decline of number of players in the game is due to many other issues than the printing of draw cards.
Because you would know? Enlighten us.
The number one biggest reason I've seen that the game had a sharp decline was because of the fact that it wasn't communicated at ALL what the next set would be after I/J until right before the last nationals. The boards and tournaments were still pretty active the year I/J was released and then when there was silence as to the next set, people started dropping off.
-
Right but if gameplay was fine then lack of news of a new set wouldn't matter.
-
Right but if gameplay was fine then lack of news of a new set wouldn't matter.
Because you would know? Enlighten us. :laugh: I couldn't resist.
we can all point to reasons we have seen players leave. The fact of the matter is that redemption is a niche market game with very little marketing. It is what it is.
-
I don't think that's a good argument, there are a number of factors far beyond simple gameplay mechanics that contribute to the decline of player numbers at nationals.
This is just a ridiculous and ludicrous statement. The decline of number of players in the game is due to many other issues than the printing of draw cards.
Both of you are attributing an argument to me that I never made. The argument was made that "more draw == more fun == more players." With the exception of TexP[1], Redemption printed more cards with draw abilities in *every single set* post-Priests than it did in all pre-Priests sets combined. If the "more cards == more fun == more players" argument were true you would expect to see the game booming. I think we can all agree that Redemption's popularity is not exactly waxing at the moment.
[1]TexP consisted of sixty cards total and contained one fewer draw card than all the pre-Priests sets combined.
-
I don't think that's a good argument, there are a number of factors far beyond simple gameplay mechanics that contribute to the decline of player numbers at nationals.
This is just a ridiculous and ludicrous statement. The decline of number of players in the game is due to many other issues than the printing of draw cards.
Both of you are attributing an argument to me that I never made. The argument was made that "more draw == more fun == more players." With the exception of TexP[1], Redemption printed more cards with draw abilities in *every single set* post-Priests than it did in all pre-Priests sets combined. If the "more cards == more fun == more players" argument were true you would expect to see the game booming. I think we can all agree that Redemption's popularity is not exactly waxing at the moment.
[1]TexP consisted of sixty cards total and contained one fewer draw card than all the pre-Priests sets combined.
Matt, I think we both know that you're smart enough to know that correlation isn't causation, which is what you've claimed multiple times now in this thread. We can rehash the multiple discussions we've had over the years about why the game is declining if you'd like, but I think we can all agree it doesn't boil down to one simple reason.
Otherwise we can continue to discuss what makes auto so good now that we've completely derailed the topic
-
Both of you are attributing an argument to me that I never made.
Matt, I think we both know that you're smart enough to know that correlation isn't causation, which is what you've claimed multiple times now in this thread.
John, I think we both know that you are smart enough to follow an argument. That being the case I really do not understand why you feel the need to keep attributing a position to me me that not only have I not made, but have expressly said (twice now) that I am *not* making.
-
Perhaps I'm reading to much into your posts then, because you certainly seem to be making it to me.
Then again, I wasn't the one who added a snarky interpretation of my quote earlier
-
AUTO's ability is so powerful, it's something you'd expect with a "Once per game" clause, like King Amaziah. I'm not sure what would fix him.
Taking away the D2: He'd still get used all the time, although maybe with less frequency. He'd get exchanged for Gideon more and Sam/Jair/Ehud/Moses less. Infinite unconditional bulletproofing, with so few "regardless of protection" cards, and 4 high quality CBN cards to play on Gid (Edict, Sword Against Sword, Deb's Directive, Ehud's Dagger) make for good rescue attempts. And he still works wiith Simeon/Jacob for CBN banding with Moses.
Taking away CBN: Now Covenant With Death, Golden Calf, and Tower become more popular to stop him... Or everyone just plays AUTO like they always did, since all three of those cards can stop your own heroes too.
Take away D2 and CBN: This might get AUTO into the realm of "not in most competitive decks".
Make his ability once per game: This would make him used less. Not sure how less though.
-
AUTO's ability is so powerful, it's something you'd expect with a "Once per game" clause, like King Amaziah. I'm not sure what would fix him.
Taking away the D2: He'd still get used all the time, although maybe with less frequency. He'd get exchanged for Gideon more and Sam/Jair/Ehud/Moses less. Infinite unconditional bulletproofing, with so few "regardless of protection" cards, and 4 high quality CBN cards to play on Gid (Edict, Sword Against Sword, Deb's Directive, Ehud's Dagger) make for good rescue attempts. And he still works wiith Simeon/Jacob for CBN banding with Moses.
Taking away CBN: Now Covenant With Death, Golden Calf, and Tower become more popular to stop him... Or everyone just plays AUTO like they always did, since all three of those cards can stop your own heroes too.
Take away D2 and CBN: This might get AUTO into the realm of "not in most competitive decks".
Make his ability once per game: This would make him used less. Not sure how less though.
Actually . . . why didn't someone think of this before? This would br a good way to keep AutO intact while turning his power down. I'd be in favor of twice per game but I think this is a good idea.
-
For reference:
T12P Top Decks (1st-3rd)
2014:
1st - Good - 24 - Evil - 16 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 19 - Evil - 18 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 21 - Evil - 18 - Auto? - YES
2013:
1st - Good - 18 - Evil - 19 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 23 - Evil - 17 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Good - 23 - Evil - 13 - Auto? - NO
2012:
1st - Good - 20 - Evil - 17 - Auto? - NO
2nd - Good - 27 - Evil - 13 - Auto? - YES
3rd - Data Unavailable - Jonathan Greeson, not sure breakdown, but he had Auto
2011: (Note, Pre-Auto, and Pre-Domcap)
1st - Good - 28 - Evil - 11
2nd - Good - 29 - Evil - 9
- Note, Andrew Played 2 decks, I'm not sure how many rounds for each.
3rd - Good - 24 - Evil - 13
3rd - Good - 13 - Evil - 39
John, Greeson used this deck for 3rd in 2012. He used several different LS and doninants but the balance of cards should have been identical or 1 more good than listed (and 1 less evil).
http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/national-tournament-winners/t1-2p-judges-assyrianmagicians/
-
Clearly I didn't do a very thorough job searching at 11 pm last night..... I'll fix that on my lunch break
-
Then again, I wasn't the one who added a snarky interpretation of my quote earlier
Unfortunately, condescension tends to induce snark.
-
Then again, I wasn't the one who added a snarky interpretation of my quote earlier
Unfortunately, condescension tends to induce snark.
Really confused now, as the quote that you added to was my first post in this thread, and was a simple verbal agreement with Josiah and Blake. If you read condescension in that, I don't really know what to say
-
I don't think that's a good argument, there are a number of factors far beyond simple gameplay mechanics that contribute to the decline of player numbers at nationals.
This is just a ridiculous and ludicrous statement. The decline of number of players in the game is due to many other issues than the printing of draw cards.
Both of you are attributing an argument to me that I never made. The argument was made that "more draw == more fun == more players." With the exception of TexP[1], Redemption printed more cards with draw abilities in *every single set* post-Priests than it did in all pre-Priests sets combined. If the "more cards == more fun == more players" argument were true you would expect to see the game booming. I think we can all agree that Redemption's popularity is not exactly waxing at the moment.
[1]TexP consisted of sixty cards total and contained one fewer draw card than all the pre-Priests sets combined.
TEXP contains 8 cards with draw abilities. Of those draw abilities one is a d1. The sets before priests counting all cards with "Draw" abilities total to 29 cards. Please check your facts. Not trying to be rude or anything I just want the facts to be correct.
-
@off-topic: In all of this discussion did anyone notice that Kirk just posted...coming out of retirement?
@on-topic: I actually would not mind AutO being having an errata that limits his ability to "x per game where x=number of redeemed souls at first use" or something much simpler that would limit his uses without bringing his power per use down.
-
And once we errata AUtO into something unusable, what's the next big-bad card we'll target to make sure no one ever uses it again? U+T? TGT? ANB again just for fun?
There will always be some cards that are OP. AUtO is definitely one of them, but I'm not in favor of errata to remove from the game a card that can actually be dealt with through existing counters and doesn't actually break the game (which is what we look for in erratas).
-
That's fine...I was just thinking out loud I suppose. I understand the reasoning for not issuing an errata.
-
And once we errata AUtO into something unusable, what's the next big-bad card we'll target to make sure no one ever uses it again? U+T? TGT? ANB again just for fun?
There will always be some cards that are OP. AUtO is definitely one of them, but I'm not in favor of errata to remove from the game a card that can actually be dealt with through existing counters and doesn't actually break the game (which is what we look for in erratas).
Auto doesn't actually warp the meta any longer either.
-
Auto doesn't actually warp the meta any longer either.
The over abundance of AUTO at the top levels for the past 3 years says otherwise.
-
Auto doesn't actually warp the meta any longer either.
The over abundance of AUTO at the top levels for the past 3 years says otherwise.
That is not warping. An AUTO deck has never won nationals. You also cannot under any circumstance draw conclusions of the metagame based solely on the top three slots. The top 8/10 of nationals is a far better judge of overall metagame. The other issue is that we should be focused on gameplay not on one card that happens to be able to played in a good many different decks. Does AUTO actually cause bad gameplay? Many top players including myself do not think so. We actually think the game is doing better than it has in quite a few years as far as gameplay goes. I continue to ask, what is the actual problem here?
-
Really confused now, as the quote that you added to was my first post in this thread,
Sorry--I thought you were referring to the exchange immediately prior (the one you were responding to which was indeed snarky).
I apologize for not recognizing that the phrase "bee's knees" was snarky. That was not my intent. I was trying to provide context, and I wanted something pithier than just noting you, Josiah, and Blake were agreeing that anything weakening draw abilities was worth abandoning the game over.
-
An AUTO deck has never won nationals.
AUTO has been in a winning deck in 4 out of 5 categories.
I wish we had better data for the top 10 decks at Nationals, top decks at regional and state tournaments, but we don't. The data we have, as well as my experience hosting and playing suggest AUTO has had a significant impact on the meta for some time.
-
Really confused now, as the quote that you added to was my first post in this thread,
Sorry--I thought you were referring to the exchange immediately prior (the one you were responding to which was indeed snarky).
I apologize for not recognizing that the phrase "bee's knees" was snarky. That was not my intent. I was trying to provide context, and I wanted something pithier than just noting you, Josiah, and Blake were agreeing that anything weakening draw abilities was worth abandoning the game over.
That's not at all what I said. I said that your proposed rule change would make me leave the game, and it absolutely would, not that any weakening of draw abilities would make me leave. If I was gonna leave because draw abilities became weaker, I would have left when the tin with Foreign Wives and Gold Cherubim was printed.
-
An AUTO deck has never won nationals.
AUTO has been in a winning deck in 4 out of 5 categories.
I wish we had better data for the top 10 decks at Nationals, top decks at regional and state tournaments, but we don't. The data we have, as well as my experience hosting and playing suggest AUTO has had a significant impact on the meta for some time.
I made a mistake in wording. I was assuming T1-2P was the main thing we are discussing here.
-
I apologize for not recognizing that the phrase "bee's knees" was snarky. That was not my intent. I was trying to provide context, and I wanted something pithier than just noting you, Josiah, and Blake were agreeing that anything weakening draw abilities was worth abandoning the game over.
Having others put words into your mouth or post as it is, is something I've seen you be very against in other threads. Please don't do it here. That said I'd like to point out that RDT, Blake, myself and others responded strong against your idea of of totally neutering draw abilities from the game. No one, to my knowledge said we would abandon the game if some draw abilities were weakened. These are totally different concepts.
-
@slightly-off-topic: On the upside with TLG events we will have excellent tracking of what is in everyone's decks with the deck list that everyone will submit when they check their deck in at our events. That will help us understand where the meta game is and what if anything needs to be done to help move it in a healthier direction.
@text-without-context-creates-misunderstandings: Back to the topic at hand.
-
The title of this thread would lead me to believe that AUTO is some sort of harmful drug...
I continue to ask, what is the actual problem here?
I'm pretty sure every year we have the best hero brackets AUTO wins, is that healthy for the game? The fact that Foreign Wives exists is a testament to how dominant AUTO is. If they somehow made him work only if all your human heroes were judges, then I could see him being more balanced without being nerfed completely.
-
I apologize for not recognizing that the phrase "bee's knees" was snarky. That was not my intent. I was trying to provide context, and I wanted something pithier than just noting you, Josiah, and Blake were agreeing that anything weakening draw abilities was worth abandoning the game over.
Having others put words into your mouth or post as it is, is something I've seen you be very against in other threads. Please don't do it here.
Fair enough...
For this [weakened draw--mjb] you would quit the game?
...
Are you really saying that you cannot conceive of how Redemption could be fun without including draw cards in your deck?
For me the answer is yes.
Since I have apparently missed your point, let me ask you simply which question are you answering yes to? Are you saying that if draw abilities are weakened, "Yes, you would quit the game" or "Yes you cannot conceive how Redemption would continue to be fun?"
I will say I most likely misspoke on Blake, cause I am not sure what RDT was referring to when he said he was "totally with" in that regard.
-
The rule as you have proposed is unnecessary, unfun, and would be a major reason to quit the game if it was ever implemented. Thank goodness it never will.
For this you would quit the game?
As I said before, all you would need to do is choose to *not* include any cards with a multi-card draw ability and you would be completely unaffected by the rule change. Are you really saying that you cannot conceive of how Redemption could be fun without including draw cards in your deck?
My answer of Yes was to this post. When you asked if quitting the game was a possibility if the DC1 for any d2(+) ability would be implemented.
For me the answer is yes. Games that go 45-50 min are not as much fun. When I play with Jerome we have balanced decks and we play very fast. We still get to 25-30 minutes a lot of the time. Playing slow or new players in this balance meta is not fun and almost always goes long or to timeout. If a game rule made drawing abilities unplayable then the game would be unplayable. Whoever lucks into SoG NJ wins the time out. Over and over and over and over.
-
I would rather play an "unplayable" game then a game that's not fun. Drawing is just ridiculous in a game when you draw three every turn. Even in Magic and Lotr base drawing is much less and still they don't have an over abundance of draw cards. And Redemption's attempts to stop it have been laughable at best. Hand limit was a joke, should of made a drawing cap per game.
-
I would rather play an "unplayable" game then a game that's not fun.
I'm really not sure what this even means. But the fact is also that a game cannot thrive unless it is both able to be played and fun at the same time.
-
If a game rule made drawing abilities unplayable then the game would be unplayable. Whoever lucks into SoG NJ wins the time out. Over and over and over and over.
I was referring to this sorry I should have quoted it.
-
I would rather play an "unplayable" game then a game that's not fun. Drawing is just ridiculous in a game when you draw three every turn. Even in Magic and Lotr base drawing is much less and still they don't have an over abundance of draw cards. And Redemption's attempts to stop it have been laughable at best. Hand limit was a joke, should of made a drawing cap per game.
...but we also have a game where your win condition is based on your opponent drawing. No other game you are mentioning has any sort of mechanic like that. If I don't draw, you don't get to rescue souls, it's that simple. We have the draw 3 because of that and the card types we have, and we have more draw abilities in a game that frankly needs a decent amount of draw. The issue is when you can design decks that will draw their whole deck in two turns, not having a lot of draw abilities. And for that problem we have printed a lot of counters.
Comparing this game and the amount of cards drawn to any other game and expecting a reasonable comparison is not logical in the least. And if we completely neuter drawing to the point that it would be unplayable, I will guarantee that while you may want to play, this game will die, without question. We have enough doomsayers about this game as it is, but that would absolutely kill it.
-
Draw three per turn is more than enough to get souls out there and add all the soul creation and its fine.
I am just curious when did you start playing?
-
I am just curious when did you start playing?
Competitively? 2011, that's when I actually started to go to tournaments. Before that, I was playing games with my brother up through the Angel Wars expansion, though without any sort of tournament scene and not very 'well'.
-
Here is your solution...When either player decks out the game is over regardless what the score is.
-
Here is your solution...When either player decks out the game is over regardless what the score is.
Yeah its a great idea and has been proposed before but I would change it to When either player attempts to draw but physically cannot due to deck count= 0. Just seems more consistent to other games to me and that way if you deck on your turn you still have one attack to win the game.
I am just curious when did you start playing?
Competitively? 2011, that's when I actually started to go to tournaments. Before that, I was playing games with my brother up through the Angel Wars expansion, though without any sort of tournament scene and not very 'well'.
Which explains your viewpoint a bit because its fair to say you entered the game when drawing was prevalent. Honestly if drawing is such an integral part of the game then how did it survive before mass drawing?
-
Which explains your viewpoint a bit because its fair to say you entered the game when drawing was prevalent. Honestly if drawing is such an integral part of the game then how did it survive before mass drawing?
The game has evolved, and going backwards in terms of what there is would be a poor way to go. A/B and Unlimited was all about numbers in battle only, but we certainly don't want to go back to that, and if we did I'd also suggest that the game would die of lack of interest. On my history, say it explains my viewpoint, but gloss over that I did play with earlier expansions (and often we didn't even have the 'newer' cards of the time), even if not competitively. I also started actually playing real games before AUtO and the speed-judges even came out.
A deck-out rule is a completely different topic, and I think it's a good one to have so long as it doesn't involve a player losing or giving up souls/opponent gaining souls when it happens.
-
[1]TexP consisted of sixty cards total and contained one fewer draw card than all the pre-Priests sets combined.
TEXP contains 8 cards with draw abilities. Of those draw abilities one is a d1. The sets before priests counting all cards with "Draw" abilities
total to 29 cards. Please check your facts.
My bad--I accidentally forgot to add the 14 draw cards from Kings into my tally. Putting aside cards like Hur, ANB and Love at First Sight--which draw cards as part of their SA, but are not draw cards--I count 23 cards in sets (not starter decks) with draw SAs prior to Priests. (Subtract off the 14 missing Kings, and you get my original count of 9. <== This just to show where I got my numbers from.)
Consider my facts checked. ;)
Not trying to be rude or anything I just want the facts to be correct.
Understandable.
-
[1]TexP consisted of sixty cards total and contained one fewer draw card than all the pre-Priests sets combined.
TEXP contains 8 cards with draw abilities. Of those draw abilities one is a d1. The sets before priests counting all cards with "Draw" abilities
total to 29 cards. Please check your facts.
My bad--I accidentally forgot to add the 14 draw cards from Kings into my tally. Putting aside cards like Hur, ANB and Love at First Sight--which draw cards as part of their SA, but are not draw cards--I count 23 cards in sets (not starter decks) with draw SAs prior to Priests. (Subtract off the 14 missing Kings, and you get my original count of 9. <== This just to show where I got my numbers from.)
Consider my facts checked. ;)
Not trying to be rude or anything I just want the facts to be correct.
Understandable.
I was assuming we were counting starter decks as well. My bad as well. I can see where you got the nine now.
-
Three cards per turn is not ridiculous in Redemption, it is necessary for the game not to be incredibly slow (try blocking with only drawing an evil card only every 2 or 3 turns (with a balanced deck), however the draw (and search) abilities may have gotten too ridiculous.
-
A deck-out rule is a completely different topic, and I think it's a good one to have so long as it doesn't involve a player losing or giving up souls/opponent gaining souls when it happens.
What do you suggest? Because loses or giving of lost souls is kind of the point of the deck out rule.
-
@off-topic: In all of this discussion did anyone notice that Kirk just posted...coming out of retirement?
Just perusing the forums for memory's sake. I found it ironic that the only deck list missing on John's post was a deck I built so of course I had to post about it. :)
Kirk
-
@Kirk: Gotcha...good to see you par rousing.
@The Hobbit: In my mind the Deck Out Rule could look something like this; "The first player to attempt to draw a card but is unable to triggers a game rule that the next players turn will the the last turn...or in multi-player situations the rest of the table gets one more turn and then the game is over. Whoever has the most souls at the end of the game wins as normal." It is a kind of time-out ahead of time.
@tAutO discussion: I appreciate all of the input. I think my questions has been answered sufficiently but feel free to carry on.
-
@The Hobbit: In my mind the Deck Out Rule could look something like this; "The first player to attempt to draw a card but is unable to triggers a game rule that the next players turn will the the last turn...or in multi-player situations the rest of the table gets one more turn and then the game is over. Whoever has the most souls at the end of the game wins as normal." It is a kind of time-out ahead of time.
This will not work, because if I make a deck designed to deck-out in two turns, that means I also have my best characters for at least 1, possibly 2 rescues, and my SoG/NJ for 2 free souls. That means that the speedster gets to get the souls then dictate that the game ends then, instead of lasting where others can catch up or take advantage of the lack of staying power.
What do you suggest? Because loses or giving of lost souls is kind of the point of the deck out rule.
You cannot have an automatic lose condition for decking out like in other games because we need players to get through their decks to get souls out.
-
This will not work, because if I make a deck designed to deck-out in two turns, that means I also have my best characters for at least 1, possibly 2 rescues, and my SoG/NJ for 2 free souls. That means that the speedster gets to get the souls then dictate that the game ends then, instead of lasting where others can catch up or take advantage of the lack of staying power.
Two things...#1. Isn't that how it works already? The "speedster" gets souls and dictates when the game ends by winning. If no one else is drawing quickly it is also likely that the "speedster" won't have any souls to go for or at least as many. Besides if your scenario does play out as you predict then aren't we doing the game a favor since everyone insists that faster games are more fun. Might as well speed up the inevitable and give the win to the "speedster". #2. With the current hand limit I am pretty sure decking yourself in 2 turns is an exaggeration to say the least.
-
This will not work, because if I make a deck designed to deck-out in two turns, that means I also have my best characters for at least 1, possibly 2 rescues, and my SoG/NJ for 2 free souls. That means that the speedster gets to get the souls then dictate that the game ends then, instead of lasting where others can catch up or take advantage of the lack of staying power.
Two things...#1. Isn't that how it works already? The "speedster" gets souls and dictates when the game ends by winning. If no one else is drawing quickly it is also likely that the "speedster" won't have any souls to go for or at least as many. Besides if your scenario does play out as you predict then aren't we doing the game a favor since everyone insists that faster games are more fun. Might as well speed up the inevitable and give the win to the "speedster". #2. With the current hand limit I am pretty sure decking yourself in 2 turns is an exaggeration to say the least.
Not in T1 Multi. I can do it consistently with Gifts.
-
#2. With the current hand limit I am pretty sure decking yourself in 2 turns is an exaggeration to say the least.
You cannot have more than 16 cards in your hand at any one time, but you can be drawing and placing down cards in a cycle. Assuming a minimum 50-card deck, your opening draw of 8 (or more with LSs), coupled with drawing and placing down characters/artifacts/sites/fortresses, then playing draw cards to get your hand up to 13 cards could go through at least half of your deck on the first turn. As Red alluded to for Multiplayer, you could then be playing and drawing cards on each of your opponents' turns.
I don't think it is an exaggeration at all for a T1 deck to deck out in two or three turns, even in 2-player.
-
And you could Gates your deck.
-
You cannot have an automatic lose condition for decking out like in other games because we need players to get through their decks to get souls out.
People can play "slow" now and they can play "slow" with the proposed rule changed so I don't see the problem.
-
You cannot have an automatic lose condition for decking out like in other games because we need players to get through their decks to get souls out.
People can play "slow" now and they can play "slow" with the proposed rule changed so I don't see the problem.
There is nothing from your statement that relates remotely to mine...
-
@Kirk: Gotcha...good to see you par rousing.
@The Hobbit: In my mind the Deck Out Rule could look something like this; "The first player to attempt to draw a card but is unable to triggers a game rule that the next players turn will the the last turn...or in multi-player situations the rest of the table gets one more turn and then the game is over. Whoever has the most souls at the end of the game wins as normal." It is a kind of time-out ahead of time.
@tAutO discussion: I appreciate all of the input. I think my questions has been answered sufficiently but feel free to carry on.
No disrespect but I believe that rule will create a situation where only two decks are used. Speed and anti-speed. Those who speed through may only rescue three souls but since the other player isn't given enough time to come back he will lose. In contrast to counter people will have to make decks preventing speed to keep up if they don't play speed themselves. This may be oversimplifying things, but I don't really like this rule, sorry.
-
@Eragon: I agree with you. I was just trying to think outside the current solutions being offered to find another way. When I go back and read over the overall thread though I am not all that convinced that tAutO is as big of a deal as perhaps I initially thought it was. It is simply the next card that will force people to build more creative decks.
-
As long as you can timeout win in those scenarios its not a bad rule.
You cannot have an automatic lose condition for decking out like in other games because we need players to get through their decks to get souls out.
People can play "slow" now and they can play "slow" with the proposed rule changed so I don't see the problem.
There is nothing from your statement that relates remotely to mine...
First you just made that up. Redemption doesn't need people to draw souls. That's like saying redemption doesn't need dou, sss, burial, susanna...,etc. Second, there are entire deck strategies designed to draw slow and manipulate souls. If you change this rule you'll see more of these decks more forced draw and larger decks. Which all add variety to the meta.
-
First you just made that up. Redemption doesn't need people to draw souls. That's like saying redemption doesn't need dou, sss, burial, susanna...,etc.
Your statements just...don't actually make sense, sorry. You claim I made up that the game is based on people drawing souls (it is...unless you are somehow saying that no one can play this game without gen, which counters your later "variety" statement being true with any change) and then somehow lump that in with soul manip and Susanna...absolutely no idea what you are driving at, or what you think I'm even saying.
If you change this rule you'll see more of these decks more forced draw and larger decks. Which all add variety to the meta.
"Change this rule" but you aren't actually saying what "this rule" even is. Without more information on what you are advocating, can't possibly comment on that.
-
I think the hobbit is referring to adding a deck out rule.
-
I think the hobbit is referring to adding a deck out rule.
I am more looking for what specifically is being advocated in that statement, since "this rule" can mean any number of things when related to deck-out if something were to change.
-
Why don't we just remove the CBN status on angel under the oak? so it can be negated somehow? :dunno: :dunno:
-
Why don't we just remove the CBN status on angel under the oak? so it can be negated somehow? :dunno: :dunno:
I'm not really a fan of issuing Erratas for power reasons, I'd rather ban a card outright and then print a more balanced version of it later than give it an errata. Also I think he should be CBI at least (it would be rather annoying to undo the exchange, which is what I'm guessing the CBN was for).
-
Why don't we just remove the CBN status on angel under the oak? so it can be negated somehow? :dunno: :dunno:
I'm not really a fan of issuing Erratas for power reasons, I'd rather ban a card outright and then print a more balanced version of it later than give it an errata. Also I think he should be CBI at least (it would be rather annoying to undo the exchange, which is what I'm guessing the CBN was for).
Precedent on cards like Mayhem, Grapes of Wrath, A New Beginning, etc. show that the PTB is willing to errata as needed for power but not willing to ban cards currently. So, AUtO would be more likely to be errata'd than banned if a change happens.
I think errata'ing AUtO to be CBI rather than CBN is my favorite of all the suggestions in this thread. I don't think we should start changing game rules because 1 card shows up in a lot of decks. Game rules should not be changed so lightly as they are the core foundation of the game.
-
Why don't we just remove the CBN status on angel under the oak? so it can be negated somehow? :dunno: :dunno:
I'm not really a fan of issuing Erratas for power reasons, I'd rather ban a card outright and then print a more balanced version of it later than give it an errata. Also I think he should be CBI at least (it would be rather annoying to undo the exchange, which is what I'm guessing the CBN was for).
Precedent on cards like Mayhem, Grapes of Wrath, A New Beginning, etc. show that the PTB is willing to errata as needed for power but not willing to ban cards currently. So, AUtO would be more likely to be errata'd than banned if a change happens.
I think errata'ing AUtO to be CBI rather than CBN is my favorite of all the suggestions in this thread. I don't think we should start changing game rules because 1 card shows up in a lot of decks. Game rules should not be changed so lightly as they are the core foundation of the game.
I agree that the Powers That Be seem to be more willing to errata cards than ban them, but I still stand my statement that I would rather cards be banned outright than errataed. It's really easy to look at a list of cards that aren't allowed for tournament play than have to remember exactly what some card actually does (A New Beginning is a great example of a card deserving of banning, but instead has become a card you have to remember this and that about it in order to actually play it properly).
Of course my stance on erratas vs banning aside, I still prefer both of them to rules changes to fix individual cards. If rules changes improve overall gameplay or if they make the game easier to learn or understand then I'm all for them, but if they make the game harder to understand for no improvement to gameplay then I usually think other options are better.
-
I was referring to the two different deck out rules proposed: auto lose and next player has last attack.
Your statements just...don't actually make sense, sorry. You claim I made up that the game is based on people drawing souls (it is...unless you are somehow saying that no one can play this game without gen, which counters your later "variety" statement being true with any change) and then somehow lump that in with soul manip and Susanna...absolutely no idea what you are driving at, or what you think I'm even saying.
If we "need" players to draw lost souls then any kind of soul manipulation is about as bad as a deck out rule.
-
I am confused by all the bickering. Auto is a problem but not a major one. If auto is restricted then it opens up floodgates of other cards people think need to be restricted. There are cards that deal with the auto problem all over the various brigades. The people are not leaving for card play. Most people love that. The problem is that there is not enough advertisement about the game. I am only one man but i advertise the game everywhere I get a chance. I have offered to do a few workshops at the 2 Lifeway stores in my town. Lifeway Manager's said that I need to complain online to corporate about the card choices (they are still selling only G/H Decks, Unlimited and Angel Wars packs). If everyone went online and complained, even if they already get the cards cheaper, then Lifeway would listen. My kids also bring their cards to all the church events and dinners to play. When we eat out or go to the park, we bring our cards and people are curious about it. I keep a deck with me at all times. It is up to us to advertise the game anyway we can. Keep in mind though, the economy is not 100% yet. Other card games are sold everywhere but Redemption doesn't have that luxury. Don't ban cards. STRATEGIZE. When the game came out I found Limited and A/B decks and then prophets but there was no one around who knew how to play. The game disappeared after that. It wasn't until 2005 when I moved to Tennessee that I found them again (Boxes of Kings and Priest on clearance for 10 cents a pack). I snatched them up and found this site. We got to advertise. Just like we witness about
God we must witness about the game. Don't complain about it, just go with it and do it.
-
Xpost from a thread in New Card Ideas:
I'm not so much concerned with it winning or not winning as it being in so many decks that place high. The problem of centralization isn't necessarily that it's going to win all the time, but that it's so good it's used to the point that it warps the meta. Whenever I am building a deck, my thought process is, not necessarily in order, "What are the win conditions for this deck? What counters to my win conditions do I need to account for? Is this deck fast enough to keep up with Judges, Prophets and Disciples/Clay? Can I come back from an early Mayhem? Can I come back from an early AutO/Isaiah? Does my defense include enough ways to block Gideon (and to a lesser extent King Hezekiah)? Does my defense include enough ways to block a FbtN Hero? Will my offense be able to get past an Invoking Terror or Persistent Pestering engine?"
This is not necessarily a problem on its own, but most of my best options to answer "yes" are to use those very cards myself. Further compounding the issue is Covenant with Death, which counters just about everything *except* Judges, Isaiah, and the salient parts of a Magicians defense or splash. The best anti-meta cards right now (Nazareth, Foreign Wives and CWD imo) are all great inclusions in the most common and consistently winning deck, as it is not hindered much if at all by them and all the other decks are. AutO by himself is not a huge problem. Having a lot of ways to get him very early, plus the fact that the best anti-meta cards do nothing or little, plus his utter lack of downsides, plus his synergy with decks that benefit from and are not hurt by anti-meta cards, plus the fact that his inherent speed makes getting counters before he's already gotten rolling improbable, plus the fact that his deck has been consistently top-table since his inception, plus the fact that his theme has one of the best answers to soul drought all scream "centralizing." I would like to win Booster Draft this year specifically so I can try to do something about his warping nature.
tl;dr, AutO by himself is an extremely powerful, but not broken card. The fact that he is not only not hurt by, but works great with cards that counter most other decks and adds huge tempo with no downside, as well as the fact that the best option to keep up with him is to use him yourself, makes him meta-warping (which shows in the hard numbers).
-
AUTO good card.WAY too centralized But not broken. Unless its first turn and on the play. The Gideon protect is annoying but there are ways to get around it. I would say a LS that gives regardless of protection to an evil enhancement or more regardless of protect cards could work. Just to make more people happy for viable defenses. The only real problem I see with AUTO is for the 1st turn. Here is an example: 43 cards in the deck really cause 7 souls. lets say hopper is in the 43 so cut it down to 42. lowest amount of cards that could be in the deck. so turn 1 on the play silver hero in territory. angelic guidance. get wheel. wheel get AUTO. draw 2 Sam. Sam search David draw 2. so first turn you net +6 cards out of your deck. if you count wheel and AUTO since they get shuffled back in that's +8 cards so essentially that 16/42 cards in your deck from initial draw and 1st turn on the play and it turns into 19/42 before your opponent draws depending on their first turn. Because of this I could see a IF IT NOT THE FIRST TURN errata being given to AUTO which is precedented by MAYHEM. Other than that more counters is the answer. Regardless of Protection cards, cards that would punish Exchanging or exchanged cards, Searched cards, Drawing, Shuffling a deck, Cards that could set aside a card while the card was in play. (Oblivion Ring type effect if you've ever played magic) Things like these could all work to at least decentralize AUTO a bit. And before someone tries to bring up the centralization of dominants that's a different matter and SOG in particular should be that prevalent. why? Our Faith is Centralized on him. Any game based on the faith should be centralized around him. Just my 2 cents.
-
Since PC, I have not seen auto/judges much, to be honest. I don't think he's much of an issue anymore. Perhaps it's because I mainly play online and people are still trying out stuff with the new sets, but I really don't know if auto is being abused anymore. There's too many ways to shut out judges now.
-
Since PC, I have not seen auto/judges much, to be honest. I don't think he's much of an issue anymore. Perhaps it's because I mainly play online and people are still trying out stuff with the new sets, but I really don't know if auto is being abused anymore. There's too many ways to shut out judges now.
Everyone seems to be playing Clay/Crimson these days, since PC hit the scene. However, for those that read all the new PC card abilities, they saw that teching CWD/DD/Hez Ring would greatly hinder (or possibly shut down) the new decks rolling out. And any deck that has CWD in it just screams "Use Judges and/or Prophets on offense".
I'm still playing Judges/Ezekiel/Babylonians/Magicians in ROOT, and it's still winning most of its games. I use AUTO, but I don't abuse him. I don't use Angelic Guidance or WWW.
-
Haha this thread. One set later everyone had auto in their nats deck, and auto even won nats!!
"How to make auto broken enough to win" hahahaha
-
I'm not so sure it was AutO that got abused at Nationals, but more that he just fit so well into the two dominant deck types (BoM and Throne). Even without AutO, I think those two decks are still at the top of the deck tier list... :P
-
this is how greedy i am:
draw 2 with auto or .. not draw and maybe get a rescue..
draw with auto. xD
-
Well it seems to me that there are really just 2 basic archetypes for Redemption atm and this creates alot of the problems. Speed and Balanced. When 95% of decks are these it really warps the meta for the best cards that fit these themes which AUTO conveniently fits in many themes and is the best speed/utility card in the game. Basically I think more controlling archetypes have to be prevalent to make things like this less prevalent. Herolite and lockout have been the control decks in the past but they are not as viable, people hate playing them, and we have actively tried to limit the presence of these decks recently. Honestly I think these decks should be encouraged and have better support. I know we don't like non player interactions in the game which results in draw end turn scenarios but we need some form of this to be a top tier deck in order to potentially shift the meta. That's my opinion though and it's part of why I play type 2. There is more diversity and potential there. I mostly consider type 1 to be a broken format atm. It lost it's fun for me. And sure speed is fun but is boring.
As for AUTO. I do think that banning it would be fine. There is still Angel with a secret name and the angel of the winds for decks that want to search that currently use it. As for drawing. Try other cards. There are more good drawing cards than AUTO and Throne offense. (Cough) 2016 Nats 3rd place (Cough)
-
John's 2015 t1 deck is still boss honestly
We have definitely seen a lot given to other brigades and themes. Really just about every theme with a few battle winners is viable at the moment since cloud
-
John's 2015 t1 deck is still boss honestly
We have definitely seen a lot given to other brigades and themes. Really just about every theme with a few battle winners is viable at the moment since cloud
John's deck is still very good. But it's not used much. Hand control is another under utilized theme that I think could use the help. I think a "deck control" theme could be viable and good if it was ever implemented. (Basically stack decks in your favor and limit how much your opponent can change that via draw, shuffle, search, etc.) Would have to be thematic based and not super splashable though.
I guess just overall I just don't see these "control decks" played much and that let's speed and even balanced decks get away with not having to worry about them. Not only that there isn't as much support for them either. This is mostly in a T1 perspective. T2 I think is more balanced.
I would like to see stuff that for instance could punish players for using more than 1 draw ability in a turn or limited them to 1, cards that punish splashing brigades or limited the # of brigades an opponent could use in battle, something that limited the number of cards a player could draw or something that took effect when multiple characters enter a side of battle. Hand control, deck control, and lockout could all use some help too. All in all there is much potential for things that can be done and I think with continuance of printing cards that creatively deal with meta issues will ultimately be good for the game. I think the game has come a long way though and the fact the we all speak out and talk about the direction we think the game should go is great and has made Redemption one of the best card games out there. It will never be perfect but we're always striving together to make it better and that says alot about the game and those who play it.
-
John's 2015 t1 deck is still boss honestly
We have definitely seen a lot given to other brigades and themes. Really just about every theme with a few battle winners is viable at the moment since cloud
Wait, you mean my Job deck will work now? :D
-
John's 2015 t1 deck is still boss honestly
We have definitely seen a lot given to other brigades and themes. Really just about every theme with a few battle winners is viable at the moment since cloud
Wait, you mean my Job deck will work now? :D
Maybe in Type 2, unless of course you have a way to get Dust and Ashes back after it has been Shipwrecked. (Not sure how that is physically possible, but that is what card games do! :P)
-
Until we have either longer time limits or more stringent controls on players taking forever to move, control archetypes will never be viable in Redemption.
-
idk im just sick of this throne stuff tbh ive never really understood why this game is so draw happy. Type 2 used to be where you could try to run control but its pretty much just draw or go home too.
-
idk im just sick of this throne stuff tbh ive never really understood why this game is so draw happy. Type 2 used to be where you could try to run control but its pretty much just draw or go home too.
Hey now, my Nationals winning deck from last year had a total of 4 drawing cards (3 Naaman's Horses + AutO). 8)
-
to be fair I don't think the meta had a chance to catch up fast enough from the new set so you're excused ;)
-
My deck had like 9ish non-LS cards from the new set (2 of which were TSC and Coliseum). :P
-
I agreed with earlier statements that every brigade/type/theme should have its own type of Auto or a very strong opening/foundational card type hero. Every brigade has its own inherent themes that are fun to explore and maximize and the issue I see with Auto is that he improved Judges so much that it made other themes seem not as viable.
I think counters are great but I think reinforcing each brigade and their sub-themes may be the way to go.
-
I think counters are great but I think reinforcing each brigade and their sub-themes may be the way to go.
100% agree
And relatively speaking the boost Syrians got from cloud is right along those lines
-
I think counters are great but I think reinforcing each brigade and their sub-themes may be the way to go.
100% agree
And relatively speaking the boost Syrians got from cloud is right along those lines
I agree with these sentiments but at least in regards to AUTO, he fits multiple themes in multiple brigade schemes and is overplayed because of it. Introducing options for other themes won't necessarily change this. I might even just encourage people to find a way to stuff AUTO in to fit their theme. I'm all down for new exciting themes and help for existing themes but I'm not sure that inherently will solve the AUTO problem.
-
To the people earlier in the thread, drawing isn't a bad thing, in fact, control decks work in other games because they draw. Ours don't draw while our aggro does. Therefore that is why they are bad.
-
I think counters are great but I think reinforcing each brigade and their sub-themes may be the way to go.
100% agree
And relatively speaking the boost Syrians got from cloud is right along those lines
I agree with these sentiments but at least in regards to AUTO, he fits multiple themes in multiple brigade schemes and is overplayed because of it. Introducing options for other themes won't necessarily change this. I might even just encourage people to find a way to stuff AUTO in to fit their theme. I'm all down for new exciting themes and help for existing themes but I'm not sure that inherently will solve the AUTO problem.
Like throne? Lol
-
Just thought of an idea, an artifact like three nails but for angels. Can't use Auto if he can get into battle. Lol
-
Just thought of an idea, an artifact like three nails but for angels. Can't use Auto if he can get into battle. Lol
I like that idea, but would people use it? no one uses three nails. Granted, angels are, IMHO, better than demons, and used a lot more than demons. demons have pretty much 3 go to characters who can be thrown into almost any deck (PoTW, Messenger, KoT), while angels have like 5 or six that can be thrown into almost any deck. Maybe other people would use it, but i wouldn't. i just don't think that it is good enough.
-
Stopping people from using TSA, Captain, Gabriel, Auto, awsn, angel of the winds, and that disciples angel would be crazy. I think it would be played
-
that disciples angel
The Green Lantern Angel? ??? ;D
-
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/3ecdb9_781417b524fa46e6ad75d2a1a4c1fccc.jpg/v1/fill/w_375,h_560,al_c,lg_1,q_80/3ecdb9_781417b524fa46e6ad75d2a1a4c1fccc.jpg)
These guys lol
-
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/3ecdb9_781417b524fa46e6ad75d2a1a4c1fccc.jpg/v1/fill/w_375,h_560,al_c,lg_1,q_80/3ecdb9_781417b524fa46e6ad75d2a1a4c1fccc.jpg)
These guys lol
i'll be honest, i have never seen that card played... :(
i have contemplated putting it in several decks, (just on lackey) but it just never made the cut in the end.
-
It's essential in a disciples deck as it pulls your most needed disciple out such as Matthew or Thad ASAP.
-
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/3ecdb9_781417b524fa46e6ad75d2a1a4c1fccc.jpg/v1/fill/w_375,h_560,al_c,lg_1,q_80/3ecdb9_781417b524fa46e6ad75d2a1a4c1fccc.jpg)
These guys lol
i'll be honest, i have never seen that card played... :(
i have contemplated putting it in several decks, (just on lackey) but it just never made the cut in the end.
Those guys are basically AutO for Disciple decks without the D2 (which Discples really don't need because they have so many other draw options (Matthew, Reach, 4DC, Peter, Fishing Boat).
-
I think counters are great but I think reinforcing each brigade and their sub-themes may be the way to go.
100% agree
And relatively speaking the boost Syrians got from cloud is right along those lines
I agree with these sentiments but at least in regards to AUTO, he fits multiple themes in multiple brigade schemes and is overplayed because of it. Introducing options for other themes won't necessarily change this. I might even just encourage people to find a way to stuff AUTO in to fit their theme. I'm all down for new exciting themes and help for existing themes but I'm not sure that inherently will solve the AUTO problem.
Like throne? Lol
Throne is a great example. It doesn't need AUTO since the printing of David the Shepherd and King Saul in COW made them very fast.
I like the new set alot and the idea of bringing up other themes but all I am saying it that just making other themes better doesn't mean that AUTO won't continue to be overused and also could create new issues or exacerbate existing ones like AUTO abuse.
Throne has its own issues but it's 1 deck archetype that things like HHI and the priest of Zeus can punish pretty hard. I still think there should be more options printed to allow other themes to keep up whether that come in speed for other themes or more controlling or counter cards.
In the end everyone likes options and that's what I'm for. More competitive options. If that comes from printing new cards, banning other cards, or some combination of things like that so be it. Whatever ultimately balances the meta of the best card game out there is great. One of the great thing about competitive card games is deck building where you can let creative ideas shine and win with them. T1 is kinda bland in the regard right now to me. If I go a game without seeing Captain, AUTO, Throne, or Moses it's a pleasant surprise. That's what I want to see more of. Vega your deck at Nats is a great example and I hope more people will follow suit with that kind of creativity.
-
I think counters are great but I think reinforcing each brigade and their sub-themes may be the way to go.
If I go a game without seeing Captain, AUTO, Throne, or Moses it's a pleasant surprise. That's what I want to see more of. Vega your deck at Nats is a great example and I hope more people will follow suit with that kind of creativity.
why thank you but i did get that deck idea from Gabe in his high level playing video. i know what you mean though. i do take some pride in the creativity that went into Sinning Bountifully, the deck i did come up with for last years t2 only.
i could have played a bom deck or throne at nats or whatever but i chose clay to show people that it can compete. however, i do agree, generally speaking i don't think it's as strong. you just have to reinforce more themes exactly like cloud did
flood survivors is another great example- great theme, powerful cards, but not played for obvious reasons. people don't see flood survivors decking and getting auto rescues with moses/captain/etc i think the main thing about auto is that it isn't broken, it is just slightly still that much better enough to make it stand out and just so happens to make samuel insane for 2 themes. for the record, i do not want any cards banned.
all in all i would say we are going in the right direction!
really excited to see what is in store!
-
More territory destruction?
-
Jephthah cbn via angel with the secret name, Sword, Edict, Dagger, Grail is 7 ecs that's why I've typically cut defenders down to 1 king now there is angel, tsc, rubble and dust auto gideon faith of gideon grapes is 11 or more ecs without including lions to eat 12 in the side battle
12 ecs is more than I see in most t1 decks along with woes or golden censer to negate protection or coliseum
Did I miss anything? Oh new Othniel is 1/1 guaranteeing initiative and another dc to 13.. Maybe it's just me.. Is that a bit overkill?
-
Jephthah cbn via angel with the secret name, Sword, Edict, Dagger, Grail is 7 ecs that's why I've typically cut defenders down to 1 king now there is angel, tsc, rubble and dust auto gideon faith of gideon grapes is 11 or more ecs without including lions to eat 12 in the side battle
12 ecs is more than I see in most t1 decks along with woes or golden censer to negate protection or coliseum
Did I miss anything? Oh new Othniel is 1/1 guaranteeing initiative and another dc to 13.. Maybe it's just me.. Is that a bit overkill?
#Judges4Ever