Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Howdy y'all and Godbless,
It has been awhile since I've struck similar conversations but as your resident Texan Tinkerer, how have you been enjoying the new Hard Stop Solution (A Schaefer original patent pending) of one territory class enhancement per turn?
After unwinding for a few months watching and helping out in the community from behind the scenes I came back in full force to testing and playing with the new rules set enjoying it thoroughly. I'd like to hear some others testimonies about this.
Originally I was resistant to this rule change when Joe and I discussed it multiple times in 2022. To me it seemed to be too arbitrary of a number to limit it to just one per turn. However there is a precedent for this number in the rules with unique characters only able to enter battle once per battle, and  limit of one artifact per turn. This hard stop rule change does solve my initial analysis of the systemic issue Redemption had which was interactivity. One TC enhancement per turn pushes the action economy back into the battle phase which makes it vulnerable to counterplay. In time this rule change could be called for review depending on what the future holds. For the foreseeable course of the game this doesn't worry me.

This brings me to my main topic which  is in regards to possible rulechange solutions I had presented in the past. After going back and listening to The Treshing Floor episode 48 by John Hendrix ft. Josh Potratz (aka Prostrats) it became apparent to me some of those gameplay changes might still be of interest to the community. Would y'all be interested in pursuing these solutions in an alternative format? The Eye for and Eye format is already outlined so that would be one direction. Other rule variations such as my Exhaust Solution and Joe's Scaefer solution both prove to be fun building and gameplay challenges. I have tested all 3 of these rule sets enjoying them all in the past. If even one person is interested, we can start pioneering these as alternative formats. The EaE format is very different fundamentally from the core rules people are used to which is why I shelved it seeing it as too radical of an option for existing players. Josh is correct however in the fact it retains Redemption identity while enhancing the interation of the original gameplay loop.
If anyone wants to join me on pursuing these alternative formats please let me know.

Thank you for your time,
Jared Strauss

I would like to see a modified version of this for Redemption where the players go through the phases simultaneously. There would still be some aspects of taking turns but you can't get around that without making for an insane shared battle phase. This would sort of eliminate rounds because each turn is shared with exception of battle phase.

Good afternoon Sean,
This sametime concept is something I have been tinkering with in my own game design. One of the alternative formats I spoke about in the OP is very similar to the idea you wrote about! In the Eye for an Eye format, interation is cranked up to 11 to allow both players to draw and take actions on each others turns. The idea is not fully fleshed out and I am looking for others to help me pioneer the format rule set and meta. Please take a look when you have the chance: https://www.cactusforums.com/game-play-variations/eye-for-an-eye-alternative-redemption-format/

Thank you,
Jared