Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Exactly. Everyone is worried about something that won't happen, and for no good reason. Every other card game bans cards, and it hasn't spiraled out of control there either.

Also, Samuel draws 8+whatever TToD draws+another 3-5+ if you have Peace Treaty or Unified Kingdom in hand.

As to CM'ing Joseph in territory, Judah and Rachel laugh at your puny efforts.

I can't speak for anyone else, but it's my belief that Type Ban should only ban staple cards. New Jerusalem, Mayhem 2 and 3 Liners, etc. I can even see the banning of Uzzah. However, I think when you get into banning cards that only apply to a specific strategy, that can go down a dangerous road. Making a blanket statement that no CCG has ever spiraled out of control in the banning of cards is just untrue. I'm all for the banning of cards- I really am. However, I think it should be done with wisdom, and not, "this card is really good and should be banned". Both Joseph and Samuel can be countered if you put the effort into it. Neither Hero is protected from capture without outside help, and I've yet to encounter anyone who uses Obidiah's Caves in a Genesis deck. In fact, both Caves and Tassels are taken care of easily enough in the current meta. I just really don't see the problem, because while Joseph is a very, very good Hero, virtually any strategy that can be used to take him out can be applied to other offenses. There's no need to specialize a very specific way to take him out, because there are at least a few ways to do that while still remaining completely viable against other strategies.

Well I've played yugioh, and I can say them banning cards is by far my LEAST favorite aspect of the game. They make whatever cards they want that are totally OP to make money, and then ban them to make everyone start over in the next format. That's definitely not something Redemption should follow.

Keeping in mind that Cactus certainly won't be making overpowered cards just to make money, with the intention of banning them later, I disagree that that line isn't something Redemption do. I much, much prefer the banning of cards than having to balance out the game every single set. Redemption hasn't had an even vaguely balanced meta since Priests.

You guys should ask my friend John how he feels about Jace the Mindsculptor being banned the day after he bought 2 on ebay for a combined $210. Putting a blanket statement down saying that no CCG has ever failed because of banning cards is naive. Yeah MTG and YuGiOh are still around but there have been probably hundreds of thousands of CCGs and we have what 3 main ones? MTG and YuGiOh can survive banning because they have millions of players and are huge games, redemption isn't. Redemption is a niche game and when you start banning cards just because everyone uses them you start turning people off the game.   

It's not an official type, Cactus hasn't banned any cards, and furthermore, do either of you even play TB? Why do you care if a fun alternate game type you don't play bans more cards than you think it should?

Because I like the idea of Type Ban, and I think that it's the best compromise since Rob refuses to ban any cards for the normal game. I currently have no reason to play it, since the only reason I play RTS is to keep my skills and deck relatively sharp, which is hard when staple cards are missing from the games. However, should Type Ban ever become an official game type (which I can definitely see happening), it's likely that the direction it takes (banning staple cards as opposed to banning pieces of specific strategies) will be the same direction that those who are involved right now decide to take it. So obviously, I have a vested interest in how this particular debate pans out, as it can very well affect the way the game is played in a year or so. It's a less a matter of specific cards and more an issue of principal. If you stick to banning staple cards that ruin some of the variety, that's easily controlled and there's not a problem there. When you get into banning the heavy hitters of particular strategies, that does turn into a giant gray area.

Again, if you don't like it, don't play TB.

The exact same statement can apply to you. I understand your frustration with Joe and Sam, but seriously, they both are countered easily enough. I actually just made a well-thought out post on the subject, which you reduced to, "if you don't like it don't play". Joseph CAN be countered. Sam CAN be countered- and frankly, they can both be countered without going too terribly far out of your way.

Well I've played yugioh, and I can say them banning cards is by far my LEAST favorite aspect of the game. They make whatever cards they want that are totally OP to make money, and then ban them to make everyone start over in the next format. That's definitely not something Redemption should follow.

this makes no sense because konami has no control whatsoever over secondary market values of yugioh cards. if you want to blame anyone for overinflated prices of singles, blame the people that make them that way.

You guys should ask my friend John how he feels about Jace the Mindsculptor being banned the day after he bought 2 on ebay for a combined $210. Putting a blanket statement down saying that no CCG has ever failed because of banning cards is naive.

...what? you're trying to put the blame on mtg when clearly they had no hand in making your friend buy the singles in the first place?

also, last i checked, mtg has not failed from banning jace. he was OP, broken, insane..and banning him was the absolute best thing to do to keep a healthy meta and not one where games go to the person with the bigger wallet. again, the company making the cards have nothing to do with secondary market values, only people like me and you.

who makes the cards op? once again: players.

i feel exactly the same way, and thats the exact reason i havent started t2 yet. i also dont like the strict deck requirements, like 1/2 and 1/2 good to evil and a 100 card deck minimum, thats just utterly ridiculous.

idk, is drawing 9 and having ttod waiting in the wings broken?

technically its 3 as the search itself is a + 1, resulting in a +3 from deck. oak angel is pretty self explanatory, so thats another +2 there. the rest you have to get creative about.

As much as you use the slippery slope argument (which is a straight-up logical fallacy), you have decades of MTG and YuGiOh proving you wrong.

Decades? Yugioh has been out for 12 years, Magic has been out for 18. Unless we're adding those two together, you're getting ahead of yourself. Furthermore, comparing Yugioh and Magic to Redemption is unrealistic all it's own. You're talking about the best selling and oldest (respectively) CCGs that are still published regularly. You can't even begin to compare that to a niche Christian card game that is lucky to see 150 people at a national tournament. The entire economy is set up completely different between those two games and Redemption. Furthermore, you're quick to mention those two (again, the juggernauts of the CCG world), and neglect to mention the couple hundred other CCGs that have come and gone in the last two decades. I'm not saying any of them failed directly or indirectly due to banning cards, because I have no idea; I'm saying until you can do a thorough look at each CCG that was roughly the size Redemption is now, and look at the effects that doing so had on the impact of the gameplay itself, along with the sales of that game, saying "banning cards won't do anything" and citing Yugioh and Magic is not going to convince anyone of anything.

Keep in mind that I'm all for the banning of cards, but you do absolutely risk jumping on that slippery slope. Let's assume that you neuter both Sam and Joe: you now have the potential for the meta in Type Ban to be impacted sharply. Should that happen, it's entirely possible that another offense (or defense) will rise as the best in the Type Ban meta. You're then forced to have this same debate about eliminating a card to balance that particular strategy. Rinse, and repeat. You can deny that that will happen all you'd like, but that remains a serious possibility, no matter how much you'd like to dismiss it as a "logical fallacy". The way Redemption is set up, the meta will always centralize on one or two strategies. That's the way it's been for years now, ranging from the FBTN days to the Z Temple and TGT days to Disciples and TGT last year. There's really no reason to assume that doing the opposite (cutting cards instead of adding them) won't have the same effect.

I'm not arguing that Joseph isn't broken. I've been using Genesis for almost a month now, I'm well aware how strong an offense this is. I'm much, much less convinced that Sam is an issue, since Naz or even just a CM shuts him down entirely. I don't believe that either card is so incredibly overpowered that it's worth the risk that these predictions that this will just lead to more bannings will turn out to be correct. Again, I completely support Type Ban, and I'd love to see it as an official category in the coming years. That's exactly why I'm going to have my say and present my argument to see it shaped the way I'd like to see it, in the exact same way you're presenting your argument to see it shaped the way you would like to see it.

Genesis will still be the best offense without Joseph. It just won't be broken. A Purple offense (which is, at the core, what a Samuel offense is) will still be powerful without Samuel.

Please, please, please bear in mind nobody is talking about banning strategies. Joseph is broken, not Genesis as a whole. Samuel is a bit difficult because he himself isn't broken, but he allows a broken deck to run. I again firmly reject any idea of a slippery slope. In fact, there are currently fewer cards banned now then there were last round. The idea isn't to ban what's most powerful, but what's broken. Decentralization is an ideal, but not necessarily a goal. We don't want to bring all decks down to the same level of power by banning all the best cards, we simply want to make sure there are no cards so enormously overpowered that no other decks have a chance, and reduce staples. Joseph and Samuel are the only offenders.

Yeah, Sam is pretty stupid broken. You can technically deck out on turn 2 with a nice opener. With a perfect open you can be at 8 cards in deck before turn 2.