Author Topic: Thoughts about Changing the Structure of How the Game is Run (Read 15586 times)

Warrior_Monk · « **on:** August 12, 2012, 04:26:40 PM »

This is in Off-Topic because we have no general Redemption forum and no real good fit for it.

So after some talk at Nationals, and previously on the forums, there are many problems with this game, but I’d like to focus more on how the game is being run as a whole. I’ll outline a few potential solutions.

Right now the only system we truly have is the Elder system. I’d like to split this group up into more specifically geared into specific things.
-The first would be the ruling group, composed of people like Gabe, Jordan, and RDT, who know the rules extremely well. I suggest a test be composed of tricky rulings that you have to pass, because frankly, some of the current elders have made really bad rulings at times. They should not have the authority to make official rulings. I understand this would be tricky in some regions, but perhaps you could have a training program, or (somehow) a written guide to avoid bad rulings. We could also have a judge on-call weekly for difficult rulings, but that would be extremely difficult with so few great judges, who are undoubtedly very busy.
-The second group would be promoters/contributers. People like Roy, Bill, and Michallyzian (you know who I mean...) who bring joy and expand the game. I’m not sure what their role would be, but we already have Elders like that, so it seems silly to exclude them.
-The third group would be Card Creators. Pretty self explanatory, these people would be creative people who create innovative and balanced cards, and from there they would go to the fourth group.
-The fourth group would be the playtesters, who make sure the cards are indeed balanced. These people would have to be very active in playing, very good at deck building, great players, and careful about who they play with, so as not to let too many people in on the new cards. They would also test out new potential rules.

The division between card creators and playtesters would let fewer people know about what cards are being put in the new set, as well as avoid one person pushing cards through because they created them because, let’s face it, we all have an affinity for our own creations.

I also propose that there has to be 2 months notice for any rules can be made or changed. This allows for:
-Greater awareness of new rules. This gives time for people to hear about the rules.
-More time to properly adjust. If we know it’s coming, it won’t be as much of a reaction because our decks are suddenly illegal. We can playtest in time.
-A brief period of time to Vito the new ruling if somebody comes up with something broken that the rulers and playtesters missed.
-No chance for in-tournament changes. Yes, I’m referring to the CBP soul ruling at Nationals.

I had something else, but I forgot. I’ll edit if should I remember. I’m also expecting a thread later on improving the competitive aspect, but I would think that’s separate.

Thoughts? Disagreements?

Red · « **Reply #1 on:** August 12, 2012, 04:37:09 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on August 12, 2012, 04:26:40 PM

-No chance for in-tournament changes. Yes, I’m referring to the CBP soul ruling at Nationals.

I had something else, but I forgot. I’ll edit if should I remember. I’m also expecting a thread later on improving the competitive aspect, but I would think that’s separate.

Thoughts? Disagreements?

CBP soul ruling at nats? lolwut?

Master KChief · « **Reply #2 on:** August 12, 2012, 04:37:27 PM »

Yes to the long time needed division of duties. Even bigger yes to a required Judge test, preferably with different tiers as well (ie. Level 1, 2, 3 Judge, Head Judge).

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #3 on:** August 12, 2012, 04:38:55 PM »

Quote from: Red on August 12, 2012, 04:37:09 PM

Quote from: Ring Wraith on August 12, 2012, 04:26:40 PM
-No chance for in-tournament changes. Yes, I’m referring to the CBP soul ruling at Nationals.
CBP soul ruling at nats? lolwut?

They ruled that the FBTN soul negated CBP. This was how it worked last year, but changed around January, yet at nats they overturned the ruling.

Quote from: Master KChief on August 12, 2012, 04:37:27 PM

Yes to the long time needed division of duties. Even bigger yes to a required Judge test, preferably with different tiers as well (ie. Level 1, 2, 3 Judge, Head Judge).

Definitely like the idea of different tiers.

Red · « **Reply #4 on:** August 12, 2012, 04:39:58 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on August 12, 2012, 04:38:55 PM

Quote from: Red on August 12, 2012, 04:37:09 PM
Quote from: Ring Wraith on August 12, 2012, 04:26:40 PM
-No chance for in-tournament changes. Yes, I’m referring to the CBP soul ruling at Nationals.
CBP soul ruling at nats? lolwut?
They ruled that the FBTN soul negated CBP. This was how it worked last year, but changed around January, yet at nats they overturned the ruling.

Quote from: Master KChief on August 12, 2012, 04:37:27 PM
Yes to the long time needed division of duties. Even bigger yes to a required Judge test, preferably with different tiers as well (ie. Level 1, 2, 3 Judge, Head Judge).
Definitely like the idea of different tiers.

That's retarded and shouldn't have been done. And I agree with all of the splits as well.

Redoubter · « **Reply #5 on:** August 12, 2012, 05:25:42 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on August 12, 2012, 04:38:55 PM

Quote from: Red on August 12, 2012, 04:37:09 PM
Quote from: Ring Wraith on August 12, 2012, 04:26:40 PM
-No chance for in-tournament changes. Yes, I’m referring to the CBP soul ruling at Nationals.
CBP soul ruling at nats? lolwut?
They ruled that the FBTN soul negated CBP. This was how it worked last year, but changed around January, yet at nats they overturned the ruling.

This was an incorrect ruling, and was later corrected. Nothing was actually overturned, and there is agreement now that SA that grant CB- to other cards are CBN. It was just an incorrect ruling, not a change in the rules. Just wanted to make sure that is clear.

However, this situation with the wrong ruling actually gives more credence to this sort of thread. The judges/elders involved in the ruling were not aware of the change, for a couple of reasons.

First, not all of the elders are on the boards constantly (let's face it, they have lives), and they will miss threads. This wouldn't be a problem, except that we expect them to know everything that has ever been posted. Fair? No. But major ruling threads are getting missed by those who are making the important calls in-game, and that is a problem.

Second, the thread in question (which can be found HERE) made a rather significant change to the game rules. Honestly, it was needed and the right thing to do for consistency and simplicity of the game, but it was just like any other thread in that board. Some elders could very well miss that thread and the ruling, even though there was a lot of agreement and no dissent. This sort of thing needs to find its way into something like this thread, at the very least.

Third, there is nowhere in the 'rules' where this ruling was put. As I said above, there are threads to keep ruling changes, but that is also insufficient. We need to update the rules, as in the REG, and keep it updated. Otherwise, people who aren't on the boards all the time or happen to miss something will make the wrong ruling (as happened at Nats).

The elders are a great group of guys. They're helpful, honest, and willing to take the hit and judge instead of play. But some of them aren't the best on rules, just because of their inability to live on the boards (like some of us do). We need to implement a new system, or things like what happened at Nats (not just the ruling on CBP soul, there were other issues...) will continue, and will continue to cost competitive players games/placement.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #6 on:** August 12, 2012, 08:08:06 PM »

Let me clarify the roles of the groups you mentioned as I understand them from your post:

1. Judges/Rulemakers - official staff position for those tasked with updating and changing the rules of Redemption
2. Supporters/SuperHosts - pseudo-staff position for those who greatly help popularize the game in order to get their thoughts on related game decisions
3. Card Creators - official staff position for those specifically tasked with creating cards for new sets
4. Playtesters - pseudo-staff position for those tasked with playing with unreleased sets in order to check card balance and/or rule changes

Soundman2 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 13, 2012, 01:09:23 PM »

The elder is working but slowly, and yes they don't see every thing. But they should half to, we can make a ruling our selves. The trick to doing that is reading the cards then if that is confusing then you bring in an elder. We also need to get beater at posting card SA when asking a question.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #8 on:** August 13, 2012, 01:13:00 PM »

Quote from: Soundman2 on August 13, 2012, 01:09:23 PM

The elder is working but slowly, and yes they don't see every thing. But they should half to, we can make a ruling our selves. The trick to doing that is reading the cards then if that is confusing then you bring in an elder.

The problem is there are elders who don't rule correctly. I wasn't going to bring this up, but two elders at nats said that Lurking could interrupt Balaam, even though Balaam was preventing the interrupt. That's frankly unacceptable.

Soundman2 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 13, 2012, 01:21:41 PM »

Quote from: Westy on August 13, 2012, 01:13:00 PM

Quote from: Soundman2 on August 13, 2012, 01:09:23 PM
The elder is working but slowly, and yes they don't see every thing. But they should half to, we can make a ruling our selves. The trick to doing that is reading the cards then if that is confusing then you bring in an elder.
The problem is there are elders who don't rule correctly. I wasn't going to bring this up, but two elders at nats said that Lurking could interrupt Balaam, even though Balaam was preventing the interrupt. That's frankly unacceptable.

It can how ever what artifacts where up? What Lost Souls where in play? who was lurking played on? What forts where out?

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #10 on:** August 13, 2012, 01:29:30 PM »

Quote from: Soundman2 on August 13, 2012, 01:21:41 PM

Quote from: Westy on August 13, 2012, 01:13:00 PM
Quote from: Soundman2 on August 13, 2012, 01:09:23 PM
The elder is working but slowly, and yes they don't see every thing. But they should half to, we can make a ruling our selves. The trick to doing that is reading the cards then if that is confusing then you bring in an elder.
The problem is there are elders who don't rule correctly. I wasn't going to bring this up, but two elders at nats said that Lurking could interrupt Balaam, even though Balaam was preventing the interrupt. That's frankly unacceptable.

It can how ever what artifacts where up? What Lost Souls where in play? who was lurking played on? What forts where out?

Lurking was played on Balaam. Nothing was negating him.

Chris · « **Reply #11 on:** August 13, 2012, 01:39:06 PM »

Quote from: Soundman2 on August 13, 2012, 01:21:41 PM

Quote from: Westy on August 13, 2012, 01:13:00 PM
Quote from: Soundman2 on August 13, 2012, 01:09:23 PM
The elder is working but slowly, and yes they don't see every thing. But they should half to, we can make a ruling our selves. The trick to doing that is reading the cards then if that is confusing then you bring in an elder.
The problem is there are elders who don't rule correctly. I wasn't going to bring this up, but two elders at nats said that Lurking could interrupt Balaam, even though Balaam was preventing the interrupt. That's frankly unacceptable.

It can how ever what artifacts where up? What Lost Souls where in play? who was lurking played on? What forts where out?

I was in the game where this occurred, and after two Elders were going to rule it that Lurking could interrupt Balaam, a third Elder came in and flatly shot it down, siding with me.

Soundman2 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 13, 2012, 01:58:53 PM »

So it didn't work then?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #13 on:** August 13, 2012, 02:00:30 PM »

How could it work if multiple elders didn't even know the answer to an extremely basic ruling question?

Chris · « **Reply #14 on:** August 13, 2012, 02:10:04 PM »

I don't think these groups should all be mutually exclusive. Specifically, I think the top tier judges, maybe even the top two tiers, should be pulled directly from the card creators/playtesters. Additionally, if we're going to break it up, I see no reason not to expand the group of playtesters to include at least a few more of the major (10+ people) playgroups, so as to avoid overpowered cards in the future.

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #15 on:** August 13, 2012, 02:13:52 PM »

Quote

So after some talk at Nationals, and previously on the forums, there are many problems with this game, but I’d like to focus more on how the game is being run as a whole. I’ll outline a few potential solutions.

Many problems? Take a step back. How many cards are coming out that are broken and not getting counters? What won type 1 2p and t2 2p this year? A Unified Kingdom deck and a fbtnb deck...old school stuff, as great as the past sets have been, no complaints there from anyone, correct? How many rules have gone right at Nationals? Majority. The Elders made a mistake, and you make an entire thread stating how the game needs to be broken up, and all this stemmed from an incorrect ruling. How is this fair? Have you ever sat out of competitive play at a Nationals to solely and only judge? Have you had the responsibility of testing new cards, judging, not playing, and yet still getting bickered at? I understand what you are trying to say and I do believe some judges need to be more qualified, but if there is ever a debate at hand at Nationals, more Elders come to fix it. The only thing I do not like is how long it can take, and no time is giving back, which I understand why.
What other problems are there with the game? New cards every year at an affordable price. A place where you can voice such opinions and be heard. Tournaments year round long with dedicated players, and devoted workers behind the game.
The game, as a whole, is being run amazingly. How many broken decks, cards, and unfairness overall is there? The fact that it is a Christian Card Game still in print says something. Just take a step back and look at how it is being run, "as a whole".

Someone just posted- edit- About judges. So the few qualified to be top judges must take a test. Now they must exempt themselves from top tournaments due to their knowledge. Anyone want to volunteer for this, and do it consistently?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #16 on:** August 13, 2012, 02:18:46 PM »

Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2012, 02:10:04 PM

I don't think these groups should all be mutually exclusive. Specifically, I think the top tier judges, maybe even the top two tiers, should be pulled directly from the card creators/playtesters. Additionally, if we're going to break it up, I see no reason not to expand the group of playtesters to include at least a few more of the major (10+ people) playgroups, so as to avoid overpowered cards in the future.

The important thing I think is that no one should be creating cards AND playtesting them in a given year.

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on August 13, 2012, 02:13:52 PM

Someone just posted- edit- About judges. So the few qualified to be top judges must take a test. Now they must exempt themselves from top tournaments due to their knowledge. Anyone want to volunteer for this, and do it consistently?

Why would I volunteer to do something that's never happened before and has shown no signs of being considered? How would anyone know if I was qualified?

Chris · « **Reply #17 on:** August 13, 2012, 02:32:47 PM »

I don't believe that because the game doesn't have any extremely major flaws, we shouldn't strive to better it, or at least propose suggestions that would better it. I don't know if you were at Nats or not, but there was a lot of talk about this from quite a few different people, and the general consensus was that there are certain things, such as Westy outlined, that could be done better.

The question of judges is a tricky one, and the obvious solution is to adjust slightly the way large tournaments are run, so as to allow qualified judges to play and still be consulted. As far as I know, Gabe was consulted more than once last week even when he was in the middle of a game, and I see no reason why that cannot be done with more people, with a small grace period on time being awarded when that needs to happen. I just struggle with the idea that we care more about getting people out the door 30 minutes sooner than we do about having the best possible system for fairness. If we don't put a better system in place to make the game better for those of us who play it very competitively, then it's possible for some of us to start looking at other competitive card games.

Soundman2 · « **Reply #18 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:14:44 PM »

Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2012, 02:32:47 PM

The question of judges is a tricky one, and the obvious solution is to adjust slightly the way large tournaments are run, so as to allow qualified judges to play and still be consulted. As far as I know, Gabe was consulted more than once last week even when he was in the middle of a game, and I see no reason why that cannot be done with more people, with a small grace period on time being awarded when that needs to happen. I just struggle with the idea that we care more about getting people out the door 30 minutes sooner than we do about having the best possible system for fairness. If we don't put a better system in place to make the game better for those of us who play it very competitively, then it's possible for some of us to start looking at other competitive card games.

We do this all the time up here in MN.

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #19 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:15:48 PM »

Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2012, 02:32:47 PM

If we don't put a better system in place to make the game better for those of us who play it very competitively, then it's possible for some of us to start looking at other competitive card games.

That sounds like a threat...which is fine if you want this to be worked out on that level. But if there is anything I have learned in 15+ years of ministry it's that if all you bring is a problem without a commitment to be a part of the solution, then you are better off walking away. I think that the PTB are not blind to the situations being discussed on this thread. As a matter of fact I know they have had these types of discussions on their own side of the boards. I agree with Tyler that if you are not willing to volunteer for something you are suggesting then you have no business suggesting it in the first place.

With that being said, I applaud those who are willing to take time to judge as I have done that on occasion. In the "other competitive card games" there is a system of training judges. Those people have to not only finish an online test successfully, but they also have to complete a certain amount of hours of training under an official judge. The only thing I see that those games do to give players an incentive to become judges are "Judge only promo cards" which are highly sought after versions of already released cards. Perhaps the full art versions of the dominants would be a good starting point for "Judge only promo cards" as long as they were tournament legal.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #20 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:25:33 PM »

Quote from: uthminister [BR] on August 13, 2012, 03:15:48 PM

The only thing I see that those games do to give players an incentive to become judges are "Judge only promo cards" which are highly sought after versions of already released cards.

My name is YMT, and I approve this message.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #21 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:42:08 PM »

Since the set hasn't been sent to the printers yet maybe a few cards could be modified to include in the set for judges?

Kirk

lightningninja · « **Reply #22 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:51:51 PM »

The problems you outlined are well stated, but can't possibly be solved without more people playing this game. As someone who has played for over 12 years, I can say that this game CANNOT be run any better without more funding. If we could pay artists to do our own cards, host bigger tournaments, create foil cards, have people with full time jobs just testing/creating cards and focusing solely on that, yeah the game would be better. And we could have official judges. And yet with SO little funding this game still manages to continue, and is awesome.

After playing 4+ other card games, this one is still the most balanced/strategic I have yet played. No other game tries for balance, they try for money. Play yu-gi-oh for just a TINY bit and tell me you're not 1. frustrated with ridiculous, stupid rule changes just to make certain cards very expensive/wanted and/or 2. sick of spending so much money just to have a chance of being competitive and/or 3. still losing to the same decks that take over 50% of the top 32 slots at major YCS tournaments, with only 1-2 cards different from each other. You want a well-run, well-designed game run by leaders that listen to their players? That's Redemption. And it can't really get a whole lot better being the niche game it is.

Warrior_Monk · « **Reply #23 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:57:15 PM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on August 13, 2012, 02:13:52 PM

Quote
So after some talk at Nationals, and previously on the forums, there are many problems with this game, but I’d like to focus more on how the game is being run as a whole. I’ll outline a few potential solutions.
Many problems? Take a step back. How many cards are coming out that are broken and not getting counters? What won type 1 2p and t2 2p this year? A Unified Kingdom deck and a fbtnb deck...old school stuff, as great as the past sets have been, no complaints there from anyone, correct? How many rules have gone right at Nationals? Majority. The Elders made a mistake, and you make an entire thread stating how the game needs to be broken up, and all this stemmed from an incorrect ruling. How is this fair? Have you ever sat out of competitive play at a Nationals to solely and only judge? Have you had the responsibility of testing new cards, judging, not playing, and yet still getting bickered at? I understand what you are trying to say and I do believe some judges need to be more qualified, but if there is ever a debate at hand at Nationals, more Elders come to fix it. The only thing I do not like is how long it can take, and no time is giving back, which I understand why.
What other problems are there with the game? New cards every year at an affordable price. A place where you can voice such opinions and be heard. Tournaments year round long with dedicated players, and devoted workers behind the game.
The game, as a whole, is being run amazingly. How many broken decks, cards, and unfairness overall is there? The fact that it is a Christian Card Game still in print says something. Just take a step back and look at how it is being run, "as a whole".

Someone just posted- edit- About judges. So the few qualified to be top judges must take a test. Now they must exempt themselves from top tournaments due to their knowledge. Anyone want to volunteer for this, and do it consistently?

Okay, I shouldn't have said many. The game works, just not as well as it could, but I'm not going to get in a giant tangent on gameplay.

And I'd totally volunteer to do any of the roles I suggested, with the exception of perhaps the Supporters as I'm not gifted in that area. I don't understand the rules as well as I think the top judges should, but I was the main judge at our tournaments for the past 5-6 years, unless of course RDT was there. The problem is what Olijar said--these roles are not freely given to those who want it, you have to be chosen. Right now though, that choosing is for a specific reason (i.e. a supporter role), and yet they're given authority over everything else too (i.e. rulings). That's just silly.

I have other examples besides the Balaam/Lurking ruling, but I don't want to attack the elders, which is why I didn't want to mention the nats ruling. That's not what I'm trying to do here. I'm trying to have them focus on what they're gifted on. However, nats is where the most rulings should go right. I am concerned that certain elders will make bad rulings at other tournaments when there are not more elders to correct it. This obviously won't fix it entirely, but it may shift the ruling power into somebody who better deserves it.

Quote from: lightningninja on August 13, 2012, 03:51:51 PM

The problems you outlined are well stated, but can't possibly be solved without more people playing this game. As someone who has played for over 12 years, I can say that this game CANNOT be run any better without more funding. If we could pay artists to do our own cards, host bigger tournaments, create foil cards, have people with full time jobs just testing/creating cards and focusing solely on that, yeah the game would be better. And we could have official judges. And yet with SO little funding this game still manages to continue, and is awesome.

I agree that we simply have too few people who play. I would like to think this would help boost the game's player base because it will be better managed. All it's really changing is the Elder system into more specific gears. Add a few more people (but realistically more people test than just the "playtesters", such as the playtester's playgroup), and we'll be fine.

Soundman2 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 13, 2012, 04:25:33 PM »

So this is all about some bad rulings? Then what you are proposing will not fix that, because the elders are all human, and are not infallible they will get stuff wrong they will miss things.

News:

Author Topic: Thoughts about Changing the Structure of How the Game is Run (Read 15586 times)

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Warrior_Monk

Chris

Chris

Chris

Warrior_Monk