Author Topic: The 25th Redemption CCG National Tournament (01-03 Aug 2019, TN) (Read 43517 times)

Red Dragon Thorn · « **Reply #100 on:** May 27, 2019, 02:29:52 PM »

Quote from: Cnakeeyes on May 27, 2019, 02:10:02 PM

Quote from: Bobbert on May 27, 2019, 02:04:38 PM
I'm not sure I like the idea of anyone who wants to do well in T12P having to be okay with not playing Teams/Multi/Sealed. It means that anyone who's excited for Saturday's categories (and/or they stand a chance at doing well for RNRS) has incentive to not play to their best ability on Friday, which is something that I think we want to avoid. On the other side of the spectrum, I for one know I would be very put out if my Teams partner and I were planning decks/strategies beforehand and he managed to make top cut. I'd be happy for him but at the same time be incredibly disappointed that we didn't get to play Teams together.

In principle I love 4 and 5, but I'm not sure I like this suggestion for implementing them.
This is exactly what I meant. I like the 2 day options just not the potential forfeiting a 3rd category. You would pretty much be telling those who do good Friday "you did good now you get to play less"

@Cnakeeyes - If we play best of 3, you'll get plenty of games in.

@Bobbert - Or you could play the category that's against T1. I will admit the teams conundrum is more problematic

Cnakeeyes · « **Reply #101 on:** May 27, 2019, 02:45:40 PM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on May 27, 2019, 02:29:52 PM

Quote from: Cnakeeyes on May 27, 2019, 02:10:02 PM
Quote from: Bobbert on May 27, 2019, 02:04:38 PM
I'm not sure I like the idea of anyone who wants to do well in T12P having to be okay with not playing Teams/Multi/Sealed. It means that anyone who's excited for Saturday's categories (and/or they stand a chance at doing well for RNRS) has incentive to not play to their best ability on Friday, which is something that I think we want to avoid. On the other side of the spectrum, I for one know I would be very put out if my Teams partner and I were planning decks/strategies beforehand and he managed to make top cut. I'd be happy for him but at the same time be incredibly disappointed that we didn't get to play Teams together.

In principle I love 4 and 5, but I'm not sure I like this suggestion for implementing them.
This is exactly what I meant. I like the 2 day options just not the potential forfeiting a 3rd category. You would pretty much be telling those who do good Friday "you did good now you get to play less"

@Cnakeeyes - If we play best of 3, you'll get plenty of games in.

@Bobbert - Or you could play the category that's against T1. I will admit the teams conundrum is more problematic

not if you lose 1st round. I'm just saying I don't like the 2day idea and why. If 2 day wins I'll be playing t2 for the soul reason of I want to play a Saturday category, and I'm able to flip to that. Some other people can't and if they make top cut could have to drop from a category they want to play Saturday.

I'm not trying to sound like I'm throwing a fit, I really don't care 1 way or the other. Every year ive gone it's always been a last minute which category am I playing so this would just simplify 1 day for me.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #102 on:** May 27, 2019, 04:32:36 PM »

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on May 27, 2019, 01:44:15 PM

Quote from: TheHobbit on May 27, 2019, 01:34:25 PM
Why can't top cut go until 11pm on Friday night with (option #4)? All the people that make top cut stay up late anyways and go out to eat. Then they can play on Saturday. If you want to extend it to Saturday it should be double elimination AND 2/3 right?

That is not at all accurate.

I agree that the bolded statement is completely false, yet the generalization is absolutely true. If you want to go to bed before it's over either lose or stay up later. All my intentions are coming out now they were trapped in my subconscious

I am good enough at type 1 to have hope to make top cut yet realistically, I know I will likely lose and play against a watered down TEAMS field

OR

I like #5 better than #4, though my bias is I am bad at TEAMS, T1, Multi, and sealed, played double eliminations 2/3 the next day.

#6 is my personal favorite. Extend the amount of people that get into top cut and play normal swiss from there. That way it is a bit longer but people can get rest if they want to AND play categories the next day.

The Guardian · « **Reply #103 on:** May 28, 2019, 10:14:13 AM »

Quote from: Bobbert on May 27, 2019, 02:04:38 PM

I'm not sure I like the idea of anyone who wants to do well in T12P having to be okay with not playing Teams/Multi/Sealed. It means that anyone who's excited for Saturday's categories (and/or they stand a chance at doing well for RNRS) has incentive to not play to their best ability on Friday, which is something that I think we want to avoid. On the other side of the spectrum, I for one know I would be very put out if my Teams partner and I were planning decks/strategies beforehand and he managed to make top cut. I'd be happy for him but at the same time be incredibly disappointed that we didn't get to play Teams together.

In principle I love 4 and 5, but I'm not sure I like this suggestion for implementing them.

This sums up my thoughts as well.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #104 on:** May 28, 2019, 10:53:33 AM »

Quote from: Bobbert on May 27, 2019, 02:04:38 PM

I'm not sure I like the idea of anyone who wants to do well in T12P having to be okay with not playing Teams/Multi/Sealed.

The decision is a value judgement. No one--no matter what their standing--is going to be forced to play in a top cut if they would prefer to play another event. Switching to a two day format means only that each individual player would need to make a personal decision as to whether participating in a possibly "fairer" top cut is worth forgoing playing in a third event.

Quote

In principle I love 4 and 5, but I'm not sure I like this suggestion for implementing them.

Just to be clear, given time constraints that are not a lot of options for implementing a more involved top cut. The only other option would be to curtail the number of meaningful rounds in the qualification (from seven--for swiss plus single elimination top cut--down to four or five).

The Guardian · « **Reply #105 on:** May 28, 2019, 11:35:19 AM »

Quote

Switching to a two day format means only that each individual player would need to make a personal decision as to whether participating in a possibly "fairer" top cut is worth forgoing playing in a third event.

Except it's not completely a personal decision when you factor in the issue of TEAMS--then the decision affects two people.

If a player simply had to choose between playing Top Cut Day 2 and playing Sealed or T1 MP, then I would be more inclined to go with the two day option.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #106 on:** May 28, 2019, 11:56:58 AM »

To clarify one thing rather quickly. This two-day tournament idea has been around for several years now, but never implemented or even brought up, unless I missed it, because of the potential "controversy" or difficulty of making it work for everyone. The main reason it is being presented here is that someone mentioned it to me and I like the idea but wasn't sure how to "make it work." So please keep the conversation moving and going forward! I honestly feel a two-day system is better for people involved in top cut, to relieve extra stress and fatigue. But to do it we have to figure out a way that works for most. Obviously, we aren't going to do anything 100% of people agree with, but if we can find a happy medium and then adjust future schedules to make it work, then we can basically count this as a win! If we can make it work this year, then we have an even bigger win. If we decide to stick with what we have always done or been doing, then we simply had a good conversation and move on. No loss in talking about it!

Sean · « **Reply #107 on:** May 28, 2019, 01:33:40 PM »

In order to accommodate the additional day, has anyone ever considered playing Sunday afternoon? I know this poses a logistical issue with morning service and most likely configuration of the church to accommodate the tournament but just putting it out there.

Also makes it hard for people to get back for whatever they need to get back to on Monday.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #108 on:** May 28, 2019, 01:55:10 PM »

Quote from: Sean on May 28, 2019, 01:33:40 PM

In order to accommodate the additional day, has anyone ever considered playing Sunday afternoon? I know this poses a logistical issue with morning service and most likely configuration of the church to accommodate the tournament but just putting it out there.

Also makes it hard for people to get back for whatever they need to get back to on Monday.

I would assume the reason this has never happened is due to the church not wanting people to have people sleeping there the night before the service so that it could be put back "in order" for the service itself. It would also make everyone who drives have to wait an extra day to head home. That would cause a potential issue for people carpooling as people who aren't playing on Sunday afternoon would only be at the tournament because one of their people is. It would also potentially cause people to have to take another day off from work due to the late start home.

While I play Redemption on Sunday afternoons with my playgroup and students during the summers, and some during the school year and the church wouldn't have a problem with the afternoon play. I would not be able to have anyone stay Saturday night at the church due to the reasons listed above, plus due to the fact I only get away with people sleeping at the church in the first place because they really like me!

The Schaefer · « **Reply #109 on:** May 28, 2019, 03:47:33 PM »

While many other TCGs have 2 days for tournaments there are some differences which makes me feel that currently Redemption shouldn't implement it.

First is that the playing field is larger. For MTG for instance in larger tournaments they play 12+ rounds to determine day 2 players which is usually a top 32 or 64. I know Yugioh also has a top 32/64 system but I'm not completely sure on the number of swiss rounds. Redemption doesnt have that kind of need for a top 64 or 32 and so it's hard to justify a 2 day format based on that.

2nd is that Redemption has multiple competitive formats at tournaments which is not the case for most of the other TCGs. MTG has multiple competitive formats but they usually arent all at one tournament or you choose between 2. They also have an interesting TEAMs based format where usually 3/4 people are to a team and each chooses a format to play for the tournament and Team scores are based on the combined scores of each. In order to accommodate players playing multiple formats over 3 days though is incredibly difficult and not everyone will be happy. T12P is obviously the most popular and has the largest playerbase but trying to extend the format to 2 days will cut into their other playing options which somewhat punishes players for doing well. Worse if they do get into the top cut and don't end up placing they may well lose an opportunity to place in another category which they had a good chance at. Teams further complicates the issue with top cut affecting other players.

The biggest reasons I can be in favor of going to 2 days for T12P is for "fairness" which to me if were talking that we need to discuss lunch as it's not right that playing a long game right before lunch can leave you less than 10mins for lunch where as a quick game can get 45mins to an hr. (Happened to me more than once at Nats so we cant say it doesnt happen) but besides that I dont see how having that extra day is any more fair than just extending top cut play after say a dinner break or something as it still offers a break and the 2 day system offers unfair things to the players who do well and their teammates.

The other reason to go to 2 days in my mind is yo extend top cut which I'm not sure is necessarily needed.

However I do think that a 2 day system could be implemented if categories were eliminated or moved. Cutting categories allows for more time for formats however it does leave some downtime that may need to be filled for those that dont make top cut.

I do think though a potential future solution (although not implementable this year) would be to hold multiple National level events but offer different categories at each. This would create a problem for those who cannot afford to travel to multiple events if they wanted to play them all but logistically the events would be smoother and players would could not make one event may be able to make the other. Granted I'm not sure that This is the direction the Redemption community would want to go.

There will always be some issues and issues that will leave people unhappy but it's just a question of what are were looking for out of Redemption National level events and what is the best way to achieve that goal. If it's to be a one stop big event for everything 2 day T12P doesnt make sense to me as other categories suffer.

Sorry for the rant. Just thought I would explain why I feel the way I do especially compared to other games.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #110 on:** May 28, 2019, 04:43:11 PM »

Quote from: The Schaefer on May 28, 2019, 03:47:33 PM

The biggest reasons I can be in favor of going to 2 days for T12P is for "fairness" which to me if were talking that we need to discuss lunch as it's not right that playing a long game right before lunch can leave you less than 10mins for lunch where as a quick game can get 45mins to an hr. (Happened to me more than once at Nats so we cant say it doesnt happen) but besides that I dont see how having that extra day is any more fair than just extending top cut play after say a dinner break or something as it still offers a break and the 2 day system offers unfair things to the players who do well and their teammates.

Just a stab at explaining why a two-day format would be more "fair"...

Despite the fact that top tier players all build their decks to be as consistent as possible, everyone has had games where pure randomness in a bad draw (or whatever) has cost them a game. A single elimination tournament (which current top cut is) is inherently going to be most susceptible to a bad (i.e., "unfair") result due to a bad draw. The way to make the top cut more "fair" is to get rid of the one-and-done format--hence the options for best of 3 play and double elimination.

Unfortunately a best of three top cut will simply not fit in an evening session after a dinner break with any reasonable ending time (for example an 8-player best of three top cut would require time to be set aside for 9 "rounds" of play) while an 8-player top cut with double elimination would require 5 "rounds" to be set aside. If you make the cut after seven rounds this would mean either a 16- or 12-round day. Sixteen rounds is pretty clearly beyond the reasonable limit. Twelve rounds *may* be doable, but--to be completely fair--I have been a strong proponent of a double elimination top cut so I may be undervaluing how hard it would be to add two games at the end what is already a long day.

jbeers285 · « **Reply #111 on:** May 28, 2019, 04:46:16 PM »

It’s probably too late this year but I’d propose that top cut qualifiers who play a second day cut should receive an awesome alt border card of some type. I also believe they should still qualify for the third copy of the nats promo.

I was originally a 2/3 guy but I think I can get on bored with a double elimination. The only stipulation I would have is that the person who makes the final without losing any games should have to be beaten twice by the player who
Climbs back through the losers bracket.

The Schaefer · « **Reply #112 on:** May 28, 2019, 05:02:41 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 28, 2019, 04:43:11 PM

Quote from: The Schaefer on May 28, 2019, 03:47:33 PM
The biggest reasons I can be in favor of going to 2 days for T12P is for "fairness" which to me if were talking that we need to discuss lunch as it's not right that playing a long game right before lunch can leave you less than 10mins for lunch where as a quick game can get 45mins to an hr. (Happened to me more than once at Nats so we cant say it doesnt happen) but besides that I dont see how having that extra day is any more fair than just extending top cut play after say a dinner break or something as it still offers a break and the 2 day system offers unfair things to the players who do well and their teammates.
Just a stab at explaining why a two-day format would be more "fair"...

Despite the fact that top tier players all build their decks to be as consistent as possible, everyone has had games where pure randomness in a bad draw (or whatever) has cost them a game. A single elimination tournament (which current top cut is) is inherently going to be most susceptible to a bad (i.e., "unfair") result due to a bad draw. The way to make the top cut more "fair" is to get rid of the one-and-done format--hence the options for best of 3 play and double elimination.

Unfortunately a best of three top cut will simply not fit in an evening session after a dinner break with any reasonable ending time (for example an 8-player best of three top cut would require time to be set aside for 9 "rounds" of play) while an 8-player top cut with double elimination would require 5 "rounds" to be set aside. If you make the cut after seven rounds this would mean either a 16- or 12-round day. Sixteen rounds is pretty clearly beyond the reasonable limit. Twelve rounds *may* be doable, but--to be completely fair--I have been a strong proponent of a double elimination top cut so I may be undervaluing how hard it would be to add two games at the end what is already a long day.

While there is merit to best of 3 format system the system as a whole should change to be best of 3 with a top cut with a 2 day system. At least imo for "fairness" to be achieved. Besides that though it's still completely unfair to do so with multiple events running over the 3 days where other formats have to suffer. Then if we want to talk "fairness" what about "fairness" in those other events? Bad draws happen in every format.

Best 2 of 3 works well for MTG and YuGiOh because they can play games quickly for 1 but also sideboards (much different than the reseve) can completely change the games. Redemption doesn't have that nor is it resource based so you cant be screwed by resource or blamed getting hosed by a card due to not being able to beat a card as you have access to all cards in your list every game. Soul drought is the only thing you can really get screwed on and if that is beating you especially with the measures taken in recent sets to alleviate this in constructed formats it's more of a deckbuilding error more often than not imo. Also concerning consistency, decks have fail rates and that's part of the game. If your decks fail rate is to the point that you need a best of 3 then your consistency may need to be looked at in deck building.

I'm not saying theres not merit to best of 3 but due to Redemption being Resourceless' sideboards being non existent, and consistency more a deckbuilding factor and part of the game imo I dont think its truly merited in Redemption.

I could see double elimination before best of 3 quite easily but I think if that were the issue then we would need to play double elimination from the get go and move towards a top cut which would likely still require a day 2 but may not depending on field size. Also other formats besides T1 would need to be looked at for "fairness". Just cause it's the biggest doesnt mean it should be any "fairer" than the others.

The Guardian · « **Reply #113 on:** May 28, 2019, 05:09:14 PM »

I know I've posted a couple times already, but I do feel pretty strongly about this so I'll add a few more thoughts in case anyone is as of yet undecided.

First, I will be the first to say that as much as anyone, I would like to have as fair a system as possible in determining a winner. The pros and cons of Swiss vs Top Cut have all been discussed before, so I am not going to delve into that, but I would ask that we also consider the "fairness" (or lack thereof) to TEAMS players whose partners end up making Top Cut. Perhaps this is not true of all pairs of teammates who play each year at Nationals, but I know that my brother Jayden and I (who have been TEAMS partners since the 2013-14 season) have invested many, many hours of prep and practice each year that we decided to take a shot at the TEAMS event. If one of us were to play T1 and make Day 2 of Top Cut, which is not an easy accomplishment, I know it would be very hard for either of us to pass up that opportunity, but I believe either of us would because we committed to playing the TEAMS event with each other. I understand that some people might be in the mindset of "If I don't make Top Cut, I'll just find a friend who wants to do TEAMS and we'll build decks the night before" and there is absolutely nothing wrong with having that plan. However, that is not the case for all players. Now for me, I can decide to play T2 MP on Friday and even though I am considering playing T1 2P this year, it wouldn't be that big of a deal to pass on it because I really enjoy T2 MP, (especially at Nationals). However, for people who simply would not enjoy T2 MP, but are planning to do TEAMS, that would put them in a really tough spot.

My second point is about the perceived lack of fairness in the current systems (1 Day Swiss and 1 Day Top Cut). Have there ever been deserving players who got knocked out of winning/placing because of the system used in a given year? Absolutely. All the way back in 2005, my brother Jonathan took 2nd place at the largest T1 2P event in Redemption history even though he and the first place finisher were both 9-1 and my brother had won the head to head match-up between them. At the time, LS differential was the first tie-breaker and that determined the winner. Last year, Josiah B lost in the first round of Top Cut and so even though he was still technically in 3rd place (points-wise) after the first round of Top Cut, he was knocked out. In 2017 Josh K went from 1st to 4th place after a final round loss in Swiss style. My point is that "deserving" players miss out pretty much every year.

That being said, can anyone really point to a year that had an undeserving winner or top 3 placer? No matter which system was used, the eventual winner has always had several tough match-ups to get through even if there have been some years (in Swiss style) where the first and second place player did not play (such as 2017 with JD and Josh P). Each year, there are several players with a highly tuned decks who play extremely well throughout the tournament and would be deserving of winning, but there can only be one winner each year.

For the reasons above, I believe it is best to keep T1 2P to a one day event (either Swiss or Top Cut), and seeing as how most people seem to prefer Top Cut of some kind, I voted for the 1 Day Top Cut option.

jbeers285 · « **Reply #114 on:** May 28, 2019, 05:17:20 PM »

I find value in eliminating the top 8, 12 or 16 players from the third day field. It gives other players a chance to place or win who otherwise might not have that opportunity.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #115 on:** May 28, 2019, 06:06:19 PM »

Quote from: jbeers285 on May 28, 2019, 04:46:16 PM

I was originally a 2/3 guy but I think I can get on bored with a double elimination. The only stipulation I would have is that the person who makes the final without losing any games should have to be beaten twice by the player who Climbs back through the losers bracket.

Absolutely. Otherwise it is not a double elimination!

Quote from: The Schaefer on May 28, 2019, 05:02:41 PM

Then if we want to talk "fairness" what about "fairness" in those other events? Bad draws happen in every format.

Yes, but bad draws have the largest impact on T1-2P.

Anyway I understand what you are saying and do not disagree with much of it.

Quote

I could see double elimination before best of 3 quite easily but I think if that were the issue then we would need to play double elimination from the get go and move towards a top cut

This I do disagree with. Having folks come to Nationals only to have a quarter of them done playing after the second round is a really, really bad idea. Swiss is a great way to run a qualifying event... arguably much better than any form of elimination event.

The Schaefer · « **Reply #116 on:** May 28, 2019, 06:19:38 PM »

Quote

Quote
I could see double elimination before best of 3 quite easily but I think if that were the issue then we would need to play double elimination from the get go and move towards a top cut
This I do disagree with. Having folks come to Nationals only to have a quarter of them done playing after the second round is a really, really bad idea. Swiss is a great way to run a qualifying event... arguably much better than any form of elimination event.

You're completely right here. I was mostly just looking at time wise at that point. Ultimately I am not in favor of a day 2 at this point in time due to the downsides, but if they can be eliminated I would be in favor of a double elimination for day 2. Regardless I think top cut is the way to go.

The Guardian · « **Reply #117 on:** May 28, 2019, 06:22:18 PM »

Quote from: jbeers285 on May 28, 2019, 05:17:20 PM

I find value in eliminating the top 8, 12 or 16 players from the third day field. It gives other players a chance to place or win who otherwise might not have that opportunity.

That's a fair point (and one of the reasons I think it's better to pair T1 2P and T2 2P, but that's a different topic), but in my opinion Sealed and T1 MP are already categories that are more wide open in terms of who has a chance to win.

For the record, I would also support a 2 Day T1 2P tournament (especially if the field was 50+ people) with 1 day of Swiss and then 1 day of Double Elimination if the schedule were such that it didn't impact TEAMS. Perhaps that is something we could look at for future years.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #118 on:** May 28, 2019, 07:33:28 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on May 28, 2019, 06:22:18 PM

Quote from: jbeers285 on May 28, 2019, 05:17:20 PM
I find value in eliminating the top 8, 12 or 16 players from the third day field. It gives other players a chance to place or win who otherwise might not have that opportunity.

That's a fair point (and one of the reasons I think it's better to pair T1 2P and T2 2P, but that's a different topic), but in my opinion Sealed and T1 MP are already categories that are more wide open in terms of who has a chance to win.

For the record, I would also support a 2 Day T1 2P tournament (especially if the field was 50+ people) with 1 day of Swiss and then 1 day of Double Elimination if the schedule were such that it didn't impact TEAMS. Perhaps that is something we could look at for future years.

What if we play teams the night of Day 2 of T1 2P this year? And then in the future play TEAMS on Wednesday night?

OR

Top cut of T1 2 player on Day 2 is TEAMS? The people that are the best at type 1 two player are the best at TEAMS let's end the facade ahahaha Are you keeping track of all our new ideas Fachman?

Bobbert · « **Reply #119 on:** May 28, 2019, 07:57:02 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on May 28, 2019, 07:33:28 PM

What if we play teams the night of Day 2 of T1 2P this year? And then in the future play TEAMS on Wednesday night?

So, our solution to not making the top T12P players play while exhausted is to make everyone (including many of those players) play a different format while exhausted?

Gabe · « **Reply #120 on:** May 28, 2019, 08:03:46 PM »

I’m certain that some of the regular officials (judges, mc, etc) do not want to spend our nights running another official event. Part of the draw to make it to Nats every year is to see distant friends again. That includes time for socializing and meals together.

I love a good competition as much as anyone but it needs to be balanced with other things that are important too.

The Guardian · « **Reply #121 on:** May 28, 2019, 08:25:46 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on May 28, 2019, 08:03:46 PM

I’m certain that some of the regular officials (judges, mc, etc) do not want to spend our nights running another official event. Part of the draw to make it to Nats every year is to see distant friends again. That includes time for socializing and meals together.

I love a good competition as much as anyone but it needs to be balanced with other things that are important too.

Agreed. The unofficial events (Type Half, Iron Man, Cube Draft) are perfect for the evening time for those who want to keep playing, but official events should end before dinner time.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #122 on:** May 29, 2019, 12:12:17 AM »

Quote from: TheHobbit on May 28, 2019, 07:33:28 PM

Are you keeping track of all our new ideas Fachman?

Nope! But I’m loving the discussion.

TheJaylor · « **Reply #123 on:** May 29, 2019, 01:54:08 AM »

As someone who is not planning to play T1-2P and would love to give more people a reason to play T2-MP, if Justin does end up playing T1-2P and cuts, I don't wanna be the reason he doesn't go for the win.

Even before the tournament he has to decide if he wants to play T1 and risk cutting when we're planning to play Teams, which may make it so he doesn't play T1 even though he would like to for some weird reason.

Anyway, this isn't meant to be about us, I'm just using it as an example that can be applied generally. Then again, I don't know if anyone else out there is really putting enough effort into prepping for Teams to make not playing T1 worth it, but at least a few people have noted that they still want to play three categories regardless.

Josh · « **Reply #124 on:** May 29, 2019, 08:05:30 AM »

Quote from: TheJaylor on May 29, 2019, 01:54:08 AM

I don't know if anyone else out there is really putting enough effort into prepping for Teams to make not playing T1 worth it, but at least a few people have noted that they still want to play three categories regardless.

I am. I voted for option 2 because I will be playing Teams no matter what.

News:

Author Topic: The 25th Redemption CCG National Tournament (01-03 Aug 2019, TN) (Read 43517 times)

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13