Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Those are definitely good points- may I ask though, what about just banning the 10 or so problematic cards and leave the rest for niche combos, nostalgia, collectors, etc?

Those are definitely good points- may I ask though, what about just banning the 10 or so problematic cards and leave the rest for niche combos, nostalgia, collectors, etc?

That's the thing, though; the longer those cards are left in the game, the harder it becomes to account for every interaction, especially when the new sets are developed. How many people thought about Ram's Horn when RoJ was developed? There's just so much backlog that's essentially worthless, but it takes only one obscure card to cause unnecessary headaches.

I don't see anything wrong with addressing those problem cards now, before any sort of set rotation. But I don't think it's reasonable/feasible to keep the rest of the older cards in circulation forever. It's time to move on from Highway/Stillness/False Peace/Momentum Change/Confusion (pr) shenanigans.

...what about just banning the 10 or so problematic cards and leave the rest for niche combos, nostalgia, collectors, etc?

If you make playing the cards a crime soon only criminals will play the cards.

I respectfully disagree with set rotation.  If the desire is to see more diversity in the cards that are being played, I would suggest that more practical solutions lie in the hands of the elders through rule changes.
I feel this is better, more versatile solution that can be changed if the desired outcomes are not realized the first time around ( or second,  or third. No harm in trying). I believe this can be done many ways but the easiest way would be adding additional deckbuilding restrictions. 
For example, if it's drawing that needs tempered, make a rule that you can only have X cards with a draw ability in a deck. This will force innovation and allow us control the tempo of the game we all love.
An alternative to deckbuilding restrictions would be to limit the number of cards with X ability that could be played each turn (or X anything for that matter). This solution has worked for us in the past to overcome several obstacles.
Amending rules would allow us to retain the rich diversity of Redemption while keeping the power/speed/meta in check and encourage revival of the awesome themes and deck strategies that have fallen to the wayside.

As the card pool becomes bigger, decks become faster and more homogenized. This is a fact. The only ways I know that exist to offset this are power creep, bans, and rotation. Until now Redemption has been using power creep. Now it must use one or both of the other two options.

Thanks for your input, Urijah! I for one like how you're thinking 

For example, the elders could come up with a new special ability that takes cards from play and puts them back into a players hand.  They could call it something like "boing" or "expel" because the cards hit the table and just bounce right back.  Actually, why not just call it Bounce.  Yeah, that's a good idea.

Bounce? I like that. Lets see if we can get it on a new card or two. 

Now it must use one or both of the other two options.

I'm curious about this statement. I followed everything else KtD was saying but I'm not sure I understand why we must use the other options now.

For those that dont want to fully read heres the short version. I fully support set rotation, I believe ban lists should be utilized to a larger extent, Redemption is a great unique game.

So as for why I all this stuff here my current line of thought. If I had to compare Redemption to other successful card games the one that is most similar is YuGiOh imo. Yugioh is mostly a resourceless game has a large card pool, no set rotation, and has numerous archetypes spanning a long length of time and power creep has definitely shifted what is good in yugioh. Redemption however is a VERY unique game in regards to content, how the game is played, structured, etc. So it's hard to fully compare it to just 1 specific game. Reason I bring up YuGiOh is to address how they deal with decks that get out of hand or problematic cards. YuGiOh has a massive Restricted/limited/semi-limited list. Multiple copies of cards only really affects T2 but in general YuGiOh shapes the power level of the format and deck diversity by controlling this list. If a deck gets too good for too long expect part of the engine or payoffs to be hit. Also decks that have served their time can have cards come off the list to reinvigorate those older strategies and get people excited about some of their older cards. The good thing about how YuGiOh approaches bannings is that deck diversity at the top level pretty much always has at least a handful of tier 1 decks and several tier 2 or viable competitive strategies because the egregious stuff gets taken out. Also unbannings are an exciting thing that keeps people interested even if those strategies have dwindled in power over the course of time. But YuGiOh also suffers in that it is a very quick high power leveled game, the ban list is massive and not even close to being all inclusive but is more or less just a means of answering the truly broken stuff and controlling the meta to keep things somewhat fresh.

So I like the aspects of trying to keep various strategies in check to promote deck diversity and also having the option to unban thing over time to reinvigorate strategies. Not much else though and I dont think simply copying what yugioh does will fix everything.

MtG answers its problems game wise with a combination of set rotation and bannings. This is closer to what I thing is best for Redemption but heres why. Set rotation doesn't explicitly mean you cant use older cards. This is usually because with set rotation new formats emerge usually splitting into a format with only newer stuff and then a format with everything. (MTG has multiple formats like this, hearthstone has this) For Redemption this would likely mean that due to all the existing formats one would likely have to be phased out (probably multi due to multiple reasons but that's another topic). Set rotation introduced the ability to control what complications exist in the format and deck diversity would in theory be less stagnant due to the limited card pool and rotating sets. The format that uses everything would basically be as things are now. However when bans are used in conjunction with rotation the older formats still have life and excitement.

That's why I believe something like this should be implemented for Redemption. It may be some trial and error but it always is. I dont believe the notion that if we just ban something something new will just take its spot is a viable reason to not ban cards. To me it's almost encouragement to ban things as it causes a meta shift to where we can figure out what is truly broken and not and if nothing else. Promote deck diversity while aiming to control power levels. Set Rotation to me is more of instituting a new format which I feel would be good for the game and for teaching especially.

Another option that intrigues me is how YuGiOh duel links handles ban lists. There are banned cards but for limiting cards there is a list of cards at 1 and a list at 2 and decks may only contain 1 card at 1 and 2 at 2 an no others. So it makes it to where you have to choose which card at 1 you want to use and which 2 2s you want cause you cant use others (similar to the dom/soul cap I guess). Its an interesting way to promote diversity without necessarily banning everything. Not sure how feasible that would be. But it's a thought.

Redemption is a truly unique game that really doesnt compare to any game. What we can do is look at the structure of other games and their formats and competitive scenes to try and come up with ideas to better Redemption. That format structuring stuff like this I feel is easier to discuss and come up with ideas for. Rules and gameplay structure stuff is the harder part.

Thanks for all who read this. I love this game and I love all of us who are passionate about it like yourselves.

I feel like the elders have been pretty clear that rotation is going to happen, just not exactly sure of the when.

Okay, it seems they set rotation is going to be a thing. Breaks my heart, btw. Having all of the cards at your disposal is part of what makes Redmeption the awesome game it is.

I still feel that rules can make it viable. For example, what if we made a rule that each player could use only two of each ability per round. A simple rule with huge consequences. Only two draw abilities. Two searches. Two band abilities. You would also have to be careful to plan for your defense that round. This would make a lot more strategies playable. Virtually all of the archetypes would be in the running again.

I am trying to keep the old-school feel of redemption. If we can't stop the train, maybe we can travel another way. What if Redemption had a new play type? I don't know... Vintage or Legacy T1. All cards are viable and the rules keep the governor on so that the game's original feel and pace are intact.

Another change that could be made is something like a tier system for deck-building purposes. For example, list the four most popular lost souls/dominants/forts in tier one and allow only three per deck. Something like that.  I feel like this is possible. This (or something like it) could work. 

What say you?

With the idea of set rotation would the old cards be rotated out for good or would they sometimes be rotated back in?

With a legacy format as a tournament category how much of the old cards value would be retained? Would it be possible that the old cards might actually gain value compared to what they have now since they would feasibly see more use in legacy than they get right now?

When set rotation happens I’m sure there will be a legacy format. But for regular tournament play, regarding RNRS and official categories, most likely it will only include cards that have not been rotated. 

For the record, I’m for set rotation. The old cards need to go (of course there will be cards I miss, but the legacy rares help mitigate this). There’s no point putting a bunch of patches on a shirt; at some point you just need a new shirt.

The legacy rares help mitigate this.  I'd agree if they were creating legacy rares that were reprints of older cards, not cards with the same name or a similar name that changes the ability.  I understand how Red Dragon and Dragon's Wrath is more specific, and now color appropriate, but that makes it to specific to be a popular concept, where previously Wrath of Satan could be played on any black evil character it didn't becomes especially powerful when used on one in particular.  It sound like Wrath of Satan will no become a legacy rare with its original ability.  Board wipe is a familiar concept in CCG's, and I would particularly be sad to see it disappear outright.

Also, thus far with the discussion of rotation.  No one has mentioned specifically the impact to type 1 or type 2, its still all speculation.  It's still at least a minimum of a year away from happening.  I for one will keep building decks with older cards, but will include newer cards as well, as they suit the deck appropriately.

Steven
Ethereal Synergy Inc

PS, I've been playing since Prophets was out.  I remember when Women's first released. (and Warriors, and …)

@Whiteandgold7 There will always be cards that get rotated that we each personally don’t want to see rotated. This occurs in every CCG. And there are cards that get rotated that get a makeover. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the new card is not as good as the old one (like your Wrath of satan example). It just means that it’s different. Personally, I like the new Dragon’s Wrath but of course it does have its limits, as it should.  I also like wrath of satan.  Why not run both in your deck then?

As for board clearing cards, there are still such cards in the game, and one’s a legacy rare even (Great Image).  But keep in mind that that strategy is changing with today’s cards in that there are a lot more protections from board clearing cards than there used to be.