Author Topic: Details of set rotation?? (Read 11178 times)

redemption collector 777 · « **on:** September 09, 2018, 12:58:25 PM »

Im not sure what rotation really implies for Redemption if it were to happen??

What would happen in a set rotation??

If set rotation happens:

1. Do all the older cards become unplayable and not can not use them all together?? (including casual play group games etc)

or do the older cards just become unplayable at official redemption tournaments only??

2. I think I read somewhere that if a set rotation happens there would be two types of tournaments:

a legacy tournament type (where all/any cards can be used) and a modern tournament type (where only the non rotated cards can be used)

Any thoughts or details on these??

Gabe · « **Reply #1 on:** September 09, 2018, 01:13:48 PM »

Set rotation hasn't happened and isn't even officially going to happen. It's something that has been discussed openly as a future plan. For these reasons your questions cannot be answered in any official capacity.

This makes a great conversation topic. Seeing the communities input on these things will help shape the future of set rotation if it becomes a reality.

jesse · « **Reply #2 on:** September 09, 2018, 01:50:10 PM »

I understand if set rotation is chosen as the best path ahead; however I would just hope that there would still be a "Legacy"-type format so that all the (non-banned) older cards didn't become completely unusable. And as a Type 2 player, I wouldn't mind at all if Type 2 fell under the Legacy category as well.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #3 on:** September 09, 2018, 02:16:57 PM »

No matter what happens with set rotation it would only ever affect official tournaments. Outside of them you can play the game in literally any way you can think of, you can even make up your own cards if you want.

If set rotation happens in Redemption the cutoff point will likely be I and J decks because the change in card face makes it easy to identify which cards are legal and which are not. There would almost certainly be a legacy format that allowed you to use all cards and the details of that format would entirely depend on what percentage of the type 1 playerbase chose to play it over the "main" format.

SiLeNcEd_MaTrIx · « **Reply #4 on:** September 09, 2018, 10:04:46 PM »

Problem with set rotation in Redemption is it pretty much instantly makes a majority of my cards worthless. It would be hard to buy further into a game with a small player base to know eventually a majority of all my expensive cards could become practically valueless.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #5 on:** September 09, 2018, 11:56:57 PM »

Quote from: SiLeNcEd_MaTrIx on September 09, 2018, 10:04:46 PM

Problem with set rotation in Redemption is it pretty much instantly makes a majority of my cards worthless. It would be hard to buy further into a game with a small player base to know eventually a majority of all my expensive cards could become practically valueless.

The alternative is that currently, without rotation, it is significantly harder for a new player to buy into Redemption since they need cards from so many different eras to catch up to everyone. Even in a post rotation world the old players that are "hurt" the most are the ones who still have the cards necessary to play the main format so their ability to play the game is not reduced in addition to the near certainty of a tournament legal legacy category that could still be run. You and your play group could decide what format is best for you and host your tournaments whichever way you prefer.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 10, 2018, 12:13:44 AM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 09, 2018, 11:56:57 PM

The alternative is that currently, without rotation, it is significantly harder for a new player to buy into Redemption since they need cards from so many different eras to catch up to everyone.

Seriously, how many of the older cards are necessary to be competitive?

Redemption also has a really strong and low-overhead secondary market. So of the older cards you must have to be competitive, how much would it cost you to go out and buy multiple playsets of each on Three Lions?

Watchman · « **Reply #7 on:** September 10, 2018, 07:48:34 AM »

Quote from: SiLeNcEd_MaTrIx on September 09, 2018, 10:04:46 PM

Problem with set rotation in Redemption is it pretty much instantly makes a majority of my cards worthless. It would be hard to buy further into a game with a small player base to know eventually a majority of all my expensive cards could become practically valueless.

Bro hate to tell you but most of the old cards are worthless already. They are simply under powered, in most cases too card-specific (Of One Mind, for example), and generally unplayable in today’s meta (speaking of sets pre-Priests). At this point only collectors purchase the older cards with the exception of a few cards that still see their way into contemporary decks (such as DoN, Great Image, Falling Away, etc). Those cards had their day. But it’s time to rotate them out so we can play Redemption in a new, fresh way, which is so much better now than how it began.

And to your second point, in a CCG there will always be cards that simply don’t have much value, and there will always be cards that retain their value or increase in value, no matter their age. Now that value may decrease due to age, demand, market flood and other factors, but if you choose to buy into and play a CCG you have to accept the fact that you’ll never get back the money you put into it.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 10, 2018, 08:04:22 AM »

Quote from: Watchman on September 10, 2018, 07:48:34 AM

Quote from: SiLeNcEd_MaTrIx on September 09, 2018, 10:04:46 PM
Problem with set rotation in Redemption is it pretty much instantly makes a majority of my cards worthless. It would be hard to buy further into a game with a small player base to know eventually a majority of all my expensive cards could become practically valueless.

Bro hate to tell you but most of the old cards are worthless already. They are simply under powered, in most cases too card-specific (Of One Mind, for example), and generally unplayable in today’s meta (speaking of sets pre-Priests).

Which is precisely why "new player buy in cost" is not an argument in favor of rotation. (Back to my response to Kevinthe dude.)

Quote from: Watchman on September 10, 2018, 07:48:34 AM

At this point only collectors purchase the older cards with the exception of a few cards that still see their way into contemporary decks (such as DoN, Great Image, Falling Away, etc). Those cards had their day. But it’s time to rotate them out so we can play Redemption in a new, fresh way, which is so much better now than how it began.

Why does this small handful of older cards (what is it a dozen in total?) prevent you from playing Redemption "in a new, fresh way?"

Watchman · « **Reply #9 on:** September 10, 2018, 09:24:22 AM »

It doesn’t prevent me from playing in a new, fresh way. What I’m saying is that there are several errata on the old cards and play-as wording to catch up with today’s wording/abilities that make it difficult to keep up with how the card is to be played, particularly for newer players. An example of this is when I build custom decks to sell, mainly geared toward newer players, I have to try and stay away from older cards because their wording is confusing and may cause the newer player to play them differently than what the errata and/or play-as is.

It’s only natural for a CCG to rotate out older cards due to changes in game rules, game play, newer or changed abilities, or whatever. However, I wouldn’t be against a legacy format. And I like the fact that some older cards are becoming legacy rares. Ultimately, what I would love to see is a reprint of all (at least most) of the old cards.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #10 on:** September 10, 2018, 09:43:15 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 12:13:44 AM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 09, 2018, 11:56:57 PM
The alternative is that currently, without rotation, it is significantly harder for a new player to buy into Redemption since they need cards from so many different eras to catch up to everyone.
Seriously, how many of the older cards are necessary to be competitive?

Redemption also has a really strong and low-overhead secondary market. So of the older cards you must have to be competitive, how much would it cost you to go out and buy multiple playsets of each on Three Lions?

My older cards I don't just mean things like IaC I'm talking everything pre I and J since that's where rotation would likely happen. There are a ton of cards this would eliminate from the card pool, several of which are ones the ban favoring side of the community would have loved to see removed from the playable card pool long ago.

SiLeNcEd_MaTrIx · « **Reply #11 on:** September 10, 2018, 09:59:12 AM »

If I get to a point to where my "The Second Coming" gets rotated out or that even becomes a plan I'm going to sell my collection unfortunately. I don't want to do that and I don't want to sound like a cry baby. But if I'm going to lose out on cards that cost over $100.00 due to set rotation this game isn't for me.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2018, 10:23:51 AM »

Quote from: SiLeNcEd_MaTrIx on September 10, 2018, 09:59:12 AM

If I get to a point to where my "The Second Coming" gets rotated out or that even becomes a plan I'm going to sell my collection unfortunately. I don't want to do that and I don't want to sound like a cry baby. But if I'm going to lose out on cards that cost over $100.00 due to set rotation this game isn't for me.

I would be very surprised if that ever happens and if it did it would be more than a decade from now. Redemption rotation would likely be a one time thing, or at least extremely infrequent.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2018, 10:55:07 AM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 10, 2018, 09:43:15 AM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 12:13:44 AM
Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 09, 2018, 11:56:57 PM
The alternative is that currently, without rotation, it is significantly harder for a new player to buy into Redemption since they need cards from so many different eras to catch up to everyone.
Seriously, how many of the older cards are necessary to be competitive?

Redemption also has a really strong and low-overhead secondary market. So of the older cards you must have to be competitive, how much would it cost you to go out and buy multiple playsets of each on Three Lions?

My older cards I don't just mean things like IaC I'm talking everything pre I and J since that's where rotation would likely happen. There are a ton of cards this would eliminate from the card pool, several of which are ones the ban favoring side of the community would have loved to see removed from the playable card pool long ago.

How many of these "ton of cards" are needed to be competitive? Given the strong secondary market, you can buy singles of any card. This means there is absolutely no buy in cost for cards like "Angel Food" or "Eyes Open" that no one ever plays. The only buy in cost a new player would have would be for the cards that he/she would actually need for competitive play.

Bobbert · « **Reply #14 on:** September 10, 2018, 11:32:29 AM »

As a former RLK I'd like to point out that I didn't start buying specific cards until I had already spent close to a (at the time) decent deck's worth of money on packs. Just because there's only two cards from blue/green packs worth playing doesn't mean I didn't get a couple, especially when I have six dollars to spend for the tournament. Even when I did start looking for specific cards, I did a lot more trading than outright buying - and those cards that I traded away came from packs.

There are indeed a ton of cards, and there is indeed a lot of pack filler. But if we're talking about buy-in costs, most kids aren't building highly synergistic decks, they're tossing together whatever cards they have that look good (and several that don't). New players don't know what cards are good. They might know what themes/strategies are strong, but unless they ask an established player they don't know what they would need to build it.

Full disclosure, I'm for set rotation. I've been part of Redemption for several other growing pains (namely not being able to SoG your own souls and the dom cap) that I disliked at the time, but were undeniably healthy for the game. I feel that set rotation is another (if more drastic) case of this. I am also of the (possibly unpopular) opinion that just because you can't use something you've spent money on, that doesn't mean that the money was wasted. Disney didn't invalidate the fun I had in KotOR or reading the Thrawn trilogy when they declared the old Star Wars EU noncanon, and the money that I spent on Priests cards wouldn't be wasted if set rotation happened because I've had a lot of fun with teal decks.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #15 on:** September 10, 2018, 11:57:14 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 10:55:07 AM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 10, 2018, 09:43:15 AM
Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 12:13:44 AM
Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 09, 2018, 11:56:57 PM
The alternative is that currently, without rotation, it is significantly harder for a new player to buy into Redemption since they need cards from so many different eras to catch up to everyone.
Seriously, how many of the older cards are necessary to be competitive?

Redemption also has a really strong and low-overhead secondary market. So of the older cards you must have to be competitive, how much would it cost you to go out and buy multiple playsets of each on Three Lions?

My older cards I don't just mean things like IaC I'm talking everything pre I and J since that's where rotation would likely happen. There are a ton of cards this would eliminate from the card pool, several of which are ones the ban favoring side of the community would have loved to see removed from the playable card pool long ago.
How many of these "ton of cards" are needed to be competitive? Given the strong secondary market, you can buy singles of any card. This means there is absolutely no buy in cost for cards like "Angel Food" or "Eyes Open" that no one ever plays. The only buy in cost a new player would have would be for the cards that he/she would actually need for competitive play.

I'm just speaking as someone who played Redemption for 8 years with mostly the same deck because my collection was too small to branch out and I went from going 3-4 at Nats to placing in one year largely because I finally had access to a significantly larger portion of the card pool. It's easy to point to a singe deck, list all the old cards, and think it doesn't look too bad but the real struggle is that if you don't own most of the card pool you don't have the ability to branch out and discover what's good or what you enjoy playing.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 10, 2018, 01:51:52 PM »

So why don't you just recommend to RLK that they only buy from I & J on until the get to the point where they are looking to be competitive? They will get the newer cards (shiny!) plus all of the best older cards. At the point they want to be competitive they can purchase/trade for the small handful of good older cards they don't have.

Maybe it is just me, but that seems to be a much better option then telling a RLK who just bought a Fall of Man pack--because they heard it was the latest and greatest thing--that 7 of their 15 cards can't be played.

There can be good reasons for set rotation. The claim that Redemption has an exorbitant buy in cost does not strike me as one of them.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #17 on:** September 10, 2018, 02:09:55 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 01:51:52 PM

So why don't you just recommend to RLK that they only buy from I & J on until the get to the point where they are looking to be competitive? They will get the newer cards (shiny!) plus all of the best older cards. At the point they want to be competitive they can purchase/trade for the small handful of good older cards they don't have.

Maybe it is just me, but that seems to be a much better option then telling a RLK who just bought a Fall of Man pack--because they heard it was the latest and greatest thing--that 7 of their 15 cards can't be played.

There can be good reasons for set rotation. The claim that Redemption has an exorbitant buy in cost does not strike me as one of them.

It isn't just one small handful though. There's a small handful of competitive pre-I/J cards for each individual deck. I'm not saying new players can't obtain 60 cards for a competitive deck (Although it is a pretty large amount of effort especially for things like Woes but that's not relevant to rotation), I'm saying rotation greatly reduce the difficulty in obtaining a competitive collection. If I was still a casual player with a small collection when I came up with the CoL deck I would have looked at the price of Love and Christ's Triumph (Both were about $30 at the time) I wouldn't have been able to justify trading for two cards that expensive that I would likely never use in any other deck, I would have stopped working on the deck before I came up with the actually competitive version, and no one would have played the deck at Nats. Things that older, more invested players never consider (Obtaining a niche $30 card because they almost certainly have it already or can easily trade for it) can be the deciding factor whether a new or casual player places at Nationals.

I agree, though, that there are many other excellent benefits of rotation. The reason I brought up the new player aspect was to counter the complaint that old players will "lose" and bunch of their collection.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #18 on:** September 10, 2018, 03:09:41 PM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 10, 2018, 02:09:55 PM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 01:51:52 PM
There can be good reasons for set rotation. The claim that Redemption has an exorbitant buy in cost does not strike me as one of them.

I'm saying rotation greatly reduce the difficulty in obtaining a competitive collection. If I was still a casual player with a small collection when I came up with the CoL deck I would have looked at the price of Love and Christ's Triumph (Both were about $30 at the time) I wouldn't have been able to justify trading for two cards that expensive that I would likely never use in any other deck, I would have stopped working on the deck before I came up with the actually competitive version, and no one would have played the deck at Nats.

I really do not understand how your example ties into set rotation. Both Love and Christ's Triumph (at least the expensive ones) are post-I/J. Rotation would have absolutely nothing to make it simpler or cheaper to get those cards.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #19 on:** September 11, 2018, 12:14:30 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 03:09:41 PM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 10, 2018, 02:09:55 PM
Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 01:51:52 PM
There can be good reasons for set rotation. The claim that Redemption has an exorbitant buy in cost does not strike me as one of them.

I'm saying rotation greatly reduce the difficulty in obtaining a competitive collection. If I was still a casual player with a small collection when I came up with the CoL deck I would have looked at the price of Love and Christ's Triumph (Both were about $30 at the time) I wouldn't have been able to justify trading for two cards that expensive that I would likely never use in any other deck, I would have stopped working on the deck before I came up with the actually competitive version, and no one would have played the deck at Nats.

I really do not understand how your example ties into set rotation. Both Love and Christ's Triumph (at least the expensive ones) are post-I/J. Rotation would have absolutely nothing to make it simpler or cheaper to get those cards.

While my personal instance wouldn’t have been solved by rotation it’s an example of how not having easy access to a large collection makes a big difference.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #20 on:** September 11, 2018, 06:44:52 AM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 11, 2018, 12:14:30 AM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 03:09:41 PM
I really do not understand how your example ties into set rotation. Both Love and Christ's Triumph (at least the expensive ones) are post-I/J. Rotation would have absolutely nothing to make it simpler or cheaper to get those cards.

While my personal instance wouldn’t have been solved by rotation it’s an example of how not having easy access to a large collection makes a big difference.

So here is an example that is on point. When I started playing Warriors had already sold out. Yet I had tons of decks that included the good Warriors cards: the FBtN characters, Ark, Holy Grail, Dragon Raid, New Jerusalem (dom). How about you? Do you have decks with cards from Warriors or Women in them? How did you figure out you wanted/needed those cards? How did you acquire them?

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #21 on:** September 11, 2018, 10:55:31 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 11, 2018, 06:44:52 AM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on September 11, 2018, 12:14:30 AM
Quote from: EmJayBee83 on September 10, 2018, 03:09:41 PM
I really do not understand how your example ties into set rotation. Both Love and Christ's Triumph (at least the expensive ones) are post-I/J. Rotation would have absolutely nothing to make it simpler or cheaper to get those cards.

While my personal instance wouldn’t have been solved by rotation it’s an example of how not having easy access to a large collection makes a big difference.

So here is an example that is on point. When I started playing Warriors had already sold out. Yet I had tons of decks that included the good Warriors cards: the FBtN characters, Ark, Holy Grail, Dragon Raid, New Jerusalem (dom). How about you? Do you have decks with cards from Warriors or Women in them? How did you figure out you wanted/needed those cards? How did you acquire them?

Until the last couple years cards like Grail and gold KoT were cards I really wanted but never had the spare trade value to justify getting. I actually still don't have a gold KoT to this day.

Master Q · « **Reply #22 on:** September 11, 2018, 12:03:18 PM »

Like MJB, Warriors was already sold out when I started playing. To give you an idea, Gold KoT was around the same trade value as an AoCP ($40 circa early 2006), so there was absolutely no way I was getting that via trade, and even if I could no one was going to trade one (in our group, anyway). Same went for Harvest Time. If you were a new player, you were simply out of luck. Those two cards were certainly played, and I certainly felt like I had a disadvantage not having them. The same comparison can surely be made now for Woes and TSC for newer players, but on a far more extreme level.

It was only thanks to the Factory set released around the end of 2006 (I think) that I and a few others in my group ended up getting the Warriors set at all. However, even then the impact was lessened greatly, for a few reasons:

Reprints- KoT and Prince of this World were reprinted in the Priests set. Though their colors were different, they were now attainable (KoT especially). Also, around the same time Harvest Time was reprinted as a promo, ensuring it was available to newer players too. Granted, winning wasn't always an option, but I traded/gave away a fair number of HT and CoF in my day and still ended up with around 35 HT and 20 CoF when I sold my cards, so HT and CoF were easy enough to get. In fact, my very first tournament an older player gave me a CoF promo for nothing, so those winning players were (and hopefully still are) generous to newcomers. Basically, reprints of older cards basically nullified the lack of access to the most competitive of the older sets.

Shifting Meta- Priests and FooF soon after saw the rise of decks that didn't use many older cards. Things like Genesis/Romans, Z's Temple, and Prophets were almost solely tin and Priests-based. You didn't necessarily need a FBTN deck anymore, as other decks were now competitive. Other themes were expanded and built up, and other sets become dominant in time.

So yeah, the issue of cost was real back then. Even cards like GoYS and DoN, which have close to no value nowadays, were uber-prized and difficult to acquire for new players back in the day. But repackaging (TEXP, DI, older packs with the Tins) mostly solved this, for better or worse. Now, there aren't many cards with value from those older sets that are still competitive, but value or the losing of perceived value of older cards is not the reason for set rotation. Hardly. It boils down to power and refreshment, and little else...

Xonathan · « **Reply #23 on:** September 11, 2018, 12:06:40 PM »

Quote from: Master Q on September 11, 2018, 12:03:18 PM

Like MJB, Warriors was already sold out when I started playing. To give you an idea, Gold KoT was around the same trade value as an AoCP ($40 circa early 2006), so there was absolutely no way I was getting that via trade, and even if I could no one was going to trade one (in our group, anyway). Same went for Harvest Time. If you were a new player, you were simply out of luck. Those two cards were certainly played, and I certainly felt like I had a disadvantage not having them. The same comparison can surely be made now for Woes and TSC for newer players, but on a far more extreme level.

It was only thanks to the Factory set released around the end of 2006 (I think) that I and a few others in my group ended up getting the Warriors set at all. However, even then the impact was lessened greatly, for a few reasons:

Reprints- KoT and Prince of this World were reprinted in the Priests set. Though their colors were different, they were now attainable (KoT especially). Also, around the same time Harvest Time was reprinted as a promo, ensuring it was available to newer players too. Granted, winning wasn't always an option, but I traded/gave away a fair number of HT and CoF in my day and still ended up with around 35 HT and 20 CoF when I sold my cards, so HT and CoF were easy enough to get. In fact, my very first tournament an older player gave me a CoF promo for nothing, so those winning players were (and hopefully still are) generous to newcomers. Basically, reprints of older cards basically nullified the lack of access to the most competitive of the older sets.

Shifting Meta- Priests and FooF soon after saw the rise of decks that didn't use many older cards. Things like Genesis/Romans, Z's Temple, and Prophets were almost solely tin and Priests-based. You didn't necessarily need a FBTN deck anymore, as other decks were now competitive. Other themes were expanded and built up, and other sets become dominant in time.

So yeah, the issue of cost was real back then. Even cards like GoYS and DoN, which have close to no value nowadays, were uber-prized and difficult to acquire for new players back in the day. But repackaging (TEXP, DI, older packs with the Tins) mostly solved this, for better or worse. Now, there aren't many cards with value from those older sets that are still competitive, but value or the losing of perceived value of older cards is not the reason for set rotation. Hardly. It boils down to power and refreshment, and little else...

I remember finally getting a DoN back in the day. I was so happy because I felt like I chased that card forever and no one would trade for one. Now I have so many its almost a joke lol.

Master Q · « **Reply #24 on:** September 11, 2018, 12:15:57 PM »

As for rotation nowadays, I don't think there's ever been more of a need. Cards like Haman's Plot, the ultimate wealth-flaunting card, still ensure those with larger back collections have an edge over those without the means to make two or three identical decks solely for tournament play. Cards like Uzzah, which are splashed into 100% of decks for the easiest block of all time. Cards like Sam and AutO, which enable the most overplayed, OP, boring offenses since their inception 7 years ago. Cards like ANB and Hidden Treasures, which have broken the game time and again and require care to work around in modern set-building. Cards like HSR, which are wholly one-sided and warp the gamestate so badly that counters are necessary. Cards like FA (w), which take away a player's feeling of accomplishment without cost.

I-J seems to be the agreed-upon cutoff point, and that makes sense to me. However, there's close to no good way to do a set rotation in this modern day without first revamping how sets are packaged, how reprints are handled, and predicting how the overall meta shifts with each set. This is so unfeasible by my understanding that it is still a couple of years away from anything resembling implementation.

If it does, though, of course a "legacy" format (where most anything goes) should certainly be played in conjunction with the modern at tournaments (Booster and Sealed would both be of this type).

News:

Author Topic: Details of set rotation?? (Read 11178 times)