Author Topic: Re: A Game Lost Completely due to the Draw (Read 8493 times)

Minister Polarius · « **on:** July 13, 2009, 08:18:58 PM »

Sounds like it was lost due to the draw and the faulty mechanic that STILL hasn't been fixed. I am speaking, of course, about the zero-disadvantage to going first paradigm. No other card game gives every advantage to whoever goes first and none to whoever goes second. For years, many people have been clamoring for a no-draw on first turn (rather than first round) rule, or a most LS in LoB (rather than most drawn) rule, or (as most prefer) both. Still the PTB have completely neglected such a huge and easily correctable error in the game mechanics.

I know that Rob listens to players about huge errors, and I'm hoping this one will get as much consideration as banning NJ (which almost nobody wants).

lightningninja · « **Reply #1 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:26:32 PM »

Wait... you don't like that the first person gets to draw?

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #2 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:33:34 PM »

I see where you're coming from, and I agree that one or more of those options should be considered.

Master KChief · « **Reply #3 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:35:42 PM »

i completely agree, and i was going to mention this in the other thread about lost souls. i've been stressing for YEARS redemption should have a 'go first or draw first' rule. it would immensly balance the game.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #4 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:36:08 PM »

I like the no draw on first as well.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #5 on:** July 13, 2009, 10:11:37 PM »

As an interesting contrast, Pokemon originally allowed players to draw on every turn including the first. There was an eventual rule change that did not allow the first player to draw on their first turn, but did allow the second player. This was done in the name of fairness, since the player to go first was decided by a coin toss.

Now, many years later, the newest Pokemon rulebook returns to the original design, allowing both players to draw on every turn.

I have to wonder if they second-guessed changing the rule in the first place. However, I also wonder why it took many years to switch it back.

Just food for thought.

lightningninja · « **Reply #6 on:** July 13, 2009, 11:57:13 PM »

Not a bad idea, they do it with teams.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #7 on:** July 14, 2009, 12:31:57 AM »

I also agree that the initial draw mechanic needs to change. That isnt NEARLY as game breaking to fix, and I agree it can be a problem. A simple fix is this... Both draw 8. P1 goes first. P1 draws no extra cards. P2 goes next, and is allowed to d3 first.

lightningninja · « **Reply #8 on:** July 14, 2009, 12:33:34 AM »

But would you have won (for sure) if you would have drawn those three? I don't think many games are decided on those three cards.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #9 on:** July 14, 2009, 12:35:05 AM »

I don't know, BUT, it can be a major problem if P2 gets a bad d8, as the opponent gets to attack them twice before they draw again.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #10 on:** July 14, 2009, 12:39:52 AM »

I like the idea of the second player drawing 3, first of all it makes players think more about whether or not they want to draw the extra cards or make the first rescue or put down artifacts/forts, etc before getting attacked

It gives more of a reason not to start.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #11 on:** July 14, 2009, 10:55:43 AM »

#1 - It has already been stated that when the next rulebook arrives that the person with the most LS in their LoB will have first choice (fixing the Hopper problem).

#2 - I think the "2nd player gets to draw 3" is an AWESOME idea. It has already been tested in TEAMS with great success, and I think that it should be adopted across the board.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #12 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:04:09 AM »

I know these ideas have been pushed for before... but I see no reason not to add this.

I will back this with full support. I know a lot of games can easily be decided by who goes first. P2 drawing 3 would help even the playing field.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #13 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:06:21 AM »

Another method of fixing it that has been implemented in teams in the intro prep phase. I back that idea as it gives more power to site decks. The 2nd player draws first is also a great idea that is used in teams and works great.

Kirk

Korunks · « **Reply #14 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:07:55 AM »

This is actually an idea that I totally agree with. When I used to MTG this was the rule on play and I loved its fairness. If you are setup to have a great first turn you sacrifice the draw, and as compensation the opponent gets to reinforce himself on his first turn, or replenish his losses from the first round. When can we implement it

happyjosiah · « **Reply #15 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:23:16 AM »

This is silly. Sometimes you are happy you don't have to draw cards the first turn if you drew no lost souls and have a nice offense. Sometimes you are trying to draw your deck as fast as possible. Redemption already has an extremely generous amount of card drawing compared to most CCGs. It's fine the way it is. In all likelihood, the rule as you suggest would give a big advantage to the player going second. But again, it's situational. No rule you can make will ever stop an example of "I lost because of this draw" from happening.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:24:41 AM »

I agree, but its just not right that player two can be attacked TWICE without being allowed to draw (excluding SA's).

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #17 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:25:24 AM »

Before we implement a 2nd player draws first mechanism, we need to implement an intro prep phase. In my opinion, that would help fix many of these quick losses, by being able to play down a crucial artifact, such as Unknown Nation, Holy of Holies, or Unholy Writ, or place your Lost Soul in a site, before the first player attacks.

Kirk

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #18 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:36:19 AM »

I would accept one or both of these changes with much happiness.

The Schaef · « **Reply #19 on:** July 14, 2009, 11:47:29 AM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 13, 2009, 08:18:58 PM

No other card game gives every advantage to whoever goes first and none to whoever goes second.

What compensation does the Vs system give the second player?

STAMP · « **Reply #20 on:** July 14, 2009, 12:44:10 PM »

So it sounds like everyone agrees that the player to play second has the disadvantage. How about this: give player 2 the option to declare a re-draw of hands on the first turn only.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #21 on:** July 14, 2009, 02:20:06 PM »

Quote from: Captain Kirk on July 14, 2009, 11:25:24 AM

Before we implement a 2nd player draws first mechanism, we need to implement an intro prep phase. In my opinion, that would help fix many of these quick losses, by being able to play down a crucial artifact, such as Unknown Nation, Holy of Holies, or Unholy Writ, or place your Lost Soul in a site, before the first player attacks.

I also totally support the "intro-prep" phase idea. This has also been tested already in TEAMS with great success and should be implemented across the board.

"2nd player draw 3" and "intro-prep" ftw!

Korunks · « **Reply #22 on:** July 14, 2009, 02:22:38 PM »

whats intro-prep?

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #23 on:** July 14, 2009, 02:26:32 PM »

At the beginning of a turn before anyone starts, there is an introductory preparation phase, in which both players can perform any actions they would normally perform during their prep phase.

Kirk

Korunks · « **Reply #24 on:** July 14, 2009, 02:33:09 PM »

Oh thats actually a pretty good idea, I just wonder if that will slow games?

News:

Author Topic: Re: A Game Lost Completely due to the Draw (Read 8493 times)

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

Lamborghini_diablo

The Schaef