Cactus Game Design Message Boards

For those concerned with the errata list, I did a bit of research.

There are currently 57 cards on the errata list (a few additional cards are on the list but are noted as "errata removed.") Here's a breakdown of the sets they come from:
Un/lim   4
Prophets   1
Women   3
Warriors   7
C/D       3
Apostles   8
Patriarchs   6
Kings   11
E/F           1
AW           2
Priests   4
TEXP           2
FooF           1
TEC           1
Promo   3

Granted there are a handful of cards from TEC, TPC, CoW and RoJ that have "first run" versions whose abilities have been corrected with subsequent print runs, but for the moment we'll focus on the cards on the actual errata list.

Of those 57 cards, I counted 17 that see play outside of booster draft. The other 40 often don't see play in booster draft either.
A Child is Born (simple printing error that most people don't even realized)
Archers of Kedar (simple printing error that most people don't even realized)
Captain of the Host (both versions) (a significant errata but one that people intuitively understand)
Falling Away (errata-ed simply to conform to modern language, people know how it works)
Grapes of Wrath (significant errata)
Holy Grail WA (significant errata but also reprinted in a more recent set)
Hormah (significant errata)
Lost Soul "Hopper" (II Chronicles 28:13) (errata-ed for clarity, people know how it works)
Lost Souls (errata-ed to save space on future cards)
Mayhem (significant errata)
A New Beginning (significant errata)
Provisions (errata-ed for clarity, people know how it works)
Ram's Horn (reference errata)
Son of God Greek (listed under errata for the Son of God/Son of Man issue)
The Rabshakeh Attacks (printing error)
Unholy Writ (errata-ed for clarity, people know how it works)

Would it be nice to start chopping down the errata list by retiring the older sets from competitive play? Perhaps, but I also don't think it's a huge issue to need to know the mere handful of "significant" erratas (i.e. those that fundamentally change how the card works and are not intuitive based on how the card is printed).

I agree with Hobbit on both of these posts:

Ccgs that do set rotation produce multiple sets per year and don't have to worry about building a player base anymore. Redemption naturally loses people who don't want to collect the new set each year, set rotation would set up a much more exclusive atmosphere. Not to mention a drop in sales of older product which would, imo, be unfair to 3 Lions Gaming.

I am just saying that at a fundamental level Redemption is not set up to do a rotation successfully (small player base, card pool, and financial reasons). I think we would agree that a set rotation would add to competitive experiences and meta enrichment.

My son and I used to play in Pokemon tournaments, but we stopped because I could not afford to keep up with purchasing each new set. It was also frustrating to take the time to put together an effective deck, only to have some of the cards end up banned because of the set rotation. I am just the kind of person that wanted to tweak a really fun deck, rather than start from scratch every other year.

If I wanted to return to Redemption tournaments now, after several years away, I would want to be able to take my old deck and play, even if it got overpowered by new cards. What I would not want is to have no deck whatsoever and have to go buy a bunch of boosters to start all over again, likely with a theme that I have never played before. That would definitely be a turnoff for me.

Personally, a set rotation does not sound appealing to me. It takes WAY too much effort to keep up with.

I would however be okay with:

A) reprints of errata'd cards (such as Mayhem), even if it took up a slot out of a future set

B) (this is the one I know not everyone would like) A modern/golden age format. Older cards and newer cards in one format and newer cards only in another.

I have a decent size collection (new and old cards) and I would be okay with this concept so new players can enter the game and not be blind sided by some old obscure cards that are tougher for them to get ahold of. I also understand that this would upset the current state of the game and sales and is very unlikely to occur. It's just a thought that I have brought up to a fee people and they seemed interested in the idea.

A) reprints of errata'd cards (such as Mayhem), even if it took up a slot out of a future set

Taking that a step further--an entire set (a Redemption Legacy set perhaps?) comprised of cards from older sets that we don't want to lose if we ended up banning certain sets from competitive play. They would be given fresh looks (new design layout, possibly new art if the old art is not that great) and obviously be updated with modern language. 

The next set definitely focuses on some of the problems we face...

Quote

A) reprints of errata'd cards (such as Mayhem), even if it took up a slot out of a future set

Taking that a step further--an entire set (a Redemption Legacy set perhaps?) comprised of cards from older sets that we don't want to lose if we ended up banning certain sets from competitive play. They would be given fresh looks (new design layout, possibly new art if the old art is not that great) and obviously be updated with modern language. 

Expanding on this idea (which I a pretty sure some of us have thought about in the past) there are ~80 cards from priests back that range from balanced and useful to even remotely useful and somewhat broken. One possible solution would be to reprint all of these cards re-balancing as needed and then release in a fixed pack of ~80 cards and charge $10-20 This would be a perfect addition for new players to expand their starter deck for a reasonable price as well as allow every player to get their hands on the useful cards from the outdated sets that are being rotated out while getting rid of a majority of the outdated cards.

(and if a new player comes to a tournament with old cards I'll give em a free pack and help em add those cards to their starter deck)
(and if they don't have a starter deck I'll give em a free I/J starter)

Assuming there is a new set that is both cost effective and replaces all of the problem cards from older sets as well as reprint and rebalance any of the useful cards there should be no reason for a legacy format in tournament play

This conversation is all over the. place...

I'm going to resist the temptation the bite on the spoilers Justin feeding us and discuss the idea of set rotation. At some point in Redemption's future I expect that we'll have a large enough pool of cards that use the new card face that we could divide the game into two formats using the design change as the dividing point. The "new" format will only use cards that don't have text over the picture (I/J forward) while people could still play the original format where everything back to the beginning of the game is legal. If we get close to going this direction we will very likely see some old cards printed on the new card face in a set, or maybe as a set all their own.

Yes, yes, yes. I think I/J would be a perfect starting point with the new card face. I do agree that we're not there yet since theres I believe only about ~960 ish cards with the new style (including the AB sets) So we do have to build up the card pool to probably 2x that before we could start rotating sets out, but once we get to a point where we can have about 1.5-2k playable, new cards in the game I think that would be a good time to start.

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on February 21, 2018, 10:27:08 AM

Seriously, what problem(s) are you (you == all the set rotation proponents) trying to solve?

Removing cards that are unhealthy (Mayhem), removing the cards that cause consistency creep and enable over powered decks (CoL), and removing cards that stifle design space (Throne).

There are a few other posts I've made that have a bit more detail on each of these points if you have questions.

I totally agree with Kevin about the purpose of set rotation and imo if we ever want to get to the point where that is the outcome it will make much more sense to rotate out all sets before a certain date vs rotating out only 1 set in the middle of nowhere.

I agree with Hobbit on both of these posts:

Quote from: TheHobbit on February 20, 2018, 07:31:02 PM

Ccgs that do set rotation produce multiple sets per year and don't have to worry about building a player base anymore. Redemption naturally loses people who don't want to collect the new set each year, set rotation would set up a much more exclusive atmosphere. Not to mention a drop in sales of older product which would, imo, be unfair to 3 Lions Gaming.

Quote from: TheHobbit on February 20, 2018, 08:05:25 PM

I am just saying that at a fundamental level Redemption is not set up to do a rotation successfully (small player base, card pool, and financial reasons). I think we would agree that a set rotation would add to competitive experiences and meta enrichment.

My son and I used to play in Pokemon tournaments, but we stopped because I could not afford to keep up with purchasing each new set. It was also frustrating to take the time to put together an effective deck, only to have some of the cards end up banned because of the set rotation. I am just the kind of person that wanted to tweak a really fun deck, rather than start from scratch every other year.

If I wanted to return to Redemption tournaments now, after several years away, I would want to be able to take my old deck and play, even if it got overpowered by new cards. What I would not want is to have no deck whatsoever and have to go buy a bunch of boosters to start all over again, likely with a theme that I have never played before. That would definitely be a turnoff for me.

I totally agree. That frequency of set rotation (every 1 or 2 years with like 6+ sets of 150-250 cards a year) would never work in Redemption. If we started rotating sets it would probably be 10-12 years of sets of cards that will be the current rotation. with about 150 cards to a set you're looking at between 1500 and 1800 currently playable cards. You could also probably add a starter deck every 5 years and some promos for about another 250-350 cards in that time frame as well. Bringing the total playable cards up to 1750-2150 at any given time.

The end result would require the same amount of money each year to get the new set and would allow for the game to naturally change and improve, while phasing out old wording, broken cards, AnB, etc. The model that games like Pokemon and Magic use for set rotation is simply too fast paced to be used as an example of what set rotation in Redemption would look like.

For the record...

I am for set rotation to a degree as long as the sets being rotated out still have a place in competitive play via their own category or play (i.e. Legacy).
I am for reprinting cards from said "Legacy" card pool with updated wording and the new card face in place of another set in the future.
I am for printing this "Legacy' set in the same year that we split the formats and outline that plan on the packaging of the set.
I am for doing this in three to four years when our cardpool of new card faces will be around 1700+ cards and Cactus has sold down their old inventory.

I don't like banning specific cards unless we decide to not split formats in which case it is the most desirable option. (as a player and host, not as TLG)
I really don't like issuing errata on cards when only a small percentage of people playing the game are privy to that change. (due to lack of access or initiative)

Seeing the list that Justin shared, it might be beneficial for us to have something (i.e. poster) for playgroups to post that outline all the cards that have had errata issued for them with specific focus and space spent on the handful of often used cards that have the most significant errata.

I think this is some great insight and like the idea of Legacy.

I think if this ever did take effect, the consistency of newer cards will be held up nicely (as in same card sizes, quality, wording, etc.)

Quote from: tripleplayNa1 on February 21, 2018, 10:49:58 AM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on February 21, 2018, 10:27:08 AM

If there are only 80 cards that even see play, why are you looking at set rotation?

This is the exact reason why these sets should be rotated out, whatever cards are useful in them use old wording/design and the rest of the undeniably useless cards have no reason to exist.

If the cards are *not* played, they are not a problem. If you don't want to play Angel Food or Bad Figs or ..., then don't play them. They cause absolutely zero harm being left in the card pool. So how many problems does the old wording/design of those "80" cards cause.

Like I said, set rotation is designed to fix a set of problems with *CG's. If those problems are not ones that currently plague Redemption, set rotation won't resolve them.

Yes, rotating out the old sets first won't stop problem cards in newer sets but in order to set up the system of rotating sets the oldest ones are the logical place to start.

There are very few cards from those sets worth keeping and they should be reprinted before the sets are rotated out with imo with a set pack of those cards. This step would only be a part of a larger picture of moving beyond old cards altogether and probably creating a "legacy" format (although this would really not see much use until newer sets tins-txp are rotated out).

Cards that really cause problems right at the moment (the ones Kevin mentioned and more) are best banned or (if banning is impossible) given an errata due to the far off nature of rotating sets.

I see no downside whatsoever to rotating out every set from priests and before IF a set is printed similar to a starter deck that gives players easy access to the cards from those sets that are playable because it will start the cycle of rotating sets and eventually lead to the rotation of sets with more problem cards.

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on February 21, 2018, 01:30:25 PM

None of these cards would be hit by rotation at the start because they are all post-Priests.

I never said I wanted to rotate at Priests. I'm aware the card pool doesn't support this yet but I believe the tin sets and TexP should be included in the rotation.

Just to clarify why I said Priests and before.

I was specifically talking about reprinting cards from original-Priests that are useful and include the in a single boxed set.

Once you get to the point of rotating sets like FooF, RoA, TExP Those will need to be dealt with separately.

Again, starting with the old sets is a stepping stone that can be built upon.