Author Topic: The problem of the Liner (or, the relevance of banning cards) (Read 19811 times)

jesse · « **Reply #125 on:** February 22, 2018, 08:43:28 AM »

Is this for real??? Would be terrific to keep in Reserve!!

JonathanW · « **Reply #126 on:** February 22, 2018, 08:46:45 AM »

Quote from: jesse on February 22, 2018, 08:43:28 AM

Is this for real??? Would be terrific to keep in Reserve!!

If that we're real it would become the new definition of "patch" lol....

The Guardian · « **Reply #127 on:** February 22, 2018, 09:50:32 AM »

Quote from: JonathanW on February 22, 2018, 08:46:45 AM

Quote from: jesse on February 22, 2018, 08:43:28 AM
Is this for real??? Would be terrific to keep in Reserve!!

If that we're real it would become the new definition of "patch" lol....

I think you mean "deterrent."

JonathanW · « **Reply #128 on:** February 22, 2018, 09:59:23 AM »

Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 09:50:32 AM

Quote from: JonathanW on February 22, 2018, 08:46:45 AM
Quote from: jesse on February 22, 2018, 08:43:28 AM
Is this for real??? Would be terrific to keep in Reserve!!

If that we're real it would become the new definition of "patch" lol....

I think you mean "deterrent."

first thing I read was "detergent"

Sadness · « **Reply #129 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:05:28 AM »

Tide or Baking Soda?

Xonathan · « **Reply #130 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:53:41 AM »

It's a Tide ad.

Eragon5 · « **Reply #131 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:14:58 PM »

I came into this post late and have only read a few pages of the discussion so just ignore me if this has already been discussed or mentioned. Why not test a "standard" format at Nationals? That way we can see the viability of such a format as well as gauge the interest in this format over the current format.

Also as a more casual player I kinda side with YMT in the fact that cutting card pools might prevent casual players from playing and in most tournaments I've been at there have only been a handful of people (aside from nationals). While I understand players who want to see more of a competitive format for redemption, for me redemption wasn't made to be a competitive format and was made for fun and fellowship. I'd rather be inclusive than exclusive.

Master Q · « **Reply #132 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:19:33 PM »

Step away for one day and this is what happens...

I've glanced over most of the responses. From what I'm seeing, it's either:

A. Implement full-on Set Rotation. At some point.

B. Implement bans. At some point.

C. Implement bans, sooner than later.

D. Keep things the way they are, for all time.

For A: I would definitely be on board if a fixed set was released of older cards (specifically around 100 or so) remastered into newer looks/wordage, all that, for a reasonable price. That, to me, would go a long way toward set rotation becoming viable. However, it still leaves the problem of current distribution (TEC, PC, CoW, RoJ), in that those would have to be drastically revamped/combined somehow. Ideally, if making all the cards in the pack the same set was not an option, we would combine them into split packs (ie, one half TEC, one half PC, you get it).

In lieu of A becoming a reality anytime soon, I would of course resort to B/C, sooner than later, until we get to rotation. Why continue holding off?

For YMT's argument D, I think that is the wrong way to look at it. Should Redemption cater to those unwilling to buy new cards (a very slim minority), instead focusing on keeping every single card playable for all time, for all the people who do not go to tournaments regularly/play outside of their own homes? Or, should it focus on those with actual money to spend on the game, those that are the majority/the driving force/those that do attend tournaments other than locals?

Tournaments could, of course, be either a "Legacy" or a "Modern" type, determined by the host, thus allowing those without the vast collection of newer cards to draw from the ability to play regardless. Booster could be a "Legacy" category in all tournaments of all types; other than that everything at a State tournament or higher would be "Modern". I can't immediately think of any downsides to banning certain cards with this option. In any case, I'd probably attend tournaments purely to play Booster.

Master Q · « **Reply #133 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:20:17 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on February 21, 2018, 03:51:28 PM

I don't see the Liner as a problem. It's been around since the very first set and it will be fine for 23 more years.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have not been to recent Nats, right? So you would be free from the unpleasantness that was the 2016 Nats meta, where just about every other deck (that I seemed to play against) ran Confusion (CoW), DoU &/or Suicidal Swine Stampede. If Covenant of Prayer was not printed to alleviate Confusion, if Ends/Paul/GoYS were not reprinted to mitigate DoU/SSS, that kind of defense would still be dominant today, and the Liner was the worst offender in it.

Now, defenses have more options, but soul removal (and protection) is still strong as ever, and probably will be going forward. Ergo, the Liner's continued existence will be a continued thorn. How fun is it to rescue the same soul multiple times, only to have it Falling Away'd? No, not a problem. Somehow...

We're lucky the Dom cap exists, otherwise Burial would make this continued problem all the harder to ignore. We're lucky Covenant of Prayer exists, otherwise Confusion would all but ensure the Liner's unrivaled brutality.

The Guardian · « **Reply #134 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:33:49 PM »

Quote

So you would be free from the unpleasantness that was the 2016 Nats meta, where just about every other deck (that I seemed to play against) ran Confusion (CoW), DoU &/or Suicidal Swine Stampede...and the Liner was the worst offender in it.

Or you could just play T2 where Rescuer's Choice is a thing...

Master Q · « **Reply #135 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:49:29 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 02:33:49 PM

Quote
So you would be free from the unpleasantness that was the 2016 Nats meta, where just about every other deck (that I seemed to play against) ran Confusion (CoW), DoU &/or Suicidal Swine Stampede...and the Liner was the worst offender in it.

Or you could just play T2 where Rescuer's Choice is a thing...

Ironisaac · « **Reply #136 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:53:12 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 02:33:49 PM

Quote
So you would be free from the unpleasantness that was the 2016 Nats meta, where just about every other deck (that I seemed to play against) ran Confusion (CoW), DoU &/or Suicidal Swine Stampede...and the Liner was the worst offender in it.

Or you could just play T2 where Rescuer's Choice is a thing...

As much as I love t2, I despise t2. rescuer's choice makes a deck full of auto and chump blocks the only viable kind of deck to run at a competitive tournament.

Red Wing · « **Reply #137 on:** February 22, 2018, 02:59:53 PM »

Quote from: Eragon5 on February 22, 2018, 02:14:58 PM

I came into this post late and have only read a few pages of the discussion so just ignore me if this has already been discussed or mentioned. Why not test a "standard" format at Nationals? That way we can see the viability of such a format as well as gauge the interest in this format over the current format.

Also as a more casual player I kinda side with YMT in the fact that cutting card pools might prevent casual players from playing and in most tournaments I've been at there have only been a handful of people (aside from nationals). While I understand players who want to see more of a competitive format for redemption, for me redemption wasn't made to be a competitive format and was made for fun and fellowship. I'd rather be inclusive than exclusive.

I really think this whole 'casual vs competitive' player thing is a false dichotomy. No one is making a living off of winning Redemption tournaments, and even the recent increased value of Nationals prizes will not cover travel expenses for most players. In the four Nationals I've attended since 2012, I've placed in the top 20 in T1-2P each time. In all my time at the top tables, the atmosphere is almost always very enjoyable. I believe it was Polarius who commented at Nats last year about how even in the latter rounds of T1 everyone was cracking jokes and having fun. Sure there will always be a few try hards, but those people are the exception in my experience.

The Guardian · « **Reply #138 on:** February 22, 2018, 03:10:33 PM »

I'm not sure it's a false dichotomy, but perhaps simply one where people draw the line at different points.

The "competitive" top tables can certainly be fun and relaxed, but that doesn't mean people there are going to let an opponent undo a misplay whereas in a game between two people with more casual attitudes they might be okay with a misplay being undone.

JonathanW · « **Reply #139 on:** February 22, 2018, 03:30:55 PM »

Set rotations don't exclude people who casually play the game from competition.... Set rotation does away with all of the baggage Redemption has acquired throughout it's growth from "colors and numbers" to the much much more complicated game it is today.... If anything the consistency you gain from having only the newest 10-12 years of sets in the primary competitive formats, and less mess ups with letting cards out that break the game HELP casual players, because they don't have to be bombarded with rule changes and erratas constantly, the game doesn't get more and more complicated each year, and the wording on cards is actually consistent and does what it says it does.

There's no reason cards that were made 12+ years ago when the game was turning into it's current form should still be in the main format. They almost belong to a different game at this point.

Red · « **Reply #140 on:** February 22, 2018, 03:36:07 PM »

Quote from: Ironisaac on February 22, 2018, 02:53:12 PM

Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 02:33:49 PM
Quote
So you would be free from the unpleasantness that was the 2016 Nats meta, where just about every other deck (that I seemed to play against) ran Confusion (CoW), DoU &/or Suicidal Swine Stampede...and the Liner was the worst offender in it.

Or you could just play T2 where Rescuer's Choice is a thing...

As much as I love t2, I despise t2. rescuer's choice makes a deck full of auto and chump blocks the only viable kind of deck to run at a competitive tournament.

Disagree.

Ironisaac · « **Reply #141 on:** February 22, 2018, 04:20:41 PM »

Quote from: Red on February 22, 2018, 03:36:07 PM

Quote from: Ironisaac on February 22, 2018, 02:53:12 PM
Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 02:33:49 PM
Quote
So you would be free from the unpleasantness that was the 2016 Nats meta, where just about every other deck (that I seemed to play against) ran Confusion (CoW), DoU &/or Suicidal Swine Stampede...and the Liner was the worst offender in it.

Or you could just play T2 where Rescuer's Choice is a thing...

As much as I love t2, I despise t2. rescuer's choice makes a deck full of auto and chump blocks the only viable kind of deck to run at a competitive tournament.
Disagree.

Ok, that's just been my experience, partially with how i built my deck, and partially what i have experienced playing against other t2 players. The only decks that beat mine were ones that had chump blocks (Protect 1 soul, shuffle/topdeck, etc), or had play first cbn enhancements as the main block. And justin. Justin always beats me in t2, but, that's because he's justin.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #142 on:** February 22, 2018, 04:32:03 PM »

Quote from: Ironisaac on February 22, 2018, 04:20:41 PM

Justin always beats me in t2, but, that's because he's justin.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #143 on:** February 22, 2018, 07:37:10 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 03:10:33 PM

I'm not sure it's a false dichotomy, but perhaps simply one where people draw the line at different points.

The "competitive" top tables can certainly be fun and relaxed, but that doesn't mean people there are going to let an opponent undo a misplay whereas in a game between two people with more casual attitudes they might be okay with a misplay being undone.

I agree with this definition clarity. Other examples:

1. Back when you could win more than 5 Lost Souls in T1, a casual player would not try to win 7-0 just to pad their differential.
2. A casual player would not try to intimidate a 10-year-old or try to trick them into not playing the card they were about to play.
3. A casual player would not raise their voice to an 11-year-old girl because she was taking too long to choose her next card to play.
4. A casual player would not cheat.

**EDIT** I do realize that not all competitive players would do these kinds of things. My point was that no casual player would even think of doing these things, but specific competitive players actually did these things at my major tournaments.

NathanW · « **Reply #144 on:** February 22, 2018, 07:44:53 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on February 22, 2018, 07:37:10 PM

Quote from: The Guardian on February 22, 2018, 03:10:33 PM
I'm not sure it's a false dichotomy, but perhaps simply one where people draw the line at different points.

The "competitive" top tables can certainly be fun and relaxed, but that doesn't mean people there are going to let an opponent undo a misplay whereas in a game between two people with more casual attitudes they might be okay with a misplay being undone.

I agree with this definition clarity. Other examples:

1. Back when you could win more than 5 Lost Souls in T1, a casual player would not try to win 7-0 just to pad their differential.
2. A casual player would not try to intimidate a 10-year-old or try to trick them into not playing the card they were about to play.
3. A casual player would not raise their voice to an 11-year-old girl because she was taking too long to choose her next card to play.
4. A casual player would not cheat.

I hope you are not generalizing about every competitive player here, I assume you are not but it could be read that way.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #145 on:** February 22, 2018, 08:16:39 PM »

Quote from: tripleplayNa1 on February 22, 2018, 07:44:53 PM

I hope you are not generalizing about every competitive player here, I assume you are not but it could be read that way.

I had figured that my descriptions were specific enough to make people realize that these are situations that I have faced as a host at major tournaments that I held in the past. I thought it might be helpful for people to see why I am so stern in my beliefs.

However, I edited my post to clarify this.

NathanW · « **Reply #146 on:** February 22, 2018, 09:43:38 PM »

@YMT It seems to me that all you are saying is that a few players who happen to be competitive do bad things. I'm not even sure how the discussion got to this from competitive players usually being picky about taking back plays while more casual players don't care as much

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on February 22, 2018, 07:37:10 PM

2. A casual player would not try to intimidate a 10-year-old or try to trick them into not playing the card they were about to play.
3. A casual player would not raise their voice to an 11-year-old girl because she was taking too long to choose her next card to play.
4. A casual player would not cheat.

**EDIT**My point was that no casual player would even think of doing these things, but specific competitive players actually did these things at my major tournaments.

Is it your point that casual players of redemption are less prone to being unkind to other people because from your personal experience with a few competitive players that have acted inappropriately? I don't think this really helps move forward any of the discussions in this thread.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #147 on:** February 22, 2018, 10:43:17 PM »

Quote from: tripleplayNa1 on February 22, 2018, 09:43:38 PM

I don't think this really helps move forward any of the discussions in this thread.

What I am saying is that competitive players should not have exclusive rights to determine the future of Redemption.

Granted, I have said this with exaggerated tones, but that's because I'm going through a mid-life crisis and have had to endure the worst two years of my adult life. If you can get past the over-the-top comments, perhaps I have made a few good points that added to the discussion. However, I will end my input at this point so as not to derail the thread with my annoyances.

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #148 on:** February 22, 2018, 11:02:04 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on February 22, 2018, 10:43:17 PM

Quote from: tripleplayNa1 on February 22, 2018, 09:43:38 PM
I don't think this really helps move forward any of the discussions in this thread.

What I am saying is that competitive players should not have exclusive rights to determine the future of Redemption.

But they should have the right to determine it's competitive future.

Sadness · « **Reply #149 on:** February 23, 2018, 01:20:29 AM »

In my opinion, there are 3 types of Redemption people here.

1) the collector- who gets the cards, for a) the artwork or b) the scriptures or c) because he/she has to collect everything Redemption-related. Btw, that's not a slight at anyone in particular.
2) the casual player- who mainly enjoys the game for a) fellowship with fellow believers or b) a friendly game or c) a budget friendly activity that can be dropped and picked up later
3) the competitive player- who goes to win and build decks that can secure the win and help place in the top tiers.

As for the future of Redemption, I just hope an updated rulebook can explain things in simple terms.

Btw, why is the 3-liner worth more than the 2-liner? Anybody know?

News:

Author Topic: The problem of the Liner (or, the relevance of banning cards) (Read 19811 times)