Cactus Game Design Message Boards

But then there's absolutely no reason to go second.

Why is it better to have a less strategic beginning? There are both advantages and disadvantages this way, the other way is straight up advantage.

Quote from: theselfevident on January 08, 2012, 01:42:00 PM

Because its too much of a disadvantage to the guy who goes 1st. the only advantage given to the guy going 1st is that he gets to attack 1st but if the 2nd player has mayhem, the game is all but over unless the 1st guy got a killer draw with a majority of his field playable cards... its too much of a disadvantage to the 1st player. the advantage of going 1st without drawing with the standard rule is that you can rescue 1st, you take this away and its a significant disadvantage. You can equalize by allowing the 1st player to draw or allow attacks/RA's on the 1st turn but no doms but not both...

I don't see how this rule makes Mayhem stronger. It essentially forces it into a second turn, which will never be as bad as an FTM. You aren't taking away the rescue first, it's just on the next turn. If everybody rescues a soul every turn, whoever went first wins. I would argue it's more advantageous to go first because of this. Making both players draw first turn gives a much more significant disadvantage to going second.

That's still better than an FTM.

ok im sorry i just gotta say it maybe if decks had to be reliant on more then just 1 main hero and could actually win in several ways but nah im just a random nobody feel free to ignore me

again with enough proper support i don't feel ive ever lost a game directly cause of mayhem yes its annoying but generally i can recover i think its these off balance offense hvy decks that because there already off balance get nailed because mayhem tips the stool and they fall over so i propose the problem is in how people are building decks and not mayhem itself at all. (waits for flame war)

Quote from: theselfevident on January 08, 2012, 03:02:02 PM

Quote from: Ring Wraith on January 08, 2012, 02:59:25 PM

That's still better than an FTM.

With a FTM, if your the 1st guy going, at least you had an opportunity to rescue, so I disagree... also this is why intro/prep is much better than this rule as it stands.

IF you're the first. If you're the second, you lose. With this ruling, the person who goes first at least has a shot at catching up, depending on the draw.

My experience proves it doesn't if the 2nd guy gets mayhem in their initial 11 cards (which puts you at a huge disadvantage) you allow the 1st guy to either draw 1st or make an attack then it evens it out... Intro/prep is better than this rule change as it stands.

Doing it with no attacks in the 1st round is absolutely relevant. I could have gotten a soul on my 1st turn with a high probability.... If i'm the guy with the most lost souls in the 1st round and I have mayhem in my deck, I am letting you go 1st every time... cuz i have a chance to get mayhem and to draw more cards than you getting more of my cards out 1st.... no reason for me not to go 1st, ever!

again with enough proper support i don't feel ive ever lost a game directly cause of mayhem yes its annoying but generally i can recover i think its these off balance offense hvy decks that because there already off balance get nailed because mayhem tips the stool and they fall over so i propose the problem is in how people are building decks and not mayhem itself at all. (waits for flame war)

Quote from: browarod on January 08, 2012, 04:25:59 PM

You know, you say that deck building is being ignored for this, but isn't it kind of the pivotal point of it all? You build your deck well enough and Mayhem at anytime becomes merely an inconvenience. I've had Mayhem played against me numerous times, a fair amount were FTMs. I can honestly state that it's never been the direct cause of me losing a game. In fact, I won many of those times, even against the FTMs.

I honestly don't know what the fuss is all about. If Mayhem screws you up, then there's something you should fix in your deck. I don't see the reason to be trying all these possible rule changes and whatever else when just building better decks can solve it.

I've heard people that they don't see what the big problem is, because they've never been too affected by it, and my response has always been that you have been fortunate. Is it possible to recover from a FTM? Absolutely. I think everyone who plays the game enough has some sort of victory story (TSE actually beat me after I FTM'd him a couple nights ago). Here's the thing though, it still presents an undeniably large advantage if a player gets it off. For instance, even if you draw it on a bum hand and can't lay anything down, it is still a +4 over your opponent (provided they don't lay down Guardian, in which case, it is only a +3). However, on a good draw (especially when using a very enhancement-light theme like Genesis or Disciples), I can get my hand size down to 3 or 4, then play Mayhem, which can be as much as a +7 or +8. Having that large of an advantage over your opponent in the first minutes of the game, assuming that both players are using competitive decks, is an extreme advantage.

Now I don't know about anyone else, but for the most part, I always choose to go first when I can, due to the fear of a FTM. Even if I'm only able to lay down two cards and am unable to make an effective rescue, I'll still opt to go first most of the time. Paranoid? Yes, however, that's the kind of power we're talking about, and I know I'm not the only person to do this. If you honestly don't see this as a problem, then you're either extremely lucky, haven't played anyone with a noteworthy amount of skill who got a FTM on you, or you're the best deckbuilder in Redemption. The fact of the matter is, it provides such a large advantage that it does absolutely need to be dealt with in some manner or another. The 6 out of 10 FTMs that won Nats just adds to this argument.

Quote from: theselfevident on January 08, 2012, 04:32:02 PM

I agree, like I said in a previous post, my same deck won in a game where my opponent played an FTM. This rule made the *STM worse than a FTM

Just because you won a game where you got hit by a FTM and then lost one with a STM doesn't mean anything. I presume that you're talking about the deck I played (and lost too, even after a FTM), and your win was due to poor drawing. I haven't fully formed my opinions yet, but using that as an example is not a good way to win people over to your way of thinking, because it's an extremely poor example.