Will TLG tournaments be replacing Cactus tournaments?
We have play tested several ways to do it and keeping drawn LSs in play defeats part of the purpose of doing a mulligan. More to come on that later though. Don't want to turn this into a discussion thread just yet.
YMT...I never said it didn't matter...just that we can hammer out the finer points later. I want the votes to be based on what you would prefer happening, not how you would prefer it happen.
This should cut back on the "pay to win" style that some people use (spend enough money for three identical decks and rotate them after HP use).
This should cut back on the "pay to win" style that some people use (spend enough money for three identical decks and rotate them after HP use).
Is this really still a thing? I'm not sure with the protection and instead out there that HP is such a huge card that it necessitates this strategy, and I haven't seen the strategy you mentioned be used of late...
I'm always for multiple decks checked in for large tournaments, though I could see cutting it down to 2 at the largest and 1 for smaller ones.
Where is 2 of 3 an option that is utilized currently?
I voted! Not only that, but I was the first vote!
Banning/Limiting cardsdoes there really need to be banned cards?
Creating a card cyclecan someone please explain this part to me? I don't understand whatsoever
Implementing a mulligan ruleok so there have been talks that there needs to be a mulligan rule, going back to magic, MTG does that, yugioh though doesn't, but in Redemption's case, I think there should be a mulligan rule, but have it to where you have to reshuffle your drawn souls and then redraw 8 cards
Using a best 2 of 3 systemthis is what I voted and why is simply cause that would give me a chance to play more games, and to me that's a huge plus
Adding a deck sideboardif I could vote more then one, I would have added this vote too.
Checking in only one deckok I must say about this; yes and no, I think this idea could be a pretty good one but one thing I think needs to happen for this is, the sideboard idea has to go along with checking in one deck so a player can make the changes they need, before and after every round.
A card cycle is like what Magic does for their primary categories: The only "valid" cards are ones from a subset of recent sets, something like from the last 2 years or whatever.QuoteCreating a card cyclecan someone please explain this part to me? I don't understand whatsoever
A card cycle is like what Magic does for their primary categories: The only "valid" cards are ones from a subset of recent sets, something like from the last 2 years or whatever.QuoteCreating a card cyclecan someone please explain this part to me? I don't understand whatsoever
For Redemption that would mean something like all sets older than Priests are no longer tournament-legal. Or all sets older than Women, or older than G/H, something like that.
The poll shows 13 people voted for not having 3 decks submitted in a tournament...
I don't like that idea. I don't play much and that would only exclude me and others who play with older cards from the gameA card cycle is like what Magic does for their primary categories: The only "valid" cards are ones from a subset of recent sets, something like from the last 2 years or whatever.QuoteCreating a card cyclecan someone please explain this part to me? I don't understand whatsoever
For Redemption that would mean something like all sets older than Priests are no longer tournament-legal. Or all sets older than Women, or older than G/H, something like that.