Author Topic: Substitute Online Tournament (Read 220537 times)

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #175 on:** October 20, 2008, 05:32:16 PM »

I beat Godspeed 5-4 for my 3rd game of the week. It was a close one. Tied at 4 and came down to a big final battle

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #176 on:** October 22, 2008, 01:16:18 AM »

I lost to Fireninja for game 1 of this week in an OTS challenge.

It was a close game 5-4 but there was virtually no interaction as his defense was no match for my offense and my defense never even got to play a card (or most of the time even block). My defense was almost completely one color, yet Garden Tomb led to 2 walk-ins. I only had 2 royals in my defense, yet King David got a walk-in as well. An AotL and a SoG, and it was game over. This is the very type of game that I think should never happen in a "strategy" game like Redemption.

In addition, I think that after 2 close losses to Fireninja, that I am beginning to suspect that I have a new nemesis

Next week, I'm coming back for more. (more LSs that I take in a game, or more punishment from Fireninja, to be decided at a later date)

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #177 on:** October 22, 2008, 03:31:18 AM »

Hmm, sounds fun. I'm in.

Not sure if this still applies, but 7 years if you count the first time I played a game or 1 year since I've been actively playing again after a long period of... well, not playing.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #178 on:** October 22, 2008, 03:32:19 AM »

Also, I'm on Prof's Redemption CCG Hamachi network if that's helpful.

Gabe · « **Reply #179 on:** October 22, 2008, 08:37:19 AM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on October 22, 2008, 01:16:18 AM

This is the very type of game that I think should never happen in a "strategy" game like Redemption.

I agree with your stance that games are much more fun for everyone involved when one player rescues, the opponent blocks and everyone plays a bunch of enhancements. I realize that it's not as fun for the opponent when they can't defend. Sometimes it's not as fun for the rescuing player either. Some people do enjoy seeing well laid plans come together and rendering an opponent's strategy useless.

To say that something like that should never happen in Redemption because it's a strategy card game completely discounts the strategy that goes into deck building. A portion of every game is won or lost before they ever sit down to play, based soley on the quality of each players deck. If you design your deck in a way that makes a large percentage of your opponent's cards useless during the game, that's good strategy on your part.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #180 on:** October 22, 2008, 08:47:38 AM »

Quote from: Tsavong Lah on October 22, 2008, 03:32:19 AM

Also, I'm on Prof's Redemption CCG Hamachi network if that's helpful.

It is extremely helpful. Welcome aboard and I look forward to playing you

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #181 on:** October 22, 2008, 08:54:48 AM »

Quote from: BrianGabe on October 22, 2008, 08:37:19 AM

To say that something like that should never happen in Redemption because it's a strategy card game completely discounts the strategy that goes into deck building.

I do not mean to disparage Fireninja's deck building (which is intelligent) or his level of play (which is excellent). I agree with you that in our current state of Redemption, that building decks like this are an effective strategy, and it requires strategy to put a good one together. I am just saying that there are 2 larger problems.

1 - Redemption as a game should not allow these particular strategies to become any more effective, because they are not fun to play with or against.

2 - Statistically speaking Garden Tomb shouldn't work against a single-colored defense, and King David shouldn't work against a deck full of non-royalty.

soul seeker · « **Reply #182 on:** October 22, 2008, 01:08:44 PM »

Gabe, please defend your #1 spot.....you're creating undue stress on my obsessive compulsive brain.

The points and leaderboard are not matching up. To pass #1 somebody has got to beat #1.

Gabe · « **Reply #183 on:** October 22, 2008, 01:32:03 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on October 22, 2008, 01:08:44 PM

Gabe, please defend your #1 spot.....you're creating undue stress on my obsessive compulsive brain.
The points and leaderboard are not matching up. To pass #1 somebody has got to beat #1.

Nobody has challenged me for two weeks.

I guess they're all scared.

Honestly, I think I'll drop from the tournament. It's been fun but I'd rather play pick up games for fun with you guys. SoulSeeker and Prof Underwood can battle it out for first.

soul seeker · « **Reply #184 on:** October 22, 2008, 02:01:45 PM »

What!?! How dare you advertise on my thread!!!

In all seriousness, I have one NW deck put together. The problem is that I've never played that style so I don't know how good it is. I may have to put another one together to be safe.

As for Gabe, Prof and I did challenge for your spot a couple of times. The problem is you rebuffed me and Prof couldn't get another win to topple you by points. I was planning the reset at the end of week 6 (the 2 starter weeks + 1 month) if you want to give it a little longer....if not then I understand. Either way, I hope you guys had/are having fun.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #185 on:** October 22, 2008, 02:23:19 PM »

Quote from: BrianGabe on October 22, 2008, 01:32:03 PM

Nobody has challenged me for two weeks. I guess they're all scared.

I thought I played you 2 weeks ago? And I asked you for a game the other night when you were too tired. And we have already talked about playing a game this week. I probably will lose, but I am definitely not scared

However, I do think that perhaps, there should be one mandatory game (out of the 3 for a week) between each person and the person next to them (starting from the top). So #1&2, #3&4, #5&6...

Quote from: BrianGabe on October 22, 2008, 01:32:03 PM

Honestly, I think I'll drop from the tournament. It's been fun but I'd rather play pick up games for fun with you guys. SoulSeeker and Prof Underwood can battle it out for first.

You left out Fireninja, who has as much a chance to win as Jon or I

Also, please do not drop out of the tournament. I really like the idea of having an online tournament, and having the National champions of the previous 2 years participating adds a lot of credibility to the event. I think that we could use a bit of tweaking, but this is just getting started, and needs time to develop. Please stick with us and help us work through it. This same message goes to Tim Mierz who I have been talking to about this very subject.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #186 on:** October 22, 2008, 07:36:10 PM »

It would be alot more fun if you could challenge anyone honestly. I would love to take a shot at briangabe but I'm farther down the ladder.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #187 on:** October 22, 2008, 07:49:56 PM »

I challenge Raven!

lightningninja · « **Reply #188 on:** October 22, 2008, 08:20:12 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on October 22, 2008, 01:16:18 AM

I lost to Fireninja for game 1 of this week in an OTS challenge.

It was a close game 5-4 but there was virtually no interaction as his defense was no match for my offense and my defense never even got to play a card (or most of the time even block). My defense was almost completely one color, yet Garden Tomb led to 2 walk-ins. I only had 2 royals in my defense, yet King David got a walk-in as well. An AotL and a SoG, and it was game over. This is the very type of game that I think should never happen in a "strategy" game like Redemption.

In addition, I think that after 2 close losses to Fireninja, that I am beginning to suspect that I have a new nemesis Next week, I'm coming back for more. (more LSs that I take in a game, or more punishment from Fireninja, to be decided at a later date)

I accept!

Also, I was not very satisfyied either with this match. Yes, good, but not great. Expecially after the epic games we've had. Also, I think I should make it known that you WOULD have won next turn. I had nothing to stop you. And only drawing two pale green evil characters out of 8 with only 16 cards left in your deck.... well, that's just messed up. A rather bad situation, after aotl defeated one of them. You played excellently and probably deserved the win more than me.

But that's how redemption is, unfortunately. That's why BrianGabe stated that the best decks only win about 80% of the time. You just can't eliminate luck in any card game. But I look forward to playing you soon. And yes, I believe being your nemesis could be fun....

Gabe · « **Reply #189 on:** October 22, 2008, 08:35:16 PM »

Quote from: fireninja on October 22, 2008, 08:20:12 PM

That's why BrianGabe stated that the best decks only win about 80% of the time.

For the record, I don't think BrianGabe ever said that. I believe it was the much wiser, handsomer, current National Chamption, Tim Mirez who said that.

soul seeker · « **Reply #190 on:** October 22, 2008, 08:41:51 PM »

Actually, I think it was Tim Maly who gave the 80% statistic.

lightningninja · « **Reply #191 on:** October 22, 2008, 10:12:40 PM »

I just played tsavong lah, but I think we made a mistake that would have turned the game around.

He used Haman's plot. It is my understanding(aren't I a genius for not thinkink of this sooner?) that you can't use it in a tourney. Because you CAN'T complete the ability on the card, so you shouldn't be able to use it. just like You can't use Jephtah if you have no top card of your deck.

please let me know. If I am wrong, why is that so? After all, I don't think that strong a card would have been made without the ending clause. would it have, Bryon, Schaef, Rob?

Thank You
Fireninja

michael/michaelssword · « **Reply #192 on:** October 22, 2008, 10:25:25 PM »

no you just renmove it from the game afterwards

New Raven BR · « **Reply #193 on:** October 22, 2008, 11:00:55 PM »

Quote from: xCaLeBx on October 20, 2008, 09:47:25 AM

I'll challenge Andy

i accept

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #194 on:** October 22, 2008, 11:20:23 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on October 22, 2008, 08:41:51 PM

Actually, I think it was Tim Maly who gave the 80% statistic.

I am sure that it was Tim Maly, and the quote can be found here.

P.S. Jonathan, I think you may have forgotten to add my 1 point for my most recent loss to FireNinja (which would put me at 28 pts).

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #195 on:** October 23, 2008, 01:57:52 AM »

Quote

He used Haman's plot. It is my understanding (aren't I a genius for not thinking of this sooner?) that you can't use it in a tourney. Because you CAN'T complete the ability on the card, so you shouldn't be able to use it. just like You can't use Jephtah if you have no top card of your deck.

You're right, but we weren't playing in a tournament game. If I had challenged you or you had challenged me, I wouldn't have been playing with that particular deck, or I would have had to have been willing to tear a Plot (which I wasn't; the deck is pretty new and untested and I don't have that many Plots to tear in the first place.

) As it was, that game was just for fun and shouldn't count for points.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #196 on:** October 23, 2008, 01:58:41 AM »

Also, since it appears that Raven is already in a challenge, I'll challenge STAMP.

lightningninja · « **Reply #197 on:** October 23, 2008, 03:57:11 PM »

So soul seeker, what is your official stance on haman's plot? For future games it would be good to know. thanks.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #198 on:** October 23, 2008, 04:08:48 PM »

STAMP beat me 5-2. Awesome game, really close until the very end. Thanks!

sk · « **Reply #199 on:** October 23, 2008, 04:45:53 PM »

Quote from: fireninja on October 23, 2008, 03:57:11 PM

So soul seeker, what is your official stance on haman's plot? For future games it would be good to know. thanks.

FWIW, back on Jacob's Ladder it was required that the player rip HP.

News:

Author Topic: Substitute Online Tournament (Read 220537 times)

michael/michaelssword