Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Today I had a thought I was wondering what the Redemption community would think about this new idea.  All of us have faced the rath of a Garden Tomb, Genisis, or purple ignor deck and have seen the un-fun playing that can result from ignorring before a character enters battle, or pre-ignor.  I was thinking that a way to possibily make the game more battle-oriented would be to change the defination of ignor just slightly so as that it would let characters that would be ignored enter battle, basically making ignor like immunity except you don't have to defeat the character by the numbers.  Repell and "cannot enter battle" would go back from meaning pretty much ignor to meaning what they sound like: repell sending a character back to territory and "cannot enter battle" meaning the character can't enter battle, but if it is already in battle then it is uneffected by the card.  These changes would only slightly de-power existing stratigies because, although an evil character can now enter battle while ignored, he still has to somehow defeat the character in battle while ignored.  This way the next set of cards won't have to be made to help combat pre-ignor, people won't have to build decks in fear of Garden Tomb, and pre-ignor can still be an effective tool.  I'm not calling for any rules to be changed, I would just like to pose this idea to the Redemption community and see what you think. Thank you and Godbless.

If you did that, it would make people who use TGT actually have cards to back it up instead of just "splashing" it in their deck.  I think splashing TGT means that you are not willing to figure what would REALLY make your deck better!  I like the idea!

Hey,

I have considered this sort of idea a couple times in the last couple years.  There are two main problems with it:

(1) it would be a HUGE change.  The change would go against 10+ years of precedent and significantly change the way ignore functions and is used.  That's not something we're inherently not willing to do, but the bigger the change the more justification is needed to make it happen, and I don't think there's enough justification for this.

and

(2) it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy.  While I empathize with the dislike of pre-block ignore and I struggle to find ways to beat The Garden Tomb like everyone does, eliminating a strategy from the game is never a good thing.  More strategies always makes the game more varied and thus more interesting.  The flip side being that fewer strategies makes the game less interesting.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

pre-ignor wouldn't be eliminated as a strategy because the EC still has to somehow would still beat the hero in battle.n  If you can play the ignor before the EC enters then they never have a chance to play a kill card aganst you or be immune to you or anything like that.  It would be just like playing any other kill card before battle, except it doesn't necessarly have to target a specific character, but could target a varity of characters (ignor a birgade, ignor human/demon, ignor a class).  Think about how many battle-winners would would work while you are ignored in battle?  You either have to negate the ignor or play something like death of unrightious to win.  It would still be a powerful strategy, you would just have to have more in a deck other than The Garden Tomb.

All of us have faced the wrath of a Garden Tomb,

I feel sometimes that I'm alone in the fact that when I faced a GT deck, I had no problems with being ignored (because I never was).  Even the person who I was against said that I had no problems dealing with him (I only lost due to not getting the enhancements I need (like in most games )).

I'll never understand how there can be so much noise about changing rules to solve a perceived game problem( hand limit fiasco), then endorse an idea to use game rules to "solve" a perceived game problem( this one ).  As far as this idea goes, I think it would drop ignore off the map.  Many people I know use ignore solely for the fact that they cannot be blocked at all.  Making it so Deck Discard, FBTN, or any other defense gets a chance to do things against an ignore offense would kill that advantage.  Whether or not less people playing ignore is considered good is your opinion.  I like things as they are.  Just my  

it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy...eliminating a strategy from the game is never a good thing

I'd be glad to see it die.  And having an available strategy that makes the playing experience less fun, is NOT a good thing for a game to have.  Is that my opinion?  Sure, but I'm not anywhere near alone in it.

Every card defaults to in play, but your hand is not in play... why are Ignores given the exception of being able to target characters that are in your hand?

I also like this idea.  It resolves an inconsistency, hurts "pre-block" ignore, but still leaves it playable as you can still use it to keep those nasty ECs in your opponents territory (that have horses WC EEs on them) from blocking you

I wouldn't mind in the least if nobody used Ignore as it works now. Epic battle phases are the best part about the game, and PBI just removes any chance of it. In addition, the problem with BPI is that it takes far fewer cards than all other viable strategies to work:

TGT+TGT Hero, then you have a whole other offense
Jacob+RTC, then you have a whole other offense
Elishana+Gathering+Melchizedek+Peace Treaty, then you have ten more offensive cards
Cheribum+ET+Peace Treaty and Spiritual Warfare, then you have a whole other offense
Jeremiah+HT+Spiritual Warfare and Burning Incense, then you have a whole other offense

The imbalance is that the most powerful offense is also the one that requires the least to work.

Besides pre-block ignores, ignores in general is actually somewhat risky, considering that it gives your opponent infinite inish that they can use to destroy your territory then interupt the ignore and get rid of you.  Also, maybe if people play with Priestly Breastplate more often, then they can stop all non-cbn ignores.

However, if it must be changed, then I'm also with Lambo idea of playing from hand.

Hey,

Quote from: SirNobody on January 28, 2010, 05:41:35 AM

it would completely kill the pre-block ignore strategy...eliminating a strategy from the game is never a good thing

I'd be glad to see it die.  And having an available strategy that makes the playing experience less fun, is NOT a good thing for a game to have.  Is that my opinion?  Sure, but I'm not anywhere near alone in it.

Does that mean that you wish we would have killed Choose the Blocker back in 2004 too?

Jacob+RTC, then you have a whole other offense
Elishana+Gathering+Melchizedek+Peace Treaty, then you have ten more offensive cards
Cheribum+ET+Peace Treaty and Spiritual Warfare, then you have a whole other offense
Jeremiah+HT+Spiritual Warfare and Burning Incense, then you have a whole other offense

I assume that anyone that is seriously concerned about these combos is playing with Darius' Decree.  Not that Darius' Decree is single-handedly the answer to all of them (and of course TGT isn't on that list at all) but Darius' Decree is a huge step in the right direction.

Tschow,

Tim "Sir Nobody" Maly

You forgot Maharai + Claudia + ET + No Need for Spices, Scarlet Line, and all those others. That's my favorite (to use), and it goes perfectly with speed.

No Need for Spices doesn't work with this...

See, the wording on No Need for Spices only further strengthens my argument I think...

If you specify in battle only, you can still add characters in from hand or territory right? Why does RTC stop ECs from entering battle from hand then, when all cards that don't specify locations default to in play? My hand is not in play, why are those ECs being targeted?

Ah, I forgot the "in battle" part...and also won a game or two that I probably shouldn't have.

However, Scarlet Line still works for that combo, correct?