Author Topic: Highway (Read 18644 times)

MichaelHue · « **Reply #75 on:** April 27, 2009, 11:56:03 AM »

Quote from: crustpope on April 27, 2009, 10:05:31 AM

@ Hue, If you did not say anything about how to counter the deck then I must have misread your post and I apologize for lumping you in with Pol. When Rob claimed that dicarding someones deck in one turn is unsportmanlike you have to put it in persepctive. is beating an opponent 100-0 in a game of HS basketball unsportmanlike? yeah probably. Just because it is legal doesnt make it right. Now B-Ball is different from redemption, but you have to acknowledge that there is somethign wrong with this type of strategy from a playing persepctive. This is the ultimate hand control/deck discard deck. While the guy playing it may be the best person in the world, the intent behind this deck is to totally destroy your hand and deck they way the New England Patriots would devasatate a HS football team. Yeah it may be legal, but if you were ont he recieving end, wouldnt you begin to think that something was wrong here?

If you're using a deck that cannot do anything similar to your opponent, your basketball/football analogy makes more sense, but I can't see why you wouldn't use a powerful deck in Type II (not necessarily a combo deck, but there are a LOT of powerful strategies out there). It seems like the idea of not being able to take an action during your opponent's turn is what's bothering you, but just remember that you get your turn also. The "ultimate hand control/deck discard deck" can still easily lose to another good deck, even one with a completely different strategy.

Let's say I come up against a speed deck in a tournament, and am either not prepared to stop it or just get a bad draw. I lose 5-0, and hardly get to do anything to my opponent. Is he a bad sport? Maybe, but that is determined by how he acts, not by how he plays.

Combo decks can be incredibly powerful, but also come with increased risks. It's very difficult to build a combo deck that can win consistently without relying on the combo it is based on.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #76 on:** April 27, 2009, 01:07:50 PM »

The basketball analogy fails, too, because in that game it's over if you're up 30 points at halftime. In Redemption it's not over until you have 7 souls. I can't tell you how many times in the past I lost a game I should have won because I didn't engage in overkill.

Bryon · « **Reply #77 on:** April 27, 2009, 01:25:15 PM »

At a regional tournament here, a player was beating Chris Bany 6 to 0. Chris FINALLY got his devastator combo set up, destroyed his opponent's hand, territory, and deck in a 20 minute turn, and proceeded to win over the the next 5 turns 7-6.

Even after such a close win, that could have been a loss, Rob changed the rules about side battles to fix the game. It is NOT a bad thing that you can destroy a player's hand, deck, and/or territory. The bad thing is that you can do it all in one turn, and that turn could be turn 3 if you get a lucky draw. 20 minute solitaire is not fun for the spectators. Some might want it that way, but most do not.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #78 on:** April 27, 2009, 02:19:42 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on April 27, 2009, 10:05:31 AM

This deck sets up MUCH faster than any of the other combos. There are only a few cards you would need in your hand to get it started.

You can't possibly make such a claim unless you have seen every other T2 combo deck play out.

Kirk

crustpope · « **Reply #79 on:** April 27, 2009, 03:10:41 PM »

Quote from: Captain Kirk on April 27, 2009, 02:19:42 PM

Quote from: crustpope on April 27, 2009, 10:05:31 AM
This deck sets up MUCH faster than any of the other combos. There are only a few cards you would need in your hand to get it started.

You can't possibly make such a claim unless you have seen every other T2 combo deck play out.

Kirk

True. It sets up much faster than any other combo deck I have played. In the three times I have played this deck it set up in an average of 7-8 turns. In two of those games I got Kindoms in my first or second draw so it set him back a few turns until he could play vengeance on a provisioned character.

Both Rob and I are finding a lot of resistance to this idea, it seems like many of you are sittign there thinking to your self. hmm, these turkeys just dont play the right defense or they dont have the right cards in their deck.

fine, believe what you wan.. I just hop ehe take the deck to nats.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #80 on:** April 27, 2009, 03:24:08 PM »

Yea, that isn't any faster than decks that have existed for several years (decks that all influenced the most recent influx of such decks).

It isn't that people are saying you don't play the right defense or have the right cards in your deck. We are speaking from the perspective that this type of deck has never done better than 3rd at nationals. We realize how effective they are as that has been proven for many years. However, any deck that relies on a combo to win a game is susceptible to bad draws or your opponent can play his cards perfectly and the combo deck fails.

Kirk

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #81 on:** April 27, 2009, 03:35:40 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on April 27, 2009, 03:10:41 PM

Both Rob and I are finding a lot of resistance to this idea, it seems like many of you are sittign there thinking to your self. hmm, these turkeys just dont play the right defense or they dont have the right cards in their deck.

IMO, the reason both Rob and you are facing a lot of resistance because we've seen the same claims before.

Last year around this time, we had a huge thread about Cooper's invincible Puple deck that set up in no time and abused Trust and Prosperity. My Nats 2008 deck's took slightly less less than 8 turns (although the number was helped by a four turner early on) on average to set up. Captain Kirk's combo deck was the best combo deck I've seen and it set up in 8 or fewer turns in five out of six games in Nats 2007, and he played the same deck for a few games at Nats 2008.

Those three decks have--combined--one place (a 3rd place Nats finish in 2007) in major tournaments.

DaClock · « **Reply #82 on:** April 27, 2009, 06:03:28 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on April 27, 2009, 03:35:40 PM

Quote from: crustpope on April 27, 2009, 03:10:41 PM
Both Rob and I are finding a lot of resistance to this idea, it seems like many of you are sittign there thinking to your self. hmm, these turkeys just dont play the right defense or they dont have the right cards in their deck.
IMO, the reason both Rob and you are facing a lot of resistance because we've seen the same claims before.

Last year around this time, we had a huge thread about Cooper's invincible Puple deck that set up in no time and abused Trust and Prosperity. My Nats 2008 deck's took slightly less less than 8 turns (although the number was helped by a four turner early on) on average to set up. Captain Kirk's combo deck was the best combo deck I've seen and it set up in 8 or fewer turns in five out of six games in Nats 2007, and he played the same deck for a few games at Nats 2008.

Those three decks have--combined--one place (a 3rd place Nats finish in 2007) in major tournaments.

That doesn't include Justin Alstad's earlier version of a similar deck which didn't do well when he played it at nationals either. I helped him play-test his ideas and they worked out well. However, if an opponent had played against a similar-type deck before a well-place dominant would ruin the combo. Unfortunately for him, he played against some people that had opportune draws to stop his combo.

crustpope · « **Reply #83 on:** April 27, 2009, 06:52:32 PM »

eh, I may be chicken little claiming that the sky is falling. but that does not change the fact that having someone's entire deck discarded in 15-20 minutes cannot be good for the game.

I don't ming getting beat, heck ive done it before, I just like to be able to play a hand every now and then.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #84 on:** April 27, 2009, 09:24:45 PM »

the decks and the combos are there, no mistake about it. The question is are they overpowered to the point of change? My recommendation is- not at this point. So at what point should there be an official declaration of change?
if we take a look at type 1 (b\c there is no way this is happenning in type 1) with justins speedfreak it completly changed the metagame. Would this combo be considered overpowered? I mean i maynot affect my opponents deck-but there'd be plenty of times where i would put all my lost souls on the bottom of my own deck to stall a couple of turns. Is it ok if i put all of my lost souls on the bottom of my deck and put my whole twenty + card hand on top of them?

anyways, seems a little overpowered to me. And im sure bryon can remember nationals 2 years ago when that guy couldnt believe i took all of his doms out of his deck, put his cards from hand on his library and proceeded to play 3 sin in the camps. Which usually happens on turn 6 by the way if not sooner depending on wheher i feel

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #85 on:** April 27, 2009, 09:28:00 PM »

its safe to go off or not. I mean get over it. Thats just type 2 for ya. We's the big boys.
anyways. Just wanted to put in some things to think about

Jacob_stroh · « **Reply #86 on:** April 28, 2009, 12:22:59 PM »

I can almost guarantee that no one will see this paticular combo deck at nats. He cannot afford to go, sorry Matt.

BTW BrianGabe's explanation of "used by" is incorect according to the reg. Used by refers to the card itself not whom the target of the special ability is.

Used by
See also Played by.

Played by
Some cards in Redemption® make reference to a special ability being ‘played by’. The phrase ‘played by’ refers to cards played directly on the holder’s character(s) in battle. It does not refer to cards played by another player.

Gabe · « **Reply #87 on:** April 28, 2009, 12:40:18 PM »

I quoted that exact statement.

crustpope · « **Reply #88 on:** April 28, 2009, 01:05:10 PM »

Quote from: Jacob_stroh on April 28, 2009, 12:22:59 PM

I can almost guarantee that no one will see this paticular combo deck at nats. He cannot afford to go, sorry Matt.

Heck then I will build it and take it

Soundman2 · « **Reply #89 on:** April 28, 2009, 01:09:09 PM »

how mean of this deck tape are out there? if its just one or 2 than I see no need to change it

crustpope · « **Reply #90 on:** April 28, 2009, 01:13:37 PM »

Quote from: Soundman2 on April 28, 2009, 01:09:09 PM

how mean of this deck tape are out there? if its just one or 2 than I see no need to change it

Yeah, but it will be copied. Especially if it lays waste to the competition. then there will be millions. just like speed in type 1 multiplayer.

STAMP · « **Reply #91 on:** April 28, 2009, 01:56:22 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on April 28, 2009, 01:13:37 PM

Yeah, but it will be copied.

Only if it's revealed.

The Guardian posted Speed Freak after all.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #92 on:** April 28, 2009, 03:47:22 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on April 28, 2009, 01:05:10 PM

Quote from: Jacob_stroh on April 28, 2009, 12:22:59 PM
I can almost guarantee that no one will see this paticular combo deck at nats. He cannot afford to go, sorry Matt.

Heck then I will build it and take it

I suppose there are worse ways to finish in the middle of the T2-2P pack

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #93 on:** April 28, 2009, 03:56:38 PM »

it doesnt take a genious to figure out how to build such a deck...or maybe it does ;p

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #94 on:** April 28, 2009, 04:01:56 PM »

Will this thread ever end? I think it needs to hit the Highway.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #95 on:** April 28, 2009, 04:12:56 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on April 28, 2009, 04:01:56 PM

I think it needs to hit the Highway.

A wise man once said, "Are you trying to provoke me?

"

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #96 on:** April 28, 2009, 04:16:56 PM »

Quote

he could play vengeance on a provisioned character.

Wasting provisions is game breaking?

Gabe · « **Reply #97 on:** April 28, 2009, 04:21:06 PM »

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on April 28, 2009, 04:16:56 PM

Wasting provisions is game breaking?

Quote from: Chicken Little

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #98 on:** April 28, 2009, 04:25:19 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on April 28, 2009, 04:12:56 PM

A wise man once said, "Are you trying to provoke me? "

It appears that the answer was "yes."

What happened to the good ole' threads like:

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=13679.45

***EDIT*** Interesting side note - having Darth Maul in the quote box makes him look like a marble (If you are logged on using Metalistic theme). I will forevermore refer to him as Darth Marble.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #99 on:** April 28, 2009, 04:42:21 PM »

@crustpope and robm and the mystery creator of the new deck:

Last year at this time I was almost completely convinced my deck was going to be one that forced Rob to come over in the middle of Nats and ban it on the spot. In fact, that was my goal in designing the deck--because every year someone wins T2-2P but a mid-tournament Rob ban-hammer is a ultra-rarity. Alas and alack it 'twas not meant to be.

So all the bantering isn't meant to ridicule the deck or how effective it is, or to minimize how much it stinks to lose to a combo deck. It also definitely isn't aimed at denying the amount of work that went into developing and tweaking it. Everyone is just having a bit of fun--mostly at themselves--for thinking about all the times that they thought they had come up with the perfect unbeatable deck.

It would be cool if this deck is ban-hammer worthy. To be able to put it on a shelf next to the Devestator would be most excellent. I'm pulling for ya.

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on April 28, 2009, 04:25:19 PM

What happened to the good ole' threads like:

http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/index.php?topic=13679.45

I don't know. The Schaef seemed to be getting pretty worked up any time I would mention Mosquito Coast. Not that he's wrong mind you; it is one of the worst movies of all time.

News:

Author Topic: Highway (Read 18644 times)

Jacob_stroh