Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 40648 times)

Redoubter · « **Reply #50 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:02:30 PM »

Problems I have with all of this:

Dominants are sometimes the ONLY way to stop some offenses and strategies. So now if I get lucky and get TGT on my initial draw, I just get a free soul regardless of what my opponent drew? And now I don't have to worry that everything banded might get shuffled with Grapes, because who wouldn't use SoG and NJ? Should I even use a two/three-liner since Burial is probably out? How can I hit that artifact without DoN?

And restricting the number of dominants makes stopping offenses so much more difficult. I see this helping the meta, not hurting it, and making the rich richer, as it were.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #51 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:03:45 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 15, 2012, 09:46:59 PM

I agree, I think #3 should be a permanent rule.

I think a limit of 2 of each alignment is WAY too low. I could go with 3 or 4, I suppose. However, if we also want to encourage diversity and larger decks, a Lost-Soul-based cap is much more interesting (and less restrictive, since you can choose to have more evil and less good or vice versa).

I also agree #4 should include all dominants.

Side note: Goodbye forever Doubt.

Bryon · « **Reply #52 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:05:10 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on March 15, 2012, 09:57:45 PM

I think 4 should include ALL dominants, not just Evil. Angel of the Lord is Free LS first turn now more than ever.

We're still talking about that one. The difficulty lies in slapjack in at least 2 scenarios:

1) You rescue a lost soul in the first round, and then as soon as the round ends, there is a slapjack race to see who plays Guardian vs. Falling Away first.
2) You rescue half of the Lost SoulS card in the first round, and then as soon as the round ends, there is a slapjack race to see who plays SoG vs. Burial first.

Both of those situations could be avoided if good dominants were allowed first round, but evil ones were not. But they are not insurmountable problems if we really want good dominants stopped first round, too. We'll see what the playtesters/Rob decide.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #53 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:06:25 PM »

It is times like this that I am glad I don't start my hosting season until after I get my tax return.

I agree with those that feel an "optional" rule for deck-building is a bad idea. Optional rules like Name-on-Name and Experience Credit (for Type 1) do not have major effects on deck-building and player testing across the country. An optional deck-building rule will have major effects, and I'm not sure how they would not be negative effects. I think we should use the 3E3G dominant rule for all types at all times.

I also agree with those who feel the "Round 1 Rule" should include all dominants. This would be much easier to teach to new players, of which Central Florida Redemption is about to have at least five more in the coming weeks.

***P.S. Will you all stop typing so I can send this message!!! ****

Bryon · « **Reply #54 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:11:34 PM »

I think most players will be fine just keeping their decks at 7 dominants. Most hosts will stick with that. In fact, I think that most hosts that drop it to 2/2 will do so only by popular demand in their own playgroup.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #55 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:17:59 PM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 15, 2012, 09:56:12 PM

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 09:47:53 PM
But it will be good for the game.
How? It just seems to hurt defense and it makes you even more dependent on your opponent drawing souls...

I'm pretty well known for playing defense, and probably know defense as well as anyone. I personally think that rule #2 will end up HELPING defense.

Korunks · « **Reply #56 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:20:28 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:11:34 PM

I think most players will be fine just keeping their decks at 7 dominants. Most hosts will stick with that. In fact, I think that most hosts that drop it to 2/2 will do so only by popular demand in their own playgroup.

So how am I as a player to know which Dominant rule will be in effect?

Bryon · « **Reply #57 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:25:34 PM »

Quote from: Korunks on March 15, 2012, 10:20:28 PM

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:11:34 PM
I think most players will be fine just keeping their decks at 7 dominants. Most hosts will stick with that. In fact, I think that most hosts that drop it to 2/2 will do so only by popular demand in their own playgroup.

So how am I as a player to know which Dominant rule will be in effect?

I thought you were the host!

Seriously, expect the LS/Site/Dom cap. Bring 3 extra non-dom cards just in case. If you MUST be sure beforehand, e-mail the host.

dermo4christ · « **Reply #58 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:26:28 PM »

ugh....i soooo don't like the rule about not rescuing ur own souls. I just found out that you could do that...and not it's taken away from me....lol. Gosh!

theselfevident · « **Reply #59 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:26:58 PM »

I would like to say although I'm not too hot on rule #2, I think its great that the game is getting shaken up. It needed some changes and I love it! Its risky to change but I think its for the overall good of the game!

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #60 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:28:20 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:25:34 PM

If you MUST be sure beforehand, e-mail the host.

Is it possible to include this sidenote on the Tournaments Page at Cactus' website?

Korunks · « **Reply #61 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:31:47 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:25:34 PM

Quote from: Korunks on March 15, 2012, 10:20:28 PM
Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:11:34 PM
I think most players will be fine just keeping their decks at 7 dominants. Most hosts will stick with that. In fact, I think that most hosts that drop it to 2/2 will do so only by popular demand in their own playgroup.

So how am I as a player to know which Dominant rule will be in effect?
I thought you were the host!

Seriously, expect the LS/Site/Dom cap. Bring 3 extra non-dom cards just in case. If you MUST be sure beforehand, e-mail the host.

I was speaking hypothetically, however I also play in tournaments that I do not host. I think that answer is unsatisfactory because not all hosts are quick with their responses.

CactusRob · « **Reply #62 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:32:31 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:11:34 PM

I think most players will be fine just keeping their decks at 7 dominants. Most hosts will stick with that. In fact, I think that most hosts that drop it to 2/2 will do so only by popular demand in their own playgroup.

When I stopped requiring host to offer all categories at district and higher events, it opened the door to more categories without over taxing the host. I view these "restrictive" categories as more options. For example, some groups love Type 1 Teams and some groups never run it. The point is that the host with input of local players decides to run Teams or not. Obviously, a Teams deck is quite different from a deck you would build for another category. Building a restrictive deck shouldn't be any more drastic than a Teams deck if that much.

dermo4christ · « **Reply #63 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:32:57 PM »

Well I'm glad I was made aware of these new rulings before I go to my first tournament next weekend...

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #64 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:35:25 PM »

Quote from: CactusRob on March 15, 2012, 10:32:31 PM

Obviously, a Teams deck is quite different from a deck you would build for another category. Building a restrictive deck shouldn't be any more drastic than a Teams deck if that much.

However, players know going into the tournament what is being offered. Is there a plan to add the restrictive categories to the Tournament Application and be advertised on the Tournaments Page?

Bryon · « **Reply #65 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:36:28 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on March 15, 2012, 10:28:20 PM

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 10:25:34 PM
If you MUST be sure beforehand, e-mail the host.

Is it possible to include this sidenote on the Tournaments Page at Cactus' website?

That is a great idea. It can be posted as a (restricted) tag where all the events are listed. For example: Teams, Type 1 2P (restricted), Type 2 2-player, Booster.

Master KChief · « **Reply #66 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:37:28 PM »

Is that the offical name of the category? Restricted?

CactusRob · « **Reply #67 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:38:41 PM »

Quote from: dermo4christ on March 15, 2012, 10:26:28 PM

ugh....i soooo don't like the rule about not rescuing ur own souls. I just found out that you could do that...and not it's taken away from me....lol. Gosh!

This is relevant in our decision. Most new players do not intuitively conclude that they can rescue their own Lost Souls. Up until now, they had to be "corrected" on that point. While we believe this decision will improve the game, it has the added bonus of flowing in the direction that most new players already understand it.

Soundman2 · « **Reply #68 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:39:21 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 15, 2012, 10:37:28 PM

Is that the offical name of the category? Restricted?

yes yes it is

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #69 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:40:40 PM »

Quote from: Redoubter on March 15, 2012, 10:02:30 PM

And restricting the number of dominants makes stopping offenses so much more difficult. I see this helping the meta, not hurting it, and making the rich richer, as it were.

I played 5 games during ROOT with dominant cap and in every game it helped bolster defense and slow down games slightly rather than promoting offense more.

Bryon,
I am curious why the first round ban extends to all evil doms instead of just Mayhem. I think we all know Mayhem is the problem, not the others. With the way it is now, AotL just got a big first round boost.

I do love 1 and 2 and am so happy to see them in place sooner than later. I think we may even see more deck variety now.

Kirk

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #70 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:41:20 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 15, 2012, 10:37:28 PM

Is that the offical name of the category? Restricted?

I'm sorry but you are not allowed access to that information.

Korunks · « **Reply #71 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:42:13 PM »

I think having the rule be optional is great, it allows me to host a tournament where my n00bs can compete on more equal footing with veterans. My only real issue is one of communication. Make it part of the application and display it on the website, people can determine that info when they acquire the other tournament information. In the end I just want players to be easily able to determine whether or not they want to participate based on Dominant deck rules with out having to hunt down the host.

**** instaposted

lp670sv · « **Reply #72 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:45:09 PM »

All of this makes the thread earlier about Cactus not making new categories/listening to players hysterically ironic considering most of those rules where ones tested in ROOT.

ArmedKevin117 · « **Reply #73 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:48:42 PM »

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 07:40:11 PM

1. Dominant cap is the same as the Site cap. You cannot include more dominants in a deck than you have lost souls.

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 07:40:11 PM

2. You cannot rescue lost souls in your own Land of Bondage. This used to apply only to your heroes. Now it includes dominants, too.

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 07:40:11 PM

3. Hosts are allowed to run their (local and district level) tournaments with this even more restrictive deck building rule for dominants:
Type 1: Max 2 good and 2 evil doms in deck
Type 2: Max 3 good and 3 evil doms in deck

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 07:40:11 PM

4. Evil dominants cannot be played in the first round. ~~This MAY also apply to good dominants, but that part is still being clarified.~~

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #74 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:49:55 PM »

Quote from: lp670sv on March 15, 2012, 10:45:09 PM

All of this makes the thread earlier about Cactus not making new categories/listening to players hysterically ironic considering most of those rules where ones tested in ROOT.

How exactly? People complained that the powers-that-be weren't listening to the player base, and then they listened. That's not ironic, that's just good.

News:

Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 40648 times)

Chronic Apathy