Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 40663 times)

JSB23 · « **Reply #75 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:53:10 PM »

Does this new rule set completely replace the old dominant rules?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #76 on:** March 15, 2012, 10:59:58 PM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 15, 2012, 10:53:10 PM

Does this new rule set completely replace the old dominant rules?

As far as I can tell. Not sure what you mean by old dominant rules though.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

lp670sv · « **Reply #77 on:** March 15, 2012, 11:00:16 PM »

Quote from: Chronic Apathy 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.

Yes because I'm sure these rules were announce specifically right now because of that thread.

Ken4Christ4ever · « **Reply #78 on:** March 15, 2012, 11:02:23 PM »

Quote from: JSB23 on March 15, 2012, 10:53:10 PM

Does this new rule set completely replace the old dominant rules?

I am positive that you can still only have one of each dominant, which was really the only dominant rule before, wasn't it?

Master KChief · « **Reply #79 on:** March 15, 2012, 11:03:08 PM »

Quote from: lp670sv on March 15, 2012, 11:00:16 PM

Yes because I'm sure these rules were announce specifically right now because of that thread.

Are you somehow under the impression players haven't said something for years?

JSB23 · « **Reply #80 on:** March 15, 2012, 11:09:58 PM »

Quote from: Ken4Christ4ever on March 15, 2012, 11:02:23 PM

I am positive that you can still only have one of each dominant, which was really the only dominant rule before, wasn't it?

You should have waited until I got a second elder to confirm...

soul seeker · « **Reply #81 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:00:20 AM »

Mentioning of Teams brings a question up.
What categories are these new rules limited too? (All of them, just T1 2P, etc.)

stefferweffer · « **Reply #82 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:18:50 AM »

Quote from: Ryupeco11 on March 15, 2012, 09:40:16 PM

rule 4 i disagree with the fact that its only evil dominants. if you are going to restrict evil Doms first round why not just restrict ALL Doms first round? in my opinion that would be better anyway thats my thought on the new rules ^_^

I for one hope that this rule just becomes Mayhem only, and here's why:

1) The player who goes first SHOULD be vulnerable to Christian Martyr or having the LS they are going for get buried. With this rule though, if you draw an awesome hero (Strong Angel, COTH) in your opening hand, you're even further guaranteed a lost soul. You also can't bury the half-rescued two-liner as a defensive move.

2) But I feel that the person who drew the most lost souls but has no souls to rescue in opp's territory, should be able to play Harvest Time to get a lost soul out. This is why I feel that good dominants should be allowed in the first round.

Just my thoughts on rule # 4 right now.

Master Q · « **Reply #83 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:19:52 AM »

1. Excellent! (No complaints. Creativity. Variety. 105 miles to Chigaco. Full tank o' gas. Half pack of Cigs. Dark. Sunglasses. Woot!

)

2. Excellent! (No more cheap SoG denials on the Shuffler or to limit LS availability!)

3. Not! (Those 25+ Harvest Times I have? Coasters with this rule

)

4. Excellent! (though to be fair, good doms should be limited as well, not being able to CM after AotL 1st turn is kinda harsh)

Peculiar implementation time though (Tourney in 2 days

), assuming this is not a scam...

Soundman2 · « **Reply #84 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:22:42 AM »

Quote from: Master Q on March 16, 2012, 12:19:52 AM

1. Excellent! (No complaints. Creativity. Variety. 105 miles to Chigaco. Full tank o' gas. Half pack of Cigs. Dark. Sunglasses. Woot! )

2. Excellent! (No more cheap SoG denials on the Shuffler or to limit LS availability!)

3. Not! (Those 25+ Harvest Times I have? Coasters with this rule )

4. Excellent! (though to be fair, good doms should be limited as well, not being able to CM after AotL 1st turn is kinda harsh)

Peculiar implementation time though (Tourney in 2 days ), assuming this is not a scam...

I dont think you have to use them at your tourney.....

Master Q · « **Reply #85 on:** March 16, 2012, 12:27:34 AM »

Quote from: Soundman2 on March 16, 2012, 12:22:42 AM

I dont think you have to use them at your tourney.....

Quote from: Ken4Christ4ever on March 15, 2012, 09:38:46 PM

I will be implementing these rules (except #3) this Saturday in WI.
Ken

This means I will have to change my T1 decks this Sat, since I am from WI.

Ironica · « **Reply #86 on:** March 16, 2012, 01:29:18 AM »

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.

Yea for those of us wh only dreamed of having all the doms :p

Quote

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.

WOW. Now that's a change. I'm with the camp that only wanted this rule to apply to NJ but you get what you can get.

Quote

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

I (Rob) will update the host application tomorrow so the host can mark if he or she is running a "restricted" event in place of the regular event. RNRS will go into the same pot. This is a test and is not required of the host and only for smaller level tournaments. I will also note if the category is retricted on the Tournament Listing page on the Cactus site. If any host wants to modify an already posted event to use restrictive deck building rules, send me an email and I will update the listing.

I don't know why people are up in arms in this. You will know what the limit is by looking at the tournament list. I see it no different then having the option of a closed local or an open local.

Quote

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

Meh. No biggie for those of us who have only seen Mayhem on RTS :p.

sk · « **Reply #87 on:** March 16, 2012, 05:35:07 AM »

How does this apply to Teams?

Bryon, do you plan to implement any #3/restricted rules at the March 24th tournament?

Jmbeers · « **Reply #88 on:** March 16, 2012, 06:22:47 AM »

To toss my hat into the lot here, I hate #3.

But I actually don't like 4 either. I know your trying to stop Mayhem but I can't remember how many games where my only option for a block 1st round was CM or Burial. It's rather frightening to not have that option

Redoubter · « **Reply #89 on:** March 16, 2012, 06:57:08 AM »

The main problem with #3 I want to point out again (and others have said), there are currently NO optional rules that hosts can pick that significantly change the game, and none are regarding deck-building. If I have hosts in my area who one week to the next choose different deck-building options, I don't see how that is fair to the player or to continuity.

If there is a deck-building rule, it needs to apply all the time. We should not be guessing.

Also, hasn't most of the argument been that these rules help simplify things for new players? How do you explain #3 with that logic?

"Hey Newbie, welcome to the tourney! Oh, yeah, NORMALLY you could use 7 dominants in that deck, but see, we've chosen an optional rule that you can only have 2 good and 2 evil. That's not too confusing, is it? Oh, and obviously being new, you have the cards to replace it right?

"

NOT helpful to new players.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #90 on:** March 16, 2012, 07:41:37 AM »

Quote from: soul seeker on March 16, 2012, 12:00:20 AM

Mentioning of Teams brings a question up.
What categories are these new rules limited too? (All of them, just T1 2P, etc.)

That's a good question. I submit that this should extend to all categories, especially rule 2 in T2, since SoG blocks are lame. (Maybe up the dom limit for T2 though.)

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #91 on:** March 16, 2012, 08:21:10 AM »

I do so dislike rule #2. The choice to whether to play SoG defensively or wait a bit longer is one nice tactical touch in T2. (Of course this would lose a bit of drama with #3 in effect, cause who's going to keep NJ as one of their 3 in T2?) I am also not sure why a SoG chump block is any worse than a Burial chump block or a Grapes chump block.

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 09:47:53 PM

But if I am wrong and the change is not for the better, it will be changed back after Nationals.

Really? So in the new starter set are you planning on having a note by this (i.e., cannot rescue your own LS with Dominants) rule that says, "Maybe not--we may have scrapped this rule before you even opened this box." I guess that would be cool.

Red · « **Reply #92 on:** March 16, 2012, 09:04:29 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on March 16, 2012, 08:21:10 AM

Quote from: Bryon on March 15, 2012, 09:47:53 PM
But if I am wrong and the change is not for the better, it will be changed back after Nationals.
Really? So in the new starter set are you planning on having a note by this (i.e., cannot rescue your own LS with Dominants) rule that says, "Maybe not--we may have scrapped this rule before you even opened this box." I guess that would be cool.

Can I write it? Can I? Please?

(It would be nice if I had a sample of my handwriting so you all got the joke....)

CactusRob · « **Reply #93 on:** March 16, 2012, 09:48:51 AM »

(#4 rule) Regarding dominants in the first round: Are you okay with Mayhem not allowed first round but all others dominants allowed?

Also, I just uploaded a revised Tournament Host Application (changes only affect # 3 Restricted deck building).

I wish the numbering of the rules in this thread were different but, since people are citing rule #'s it would be too confusing to change now. So, I will just clarify:

Rules 1, 2 and 4 are to be mandatory for all tournaments not later than April 13th. So, adopt as soon as you can make it work for your players. I realize we need to nail down #4. I will decide by this afternoon.

Rule 3 "Restricted" deck building rules is optional and eligible only for Local and District Events for the rest of this season. Again, hosts have this as an option if that is what their local players want. Just make sure that you let me know (so that I can posted on the tournament page) and your players know about it ahead of time.
Rule 3b: Perhaps it's too much too soon but, "Restricted" could also include a list of banned cards such as A New Beginning and New Jerusalem as part of the "Restricted" category. Of course a ban list, would involve much more drastic changes to some decks.
Looking ahead, if "Restricted" tests well it could be made a full category option next season or even replace one or more categories.

robm · « **Reply #94 on:** March 16, 2012, 09:54:51 AM »

an extra caterory could be nice but that may seem to costly. i prefer just #1 to #3 though. seven doms seems fair 2 me

Master KChief · « **Reply #95 on:** March 16, 2012, 10:11:05 AM »

Quote from: CactusRob on March 16, 2012, 09:48:51 AM

(#4 rule) Regarding dominants in the first round: Are you okay with Mayhem not allowed first round but all others dominants allowed?

I'm for this, and I'm pretty sure the general consensus agree Mayhem is the main culprit. On that notion, would it make more sense to just errata Mayhem with 'Cannot be played first round'?

Quote

Rule 3b: Perhaps it's too much too soon but, "Restricted" could also include a list of banned cards such as A New Beginning and New Jerusalem as part of the "Restricted" category. Of course a ban list, would involve much more drastic changes to some decks.
Looking ahead, if "Restricted" tests well it could be made a full category option next season or even replace one or more categories.

I'm liking the sound of this.

stefferweffer · « **Reply #96 on:** March 16, 2012, 10:14:24 AM »

I agree that Mayhem simply needs an errata that it cannot be played in the first round. Of course, this would not be on the card, so new rulebooks should include one sentence about this as well.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #97 on:** March 16, 2012, 10:22:01 AM »

Rob,

Thank you for your continued willingness to include our input in the direction of the game. I don't solely speak for myself when I say it means a lot that our opinion matters.

I completely agree with MKC and Steffer about Mayhem. I may be wrong and just missing something, but wouldn't an errata for Mayhem be the easiest solution instead of having a rule to stop Mayhem in the first round?

I like the sound of making Restricted a new category. Numerous players have advocated for such for a long time and Type Ban has gained traction on the boards.

Kirk

Ryupeco11 · « **Reply #98 on:** March 16, 2012, 10:29:19 AM »

Quote from: CactusRob on March 16, 2012, 09:48:51 AM

(#4 rule) Regarding dominants in the first round: Are you okay with Mayhem not allowed first round but all others dominants allowed?

yes as we all know Mayhem is the reason for this rule and I think limiting all evil dominants is going to be problematic.

theselfevident · « **Reply #99 on:** March 16, 2012, 10:46:05 AM »

I think erata'ing cards is more annoying than simple rule changes. However, I do believe it should be applicable to all Dom's not just evil.

News:

Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 40663 times)

Ironica