Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 40656 times)

LordZardeck · « **Reply #150 on:** March 16, 2012, 11:27:21 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on March 16, 2012, 11:25:47 PM

Dom cap + not able to rescue your own lost souls balances the meta incredibly. It makes every single player reevaluate which is more important in regards towards Dom selection, defense, and lost soul generators. Before yesterday it did not take me much thought into building a top tier deck. I now actually find myself having to think about different scenarios and possibilities.

Until they find out how to deal without it, and then we are back where we started.

LordZardeck · « **Reply #151 on:** March 16, 2012, 11:28:51 PM »

question: do these rules apply to the already in progress root tourney?

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #152 on:** March 16, 2012, 11:29:17 PM »

Check the ROOT thread for info on that.

Master KChief · « **Reply #153 on:** March 16, 2012, 11:29:53 PM »

Quote from: LordZardeck on March 16, 2012, 11:27:21 PM

Until they find out how to deal without it, and then we are back where we started.

Both rule changes promote a slower game. I don't think we'll ever be where we started in those regards.

Red · « **Reply #154 on:** March 17, 2012, 12:24:14 AM »

Yes, I actually am on board with these rules now. When I was constructing my deck that I play now it took me longer than 5 minutes. Deck construction now requires longer time with more decisions not counting the benefits of the longer deck construction on the metagame.

Isildur · « **Reply #155 on:** March 17, 2012, 02:39:48 AM »

Thank you playtesters for finally going through with a drastic rule change. Sure this really doesnt help vs Mayhem or too much with op'd super fast decks but it does make a "normal" or "Brandon" play style once again possible. I honestly havnt been able to use my Deacon deck competitively since before Priests came due to doms crushing me with the new rule change I think I might just break the deck out for the next tourney (:

SignoftheStar · « **Reply #156 on:** March 17, 2012, 08:38:08 AM »

While everyone else is at it, I'll add my two cents.

1: I think this is a pretty great idea, though that may be because I usually keep my dominants to a minimum. Anyway, this really keeps decks from being super small with the minimum Lost Souls and having, like, 10 dominants as well. I always liked the Site Cap, and now I like the Dominant Cap for the same reason.

2: This is actually the one that made my chin hit the edge of my desk. Who doesn't use Son of God on their own Lost Soul? My feelings are kind of mixed about this one, but that's only because I enjoy rescuing my own Souls so much. All in all, I would say this change has an air of sportsmanship to it that I do like. So I'm for this rule, too.

3: Yeah, I'm like everyone else and their mother about this one. Changing rules at the discretion of the host is not a good idea, plain and simple. It makes me feel uncomfortable, it makes you feel uncomfortable. This one should be retracted.

4: Oh, come on, this one is not that big a deal. So you wait one more turn. Your Mayhem can wait. I think it's fair enough myself, but I am relatively neutral about it.

So, in recap:
1: completely support
2: support
3: do not support
4: sort of support

All in all, a decent new set of rules!

Nermon · « **Reply #157 on:** March 17, 2012, 09:34:53 AM »

all i can say is thank you for making my angels actually work again. I can now play again.

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #158 on:** March 17, 2012, 10:15:42 AM »

1. I really like this rule! I believe it will create more differences between decks now. Yes there are the same ol' lost soul generation & auto blocks and things, but it does make people play a little different based on their favorite way to play.

2. I really like this rule too. It forces people to have at least a little defense. Yes, I did enjoy playing my SoG & NJ on my own shuffler or the lost souls that they could rescue only leaving ones they couldn't, but I think this will again be a good way to make decks a little different. I think one of the biggest things this does is let people who don't play speed, to be able to maybe win some lost souls before they even draw a lost soul. I think this will create a premium on quality blocks, compared to just running a hiding for a turn or two.

3. I don't see why people are having such problems with this. First, it is optional, so my playgroup will not be doing this style. Second, I think it is a good idea for beginning playgroups. I had a group come up from Dunlap, TN to one of my tournaments, and since they are new to the game and can't afford all the newer cards, it would be nice for them to host restricted tournaments, so that we don't come down there with a bunch of dominants that none of them have yet. If you are afraid that you don't know if the tournament you are about to join is hosting a restricted category or not, then e-mail the host! Cactus puts contact information for every host for every tournament. If you are that concerned that you can't find another 4 cards to replace the 4 dominants you can't use, then take the longer and more painful option and contact the host.

4. I like this much better than to not be able to play CM or Burial first turn. I'm surprised that Mayhem hasn't received an errata before now. Grapes has had one for over a year, so why not give Mayhem one too?

Ironica · « **Reply #159 on:** March 17, 2012, 10:50:27 AM »

Do you guys think that rule#2 will make the wanderer LS more popular? Just think, you have the NT LS, */4 LS, Wanderer, and another one. If he has at least two out and one of them is either NT LS or the */4 LS, you could switch them and SOG it so that you have three LS that can't be rescued by Doms. Do you think that tactic will be used more now?

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #160 on:** March 17, 2012, 11:01:43 AM »

Quote from: Ironica on March 17, 2012, 10:50:27 AM

Do you guys think that rule#2 will make the wanderer LS more popular? Just think, you have the NT LS, */4 LS, Wanderer, and another one. If he has at least two out and one of them is either NT LS or the */4 LS, you could switch them and SOG it so that you have three LS that can't be rescued by Doms. Do you think that tactic will be used more now?

I also expect the Thorns, the FbtN, the Shuffler, some Female heroes, some NT heroes, some over */4 heroes, etc. will be found in decks. Also, you just gave your opponent an exchanger, so he can exchange right back if you don't rescue it. He most likely will have an exchanger in his deck as well. So I doubt its popularity will be affected much. Most people use it already, and the new rules give it little to no extra power.

I DO think that the */4 LS might see some play, and the NT a little more.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #161 on:** March 17, 2012, 12:45:32 PM »

FBTN Lost Soul is even more of a borderline staple than it was before! Yaaaay!

lp670sv · « **Reply #162 on:** March 18, 2012, 12:29:25 AM »

Quote from: Luxumbra on March 17, 2012, 08:38:08 AM

4: Oh, come on, this one is not that big a deal. So you wait one more turn. Your Mayhem can wait. I think it's fair enough myself, but I am relatively neutral about it.!

Jmbeers · « **Reply #163 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:15:40 AM »

There is always entering battle with a character that negates lost souls. Once you enter battle SoG/NJ the two you want and then resume your rescue attempt (or if you only need two just go in with a soul negater and end the game).

I actually took my FBTN soul out of my deck and used Iron Pan to gain acess to the NT, Woman,*/4 at a tourney today.

cardsofmanykinds · « **Reply #164 on:** March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM »

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

Lampy 2.0 · « **Reply #165 on:** March 18, 2012, 11:19:11 AM »

Quote from: cardsofmanykinds on March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

I totally agree. However, we can make that the one dominant that can rescue any lost soul, and probably put a restriction on New Jerusalem to where you can only rescue one of yours.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #166 on:** March 18, 2012, 01:55:46 PM »

Quote from: cardsofmanykinds on March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM

i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

Well, for gameplay purposes, Lost Souls in our Land of Bondage don't want to be rescued.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #167 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:02:44 PM »

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

"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."

So, a host cannot have both a regular Type 1 and a Restricted Type 1? I think it would be fun to have both, especially for comparative purposes. However, the "shared pot" for RNRS points makes that difficult. Is there any way to get both? I guess we could do a regular multiplayer and a Restricted 2-player (or vice versa).

Is there any thought of making these available for States and Regionals this year if they are well-received?

**Yes I ddoouubbllee--ppoosstteedd; deal with it!

theselfevident · « **Reply #168 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:09:50 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on March 18, 2012, 01:55:46 PM

Quote from: cardsofmanykinds on March 18, 2012, 09:31:12 AM
i think #2 is very wrong since God can redeem our souls (no pun intended) wherever we are.

Well, for gameplay purposes, Lost Souls in our Land of Bondage don't want to be rescued.

Are you saying they have hardened-hearts? Or that our Land of Bondage is stoney ground?

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #169 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:14:30 PM »

Quote

Is there any thought of making these available for States and Regionals this year if they are well-received?

I wouldn't have a problem with letting states and up be 2 and 2 or 3 and 3, but they need to be uniform.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #170 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:17:29 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on March 18, 2012, 02:14:30 PM

Quote
Is there any thought of making these available for States and Regionals this year if they are well-received?
I wouldn't have a problem with letting states and up be 2 and 2 or 3 and 3, but they need to be uniform.

Well, all the schools in Central Florida have uniforms, so this won't be a problem.

Chronic Apathy · « **Reply #171 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:19:25 PM »

Quote from: Minister Polarius on March 18, 2012, 02:14:30 PM

Quote
Is there any thought of making these available for States and Regionals this year if they are well-received?
I wouldn't have a problem with letting states and up be 2 and 2 or 3 and 3, but they need to be uniform.

I think it's best if the restricted rule stays at local and district levels. A lot of people (myself included) use State and Regional tournaments to feel out what kind of decks they want to play at Nationals and I think mixing up the rules at that level of tournament is a bad idea.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #172 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:25:41 PM »

I agree, that's why I said it needs to be uniform. Whatever the T1 rules are at Nationals, so must they be at States and Regionals. I just wouldn't have a problem with them all being 2 and 2 or 3 and 3.

robm · « **Reply #173 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:49:24 PM »

no matter how hard I think, I can't make a top tier deck. i will miss resucing my own lost souls. However I have only been able to play one game since the change, so how it effects me remains to be seen.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #174 on:** March 18, 2012, 03:01:33 PM »

I think we're missing the biggest change with these rules: March Madness. How will this change our eventual winner? Will early dropouts complain that they could have won? With this become a scandal, forever slandering the eventual winner's trophy?

News:

Author Topic: MAJOR RULE CHANGES - In effect NOW. Tell everyone! (Read 40656 times)

Chronic Apathy

Ironica

Chronic Apathy

Chronic Apathy