Author Topic: New Jerusalem is not going to be banned at this time. (Read 21179 times)

Master KChief · « **Reply #75 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:05:26 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on July 10, 2009, 10:21:43 AM

Quote from: Master KChief on July 09, 2009, 09:36:50 PM
...sog/nj has no risk, but a huge reward. its broken. ban one, or both ideally.
Ban Jesus from a Christian card game. Wow.

we're not banning jesus. we're banning a card. from a card game. wow. some people take this game considerably too seriously.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #76 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:08:58 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 12:05:26 PM

wow. some people take this game considerably too seriously.

It's all good. Some people take Halo considerably too seriously.

metalpsalm · « **Reply #77 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:11:33 PM »

Quote from: crustpope on July 10, 2009, 11:45:39 AM

Dont forget he also took 2nd place from me at the MW Regionals in type 2 two player ...

and then CRIED about it due to people showing up late and their byes and such. If only HE had played Jonathan Pequinot, then maybe he could have had something to cry about like me...

I'd wanna play him just for that name.
Man! What a handle!

Master KChief · « **Reply #78 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:19:48 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 10, 2009, 12:08:58 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 12:05:26 PM
wow. some people take this game considerably too seriously.

It's all good. Some people take Halo considerably too seriously.

theres a difference between being heavily involved in a video game, and thinking master chief is the next messiah.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #79 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:23:01 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 12:19:48 PM

theres a difference between being heavily involved in a video game, and thinking master chief is the next messiah.

Sooooo...... which one are you again?

The Schaef · « **Reply #80 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:24:38 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 12:19:48 PM

theres a difference between being heavily involved in a video game, and thinking master chief is the next messiah.

I don't think Jonathan believes the Son of God card actually is Jesus. But taking Jesus out of a Christian game is kind of like taking Link out of a Zelda game. Even the multiplayer titles just had four Links

Master KChief · « **Reply #81 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:25:16 PM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on July 10, 2009, 12:23:01 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 12:19:48 PM
theres a difference between being heavily involved in a video game, and thinking master chief is the next messiah.

Sooooo...... which one are you again?

haha. touche

Master KChief · « **Reply #82 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:30:09 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on July 10, 2009, 12:24:38 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 12:19:48 PM
theres a difference between being heavily involved in a video game, and thinking master chief is the next messiah.

I don't think Jonathan believes the Son of God card actually is Jesus. But taking Jesus out of a Christian game is kind of like taking Link out of a Zelda game. Even the multiplayer titles just had four Links

yeah i didnt think so either...but i couldnt see his reasoning towards not banning a card except for the fact it relates to jesus...that seemed a bit myopic to me.

The Schaef · « **Reply #83 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:40:12 PM »

I don't get the impression that he was giving you a full dissertation on his reasoning. Just pointing out that making a Christian card game and then banning Jesus from tournament play seems to send a strange message.

soul seeker · « **Reply #84 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:41:36 PM »

I'm coming from a "don't ban anything" platform...so I will admit that I used a play on words for emphasis to not ban the card. However, as Schaef well illustrated; I think the SoG card should be the center and most powerful card of the game. I don't think keeping strong cards especially ones in which the game is centered around/founded on is myopic either.

Then again, I hate seeing things banned.

Master KChief · « **Reply #85 on:** July 10, 2009, 12:52:15 PM »

but my point is, isnt that a bit biased? giving special treatment (in this case, power, exemption from banning) to a card just because its related to jesus? in my opinion that doesnt fuel a balanced environment, which was my original point. i see yours as well though, and im sort of in agreement with that; the son of god card should be more powerful than other cards...but not at the level its currently at. perhaps a good multi-colored enhancement that read 'rescue any lost soul in play. cannot be negated' would help alleviate that power.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #86 on:** July 10, 2009, 02:58:54 PM »

Quote from: soul seeker on July 10, 2009, 10:21:43 AM

Plus, I think Jannissary is making some great points. I would highly recommend his posts to be read in this thread. Twice.

Someone gets a cookie at Regionals.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #87 on:** July 10, 2009, 04:41:22 PM »

I think SoG is and always has been a necessary part of the game. Yes, it's overpowered, but everyone has it and it's not a guaranteed Lost Soul (Denying Blame, Confusion, etc.). A good chance at getting 20% of what you need to win, with the risk of FA counterbalancing it is ok. The problem started when with just one more card, you could get 40%, and then became worse with the advent of GoyS. I'm not advocating banning either one, just pointing out that when the 5 LS to win rule was made, there was no NJ, and soon after there was a FA. Now, there is both NJ and GoyS but the LS requirement is the same.

Tsavong Lah · « **Reply #88 on:** July 10, 2009, 04:53:09 PM »

I still don't think the solution is to ban NJ. Cactus has recently been focused on balancing the game by introducing new cards that are useful both as counters to old cards and as new strategies; something like that is the solution to this problem, if anything. Justin's comment that "we want to see what effect TexP will have on the game before making such a drastic change" indicates, to me, that the next set probably has at least a few cards that may affect the way people use SoG/NJ.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #89 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:07:15 PM »

Quote from: Tsavong Lah on July 10, 2009, 04:53:09 PM

I still don't think the solution is to ban NJ. Cactus has recently been focused on balancing the game by introducing new cards that are useful both as counters to old cards and as new strategies; something like that is the solution to this problem, if anything. Justin's comment that "we want to see what effect TexP will have on the game before making such a drastic change" indicates, to me, that the next set probably has at least a few cards that may affect the way people use SoG/NJ.

You can try to balance the game by making counters, but when you eliminate the option to ban cards the power curve only goes up. In short eventually counters and counters to counters won't be enough.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #90 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:14:07 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on July 10, 2009, 09:07:15 PM

In short eventually counters and counters to counters won't be enough.

That's why we have counters to counters to counters (a.k.a. Cubic Counters). Since trilogies tend to make great movies, why not great counters? Of all people, a Hobbit should understand this.

Master KChief · « **Reply #91 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:16:35 PM »

*cough cough* matrix trilogy...

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #92 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:18:12 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 09:16:35 PM

*cough cough* matrix trilogy...

You didn't like the Matrix trilogy???

Master KChief · « **Reply #93 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:23:09 PM »

i liked the matrix trilogy, but you said 'great'...

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #94 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:27:13 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 10, 2009, 09:23:09 PM

i liked the matrix trilogy, but you said 'great'...

I was talking about revenue.

The Guardian · « **Reply #95 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:31:43 PM »

As has been previously stated, Rob is not against banning cards solely for the sake of having zero banned cards. It's a plus yes, but he's not "eliminating the option," instead rather viewing it as a very last resort option.

Soundman2 · « **Reply #96 on:** July 10, 2009, 10:43:22 PM »

I say NJ is not the root of the problem its GoYS in that is the problem. If we did not have GoYS in T1-2p we'd all use falling away thus SoG/NJ would not guarantee +2 lost souls. If we do ban NJ where do stop? AoCp? Urim and thummin? Also if I'm getting my butt kicked 3-0 in a game I'd rather have SoG/NJ played and have it over than sit through to more RA.

redemption99 · « **Reply #97 on:** July 10, 2009, 11:00:49 PM »

GoYS is not a problem at all

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #98 on:** July 11, 2009, 02:00:02 AM »

Soundman, no significant Redemption population is talking about banning, so you're responding to an imaginary argument. You're confusing the fact that most people have a problem with NJ with the conjecture that most people want to ban NJ. Many more are in favor of increasing the number of Lost Souls required to win, or just trusting that the NJ problem will be taken care of organically by new cards.

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #99 on:** July 11, 2009, 09:14:39 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on July 10, 2009, 09:31:43 PM

As has been previously stated, Rob is not against banning cards solely for the sake of having zero banned cards. It's a plus yes, but he's not "eliminating the option," instead rather viewing it as a very last resort option.

All I know is Nathan Mashuda asked him straight up if he would ever ban cards, and he said no.

News:

Author Topic: New Jerusalem is not going to be banned at this time. (Read 21179 times)

The Schaef

The Schaef

TheHobbit13