Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Outside of regular tournament play, players can still play just to 5 if they wish for a shorter game. The "60/6" rule could become an "optional advanced rule" that simply becomes the norm like name on name bonus.

Why do we have to change the game? I like being able to play with a 50 card deck.  When the next starter deck comes out would they be 60 card decks then???

I have a nice 50 card deck. Going to 60 would just make the game take longer and have more time outs.

I haven't read every page of the discussions but I have read a few and I thought I would give my opinion as a play group leader of a kind of new group.

1. Increasing the deck size to 60 would actually hurt my group in alot of ways.  I make the decks for the kids when they start and the decks are 50 to 56 cards.  If I had to increase there deck size the decks of the new players would get even weaker as I only have so many strong cards that I can give each player.  Plus buying sleeves to cover the increase would be a bit harder for me. Plus starter decks are 50 so I like that number.

2. Increasing the time of games isn't a good idea.  If the time limit was 55 minutes and you only gave 5 minutes in between rounds that wouldn't work well.  If someone times out they need to have enough time to go to the bathroom, grab a snack and atleast stand up for a minute so what would happen is that T1-2p would just extend even longer.  And since T1-2p is usually the largest number of players  (atleast here in the NW) that would make that event a half hour to an hour longer and that really throws off schedules.

3. NJ is powerful but I think it isn't over powerful.  There are alot of ways to stop it or slow it down enough.  Using confusion to take out SoG effectively makes NJ nothing more then a place holder.  Altar of Ahaz is nice.  Honestly I really like the idea of have a no dominants category like Type NW.  Then a player can choose which category and can either deal with having NJ played in games or avoid it all together.

i love New Jerusalem!

in all honesty i REALLY dislike the idea of banning new jerusalem.
i mean it's well balanced and when son of God has been used it makes useful for other things. i mean if there are any cards that should be banned it's haman's plot cause banning new jerusalem is a bad idea.
but i doubt rob wants any cards banned from redemption cause that's what makes this game unique is it's biblical and it doesn't have banned cards

Will you nubs stop talking about banning NJ? Nobody wants to do that. We're talking about increasing deck size and play-to.

As much as I hate to get on Pol's bad side, I think that there is a relatively small number of extremists who would like to see every copy of NJ banned, burnt, and buried.  Such as the person who posted before me.   So saying that no one wants it banned isn't quite true (actually, nearly my entire playgroup would like to see it banned).

I don't mind NJ at all but I also wouldn't care if it got banned. I have no problem with the card and it in no way ruins the game but if it gets banned it will equally effect EVERYONE so what is the big deal...if anything that opens up another slot in your deck for maybe Grapes of Wrath!! As for increasing deck size...I hope that never happens.

There may have just been some confusion about the seemingly conflicting suggestions to increase the mimiumum deck size (while increasing lost soul rescues) and decreasing the maximum deck size.

I think personally straight up FBN decks died with FooF

I think personally straight up FBN decks died with FooF

No, they didn't sadly. I think its just that there are alot of counters to them, but no one prepares for a FBN deck. Either way, my points are still valid, I challenge any of you to play my Samaritan deck and lose.

I'm coming in late (and kind of surprised) to this debate, but I still want to post my opinion. And, since this opinion comes from me, you can expect it to be long. 

I am adamantly opposed to the banning on NJ. Here are my reasons:

1) As stated several times previously, Cactus has never banned any Redemption card, and that has been one of the great aspects of the game. Whenever you open a pack of cards or get a promo, and find a card you think is great, you can play it. I have been busy working with another game company, and one of the things we want to do as we produce new dice (the game is called "Dragon Dice") is make sure all previously produced dice are still viable. I hate having to sift through banned lists to make a tournament deck, which is one reason I only play games like Magic in friendly settings. Plus, although a slippery slope is not a necessary followup to a single banning, it makes future ones more palatable, and becomes an easy way out to card issues. One of the greatly anticipated features of new sets is what cards Cactus produced to solve the unintended consequences of the last set.

2) The "fun factor" has been stated several times. Let's turn that around. Suppose you have a new player, who enters a tournament with many players above their level. As they continually get squashed 5-0 and 5-1, the fun starts to die. OK, maybe getting that 1 more LS isn't going to salvage much, but it might make them think they have a chance at this game someday. (And my impression is that some players are defining "fun" as "milking every last point I can from the clueless noobs, so NJ spoils my LS differentials." And don't tell me some players aren't thinking that!)

3) LS screw (borrowing from Magic's mana screw). In your first four turns, you pull 5 LSs, while your opponent pulls one (and promptly Buries it). Sound familiar? It happens sometimes. NJ gives you the possibility of using it defensively early in a situation like this, giving you a fighting chance to survive. (This happened to me TODAY in a game against my son. I eventually lost 5-4, but an early SoG/NJ kept him from getting a couple of early rescues that might have ended the game more quickly.) Again, there may be some players who are drooling at the thought of those quick high differential games, but there needs to be a balance to help you try to overcome the luck of the draw.

4) Site defense, from what I've read elsewhere, is a popular deck build. Obviously you want to put site access cards in your deck, but SoG/NJ also are a check on site defense. The banning of NJ would make site defense even more powerful.

5) Marketing. Yes, like it or not, Cactus makes Redemption primarily to make money on it. If they stop making money, we stop getting Redemption, and Rob's kids can't go to college. SO now you have a nice Gift Set with a NJ card in it. Your noob walks into the store, buys his Gift Set to start his collection, sees NJ, gets excited, and builds his first attempt at a deck. He goes to his local tournament, and is told, "Sorry, kid-can't use that card." His natural response is, "So why put it in the box for me to see and get excited about then?" Maybe he doesn't completely sour on the game, but now he's wary when he sees a new powerful card (especially if he comes from a CCG background). This is an unnecessary stumbling block for new players.

6) I haven't been to a tournament for a while, so maybe having games time out isn't as big an issue as it used to be. Still, I recall that a lot of games used to go long, and there would be quite a few time-outs. NJ helps to shorten games. There is a significant minority of Redemption players who prefer quicker games, as I found out when I proposed/ran Redemption Retro a few years ago. I'm in favor of keeping the strategic situation as it is. (For this reason, I also oppose having T1 go to 6 rescues. Why do we want to drag these games out?)

Finally, I would like to go on record as saying that IF NJ is banned, I think the SoG ruling needs to be revisited. IF you don't have the chance to get that 2nd LS among those you can rescue, then SoG should go back to rescuing EVERY LS in the game (except only getting 1/2 of the double LS card).

Aren't you all sorry I came back to the boards? (At least, until school starts again, and I have two jobs, plus marching band for my son...)

Quote from: Minister Polarius on August 14, 2009, 01:33:25 AM

@ D-man, thanks for calling me out. I meant nobody with much credibility (MKC was being fascist).

@ EJB, would you like to elaborate on why? Tons of people have outlined very well thought-out and detailed arguments for why we should go up to 60 with 6 LS's. Is the best you can do, "I hope it never happens?"

LotR for instance I never draw my whole deck. I put cards in my deck to use them and I won't always use them if I don't draw my whole deck...

That makes the deck building so much better than Redemption. I don't know if I will get to the cards I  need when I am playing or not so I pack 4 of the cards I need for sure.  I Iike it because it eliminates alot of the luck factor In a ccg and puts more of an ephasis on deck building. In redemption it is to easy to draw your deck making it more of a game of luck than a game of deck building. There is a deck building element in Redemption but I dont feel that players are reworded enough for building a good deck.

That's one of the perils of coming in late. We haven't been talking about banning NJ for a while (well, nobody has been for it, but a lot of people are still making cases for why it shouldn't be banned). The more pertinent question now is whether to increase deck size to 60 and Lost Souls to win to 6. That takes care of the problem of winning with five cards and doesn't require any banning.

What if we do both? I like that.