Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Redemption® Collectible Trading Card Game HQ => Redemption® Resources and Thinktank => Strategies and Combos => Topic started by: Warrior_Monk on April 21, 2013, 03:06:25 AM
-
Hey guys, I'm here to tell you about an awesome new project Alex Olijar and I are starting called Redemption MetaGaming. This is a YouTube channel dedicated to helping you with several things:
- Deck strategies, complete lists, and expert deck discussion.
- Reviewing new sets and predicting the future meta.
- Discussing Redemption news, new rulings, and thoughts on where the game should go.
We also hope to bring you tournament coverage, complete with a video stream, interviews of top competitors, and commentary.
We will be doing games on RTS with commentary so you can see which decks are most successful, as well as how to counter them. To start off we're going to be playing some common and powerful decks to introduce people to the meta. If you are unfamiliar with any of the cards used, we will be posting the decklists in this thread and then you can look up the card on the Redemption Visualizer (http://redemptionlive.com/#/Visualizer). We have already recorded a game to give you an idea of what to expect. We apologize that the RTS quality is questionable at best. If you can't tell what a card is on the video, feel free to ask.
Redemption CCG: Westy (TGT) versus Olijar (Genesis) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xyo_AUV68I#ws)
If you have any suggestions for content you would like to see, please e-mail us at redemptionmetagaming@gmail.com. This thread will be used for Redemption MetaGaming updates, information, and discussion.
-
I'm really excited to bring you guys some awesome Redemption content! Look forward to some great discussion about your favorite cards between Westy and I. Here's the decklist I used in the video above. It's mostly a standard Genesis list, with a few kinks.
1. Jacob's Dream allows me to steal an opposing Nazareth and shut it off
2. Mixed in some Herods from some additional oomph.
3. Fit in Users of Curious Arts because he's awesome. Playing any enhancement color is great! Magic Charms isn't bad either.
Cards in deck: 50
Lost Souls: 8
Lost Soul (can't be prevented)
Lost Soul (FBTN)
Lost Soul (hopper)
Lost Soul (revealer)
Lost Soul (Site Discard)
Lost Soul (Wanderer)
Lost Soul (withdraw)
Lost Souls (2-line)
Dominants: 7
Angel of Lord
Guardian Of Your Souls
New Jerusalem
Son of God
Burial
Destruction of Nehushtan
Mayhem
Fortresses: 1
Storehouse
Sites: 1
Herod's Dungeon
Artifacts: 3
Holy Grail
Magic Charms
Stone Pillar at Bethel
Heroes: 9
Joseph
Asher
Benjamin
Eve
Jacob
Judah
Rachel
Simeon
Zebulun
Good Enhancements: 7
Seven Years of Plenty (Blue/Evil Gold)
Abraham's Descendant
Answer to Prayer
Forgiveness of Joseph
Jacob's Dream
Joseph Before Pharaoh
Reuben's Torn Clothes
Evil Characters: 8
Archelaus
Herod the Great
Pharaoh's Baker
Pharaoh's Cupbearer
Salome
The Dreaming Pharaoh
Egyptian Magicians
User of Curious Arts
Evil Enhancements: 6
Herod's Treachery
Escape to Egypt
Failed Objective
Swift Horses
Wonders Forgotten
Divination
-
I am also playing a pretty standard list, but the defense has a lot of nice tricks. It focuses on hiding lost souls through shuffling them back with Death of Unrighteous and Suicidal Swine Stampede, as well as putting them to the bottom with Hormah and even Susanna. The offense is focused on He is Risen! and The Garden Tomb, with an infinite loop of recursion of He is Risen! and a lot of ways to clear the territory, such as Authority of Christ, He is Risen!, and Holy Grail. I originally had Meeting the Messiah in here, but had to drop it due to space issues. I left Passover Hymn in to take care of nasty things like Destructive Sin and Image of Jealousy, which really mess with The Garden Tomb.
Cards in deck: 52
Lost Souls: 8
Lost Soul (*/4)
Lost Soul (can't be prevented)
Lost Soul (Female Only)
Lost Soul (hopper)
Lost Soul (N.T. only)
Lost Soul (revealer)
Lost Soul (Wanderer)
Lost Souls (2-line)
Lamb Dominants: 5
Angel of the Lord
Grapes of Wrath
Guardian Of Your Souls
New Jerusalem
Son of God
Grim Reaper Dominants: 2
Burial
Mayhem
Fortresses: 2
Herod's Temple
The Garden Tomb
Blue Sites: 1
Hormah
Artifacts: 5
Four-Drachma Coin
Holy Grail
Lampstand of the Sanctuary
Magic Charms
Samaritan Water Jar
White Covenant Cards: 1
Covenant With Death (Brown/Pale Green)
Multi-Color Heroes: 1
Faithful Servant
Silver Heroes: 1
Gabriel
White Heroes: 5
Joanna
Lydia
Mary the Mother of James
Salome
Susanna
Red Heroes: 1
Peter
Gold Heroes: 2
The Thankful Leper
The Woman at the Well
Purple Heroes: 2
John
Lois
Multi-Color Hero Enhancements: 3
First Fruits
Passover Hymn (Purple/White)
Pentecost
White Hero Enhancements: 4
Consider the Lilies
'He Is Risen'
Magnificat
Words of Encouragement
Purple Hero Enhancements: 1
Authority of Christ
Pale Green Evil Characters: 2
Balaam
User of Curious Arts
Multi-Color Evil Characters: 1
Damsel with a Spirit of Divination
Orange Evil Characters: 1
Legion
Multi-Color Evil Enhancements: 2
Destructive Sin (Orange)
Suicidal Swine Stampede (Orange)
Pale Green Evil Enhancements: 1
Death of Unrighteous
Gray Evil Enhancements: 1
Balaam's Disobedience
-
This sounds like a great idea. Thanks guys for doing this.
1. Jacob's Dream allows me to steal an opposing Nazareth and shut it off
How do you do that? I thought the rule about sites' abilities not working in battle changed?
Kirk
-
What application did you use for recording?
Thank you guys for the content.
-
I'm actually really intrigued by the version of the Genesis deck you used. I think I'm gonna give that a try.
Also, I really like this idea for a Youtube channel. Kudos to you guys. :)
-
This sounds like a great idea. Thanks guys for doing this.
1. Jacob's Dream allows me to steal an opposing Nazareth and shut it off
How do you do that? I thought the rule about sites' abilities not working in battle changed?
Kirk
Jacob's Dream 2/2 Genesis 28:13 Blue HE Take one Lost Soul site from an opponent and add it to your territory. If site held a Lost Soul, Lost Soul returns to general Land of Bondage. Discard any other cards in that site.
So yeah, you can move the protection from shuffle to yourself and away from your opponent, but how are you "turning it off" then?
-
What application did you use for recording?
Thank you guys for the content.
Quicktime Player recorded the video, and then we used Skype Screen Share and Call Recorder Demo so we could comment and record the audio. Call Recorder also records video, but it's even worse quality, so I just ripped the audio off of that and matched it up to the Quicktime video.
-
It'd probably be a bit easier to see if you didn't record your entire stream - just the play area and hand. You could also have whoever isn't recording record their hand so the viewers can see that too.
Otherwise, neato.
-
I'm actually really intrigued by the version of the Genesis deck you used. I think I'm gonna give that a try.
Also, I really like this idea for a Youtube channel. Kudos to you guys. :)
Thanks. It's kinda of a neat little toolbox.
This sounds like a great idea. Thanks guys for doing this.
1. Jacob's Dream allows me to steal an opposing Nazareth and shut it off
How do you do that? I thought the rule about sites' abilities not working in battle changed?
Kirk
Jacob's Dream 2/2 Genesis 28:13 Blue HE Take one Lost Soul site from an opponent and add it to your territory. If site held a Lost Soul, Lost Soul returns to general Land of Bondage. Discard any other cards in that site.
So yeah, you can move the protection from shuffle to yourself and away from your opponent, but how are you "turning it off" then?
I was under the impression that ruled hadn't changed and then I could push it into battle to negate the ability for the phase. I remember that discussion, but maybe I just remember the conclusion wrong.
It'd probably be a bit easier to see if you didn't record your entire stream - just the play area and hand. You could also have whoever isn't recording record their hand so the viewers can see that too.
Otherwise, neato.
Yeah, originally we were going to record my hand as well and crop it in, but we went simple for the first try to make sure everything works right. Expect this in the future though I'd say.
-
I'm actually really intrigued by the version of the Genesis deck you used. I think I'm gonna give that a try.
Also, I really like this idea for a Youtube channel. Kudos to you guys. :)
Thanks. It's kinda of a neat little toolbox.
This sounds like a great idea. Thanks guys for doing this.
1. Jacob's Dream allows me to steal an opposing Nazareth and shut it off
How do you do that? I thought the rule about sites' abilities not working in battle changed?
Kirk
Jacob's Dream 2/2 Genesis 28:13 Blue HE Take one Lost Soul site from an opponent and add it to your territory. If site held a Lost Soul, Lost Soul returns to general Land of Bondage. Discard any other cards in that site.
So yeah, you can move the protection from shuffle to yourself and away from your opponent, but how are you "turning it off" then?
I was under the impression that ruled hadn't changed and then I could push it into battle to negate the ability for the phase. I remember that discussion, but maybe I just remember the conclusion wrong.
No, this got changed at natz two years ago. Sites are active all the time, regardless of being in battle.
-
Two years ago? So much for being update on rulings.
Well, then I guess I should drop Jacob's Dream. I'd probably add some other site counter I guess, because Nazareth really hurts this deck a lot.
-
Two years ago? So much for being update on rulings.
Well, then I guess I should drop Jacob's Dream. I'd probably add some other site counter I guess, because Nazareth really hurts this deck a lot.
So...a lost soul doesn't have to be in the site for the site to be active?
-
Two years ago? So much for being update on rulings.
Well, then I guess I should drop Jacob's Dream. I'd probably add some other site counter I guess, because Nazareth really hurts this deck a lot.
So...a lost soul doesn't have to be in the site for the site to be active?
Lost souls have never needed to be in sites activate them as far as I am aware, but until recently, no special ability has done anything that you would want it to be empty for (such as Herod's Dungeon). You used to be able to shut off single color site abilities by using them in battle as an access site, but that's now be changed to say site abilities are always active.
-
Two years ago? So much for being update on rulings.
Well, then I guess I should drop Jacob's Dream. I'd probably add some other site counter I guess, because Nazareth really hurts this deck a lot.
So...a lost soul doesn't have to be in the site for the site to be active?
Lost souls have never needed to be in sites activate them as far as I am aware, but until recently, no special ability has done anything that you would want it to be empty for (such as Herod's Dungeon). You used to be able to shut off single color site abilities by using them in battle as an access site, but that's now be changed to say site abilities are always active.
Actually that only changed at Disciples.
-
The only reason I asked is because of the Collectors Edition rule book on page 10 under "site maintenance"
-
Curiosity question:
Who is your target audience? Because I noticed that you guys used a lot of terms that may not be familiar to beginners ("TGT", "Aggro")
General comment:
Well done and great idea. Also, the commentary synced well with the game.
Bonus info:
I learned a little bit about RTS. I didn't know you could hover cards over their destinations to get them to go there. I just right-clicked everything. It looks like that would speed the game up. I'm such a computer noob.
-
I watched the first part of the video you linked. The strategy is impeccable! :o The way everything you do helps something else you do is awsome! I wish I had better strategy.
-
Also He is Risen does NOT go to the set-aside area per this quote. Change away from how it always was.
Hopefully I'll clear up the confusion as opposed to muddying the waters.
Jordan's understanding was also mine - set aside enhancements go to the set aside area until the set aside character(s) are returned, then the enhancement is discarded. That used to be the rule and it's still the way I play still it.
I was also a little confused how that was missing from the REG entry for Set Aside. I looked back and some discussions and found that the rule was removed/changed with the release of the online REG 2.0 a couple years ago. It was removed based on the fact that so many other card types now set other cards aside and we don't want Haman, the Shame Lost Soul, etc going to the set aside area with the cards they target.
So, the current rule is that set aside enhancements (or cards of any type) do not follow the card(s) they set aside to the set aside area. If any elders wish to change that I support reviving the private discussion found here (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/reg-discussion/set-aside-placed-on-targets/).
Kirk
-
Curiosity question:
Who is your target audience? Because I noticed that you guys used a lot of terms that may not be familiar to beginners ("TGT", "Aggro")
We might do a general tutorial etc but I think it's mostly geared to people who want to improve their games for tournaments, etc. Obviously there will be some other random stuff and it's not all going to be strategy etc but its definitely geared toward someone working on getting into the competitive game.
Also He is Risen does NOT go to the set-aside area per this quote. Change away from how it always was.
Hopefully I'll clear up the confusion as opposed to muddying the waters.
Jordan's understanding was also mine - set aside enhancements go to the set aside area until the set aside character(s) are returned, then the enhancement is discarded. That used to be the rule and it's still the way I play still it.
I was also a little confused how that was missing from the REG entry for Set Aside. I looked back and some discussions and found that the rule was removed/changed with the release of the online REG 2.0 a couple years ago. It was removed based on the fact that so many other card types now set other cards aside and we don't want Haman, the Shame Lost Soul, etc going to the set aside area with the cards they target.
So, the current rule is that set aside enhancements (or cards of any type) do not follow the card(s) they set aside to the set aside area. If any elders wish to change that I support reviving the private discussion found here (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/reg-discussion/set-aside-placed-on-targets/).
Kirk
I thought the rule was enhancements follow, other cards don't. Seemed logical to me, but I guess I was wrong.
I watched the first part of the video you linked. The strategy is impeccable! :o The way everything you do helps something else you do is awsome! I wish I had better strategy.
I don't know about impeccable, but thanks for the comment! Hopefully our future content can help you improve your decks and playing ability!
-
Here's a quick (36 min) intro to who we are, why we are doing this, and why you should care!
Introduction to Show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQNAAriThx8#ws)
This video comes complete with digs at John Earley, so you can't miss it! :-*
-
Here's a quick (36 min) intro to who we are, why we are doing this, and why you should care!
Introduction to Show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQNAAriThx8#ws)
This video comes complete with digs at John Earley, so you can't miss it! :-*
Thank you for wasting 36 min of my life telling me your redemption testimonies Jk lol
All seriousness this is a great idea and I hope you guys continue to work on this project
-
I'm tempted to abuse my moderator powers and delete that comment so other people waste 36 mins of their lives :)
I'd like to think we were somewhat entertaining along the way, although I realize we also were laughing at a lot of "in" jokes in the community/our freindship (John Earley is bad, Red's and Cov with Salt [i still don't believe in this], worshiping at Gabe's feet, etc). I'll try to cut back on those in future for those who aren't aware of them. Except ones about John Earley, because they are mostly true ::)
-
There was at least one valuable piece of information in there. ::)
-
There was at least one valuable piece of information in there. ::)
There's just so much good information to choose from I couldn't decide which piece you meant!
-
Overall, I think the idea that you guys are doing is GREAT. I'm just trying to give some constructive criticism as you are still getting all the details worked out.
I also watched the whole 36 mins, and enjoyed parts of it. I do think that it might be better if you guys planned what you were going to talk about a bit more before filming or do a bit more editing/post-production. I'm not saying to script it completely because I think it's more fun to have the natural flow of conversation, but having an outline at least might help to keep things focused and moving faster so that it doesn't take quite so long.
I would actually leave in the inside jokes as it makes it more fun for people who already know most of the strategy/content of video. You probably won't give many strategy tips that Red doesn't already know for instance, but he might keep watching your channel just to see if you mention him again :)
I would focus the time more on Redemption itself. You spent a long time talking about your Pokemon experiences when really the only thing that related to Redemption was that the TopCut website helped you become competitive quickly and inspired you to create this YouTube channel to help others do the same in Redemption. You could have just said that in one sentence and saved a lot of time.
On a technical note, Alex, you're sound gets kinda staticky every once in a while, but it's not a big deal. I like how you switch back and forth depending on who's talking, and I felt like you both contributed significantly to the conversation. I might give some more suggestions later, but these are the first ones that popped in my head.
Overall, I hope you guys keep these coming. I know that they'll just keep getting better.
-
I haven't been on these boards in forever and I don't really know Westy all that well, but I thought I'd give my two cents. My brother told me that you guys were doing this and I thought it was awesome. I too watched your introductory video and came out with relatively the same feedback as Prof Underwood.
First, I didn't mind that it was so long as you guys were mostly talking about background information which, let's face it, no one that doesn't know you will really watch.
Second, I don't know how much video editing background either of you have, but perhaps a solution to your RTS interface problem is posting the card you're currently talking about (or making a RA or block with) on the side of the screen; either in picture form or just an ability description. If you watch any kind of tournament coverage (especially MTG) you can't really see the cards being played on the table but they show it on the side like so:
http://s1302.photobucket.com/user/redemptioncousin/library/MTG%20snapshot
If you could figure that out, I think you'd reach a whole new level.
Anyways, great job so far!
Matt
-
James appreciates the shout-out!
You're forgiven for costing me Natz Westy.
-
He mentioned costing you nats. At least I think so - I watched it earlier today and don't remember when he mentioned it.
He did not mention costing me teams for being so bad.
-
Thanks guys.
FWIW, we did actually pseudo-script the 36 min video with a skeleton outline. Most of the awkward transitions are us not knowing if the other is done, and the tangents we get on because we were having a conversation essentially.
We did talk about Pokemon a lot, but Matt caught why. This video wasn't necessarily content driven, and is only going to be watched by people who know us or are interested in who we are. It's just a background of the channel essentially.
I am aware of my static issue. I'm not sure if its a mic issue or a connection issue, but I'm looking into it. The switching back and forth is an auto feature of Google Hangouts actually, but it is nice.
Neither of us have much video editing experience. I think the picture Matt posted is a good example of a finished product that would be a goal. We are working on the practical updates to start with.
-
More importantly, the point you're looking for is 24:00, RDT.
He's watched the whole thing, so i think that's why he's forgiving Westy.
-
Huh. I thought he said Westy forgot to mention it. Nevermind. This is why I don't post as much anymore.
-
Unless I missed it how often will you post a video?
-
Unless I missed it how often will you post a video?
No set schedule. We will always post here when a new one goes up though.
-
Sweet. I think a lot of people have already given ya'll different things to think about in making this better for everybody.
It would be cool if you did a 15-20 minute video with set segments every other week.
Segment examples:
-Combo Corner
-Best new deck submission in the complete deck forum
-highlight a defense/offense tier 1,2,3,4,etc. (cheap version and expensive version)
-phone,audio or video interview with a National Champion (their thoughts on new set cards,etc.)
-best new card in new card ideas forum
-list future new tournament dates
-highlight a recent RTS game
...and the list goes on and on and on...
(This could boost the number of people on the forum, new players, more players, etc. hint hint... ;))
I guess you would defiantly need a video editor for this type of thing.
Maybe there is someone on the forum that would be willing to help?
Cactusgamedesign.com may post the video link on their website?
...the possibilities are endless...
Just my :2cents: worth
-
Content ideas and suggestions aren't going to be an issue for awhile. Here's some of the possibilities you can expect in the near future:
- more RTS games [we are focusing on uploading games with big meta decks like TGT, Genesis, "The Deck", FBTNB, Disciples, etc, but after that, expect random games to just show up]
-deck profiles [these in-depth discussions of deck skeletons will highlight staples in meta decks and discuss possible additions]
-combo and strategy sessions [these short discussion of neat trick are designed to bring your game to the next level]
-new set discussion [when list is published]
-thoughts on the meta at large [What's the play at your next big tournament?]
-history of the game [Why is everything CBN or CBP?!?!?!]
-tutorial video on how to play redemption [seems like we should, though this is not a focus]
My guess is that for now, we can produce between 1-3 videos a week to get the RTS games and basic deck videos online and go from there. But again, I emphasize that's a guess, especially since we both have finals over the next two weeks. After that, we might be able to start producing a bit quicker (and then it will slow down again in June-July quantity wise while I work at my internship with the Treasury and take some night classes).
Possible video formats are as follows:
- RTS game [seen already]
- Video Chat [seen already]
- Deck profile [yet to be released]
Any topic above currently will fit into one of these three formats.
-
I haven't been on these boards in forever and I don't really know Westy all that well, but I thought I'd give my two cents. My brother told me that you guys were doing this and I thought it was awesome. I too watched your introductory video and came out with relatively the same feedback as Prof Underwood.
First, I didn't mind that it was so long as you guys were mostly talking about background information which, let's face it, no one that doesn't know you will really watch.
Second, I don't know how much video editing background either of you have, but perhaps a solution to your RTS interface problem is posting the card you're currently talking about (or making a RA or block with) on the side of the screen; either in picture form or just an ability description. If you watch any kind of tournament coverage (especially MTG) you can't really see the cards being played on the table but they show it on the side like so:
http://s1302.photobucket.com/user/redemptioncousin/library/MTG%20snapshot
If you could figure that out, I think you'd reach a whole new level.
Anyways, great job so far!
Matt
Hi, I'm Westy.
I don't have too much video editing background--I'm an audio guy--but I do plan on learning. I don't have the money for Final Cut Pro or anything like that (nor money for a better computer that can actually run FCP...), so I'm using iMovie. I know you can do one picture over a video in iMovie, though I haven't done it just yet. It's more likely that I'll stack the video and have Olijar's hand on the video in the future. I could export it and then re-import it to do more pictures, but that'd be a ton of work for something that might not even show up too well.
The quality is an issue with iMovie. The Quicktime video looks fine, but when I export it, it gets all pixelated. I've been doing some googling and am looking to fix it, but as Alex said, this is finals week, so I won't have a lot of time until I get home in a couple weeks. I do still plan on releasing some more content (currently working on a deck profile) to keep things moving, but I won't be able to work on making better videos for ~2 weeks.
-
hey guys i do have fcp 7 etc and can edit for you guys if you wanna send me stuff just let me know.
-
Just recorded a new video today. Wow is it exciting! Stay tuned for it to come online tomorrow!
-
New Set Discussion!
New Set Spoiler Discussion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cc2V2NF1kuc#ws)
Again, sorry for my mic. Maybe it's time for a kickstarter for me to get a new mic! ::) For the record, I'm pretty sure I know why the static is happening, and there's little I can do to fix it (because I don't really have other mic options).
-
You don't have to watch the whole thing, but the first 10 seconds are definitely worth it. That awkward moment when...
Olijar (Disciples) versus Westy (The Deck) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asx9bye5AWg#ws)
-
You guys are funny and informative. I want to see a guest appearance from John Early. ;)
Btw, "withdraw" simply means to return the character(s) in battle to territory. "Topdeck" and "Underdeck" are their own special ability and not considered a withdraw. They're key words that replace the lengthy "place this card on the top/bottom of your deck" that's found on so many cards.
-
Any of the spoiled cards going to make it into the Diciples deck Olijar? I think Daniel shuts down NT demons pretty good. Maybe something to stop him. Like I said, Nazzy can go in this deck too.
-
Any of the spoiled cards going to make it into the Diciples deck Olijar? I think Daniel shuts down NT demons pretty good. Maybe something to stop him. Like I said, Nazzy can go in this deck too.
Peter and Nazzy should be in disciples decks now. Maybe the soul.
-
Peter is completely broken. Free LS and draw 1? I have ran Nazzy in my list since we did the sideboard in ROOT. Still, the option to splash red with Zealot and Peter(ap) has value. Broken Cheribum hurts us and we're not even a tier 1 deck...Hezzy Ring?
-
Hezzy ring wouldn't stop GC, because if I recall Hezzy's Ring is a Prevent search and GC is cannot be negated so it wouldn't be stopped by that.
-
Hezzy ring wouldn't stop GC, because if I recall Hezzy's Ring is a Prevent search and GC is cannot be negated so it wouldn't be stopped by that.
It's a restrict.
-
In one corner, we will have The Deck and similar search-based decks that run Golden Cherubim. And in the other, Naz will be in draw-heavy decks, both to stop Golden Cherubim and to protect against Mayhem.
Peter is completely broken. Free LS and draw 1?
If he is a free lost soul, then he is broken (and I personally don't think he is). The D1 doesn't really compare with a free LS.
-
This Peter will be replacing the red one in my Gardenciples deck for sure. :P
New SoG undoubtedly will, too.
-
So in a deck that can draw upwards of 20 cards in a turn already, we're going to complain about them being able to draw 1 (instead of them using Matt to draw 3)?
As for the "free soul": If people used actual defenses, they wouldn't have to worry about TGT walk-ins.
-
Oh believe me, Im not complaining. :)
-
Hey guys,
Something new and exciting is here. Westy and I will be live streaming momentarily. If you read this late, don't worry, the stream will upload to youtube when it's finished so you can see what we are discussing
The link is Starter Deck Spoilers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eF46ZNT_9U#ws)
-
My favorite line from the last installment, "I don't know how Tim Maly ever wins more than 3 games again".
I'm totally pumped about the guest appearance by John Early!
-
I liked how you had different perspectives and therefore presented both sides about the dominants and LSs. I'm also looking forward to seeing RDT on there next time.
The only constructive criticism that I have is that again it was a bit long. You said that you didn't have anything else to say at 27:00, and then again 28:56 before finally ending at 31:31. It just reminded me of sermons I've heard where the pastor keeps saying that it's the last point, or he's almost done :)
Overall, though I enjoyed it again. Keep up the good work!
-
You guys kept saying I was Red... ::)
-
I find them amusing to watch although I disagree with at least half of Alex's comments. ;) thanks for the shout out by the way. Westy is right - NJ doesn't deserve a spot in defensive heavy decks.
Also Vain Philosophy is really good. I can ensure that my Confusion will discard something really good (SoG) or I can take out that one card you really needed to beat me when I block.
Kirk
-
Would it be possible for you guys to put like time links to when things happen in your videos? Like 3:57 or what ever is when you start talking about Strife, 8:06 or what ever is when you start talking about Vain Philosophy ect ect. Sometimes you guys just kind of ramble on and it would be nice to just skip to when you start talking about the next card :p
-
You guys kept saying I was Red... ::)
I was there the whole time bro:P
-
Yes, we do ramble a considerable amount, more because it was supposed to be a live stream and not an actual video. We'll post timelines in future, and I'll try to get some up on this one tonight or so, but I'm really busy today and tomorrow.
Yeah, the counter apparently wasn't the best. Sorry Mageduckey, and thanks for your dedication! We'll have to do a shoutout at some point to make up for it. :)
-
There's supposed to a video up, but Westy stinks at recording! Just kidding! Technical difficulties or something.
But, we have an exciting announcement that's now confirmed:
Westy and I will be streaming tomorrow with special guest John Earley at 12:15 a.m CST with new set discussion following the set release by Gabe! Make sure to tune in! We will post the link at around midnight when the list goes up for you guys to check us out!
-
http://youtu.be/nokdjxy1zy4 (http://youtu.be/nokdjxy1zy4)
Live stream of the new set!
-
Post any questions you have for us about the new cards in this thread!
-
Why am I up late listening to a live stream about John Early not making a rescue attempt?
Seriously...how can anything be overpowered when a single game hasn't been played with these cards?
-
Seriously...how can anything be overpowered when a single game hasn't been played with these cards?
Playtesting?
-
You guys haven't even mentioned the Philistines!
-
Seriously...how can anything be overpowered when a single game hasn't been played with these cards?
Playtesting?
Playtesting is to avoid the label "op" not get an idea of which card is over-powered.
My question highlights my 2-fold thought on OP cards:
1) I think the term "OP" is used too often.
2) We can't know what is OP until the big tournaments start unfolding.
New question: Was Foreign Wives intended to strengthen Mayhem (an already super powered card)? (Forcing an opponent to draw for the auto-block)
-
Gathering Angel is the sleeper champion.
-
Thanks for hanging out with us tonight! The video will upload to youtube automatically if you'd like to see the stream later. It's long though!
-
It's long though!
WOW! You aren't kidding :)
-
It's long though!
WOW! You aren't kidding :)
Haha! It wasn't really meant to be a real video but it uploads anyway.
-
Trust me - I saved my last joke for the last few minutes, you're going to want to watch this thing :D
-
Trust me - I saved my last joke for the last few minutes, you're going to want to watch this thing :D
I'm over a hour into it, but had to take a break for a while. I'll finish it later. As far as jokes go, you'll be hard pressed to beat the earlier one about SirNobody (which I would bet he'll enjoy as well) :)
-
Trust me - I saved my last joke for the last few minutes, you're going to want to watch this thing :D
I'm over a hour into it, but had to take a break for a while. I'll finish it later. As far as jokes go, you'll be hard pressed to beat the earlier one about SirNobody (which I would bet he'll enjoy as well) :)
I'm surprised you are watching it! It's definitely not intended for regular viewing!
-
Why are stats turned off for the video? I wanna know how many views you got. we know it's gonna be a double digit number ;)
-
Why are stats turned off for the video? I wanna know how many views you got. we know it's gonna be a double digit number ;)
It's because it was a Google Hangout and not an uploaded video. Is there a way to set that so it can be shown?
-
I'm surprised you are watching it! It's definitely not intended for regular viewing!
I couldn't make it for the live version, so I'm catching up. I'm trying to watch all you're videos that you're posting. I enjoy them, and I see a LOT of potential for them to become a great tool for helping the broader Redemption community. Especially if you stick with it and keep making them, and especially if you can figure out how to make them shorter (I noticed Westy said something about wrapping things up at 61:42, but there's another 40 mins after that) :)
OK, I just finished it up, and I did like John's Hitchhiker's joke at the end, although I still think the earlier one about pickup lines was funnier. I also was glad to get at least a shout out by Alex at 76:42 even if Westy shoots it down right afterward :)
-
We are looking at doing another live stream conversation at 7 pm EST (6 pm CST) on Tuesday May 21st. We will be discussing cards that have impacted the meta (now that we've been playing with the cards, this should be more accurate and insightful!). Make sure to check it out!
If you have any questions about the new cards or the meta you would like to be addressed on our show, send them via email to RedemptionMetaGaming@gmail.com.
-
Our mistake. We are going to have to move our stream tonight from 7 EST/6 CST to 10:45 EST/9:45 CST. Westy's mistake. Sorry!
-
Our mistake...Westy's mistake
I saw what you did there :)
-
Interestingly enough, apparently we can't use google hangouts any more. So I guess our stream is delayed until further notice.
-
Apparently we need 1000 subscribers to be able to live stream now. I guess this means you won't be able to listen to us tonight. Sorry guys. Get us 1000 subscribers :)
*shakes fist at Youtube*
-
What about Ustream* or something?
*I've never used nor watched Ustream. But I know it's free.
-
What about Ustream* or something?
*I've never used nor watched Ustream. But I know it's free.
We are looking into alternative but neither of us has any experience with them so we are trying to figure something out.
-
Why can't you use Google Hangouts anymore?
And did YouTube recently change policies or were you on a "trial" basis?
Kirk
-
Why can't you use Google Hangouts anymore?
After their last live stream it could no longer handle the awesomeness of John Earley so they've been banned. ::)
-
Why can't you use Google Hangouts anymore?
And did YouTube recently change policies or were you on a "trial" basis?
Kirk
Youtube recently changed streaming policies according to Westy's googling skills. As in, sometime since last Wednesday. I'm glad we got that one in at least.
-
Use twitch.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUM6wdYpJqs
Twitch is...tricky. There's extra things you need to do and it's generally used for games, so to do what we need it to do, we'd have to use loopholes. We could figure it out eventually, but this is just easier.
They changed how to get into a Google Hangout on air. We figured it out.
-
Keep up the good work guys. I'm looking forward to when you post another game online for people to see. Doing one with I vs. J would probably be the most helpful to have available for people who buy the new starters soon.
Thanks again for the shout out at 69:04.
-
I'm looking forward to when you post another game online for people to see. Doing one with I vs. J would probably be the most helpful to have available for people who buy the new starters soon.
Great idea!
-
I/J games have been filmed and will be posted at a later date. Tonight we have a special viewing of a ROOT game where I will be beating Westy live on stream at 8 EST/7 CST. Make sure to tune in for live redemption.
-
How do you watch it?
-
How do you watch it?
We will be posting a link when the time comes.
-
nevermind my browser hates me and a new link is incoming.
-
Google is currently sitting at 99% ready to broadcast and has been for quite a few minutes. Hopefully it won't keep lying to us.
-
https://plus.google.com/u/0/106636280351174936240/posts/d4gMcCEEfqA (https://plus.google.com/u/0/106636280351174936240/posts/d4gMcCEEfqA)
Google Hangouts is apparently having its own technical difficulties. It's not us this time! We are still hoping to do this tonight if possible.
-
It worked for us finally. We should be starting in about five. The broadcast is already prepared so we know it can start!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8v7TsoOr88 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8v7TsoOr88)
-
Or potentially right here?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/105255363118501195530/posts
Should be the first or second post
-
It isnt working for me. I can only watch what yall have already posted.
-
Check out our new medium of content!
Redemption Metagaming (http://redemptionmetagaming.blogspot.com/)
-
I just read all your posts so far on the blog. Here are my thoughts:
1 - in the first post you called the blog the "evolution" from the video content. It seems to me that going from video to simply text is a de-evolution.
2 - the most recent two posts were well written, though-provoking, and I think would be really helpful to the community at large. However, why bother putting them on a personal blog? They would have made great forum threads where people could easily see them and start a dialog on the subject.
By posting content like this on a personal blog you will decrease the number of people who are likely to read it and benefit from it. Part of the draw of Redemption Metagaming was that it provided something that the forum cannot (video content). But the forum is great for providing discussions about strategic deck-teching and deck-building. So duplicating that somewhere else seems like the wrong direction to go.
-
1. We aren't switching from video content to blog content completely, we are merely adding blog content. Right now Alex and I are having a tough time matching schedules, and so for now Blogging is easier. In that sense, it is evolving, but eventually we will be doing both side by side.
2. Part of the objections we'd been having with our earlier videos was that we got sidetracked too much and they were too long. We're basically going to stop some (not all) of the subjects we were originally planning on talking back and forth on, and writing them up in blog form. These subjects were never supposed to have a dialogue between us before, and we still prefer to keep that at a minimum. Additionally, awhile back I posted the process of building a CTB deck, which wasn't the best of articles, sure, but it facilitated no discussion. Most of the content will be similar to that. We're trying to equip our readers to take the information we give them and be able to take them so much further than we can help them. Taking Alex's article as an example, we want them to weigh the cost themselves, not come to us and say "which tech/defense is better" because that's missing the entire point. There are comments on the blog too, so if people do have questions pertaining to an article they can leave them there and we'll get back to them, but most of the time we are simply trying to give you information. Finally, a blog also allows us to archive it easier. In a blog, these subjects will be on there forever, and you can easily access it in the sidebar.
-
1. We aren't switching from video content to blog content completely, we are merely adding blog content. Right now Alex and I are having a tough time matching schedules, and so for now Blogging is easier.
I'm glad that you'll keep the videos comings as well. If your schedules aren't matching up, perhaps a better solution to moving backwards to text is to increase the size of your group. If you added one or two other people besides you and Alex, then you would greatly increase the chances of being able to match up two people's schedule to get in a game or a short conversation about a specific topic.
Additionally, awhile back I posted the process of building a CTB deck, which wasn't the best of articles, sure, but it facilitated no discussion. Most of the content will be similar to that.
So instead of continuing to focus on videos that have sparked significant discussion here on the boards, you are going to try to put out more of something that flopped before? And you're going to put it in a place where even less people are likely to see it?
Finally, a blog also allows us to archive it easier. In a blog, these subjects will be on there forever, and you can easily access it in the sidebar.
This is actually not that hard to do here on the forum either. All you need is 1 locked thread that you use as a table of contents. Then in the posts of that thread you simply provide links to all of the separate threads discussing all of the different content that you like. If the threads that you post all continue to be of the high quality of the "cost analysis" post Alex wrote, then I would be glad to even sticky the table of contents thread so that people could easily go there to look up stuff.
-
You guys, I am offended. You have a fully qualified web developer who would be more than happy to, if nothing else, make a theme for your blogspot so you aren't using a stock one and you never even mentioned this to me :(
-
1 - in the first post you called the blog the "evolution" from the video content. It seems to me that going from video to simply text is a de-evolution.
As the husband of someone who wrote a book, the idea that words are less valuable than video is the last criticism I'd have thought for you to bring to the table. Is a book less valuable than a movie?
2 - the most recent two posts were well written, though-provoking, and I think would be really helpful to the community at large. However, why bother putting them on a personal blog? They would have made great forum threads where people could easily see them and start a dialog on the subject.
By posting content like this on a personal blog you will decrease the number of people who are likely to read it and benefit from it. Part of the draw of Redemption Metagaming was that it provided something that the forum cannot (video content). But the forum is great for providing discussions about strategic deck-teching and deck-building. So duplicating that somewhere else seems like the wrong direction to go.
A personal blog is the first step to a website. If you continue to support the Redemption MetaGaming blog, you'd be surprised where it could go.
Traditionally article-type media has performed terrible here on the forums. While most attempts have been lackluster at best in their writing skill or depth of content (Sorry Westy :) ), that doesn't change the fact that there is no recent track record to suggest we should have put those posts into topics. While Redemption MetaGaming is about creating a discussion of Redemption on some level, it's also not up to us to force a discussion upon you. If you think it was an interesting post and have some responses, why don't you start the forum thread? Redemption MetaGaming is, like it or not, a personal project of myself and Westy. I think we would both agree that the blog/essay/article style is far superior for what we primarily want to accomplish with Redemption MetaGaming when compared to the conversational style of the forums.
I'd also argue that a blog is arguably easier to find that a forum topic, but that's semantics. Both are going to be found by the same people so it's pretty irrelevant in my eyes.
I'm glad that you'll keep the videos comings as well. If your schedules aren't matching up, perhaps a better solution to moving backwards to text is to increase the size of your group. If you added one or two other people besides you and Alex, then you would greatly increase the chances of being able to match up two people's schedule to get in a game or a short conversation about a specific topic.
While adding other people to Redemption MetaGaming may be prudent in the future, Westy and I have the vision for this content driven form of media currently, and given the track record of collaborative projects in this community, I think two is plenty of people. Additionally, adding more people with different perspectives would actually make it harder to coordinate as it'd be much better to have all contributors on a show if possible.
Additionally, currently the contributor to audience ratio is about 1 contributor per 20 audience members (and that's being incredibly generous to the audience size). I don't think it would make sense to add more contributors unless our audience were to grow. Redemption MetaGaming was not designed or intended to be a community project in the sense that all contribute to it.
Thanks for your overall feedback and compliments on our content.
-
As the husband of someone who wrote a book, the idea that words are less valuable than video is the last criticism I'd have thought for you to bring to the table. Is a book less valuable than a movie?
Ouch. I'm just trying to give some constructive criticism. Let's not get personal :)
I do agree with you that a book is NOT less valuable than a movie, and in fact most movies based on books are NOT as good as the book. However how many people have read the unabridged "Count of Monte Christo"? How many people have seen the movie? I'm just saying that in our current culture, a video will reach a wider audience.
A personal blog is the first step to a website. If you continue to support the Redemption MetaGaming blog, you'd be surprised where it could go.
This is also a bit concerning, as it seems like if you offer the same kind of content on your website of the future that is currently delivered on the forum here, then there are only a couple of likely outcomes. Either almost no one bothers to go there and you lose interest in your pet project and quit creating content. Or a large number of people go there, and the forum basically fades away. Personally I find the first scenario massively more likely, but neither is a good outcome.
Traditionally article-type media has performed terrible here on the forums.
I disagree. When I think of "article-type media" here on the forum, the first thing that comes to mind is Bryon's annual articles about the new cards. And they have performed terrifically. They are extremely well liked, and consistently receive a decent number of responses.
If you think it was an interesting post and have some responses, why don't you start the forum thread?
I suppose I could. But it's a lot easier to just click reply, than to create a whole other thread. And also I'd feel a bit like I was just ripping off your ideas. But point taken, and perhaps I might someday.
given the track record of collaborative projects in this community, I think two is plenty of people.
Good point.
-
I do agree with you that a book is NOT less valuable than a movie, and in fact most movies based on books are NOT as good as the book. However how many people have read the unabridged "Count of Monte Christo"? How many people have seen the movie? I'm just saying that in our current culture, a video will reach a wider audience.
I think that content in all forms is the best chance to reach the most people. This isn't closing videos. It's opening articles.
This is also a bit concerning, as it seems like if you offer the same kind of content on your website of the future that is currently delivered on the forum here, then there are only a couple of likely outcomes. Either almost no one bothers to go there and you lose interest in your pet project and quit creating content. Or a large number of people go there, and the forum basically fades away. Personally I find the first scenario massively more likely, but neither is a good outcome.
I don't understand why a content website is at odds with a discussion forum. That's never been the case in any other game I've ever seen, heard of, or participated in, be it card, board, or video game.
I disagree. When I think of "article-type media" here on the forum, the first thing that comes to mind is Bryon's annual articles about the new cards. And they have performed terrifically. They are extremely well liked, and consistently receive a decent number of responses.
Which also are not delivered via Forum Topic, for what it's worth. He just starts a thread about it. I actually forgot these even were articles because they are largely popular due to the new set spoilers. I'm not saying they aren't good articles, because they are, but new set hype typically drives their popularity (at least in my opinion).
-
I like the idea of the blog and content articles. I used to find Holder's Heroes both helpful and interesting. My only criticism is the contrast between the black background and white typeface is terrible. I tried to read it but I cannot. I hope you change to something easier on the eyes.
-
I like the idea of the blog and content articles. I used to find Holder's Heroes both helpful and interesting. My only criticism is the contrast between the black background and white typeface is terrible. I tried to read it but I cannot. I hope you change to something easier on the eyes.
Thanks for letting us know. We can change that to something easier to read.
-
Back on subject, we're going to be streaming tomorrow at 5/4c, discussing NE Regional results and further development.
-
I like the idea of the blog and content articles. I used to find Holder's Heroes both helpful and interesting. My only criticism is the contrast between the black background and white typeface is terrible. I tried to read it but I cannot. I hope you change to something easier on the eyes.
Thanks for letting us know. We can change that to something easier to read.
The green text is definitely an improvement. I think that the solid black background is part of the problem. Have you considered changing the background to a dark shade of gray? It will still give the same effect but would be easier on the eyes.
As it is I'm able to select the text, which changes the background color now so I can read it. Thank you.
-
I like the idea of the blog and content articles. I used to find Holder's Heroes both helpful and interesting. My only criticism is the contrast between the black background and white typeface is terrible. I tried to read it but I cannot. I hope you change to something easier on the eyes.
Thanks for letting us know. We can change that to something easier to read.
The green text is definitely an improvement. I think that the solid black background is part of the problem. Have you considered changing the background to a dark shade of gray? It will still give the same effect but would be easier on the eyes.
As it is I'm able to select the text, which changes the background color now so I can read it. Thank you.
I'll mess around with it
-
Back on subject, we're going to be streaming tomorrow at 5/4c, discussing NE Regional results and further development.
Fixed
-
It's almost time! Check the stream out at live on stream (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLEXQL0y4EA#ws) in 15-20 minutes.
-
Desecrate the Temple discarded my opponent's SoG in my 3rd, 4th, and 5th games. I guess I was lucky with a 60% success rate.
Iron Pan honestly never crossed my mind. I was satisfied with Naz/CWD/DD as techs that mesh with my deck. Iron Pan would shut down my drawing and Nazareth, and would also stop Belshazzar's Banquet. Plus your opponent can discard it without DoN, albeit at the cost of dumping their good fortress.
Swift Horses was in there basically for drawing, or a play-first in side-battle, or for King Belshazzar's recur. And also to bring an intimidation factor. Nerg with Horses sitting in my territory commands respect, even if I have nothing to play on him.
I've updated this deck with the new cards. I dropped Great Image for Scattered, as you are right, there really aren't many blocks in the deck. The anti-meta tech slows down your opponent, but honestly pulling off Great Image is a semi-pipe dream. Because Scattered is in, I am keeping Swift Horses; otherwise, I'd drop it for Invoking Terror. I added Jephthah, but only because I have Divination and Deborah's Directive in the deck. I can discard a LS with him, and I can band him in off of Deb's Directive to win a battle. Otherwise, I think he clashes a bit with my U&T/CWD play, although U&T will now tell me if they have something to negate him with. I added a 3-Liner and dropped the deck discard LS, as pulling off DtT makes a 3-Liner insanely valuable (although that has nothing to do with the new cards). I also (and I am going to test this before I keep the change) dropped NJ for Vain Philosophy. My reasoning: With Sorrow of Mary and Vain Philosophy, SoG being underdecked hurts a lot if you also run NJ; plus, Vain Philosophy can increase the chances that DtT works. Like I said, I'll test it for now.
I haven't played that many games since the new cards came out for RTS (pretty much just ROOT games), and I have never seen an offense similar to mine. This was an idea I had been toying around with in my head for months, I just never put it on paper.
-
Just as a note to everybody, the last 25 minutes has mostly repeat information about the metagame. The first half is interesting enough though.
-
I enjoyed your latest livecast.
I liked how you did some deck dissection of recent winners of major tournaments.
I liked how you talked about your own experiences with successful decks (although if a deck goes 12-2, it seems like it would be worth mentioning something explaining the 2 losses).
I liked how you mentioned the new rulings like the required card sleeves, the SoG/Hopper combo, and the clarification on special initiative.
I liked your asking the community for a cool slogan, although I'm way to cheezy to be good at that sort of thing personally :)
It was still a bit long, but it seems like that's a bit inevitable in your current format. I understand that is part of why you are moving towards the blog. But have you considered doing a bit of video editing as an alternative? Some simple splicing would REALLY be a nice thing to have for your videos.
-
It's a live show, you can't edit live. It posts straight to youtube when their done and I think this is best. First off it gives people who came in at the end to immediately see what they missed, it requires the least amount of work from them, and it takes care of the ordinarily lengthy process of youtube processing.
-
It's a live show, you can't edit live. It posts straight to youtube when their done and I think this is best. First off it gives people who came in at the end to immediately see what they missed, it requires the least amount of work from them, and it takes care of the ordinarily lengthy process of youtube processing.
QFT
-
I understand that editing takes time. But maybe Redemption Metagaming could add a producer to their team. Someone who didn't participate on camera, but worked behind the scenes. They could be someone with technical expertise, and they could take the full-length YouTube that automatically comes over from the live chat and splice it into something more tight that would be released to the broader community. I don't have these kind of skills, but I suspect that there is someone on the forum who does.
It seems to me that they'd just have to have a program that downloads a YouTube to their computer (free options exist on the web), and a program that they could use to splice that file (free options of this exist too). Then they could just take that shorter video and upload it to YouTube.
-
Combine your two slogans:
Redemption MetaGaming: Giving you the classy edge.
-
Another article has hit the presses!
-
Another article has hit the presses!
So for the most part I agree with you one the dominant rankings, but there are a few I disagree with.
1) Falling Away - Yes its no longer a staple, and yes its completely stopped by two other cards, but its base power is unmatched by any other evil dominant. I still agree mostly with its placing, except beneath two specific dominants, which I will get to in a second.
2) Harvest Time - You are really going to bash Mayhem for being hit by Nazareth, but not mention it at all when its Harvest time's turn? Harvest time is a card that is stopped by a rather popular card, and has various alternatives (water jar, call, fishers, hopper, etc.), it really should not be rated above Falling Away.
3) Mayhem - Look, I know you are saying Nazareth shuts down one of the best parts of mayhem, and it totally does, but that doesn't take away from its other benefits. In enhancement-lite decks (like many are now), it can be just a straight draw when you need it, and if your opponent doesn't play naz (or you know, doesn't draw it), the ability limit your opponent's hand size is still very powerful. All in all, not the best dominant, but not nearly as bad as you make it out.
4) Burial - The only time you should be using burial in your deck is if you are running the 2/3-liner and other return to deck cards for souls. Other than that, with the amount of soul gen out there, it really isn't that great. Again, you bash Falling Away for its counters, but then completely neglect to say that one of those "commonly played counters" counters burial as well. And though not as common as GoYS, I still do see the anti-burial soul get used.
I guess in summery of what I'm trying to say, Falling Away and Mayhem are both better than you give them credit for, though not too much better, and should be considered for the last couple dominant slots in deck building, and you give Harvest time and burial too much credit, though I mostly agree with what your saying (and I don't think anyone should argue at all about the top 5 doms).
As a side-note, Strife (while still pretty bad, and quite deserving of its placement) does have some offensive capability.
-
Your rankings of dominants seem biased due to being an offense-heavy player:
Son of God - obviously offense
New Jerusalem - obviously offense
Vain Philosophy
Angel of the Lord - obviously offense
Grapes of Wrath - probably offense
Christian Martyr
Destruction of Nehushtan - most arts used now are defensive, so eliminating them helps the offense
Only 2 of your top 7 dominants are primarily defensive.
-
Your rankings of dominants seem biased due to being an offense-heavy player:
Son of God - obviously offense
New Jerusalem - obviously offense
Vain Philosophy
Angel of the Lord - obviously offense
Grapes of Wrath - probably offense
Christian Martyr
Destruction of Nehushtan - most arts used now are defensive, so eliminating them helps the offense
Only 2 of your top 7 dominants are primarily defensive.
Type I is biased to offense-heavy
Edit: Also Grapes is just as much defensive as it is offensive.
-
Redemption is an offensively biased game. The point of the game is to rescue five souls. Why not use the most powerful cards in the game to help you succeed in this?
On that note, my next article is going to be about Offensive Heavy/Balanced/Defensive Heavy, so I'm going to leave my statement at that for now.
-
The green text on gray is much easier on the eyes. Thank you for changing that. I enjoy the articles you guys write. RMG is a valuable resource for the community. We're grateful for your efforts.
-
I'll respond to Prof first since his is easy:
Your rankings of dominants seem biased due to being an offense-heavy player:
Son of God - obviously offense
New Jerusalem - obviously offense
Vain Philosophy
Angel of the Lord - obviously offense
Grapes of Wrath - probably offense
Christian Martyr
Destruction of Nehushtan - most arts used now are defensive, so eliminating them helps the offense
Only 2 of your top 7 dominants are primarily defensive.
Defense is bad and always has been bad. When some cards help you win the game, and others just stop your opponent from winning, which would you rather play generally?
Another article has hit the presses!
So for the most part I agree with you one the dominant rankings, but there are a few I disagree with.
1) Falling Away - Yes its no longer a staple, and yes its completely stopped by two other cards, but its base power is unmatched by any other evil dominant. I still agree mostly with its placing, except beneath two specific dominants, which I will get to in a second.
2) Harvest Time - You are really going to bash Mayhem for being hit by Nazareth, but not mention it at all when its Harvest time's turn? Harvest time is a card that is stopped by a rather popular card, and has various alternatives (water jar, call, fishers, hopper, etc.), it really should not be rated above Falling Away.
3) Mayhem - Look, I know you are saying Nazareth shuts down one of the best parts of mayhem, and it totally does, but that doesn't take away from its other benefits. In enhancement-lite decks (like many are now), it can be just a straight draw when you need it, and if your opponent doesn't play naz (or you know, doesn't draw it), the ability limit your opponent's hand size is still very powerful. All in all, not the best dominant, but not nearly as bad as you make it out.
4) Burial - The only time you should be using burial in your deck is if you are running the 2/3-liner and other return to deck cards for souls. Other than that, with the amount of soul gen out there, it really isn't that great. Again, you bash Falling Away for its counters, but then completely neglect to say that one of those "commonly played counters" counters burial as well. And though not as common as GoYS, I still do see the anti-burial soul get used.
I guess in summery of what I'm trying to say, Falling Away and Mayhem are both better than you give them credit for, though not too much better, and should be considered for the last couple dominant slots in deck building, and you give Harvest time and burial too much credit, though I mostly agree with what your saying (and I don't think anyone should argue at all about the top 5 doms).
As a side-note, Strife (while still pretty bad, and quite deserving of its placement) does have some offensive capability.
Being a good dominant is inherently better than being an evil dominant. I'd consider FA and HT on the same relative tier, but since good>evil, I'd give HT the nod.
Mayhem actually is as bad as I think it is. I've tried to make it good because it used to be so brokenly awesome. It's just not anymore. I want it to be, but I just can't justify it over anything above it.
You bring up some interesting points on Burial. I'll counter with the idea that often you are running at least two sites anyway - Burial can be a great extra turn in that situation. It could bury an opposing two line. You bury the Thorns so you can DoU. It could bury a non-limiter soul so the opponent can't rescue the NT or Female that's left. Burial is rarely effective in my eyes if you are using it to clear the table (because that rarely occurs). You are typically using it to manipulate the souls on the table.
-
So what you're saying is that Soul Control is good?
-
Hey guys, I just posted a new article about different styles of alignments! I apologize for this being so late, but I've been working a lot and working on deck building. Olijar made me finish, or you might not have gotten this for another two days! But anyway, I'm going to bed and you should click the link in my sig and check it out!
-
Sauce will be very disappointed that you forgot an alignment.
Combo.
-
Spread offenses versus theme offenses? Which are better? It's another entry in my never-ending series on Economics. This time the lessons Economics teaches us are applied to deck building yet again with a stimulating discussing of the diminishing returns of only playing one color in your deck.
So what you're saying is that Soul Control is good?
No.
-
Interesting point about diminishing returns. One could argue that this is where recursion becomes a major asset to themed decks. Rather than filling your deck with more strong cards, keep re-using your best themed cards.
One could also argue that this is why Ashtaroth Worship should be in every deck now.
-
Interesting point about diminishing returns. One could argue that this is where recursion becomes a major asset to themed decks. Rather than filling your deck with more strong cards, keep re-using your best themed cards.
Yep, that is one of the main powers of recursion. Playing two Authority of Christ's is probably better than playing one and Fall like Lightning.
-
Don't cheat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZY6BBbyc8I#ws)
-
No I haven't specifically place 1 lost soul every 7 cards and then done 7 pile shuffle, leaving all the lost souls in one pile which i then place at the bottom of my deck, what are you talking about?!?!?!?
Luckily this is really only possible in casual games (and the only time i've done it) since it takes a LOT of prep work to make sure you have 1 lS EXACTLY every 7th card. But seriously, as soon as I was shown that that was the most common form of redemption shuffle I was confused as to why thats allowed to happen without it being mandatory that your opponent also be allowed to shuffle your deck
-
No I haven't specifically place 1 lost soul every 7 cards and then done 7 pile shuffle, leaving all the lost souls in one pile which i then place at the bottom of my deck, what are you talking about?!?!?!?
Luckily this is really only possible in casual games (and the only time i've done it) since it takes a LOT of prep work to make sure you have 1 lS EXACTLY every 7th card.
It takes *minimal* amount of prep work to get this configuration in a standard 56-card deck.
See this post (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/redemption-card-play/do-you-know-what-a-double-nickel-is/msg512027/#msg512027) for a description on how to do this all day long.
-
No I haven't specifically place 1 lost soul every 7 cards and then done 7 pile shuffle, leaving all the lost souls in one pile which i then place at the bottom of my deck, what are you talking about?!?!?!?
Luckily this is really only possible in casual games (and the only time i've done it) since it takes a LOT of prep work to make sure you have 1 lS EXACTLY every 7th card.
It takes *minimal* amount of prep work to get this configuration in a standard 56-card deck.
See this post (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/redemption-card-play/do-you-know-what-a-double-nickel-is/msg512027/#msg512027) for a description on how to do this all day long.
1) your method results in all 7 of your lost souls being either in the top or middle, mine puts them on the bottom or middle with a cut. you can also expand the method out to use more shuffles to make your opponent less suspicious but it involves additional math for each shuffle.
-
Westy and Olijar, you should also mention that you should not be happy with an opponent who does *not* do at least one pile shuffle of his deck. Redemption is far too dependent on seeing small (2 or 3) card combinations (SoG/NJ anyone?), and even the most skilled riffle shufflers needs to do three or more passes to reliably separate two and three card combos. (On the cheating front--with sleeved cards it is trivial to ensure that any small combination do not get separated in riffle shuffle alone no matter the number of attempts made.) The primary reason for requiring a pile shuffle is to force the break up of combinations prior to attempting to randomize using riffle or other methods.
No I haven't specifically place 1 lost soul every 7 cards and then done 7 pile shuffle, leaving all the lost souls in one pile which i then place at the bottom of my deck, what are you talking about?!?!?!?
Luckily this is really only possible in casual games (and the only time i've done it) since it takes a LOT of prep work to make sure you have 1 lS EXACTLY every 7th card.
It takes *minimal* amount of prep work to get this configuration in a standard 56-card deck.
See this post (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/redemption-card-play/do-you-know-what-a-double-nickel-is/msg512027/#msg512027) for a description on how to do this all day long.
1) your method results in all 7 of your lost souls being either in the top or middle, mine puts them on the bottom or middle with a cut. you can also expand the method out to use more shuffles to make your opponent less suspicious but it involves additional math for each shuffle.
Ha! I understand (or at least I think) you are joking around here lp, but just for people who may miss this...
The method I outlined shows how you can quite naturally get 1 LS every 7 cards exactly with very little preparation at all (and the preparation that is required looks like a natural part of any tournament scene). At the end of the create-the-pile phase in the 7-pile "shuffle," you will end up with one pile which contains all seven lost souls and you know precisely which pile it is. Where the lost souls end up in your deck after that depends on when you choose to pick up the LS pile.
-
Ban all lost souls. Problem solved.
-
Another winning article (http://redemptionmetagaming.blogspot.com/)
-
A 56 card deck has 6 more cards than a 50 card deck. Since we draw 3 cards per turn, that means that it will deck out 2 turns slower. I wouldn't exactly call this calculus :)
Also, I think you meant "1/40" in your first regression instead of "1/1".
-
The math was more about the percentages of drawing a specific card in your first 8 cards.
-
I would have liked to see some speculation on when extra cards might be worth it (e.g. adding extra drawing).
-
A 56 card deck has 6 more cards than a 50 card deck. Since we draw 3 cards per turn, that means that it will deck out 2 turns slower. I wouldn't exactly call this calculus :)
Also, I think you meant "1/40" in your first regression instead of "1/1".
Calling it calculus makes me seem smarter and makes people less likely to question it if they don't understand it completely. Also I know calculus so I can do that next time if you want.
I would have liked to see some speculation on when extra cards might be worth it (e.g. adding extra drawing).
It would have to be extra drawing above and beyond what a 50 card deck is playing, so it would get really complicated.
-
With the 42 card deck, your chance of drawing any one card in your opening hand looks like this:
1/42 + 1/41 + 1/40 + 1/39 + 1/38 + 1/37 + 1/36 + 1/35 = .2085328
Unfortunately your math is slightly off. In each iteration after 1/42, you are forgetting to adjust for the odds that all previous draws did not net you your desired card. I carried out your logic to fractions beyond 1/35, and at 1/16 (i.e., your 27th card) the sum exceeds 100%.
And this logical conclusion of the odds of being able to draw any card in your deck with over 100% certainty upon drawing the first 27 non-LS cards of your deck... Well, I think we know the odds of this are less than 0%.
Obviously 1/42 are the odds of getting any card as your first card. The odds of getting that card as your second card, after you missed with your first, is 41/42*1/41 (41 out of 42 times you miss, and then 1 out of the next 41 times after the first miss you get your card). Each iteration will simplify to 1/42, leaving you with odds of 8/42, or 19.05%.
Personally, for me, it's easier to calculate the odds that you don't get your card, and then subtract that percentage from 100%. The odds of not getting a specific card repeatedly can be multiplied together. So it would be:
1 - (41/42)(40/41)(39/40)(38/39)(37/38)(36/37)(35/36)(34/35)
Which equals 1 - 80.95%, or 19.05%. Same as 8/42.
Doing this same calculation for a 56 card deck with Hopper is 16.67%. So you better yourself by 2.38% going with 50.
Additional geeks' note:
You can extend the "subtract the odds of not getting your card from 100%" logic to find the odds that you get one of any number of cards in a starting hand. Example:
Let's say you make a 50 card Gates of Samaria deck with 8 LS, and you include King Solomon, King Hiram, Zaccheus, and I Am Creator to help tutor GoS. The odds that you get one of these 4 tutors in your initial D8, or GoS itself, would be:
1 - (37/42)(36/41)(35/40)(34/39)(33/38)(32/37)(31/36)(30/35)
Which equals 1 - 32.71%, or 67.29%.
So 2 out of every 3 games or so, you will get GoS or one of your 4 tutors for it. Which is a really fun deck to play by the way ;)
-
Thanks for posting this. As a future math teacher, I was going to do this myself, but just hadn't gotten around to it yet. However, when you said:
Well, I think we know the odds of this are less than 0%.
My first thoughts were...well, to quote someone else who knows his math...
Unfortunately your math is slightly off.
;)
-
Math hurt brain... logic says 50 is less then 56 so it must be faster.... :giveup:
-
As a future math teacher, I was going to do this myself, but just hadn't gotten around to it yet. However, when you said:
As a future engineer hopefully, he's approximately correct as long as you end your calculation when you still have a significant amount of cards left in your deck.
Man, I'm going to kill someone some day.
-
As a future math teacher, I was going to do this myself, but just hadn't gotten around to it yet. However, when you said:
As a future engineer hopefully, he's approximately correct as long as you end your calculation when you still have a significant amount of cards left in your deck.
Man, I'm going to kill someone some day.
WIN. You are awesome.
-
With the 42 card deck, your chance of drawing any one card in your opening hand looks like this:
1/42 + 1/41 + 1/40 + 1/39 + 1/38 + 1/37 + 1/36 + 1/35 = .2085328
Unfortunately your math is slightly off. In each iteration after 1/42, you are forgetting to adjust for the odds that all previous draws did not net you your desired card. I carried out your logic to fractions beyond 1/35, and at 1/16 (i.e., your 27th card) the sum exceeds 100%.
Yep. The fact that the harmonic series 1/n as n->infinity doesn't converge is one of the most frustrating parts of Calc II. I'm rather disappointed I didn't catch that myself.
-
Well, I think we know the odds of this are less than 0%.
My first thoughts were...well, to quote someone else who knows his math...
Unfortunately your math is slightly off.
Just to let you know, the "less than 0%" happens to be a forum-meme here. I don't think jmhartz was trying to be accurate there :)
-
I haven't made a lot of appearances on the forums, and I've only been involved with the game for a year, so I may not know a lot of inside jokes, so thanks for the explanation. That being said, my post was also an attempt at a joke, hence the winky-smiley at the end.
-
Yeah I actually realized that later on but I had already posted and was a bit too lazy to switch it. I knew something felt wrong but I didn't place it until much later.
-
There is tentatively a stream scheduled for this Sunday at 5 pm EST. Expect discussion of PA and MN states and a review of EC regionals.
-
Expect ... a review of EC regionals.
How are you going to review something that neither of you were at? Can we expect another guest on your show, or are you looking for one?
-
Expect ... a review of EC regionals.
How are you going to review something that neither of you were at? Can we expect another guest on your show, or are you looking for one?
We have decklists for the top 2 placers and a few tournament reports, as well as talking directly with the winner. We are not planning on having any guests, as we have 3 tournaments to cover, so we want to make it brief.
-
Just as long as you get all the facts straight.
I suspect this is only a review on the Type 1 format?
-
Correct
-
I suspect this is only a review on the Type 1 format?
Correct
That's too bad considering that two of the best T2 players ever both competed at the EC Regionals (RTSM and Mr. Hiatus) and that some of the TN players are no slouches either.
-
I suspect this is only a review on the Type 1 format?
Correct
That's too bad considering that two of the best T2 players ever both competed at the EC Regionals (RTSM and Mr. Hiatus) and that some of the TN players are no slouches either.
Considering we have 0 decklists, don't even know who won, and don't play Type 2, I don't really think it would bring much value to the show to talk about it for the 5 seconds we'd be able to do so.
-
And here I was hoping to see a review of who made top cut for Sealed. Rats.
-
Also there is a reason I used discussion to describe the events we will be at the review of the one we were not at. EC regionals won't be as long of a discussion, but since it was a well attended tournament with one published decklist for 2nd place in addition to being able to acquire the first place decklist from Red (who kindly sent it to Westy and I) it seems dumb not to talk about it for a little bit.
I don't think we've ever pretending to know anything about Type 2 :) I doubt either of us has anything to add. I spend any Type 2 time I have trying to break the game with ridiculous lists, not trying to win tournaments - which I definitely try to do in Type 1.
-
I played T2-2P, 3 rounds. I won every game running two decks, a Disciple/Pharisee list with 3 Peter (I) - no Miraculous Catch or Authority of Peter, and a Silver/Isaiah emphasis on the silver with Angel Sword and Overwhelming Presence on Mike. I ran the decks switching every round starting with the purple against Gabes Isaiah list.
An early Nazzy, RbD, and Darius Decree shut my opponent down quickly as his CwD hurt me as well stopping me from playing my Pretentions outside of combat. I had better draws with 4dCoin helping to power out a 7-2 victory.
Round 2: was against Tyler who also had 2 decks including an Angel variant and a Purple/Gold. He knew the Pretentions would be trouble for him, so he opted for the Purple/Gold and got a turns 1 and 2 Jar. I switched decks and was lucky he didnt hit too many uniques. He did get Mike so I had to equip Angel of His Presence with Sword which was fun. Isaiah drawing 4-5 cards a turn didnt help my oppponent as I kept him at bay with the 4 Words of Discouragement (classic Clift, right?) any Arts getting in my way were discarded with ASA and I even finished the game with an epic shuffle in Mike from Jar, play Wheel, and equip with Sword FTW! 7-2.
Round 3: I switched back to Disciple/Pharisee and was rewarded against a Genesis/Grey-PaleGreen-Brown with a turn 1 Nazzy/Darius Decree which shut him down while I drew into all my Disciples FTW. I dont remember the score 7-1 i think. Memorable play: Darius Decree up, Idol Gossip off of Proud and stating "I'll have your guy fight my big Purple Peter".
I made my T1 deck from my T2 and had my "TheDeck" variant half build to turn in as well but didnt have it ready in time for the T1 event so I just went with what I had, which wasnt something I was proud of and was certain wasnt going to do well...
-
States 2013 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd5ALDAX8c8#ws)
-
You know you have a good stream when one of the best players in the game tells you to stop giving away his secrets. :D
-
I highly enjoyed this video and was very surprised with how spot on you guy's were with your remarks when it came to card choices used in both decks of EC Regionals.
defense too weak
needs more soul gen
thadd tgt aoc aop mlmg
lacking- close to being very good
2liner (should have had thorns)
maybe add teal
Red didnt have a revealer or he would have had it in there.
King David was good against the meta of the tourney.
Deb with name on name bonus did come up in our game.
Red did have a stronger schedule of play than I did, and deserved that win even though I almost stole it from him with the exception of one misplay.
-
For those who are interested:
A Typical Jordan Alstad Deck (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/complete-decks/a-typical-jordan-alstad-deck-mn-t1-2p-2nd-place-(tied)/msg513034/#new)
-
You guys forgot one royal evil character when talking about Canaanites: King Bera of Sodom who may not be used much but is still in there
-
Bera's a beast if you use him right. I ran 4 Bera's and 3 Political Saavy in my Type 2 deck for MN states.
-
I just spoiled my States deck. (http://redemptionmetagaming.blogspot.com/2013/07/deck-architect-abomination-of.html) Hold your applause please! :)
-
We will be doing a recap of MW Regionals and Nationals preparation video Sunday at 5/4c.
-
MW Regionals Recap and National Preparation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8lATpDWIls#ws)
-
If it makes you feel better, Ari isn't a "new player" per se, he's been playing for several years, he just hasn't really kept up with the game so still uses old/starter cards. :P
-
FYI:
Chances of Westy making top game = 1:25
Chances of Olijar making top game = 1:27
Therefore, chances of both of them making top game = 1:675
For further curiousity:
Chances of reigning champ making top game = 1:15
Front-runner's chances of making top game = 1:5
Chances of me making top game = 1:31
P.S. I liked the show as well as Westy's tips on the blog.
-
Chances of Westy making top game = 1:25
Chances of Olijar making top game = 1:27
Therefore, chances of both of them making top game = 1:675
For further curiousity:
Chances of reigning champ making top game = 1:15
Front-runner's chances of making top game = 1:5
Chances of me making top game = 1:31
Chances of Mark pulling arbitrary numbers out of thin air 1:1. ;)
-
FYI:
Chances of Westy making top game = 1:25
Chances of Olijar making top game = 1:27
Therefore, chances of both of them making top game = 1:675
For further curiousity:
Chances of reigning champ making top game = 1:15
Front-runner's chances of making top game = 1:5
Chances of me making top game = 1:31
P.S. I liked the show as well as Westy's tips on the blog.
Where do you get the ratios from?
-
Like Gabe said, I'm fairly certain they were purely arbitrary.
-
If it makes you feel better, Ari isn't a "new player" per se, he's been playing for several years, he just hasn't really kept up with the game so still uses old/starter cards. :P
To further elaborate, he usually likes to play Genesis/Gray but was playing Teams with Nathan Wagenknecht and used the deck list Nathan made for teams during T1 2p. I wouldn't call it a starter deck - it was a third Ruth, third Judges, and third other heroes (David, Ahimelek, Aaron, etc) with a Magician defense.
Kirk
-
Where do you get the ratios from?
Not quite "thin air" (good guess Gabe), but certainly nothing to be taken too seriously either :)
-
FYI:
Chances of Westy making top game = 1:25
Chances of Olijar making top game = 1:27
Therefore, chances of both of them making top game = 1:675
For further curiousity:
Chances of reigning champ making top game = 1:15
Front-runner's chances of making top game = 1:5
Chances of me making top game = 1:31
P.S. I liked the show as well as Westy's tips on the blog.
FWIW, even if all of your ratios were correct, your math is not. Since Westy's chances of making the top two and Olijar's chances of making the top two are not independent variables, you can't just multiply the two ratios to get your odds. You have to take into account the fact that they might not end up on different sides of the bracket (i.e. in an 8-person tournament, the only way two seeds can meet in the final round is if one of them is from the set [1,4,5,8] and the other is from the set [2,3,6,7]).
Of course, now I'm intrigued by what types of math/assumptions an actual oddsmaker would use to set odds for such an event. If I were to spitball numbers, I'd give Westy and Olijar about equal odds to make Top Cut. I'd say that the probability that Westy makes it is 1:6, and the probability that Olijar makes it is 1:6 (based on past performance, experience, knowledge of the game, etc.). Now with a large enough field, Westy making it and Olijar making it are roughly independent events (though not truly independent, the only way that could happen is if the initial field was infinite and they played infinite rounds...but I digress.) In order to get anything more precise, you'd have to take into account the probabilities of every single game in every single round, which includes souls differentials, random pairings between people with the same differentials, ties, timeouts, etc. etc...way too many variables. But like I said, with a sufficiently large field, the odds of both Olijar and Westy making top cut are ~1:36 using my stated assumptions. Now the odds that they end up in different halves of the bracket (assuming they both make it) is going to be roughly 4:7. Why you ask? Well, the most likely seed for an arbitrary top cut contender is the middle (4th or 5th seed). The least likely seeds will be the ends (1st because you need to be either 6-1 with the best differential or 7-0, and 8th because you need to probably be the best or second best 5-2 player by Strength of Schedule out of a field of anywhere from 12-16 5-2 players depending on the tournament size...no easy task in either case). From there, the other four seeds have likelihoods between the [1,4,5,8] seeds, so it can be assumed that an arbitrary top cut player has a 1:2 chance of being in either half of the bracket. From there, the odds that a second arbitrary player ends up on the other half as the first is going to be ~4:7 because 4 of the 7 remaining spots are on that other half.
Now, if we assume that both of them make it and on different halves of the bracket, we finally have two truly independent variables: the event that Westy wins his half, and that Olijar wins his half. Because of the way Redemption is, and historically a "good" player has ~ a 50% chance of beating another "good" player, I'd put the odds of each of them winning their bracket at 1:4 (since really each of the four players on each side of the bracket will be "good" players, and thus all have an equal chance of winning their side). Since the two events now are truly independent, the odds of both of them winning their halves of the bracket is 1:16.
Hence: 1:36 * 4:7 * 1:16 = 1:1008. To make it a nice, even number, I'd just go ahead and say that the odds of a matchup between our two RM friends in the top two is a thousand to one.
/math
-
Hey guys, I wrote an article about why we haven't been writing articles! Well, kind of. Check it out! (http://redemptionmetagaming.blogspot.com/)
-
I have had Redemption PND since Nats 2010. The article did however forget to mention one of the best ways to combat PND: play a different CCG. :P
-
I have had Redemption PND since Nats 2010. The article did however forget to mention one of the best ways to combat PND: play a different CCG. :P
I think it's fairly well known by now that Olijar and I also play Pokemon, and that originally started from PND 2012. That said, it's more likely to kill the game than it is to help retain players, so I omitted it. There are plenty of things that can help you keep busy once summer is over, but few that also help keep you interested in Redemption.
-
What is PND?
-
Post Nationals Depression
-
Bored and suffering from PND?
Aug:Sep ROOT Westy vs Slugfencer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6ruf5xoZus#)
-
Westy is taking the site on his back. Good work.
-
add me on youtube guys. TheRaven878
-
It's back? (http://redemptionmetagaming.blogspot.com/2014/08/card-by-card-review-of-tec-phase-1.html)
-
does this mean new redemptionmetagaming videos?
-
does this mean new redemptionmetagaming videos?
We have a lot underway right now, should be able to start uploading 1-2 a week!
-
does this mean new redemptionmetagaming videos?
We have a lot underway right now, should be able to start uploading 1-2 a week!
just out of curiousity, have any plans as to who you and alex want to be on your show as your special guest?
-
just out of curiousity, have any plans as to who you and alex want to be on your show as your special guest?
We aren't planning on having a special guest at this point.
-
Welcome back Alex we missed your trolling.
-
just out of curiousity, have any plans as to who you and alex want to be on your show as your special guest?
We aren't planning on having a special guest at this point.
ok im just curious but I will keep an eye out for your videos
-
So we were going to do a video for you guys tonight, but my voice is almost completely gone, so we'll have to postpone it until it returns.
-
I'm a machine full of content (http://redemptionmetagaming.blogspot.com/2014/08/card-by-card-review-of-tec-phase-1-good.html)
-
Our latest video posted to the wrong youtube account because Google+ created a new account for itself and it automatically logged us in on that account. I'm not sure at this point how to move the video from one channel to another, but for now....
New Set Overview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPYWFWn_mQA#ws)
Actual cards begin being discussed at the 3:00 mark, but you wouldn't want to skip our re-introduction, right?
-
We are both super not in practice either, my apologies on the poor quality :(
-
Simon the Tanner and.... Plagued with Diseases? I'm not sure I see the synergy there.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140811045419%2Fredemption%2Fimages%2F2%2F2a%2FSimon_the_Tanner_%2528TEC%2529.jpg&hash=d96a54227904d6a1af4e416f9818c8dd4cbdfd5b)(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg1.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20100522234254%2Fredemption%2Fimages%2F4%2F46%2FPlagued_with_Diseases_%2528Pi%2529_-_Priests.jpg&hash=4d4e7035482c7f01e2fdd2777f251ee3d197ce12)
-
I meant broken cisterns, but PwD would be be there too
-
I wish you guys wouldn't refer to Peter as a Jerusalem hero in your video when he doesn't have that identifier on the card, and hasn't been ruled that way currently.
EDIT: Well don't I look silly now :P
-
I wish you guys wouldn't refer to Peter as a Jerusalem hero in your video when he doesn't have that identifier on the card, and hasn't been ruled that way currently.
Yes he does. Print run 2 has a Jerusalem identifier.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg1.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20140815210855%2Fredemption%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fd1%2FPeter_%2528TEC%2529.jpg&hash=398021300044af78e01c0e69b721514c87d7c109)
You may need to do a hard refresh to see the updated version.
I listed every change between print runs here: http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/redemption-card-play/early-church-phase-1-2nd-print-changes/msg531034/#msg531034 (http://www.cactusgamedesign.com/message_boards/redemption-card-play/early-church-phase-1-2nd-print-changes/msg531034/#msg531034)
-
Yes! I got a mention! I knew there was a reason I kept watching it. :P