Author Topic: White ignore enhancements (Read 155783 times)

seeker · « **on:** October 20, 2008, 03:56:49 PM »

I am making a white ignore music deck using the i am's and i dont hink that there is a white or multicolored ignore card.

Connor the Seeker

lightningninja · « **Reply #1 on:** October 20, 2008, 03:58:03 PM »

Quote from: seeker on October 20, 2008, 03:56:49 PM

I am making a white ignore music deck using the i am's and i dont hink that there is a white or multicolored ignore card.

Connor the Seeker

if there's "no need for spices," why should they need ignore?

Sean · « **Reply #2 on:** October 20, 2008, 04:15:09 PM »

Quote from: seeker

i dont hink that there is a white or multicolored ignore card.

Sean

seeker · « **Reply #3 on:** October 20, 2008, 04:59:14 PM »

i agree with sean what the heck are you talking about brandon

Sean · « **Reply #4 on:** October 20, 2008, 05:27:54 PM »

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I edited my post to clarify.

Sean

seeker · « **Reply #5 on:** October 20, 2008, 06:38:58 PM »

sry i ment to say crimson ignore card for white.

lightningninja · « **Reply #6 on:** October 20, 2008, 07:02:12 PM »

I'll say again, if they have "no need for spices," then why do they need to ignore crimson?

If someone doesn't understand this within 10 minutes, it will explode!

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #7 on:** October 20, 2008, 07:43:32 PM »

I unde --
BOOM!!!

Sean · « **Reply #8 on:** October 20, 2008, 08:11:53 PM »

No Need for Spices, Faith Shared, and Compassion of Jeremiah all ignore crimson.

Sean

seeker · « **Reply #9 on:** October 21, 2008, 01:08:58 AM »

okay what about something for white that ignores pale green.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #10 on:** October 21, 2008, 03:42:13 AM »

Quote from: seeker on October 21, 2008, 01:08:58 AM

okay what about something for white that ignores pale green.

No need for spices
Wall of fire
And...Submissiveness of mary I think. White has an ignore for EVERYTHING cept orange.

Oops! edit: Confused ruth's card with mary's.

The Schaef · « **Reply #11 on:** October 21, 2008, 07:15:05 AM »

Devotion of Ruth ignores gray.
Compassion of Jeremiah ignores crimson.
Meekness of Isaac ignores gold.
First Edition Submissiveness of Mary ignores pale green.
Second Edition Submissiveness of Mary ignores brown.
Faith Shared ignores black and crimson if used by a female.
No Need for Spices lets female New Testament Heroes ignore a brigade of choice.
Child of Great Wisdom ignores Pharisees and Sadducees.

Wall of Fire ignores black and pale green.
Scarlet Line lets females ignore males.
But the lack of the word "ignore" in the ability text means the I Am's can't bring these two back.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #12 on:** October 21, 2008, 04:15:48 PM »

So, you can ignore everything, but if you want to recur all your ignores with the I Am's, you'll have to choose between pale green and brown (the two versions of Submissiveness of Mary).

The Schaef · « **Reply #13 on:** October 21, 2008, 04:43:25 PM »

That has been the case with my white NT female ignore offenses, yes. The good news is that No Need for Spices takes the edge off that decision, and if you were really digging, you could add either or both of the non-recurrable ignores. You can't get them back with the Covenants, but a one-shot pale ignore and/or an all-male ignore might get you a critical block when you need it most.

With the addition of the new cards, the Submissiveness of Mary dilemma is not that bad. What's tough about this offense is that it's still difficult to work around warrior-class ECs, and most cultures have a bunch of warriors in their defense (Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, etc).

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #14 on:** October 21, 2008, 04:47:29 PM »

Pairing it with Gold/ehud/samsons sac/Ia/Angel of God might help.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #15 on:** October 21, 2008, 06:58:56 PM »

What's so bad about WC EC's?

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #16 on:** October 21, 2008, 07:11:33 PM »

The cov to recur ignores doesn't work vs them,

The Schaef · « **Reply #17 on:** October 21, 2008, 07:50:13 PM »

Right, and the power of the ignore offense comes from being able to go back and keep drawing out the right ignore card to stop the brigade you're facing. Without additional help versus warrior class, you would get to ignore once or twice and then be out of ammo for the remainder of the game. It's already a bit of a risky strategy as it is. But man, when the cards fall right and you see the look on your opponent's face when you ignore his characters again and again and again and he has no way to stop you... deeply satisfying.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #18 on:** October 21, 2008, 07:59:39 PM »

Well, Salome helps a bit with that. Also, maybe if you merge white with a little purple (throw in Moses, Elijah, and Transfiguration), you could use AoC to take out the majority of your opp's WC EC's (as well as others).

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #19 on:** October 21, 2008, 08:04:57 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on October 21, 2008, 07:50:13 PM

...when the cards fall right and you see the look on your opponent's face when you ignore his characters again and again and again and he has no way to stop you... deeply satisfying.

I would think exactly the opposite. Pulling this off once would be cool. But after that it would make for a very boring game for both players. Anytime one player just walks in for repeated LSs and the win, it is very dissatisfying in my experience. I have been on the winning and losing sides of these games and they just aren't very fun.

The most fun games are where both players have LSs available to take, both players have offenses that are attacking, and both players have defenses that are blocking. This is a complete game of Redemption the way it was intended to be played. And it remains the best way to play. Sitting there twiddling your thumbs on offense because all 3 of your site access cards are on the bottom of your deck is lame. Sitting there twiddling your thumbs because your opponent won't draw any LSs, and your 3 LS creation cards are sitting on the bottom of your deck is also lame. Sitting there twiddling you thumbs on defense because your opponent never attacks until you can't block is also lame.

I'm glad that this White strategy isn't competitive, and I hope that they never give a recurring WC enh to make it possible.

lightningninja · « **Reply #20 on:** October 21, 2008, 08:08:38 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on October 21, 2008, 08:04:57 PM

Quote from: The Schaef on October 21, 2008, 07:50:13 PM
...when the cards fall right and you see the look on your opponent's face when you ignore his characters again and again and again and he has no way to stop you... deeply satisfying.
I would think exactly the opposite. Pulling this off once would be cool. But after that it would make for a very boring game for both players. Anytime one player just walks in for repeated LSs and the win, it is very dissatisfying in my experience. I have been on the winning and losing sides of these games and they just aren't very fun.

The most fun games are where both players have LSs available to take, both players have offenses that are attacking, and both players have defenses that are blocking. This is a complete game of Redemption the way it was intended to be played. And it remains the best way to play. Sitting there twiddling your thumbs on offense because all 3 of your site access cards are on the bottom of your deck is lame. Sitting there twiddling your thumbs because your opponent won't draw any LSs, and your 3 LS creation cards are sitting on the bottom of your deck is also lame. Sitting there twiddling you thumbs on defense because your opponent never attacks until you can't block is also lame.

I'm glad that this White strategy isn't competitive, and I hope that they never give a recurring WC enh to make it possible.

Go look at his thread "shooting ourselves in the foot" to get a better understanding of what he is saying. I agree completely.

Prof Underwood · « **Reply #21 on:** October 21, 2008, 10:51:00 PM »

Quote from: fireninja on October 21, 2008, 08:08:38 PM

Go look at his thread "shooting ourselves in the foot" to get a better understanding of what he is saying. I agree completely.

First you agree with me. Then you reference a thread from a long time ago, which I actually started. I'm going to have to double what I'm paying you to give me props here on the forum

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #22 on:** October 21, 2008, 10:53:02 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on October 21, 2008, 10:51:00 PM

Quote from: fireninja on October 21, 2008, 08:08:38 PM
Go look at his thread "shooting ourselves in the foot" to get a better understanding of what he is saying. I agree completely.
First you agree with me. Then you reference a thread from a long time ago, which I actually started. I'm going to have to double what I'm paying you to give me props here on the forum

Lol I also agree with prof. I prefer big battle games. Though my offenses usually don't let you have much chance by the time my offense comes out. You've had a nice fun game with my defense. Usually ending in you not liking me much.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #23 on:** October 21, 2008, 10:59:09 PM »

Quote from: The Schaef on October 21, 2008, 07:50:13 PM

Right, and the power of the ignore offense comes from being able to go back and keep drawing out the right ignore card to stop the brigade you're facing. Without additional help versus warrior class, you would get to ignore once or twice and then be out of ammo for the remainder of the game. It's already a bit of a risky strategy as it is. But man, when the cards fall right and you see the look on your opponent's face when you ignore his characters again and again and again and he has no way to stop you... deeply satisfying.

There ARE other ways of doing this as well. I know I have told several of you my evil methods of doing this.

lightningninja · « **Reply #24 on:** October 21, 2008, 11:34:29 PM »

Quote from: Prof Underwood on October 21, 2008, 10:51:00 PM

Quote from: fireninja on October 21, 2008, 08:08:38 PM
Go look at his thread "shooting ourselves in the foot" to get a better understanding of what he is saying. I agree completely.
First you agree with me. Then you reference a thread from a long time ago, which I actually started. I'm going to have to double what I'm paying you to give me props here on the forum

Of course you started it. "Go look at his thread "shooting ourselves in the foot." I think the fact that you are trying to solve what I HATE the most is payment enough. So, to double it, I guess, just try harder!

News:

Author Topic: White ignore enhancements (Read 155783 times)

The Schaef

The Schaef

The Schaef

Lamborghini_diablo