Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Quote from: Josh on January 03, 2019, 09:35:55 AM

Quote from: Master Q on January 01, 2019, 12:47:53 PM

PS - I hate how this deck plays.

I'm curious what you mean here.

Any deck that punishes the opponent for simply playing the game is not much fun to play or play against, imo. This deck is capable of having a combination of Jonah, habbakuk, merchants, and Babel out early enough to be more than a nuisance, and consistently enough to be more than egregious. Not to mention almost every attack this deck should be making is CBN (Zeke, Isaiah), meaning lots of boring, non-interactive battles. Not to mention the "discard an evil card from a reserve" star abilities, which trigger nearly every game (sometimes more with Isaiah) and uncounterably shoot the opponent's reserve in the foot.

Long story short, this deck has so many things for free while countering almost everything the opponent does, also for free. It's not as bad as other decks of recent nats (you know the ones), but it's leaving a bad taste in my mouth just the same. I can only imagine what mirror matches would be like...

He who combos first wins.

The best way to beat a good player is take away their ability to play well by giving them as few decisions as possible. Punish and uninteractivity will always be present in the best decks.

I agree. But not everyone is a "good player". We want people to play, right? If so, why do the winning decks of the past recent years all focus on doing the opposite?

I get that from a competitive standpoint that's exactly what you want to do. I'm merely questioning if decks like this and years prior are healthy or not.

Understand, this is far from as problematic as Abom, Col, and Throne blitz. But it has a bit of that blood in it. And that's not really my playstyle.

Good decks don't always equal fun decks.

Keeping the opponent from playing has ALWAYS been part of the best decks in the game. It's taken on different shapes over the years, but that was the case long before I even found Redemption.

When I started I studied past tournament winning decks to figure out the best ways to play Redemption. In T2 I recall an Eric Largent deck that used Provisions + Plague of Frogs to choose his own defenders and get them back while winning a LS. In T1-2P I recall reading about Tim Maly's FBTN+CBN deck that kept opponents from doing anything. In T1-MP I was enthralled by Justin Alstad's SpEeD FrEaK that drew out the entire deck in the first couple turns to win before the opponent ever set up. Those are just the ones before I started playing. There have been many since. Like Clifts SitC T2 deck. That might be the ugliest of them all.

We do a lot to promote interaction, but the best players will always find ways to limit interaction. The things that Habakkuk, Jonah, Babylonian Merchants, etc are doing were already in the game but being splashed into decks. Giving more brigades options like that without the need to splash feels like a good idea. If we get enough of these that they become common in all the top decks maybe people will start playing cards that negate TC characters.

If only Cloud Moses didn't negate your own dudes.....

Then he'd be OP. 

Quote from: Kevinthedude on January 03, 2019, 11:36:06 PM

The best way to beat a good player is take away their ability to play well by giving them as few decisions as possible. Punish and uninteractivity will always be present in the best decks.

I agree. But not everyone is a "good player". We want people to play, right? If so, why do the winning decks of the past recent years all focus on doing the opposite?

I get that from a competitive standpoint that's exactly what you want to do. I'm merely questioning if decks like this and years prior are healthy or not.

Understand, this is far from as problematic as Abom, Col, and Throne blitz. But it has a bit of that blood in it. And that's not really my playstyle.

Good decks don't always equal fun decks.

I'm encouraged when I hear you talk like this, Josh. Not saying that anyone else doesn't, but it's really cool that you involve your conscience in playing the game. I also ideally want for my games to be fair fights that are fun for everyone, as much as possible...I'd pretty much rather lose than cause my opponent NPE! But of course fairness and NPE can be subjective, a fine line, and personal conscience is definitely involved. So I'm not judging anyone for whatever cards or playstyles they use, just saying how I personally feel about it and once again commending you for caring. 

Yes, it's definitely more of a personal preference that drives my dislike of how this plays. It's just so easy and so coherent; almost like it was done on purpose...

I think my opinion will ultimately improve with phase 2. After all, a half doesn't necessarily equal the whole.

Quote from: Gabe on January 04, 2019, 03:56:27 PM

Quote from: Red Dragon Thorn on January 04, 2019, 12:39:47 PM

If only Cloud Moses didn't negate your own dudes.....

Then he'd be OP. 

Sounds like you guys have some more play testing to do before releasing whatever character you are hinting at.

Sounds more to me like a subtle reminder that Golden Calf exists. If only there was a reliable way to grab that in the match-ups where it shines...