Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

All discussion of candidate rules for errata; open to non-members.
Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Bandobras Took » Wed Mar 02, 2011 10:41 pm

And will. 8 turns? Seriously? In a tournament setting? If I had the luxury of eight turns, I wouldn't be nearly so worried. In any dunk deck, the opponent calls as soon as he exhausts and hits 25 MPs. In a tournament, you expect that to happen in 5 turns.

They don't necessarily have to have both Blind and Ire in hand. If you've played Hero Gold Rings, they know you have to use Hero Events to Test Them. If you've gone with Minion Gold Rings, there's a bit more leeway since spells can target Minion items, but what of it? It's a dunk deck. They can still hold on to their Blinds and Ires because they KNOW you're not an MP threat and they KNOW that stopping the tests unavoidably delays you for the necessary turns to call.

Again, I ask for decklists and proof. Heck, just dunk against Marcos' GCCG Tournament deck, and I'll be satisfied (and remember that my deck had a shot at winning by testing on the turn after he called.)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

marcos
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by marcos » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:19 am

Again, I ask for decklists and proof. Heck, just dunk against Marcos' GCCG Tournament deck, and I'll be satisfied (and remember that my deck had a shot at winning by testing on the turn after he called.)
I'm flattered :oops:

Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Bandobras Took » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:27 am

Come now, it's the GCCG Tournament Winning deck; there's no need for modesty. :)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

marcos
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by marcos » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:40 am

i'm actually thinking on a decklist-idea for a FW dunk deck, if i have the time to put it together i will post it somewhere so we could check how badly blind/ire need errata

Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Bandobras Took » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:44 am

That'd be nice. Make sure you can overcome Rolled, too! :)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1513
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:06 am

And even if you test The One, you have a 72% chance of not winning the game without modification other than waiting another (couple of) turn. Meanwhile you have your avatar loaded up with 7 CP. I'd say: 1-0 for Balance vs. FW Dunk.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

miguel
Posts: 658
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:21 am

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by miguel » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:07 pm

As Karsten has already pointed out, Ires and Blinds are very important in dealing with the top level FW decks. Packing 3x Heart Grown Cold in the sideboard won't do you much good because the opponent will have 2x Marvels Told and 2x Voices of Malice (plus Smokes and Weighs) to easily counter if you can't use Ires/Blinds. So IMO a general nerfing is out of the question.

And for making FW ring decks stronger... As has already been stated, this is hardly a sound basis for creating erratum. Yes, FW "dunk" is incredibly hard, but not impossible. Blinds are removed from the game but Wizard's Tests can be Smoked, you just need to deal with that situation. Or play Gandalf. :P

So two thumbs down from me on this one.

marcos
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by marcos » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:19 pm

i agree with Mikko, we don't have to forget that this is a ccg and as such there will be top tier decks and non-competitive decks. I believe that FW dunk is just non viable for a tournament scene even when i can think on a decklist that could avoid most of the problems here mentioned, it can't just do it in the needed ammount of time for making it competitive.
Another thumb down here.

Jose-san
Council Member
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Valencia, Spain

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Jose-san » Thu Mar 03, 2011 4:07 pm

I don't see the need for this change. I have to say no.

Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Bandobras Took » Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:11 pm

marcos wrote:I believe that FW dunk is just non viable for a tournament scene even when i can think on a decklist that could avoid most of the problems here mentioned, it can't just do it in the needed ammount of time for making it competitive.
Apologies for the necro on a very old thread, but this is essentially saying that it's totally okay for FWs to not possibly be able to score as many TPs as Hero/Minion possibly can. Hero/Minion can get a 7 TP victory while FWs are excluded.

This is in no way fair or equitable, and is certainly not a balanced playing environment.
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1513
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:09 pm

Well FW One Ring is not excluded de jure..., just not played de facto. So, fair?

For a "balanced environment" many things come into play. To avoid that discussion here, and assuming players are clever and want to win, easiest is to look at the actual situation. Tourney results show FW's win tourneys all the time. You might do a statistical analisis of tourneys since 1999 to prove otherwise. There's many reasons why those FW won, but "balance" on the whole (between the alignments at least) is not disturbed by it. FW's got stuff going for them, One Ring got other stuff going. Also haven't seen many Challenge the Power decks, but Balrogs are popular nevertheless, and win tourneys.

But yes, one might say it's a pity in tourneys FW (or minion) One Ring is hardly played. But I also think that of Riddling decks :lol:. In tourneys many play the same (proven) decks, while trying to read the meta-game to get a small edge.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Bandobras Took » Sun Nov 20, 2016 3:49 pm

I would argue that it is de jure, since Blind/Ire make it impossible for FWs to get the One Ring out in a tournament. Not just difficult, impossible.

Minion dunks are difficult, so much so that one rarely if ever sees them in a tournament. But there are no cards that make them actually impossible.

If tournament games went 7-8 turns instead of 4-5, it would be a different story, but as marcos said above, there just isn't a way to overcome Blind/Ire in the tournament setting.

There is the obvious exception of FW Gandalf, I suppose . . . but even then, we run into the issue of four avatars in the game being excluded from One Ring victories while all the others have a shot if you want.

It's true that FWs do win, but even going 6-0 in their games puts them behind those who can consistently dunk.

If there's a compilation of tournament records anywhere, I might be able to go over them in the coming weeks. I can't say that I'm vitally interested, since most of my time is taken up caring for my kids these days. It just irked me a little that this problem exists, and, what's more, that people say it's okay.

(There may also be some circular logic -- nobody tries FW dunk, so why bother to make it fair? Because if it's not fair, nobody will try FW dunk.)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1513
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Sun Nov 20, 2016 10:17 pm

if people could consistently dunk, the 7-0 TP's would not be justified ;-)

Blind/Ire make testing very difficult in a tourney game, but not impossible. There's something like timing of draw. And perhaps people don't include them even, there's no rule that says one must.

concerning tourney results, Karsten should have a decent amount of data on his webpage.

as with politics, if people do not share your analisis or solution to a perceived problem, that does not mean they are ok with it. That's pure rethoric ;-)
why Blind/Ire should be playable outside m/h phase in first place, I'd like to hear that analisis. 6 hazards to counter 1 more Marvels/Voices in deck? buh.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

Bandobras Took
Rules Wizard
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:30 pm

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Bandobras Took » Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:16 am

Do people no longer run Blind/Ire in tournaments? I'm a little out of the loop.

I'm talking strictly about standard 2-deck tournament format, here. I would like to see proof that dunk is possible that doesn't rely on the opponent not playing the obvious counter cards correctly. I am for that reason not in favor of a nerf to Rolled against One Ring decks even though I feel it's a terribly balanced card. It has been shown that it can be beat even when it's being played to the hilt.

But I'm not aware of anybody winning a tournament with FW dunking despite Blind/Ire being used on their Ring Tests. I'm not aware of anybody even running such a deck (aside from me). It was that experience that led me to create this thread. To reiterate, Blind made the deck impossible. It didn't fail on the rolls -- it did not get to roll.

It is impossible to get the One Ring out if you cannot make a ring test roll. Various circumstances for other alignments might necessitate an impossible roll (RW automatic testing A Little Gold Ring, for example), but the roll still happens. I'm okay with slim odds. I'm okay with infinitesimal odds. I am not okay with no odds.

Until somebody can demonstrate otherwise, this remains a point of imbalance. I did the work to show that dunk would be possible otherwise. Marcos stated his professional opinion that a FW deck cannot be built to overcome this difficulty and remain viable in a tournament. Karsten stated it took him eight turns, which is (as Marcos also stated) not viable in a tournament setting.

With an open confession that FW Dunk is not viable in a tournament setting and a blunt refusal to modify the one thing that makes it so, what else can we say but that those who will not change it are okay with things as they stand?

(As for Blind/Ire playability, when a card flat-out states "This card may be played at any time," it means just that. The common interpretation of Adûnaphel is far more farcical than that of Blind/Ire.)
Remember, NetRep rulings are official. This does not necessarily mean they are correct.

You probably aren't playing Fallen Wizards correctly.

Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1513
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Re: Erratum Proposal: Blind/Ire and Ring Tests

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Mon Nov 21, 2016 7:48 pm

blunt refusal to modify the one thing that makes it so
that's far from proven, I'd even state that without Blind/Ire in the picture, people still wouldn't play FW dunk in a tournament. What's the benefit over hero dunk? Playing Carambor perhaps? So, rethorics nr.2, claiming unproven things as fact. Though not of the worst kind.
I'm okay with infinitesimal odds
Hyperbolic much? how many games did you play? Rethorics nr 3, sensing a trend here, affected by politics perhaps?
If Fallen Saruman has 2x Wizard's Test in hand and get's a third with his tapping ability, small chance opponent has 3 Blinds in 1 turn. But sure, it's all impossible to test.
I'm not aware of anybody winning a tournament with FW dunking
so now the object is not to win a tournament game, but the tournament even? Upping the stakes...
okay with things as they stand?
Ok enough not to adopt certain measures, such as the one proposed.

I get that you are so adament because you refuse to play anything else but Fallen Saruman, but I like Riddling, not a single Riddling deck has won Worlds in 20 years, This Cannot Be Borne!
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules & Errata”