[Dizzle of Borg]

Hi I'm new here, but I have been playing Star Trek CCG since 1999. I played in lots of events back then, and helped run tons of events for decipher in our local game store. To this day, my friends and I play STCCG, but with the old rules sets. I absolutely love what you guys are doing here. The virtual sets seem really neat and seeing that you still have a rating system rolling makes me super happy! I've been looking around the site and the support it inspiring! I'm even thinking of becoming a member. Kudos to your entire community for supporting STCCG for so long!

That being said, I have a couple questions. It seems my group would play with the open traditional rules set, since we have none of the new cards printed out and play with the old rules. I was looking at the "suggested documents" and it listed the "Virtual Errata" file as something a TO should have on hand. After perusing the document there are some major changes to a lot of the cards that see heavy play around here. We play pretty much the meta-game as Decipher left it, so changes to cards like a borg ship, Ajur, colony, going to the top, etc, are huge. Are these Decipher errata that I missed or are they errata decided upon by this community? If the latter, can traditional tournaments be sanctioned without them since it seems the purpose of those events is to play the game with the decipher rules set? I ask because I think getting into the community and sanctioning events for our payers would be fun again, but if I show them these errata they might blow their top. (Let alone convince them to play OTF with the BAN LIST... that's never happening, lol)

Anyway, thanks for your time in answering. Like I said, I'm new here, so I hope I put this in the right place.

[CaptMDKirk]

The least restrictive format is Open, which only bans Raise the Stakes (as Decipher did for tournament play). Open Format as sanctioned by trekcc.org would still use the errata that's been issued for the cards you mentioned; however, some TDs hold pre-errata sealed events using old product like OTSDs so that cards still do what they say in the format they were designed for. But a lot of the virtual cards were designed based on the errata for older cards so that they coexist a little more peacefully.

[BCSWowbagger]

Welcome, Dizzle!

Are these Decipher errata that I missed or are they errata decided upon by this community?

You can check on each individual card's page to find out when the errata was issued. For example, Borg Ship received errata on 13 May 2013. For your use, here is a list of all Decipher-era errata:

Code: Select all

Card     Date    Reason   Gameplay Impact
Armus - Skin of Evil	1995-06-01	Typo. Missing article "A" at the beginning of Lore in Alpha printing.	None
Distortion Field	1995-06-01	Nerf. Made it unique.	Moderate
Emergency Transporter Armbands	1995-06-01	Nerf. Prevent escape from dilemma encounters (applied in Beta printing, so most extant copies have this errata).	Moderate
Evacuation	1995-06-01	Typo. "Strength" should have been "STRENGTH."	None
Firestorm	1995-06-01	Emergency Transporter Armbands explicitly allowed as a counter in Beta printing.	None
Giusti	1995-06-01	Typo in lore.	None
Investigate Time Continuum	1995-06-01	Typo. "Devidia" misspelled.	None
Khitomer Research	1995-06-01	Added Klingon attemptability.	Moderate
Lwaxana Troi	1995-06-01	Typo in title.	None
Mendon	1995-06-01	Typo in lore.	None
T'Pan	1995-06-01	Added skill of Mindmeld	Moderate
Toral	1995-06-01	Typo in lore.	None
Tsiolkovsky Infection	1995-06-01	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
U.S.S. Oberth	1995-06-01	Typo in lore.	None
Wesley Crusher	1995-06-01	Typo in lore.	None
Wind Dancer	1995-06-01	Typo: Lwaxana's name misspelled in Alpha printing.	None
Amanda's Parents	1996-10-01	Corrected ambiguous wording that appeared on only some printings of the original card.	None
Amanda Rogers	1999-10-04	Prohibited use of Amanda Rogers to nullify Kevin Uxbridge or another Amanda Rogers.	Moderate
Anti-Time Anomaly	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Assign Mission Specialists	1999-10-04	Removed "Captain's Order" status.	Moderate
Captain's Log	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Docking Pads	1999-10-04	Location corrected to Habitat Ring.	Minor
Firestorm	1999-10-04	Unnecessary text allowing Thermal Deflectors to nullify removed.	None
Full-Planet Scan	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity. ("Glance at all seed cards" instead of just "Dilemma and Artifact cards")	None
Garak	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Kevin Uxbridge	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity. ("Destroys" changed to "Nullifies")	None
Major Rakal	1999-10-04	Added species identification.	Minor
Martok	1999-10-04	Typo in special download.	None
Menthar Booby Trap	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Phaser Burns	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Quark Son of Keldar	1999-10-04	Typo. "All attributes" on white-border version changed to match "Attributes all" on black-border version.	None
Red Alert!	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Remodulation	1999-10-04	Typo. Previously referred to a non-existent card.	None
Reported Activity	1999-10-04	Typo. "ENGINEERING" should have been "ENGINEER."	None
Scan	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity. ("Glance at all seed cards" instead of just "Dilemma and Artifact cards")	None
Scanner Interference	1999-10-04	RESCINDED. Added an unnecessary clarification of "into play" after "download."	Rescinded
Six of Eleven	1999-10-04	Typo. "Doorway" should have been "Door."	None
Tasha Yar: Alternate	1999-10-04	Significant rewording to work with new "downloading" rules.	Minor
Thine Own Self	1999-10-04	Clarification that personnel in planet facilities are not affected, in light of updates to "away team" rules.	None
U.S.S. Danube	1999-10-04	Typo. Should have said "Docking Pads" instead of "Runabout Pads."	None
Vulcan Nerve Pinch	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Zon	1999-10-04	Minor rewording for clarity (he nullifies the dilemma Nausicaans, not Nausicaan personnel)	None
Alien Abduction	2000-08-07	Removed the word "captive" to make it clear it's not a capture-related card (as was the case at the time).	None
Bajoran Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Birth of "Junior"	2000-08-07	Modernized game text for readability.	None
Borg Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Cardassian Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Cargo Rendezvous	2000-08-07	Typo. "ENGINEERING" should have been "ENGINEER."	None
Chinese Finger Puzzle	2000-08-07	Should have said "crew or Away Team" as a Planet/Space dilemma.	None
Clan People	2000-08-07	No card named "Opaka" exists, so they made sure it'd affect the right person.	Minor
Covert Installation	2000-08-07	Offloaded region text from rules to card.	None
Cryosatellite	2000-08-07	Also allows Borg to use it by removing 'mission complete' text.	Minor
Diplomatic Conference	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Distortion of Space/Time Continuum	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Edo Probe	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Ensign Tuvok	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Espionage Mission	2000-08-07	Offloaded region text from rules to card.	None
Federation Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Ferengi Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Frame of Mind	2000-08-07	Should have said "crew or Away Team" as a Planet/Space dilemma, plus minor wording cleanup.	None
Husnock Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
I.K.C. Bortas	2000-08-07	Clarification of Gowron's matching commander status; updated I.K.S. to match newer I.K.C. reprint.	None
Iconia Investigation	2000-08-07	Offloaded region text from rules to card.	None
Investigate "Shattered Space"	2000-08-07	Offloaded region text from rules to card.	None
Klaestron Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Klingon Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Latinum Payoff	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Neutral Outpost	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Patrol Neutral Zone	2000-08-07	Offloaded region text from rules to card.	None
Phased Matter	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Q	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Radioactive Garbage Scow	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
REM Fatigue Hallucinations	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Reunion	2000-08-07	Offloaded region text from rules to card.	None
Romulan Outpost	2000-08-07	Outpost mass errata for clarity and consistency with other card types.	None
Sense The Borg	2000-08-07	Errata to cement a ruling that the downloads go to hand.	None
Terellian Plague Ship	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Two-Dimensional Creatures	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Zaldan	2000-08-07	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Admiral Riker	2000-10-18	Printing error. Admiral Riker originally allowed downloads at matching facility, but his Reflections foil inadvertently allowed it at a merely compatible facility. Errata restored original card.	None
Kira Nerys	2000-10-18	Printing error. Kira Nerys originally had Navigation x2, but her Reflections foil inadvertently had only one Navigation. Errata restored original card.	None
Explore Typhon Expanse	2000-11-01	Typo. "Typhone" should have been "Typhon."	None
Investigate Sighting	2000-11-01	Typo. "Stromgren" misspelled.	None
Assign Mission Specialists	2001-05-23	Added definition of "mission specialist" to card itself.	None
Auto-Destruct Sequence	2001-05-23	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Lower Decks	2001-05-23	Minor rewording for clarity, and offloaded "Captain's Order" from Ready Room Door.	None
Starfleet Type II Phaser	2001-05-23	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Adapt: Negate Obstruction	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Assimilate Planet	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Assimilate Starship	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Borg Cube	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Establish Gateway	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Locutus's Borg Cube	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Queen's Borg Cube	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Transwarp Network Gateway	2001-09-19	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Holo-Projectors	2001-12-21	Nerf. Now works on only a single planet.	Moderate
Holosuite	2001-12-21	Typo. On some printings in original release, a random "g" was inserted into the middle of the location bar.	None
Bajoran Resistance Cell	2002-08-05	Typo. Added "of" to "to one your missions."	None
Disruptor Overload	2002-08-05	Minor rewording for clarity.	None
Fair Play	2002-08-05	Minor rewording for clarity, and offloaded Referee icon from Q the Referee.	None
Q's Fantasy Women	2002-08-05	Typo. Card stated in gametext it was an event, but was labeled a dilemma.	None
Thought Fire	2002-08-05	Should have said "crew or Away Team" as a Planet/Space dilemma.	None
Vulcan Mindmeld	2002-08-05	Minor rewording for clarity.	None

Special thanks to jrch for helping compile that list a while ago.

Any errata not on that list is something the CC did.

If the latter, can traditional tournaments be sanctioned without them since it seems the purpose of those events is to play the game with the decipher rules set?

I don't believe you could be sanctioned to host a high-level event (e.g. a regional or national tournament) without using all official errata.

But, at the local level, as long as you state VERY CLEARLY in your posted tournament description what rules and cards are allowed, you can pretty much do what you want (at least in practice). I've never heard of the Department of Organized Play raising an objection to anyone doing anything at a local level -- as long as they're not faking games and/or players to manipulate the ratings. Officially, all errata are used at all sanctioned events, even Open format, but tournament directors are given broad discretion to customize their local environment as they see fit. The most important thing is that people are playing the game and having fun doing it; there's no need to be fussy about details until you start getting into higher-level competition.

Now, I should say that I think you all should try playing OTF with virtual cards. Modern OTF is the best the game has ever been. But I know where you're coming from: when I first came back to the CC, I, too, said, "Ha! I'm glad this group is here, but I'll never ever play with a ban list!" Took me a while to convince me otherwise. Until the same happens to you, though, I think you're good to go playing sanctioned tournaments with only Decipher-era errata... as long as you CLEARLY COMMUNICATE that in your tournament posting and specify EXACTLY which errata you are including/ignoring.

(Of course, if the Organized Play Director comes in and tells you something different, listen to him, not me. )

[jadziadax8]

Welcome to the CC! Please tell us where you and your friends are located. There may be a group of players near you willing to lend out decks. You may also want to check out my series of articles exploring some decks that are friendly to new players. It is easy to print, cut and sleeve these decks from the deckbuilder.

[Dizzle of Borg]

Wow!

Thanks for the quick responses and all the love! We are in the Indianapolis, In area. I will do my best to convince my players to try out some OTF, but I think we will be keeping our old decks together to play the way we always have as well.

About the sanctioned events... are players allowed to print out ANY card or just cards that are from a virtual set? Is there any reason for players to use the old cards, or should we just make decks using anything we want and print them all out? As far as legality goes, is that legit? I know some of the stuff can be hard to pick up nowadays.

Thanks for all the help so far. You guys seem really nice! That list of Errata is BOMB, btw.

[pfti]

Wow!

Thanks for the quick responses and all the love! We are in the Indianapolis, In area. I will do my best to convince my players to try out some OTF, but I think we will be keeping our old decks together to play the way we always have as well.

About the sanctioned events... are players allowed to print out ANY card or just cards that are from a virtual set? Is there any reason for players to use the old cards, or should we just make decks using anything we want and print them all out? As far as legality goes, is that legit? I know some of the stuff can be hard to pick up nowadays.

Thanks for all the help so far. You guys seem really nice! That list of Errata is BOMB, btw.

you can print any card. also if you all ever want to road trip. I host the occasional tournament in the Detroit area.

[Boffo97]

If it helps, when I first came here, I was kind of thinking like I'm reading you as thinking now (though I could be wrong): "Hey, I appreciate all these nifty new cards, but who do those people think they are errata-ing the cards in my binder? I want to play the game that Decipher intended!"

Then later "What?! Continuing Mission gives all the personnel and ship cards with a TNG or Generations property logo a icon, and then all these other cards give benefits to that, but you can't include any personnel or ship without those property logos or it all goes away! Dumb! Why would anyone ever do a deck that mixes those properties now?! I loved decks like that!" (This was before the very similar card Reshape the Quadrant did something similar for DS9 decks as well.)

But in my time hanging out here, I learned that as much as I loved the game in the Decipher era, it was very flawed, had issues with power creep forcing players to play Voyager decks to be competitive, and was exploitable, particularly at high levels. The cards here have done a good job or rectifying that while issuing errata as infrequently as possible. So, while we all fear change , it's good to look at what they've done with an open mind as I'm sure you will. And if some card ever makes you ask why it was done that way or designed at all, just ask. I'm sure many people will happily and politely tell you the story.

Anyway, welcome to the board!

[Dizzle of Borg]

I'm sure I wil develp a love of the new meta like I did the old. The only thing that concerns me is that ban lists and heavy errata are the exact OPPOSITE of everything Decipher stood for as a company. My favorite thing about STCCG is that you never knew what was coming out of your opponent's deck so you had to make more of a tool box. If Decipher saw a strategy that was dominant, they didn't ban the cards or errata them to nullify the deck archetypes.... they released cards that dealt with them. A few referee lines on a card and all of a sudden all those broken Romulan Homefront decks go away, etc. If the community is releasing virtual sets, why not work in that direction instead to keep it "traditional"?

Also, why ban cards that are mentioned tons of times and have lots of ways around them? Red alert for example? Red alert is cancelled by other cards and also like everyone played Spacedock, so that they could mirror red alert. I don't see how it gave any form of unfair advantage. It seems more like decisions were made to SLOW the game down. Looking at the decks in the community, they don't look like toolboxes at all, they look like well oiled machines, extremely focused and near deck building minimums. (I also noticed a consistency of many of the dilemmas) This is probably due in part to the limit on special downloads. But it seems also a conscious effort was made to slow down play. Is this accurate? As far as I read the ban list is supposed to be a "penalty box" for cards awaiting errata. How long has Red Alert been there? Seems it has an awful lot of players in it.

[Dizzle of Borg]

Also, I hope you guys don't feel like I'm dissin' all the work you've done. While some of the decisions might seem counter to what I would expect, this community has been at this a long time on a much grander scale than I have dealt with. I am simply trying to understand the decision making process so I can acclimate myself to the overall mindset of the collective.

[frakkingoff]

The only thing that concerns me is that ban lists and heavy errata are the exact OPPOSITE of everything Decipher stood for as a company.

I think some of the errata and ban lists are a bit heavy-handed at times. Some are done well, some not so well (Q is a disaster and needs to be re-errata'ed). So I understand your concerns and sympathize with them, but there are merits to some of the decisions. Read on.

Also, keep in mind - when it comes to game design, some of what Decipher "stood for" was honorable and aspirational (no clunky ban lists, for example). But some of what they "stood for" in terms of their actions and choices were deliberately poor design choices, made to sacrifice game design balance and elegance for the sake of profitability.

For example, the power level of cards in the last few expansions was amped up considerably, in what is now a very obvious move to try and keep moving product - if you don't keep buying the new cards, you're going to get steam-rolled by the competition because they will outclass you so severely.

My favorite thing about STCCG is that you never knew what was coming out of your opponent's deck so you had to make more of a tool box. If Decipher saw a strategy that was dominant, they didn't ban the cards or errata them to nullify the deck archetypes.... they released cards that dealt with them. A few referee lines on a card and all of a sudden all those broken Romulan Homefront decks go away, etc. If the community is releasing virtual sets, why not work in that direction instead to keep it "traditional"?

I get what you're saying here, and to an extent I agree that decks are too stream-lined (preventing player interaction). But adding referee lines to cards becomes a growing bureaucratic nightmare for players. As abusive strategies and unintended loopholes are discovered, the game designers can either:

A) Close the loophole with errata and ban lists
or
B) Add "silver bullet" cards and referee cards to counter the strategies.

Keep in mind that as the population of cards grows linearly, the number of possible interactions grows geometrically - meaning the appearance of unintended abusive interactions, combos, and loopholes will grow in frequency over time.

So while A may be inelegant at first, the overhead and weight of B will become exponentially worse over time. Players will have to memorize dozens of referee cards AND be able to cycle them in and out of their deck without slowing their own strategy down. And those cards aren't much fun to play with anyway. (Playing the USS Enterprise and watching it zoom down the spaceline? That's cool and has a storyline component to it.. Playing "Strategema" because it counters an abusive strategy that happens to be stopped by that referee card? That's boring and there's no story there).

Either way, the end result is ideally the same - an abusive card is not abused. While A means that card can't be used unabusively for a time, it does have the chance of being re-tooled for a re-appearance. Whereas with B, the game just becomes a game for slow-playing rules lawyers.

B was the standard for many years. The CC has been making an effort to move AWAY from B and TOWARDS A precisely because players tried B and it sucked.

Also, why ban cards that are mentioned tons of times and have lots of ways around them? Red alert for example? Red alert is cancelled by other cards and also like everyone played Spacedock, so that they could mirror red alert. I don't see how it gave any form of unfair advantage.

I think you're right, Red Alert shouldn't be banned. It has several counters which many decks are already using for other purposes anyhow.

It seems more like decisions were made to SLOW the game down. Looking at the decks in the community, they don't look like toolboxes at all, they look like well oiled machines, extremely focused and near deck building minimums. (I also noticed a consistency of many of the dilemmas) This is probably due in part to the limit on special downloads. But it seems also a conscious effort was made to slow down play. Is this accurate?

Yes, an effort was made to slow down the game. It had gotten to the point where competitive games could be over in 3 turns or less. Even one-turn wins weren't impossible.

One-turn games AREN'T games, and 3-turn games are barely so. They aren't fun, so the game needed to be slowed down. If you ask me, it needs to be slowed down even FURTHER. Like you said, decks are well-oiled machines and not toolboxes - because the game is still too fast, so decks can't afford to be anything OTHER than well-oiled machines.

[Armus]

It seems like your typical speed solver can win in 5-7 turns. So you have to either be able to race at that level, or cause enough bad things to happen to your opponent that you draw the game out.

Realistically though, I wouldn't go much past turn 12-14 based on clock alone, so even your interference decks need to be able to get after the missions in short order.

Regardless, that's a reasonable enough Pace to allow for myriad strategies, which is as it should be for a game with a ton of options in deck theme and approach.

[Boffo97]

Just out of curiosity, has an approach like baseball's extra innings ever been considered? Where if the visiting team gets ahead, the home team still has the bottom of the inning to match or beat them, but if the home team gets ahead, the game is over.

Like let's suppose we're playing against each other. I win the coin toss or whatever and since it's an advantage under this system, I elect to go second. You pull off some devious master plan and score 110 points in turn 1. Rather than the game being over, I get my turn. If I can't score 110 points, I lose. If I score exactly that, we go on to another turn. If I score more, I win.

Just throwing things against the wall here. It would seem to make speed solvers much less of an issue because the advantage of going first is mitigated.

[nobthehobbit]

Before that's considered, I think we'd need good statistics on the win percentage for players who go first, especially correlated to deck types.

[BCSWowbagger]

If you ask me, it needs to be slowed down even FURTHER. Like you said, decks are well-oiled machines and not toolboxes - because the game is still too fast, so decks can't afford to be anything OTHER than well-oiled machines.

I strongly agree with this. We were in a good place back when we had In The Zone, but we aren't anymore. The game has in many cases contracted from 7-10 turns (which is a real game, if a bit too brief for my taste) to an extremely short 5-8. 5 turns is so fast that there are reasonable interference decks that can't even get started interfering by then. Newbies will play games where they never even leave their outposts before their opponent wins. It's getting degenerate.

I think ITZ needed to be banned because it was a bad, asymmetric, "gotchya" way to fix the problem that got exponentially worse with Tribunal of Q and Q's Tent: Civil War. It wasn't used anymore to keep a fast player from winning; it was used more often to keep a slow player from catching up. But removing it from the environment relieved significant pressure on speed solvers (which were already very good) and made two-mission wins the predominant strategy in high-level play.

This is one reason I'm pretty excited about the Vulcans. If they have the desired meta impact of adding a few turns to the game without adding much time to the game (so you get more turns, but they're on average shorter), their affiliation could provide the game with the meta correction it needs most right now.

Anyway, back on topic.

I agree with everything Frakkingoff wrote. 1-2 turns is not a game, and Ref cycling is a mind-numbingly dull minigame that only became more complicated (and boring) over time. It's worth noting that Open format was becoming quite rare even before OTF came out. Open was already being supplanted in groups across the world by Revised Format (which tried to fix the game's degeneracy with rules sledgehammers) and by X-List Format (which tried to fix the game's degeneracy with a truly massive ban list). OTF simply combined some much more moderate rules fixes with a much more moderate ban list.

Now, of course, not everyone loved this, and OTF was very controversial when it first came out. (The aggressive errata were, too.) OTF's stability and success in the seven years since has won almost everybody over as a convert. But I'm sure there are still people who prefer Open, and I wish them all the best.

[Dizzle of Borg]

Thank you guys so much for all the answers and discussion!!!!

I can see what you are getting at when it comes to the referee cards. The virtual card pool is pretty huge, so obviously it would get harder and harder to manage that way.

Also: wow... 5-7 turns? I guess I'm missing something. I assumed reading through the OTF rules the limits on personality downloads a turn would shut this sort of thing down. Am I misreading the downloads rule? Are there way more seed cards than mission specialists/support personnel that are starting guys in play? Are there just a lack of people playing cards punishing archetypes that get going quickly or have small away teams?

I'm looking at building an OTF Borg deck over the next few days, It is going to be different than I'm used to (used to just play 6x scout encounter 6x servo 6x undetected beam-in and download.dec) but I think it will be a fun change of pace.

Even back when the game was still in print our group thought In the Zone was problem. It has always made comebacks harder.

Also, are lock down decks still a thing? One of our players just plays tons of cards that stop your personnel or your ship or prevent you from doing your missions. Always seemed effective against speed racer decks.