Discuss all of your questions, concerns, comments and ideas about Second Edition.

Vote for your preferred ability:

Ability A: Cost Reduction - "...the next [AU] [TNG] or [Pa] [TNG] personnel you play..."
20
54%
Ability B: Battle Carrot - "When this personnel is involved in an engagement..."
15
41%
Ability C: Thematic Download - "...you may download a Maneuver or Temporal card."
2
5%
User avatar
Second Edition Art Manager
By edgeofhearing (Lucas Thompson)
 - Second Edition Art Manager
 -  
Community Contributor
#469447
Welcome to Will of the Collective VII: Bottom's Up! This time around we're designing a non-unique character from the bottom up, starting with faction and ending with the story.

Three abilities made it to round 2. This time, I won't break the formatting of the poll, and will only post the full text of the abilities here in the body of the post:

Ability A: (Cost +1) When you play this personnel, the next [AU] [TNG] or [Pa] [TNG] personnel you play this turn is cost -2.

Ability B: (Cost +1.5) When this personnel is involved in an engagement, if he/she is present with a personnel that costs 4 or more, remove him/her from the game to take the top card of your opponent's dilemma pile and place it under your incomplete non-HQ mission.

Ability C: (Cost +1) When you play this personnel, if you command a [TNG] personnel who has a cost of 4 or more, you may download a Maneuver or Temporal card.

Vote for your preferred ability - you have 2 days to do so. The option that wins the plurality of the votes will be our personnel's ability. If there is a tie for first, there will be a third round of voting.

Our next step, after picking an ability, will be to choose what total cost we'll be shooting for. Once we know the total cost of the personnel and the cost of the ability, we'll know how much we have left to spend on skills and attributes.
User avatar
 
By GooeyChewie (Nathan Miracle)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
#469526
monty42 wrote:Tbh this card would not fit into that deck at all.
No, but it could be used for a similar purpose, likely also with Bajor so Benjamin Sisko (Man of Two Worlds) can get him back to use him even more.

I think Ability B would be okay on a unique personnel, but for a non-unique personnel I'd prefer a simple, straight-forward ability. I prefer A because I feel like AU-TNG needs the grease. I'd be perfectly okay with C.
User avatar
 
By Danny (Daniel Giddings)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
2E British National Runner-Up 2021
#469567
Fritzinger wrote:I voted for B because I don’t want there to be Fed battle on the strength of one episode.
So, you voted for B? :?
User avatar
 
By Jono (Sean O'Reilly)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Pioneer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#469570
monty42 wrote:
Jono wrote:I hope it’s not B. We don’t need more cards to help Ted win without facing a single dilemma:
https://www.trekcc.org/decklists/index. ... ckID=40691
Tbh this card would not fit into that deck at all.
Take out SF and replace it with Federation. Now instead of one Malcolm Reed you would have three non-uniques with the same ability. That’s much worse and makes the deck function even better.
User avatar
Second Edition Playtest Manager
By Faithful Reader (Ross Fertel)
 - Second Edition Playtest Manager
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#469594
Jono wrote:
monty42 wrote:
Jono wrote:I hope it’s not B. We don’t need more cards to help Ted win without facing a single dilemma:
https://www.trekcc.org/decklists/index. ... ckID=40691
Tbh this card would not fit into that deck at all.
Take out SF and replace it with Federation. Now instead of one Malcolm Reed you would have three non-uniques with the same ability. That’s much worse and makes the deck function even better.
This deck is already crazy good at going through the entire draw deck.
User avatar
 
By monty42 (Benjamin Liebich)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
2E World Quarter-Finalist 2023
Chancellor
2E European Continental Runner-Up 2023
2E German National Champion 2022
#469597
Jono wrote:
monty42 wrote:
Jono wrote:I hope it’s not B. We don’t need more cards to help Ted win without facing a single dilemma:
https://www.trekcc.org/decklists/index. ... ckID=40691
Tbh this card would not fit into that deck at all.
Take out SF and replace it with Federation. Now instead of one Malcolm Reed you would have three non-uniques with the same ability. That’s much worse and makes the deck function even better.
Assuming that decklist is correct, this deck is completely reliant on 3 copies of one single maneuver. Tell me how he wins without facing a single dilemma, if you don't make the mistake of facing him in the open?
I mean that's really on you...
User avatar
Second Edition Playtest Manager
By Faithful Reader (Ross Fertel)
 - Second Edition Playtest Manager
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#469601
[quote="monty42"Assuming that decklist is correct, this deck is completely reliant on 3 copies of one single maneuver. Tell me how he wins without facing a single dilemma, if you don't make the mistake of facing him in the open?
I mean that's really on you...[/quote]

Presume he wins each battle.

The Dominion Will Prevail gives you two dilemmas per battle, for a total of six. Ja'Chuq puts another three under missions, for a total of nine. Malcolm Reed, Weapons Expert can do another and cycles. We'll call it ten, but it can be more, especially since [urlhttps://www.trekcc.org/2e/index.php?cardID=15]Alexander's[/url] download can mitigate a card placed on the bottom of your draw deck.

This deck can reliably solve Signal for Rescue with five personnel. If need be, the Defiant can scurry dilemmas as needed.

In terms of facing in the open, I suppose it's possible you can't stop your opponent leaving them vulnerable next turn, but not likely.
User avatar
 
By monty42 (Benjamin Liebich)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
2E World Quarter-Finalist 2023
Chancellor
2E European Continental Runner-Up 2023
2E German National Champion 2022
#469602
Faithful Reader wrote:
monty42 wrote:Assuming that decklist is correct, this deck is completely reliant on 3 copies of one single maneuver. Tell me how he wins without facing a single dilemma, if you don't make the mistake of facing him in the open?
I mean that's really on you...
Presume he wins each battle.

The Dominion Will Prevail gives you two dilemmas per battle, for a total of six. Ja'Chuq puts another three under missions, for a total of nine. Malcolm Reed, Weapons Expert can do another and cycles. We'll call it ten, but it can be more, especially since [urlhttps://www.trekcc.org/2e/index.php?cardID=15]Alexander's[/url] download can mitigate a card placed on the bottom of your draw deck.

This deck can reliably solve Signal for Rescue with five personnel. If need be, the Defiant can scurry dilemmas as needed.

In terms of facing in the open, I suppose it's possible you can't stop your opponent leaving them vulnerable next turn, but not likely.
Ross, you have no idea how to play against a battle deck.
Last edited by monty42 on Mon Jun 17, 2019 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
 
By monty42 (Benjamin Liebich)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
2E World Quarter-Finalist 2023
Chancellor
2E European Continental Runner-Up 2023
2E German National Champion 2022
#469603
Ok boys and girls, sit down and put on your listening ears it's time for a bit of a rant cuz I've had it up to here!
This doom and gloom predicting no-can-do attitude, not only here but mainly on the playtest boards is something that really disgusts me.
Set after set I see potetially great cards getting toned down to mediocrity, not even because of actual playtest data, but because of people predicting these "worst-case-horror-scenarios".
Does anybody remember the exact point when societal pressure started to force everybody to remove their balls and keep them in a little box? People are so afraid of maybe causing controversy that instead what we're striving for is mediocrity. "Let's create another ten pages of binder fodder just so we don't have to take the heat of another broken card"
Somewhere in the world might be a deck that'll get really good because of this card, ouh we better not make it then!
It's that sort of designing with the handbrake on that ultimately led to my disenchantment with 2E.

Sean, you said Ted's deck already won without facing a dilemma. How can the proposed personnel make it worse then? Is he somehow gonna face a negative amount of dilemmas?
You had a bad experience, I get that but please don't let this one bad experience take your eyes off the fact that for the one deck that's already bad there might be several potetially great decks that would benefit from a personnel like this.

I'm really gonna call on Ross and Nathan here to shift their view towards the horizon and start making some ballsy calls regarding 2E design. It's not just a bunch of new cards that keep people around, it's interesting new cards that keep people around and right now people let their fear of controversy keep themselves from making interesting cards!

#GiveSheetsSomethingToDo!
Card Page Glitches

So, it's seeming on some sets that the cards on th[…]

Question for noob

Awesome. Thanks everyone for all the help!

Only works when RS is played after AIV. This is be[…]

Still a few weeks left to get registered for the[…]