.
First of all let me point out that I have no idea who designed what card, so that has nothing to do with anything.
Quick spontaneous answer without much checking, (probably the most honest one...:p)
What sets from the 40s were good? Why?
What sets from the 40s were bad? Why?
No particular stands out in my book, I do believe all of these have good and bad cards. From my casual point of view I could also say, some have interesting cards, some don't.
What individual cards from the 40s were good? Why?
Arne Darvin, HotE - Nice ability that makes up for a nice themed Klingon Tribble deck with Infestation pile. Love it.
Soft Cell - Again very thematic, fits into my Thief deck, good.
Hyralan Sector Did I mention I love cards with Trek sense, another example...
Harried and Harassed This card enables a lot of interaction, Great!
Royale Casino: Craps - Fun card.. hoping for Royale Casino dilemma pile in the future (with a trigger dilemma like Chula or Clown)
Bok and his
Stargazer See theme and trek sense above. Good cards. I was skeptical about these at first but they turn out to be fun.
What sets from the 40s were bad? Why?
Q'Planet - A missed opportunity, this supposed to be Q's home planet. The ability is boring. Nothing points to other Q cards.
Hazardous Materials - I hated this dilemma, that cheesy Trellium D even got another boost. Awful, this dilemma went rampart for a while, luckily haven't seen it recently. I think it's too strong.
Both categories above have probably more cards.. those were what thought of right away.
Which mechanics and/or themes from the 40s were good? Why?
Shaping out the Mirror faction (KCA) was nicely done. I personally haven't played them, but I can see the effort and success in it.
Maneuver and Combat cards with static effects like
Invasion Plans. I think these fit nicely into certain decks in combination with dilemma piles. Are they always gonna be successful probably not, but a new option available.
As I recall in this time period falls the invention of more headquarters with benefits/restrictions on them. If that's true, thumbs up, best idea in this era.
Which mechanics and/or themes from the 40s were bad? Why?
Sorry but I really disliked what has been done with Q's Planet and
Deneb Approach. I know 2e is "streamlined" but come on, this brings the fantastic theme of Q and his cards and his keyword down to children's level. No connection to any previously created Q card, no synergy at all. It creates its own 40 card deck theme with no further support (thank god).
Clearly the worst thing for me in those 10 sets. A missed opportunity.
I don't care for the Nazi Starfleet faction, the theme alone is cringe worthy. Starfleet did not need another way to be played at the time. Waste of space that could have been gone to other more needed cards.
Does that count as an example for "the designer do what they like"?
On the whole, do you think the 40s sets were good for the game? Why or why not?
Good, new cards are always good for the game. Are they always great? Can they be broken? Possibly. But we have the tools with errata to correct things if necessary. As long as action will be taken switfly I don't see a problem with any set, 40 to 49 or 50 to 59.
PS I want to celebrate set 99 one day, so keep on working..
