trekcc.org

jjh wrote:Missions that reward solving them are off the rails.

I'd ban all of them with non-meta police gametext.

Yup, I said "ban". Their day should be over.

Sounds like a great premise for Matt's new format. Not sure I'm down with a ban list in Standard.

Also, what missions specifically would be on your ban list?

jjh wrote:Missions that reward solving them are off the rails.

I'd ban all of them with non-meta police gametext.

Yup, I said "ban". Their day should be over.

I think there's two other allowable exceptions:

1. Missions that give you a bigger reward for solving them with higher requirements, such as Geological Survey. I'm not saying Geological Survey is balanced, just that I think this type of reward is OK. (Solve with lower requirements, get lower points; solve with higher requirements, get higher points.)

2. Modal missions, like The Siege of AR-558.

nobthehobbit wrote:

jjh wrote:Missions that reward solving them are off the rails.

I'd ban all of them with non-meta police gametext.

Yup, I said "ban". Their day should be over.

I think there's two other allowable exceptions:

1. Missions that give you a bigger reward for solving them with higher requirements, such as Geological Survey. I'm not saying Geological Survey is balanced, just that I think this type of reward is OK. (Solve with lower requirements, get lower points; solve with higher requirements, get higher points.)

2. Modal missions, like The Siege of AR-558.

On the other hand, I might be able to got on board with this if it means that Voyager and Relativity go bye bye....

starfleetsfinest wrote:Why isn't Preposterous Plan not on the watchlist? 2E Worlds is 68 days away...

It is on the Watch List.

https://www.trekcc.org/2e/watchlist.php


Sent through subspace from the Starship Enterprise

Now the real question is this errata team going to do something about it?

Armus wrote:

nobthehobbit wrote:

jjh wrote:Missions that reward solving them are off the rails.

I'd ban all of them with non-meta police gametext.

Yup, I said "ban". Their day should be over.

I think there's two other allowable exceptions:

1. Missions that give you a bigger reward for solving them with higher requirements, such as Geological Survey. I'm not saying Geological Survey is balanced, just that I think this type of reward is OK. (Solve with lower requirements, get lower points; solve with higher requirements, get higher points.)

2. Modal missions, like The Siege of AR-558.

On the other hand, I might be able to got on board with this if it means that Voyager and Relativity go bye bye....

You can impute whatever motive you like to my forgetting about those.

jjh wrote:Missions that reward solving them are off the rails.

I'd ban all of them with non-meta police gametext.

Yup, I said "ban". Their day should be over.

I'm curious, what this means? Does this mean Brute Force? Necessary Rendezvous? Dyson Sphere? Penetrate Enemy Lines?

I guess I'm wondering what is meant by "reward"?

starfleetsfinest wrote: Why not have the public help out with these cards?

We are in need of 2E playtesters. If you have a friend who you can work with on a regular basis, we would certainly welcome your input for errata and future sets.


Sent through subspace from the Starship Enterprise

jadziadax8 wrote:
We are in need of 2E playtesters. If you have a friend who you can work with on a regular basis, we would certainly welcome your input for errata and future sets.

Sorry Josh, more off-topic....

We are in desperate need of playtesters. Starfleetsfinest has the spirit, I'll give him that. He should be part of the solution, contact Ross, and get a nerd job. Testers have more of a say in the Process now. That's the only real reward we can give them.

T'pol is headed to the Watchlist. The ability to look at all missions, instead of the mission she is at, is being looked at. Any thoughts and or feedback is welcomed.

prylardurden wrote:T'pol is headed to the Watchlist. The ability to look at all missions, instead of the mission she is at, is being looked at. Any thoughts and or feedback is welcomed.

If an errata is needed to make it at the current mission I think it should be change to “this mission” getting rid of the requirement for the mission, otherwise becomes too restrictive when you are trying to use anti-meta missions.

prylardurden wrote:T'pol is headed to the Watchlist. The ability to look at all missions, instead of the mission she is at, is being looked at. Any thoughts and or feedback is welcomed.

I'm down with that. I'm also down with keeping the restriction to missions, what with 4 of the 5 most popular missions in actually being ones (and the fifth being a meta one).

Danny wrote:

prylardurden wrote:T'pol is headed to the Watchlist. The ability to look at all missions, instead of the mission she is at, is being looked at. Any thoughts and or feedback is welcomed.

I'm down with that. I'm also down with keeping the restriction to missions, what with 4 of the 5 most popular missions in actually being ones (and the fifth being a meta one).

What would be more telling would be to look at the mission sets of choice between decks with this T'Pol, and those without her--that is, to what extent is playing missions because those are actually the best missions for , and to what extent is T'Pol driving them to play those missions because of her ability's power overcoming any loss from not playing non- missions?

nobthehobbit wrote:What would be more telling would be to look at the mission sets of choice between decks with this T'Pol, and those without her--that is, to what extent is playing missions because those are actually the best missions for , and to what extent is T'Pol driving them to play those missions because of her ability's power overcoming any loss from not playing non- missions?

Okay, but if T’Pol is getting players to use missions then she is accomplishing a goal of the card, and if people are playing missions because they are the best ones then lacking the restriction provides no real benefit. So either way, I think she should keep the restriction to missions.