[Naetor]

Unfortunately when it comes to NtL, we got a few years...

Or the new 2E Director could, idk, finally make an official ban list and make an OTF for the game. Just a 10+ year old suggestion...

We have the ability to create the game we want. We aren't beholden to a design decision 15 years ago by someone who hasn't been around for the past 10. We can even recognize a problem, errata a card, and get a new image in 2 days! Good work, people.

I've thought about the OTF issue- namely, for every person that wants OTF there is another that doesn't want to play with a ban list and another that thinks it's just dictator-HoF. I think the way you solve that is to take the existing HoF list and issue power-level errata to each card on that list that hasn't already received one. That way there is no ban list, it doesn't disrupt HoF, and each year players voting for HoF also participate in deciding which cards are too good for standard (which I think is how most people view that voting, anyways).

[Gorgo Primus]

Unfortunately when it comes to NtL, we got a few years...

Or the new 2E Director could, idk, finally make an official ban list and make an OTF for the game. Just a 10+ year old suggestion...

Sure, they could easily make a plurality of players upset and create a format with very few players if they want.

If a card is so bad that it needs to be banned, then it is bad enough to need errata to fix it. So let’s just errata it...

[LORE]

If a card is so bad that it needs to be banned, then it is bad enough to need errata to fix it. So let’s just errata it...

This is an over-simplification of a multi-layered issue. The entire Prevent & Overcome mechanic is something Decipher introduced, rather foolishly, in 2006. There have been nearly 15 years of cards that take different approaches at expanding which affiliations can have this power, when many would agree the game would be better without it. To simply state in blanket form that errata has the capacity to do large-scale errata to nearly 15 years worth of cards is arrogant if not ignorant of the actual work that would have to get done to do so.

[The Prefect]

If a card is so bad that it needs to be banned, then it is bad enough to need errata to fix it. So let’s just errata it...

This is an over-simplification of a multi-layered issue. The entire Prevent & Overcome mechanic is something Decipher introduced, rather foolishly, in 2006. There have been nearly 15 years of cards that take different approaches at expanding which affiliations can have this power, when many would agree the game would be better without it. To simply state in blanket form that errata has the capacity to do large-scale errata to nearly 15 years worth of cards is arrogant if not ignorant of the actual work that would have to get done to do so.

I'm not sure I agree here. Yes, you're talking about 15 years worth of time, but only a handful of cards... the biggest ones needing to be addressed are probably:

Adapt
Bridge Officer's Test
Knowledge and Experience
Assess Contamination
Inversion Mystery
Donatra, Honorable Commander
Geordi La Forge, Retired Engineer
Giotto, Security Chief
James T. Kirk, Living Legend
James T. Kirk, Original Thinker
Montgomery Scott, Relic
M'Pella, Seductive Employee
Reyga, Young Scientist
Richard Daystrom, Influential Scientist
Tristan Adams, Deranged Psychiatrist
Two of Two, Adaptation Drone

Those cards could be prioritized and addressed over time by power and/or popularity... or tackled all at once.

Now, where I think it would get tricky is trying to figure out how to errata these cards, and that's where a lot of coordination among 2e departments and leadership would have to come in.

For example, we would need to decide if the goal is to eliminate "prevent and overcome" entirely from the game or if the goal is to make it incredibly limited and situational.

Then we would need to figure out if our goal can be accomplished through simple errata or if the cards need what would more closely resemble a redesign. If it's the latter, and I suspect it would be, we could team up some designers with members of the Errata Team to come up with the best solutions and then test those out.

So, I disagree that what we're talking about here requires a ban list or some kind of limited format to address. But, I do recognize that it's probably going to be more complicated than issuing simple errata like changing a couple of words, eliminating a line or text, or fiddling with the cost.

[The Guardian]

Hmm... topics for new threads:
1) Relativity is broken
2) Bread and Circuses is broken
3) Nothing to Lose is brokenboring

I have a hard time disagreeing with #s 2 & 3.

2) Pattern Loss and Underlying Influence were designed to be a planet and space side of a dilemma pile to promote fewer dual dilemmas and after a LOT of research to find acceptable skills. Historical Pursuit was a bridge, but that is a costly card. I wonder if Bread and Circuses was designed to accommodate the other dilemmas or if it was an accident that the skills matched up, but a full stop and a return is too good for such an easy combo to set up. And I'm all for combos, but I think players should have to work for them. I do think, and this isn't directed at anyone or meant to be incite anything, that we as a culture can kind of want design to do the work for us. "Make a card that does this in two steps instead of four." or "Make me someone with exactly these skills or this is unplayable." I don't know, but I get the feeling that B&C is really just a response to that type of thinking and I probably would have discouraged its design. My one quibble with Charlie's tenets of Phase II was the idea that we shouldn't be afraid of strong cards. I think we should. We shouldn't be afraid of strong mechanics and engines and strategies and combos.

3) Nothing to Lose is, in my view, a mismatch between trigger and effect. (Consider balanced large requirements and relatively low penalties on A Devil Scorned and Alluring Spy.) I don't think you should have to pack a bunch of stuff in your deck because of one dilemma. I recall that early in 2Es history (back in the Decipher days), someone pointed out that dilemma in 2E seemed to always include a second option, unlike most 1E dilemmas. A designer replied that 2E was defined by what you could have and 1E was designed by what you had to have. Looking at the 1E side, Quantum Incursions is banned because (I'm oversimplifying) it required decks to have to be prepared for too many options simultaneously. I'm not a 1E player, but I do see the articles on deckbuilding from time to time and there was often a mention of which or Empathy personnel were available before QI got banned. NtL seems to be the 2E equivalent of some 1E cards. I worry about that.

What would I recommend? Bread and Circuses should probably lose the return to dilemma pile part. I imagine it would be a 3-cost dilemma. Nothing to Lose should have another effect. Maybe stopping two personnel? I don't know there exactly. An all stop for steep requirements just doesn't match.

[GooeyChewie]

Re: B&C. Bouncing walls are a dangerous space to work in. In some ways, it's almost as dangerous as P&O. There are a few other 4-cost dual bouncing walls, but none of them restrict who can use their skills to meet the requirements, nor do they get big boosts from other dilemmas. So, yeah, this card does a few too many thing, and I agree removing the bounce would be good.

Re: Nothing to Lose. I can't tell you how many times I've had a personnel with Integrity 4 and Acquisition or a way to gain Acquisition. Or a personnel with 3 printed Integrity and some random attributes +1 to make me fail the dilemma. Plus there's 11 non-aligned personnel who have Acquisition and Integrity 4 naturally. I think a simple change of "<4" to "<5" would help significantly. It'd still be a powerful dilemma, especially against Integrity decks, but not such an auto-include.

[The Prefect]

Re: B&C. Bouncing walls are a dangerous space to work in. In some ways, it's almost as dangerous as P&O. There are a few other 4-cost dual bouncing walls, but none of them restrict who can use their skills to meet the requirements, nor do they get big boosts from other dilemmas. So, yeah, this card does a few too many thing, and I agree removing the bounce would be good.

Re: Nothing to Lose. I can't tell you how many times I've had a personnel with Integrity 4 and Acquisition or a way to gain Acquisition. Or a personnel with 3 printed Integrity and some random attributes +1 to make me fail the dilemma. Plus there's 11 non-aligned personnel who have Acquisition and Integrity 4 naturally. I think a simple change of "<4" to "<5" would help significantly. It'd still be a powerful dilemma, especially against Integrity decks, but not such an auto-include.

If we want simple errata and not "redesigns" this is the way to go.

• Remove "return" text from Bread and Circuses. Leave the rest as is.
• Change the Integrity to <5.

[Naetor]

I think the correct change to Nothing To Lose is make it a 3-cost space or planet dilemma- to hell with high-level play and dilemma ratios. Ben Liebich called it 2020 Rogue Borg Ambush, which makes more sense to me.

Bread and Circuses is probably best dealt with by those "doubler" dilemmas. The requirements are pretty fair until you need 2x and 1/3 of your people can't use their skills. Putting double Treachery or double Honor on opposite side makes it easy to track one side, in addition to the other skills being the rarest in the game.

[Danny]

From where do I recall having that discussion before?

Maybe from me, on one of the Design boards back in June last year?

[durgforaday]

Not sure what is the problem !? Nate, I tried to bring you to the Durg side years ago! Best card in the game, I said. Do not leave home without him, I said. You and the others have still not heard the call of the Durg! Past NtL, a pair of him and all you need is two transporters and you are past Bread and Circuses. Durg just solved two of your three problems. Given a little time I am sure he could deal with Relativity as well. When will you all learn!!? I am a simple man and even I see the beauty in simple cards and recognize the power of the Durg!! Come on over, there is plenty of room!!

[Armus]

Not sure what is the problem !? Nate, I tried to bring you to the Durg side years ago! Best card in the game, I said. Do not leave home without him, I said. You and the others have still not heard the call of the Durg! Past NtL, a pair of him and all you need is two transporters and you are past Bread and Circuses. Durg just solved two of your three problems. Given a little time I am sure he could deal with Relativity as well. When will you all learn!!? I am a simple man and even I see the beauty in simple cards and recognize the power of the Durg!! Come on over, there is plenty of room!!

Durg's buddy Togaran (x2) can provide those Transporters AND keep Durg safe from that nasty Whisper in the Dark. Durg and Togaran, natural wingmen.

Togaran and Durg at the mission.

Naetor, his eyes uncovered?

[Naetor]

Durg and Sigmund on the bottom.

Naetor, with fists closed.

[Armus]

Durg and Sigmund on the bottom.

Naetor, with fists closed.

[jadziadax8]

So many times...

[Naetor]

So many times...

In modern 2e- against a double dilemma pile even- K'wov is a better personnel than Klingon Riker. What does that tell you?