trekcc.org

We are complaining about hep/help and committing/omitting? Because Google thinks those are words, so it probably won't flag them on spell check. This has actually been a major flaw in using spell check for at least since Windows 3.1, in my experience. If the word you spelled wrong simply is a different word, Computer doesn't care. And grammar check gets so hung up on passive sentences that, again in my experience, people just ignore its commentary when It is available. This is something that a Proof Reader could catch, true. But as has been mentioned before, the CC's Proof Reading people don't work on articles or private posts.

Naetor wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:56 pm
I've traveled around this country playing the game for 20 years. In that time, I've been allowed 0 impact on the game. After >50% of the player base having quit, I now have some small impact and what do I try to do? Not put a hammer on affiliations or missions I don't like, but suggest that a couple cards that have been played in 763, 591, and 584 recent decks - cards that I play all the time - be slightly less playable.

I'm just an ass about it.

Me too. (regarding the first 2 sentences)
But the Balance team is going the wrong way - ruining often played cards will affect the last playing people. They shall do their work with underplayed cards. People will not care if they eventually mess it then again or not and in the best case we have a better card. If we have more good cards we have to choose between them what leads to often played cards to be played less. But when they work on cards 50% of the community like, they (most probably) will piss 50% of the last people playing this game.

To this poll - where is the * none of it option?

There should be a poll "Humq: Most unpopular Errata Ever (may 2021)"
But such things they seem not to be interested in...

Although, if you do not noticed it, there are the same few people in most every thread writing. (Naetor, Armus, GooeyChewie , Faithful Reader, Danny, The Guardian) that dominate every discussion.

After a while, there finally are changes to the VPs, but my list of suggested erratas was 25 cards. And I even missed 2 VPs.

Enabran wrote: ↑Thu May 06, 2021 2:41 am To this poll - where is the * none of it option?

There should be a poll "Humq: Most unpopular Errata Ever (may 2021)"
But such things they seem not to be interested in...

Although, if you do not noticed it, there are the same few people in most every thread writing. (Naetor, Armus, GooeyChewie , Faithful Reader, Danny, The Guardian) that dominate every discussion.

I care why someone might hate the changes. From my understanding of your posts, you don't like that a 2nd and 3rd copy of UD might fester in your hand. But that's precisely what I was going for since there's otherwise no downside of including 3x in your deck. That downside makes Voluntary Withdrawl, Bigger Tattoo, and all sorts of other dilemma re-draw that never gets played better.

I got a note from a top player that they thought the strength of dilemmas has far outscaled the ability to solve a mission- which I agree with. So if this rebalances that in some way, I am for it.

Lastly, I think it's courteous to respond to posts rather than just ignore them. Even if you totally disagree with me, at least my rationale isn't a mystery. Maybe I'm a dumb and an ass, but I try not to be a dumbass.

Enabran wrote: ↑Thu May 06, 2021 2:41 am Although, if you do not noticed it, there are the same few people in most every thread writing. (Naetor, Armus, GooeyChewie , Faithful Reader, Danny, The Guardian) that dominate every discussion.

Huh. Interesting. I would've thought my 2e post count would be down this year (at least outside of the HoF thread).

It sure feels like I've been participating less...

*shrug*

option G) the missing VP images that i've been requesting for *ages*. (i've been actively pushing this topic since i've been on the errata team, to no avail. and my first PM on this topic was long before that, for 0VP21 Machinations in 2013, to the then responsible for errata rules master...)

i'm happy that this was finally done.
and i'm sad that some of the images weren't faithfully reproduced. (compare 0VP15 pre- and post-errata. the new image may be sharper, but it's also *wrong*. the decipher image excuse doesn't check when the original card was also a trekcc-made VP.)
(and i'm even sadder that the day this finally got done was also the day of these other errata...)

Naetor wrote: ↑Thu May 06, 2021 5:44 pm I got a note from a top player that they thought the strength of dilemmas has far outscaled the ability to solve a mission- which I agree with. So if this rebalances that in some way, I am for it.

This.

Dilemmas can go in any pile, solving is heavily team-stamped. Any good solving card only contributes to 1/15+ decks, but a good dilemma contributes to every dilemma pile.

That makes the standard dilemma piles 20 years worth of good, whereas the standard draw decks only 20/15 = 1.3 years of good. My use of maths here is awful but even allowing for fudge factors and different flavours of dilemma pile (Pattern Loss, chula, kill etc) it seems inevitable that dilemma piles are too good.

I'm therefore hugely in favour of these changes.

Naetor wrote: ↑Thu May 06, 2021 5:44 pm Maybe I'm a dumb and an ass, but I try not to be a dumbass.

You are the Donald Trump of Trek CC thats for sure.

Enabran wrote: ↑Fri May 07, 2021 12:32 pm You are the Donald Trump of Trek CC thats for sure.

Very low ratings points. Best errata ever for women and South Africans! covfefe

IMO, the Kirk errata was needed. Most of the other errata I could do without.... RIP UD, but I can find other events to fuel my 8 cost kill dilemmas and Romulan shenanigans.... speaking of, interesting Power Shift is still non-unique.
I wonder if Gomtuu will get nerfed next?

IQ542 wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:51 pm I wonder if Gomtuu will get nerfed next?

Nerfed? I hope not. Fixed? I hope so. That dilemma's requirements should not both require the same attribute. That dilemma should read something like:

3 Gomtuu Shock Wave
Unless you have 2 Diplomacy and Cunning>32 or Telepathy and Integrity>35, all your personnel are stopped and this dilemma is placed on your ship.
Damage - This ship is attributes-2.

That is still a damn-good dilemma.

The Prefect wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:55 pm

IQ542 wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:51 pm I wonder if Gomtuu will get nerfed next?

Nerfed? I hope not. Fixed? I hope so. That dilemma's requirements should not both require the same attribute. That dilemma should read something like:

3 Gomtuu Shock Wave
Unless you have 2 Diplomacy and Cunning>32 or Telepathy and Integrity>35, all your personnel are stopped and this dilemma is placed on your ship.
Damage - This ship is attributes-2.

That is still a damn-good dilemma.

Keep the integrity on the first requirement. I'd guess that's how it's been beaten 95% of the time and retains the "easy for integrity" characteristic. Cunning second.

The Prefect wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:55 pm

IQ542 wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:51 pm I wonder if Gomtuu will get nerfed next?

Nerfed? I hope not. Fixed? I hope so. That dilemma's requirements should not both require the same attribute. That dilemma should read something like:

3 Gomtuu Shock Wave
Unless you have 2 Diplomacy and Cunning>32 or Telepathy and Integrity>35, all your personnel are stopped and this dilemma is placed on your ship.
Damage - This ship is attributes-2.

That is still a damn-good dilemma.

Personally I disagree that that's a 'fix' the game needs. When I last looked into this sort of thing, presuming I recall it correctly, there were 90+ dilemmas that require Cunning and/or Strength. There were around 30 that require Integrity. There are dozens of dilemmas that force you to care about Cunning or Strength. I can only think of ~2(!) that truly force you to care about Integrity, and of those Gomtuu is the only one I regularly see in play. Excalbian Drama is the other that came to mind, for what it's worth.

Right now there is very little downside to never paying any attention to your average Integrity when building a deck that isn't solely focused on it. I wouldn't super care if most of my attempt was personnel with only 1 or 2 Integrity, but I would never allow myself to go on a mission where I didn't average at least a 4 in strength and cunning - or at the very least I'd bring one to three high Strength/Cunning people to even it out. There should be some kind of potential consequence, beyond blanket things like Chula: The Dice to totally ignoring Integrity.

Right now Gomtuu is basically the only thing doing that job in a pile. If you still don't want to ever look at an Integrity number, you can still cheat it by boosting Integrity or outright replacing it with cards like Pel, Profit-Seeker, Sela, Cunning Strategist, Warrior's Birthright, Deleted Subroutines, Are You Offering Me ... a Bribe?, etc - at the cost of preparing and paying for that workaround. Now, I don't think we should have a tons of cards like Gomtuu that go nuts on Integrity, but why effectively remove the rare dilemma we do have in the game acting as a deterrent to ignoring the attribute by allowing people to once again just default to the not-Integrity option like 90%+ of players do when Integrity is involved? It isn't like failing at Gomtuu is the end of the world either (it's just a standard wall with a -2 damage). I just think it's nice to have at least one dilemma out of the 100s we have where you truly have to keep in mind that Integrity exists and fear the consequences of ignoring it.

Now all that aside, if I was told the card 100% had to have a non-Integrity option no matter what and I was the one who had to decide how, I'd also go with making the second option Cunning for the same reason Nate gave.

Gorgo Primus wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 1:31 am

The Prefect wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:55 pm

IQ542 wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:51 pm I wonder if Gomtuu will get nerfed next?

Nerfed? I hope not. Fixed? I hope so. That dilemma's requirements should not both require the same attribute. That dilemma should read something like:

3 Gomtuu Shock Wave
Unless you have 2 Diplomacy and Cunning>32 or Telepathy and Integrity>35, all your personnel are stopped and this dilemma is placed on your ship.
Damage - This ship is attributes-2.

That is still a damn-good dilemma.

Personally I disagree that that's a 'fix' the game needs. When I last looked into this sort of thing, presuming I recall it correctly, there were 90+ dilemmas that require Cunning and/or Strength. There were around 30 that require Integrity. There are dozens of dilemmas that force you to care about Cunning or Strength. I can only think of ~2(!) that truly force you to care about Integrity, and of those Gomtuu is the only one I regularly see in play. Excalbian Drama is the other that came to mind, for what it's worth.

Right now there is very little downside to never paying any attention to your average Integrity when building a deck that isn't solely focused on it. I wouldn't super care if most of my attempt was personnel with only 1 or 2 Integrity, but I would never allow myself to go on a mission where I didn't average at least a 4 in strength and cunning - or at the very least I'd bring one to three high Strength/Cunning people to even it out. There should be some kind of potential consequence, beyond blanket things like Chula: The Dice to totally ignoring Integrity.

Right now Gomtuu is basically the only thing doing that job in a pile. If you still don't want to ever look at an Integrity number, you can still cheat it by boosting Integrity or outright replacing it with cards like Pel, Profit-Seeker, Sela, Cunning Strategist, Warrior's Birthright, Deleted Subroutines, Are You Offering Me ... a Bribe?, etc - at the cost of preparing and paying for that workaround. Now, I don't think we should have a tons of cards like Gomtuu that go nuts on Integrity, but why effectively remove the rare dilemma we do have in the game acting as a deterrent to ignoring the attribute by allowing people to once again just default to the not-Integrity option like 90%+ of players do when Integrity is involved? It isn't like failing at Gomtuu is the end of the world either (it's just a standard wall with a -2 damage). I just think it's nice to have at least one dilemma out of the 100s we have where you truly have to keep in mind that Integrity exists and fear the consequences of ignoring it.

Now all that aside, if I was told the card 100% had to have a non-Integrity option no matter what and I was the one who had to decide how, I'd also go with making the second option Cunning for the same reason Nate gave.

I'd be more sympathetic to this argument if Gomtuu wasn't a damage dilemma. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if Gomtuu was a regular, non-bouncing wall, I'd have zero issue with the current set of requirements, even if it was a dilemma.

As it is, it creates the opposite effect of "Integrity or die" that really hamstrings some affiliations.

Armus wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 9:01 am I'd be more sympathetic to this argument if Gomtuu wasn't a damage dilemma. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if Gomtuu was a regular, non-bouncing wall, I'd have zero issue with the current set of requirements, even if it was a dilemma.

As it is, it creates the opposite effect of "Integrity or die" that really hamstrings some affiliations.

I don't use this nickname as much anymore, but we used to call Gomtuu "Bane of Romulans." It's also the sole reason I don't play Bluegills.