Place to discuss Tribbles CCG

Should Fizzbin be addressed?

Yes, change it immediately.
12
46%
Yes, change it with new design.
7
27%
No, it's fine.
3
12%
Other (Please reply).
4
15%
User avatar
 
By MrVorlon
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#324953
I voted "Other". I have always thought its interaction with Mutate should be tweaked...I don't think it should allow you have additional cards in your play pile after Mutate activates. Beyond that, I have not played with it enough in order to make a judgment.
User avatar
Tribbles Art Manager
By Kamala (Andrea Heywood-Lobban)
 - Tribbles Art Manager
 -  
#324966
I like the change in dynamic, I do think another set is needed to help balance things a little bit though.
 
By sevencrdspud (Jason Beyer)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#324974
If you never go out, you never score the points. I fail to see the issue.
User avatar
Ambassador
By Linkan (Torbjörn Lindquist)
 - Ambassador
 -  
Architect
#324975
sevencrdspud wrote:If you never go out, you never score the points. I fail to see the issue.
If only one deck has Fizzbins, then it might be ok. But when 3 of 6 decks have 35-50 each, the other 3 decks has little to no chance.
 
By sevencrdspud (Jason Beyer)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#324976
Linkan wrote:
sevencrdspud wrote:If you never go out, you never score the points. I fail to see the issue.
If only one deck has Fizzbins, then it might be ok. But when 3 of 6 decks have 35-50 each, the other 3 decks has little to no chance.
If a deck can GO OUT running 35-50 Fizzbins, more power to that guy. I feel this game has morphed from a game that involves some skill and luck to a lottery ticket drawing. TOO MANY points are scored on a bonus point basis.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#325004
After playing in Linkans Swedish Nationals yesterday and being one of the 3 players with a Fizzbin deck, I can honestly say I did not enjoy the game. None of the other players had a fighting chance as they where decked out early so their time was mostly watching while we, the fizzbin players battled each other.
There are different ways we could go about things but the one thing I think jumps to the top of the list is a fixed deck size. If you're set to always having 50 or another number that would be good (60 maybe, it works for many other games) it would be much easier to balance. Sure you can fill your deck with Fizzbins but you would be hard pressed to go out.
User avatar
 
By Iron Mike
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
1E Australian National Runner-Up 2015
2E Australian National Runner-Up 2015
#325005
sevencrdspud wrote:If you never go out, you never score the points. I fail to see the issue.
True, but then it only has to go out once, and it can be a pretty devastating round. Also, once the Fizzbins are out of the deck, the rest of the deck can flow a lot easier. It's a troubling mixture.
User avatar
 
By MrVorlon
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#325009
Smiley wrote:After playing in Linkans Swedish Nationals yesterday and being one of the 3 players with a Fizzbin deck, I can honestly say I did not enjoy the game. None of the other players had a fighting chance as they where decked out early so their time was mostly watching while we, the fizzbin players battled each other.
There are different ways we could go about things but the one thing I think jumps to the top of the list is a fixed deck size. If you're set to always having 50 or another number that would be good (60 maybe, it works for many other games) it would be much easier to balance. Sure you can fill your deck with Fizzbins but you would be hard pressed to go out.
This would kill my Battle deck...that's no good. I would not be opposed to a high limit to the number of copies of a card in a deck. I think 10 copies of any card should be enough. Yeah, 50 copies of a card in a deck is too much.
 
By Wedge772 (Matthew Ting)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Adventurer
1E Australian National Champion 2015
#325100
Smiley wrote:After playing in Linkans Swedish Nationals yesterday and being one of the 3 players with a Fizzbin deck, I can honestly say I did not enjoy the game.
:thumbsup:

I'm pretty casual with tribbles, but Fizzbin has made me feel like I'm truly wasting my time playing the game. Maybe I can build decks to meta against Fizzbin, but for me that even further defeats the point of tribbles as a casual game.

In theory we can wait till the next tribbles release for a design solution, but that means potentially another year of not wanting to play tribbles. Plus, a design solution means more "counter tribbles". That's how we got into the current situation where design gave us a [Ref] [Trob] sidedeck, which I also feel is a sign that tribbles has lost it's way.
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Prophet
#325101
Wedge772 wrote:In theory we can wait till the next tribbles release for a design solution, but that means potentially another year of not wanting to play tribbles. Plus, a design solution means more "counter tribbles". That's how we got into the current situation where design gave us a [Ref] [Trob] sidedeck, which I also feel is a sign that tribbles has lost it's way.
I think this is a bit harsh. Troubles were designed to increase the randomness - most of the Trouble cards aren't [Ref] like at all. We also went out of our way to make them optional, so that if a group doesn't like them, they aren't obligated to use them. We absolutely weren't trying to make a [Ref] pile.

-crp
 
By Wedge772 (Matthew Ting)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Adventurer
1E Australian National Champion 2015
#325111
MidnightLich wrote:
Wedge772 wrote:In theory we can wait till the next tribbles release for a design solution, but that means potentially another year of not wanting to play tribbles. Plus, a design solution means more "counter tribbles". That's how we got into the current situation where design gave us a [Ref] [Trob] sidedeck, which I also feel is a sign that tribbles has lost it's way.
I think this is a bit harsh. Troubles were designed to increase the randomness - most of the Trouble cards aren't [Ref] like at all. We also went out of our way to make them optional, so that if a group doesn't like them, they aren't obligated to use them. We absolutely weren't trying to make a [Ref] pile.

-crp
It might be a bit harsh, but the reality is the trouble pile does specifically call out and counter specific powers. That's meta control, because Go / Discard / Poison etc are considered too popular. If the only goal was to increase randomness, then we wouldn't have any of the counter troubles.

Also: ... At Manheim's Lab further fuels the Fizzbin problem.
User avatar
 
By chompers (Steve Hartmann)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
1E Australian Continental Runner-Up 2019
2E Australian Continental Semi-Finalist 2019
#325118
I personally like Fizzbin - but don't like that it is so popular right now. Small decks and death marches can fuel big Battle / Fizzbin decks. Solve that problem and Fizzbin is probably fine.

I'm interested in brainstorming what are the best strategies to counter Fizzbin and presumably Battle decks? Any ideas?

Maybe Rescue. Presumably opponents will target you with Battle filling up your discard pile.

*dramatic noise* *suspends play* 0KF19 Kaiserfe[…]

Is Sedis a captain?

Not exactly, because that is the ONLY keywor[…]

MN 2024 Gatherings

I'll not make the 27th, unfortunately. I've pencil[…]

I get the MW 80-70....good game.