[SudenKapala]

1. 
2. (All-Property)
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 
11. (All-Property)
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
23. 
24. 
25. (All-Property) (+1)
26. (-1)
27. 
28. (All-Property)
29. 
30. 
31. 
32. (All-Property)
33. 
34. 
35. 
36. 
37. 
38. 
39. 
40. 

[SudenKapala]

1. 
2. (All-Property)
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 
11. (All-Property)
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
23. 
24. (All-Property) (+1)
25. (-1)
26. 
27. 
28. (All-Property)
29. 
30. 
31. 
32. (All-Property)
33. 
34. 
35. 
36. 
37. 
38. 
39. 
40. 

[SudenKapala]

1. 
2. (All-Property)
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 
11. (All-Property)
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 
23. (All-Property) (+1)
24. (-1)
25. 
26. 
27. 
28. (All-Property)
29. 
30. 
31. 
32. (All-Property)
33. 
34. 
35. 
36. 
37. 
38. 
39. 
40. 

[Ensign Q]

I find the list of 1E Affiliations and all the Factions to be way, way too complicated.

Perhaps a Hurt and Heal for the top 20 1E DILEMMAS would be more valuable to the Community and Designers?

One of my main complaints about 1e is the lack of dilemma diversity. The cc struggles to make quality dilemmas.

I feel its because they don't want to make an NPE.

I mean let's be honest here. If you ever ran against Chula + Sheliak + Q + Dead End you never made the same mistake twice. Same with 'God' and many many many other cards.

We need dilemmas to make an opponent pay for just trying to redshirt their way through a dilemma pile but many of them have been neutered and we have decent walls now but now people save their downloads to be more strategic or make sure that one personnel alone can complete the mission requirements for a mission.

But it really is a larger issue than just lack of dilemmas. It also has roots in the fact that we have to seed so many cards to make a deck competitive that we rely on only 3 or less dilemmas in many cases.

On topic. The newer factions like starfleet and vulcans seems to be powercreeped according to this thread.


About the dilemma situation, I agree. I dont get why there are so many seedcards that download personnel into play. I see player here complain the games got too quick and end after a couple of turns, on the other hand there are those cards.
Id much prefer they get axed and we can come back to playing more dilemma. Also some dualdoorways would be helpful. For example give QsTent also the ability to play AU cards.

[BCSWowbagger]

On topic. The newer factions like starfleet and vulcans seems to be powercreeped according to this thread.

+1

About the dilemma situation, I agree. I dont get why there are so many seedcards that download personnel into play. I see player here complain the games got too quick and end after a couple of turns, on the other hand there are those cards.
Id much prefer they get axed and we can come back to playing more dilemma. Also some dualdoorways would be helpful. For example give QsTent also the ability to play AU cards.

+2

If you want seed-phase personnel or ships, make like Data's Body and pay the seed cost, darn it.

One obstacle to this is that it's hard, in Design, to make cards that you know are weaker than cards that people are already playing with. You don't want to make binder fodder.

But reducing the number of "jumpstart" cards would go a long way toward adding more turns to the game.

[Ensign Q]

errata all the "jumpstarts" by removing can be seeded. Its fine to have tutors available in the game , so its not becoming too draw dependant, but having a full team when the game starts is kinda silly and since both player do it also not a huge advantage. Its just limiting deck design, since you will always start with the same ~10 seed cards.

Its pretty easy to make weaker cards playable be nerfing the "broken" ones.

[SudenKapala]

errata all the "jumpstarts" by removing can be seeded. Its fine to have tutors available in the game , so its not becoming too draw dependant, but having a full team when the game starts is kinda silly and since both player do it also not a huge advantage. Its just limiting deck design, since you will always start with the same ~10 seed cards.

Its pretty easy to make weaker cards playable be nerfing the "broken" ones.

On the one hand I agree with much -- if not all -- of the concerns that you raise here. But the solution -- many, and heavy, errata -- I can't get behind. Go forward -- not back, is my credo. The problem is, the power creep often transforms the question into "go up or go down", of which neither -- each in their own way -- is a good idea, in my personal experience and playbook.

[Ensign Q]

if you have a non-rotating format then powercreep is your worst enemy. especially in a game like this were playtesting is very very limited.
but when the game is at the point where basically all major actions happen in turn0, the tempocreep got real. so id say, definitely go down.
at best you release the betaversion of the sets first, then rework it after a couple events, then release.

when it comes to nerf or bans of established cards, well you could also print silverbullets (like decipher did) which then eventually become basic rules (like cc did) lol.
so yeah, next released doorway that seeds limits the seedable incidents to 2. or you add a pricetag to non-dilemma seedcards like -3 points.

[SudenKapala]

but when the game is at the point where basically all major actions happen in turn0, the tempocreep got real.

Excellent point!! If we can make that (i.e., the going down) happen without ruining other cards (and without too many errata), then I'd be all for it... but that's the complexity of it. Hence, in part, my solution to play by the 'Vintage' rules.

(In the mean time, the Ferengi can't hear our conversation over the sound of how gold-pressed latinum is ringing in the distance.)

1. 
2. (All-Property)
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 
11. (All-Property)
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. (All-Property) (+1)
23. (-1)
24. 
25. 
26. 
27. 
28. (All-Property)
29. 
30. 
31. 
32. (All-Property)
33. 
34. 
35. 
36. 
37. 
38. 
39. 
40. 

[SudenKapala]

By the way, our 'Vintage' solution is not the only one, I think, to deal with 'tempo creep'.
By proposing an untimed format, BCSWowbagger may have tabled an idea that inspires players to try out other kinds of decks (that are currently effective in tourney play). It's a wholly different field, but it may address some of the concerns that I (and perhaps EnsignQ) have with too few turns in a game (and thus seeing many fun tactics, strategies and cards lose their viability).
See the 'Exhibition' format topic.

[Armus]

1. 
2. (All-Property)
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 
11. (All-Property)
12. 
13. 
14. 
15. 
16. 
17. 
18. (+1)
19. (-1)
20. 
21. 
22. (All-Property)
23. 
24. 
25. 
26. 
27. 
28. (All-Property)
29. 
30. 
31. 
32. (All-Property)
33. 
34. 
35. 
36. 
37. 
38. 
39. 
40. 

(In the mean time, the Ferengi can't hear our conversation over the sound of how gold-pressed latinum is ringing in the distance.)

I dunno man. I know you wanted them out of the basement, but it's starting to get to the point where they're looking overvalued. I have a hard time justifying all property in the top half when nobody is even playing them, let alone winning with them. You'd have a stronger case for - at least they've already won a Regional this year.

[SudenKapala]

I was wondering if anybody was going to question our motives!

nobody is even playing them, let alone winning with them.

I know it "doesn't count when it's not sanctioned/recorded", for many people, but I'm very fond of my Traditional (thus, all-prop; hence my preference for them) deck. And I did win with it, once or thrice. Working on that is where I got the inspiration for my next endeavour here.

it's starting to get to the point where they're looking overvalued. I have a hard time justifying all property in the top half [···] You'd have a stronger case for - at least they've already won a Regional this year.

Well, you know me from my stint with the Borg. Right now I'm just after a fat latinum payoff. There's money strewn around the Affiliation Line, and us greedy people want to have at it. Just for fun. Where I park them afterward... can be negotiated about!
We're always willing to trade.
(Let's see, then, what we can achieve with their counterparts. Perhaps they could do some courier work? Ugh, no -- they're too far down. But yeah, I can bring them up later. For now, is there some faction above #11 that needs to go down? They could take the latinum with them towards the Ferengi.)

[Ensign Q]

ok today i played vulcans and i faced two cards i dont understand passed playtest. one thing that makes attempting require 9 personnel and the other that stops each used skill personnel.
You're Not Ready Thorough Debriefing

that makes dilemmas like denevan insane. like to solve the mission you have to sacrifice 5! personnel or spam phasers.
the other one is just the ultimative filter for everything.
both cards are easily 3times the power of similiar events (that usually only count for 1 mission and can be uxbridged)

besides vulcan get to draw insane amounts of draws and freeplay, im disappointed.

[Armus]

ok today i played vulcans and i faced two cards i dont understand passed playtest. one thing that makes attempting require 9 personnel and the other that stops each used skill personnel.

that makes dilemmas like denevan insane. like to solve the mission you have to sacrifice 5! personnel or spam phasers.
the other one is just the ultimative filter for everything.
both cards are easily 3times the power of similiar events (that usually only count for 1 mission and can be uxbridged)

besides vulcan get to draw insane amounts of draws and freeplay, im disappointed.

If you think that's bad you should have seen them pre-errata Wisdom. Oy!

There's more than a few reasons that I have Vulcans as a firm #1. They have a lot of strengths and very few weaknesses. And there's multiple ways to make a Tier One Vulcan deck. Despite the errata, Wisdom is still good and I cracked the code on Power with my Masters deck this year. Courage lags a bit behind those two but has the same fundamentals, and the all-Vulcan Kolinahr builds allow for a wider personnel selection and opens up all of the missions.

I've been telling Charlie we need a Surak of Borg (and an Archer of Borg TBH) to add some risk to playing Vulcans because right now there's very little downside.

[Ensign Q]

that they can also solve fed mission (AND score bonus points) is just icing on the cake, but i can live with that (exept points) since they were added to the game later and need some variety of missions.

but those two cards. they render each 2 mission unsolvable without any downside or counterplay.

i cant wrap my head around it. wtf