[MidnightLich]

Some questions for you all to ponder, and to offer opinions on. These are all about the term "top tier" and the criteria we use to judge things in that way. I'm most curious about your quick, initial impressions, but any more considered opinions that might come later are also welcome.

-crp

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

Cards
8) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?
9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?
10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

[BCSWowbagger]

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?

Rating >1750

2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?

They can track everything going on on the table better and faster than I can, and remember to do things (like play useful interrupts at the right moment) that I can't depend on remembering and usually forget to do if I'm foolish enough to trust myself.

3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?

It's not out of the question that I could be someday. I think I am a first-rate deck builder. But I am not a very good actual player, so, no. One of my favorite hobbies is playing against pfti and having him beat the snot out of myself and others with a deck I built but did only okay with.

4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

MVB
LORE
Paddy

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?

Easy to define: decks that top-tier players use (or could use) to get more wins than they would otherwise. Hard to measure: top-tier players don't play a lot of middle-tier decks, which is how they got top-tier to begin with. So how they would have done "otherwise" involves some speculation.

6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?

They can either play so stupid fast that average decks don't have time to stop them (MACOs, basically -- or Jaeger's EE/22Kli solver) or they do stuff that make it difficult or impossible for an opponent to keep up (Jaeger's Dominion Capture deck)

7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

Pick ten top-tier players and look at their decklists. If you see the same archetype played in more than three tournaments, call it top tier.

Cards
8) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?

I don't think there is such a thing as a top-tier card. You can have a card that fits nicely into a top-tier deck and powers it up, or pulls an average deck up to top-tier, but is useless in most other decks. Look at how Jaeger pulled Sniper out of a binder after 20 years and built a top-tier deck around it practically overnight. Sniper ain't a top-tier card, but that deck was amazeballs.

9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?

Any card that can be readily identified as truly top-tier is, I think, broken, almost by definition.

10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?

Temporal Benefactor
Enemies of the State
pre-errata Kir'Shara

11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?

There were a bunch in TNG block, then DS9 block dipped too hard toward underpowered, then Mirror Block hit what felt like a sweet spot of strong but not TOO strong, with one or two top-tier decks but nothing standing out as a top-tier card, then 22 Block had more than its share of top-tier (i.e. broken) cards -- but still not nearly as many as in TNG Block.

12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

Going by what I've said above? 0%.

Nor should sets be designed to make existing top-tier decks even top-tierier, even with gentle nudges. New cards should give nudges to other decks, or create opportunities for entirely new decks, and a few (maybe 10-15%) should have no particular use-case in mind but should just be put out there with an interesting mechanic to see what players do with it. Even if some of them end up binder fodder, today's binder fodder is tomorrow's fuel for a surprise top-tier deck (like Sniper) or the inspiration for a great card like Continuing Mission or Shades of Gray.

[LORE]

Author's note: I'm taking my DoOP hat off here and reply strictly as a veteran tournament participant and director. I'm writing entirely as a stream of consciousness as requested, so please do not feel slighted / offended by my responses. These are my own and have no tie back to my position within the CC.

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

Cards
8.) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?
9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?
10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

1. Your active top 25 in World ranking can be considered as such, but really I think we are talking about players routinely in the top 10. Someone whom by simply pre-registering for an event (especially a high-level one) fundamentally shifts the meta as the field prepares to face them.
2. Expert deck builders that blaze their own trails. Players with the ability to take an existing idea and improve upon it, or whom use cards in ways they were not intended. An intuitive feel for the nuances of the game and ability to change gears in-game on the fly. These folks routinely 'make something out of nothing' and win games they should have lost.
3. Some days yes, some days no. I freely admit some days I 'have it' and will be tough to beat. Other days, I'm either playing for achievments or simply am off my game.
4. Kevin Jaeger, Jason Drake, and Stefan de Walf.
5. More than likely, you know it when you see it. Usually a deck capable of making the player better (rather than the other way around.) Wins far more games than it loses. Typically, extremely malleable. Often times can be downright overpowering.
6. Rapid deployment of high quality personnel, many of which can report for free. Extreme draw capacity. Ability to overload one phase of the game (e.g. eliminate an opponent's Plan A strategy in very few turns, power through missions on turn 2, etc.)
7. Borg Assimilation. Pre-errata IDIC Vulcans. Kazon Battle.
8. Can be a lot of things - could be a powerful draw / play mechanic. Or a seed card that limits the seed burden for a deck type. Or even a dilemma with extremely difficult requirements.
9. In addition to the above answer, these are usually cards that instantly spawn deck ideas or immediately replace cards in existing decks.
10. Quantum Incursions. Tribunal of Q. Dead End. Interestingly enough, they are very rarely personnel, or even nouns in general. K'ChiQ is about the only one I can think of off the top of my head even in this conversation.
11 & 12. A miniscule amount, but that is ok... the number of top tier players isn't all that high either. I'd much rather make interesting nouns that allow players to get creative with deck building than pump out cards that break the game for a few months before they get banned.

Thanks for reading.

[HoodieDM]

1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?

Anyone who routinely shows up at any Regional+ event and consistently gets top 3.

2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?

I don't think there is an easy answer to this. Some players are good at predicting meta fields and counter it well. Some are great at deck building and creating the meta. Others just have a great understanding of the game's mechanics/fundamentals. But these players definitely play a lot, that's typically one shared quality.

3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?

If I played more consistently, I'm sure I could get there again.

4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

Just look at the top 25 and who consistently plays and does well.

5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?

One that can consistently do well at high events. Just because a deck wins at a tournament, doesn't mean it's top tier, just means it was piloted well and/or good counter to what the field represented.

6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?

One that can typically handle well against most affiliation deck types. Can be a solver, staller, and/or battle deck.

7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

Starfleet, Vulcan, KCA, Kazon battle, Borg, TNG Fed, Baj Resistance, & any deck piloted by Jaeger.

8 ) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?

There are no "top tier" cards in STCCG. Every deck has different cards that perform well for them or what make those "top tier" decks perform. Some consistently great cards are ones that are universal, but no card is required to auto win in any deck. Some are "broken" or "abusive" but that's a different category. Quantum Incursions is probably the one card I see consistently, in decks, but that's probably about it. Besides CM or RtQ but that's more about making a deck work.

9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?

About the only thing is making it universally usable amongst all the different decks out there.

10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?

Mentioned above, Quantum Incursions is about the only thing because it's so "random" in it's requirements.

11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?

NA - all cards should be designed with a purpose to be useful.

12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

NA - all cards should be designed with a purpose to be useful.

~D

[HoodieDM]

I want to add, but didn't want to get it lost in my answers. The current goal of the design should be to make fun, playable cards, but should also be about making every affiliation/faction playable. Here's where we could see some needed love and improvement to deck types that need cards made by design to just make them more functional/playable and at least a bit competitive in the field. Again a healthy environment is a rock/paper/scissor type of scenario between 10+ decks.

*BTW this is all my opinion but feel it's pretty well shared*

TNG Bajoran
TNG Maquis
TNG Cardassians

DS9 Feds (solo w/o requiring to mix)
DS9 Cardassians (solo w/o requiring to mix)
DS9 Ferengi (need to be able to mix more and not be so limited)
DS9 Maquis
DS9 Klingon (solo w/o requiring to mix)
(I think an overhaul of Nors would be an ideal situation)

DQ Fed (need something a little less seed heavy and not needing to flood deck with 1000 shuttles)
DQ Kazon solver
DQ Vidiians

TOS Romulans
TOS Klingons
TOS Non-Aligned
TMP Federation
(These 4 I'm hoping get solved in the next 2 block waves)

~D

[Se7enofMine]

A lot of this will be re-hashed from previous answers but ....

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
- people who are consistently at the top or near the top of the rankings

2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
- making "meh" decks and cards into something effective and smooth. That ability to see the game at a much more granular level and be able to react better than others

3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
- HA. NO. I barely consider myself a player, let alone anything close to top tier

4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?
- Anyone is who is top 10, year after year


Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
- dont believe this is a thing. A great player can take an under performing deck and make it killer and a lousy player can kill a world championship deck.

6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
- reliable play and draw engines, ability to be diverse to what that game requires: quick solve, battle, etc

7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?
- see #5


Cards
What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?
- a card(s) that regularly sees use in a large portion of decks.

9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?
- everyone wanting to use them

10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
- this changes regularly as new cards are released. But, in the current meta, a few of the cards (such as Temporal Benefactor)

11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?
- I havent been around long enough to make an informed opinion on this. So in lieu of making myself look silly, I will refrain for now

[Se7enofMine]

I want to add, but didn't want to get it lost in my answers. The current goal of the design should be to make fun, playable cards, but should also be about making every affiliation/faction playable. Here's where we could see some needed love and improvement to deck types that need cards made by design to just make them more functional/playable and at least a bit competitive in the field. Again a healthy environment is a rock/paper/scissor type of scenario between 10+ decks.

*BTW this is all my opinion but feel it's pretty well shared*

TNG Bajoran
TNG Maquis
TNG Cardassians

DS9 Feds (solo w/o requiring to mix)
DS9 Cardassians (solo w/o requiring to mix)
DS9 Ferengi (need to be able to mix more and not be so limited)
DS9 Maquis
DS9 Klingon (solo w/o requiring to mix)
(I think an overhaul of Nors would be an ideal situation)

DQ Fed (need something a little less seed heavy and not needing to flood deck with 1000 shuttles)
DQ Kazon solver
DQ Vidiians

TOS Romulans
TOS Klingons
TOS Non-Aligned
TMP Federation
(These 4 I'm hoping get solved in the next 2 block waves)

~D

I will preface what I am about to write by saying that since I haven't been part of design before, I am not entirely sure of the methodology behind creating a set. BUT ..

... I agree with Hoodie.

I get the reason for block sets. But, I think it would be good to include a few cards from "outside" the block so the love is spread around a bit more.

Eg (using just random nunbers here). The next block is for, say, (65) cards, relating to . Cool. Maybe throw in 2 or 3 extra cards for one or two affils who need a bit of help.

Sure, that brings the set up to over (70) cards. But I think that having a schedule where the focus is on one or two affiliations at a time ... it takes a LONG while to get back to the top of the list again. Be nice if things were spread out a bit more to adjust 4 or 5 affiliations on the fly, then 4 or 5 more, etc, etc.

Now, again, I dont know how sets are planned or if that is even possible. As I say, I have not been part of set design or planning. Just something that I was thinking about awhile back and Hoodie's post sorta made me think about it again.

Humbly ...

[Hoss-Drone]

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

Cards
What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?
9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?
10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

1. Top 15 rated for at least 2 years straight while still regularly playing.
2. An understanding of the rules and strategies of the game as such that their win percentage is so high as to not be explainable as luck.
3. *looks at #1 rating and title history* - maybe?
4. Other than me: de walf, drake, carter
5. Something I would play
6. I would play them
7. My Borg, my dominion, romulan drone interference
8. Not sure
9. They either see a lot of play or they are the lynchpin card of a top level deck
10. Dead end, QI, ...and transwarp hub
11. Dunno
12. Not sure

Bonus thought:

What are great decks?

James: these three decks Kevin has designed

Name 3 top players:

Also James: Not Kevin

BULLETIN BOARD MATERIAL FOR 2019.

Thanks Heaney!

[LORE]

4. Other than me: de walf, drake, carter

No love for your Money, Inc. running mate? Cold, bro. Cold.

BULLETIN BOARD MATERIAL FOR 2019

You bet it is.

[Hoss-Drone]

4. Other than me: de walf, drake, carter

No love for your Money, Inc. running mate? Cold, bro. Cold.

BULLETIN BOARD MATERIAL FOR 2019

You bet it is.

I know how to motivate you bro.

Gotta whip you into a lean, mean,

Machine
download (1).jpeg (7.85 KiB) Viewed 1103 times

MACHINE.

[Armus]

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

1.) One of the ten best in the world. The only reason they wouldn't be favored to win is because another top tier player would have a modest edge

2.) A.) Deck building skills - the ability to prepare for as many contingencies as efficiently as possible; B.) Meta analysis capability - knowing what types of decks are most (and more importantly least) likely to be successful; C.) The ability to make in-game decisions as needed to gain advantage over an opponent.

3.) In my prime I was. By my own definition I'm not top tier today, though I've been trending in the right direction since my return to competitive 1E play 4 years ago. I think I can get back to that level, but right now I'd consider myself "reasonably good"

4.) I created Rule #1 in pickem a couple years ago: If Kevin Jaeger is playing in an event, pick Kevin Jaeger to win. I've won 1e regional pickem 2 years straight. I've since extended that rule to Stefan DeWalf (though I won't call him the Kevin Jaeger of Europe again, he's been just as dominant over there as Kevin has been here. I've also not lost any money betting on Jason Drake when he's played. He isn't as frequent a contender but he's won the last two World Championships on the North American continent and has demonstrated an unparalleled deck building prowess - Deck Engineering is probably a better term for what he does.

So Jaeger, de Walf, and Drake are my clear top 3. Beyond that, MVB, Tufts, Sonsteby, Carter, Alex Dixon, Niall Matthew, and Slaby would round out my top tier.

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

I'm a firm believer that a good player can find ways to win with a substandard deck and a bad player can crash and burn with a Worlds winning deck. Having said that I'll try to answer these questions.

5 & 6.) A desk that can win consistently. Has the tools to deal with various types of opposition.

7.) decks built correctly are difficult to defeat. The best in breed that I'd point to are Jaeger's / and De Walf's / builds as two examples of this.

Cards
8.) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?
9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?
10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

[/quote]

8.) A card that either finds a home in many decks or makes a specific subset of decks better.

9.) See 8.

10.) In order of power: Temporal Benefactor, Disrupted Continuum, Quantum Incursions. All three have the potential to be game winning cards in any deck in which they are played.

11/12.) I'll just say this: in no way am I opposed to new interesting and powerful cards. However, there needs to be a certain degree of care taken to make sure that new cards don't make entire affiliations unplayable for a long time.

Case in point: Cold Front was both - centric and above the existing power curve. That's fine, but you don't want , (and to a certain extent decks) to not be able to compete. The latest set helping Delta affiliations out is a step in the right direction, but I'm still looking for a reason to not play a in a high level event. comes close but can totally dead end against QI so maybe some more and/ or Empathy options would be a nice balancing force.

[BCSWowbagger]

What are great decks?

James: these three decks Kevin has designed

Name 3 top players:

Also James: Not Kevin

Well, yeah, but you're kind of a given, aren't you?

[sexecutioner]

I've also not lost any money betting on Jason Drake when he's played.

See below sig.

Be careful when you bet on him when I'm in the field

[Dukat]

Before answering the questions, I have to point out one very important issue. In my view, we have a 'splitted' world: there are U.S. players and there is 'the rest of the world'.
U.S. players rarely travel to other continents and non-U.S. players rarely visit the U.S.

Online events have changed the level of interaction, but there is still not much mixing, in my eyes.
U.S. players, that is my view, have a fundamentally different understanding of the game.

Additionally, I do not think that the player list and its permanent point system does represent the abilities of a player accurately.



Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
- Someone who can take ANY deck and win with it.
- Someone who can break the game.

2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
- Creativity, a disciplined and focused mind, intelligence.

3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
- That's a tough one. Does winning Worlds 8 years ago count as top tier? Seriously, since I haven't played in sanctioned games very often since then.

4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?
- Sebastian Kirstein, Stefan Slaby, Kenneth Tufts

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
- A deck that determines the course of the game by design, not by chance.

6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
- They are hard to prepare for.

Cards
10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
- Hirogen Hunt, any Headquarters facility, Quantum Incursions

11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
- Less than 0.1 percent.

12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?
- Less than 0.1 percent.

[DarkSabre]

Players
1) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition player?
2) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition player?
3) Do you think of yourself as a "top tier" First Edition player?
4) Who are three examples of "top tier" First Edition players?

1.) One of the ten best in the world. The only reason they wouldn't be favored to win is because another top tier player would have a modest edge

2.) A.) Deck building skills - the ability to prepare for as many contingencies as efficiently as possible; B.) Meta analysis capability - knowing what types of decks are most (and more importantly least) likely to be successful; C.) The ability to make in-game decisions as needed to gain advantage over an opponent.

3.) In my prime I was. By my own definition I'm not top tier today, though I've been trending in the right direction since my return to competitive 1E play 4 years ago. I think I can get back to that level, but right now I'd consider myself "reasonably good"

4.) I created Rule #1 in pickem a couple years ago: If Kevin Jaeger is playing in an event, pick Kevin Jaeger to win. I've won 1e regional pickem 2 years straight. I've since extended that rule to Stefan DeWalf (though I won't call him the Kevin Jaeger of Europe again, he's been just as dominant over there as Kevin has been here. I've also not lost any money betting on Jason Drake when he's played. He isn't as frequent a contender but he's won the last two World Championships on the North American continent and has demonstrated an unparalleled deck building prowess - Deck Engineering is probably a better term for what he does.

So Jaeger, de Walf, and Drake are my clear top 3. Beyond that, MVB, Tufts, Sonsteby, Carter, Alex Dixon, Niall Matthew, and Slaby would round out my top tier.

Decks
5) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition deck?
6) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition decks?
7) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition decks?

I'm a firm believer that a good player can find ways to win with a substandard deck and a bad player can crash and burn with a Worlds winning deck. Having said that I'll try to answer these questions.

5 & 6.) A desk that can win consistently. Has the tools to deal with various types of opposition.

7.) decks built correctly are difficult to defeat. The best in breed that I'd point to are Jaeger's / and De Walf's / builds as two examples of this.

Cards
8.) What is your definition of a "top tier" First Edition card?
9) What characteristics do you think are common among "top tier" First Edition cards?
10) What are three examples of "top tier" First Edition cards?
11) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC have been "top tier"?
12) What percentage of First Edition cards produced by the CC should be "top tier"?

8.) A card that either finds a home in many decks or makes a specific subset of decks better.

9.) See 8.

10.) In order of power: Temporal Benefactor, Disrupted Continuum, Quantum Incursions. All three have the potential to be game winning cards in any deck in which they are played.

11/12.) I'll just say this: in no way am I opposed to new interesting and powerful cards. However, there needs to be a certain degree of care taken to make sure that new cards don't make entire affiliations unplayable for a long time.

Case in point: Cold Front was both - centric and above the existing power curve. That's fine, but you don't want , (and to a certain extent decks) to not be able to compete. The latest set helping Delta affiliations out is a step in the right direction, but I'm still looking for a reason to not play a in a high level event. comes close but can totally dead end against QI so maybe some more and/ or Empathy options would be a nice balancing force.[/quote]

Just going to say that Brian pretty much nailed what I was going to write. As for me being a top player, I consider myself a good player but definitely not top.