[MidnightLich]

Hi guys,

We want your opinion on something. For a few reasons I don't want to get into right now, there is going to be a minor change to seed phases coming down the pipeline. Specifically, the rules will now require that cards of a type seed only in that phase, unless they have text otherwise. That means:

Doorways only in the Doorway Phase
Missions only in the Mission Phase
Dilemmas, Artifacts, and cards that seed like those cards in the Dilemma Phase
Everything Else

And again, to be clear: a card that says otherwise (Deep Space 9, for example) overrides this rule. Right now, this isn't a rule - you can technically seed any card in any phase. This has led to a few situations where a card design had to be killed because it didn't work (i.e. you couldn't guarantee in a reasonable number of words card A would be before card B).

The question is: would you, the community, want to see this be an OTF only change? Or would you want us to have it apply to all formats equally from the get go? Let us know what you think. We're happy to take questions, but we aren't going to get too into the weeds here; instead, we'll cover that when the change is officially made.

-crp

[geraldkw]

I voted all formats because I care about the design team feeling like they can design cards more freely. This was spurred on by a recent post I was reading about how the "Anti-strategies" text on Writ of Accountability is blocking some interesting ideas that the design team would like to implement.

[frakkingoff]

Hi guys,
Right now, this isn't a rule - you can technically seed any card in any phase.

Can you give an example of this "out of phase" seeding happening (other than when the card specified it, i.e. Empok Nor)?

For instance, you saying this is legal:

A) Mission seeding: Player A seeds Mission 1
B) Mission seeding: Player B seeds Mission 2
C) Mission seeding: Player A seeds a dilemma under Mission 1 (perhaps setting up Q to ensure it's encountered first, for a Q-bypass)
D) Mission seeding: Player B seeds Mission 3 (basically got to seed 2 missions in a row because player A seeded a dilemma)

?

[MidnightLich]

Hi guys,
Right now, this isn't a rule - you can technically seed any card in any phase.

Can you give an example of this "out of phase" seeding happening (other than when the card specified it, i.e. Empok Nor)?

For instance, you saying this is legal:

A) Mission seeding: Player A seeds Mission 1
B) Mission seeding: Player B seeds Mission 2
C) Mission seeding: Player A seeds a dilemma under Mission 1 (perhaps setting up Q to ensure it's encountered first, for a Q-bypass)
D) Mission seeding: Player B seeds Mission 3 (basically got to seed 2 missions in a row because player A seeded a dilemma)

?

I can't speak to that specific example, and most of the examples I have heard about involve Shenanigans along these lines. But I can give you a recent example: Preserver Obelisk. The Delenn design team was having a devil of a time getting the wording on that card to disallow both it and AMS to work in the seed phase. With this rule change, Preserver Obelisk would have to seed in the doorway phase and could simply say "You may not seed Assign Mission Specialists," which would then have to seed in the facility phase.

-crp

[pfti]

It isnt any card. it is any card that isnt defined by a phase (all non- doorway, mission, dilemma, or facility cards)

p1 - seed mission
p2 seed tribunal
p1 - seed mission
etc maybe to rig spaceline.

in open, you could also seed hidden agendas to make your dilemmas later.

[DarkSabre]

I say all formats - apparently I was never evil enough to think of what people are suggesting here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MidnightLich]

To be clear about why we're asking: typically, we make changes in OTF that provide a tradeoff, i.e. that sacrifice some element of strategy for an overall better game experience. Originally, when the idea of this change was suggested, that was the plan. But the idea was raised that doing so would send the message that we don't care about other formats, and that isn't the case.

Since this change is relatively small, and usually only matters when doing Shenanigans (TM), we thought that we'd ask the community for guidance. Do enough people value this ability that we should preserve it in Open?

-crp

[Dukat]

Hi guys,

We want your opinion on something. For a few reasons I don't want to get into right now, there is going to be a minor change to seed phases coming down the pipeline. Specifically, the rules will now require that cards of a type seed only in that phase, unless they have text otherwise. That means:

Doorways only in the Doorway Phase
Missions only in the Mission Phase
Dilemmas, Artifacts, and cards that seed like those cards in the Dilemma Phase
Everything Else

And again, to be clear: a card that says otherwise (Deep Space 9, for example) overrides this rule. Right now, this isn't a rule - you can technically seed any card in any phase. This has led to a few situations where a card design had to be killed because it didn't work (i.e. you couldn't guarantee in a reasonable number of words card A would be before card B).

The question is: would you, the community, want to see this be an OTF only change? Or would you want us to have it apply to all formats equally from the get go? Let us know what you think. We're happy to take questions, but we aren't going to get too into the weeds here; instead, we'll cover that when the change is officially made.

-crp

Fun fact ...

I, my players and I think all people at tournaments have ALWAYS played exactly like the way you want to change it to: all cards can only be seeded in their specific phases.

Can't remember having it done otherwise in a long time. (Or I am getting old and forgetting things ...)

[MidnightLich]

Fun fact ...

I, my players and I think all people at tournaments have ALWAYS played exactly like the way you want to change it to: all cards can only be seeded in their specific phases.

Can't remember having it done otherwise in a long time. (Or I am getting old and forgetting things ...)

I can't think of a situation in the past five years that I was part of where someone tried to see things out of order, either.

-crp

[BCSWowbagger]

For instance, you saying this is legal:

A) Mission seeding: Player A seeds Mission 1
B) Mission seeding: Player B seeds Mission 2
C) Mission seeding: Player A seeds a dilemma under Mission 1 (perhaps setting up Q to ensure it's encountered first, for a Q-bypass)
D) Mission seeding: Player B seeds Mission 3 (basically got to seed 2 missions in a row because player A seeded a dilemma)

?

The dilemma example doesn't work, because dilemmas have to seed in their phase, but you could seed The Inner Light at step C. As an objective, it doesn't seed in any particular phase, and, yes, you'd be forcing your opponent to seed two missions in a row (potentially giving you more power to shape the spaceline in your favor).

It's hard to pull this off in a way that's actually useful, and I don't think I've ever seen it done in real life, but it's theoretically allowed by the rules, and there's been hesitation to change that behind-the-scenes in case somebody out there is depending on it for their broken Open deck.

[LORE]

If I read this correctly, we are just trying to put some structure into a nebulous phase of the game, correct? If that is all, I'm supportive.

Like Jon's note above, there has been room for silly shenanigans in the seed phase since the game started. If we are trying to bring in new players, we ought to pull the angle shooting out of the seed phase and make it straight forward (which, I think, most people play that way now anyway.) Once upon a time in the seed phase a player could "pass" without actually ending the phase. This led to several scenarios where I would seed 1 dilemma under all my opponents dilemmas and then start "passing" if they hadn't seeding 1 here, 1 there, 1 there like I did. It was pure gamesmanship, and allowed me to set my outposts close to theirs by running them out of seed phase cards before me. Do we need that kind of dirt bag move in the game today, two decades later? I'd vote no.

[MidnightLich]

If I read this correctly, we are just trying to put some structure into a nebulous phase of the game, correct? If that is all, I'm supportive.

Yup. I suspect it won't change 99% of games that have been or will be played, but it'll make a few things easier from a design point of view.

-crp

[AllenGould]

With batch seeding, "first seed" doesn't have near the advantage it used to.

I've got no objections.

I wonder... could we just add a last step for "everything that didn't state another step"? (The "vowel step" - Incident, Events, and Objectives. )

[DarkSabre]

I messaged a couple of decipher only style players for their input and posted it up on the Facebook Star Trek ccg group. Feel free to also go there to discuss


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BCSWowbagger]

I wonder... could we just add a last step for "everything that didn't state another step"? (The "vowel step" - Incident, Events, and Objectives. )

Look at it this way: if this change goes through, the "facility phase" becomes the "everything else" step.