This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#492054
honestly printing cards out and cutting them out nd sleeving them is both so expensive and such a pain in the ass that its a wonder a new player would ever do it. whoevers arguing for internet play is right, thats teh only way to get new players who dont already have a personal history of star trek ccg.
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492075
Discovery rox wrote:honestly printing cards out and cutting them out nd sleeving them is both so expensive and such a pain in the ass that its a wonder a new player would ever do it. whoevers arguing for internet play is right, thats teh only way to get new players who dont already have a personal history of star trek ccg.
I think that may be overly generalizing. What you say may be true for some people, of course. But there's also a lot of handy, and/or handcrafty people out there, who might not mind to spend a bit of effort for a free game with endless possibilities.

I know a few examples -- one even printed and cut out cards, created a custom logo for them and glued that on, and laminated those cards by hand. Oh... after designing the whole game and its cards herself, because she didn't know Trek already had a few card games. True story! :lol:

(Huh -- Why I never thought of that... might people here be interested in a totally different Trek card game? Not sure if she'd be willing to put it out in the open, but I can ask.)

In any case, I reckon there's bound to be both all sides of those people -- those who like to have everything ready to go (and perhaps even like to spend money for that on a "finished" game OR indeed rather play digitally); and those who like to go physical but cheap and/or like to do some handiwork.
User avatar
Second Edition Art Manager
By edgeofhearing (Lucas Thompson)
 - Second Edition Art Manager
 -  
Community Contributor
#492078
[SD] Learn to play videos would be valuable (though much harder for 1e than 2e).
[SD] A way to encourage reporting of kitchen table games. They happen, and there needs to be some way of enticing those players to come, say hi, and make friends with us.
[SD] A way to encourage players to demo the game, either at stores or conventions.
[SD] Something that people often come here looking for are relatively balanced decks that use 1e premiere cards only. I know that doesn't directly get people playing the whole game, but if we have what they want when they come here, it might encourage them to come back.
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492081
edgeofhearing wrote: [SD] Learn to play videos would be valuable (though much harder for 1e than 2e).
That reminded me of Commandeur's slide shows. I only ever investigated the Borg one myself, but it was fun and nicely done and very educational.
Why can't we use those, or something like that? Or -- even winning on multiple fronts -- make films from inside Lackey or TTS or some such? (I'm sure this has already been proposed... has to be... :shifty: )
But those slideshows, why can't they already be put on the site, perhaps after some retooling?
[SD] A way to encourage reporting of kitchen table games. They happen, and there needs to be some way of enticing those players to come, say hi, and make friends with us.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: This. 8)
[SD] A way to encourage players to demo the game, either at stores or conventions.
*cough* Short introductory simple game? Impulse Speed! *cough* :lol:
[SD] Something that people often come here looking for are relatively balanced decks that use 1e premiere cards only. I know that doesn't directly get people playing the whole game, but if we have what they want when they come here, it might encourage them to come back.
Exactly! This, too! (You're on a roll, Edge. :P )

I remember now I drafted a lengthy post about exactly those things, but not sent it. Gonna look it up.

My own Impulse decks are made up of Traditional cards, but only those I have in abundance (surplus). Thus, regretfully, no rares; and they had to be solidified with everything I had from up till, say, The Borg.

But I'd be willing to look at Premiere-only decks... much easier to put together a 3-mission deck with a total of 40 cards, than a full one... Should they include rares? Or only c/uc? (It would be harder then, at least for my specific tastes, to get a functional and nice-feeling deck going -- but not impossible.)
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492090
to be fair. premiere only is a pretty boring format. even more if you limit it to c/uc only. so you dont even get to play the stars.

i teached two friends with tribbles precons. it worked, but i also found it boring af.

the report one, draw one pacing of the stock sets is just not the modern game and pretty tedious.

also i draw most fun from tweaking dilemma piles.
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492099
i teached two friends with tribbles precons. it worked, but i also found it boring af.
The existing, commercially sold starter decks had a partially very different goal(s). (I.e.: part was a ploy, naturally, to get people to want to change them because they were not nice/good/interesting enough.) Do not confuse them with good teaching/starting decks that we'd want to have in light of this thread. As you say -- we'd want such decks to be a lot better/nicer.
Ensign Q wrote:to be fair. premiere only is a pretty boring format. (...)
the report one, draw one pacing of the stock sets is just not the modern game and pretty tedious.
This is exactly what I feel is wrong with a lot of the sentiments around this topic.

You feel it's boring. We may feel it's slow. You're looking at your own short-term desires for the game -- not at what could, long-term, land you more people to play with. (Which is what you seem to want.)

This is not about what is fun or boring or fast enough or slow enough for us. It is about how you can tap into new people. Yes, you may have to invest some time and effort in promoting/teaching -- and, the porphets forbid -- you might have to use some cards/decks you'd rather never see, and/or hold off on using some advanced mechanix that you'd rather play with.

Let's all stop wanting to (immediately) teach the same game that we, ourselves, want to (eventually) play! That very sentiment really, really limits the number of people you can reach!
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492101
Ensign Q wrote:(...) pretty boring format. even more if you limit it to c/uc only. so you dont even get to play the stars.
This indeed was a serious consideration, for me, as well. But I've seen that it doesn't matter for people who already know a lot of Trek.
You do want to include "stars" of the shows if you want to reach people on the fringe of the franchise, however -- say, CCG or generic game enthusiasts whi have only a passing interest in Trek, so far.
But I've been positively surprised at how well new people can immerse themselves with just c/uc decks. (Perhaps it does help that I -- tip! -- consciously do name recognisable characters, e.g. explain things using their skills -- "Now, if you'd have had Data on table, who has ENGINEER and is an OFFICER, then...")
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#492105
i think reporting of kitchen table games is a great idea. if both players sign off on it, it should affect some kind of rank thats part of your profile. and getting both players to sign off also encourages visits to the site and community.
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492389
Discovery rox wrote:i think reporting of kitchen table games is a great idea. if both players sign off on it, it should affect some kind of rank thats part of your profile. and getting both players to sign off also encourages visits to the site and community.
This. :wink:

Also, I dug up and finished that draft post...

On a tangient to my previous posts, I'd like to come at this from an opposite angle.

On the one hand, we want to recruit new players, broaden the base.

On the other hand, you all seem to love this very specific version of the game -- being OTF with full card pool and all the bells and whistles -- which has proven to be very difficult for new players to learn. It's not for lack of interest, I think. It's because of lack of stamina, (structural/close-together) time (slots), and energy to get efficiently up to speed with the mammoth that is 1e.

I have always loved the cards and the franchise even more than I loved the actual game (which is saying a lot). And from that perspective, I have to ask...

Why do a lot of people here seem so reluctant to use (subsets of) those cards in different manners, ever since OTF surfaced as the definitive version of the game? I have accepted it as definitive, but I can't accept that it is the only way to use "our" cards.

Especially when it comes to finding, drawing in, and teaching new players -- and keeping them on board until they've learnt OTF.

I've often heard something along the lines of, "you can do what you want at home with your group, but we only promote one version of the game".
Well, I can see how that is easy, prevents confusion, and is most fun for you... the current players. But if you really want to attract and keep new players in an age group that usually does not have opportunity to binge-learn 25 years of cardplay and binge-game it into OP-level capacity... then you might have to make some sacrifices. Temporarily.

And it's not like the generic tools aren't already there! There was a Premiere / PAQ version of the game, with less and easier rules. There is Warp Speed, which is still a lot to take in, but at least runs shorter. (And, yes... there is Impulse Speed.)

(They're not what you're used to; but those iterations were/are fun -- for some people; new people! -- in their own right. That belief underlies my crusade here, to "generate awareness" about other card pools and formats.)

I think there should be more official support for easier step-in solutions. They should become easily visible on the website. Perhaps... it pains me to say... even a much shorter "pre-beginner's" version of the Rulebook...? Bring back the Premiere rulebook (really thinking outside the box here), with an accompanying portal that emphasizes that it's a sandbox version of the game? Or -- much-preferred -- retool the current, fantastic Rulebook into having a real simple version for true beginners, and rename the current Beginner layout into Novice or Intermediate.

The Tr00 Beginner rulebook could start with: "ignore the following icons..."
[DL] [1E-DQ] [1E-GQ] [MQ] [Holo] [1E-AU]
And "do not use the following card types"...
Time Loc, Stations/HQ, [Tac] , [Bor] [BO] , [Q] -- perhaps even [Door] [Inc] and/or [Obj] ?

Actually, that's getting too far into the details of my Impulse format. But then again, while I'm at it: I've been thinking about discussing the possibility for me to retool the current official rulebook myself, into a heavily truncated (PDF only?) version to go with Impulse. I could do it "unsanctioned" (and: time permitting :shifty: :roll: ), of course; but for me and mine, it isn't really needed. So, not "worth" my time, technically. Yet I'd love to be able to do it if it were supported by the community, to add to our teaching toolbox.
But that's getting really far ahead of this topic... :lol:
User avatar
 
By Iron Prime (Dan Van Kampen)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#492420
Ensign Q wrote:
Id like to see a cc channel on
youtube where events are streamed and maybe a new player introduction series.
also a "recruit a friend" program cant hurt, where you get promos for every new friend who participates on an event.

promo cards for tournament organizers and players. sth like fnm. tuesdaytrek?

pretty much all the stuff wotc does to promote magic.
Emphasis mine
I think some "learn to play" type things on youtube will be key. This weekend someone swung by Lore's New Year's Charity Draft and asked a ton of questions. I had a nice talk with him and this came up twice...

In a perfect world I think we would have a multipart learn to play series of videos and then two or so games that were scripted with commentary so that a new player could learn the thought process and see why certain decisions are made.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#492465
There's universal agreement that a 1E videotape learn-to-play series is essential, but nobody ever finds time to do it. I've volunteered for at least one of these initiatives.

Eventually, somebody has to just go and pull a Lucas Thompson and do it instead of waiting for official sanction. If you make a good learn-to-play series, it'll get sanction. Heck, even if you make a bad learn-to-play series, it'll probably get sanctioned as long as it's better than the nothing we currently have.
I think there should be more official support for easier step-in solutions. They should become easily visible on the website. Perhaps... it pains me to say... even a much shorter "pre-beginner's" version of the Rulebook...? Bring back the Premiere rulebook (really thinking outside the box here), with an accompanying portal that emphasizes that it's a sandbox version of the game? Or -- much-preferred -- retool the current, fantastic Rulebook into having a real simple version for true beginners, and rename the current Beginner layout into Novice or Intermediate.
I think there's a risk in providing too many entry points into the game. When a player first encounters our game, they're overwhelmed by the game. The goal of most new-player interactions should be, basically, to reduce that "overwhelmed" feeling to a manageable level, helping newbies feel smart, capable, and well-supported.

However, if there are too many different entry points (too many different formats, rulebook options, rules sets, card pools), we end up making new players overwhelmed all over again -- not by the game itself, but by the difficulty of sorting out all the different entry points!

There is currently a Beginner's Rulebook. (There's a PDF of it as well.) Even the existence of that alternative entry point is not well-known, because the current website doesn't really give us the space to explain things. (The new website is something I need to be working on much more than I have been.) I think that adding a second Beginner's Rulebook, with a slightly different name, which would be equally or even more difficult for a new player to actually find, would cause more confusion among new players than it solves. You'd end up with some newbies trained on the Beginner's Rulebook and others trained on the "True Beginner's Rulebook" and not even realizing that they're missing different parts of the game.

The current Beginner's Rulebook does exclude Borg rules, Time Locations, Hologram rules, Tactics, and Q-Icon cards, exactly as you suggest.

It also excludes Artifacts, Tribbles & Troubles, Sites, multi-affiliation cards, dual-personnel cards, persona replacement, cloaking, capturing, commandeering, infiltration, mirror opposites, countdowns, probing, loaded skills, relocation, landing, cross-quadrant movement, the cumulative rule, the vast majority of the dilemma resolution rules, and a bunch of other rules that you simply don't need to know when just starting out and can work out for yourself.

The Beginner's Rulebook does include native quadrants, special downloads, doorways, incidents, objectives, and the [1E-AU] icon rule, because those are so integral to the game I didn't think players could effectively play any modern card pool without knowing about them. I also thought that not telling new players about native quadrant / AU restrictions would lead to deep disappointment and frustration when they built decks around that and later found out that their decks don't work under the full rules. Frustration is not a feeling our new-player path should engender.

I made all these decisions about what to include and what to exclude pretty much on my own, based on my own judgment about what is "core" to the game and what isn't. My target audience was all newbies, but specifically TNG Block players. (TNG Block was the active block at the time I started the Rulebook.) As far as I know, this aspect of the Rulebook was not closely scrutinized when it was approved. So I'm open to the suggestion that it struck the wrong balance between "explaining the core game" and "being easy enough for newbies to understand." I'm open to the suggestion that the Beginner's Rulebook should exclude a few more things, and include a few other things. But I think the approach of having another Beginner's Rulebook, only this time even simpler, would do more harm than good (although I realize that the idea comes with only the best of intentions).
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#492469
BCSWowbagger wrote:There's universal agreement that a 1E videotape learn-to-play series is essential, but nobody ever finds time to do it. I've volunteered for at least one of these initiatives.

Eventually, somebody has to just go and pull a Lucas Thompson and do it instead of waiting for official sanction.
And honestly, a bunch of videos is the sort of thing that doesn't need sanction at all - how-to-play isn't like a rulebook (where we say "yes, this is now the official rulebook"), it's a "hey, here's a link to <your name here>'s cool video walking through <your topic here>" post.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#492510
there are some l2p videos on youtube already. not the best quality though.

first step is to spark interest in the game i guess. so streaming tournaments seems a good start and would probably also be watched by already active players.

any form of content would help the game at this point tbh. maybe the cc can approach established channels or streamer to promote the game??

next step would be reworking the rules, so the game is easier to pickup from people that come from magic or other cardgames.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to @Takket ! :D :thumbsup: […]

Opponents turn

Remodulation