What's New Dashboard Articles Forums Chat Room Achievements Tournaments Player Map The Promenade Volunteers About Us Site Index
The Continuing Committee
It is currently Mon Feb 24, 2020 4:47 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"? 
Author Message
Director of First Edition
Director of First Edition


User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 5:54 pm
Posts: 21743
Location: Salem, OR
Region: Ferenginar
Post 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
Welcome to today's First Edition Friday Question, where you get a chance to answer questions that will help shape the future of First Edition. If you'd like to catch up on previous entries, here's a list of all of my previous Friday Questions:



Q Who is legal in all formats today! Have you started working on a [1E-TNG] [Bor] deck? I hope that you get the chance to try it out soon.

Over the past two weeks, we've talked about banning cards and unbanning cards. But we've got another step in the process called watching cards. A card on the watch list is a card that might be a problem - or it might not. The point of watching a card is to pay special attention to the card and when, where, and how its used to make an informed decision. Today's question is about the watch list.

What circumstances should qualify a card to be added to the "watch list"?

I'm curious to know what criteria each of you would use to determine a card should be watched. They can be whatever you like, as strict or as lax as you'd like to see. Perhaps a card should go on the watch list if it's used in a certain number of decks? Or maybe just winning decks? Maybe it's cards that you feel are too powerful, or cards that are too confusing.

Any and all criteria are valid. Your reasons can be your own, but I'm very interested in what you think should qualify a card for being on the watch list. I personally think that we should be pretty liberal about how cards get added to the watch list, but I want to know what you think.

Have a good weekend, everyone. If you can, check out Star Trek: Picard. I watched the first episode last night and (no spoilers) thought it was very good.

-crp

_________________


MidnightLich @okcoyote Make it so, friend.


Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:00 pm
Profile My Photo Gallery
The Center of the Galaxy


User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:39 pm
Posts: 13316
Location: Alberta, Canada
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
I take the term literally - card A *might* be a problem (or a local group *is* having a problem), and we want to keep an eye on it before pulling the trigger on ban/errata - sometimes the meta adjusts, sometimes it just had a lucky game and it's not reliable enough to be a constant problem.

So the watch list brings attention - ironically it's almost a call to ask people in other *to* break the card if they can. And more attention hopefully means more data for the Powers That Be to make a more informed decision.

_________________
Join the CC Discord channel!


Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:07 pm
Profile
Beta Quadrant

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 320
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
I agree with Allen's take - the watch list should be for cards that are potentially too powerful/ broken but we don't have the data to be sure. It's a useful signal to deckbuilders, both as a dare to try to break something and also to let them know that the card might be gone/ changed soon so prepare accordingly.

I think it would be great to have a second category on three watch list for cards that are currently being considered for errata or new rulings because of rules problems and not power level problems. It would be nice to have a clear signal that the appropriate people are aware of rules issues with certain cards and are developing fixes to them.


Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:38 pm
Profile
First Edition Rules Master
First Edition Rules Master



User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 1:51 am
Posts: 11025
Location: Twin Cities
Region: Andoria
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
I'm torn.

Argument for a liberal watchlist: it allows the Department as well as the Community to share concerns about a broad cross-section of cards from all across the game.

Argument for a conservative watchlist: The Errata team really has to focus on the cards that are on the watch list -- and its resources are limited, as with all teams, so an overly broad watch list ends up with a lot of cards on it being ignored and not really watched at all, reducing the list's value as a focusing-and-communications tool.

The current policy (intermittently followed) that a card on the watchlist automatically drops off the watchlist after six months if no further action is taken, somewhat complicates both sides of the argument.

Regardless, I would very much like to see monthly watchlist updates, just like monthly rules updates. The watchlist is rarely touched at all right now, maybe annually, and that really attenuates its value. Monthly updates would also encourage quick movement on and off the list, which would also be valuable.

_________________
Rules Manager, First Edition

If it's blue, it's an Official Ruling. The rest is mere opinion.

We pledge our loyalty to the Glossary from now until death.
Then receive this reward from the Glossary. May it keep you strong.
~Iron Prime


Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:02 pm
Profile
The Center of the Galaxy


User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:39 pm
Posts: 13316
Location: Alberta, Canada
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
BCSWowbagger wrote:
Argument for a conservative watchlist: The Errata team really has to focus on the cards that are on the watch list -- and its resources are limited, as with all teams, so an overly broad watch list ends up with a lot of cards on it being ignored and not really watched at all, reducing the list's value as a focusing-and-communications tool.


I always thought of it the other way - it's asking the *community* to watch the card, rather than Errata. The six months just gives an alternate out (if it's not screamingly bad by then it most likely just isn't that bad). I'd actually up that to a full twelve months, just to guarantee that any watchlist card had the opportunity to get abused during the Big Events.

Aside: I know some folks hate the idea of "I won with X and now they nerfed it", but locally we always used to consider it a badge of honor - what is a better proof of knowing the game at an extremely high level than finding the broken combo and putting the game in a submission hold? :D

_________________
Join the CC Discord channel!


Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:16 pm
Profile
Director of Organized Play
Director of Organized Play






User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:52 am
Posts: 5880
Region: Andoria
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
BCSWowbagger wrote:
The current policy (intermittently followed) that a card on the watchlist automatically drops off the watchlist after six months if no further action is taken, somewhat complicates both sides of the argument.
This stipulation seems silly to me. A card should be on the watch list until a ban / errata are deemed necessary or the rules team has taken a long look at it (or used information provided by others by proxy) and given it a pass. A card should never get removed from the watch list simply because we ran out of time on some artificial / arbitrary clock. :twocents:

_________________
Director of Organized Play
Founding Member of Minnesota's Frozen Chosen


Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:28 pm
Profile My Photo Gallery
Delta Quadrant

User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:01 am
Posts: 3494
Region: Andoria
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
AllenGould wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote:
Argument for a conservative watchlist: The Errata team really has to focus on the cards that are on the watch list -- and its resources are limited, as with all teams, so an overly broad watch list ends up with a lot of cards on it being ignored and not really watched at all, reducing the list's value as a focusing-and-communications tool.
I always thought of it the other way - it's asking the *community* to watch the card, rather than Errata. The six months just gives an alternate out (if it's not screamingly bad by then it most likely just isn't that bad). I'd actually up that to a full twelve months, just to guarantee that any watchlist card had the opportunity to get abused during the Big Events.
Aside: I know some folks hate the idea of "I won with X and now they nerfed it", but locally we always used to consider it a badge of honor - what is a better proof of knowing the game at an extremely high level than finding the broken combo and putting the game in a submission hold? :D

+1
However I don't think it is communicated that way. I would hazard a guess that most people believe the errata team - or at least some team - is watching these. Whatever the outcome of this thread I would like to see a short article on the front page so we can all be applying the same "rules" to the watch list.

:twocents:

_________________
Corbinq27 wrote:
The glossary works in mysterious ways.

Armus wrote:
You play in Minnesota. They're animals up there. :wink:


DanVanKampen Rules Update, February 2020 https://t.co/Cg45WaAMgV via @TrekCC


Fri Jan 24, 2020 4:30 pm
Profile
Social Media Manager
Social Media Manager
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 6:53 pm
Posts: 2703
Location: Richmond, VA
Region: Sector 001
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
Iron Prime wrote:
AllenGould wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote:
Argument for a conservative watchlist: The Errata team really has to focus on the cards that are on the watch list -- and its resources are limited, as with all teams, so an overly broad watch list ends up with a lot of cards on it being ignored and not really watched at all, reducing the list's value as a focusing-and-communications tool.
I always thought of it the other way - it's asking the *community* to watch the card, rather than Errata. The six months just gives an alternate out (if it's not screamingly bad by then it most likely just isn't that bad). I'd actually up that to a full twelve months, just to guarantee that any watchlist card had the opportunity to get abused during the Big Events.
Aside: I know some folks hate the idea of "I won with X and now they nerfed it", but locally we always used to consider it a badge of honor - what is a better proof of knowing the game at an extremely high level than finding the broken combo and putting the game in a submission hold? :D

+1
However I don't think it is communicated that way. I would hazard a guess that most people believe the errata team - or at least some team - is watching these. Whatever the outcome of this thread I would like to see a short article on the front page so we can all be applying the same "rules" to the watch list.

:twocents:


:thumbsup:

_________________
Player since '96, DS9 is the best, The Dominion is always the right answer to a speed deck, Social Media Manager & Playtest Manager for First Edition


Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:08 pm
Profile
The Center of the Galaxy


User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:39 pm
Posts: 13316
Location: Alberta, Canada
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
LORE wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote:
The current policy (intermittently followed) that a card on the watchlist automatically drops off the watchlist after six months if no further action is taken, somewhat complicates both sides of the argument.
This stipulation seems silly to me. A card should be on the watch list until a ban / errata are deemed necessary or the rules team has taken a long look at it (or used information provided by others by proxy) and given it a pass. A card should never get removed from the watch list simply because we ran out of time on some artificial / arbitrary clock. :twocents:


The problem with that is now Errata is being tasked with certifying that Card A Is Fine (and probably in the face of some number of players still advocating for a ban). Which will 100% bite them in the ass if it gets broken later. That's a lot of stress folks don't need.

And just because it comes off the list doesn't mean it can't go back on if it flares up again. It just means that the list will naturally prune itself down to things the community are actively caring about.

_________________
Join the CC Discord channel!


Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:21 pm
Profile
Delta Quadrant
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:26 am
Posts: 1355
Location: Germany
Post Re: 1EFQ - What should qualify a card for the "watch list"?
A card should be banned if Overpowered AND with no, or rare or no practical counter.
e.g. Holoprogram cafe desatist (reduce to draw 1-2) or Space Time Portal drop. Should be limited 2 [1E-AU] personal report with crew. And return ship to hand, only of your 4 cards (random selection).

In a few cases if its a NDE, e.g. costs a lot of time.
e.g. Containment field
or cards that allow constant or unlimited downloads.
Empok Nor errata to 3 equipments.

_________________
The [Fed] and 31 are symbiotic. 31 protects it from destruction. Like 21st Europe: A humanitic utopia while ressource striping other countries. Believing on thing while doing another. - LuthySloan


Mon Feb 03, 2020 11:27 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Terms of Use

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.