[emace7]

Hi. I am looking to get back into the game. I see that there are a ton of expansions and that the accumulation of them all made the 1st edition hard to learn. Could someone tell me at what point that occurred? If that can even be answered. I'd like to pick up some of the expansion packs to go with my original decks however I don't want to introduce the expansion packs that created all the new types of cards and rules.

Thanks!

[Johannes Mette]

Hi. I am looking to get back into the game. I see that there are a ton of expansions and that the accumulation of them all made the 1st edition hard to learn. Could someone tell me at what point that occurred? If that can even be answered. I'd like to pick up some of the expansion packs to go with my original decks however I don't want to introduce the expansion packs that created all the new types of cards and rules.

Thanks!

After Premiere?

[Professor Scott]

Yeah without a more specific question, there is no real easy way to answer this.

Premier had 9 types of cards:
Artifact
Dilemma
Equipment
Event
Facility
Interrupt
Mission
Personnel
Ship

Alternate Universe introduced the Doorway.

Q Continuum added 4 new types:
Q Dilemma
Q Event
Q Interrupt
Q Mission

First Contact added Objective and Time Location

Fajo Collection added the first dual type card an Interrupt/Event and Q Artifact

OTSD added Q Dilemma/Event

DS9 added Site

Enhanced First Contact added Incident and had some clear overlays; while not really a card type themselves, I included them for completeness.

Blaze of Glory added Tactic and also foil cards, also not a new type.

The Trouble with Tribbles added Tribble and Trouble

All 24 of these types were created by Decipher, and The Continuing Committee has created no new types of cards.

As you can see only 1 or 2 new types were introduced at a time (exceptions being Premier and Q Continuum) and even then only every couple of sets. In fact as of August 9th this year, all 24 types have been around for 20 years!

I hope this at least helps you pace your re-immersion into 1E.

[Smiley]

Unfortunately, There's no good answer to your question. Premiere had many problems but most of them were discovered later in the games life. AU and Q were mostly just bloating of the rules with bad decisions from the designers. With the rules changes in FC you got away from most of it but not all. DS9 is as close to perfect this game ever got but the complexity added by the Sites and Nors was not the best. Skipping them would make the game more playable. So I would recommend DS9 and maybe Dom, RoA and maybe, just maybe BoG. Though the battle decks were mostly unbalanced by this time. If you skip the expansions before this then it would be more balanced as most of the bad cards would go away.

[BCSWowbagger]

Subjective, but to me Mirror, Mirror and the "Mirror Quadrant" was 1E's bridge too far into rules complexity, and it was immediately followed by Voyager, which was literally a game-breaking expansion.

[Mr.Sloan]

if you want it simple use premiere only and ignore artifacts?

or buy voyager only?

both sets alone are a good entrance.

[Hoss-Drone]

My b suggestion for simplicity is to learn the voyager warp speed format and my draft cube format. I've had luck actually be able to teach new players with them as the stepp I ng stone to the larger otf format game.

[willraiman]

Just as another option that exists: You could pick up 2nd Edition, instead. 2E with all expansions probably has less rules baggage than 1E Premiere.

[Pazuzu]

Hi. I am looking to get back into the game. I see that there are a ton of expansions and that the accumulation of them all made the 1st edition hard to learn. Could someone tell me at what point that occurred? If that can even be answered. I'd like to pick up some of the expansion packs to go with my original decks however I don't want to introduce the expansion packs that created all the new types of cards and rules.

Thanks!

I think there are a couple of ways to answer your question.

1) Competitive play: I think there are some community members still active on the boards that used to played competitive during Decipher era. If I am not mistaken Armus is one and may answer the question when competitive play was in a down spiral. My answer would be with Voyager because of the immense power creep.

2) Design wise: I think Star Trek CCG was never a good game from a design perspective and my one and only reason for that is the missing cost and resource element. (And maybe the solitair part of seed phase could be another one.) Decipher tried to fix it and did an okay job with Second Edition, but I think Star Wars is just so much better. If you like other dead CCG games, there is also Middle-earth which is also quite elegant and I think Decipher's Lord of the Rings is interesting aswell. Another example (but I still like the game) of an horrible CCG from a design perspective is SimCity.

3) But actually the two points above don't matter, if you like Star Trek and don't play competitive but just some friendly games with your friends. Just create some balanced decks on your own, print some sweet cards from The Continuing Committee and have a lot of fun playing the game! That is what I do, and that is also why Magic's Commander is a lot of fun imho. Get rid of the competitive aspect and focus on the fun playing the game.

[Klauser]

I've been playing 1E since Premier, and my take on the game is that while it's core design on release was solid, it was Decipher's execution that was flawed.

Chase Cards: In the first year of the game, most players focused on getting the U.S.S. Enterprise and overpowered bridge crew in play, then plowing through dilemmas on high-point missions. It wasn't until AU and later that you started seeing Klingon swarm decks and other strategies become viable. In the best of worlds, obvious strategies for each affiliation - and cards to support it - should have been apparent to even casual players right out of the box.

Starter Decks: While the Warp Pack (which came out right before Alternate Universe) helped make Premier starter deck technically playable, out of the box starter decks for different affiliation did not happen until the Two Player Game in early 97 - and even then they missed the mark by not including a Romulan deck! Until then, you had to buy a starter deck and 3-4 packs (or another starter deck) to get enough cards to have a good chance at a decent deck.

Fixing problems by adding more cards: My biggest gripe. Professor Scott's post above illustrates how Decipher's approach to fixing problems was to add more cards you had to buy to address imbalance issues - instead of fixing or banning the offending card. Decipher steadfastly refused to errata cards and only banned one - Raise the Stakes.

Creeping Complexity: Later expansions (i.e. First Contact and Deep Space Nine) added a welcome number of different play options, but also added sometimes needless layers of complexity. The Nor mechanics were needlessly cumbersome - particularly the Outpost vs. Station restrictions and ... don't get me started on sites.

With each level of complexity imposed on the game, the seed phase got increasingly complex. What started out as a couple of minute setup at the start of the game got more complex and convoluted, often becoming the focus of the game instead of ... you know, game play.

Looking back, it seems fairly clear that Decipher, particularly towards the end of 1E, was purposely cranking out expansions with very short playtest suspenses (full disclosure - I was a playtester for Holodeck and Motion Pictures). What we didn't understand until much later was how much the financial crisis Decipher was undergoing at the time aggravated the impact to their STCCG (and LOTR) product lines.

Sigh ...

On the plus side, I am encouraged by the CC's management of the game. They're not afraid to try new approaches with the game (my personal favorite is TNG Block "Continuing Mission". Truly inspired), and are willing to review and adjust with errata and banning when necessary.

[Nerdopolis Prime]

Am I seeing that right that you have to discard Continuing Mission after playing any ship? Because of:

... Discard this incident if you play (or have played) a non- personnel or ship.

[Armus]

Am I seeing that right that you have to discard Continuing Mission after playing any ship? Because of:

... Discard this incident if you play (or have played) a non- personnel or ship.

Only if you play a ship without the TNG property logo. Anything with the TNG property logo gains per Continuing Mission's game text.

[JeBuS]

Am I seeing that right that you have to discard Continuing Mission after playing any ship? Because of:

... Discard this incident if you play (or have played) a non- personnel or ship.

Only if you play a ship without the TNG property logo. Anything with the TNG property logo gains per Continuing Mission's game text.

The issue is one of grammar. The sentence can be parsed to read: (a non- personnel) OR (a ship).

[Professor Scott]

Correct, it should be read as: Discard this incident if you play (or have played) a non- personnel or a non- ship.

[Armus]

The issue is one of grammar. The sentence can be parsed to read: (a non- personnel) OR (a ship).

If the OR in CM was red and bold like you say then I'd agree. But 1e parsing is actually somewhat consistent. In this case it's non- (personnel or ship) specifically BECAUSE there's no big red OR.