This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
  • 122 posts
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#552541
Mr.Sloan wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:51 pm i need to work on me anyway.
Don't we all.

I mean this sincerely: I wish you the best in whatever self-improvement you choose to pursue.
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#552543
Armus wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:59 pm I meant it when I said I was done with Staging Ground.
@Boffo97 Yeah the personal rant is over.

And i am starting with Staging Ground because i love the concept. I am playing 101 devils in my deck to get him banned so that i can play staging ground ;)

So sorry @edgeofhearing no more drama entertainment here. Some comedy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGxG7QmPQ44
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#552544
Mr.Sloan wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:10 pm I am playing 101 devils in my deck to get him banned so that i can play staging ground ;)
Okay, but you have to call the deck "Everything Is The Devil To You, Mama!" ;)
User avatar
 
By sexecutioner (Niall Matthew)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
1E World Runner-Up 2023
1E European Continental Semi-Finalist 2023
1E British National Second Runner-Up 2023
#552545
Now that it's no longer personal, can we make it professional?

Sykes/Sloan, hire me as your booker for the match of the year, and we can make $$$

:wink:
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#552550
DarkSabre wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 12:36 pm
stressedoutatumc wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:48 am I think the best frame for this argument is actually Memory Wipe. My take is that it was banned because it only grief's an opponent and ultimately lock their deck out. Killing a treaty is really no different. If you plan your deck around a treaty, then as soon as it's gone, you are boned.

Yeah, I get the argument that you should plan for that, but that wasn't a winning argument for Memory Wipe. Imagine telling someone..."well, you could get memory wiped, so it's your job to stock all the counters and maybe plan your mission set so you can complete them non-aligned." That's what some people are saying in regards to the Devil. Yeah, you better stock against this one possibility because it really screws your deck without acknowledging the broken nature of the card, itself.
Ah, but what you think isn't true. Memory Wipe was playtested and cannot be used to lock out a deck. It might take a little bit of inventiveness but it isn't the case at all.

There has so far been NO DECK released to anyone (especially myself as a Playtest Manager) since the 'alarm over Memory Wipe' was brought up. It is based on theory craft and ever since Obsession was released I have been asking for a deck design that proves it and no one has done so.
I meant it more in the sense that one card, ala memory wipe or the devil, causes such a disruptive rift in the gameplay of the deck that you have to be prepared to counter just that one thing...or else. I think that's why memory wipe was banned (and it should be). The devil causes the same....counter me or else for treaty decks. It's actually the reason I don't play them.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#552555
DarkSabre wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 12:38 pm
HoodieDM wrote: So good feedback. Design will look into helping.
I hope so. I'll say again: Counters being pushed out of the game is what is leading to many of these issues.
I've played enough MtG to know that if you really want players to not play with you, you play a bunch of "counterspells".

Counters only work in mtg bc the fast decks are fast enough to get under them. We don't have that mechanism in 1e bc the opponent still has to face dilemmas also. So the counters that exist have to balance accordingly and imho they are right where they should be now. They either cost you points limiting their use OR they cost you seed slots/card plays (computer crash) which are very valuable.

Play dudes, ships and go is still the tried and true method and the verbs are typically not game breaking anymore so playing counters is less important. This is a good thing. Counters should be a scalpel not a sword. The devil is a sword that cuts off the head of your opponent. That's not fun gameplay and saying that the response should be stock more unfun gameplay is a bad idea long term.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#552556
stressedoutatumc wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:06 pm I meant it more in the sense that one card, ala memory wipe or the devil, causes such a disruptive rift in the gameplay of the deck that you have to be prepared to counter just that one thing...or else. I think that's why memory wipe was banned (and it should be). The devil causes the same....counter me or else for treaty decks. It's actually the reason I don't play them.
The difference, at least in my mind, is that you know whether you're vulnerable to Devil or not - that's a trade off you can choose to make during deck construction. And stocking a Devil is a bet as well - a good bet in the current meta to be sure, but a bet none the less.

Memory Wipe (and old Q bypass, etc) flip that logic - the person stocking it takes no risk, and it almost always will work. Meanwhile, the opponent didn't do anything to open themselves up to it, but has to stock cards just in case, even though they're not doing anything to gain an advantage and thus justify the weakness.
 
By HoodieDM
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#552562
And a lot goes away if we'd allow Kevin, Amandas, & Q2 to be used w/o costing us game winning mechanics (obviously by putting a limit usage of 2-3 on them) which if my opponent stocks more nasty tactics, eventually they'll get through as I, myself, only have a limited amt of protection.
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#552576
Boffo97 wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:13 pm
Mr.Sloan wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:10 pm I am playing 101 devils in my deck to get him banned so that i can play staging ground ;)
Okay, but you have to call the deck "Everything Is The Devil To You, Mama!" ;)
It has already a name: "Beyond good and (d)evil". Yeah it also includes 175 beyond the subatomic...
someone unbanned beyond...
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#552578
sexecutioner wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:24 pm Now that it's no longer personal, can we make it professional?

Sykes/Sloan, hire me as your booker for the match of the year, and we can make $$$

:wink:
sorry all my anger has disapeared. don´t know why. guess thats how feelings work :shifty: :D
Hoss-Drone wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:23 pm The devil is a sword that cuts off the head of your opponent. That's not fun gameplay and saying that the response should be stock more unfun gameplay is a bad idea long term.
yeah the idea of "once ech turn, once per game etc." is a good idea for most cards.
having kevin going to point area etc. is a simular idea, that i like.
The Devil without once per game limit was an accident waiting to happen. With Seb, i had some times where none of us uses FED Treatys/Decks. Before Classic-Themeds and ds9-themeds. Because in all star fed decks you can kill a fed treaty twice in turn 1. it effected our friendly matches, it was just a matter of time until an unlimited devil will become .. maybe OP, but surly NPE.
Last edited by Mr.Sloan on Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
 
By DarkSabre (Austin Chandler)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#552579
KazonPADD wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:03 pm Austin, have you actually asked the balance team to look at a ban/errata to Oof if you consider lack of counterplays such an issue to gameplay? If so, what was their conclusion?
I have asked (along with a hard look at Counters in general) and was told that it wasn't a concern, but that is pre-balance team. I have been pushing the subject for over a year about relooking at Counters.
User avatar
 
By DarkSabre (Austin Chandler)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#552580
AllenGould wrote: Memory Wipe (and old Q bypass, etc) flip that logic - the person stocking it takes no risk, and it almost always will work. Meanwhile, the opponent didn't do anything to open themselves up to it, but has to stock cards just in case, even though they're not doing anything to gain an advantage and thus justify the weakness.
Don't equate memory wipe for that. There is absolutely no data that memory wipe deserved to be banned. As of today its been almost two years since I have asked for an example as to why Memory Wipe is an issue & a decklist to be tested. I have been completely ignored. Even when I was Playtest Manager this was still ignored. Theorycraft should NEVER cause a card to be banned.
User avatar
 
By DarkSabre (Austin Chandler)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#552585
Hoss-Drone wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:23 pm
DarkSabre wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 12:38 pm
HoodieDM wrote: So good feedback. Design will look into helping.
I hope so. I'll say again: Counters being pushed out of the game is what is leading to many of these issues.
I've played enough MtG to know that if you really want players to not play with you, you play a bunch of "counterspells".

Counters only work in mtg bc the fast decks are fast enough to get under them. We don't have that mechanism in 1e bc the opponent still has to face dilemmas also. So the counters that exist have to balance accordingly and imho they are right where they should be now. They either cost you points limiting their use OR they cost you seed slots/card plays (computer crash) which are very valuable.

Play dudes, ships and go is still the tried and true method and the verbs are typically not game breaking anymore so playing counters is less important. This is a good thing. Counters should be a scalpel not a sword. The devil is a sword that cuts off the head of your opponent. That's not fun gameplay and saying that the response should be stock more unfun gameplay is a bad idea long term.
That's a bad connection in comparing counterspells from MTG to Counters in STCCG.

In my experience where counters are in STCCG is not a good situation.

I agree Counters should be a scalpel. I don't think any of the counters in the game are a sword unless they get rid of a dilemma easily (and one can argue the pros and cons on that).

The game has changed a lot. I do think the right counters could help slow down the game. However, losing points at the speed of a Ref card is ridiculous. For me to not be able to on occasion counter an Invasive-Beam In, or Interrogation, or Parallax Arguer, or many other cards that won't break the game is a little disheatening. It makes it so easy to just feel like 'unless my opponent is going to battle me my deck is only going to have issues with dilemmas I run into because they aren't going to play cards that are going to hamper mine'.
User avatar
 
By DarkSabre (Austin Chandler)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#552586
Mr.Sloan wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:08 pm
DarkSabre wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:05 pm Theorycraft should NEVER cause a card to be banned.
Yes, sometimes it should. :cross:
Um no, that isn't good game design. And even if you ban via theorycraft then you should be able to back it up. So far its been almost two years and NO ONE has backed up the theorycraft behind the ban for Memory Wipe.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
Question for noob

Awesome. Thanks everyone for all the help!

Only works when RS is played after AIV. This is be[…]

Still a few weeks left to get registered for the[…]

Hey all, we are running a "Warum-up" fo[…]