This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
 
By SudenKapala (Suden Käpälä)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#554618
BanditKeith wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 1:24 pm
boromirofborg wrote: Tue May 25, 2021 12:09 pm 2. Overall I would say 1E has a lot of strange hidden information rules, many of which don't actually help gameplay. Personally, the only zones I would have hidden to both players are deck and seed piles. The ones that should be hidden to opponent are my hand, q's tent, cloaked ships. I'm not even convinced that not being able to look at opponents personnel most times is a good thing. I think it shifts the skills from strategic thinking to memory.
I've played a lot of card games and I can't think of a single one, even from this "early era" ccg design, that was so weird about hiding information about what cards are in play. Just utterly baffling to me.
Yes! This. (Emphasis added.) I was reading along to see if I agreed vehemently with thing; this is one.
Just show the whole away team. Don't have players waste time on who -- or what part of a card!! -- should remain hidden. Granted, many players can do that quickly; but some can't, and it feel like a huge unnecessary waste of time during each dilemma encounter.
Also, it does away with the discussions on who is allowed to verify what, when. :thumbsup: :twocents:
User avatar
 
By winterflames (Derek Marlar)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#554626
Mr.Sloan wrote: Tue May 25, 2021 5:24 pm Phase Cloak. Convert it to a card?
Wait, I don't follow this one.
What part of Phase Cloak is hard, hidden, or complicated?
Both Apnex and Phased Cloaking Device already tell you "(RANGE +4 while phased)" on their cards. The glossary entry literally just repeats the parenthetical remark with flowery prose and in story mode.

So, there is a card for that? And that card is the only method of doing that already?
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#554627
the part that cloaked ships cannot pass through Q´s Net and phased cloaked ships can.

Basicly the physical not existence in the universe for phased ships, while cloaked are still phyiscly in the universe.

https://www.trekcc.org/op/1e_rulebook/G ... asingcloak

And Rulebook:
"Cards with the Phasing Cloak special equipment may phase or dephase, which is exactly the same as cloaking, except phasing includes these additional effects:

You may not target your phased cards.
Phased ships may not move except by using RANGE. Phased personnel may not move except by beaming.
A phased ship may not land or dock. If a landed or docked ship phases, it immediately takes off or undocks.
Cards aboard a phased card may not be attacked or targeted by cards that are not on or aboard the same card (or vice versa). For example, a Tantalus Field played on a phased ship can target personnel aboard the same ship, but not other ships.
Phased cards are unaffected by most cards in play. For example, a phased ship is unaffected by Q-Net, but also cannot use Bajoran Wormhole. Only cards that affect all cards in play (such as Anti-Time Anomaly) can affect phased cards."

But I wonder if there is a way to outsorce and summarize it up on one card.... But still quite a lot of rules for phasing that appears only on 2 cards... (Apnex + [Art] Interphasing Cloak ).

Solution: A card like Engage Cloak for phased ships. phased cloaked ships/Personal are considered in stasis for all purposes but may be "unstasised" only by decloaked. Also those ships are moveable on the spaceline (without landing or docking).
 
By Borg King
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#554719
Just going to echo the "not allowed to look at cards" and dilemma resolution rules as top of the pops for required rules changes.

Unless it's you hand, draw deck, or a side deck there is no reason players shouldn't be able to see what cards the opponent has played. Those cards are "in play" and should be visible to both players unless a card specifically allows it to be hidden (ie; cloaked, hidden agenda). How much faster would a game go if player's didn't have to make sure all there cards are as hidden as much as possible or didn't have to remember where an opponent's card is now to make sure it's targeted correctly or what have you?

Dilemma resolution is also a lot of overhead as people have already pointed out, and making it streamlined to play out as it's written on the card as previously mentioned would remove a lot of barriers to new players trying to understand the game. I'm *still* playing certain dilemmas wrong and I've been playing since the Decipher days! One less hurdle for new players and smoother gameplay would be a great thing!

:borg:
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#554721
Borg King wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 8:24 pm Just going to echo the "not allowed to look at cards" and dilemma resolution rules as top of the pops for required rules changes.

Unless it's you hand, draw deck, or a side deck there is no reason players shouldn't be able to see what cards the opponent has played. Those cards are "in play" and should be visible to both players unless a card specifically allows it to be hidden (ie; cloaked, hidden agenda). How much faster would a game go if player's didn't have to make sure all there cards are as hidden as much as possible or didn't have to remember where an opponent's card is now to make sure it's targeted correctly or what have you?

Dilemma resolution is also a lot of overhead as people have already pointed out, and making it streamlined to play out as it's written on the card as previously mentioned would remove a lot of barriers to new players trying to understand the game. I'm *still* playing certain dilemmas wrong and I've been playing since the Decipher days! One less hurdle for new players and smoother gameplay would be a great thing!

:borg:
I think this goes too far. Why should you get to see who I have on my Outpost vs. Ship vs. Planet, etc. so you can come over and kill whoever is annoying you the most with ease?

Open discard piles? Sure. Open everything? Hell no. :thumbsdown:
 
By Borg King
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#554723
Armus wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 9:24 pm
Borg King wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 8:24 pm Just going to echo the "not allowed to look at cards" and dilemma resolution rules as top of the pops for required rules changes.

Unless it's you hand, draw deck, or a side deck there is no reason players shouldn't be able to see what cards the opponent has played. Those cards are "in play" and should be visible to both players unless a card specifically allows it to be hidden (ie; cloaked, hidden agenda). How much faster would a game go if player's didn't have to make sure all there cards are as hidden as much as possible or didn't have to remember where an opponent's card is now to make sure it's targeted correctly or what have you?

Dilemma resolution is also a lot of overhead as people have already pointed out, and making it streamlined to play out as it's written on the card as previously mentioned would remove a lot of barriers to new players trying to understand the game. I'm *still* playing certain dilemmas wrong and I've been playing since the Decipher days! One less hurdle for new players and smoother gameplay would be a great thing!

:borg:
I think this goes too far. Why should you get to see who I have on my Outpost vs. Ship vs. Planet, etc. so you can come over and kill whoever is annoying you the most with ease?

Open discard piles? Sure. Open everything? Hell no. :thumbsdown:
Fair; maybe not while cards are on a ship or an outpost or something else where they would be "inside" (and so out of sight) but if I'm attempting a mission (planet or space) then which personnel are in the attempt should be declared and laid out. Either your going to overcome the dilemmas or not; keeping your opponent in the dark about who's in the attempt or not it is a lot of unnecessary busy work and doesn't really add anything beneficial.

:borg:
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#554736
Armus wrote: Sun May 30, 2021 9:24 pm Why should you get to see who I have on my Outpost vs. Ship vs. Planet, etc. so you can come over and kill whoever is annoying you the most with ease?
1. Because with a good enough memory, I already know. You have to show me Ensign Bob when he reports, and I don't believe beaming is hidden information. So all we're doing is confirming game state.
User avatar
 
By Ausgang (Gerald Sieber)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E European Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#554739
AllenGould wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 9:53 am I don't believe beaming is hidden information.
I was checking this recently. Not thoroughly enough maybe or I overread it, but I'd appreciate if we get some more details about what kind of information regarding beaming is hidden (number of personnel/equipment, which ones etc.)? In the same vein, is the number of personnel/size of Away Team/crew when starting a mission attempt hidden information?
User avatar
 
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#554771
I thought of another one...

WHY can i only persona swap at the start of my turn? Personal swapping should be a regular game action (once per turn per persona) to make it actually more useful.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#554772
Takket wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 9:42 pm I thought of another one...

WHY can i only persona swap at the start of my turn? Personal swapping should be a regular game action (once per turn per persona) to make it actually more useful.
Plain, Simple Garak disagrees with this hot take...
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#554784
Heh heh, persona swaps shouldn't exist at all. That's one of my die-in-a-fire rules. Lots of the First Contact rules supplemental was great! But not all of it.

(NOTE: There is no effort underway, nor do I foresee an effort in the future, to get rid of persona swaps. [Bor] depend on them heavily, many people are fond of them, and they aren't creating any significant problems. Also, there are at least two people on the Rules Committee who would stop any effort cold even if I tried it. :) )
User avatar
 
By Boffo97 (Dave Hines)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Retired Moderator
#554786
I wouldn't get rid of persona swaps, but I think there's a better way to do them.

My idea has been some sort of Doorway that establishes a persona side deck if you seed it and you can put versions of personnel you already have in play into the side deck when you draw them, or lets you do a persona swap if played during your turn.

Right now, people don't do swaps much because if you even want to swap one card back and forth, the other version basically becomes dead weight in your hand. Something like this opens up story possibilities IMO.

:twocents:
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#554787
^ I like that idea, and it would solve my problem with persona swaps (rules cruft) by printing the whole mechanic on a card and making it optional.
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#554800
The persona swap rule is IMO not that difficult. Exchange at start of turn.

A bit tricky with dual personal, though.

The persona rule it selve is complicated, but I have no solution on how to simplify that.

The [Tac] rules could be outsorced on a card and described on the Battle Bridge Door, by removing the 2nd function from it.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#554805
BCSWowbagger wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 1:49 am
(NOTE: There is no effort underway, nor do I foresee an effort in the future, to get rid of persona swaps. [Bor] depend on them heavily, many people are fond of them, and they aren't creating any significant problems. Also, there are at least two people on the Rules Committee who would stop any effort cold even if I tried it. :) )
Image


OK, seriously - the problem isn't with the rule, it's with the personas. There just isn't enough reason to want to do the swap, except to cash in downloads - and that's an argument *against* making it easier.

I think the persona swap rule is probably one of the cleaner ones we have, tbh. Dual-personnel is a bit clunky, but that's a problem with dual personnel, not personas. (Which is another thing I'd add to my bonfire.)

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

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

1EFQ: Game of two halves

Or maybe keep your unsolicited snark to yo[…]

Vulcan Lander and its ability

What constrains this strategy is the number of c[…]