This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#565423
I think we also keep some players away with an overly-aggressive ban list that says they can't play with cards they love, for no better reason than "someone in 2011 got mad about losing to it."

It's a balancing act.

And we all know that Kevin Jaeger is going to obliterate us anyway. You slaughtered a regional with Sniper one time, and then you slaughtered a regional with Dial Martok For Murder just this year. (There should be achievements for obliterating people using the least-expected cards.)

So "How bad can it be?" is a very relative question when it comes to decks piloted by you.

On balance, I'm still glad we brought back Black Hole, even though you devastated people with it, and I don't think the added deck diversity drove people away. (Are you glad we brought back Black Hole? Or do you think it should have stayed banned like Tox?)

You've sold me on Anti-Time Anomaly (which was on my bubble anyway), but not Tox or WDGNWAS?.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#565426
Hoss-Drone wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:12 pm This game is supposed to be fun and playing out 9 dudes just to get ATA'd is not fun.
You make some great points, and part of it comes back to the questions that are at least in part theory based:

- What is the direction of the game?
- Is balance the same as fun
- If not, what's more important?
- What do people really want out of the game?

I see this in pretty much all the games I play/have played over the years. Some times the thing that is best for the platonic idea of a healthy game is also directly counter to what people find fun.

Personal example; I ran a MTG cube for a dedicated playgroup for several years. I started off as a powered cube (running the busted cards like Black Lotus, Oxen) because that's what I thought a cube was.

As I learned more about good game design and watched the cube evolve, I wanted to take them out because they did lead to busted games, and because it warped the draft.

My players protested. To them, they wanted them because the broken stuff is part of what made it fun for them.

___________________

So to your point, even though I personally think the game really needs reset buttons like ATA, and probably faster ones to be a "better" more "balanced" game, if the majority (or even a large minority) of people don't find reset buttons fun, then what's the point of balance if it's not enjoyable.
(And you are very right, the game is too small to afford losing people over a cleaner ban list.)

On the counter point, sometimes what players complain about as NPEs are closer to vegetables that they need for a healthy game to exist. To your point about playing 9 dudes out into a wipe isn't fun... I personally wouldn't have an issue with it. It tells me not to over extend, I shuffle up and play again. ATA might be a danger point because there are ways to make it one sided.

For some people, a fun game is playing out everyone and seeing how many missions they can get thru. For others, it's engaging in back and forth battles, or seeing how many people they can assimilate. Is interaction a benefit, or a curse. (I'm on the side of, if the only cards of yours that I interact with in a game are the missions I fly past and your dilemmas, that's not enough for a fun game.)
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#565427
Hoss-Drone wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:12 pm This game is supposed to be fun and playing out 9 dudes just to get ATA'd is not fun.
But is it really different from playing 9 dudes and getting wiped out in a mission attempt, or a Borg drive-by?
 
By phaserihardlyknowher (Ben Daeuber)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#565428
Hoss-Drone wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:12 pm Here's the problem James, this community is already so small that releasing super npe cards out on even a probation period is just going to drive people away. Saying "well let's put this out there and see what innovative deck builders like Kevin can do with it" just turns me into a villian when I do show up and nuke my opponent into oblivion and then I feel bad and just get mad at you for making me do it and having ppl mad at me for doing it.
I've never played Kevin, so this isn't aimed at him, but this is sort of how I feel (from the other side, obviously).

The knowledge required to prep and play a deck is already overwhelming, and then to have your careful board prep blown up on turn 3 by some janky card that doesn't really advance anyone's strategy is frustrating and demoralizing. This isn't meant to say that someone who's better shouldn't win, but if your opponent has something that clears the board they've likely prepped a good workaround for it as well (so perhaps it does advance their strategy), so you are just left watching, which is bad (see also: The Devil). If your opponent did prep a response to it, that also means they didn't really ever put themselves on the line for that strategy. A battle deck is annoying to play against but it also requires your opponent to make a sacrifice, and I don't think that's true of ATA or similar.

I guess my general rule of thumb is: if both players played this strategy, would the game be fun? For all of the cards mentioned, I think the answer is no.
BCSWowbagger wrote:I think we also keep some players away with an overly-aggressive ban list that says they can't play with cards they love, for no better reason than "someone in 2011 got mad about losing to it."
I'm definitely in favor of a ban list. But it's also healthy to revisit and say "is the reason still true in the current meta?" I think many players who don't complain loudly likely just stop playing, however, and I'm not sure what's worse.

EDIT: What would be great is to have a large enough player base to accommodate a variety of formats. MtG has this and I suspect it keeps a lot of people in the game since they can likely find players for whatever flavor they want. I personally wouldn't want ATA to pop up in a tournament, but I can see how a "vintage" even could be fun.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#565430
AllenGould wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:43 pm But is it really different from playing 9 dudes and getting wiped out in a mission attempt, or a Borg drive-by?
In theory, no. In practice, people seem to feel there is in many, many games.

In Magic, for example, people seem to get far more upset if a creature is countered vs getting killed immediately. In practice, it's the same (assuming the creature has no triggers), but a significant number of people feel it's different.

in this case, I would also say that mission attempts and Borg drive bys *feel* as if you have more agency to avoid, where ATA just happens.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#565431
phaserihardlyknowher wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:50 pm EDIT: What would be great is to have a large enough player base to accommodate a variety of formats. MtG has this and I suspect it keeps a lot of people in the game since they can likely find players for whatever flavor they want. I personally wouldn't want ATA to pop up in a tournament, but I can see how a "vintage" even could be fun.
Very true, and also a large factor is, if I play Magic, I can easily play between 6-100 games a week with little to no effort on my part, so if a game, or even 10% of games are negative, it gets forgotten soon. For most STCCG players, I'd bet this might be the only game they play that week, or one of a few if at a tournament, so it's a bigger impact.

There's things I'll gladly play at mid level tournaments that are fun, that I wouldn't play at local tournaments because I want others to enjoy just as much, and things I'd play in FNM that I wouldn't play at my friend's house on Tuesdays because one is at least quasi-competitive, and the other is just chilling.

because of the lower player bast, STCCG has to be all things for all people much more so. Excellent points.
User avatar
 
By geraldkw
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#565466
Just do errata.

1. Errata'd cards will be playtested the same as new cards so they will have a similar chance of breaking the game to newly designed cards.

2. It's fun to see what the errata team comes up with.
User avatar
 
By Enabran
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
2E Austrian National Second Runner-Up 2022
#565480
Ok, here is something else. A little inconsequence with the card Anti-Time Anomaly.

4 cards are mentioning this card in their gametext: Temporal Wake, Persistence of Memory, Writ of Accountability and Anti-Time Anomaly itself.
The first 3 write the cardname "Anti-Time Anomaly" in the "right" way with first letter of each word in capital. But the card Anti-Time Anomaly itself writes it "anti-time anomaly"; all in lower case.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#565486
Not to make a judgment on Tox Uthat specifically, just that Artifacts in particular seem to be in a state where they're waiting for certain decisions to be made about the game. Artifacts are described in the Premiere rule booklet as "These cards represent rare objects found at mission locations. Artifacts give players immense and special powers." That sounds amazing... or maybe that sounds terrible?

Is there a place for tossing nukes and pressuring the game to a conclusion, or--after setting up camp and getting comfortable--should things stay on the down low? Does the game even have a way of supporting over-the-top cards, for example by having cards respond to the early, mid, or late game? Maybe figuring some of these out would make power level stuff easier to answer.

Anyway, I don't think I can pick a card to parole, just enthused about the ban list possibly getting a little shorter.
User avatar
 
By PantsOfTheTalShiar (Jason Tang)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#566016
Hoss-Drone wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:12 pm Just say no to:
ATA
Persistent Individuality
Tox Uthat
Ceti eel
Horghan
Romulan minefield
What does God need with a starship
I am broadly in agreement with Kevin's posts in this thread; to suggest that the cards quoted above can be unbanned in the current environment is to overlook just how badly the 1E player community hates anything approaching a control deck.

Part of that's is what boromir and phaser talk about regarding competitive and casual players having to play together, but there also just aren't good forms of counterplay (and counter-counterplay, and counter-counter-counterplay, etc.) for those kinds of decks.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#569290
any news on the topic?
im still convinced ATA has to get free.
its not a board wipe, its a board wipe thats telegraphed 3 turns in advance and gives you plenty of time to adjust your playstyle or find an answer.
problem is, card would need an errata that adds a countdown anyway

maybe we dont need a hardlock control deck, but cc shouldnt give in to streamline speedsolver and allow them to drop all defense.

Persistent Individuality seems completely out of place, as its just another dilemma that kills people. and the argument against ssm was those reqs are ubiquitous

Tox Uthat and horgahn - essentially banned the artifact card type from the game. on the other hand they snowball way too hard.

What does God need with a starship -opponents choice cards can never be too powerful

red alert - dont get the argument that its a card play, when it gives you infinite card plays lol

Dixon Hill- sounds like he shouldve never been on the list in the first place. i get the cc is slow, but 10 years slow?
Last edited by Ensign Q on Mon Jan 10, 2022 6:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#569292
boromirofborg wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 6:13 pm
phaserihardlyknowher wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:50 pm EDIT: What would be great is to have a large enough player base to accommodate a variety of formats. MtG has this and I suspect it keeps a lot of people in the game since they can likely find players for whatever flavor they want. I personally wouldn't want ATA to pop up in a tournament, but I can see how a "vintage" even could be fun.
Very true, and also a large factor is, if I play Magic, I can easily play between 6-100 games a week with little to no effort on my part, so if a game, or even 10% of games are negative, it gets forgotten soon. For most STCCG players, I'd bet this might be the only game they play that week, or one of a few if at a tournament, so it's a bigger impact.

There's things I'll gladly play at mid level tournaments that are fun, that I wouldn't play at local tournaments because I want others to enjoy just as much, and things I'd play in FNM that I wouldn't play at my friend's house on Tuesdays because one is at least quasi-competitive, and the other is just chilling.

because of the lower player bast, STCCG has to be all things for all people much more so. Excellent points.
maybe the playerbase is tiny because you alienated all playstyles and turned the game into a one trick pony solver meta.
no control decks
no combo decks
hardly any battle
people like options
but its too late now, theyre gone and never come back
BCSWowbagger wrote:
I think we also keep some players away with an overly-aggressive ban list that says they can't play with cards they love, for no better reason than "someone in 2011 got mad about losing to it."
more like someone in 1999. ie hexany

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[…]