This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
Shipping Manager
By SirDan (Dan Hamman)
 - Shipping Manager
 -  
ibbles  Trek Masters Tribbles Champion 2023
#565402
Hey folks. Happy Friday!

A while back I posted about card on the OTF Ban list that we're looking at releasing back into the wild without changes. (If interested, the discussion is here.)

Thank you to everyone that participated, as it generated a lot of good points and a history lesson on Hexany. One of the topics that came up was other cards on the Ban List that may be a good candidate for return with no changes, and I think it is a good thing to talk about. Here's the current OTF Ban List.

Do you think there is a card on the OTF ban list that should be released "on parole" without any changes?

We'd consider letting one or more of these cards back into the OTF card pool and put it directly on the Watch List. Then after a few months, we'd "check in" on it to see how it was being used, its effect on the meta, etc. I know there are a few candidates (here's lookin' at you, Dix), but if there's anything you'd like to nominate, please post below.

Thanks again, and have a good weekend!
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#565405
-Dixon Hill, as discussed
-Persistent Individuality seems the oddest to be on the list at first glance, being banned because it was a WB preview card, and still being banned almost 2 years later. (So it hasn't been released yet?)
- Ceti Ell : The risk of a degenerate deck based on Khan and Ceti Eel is too high to allow this card to remain available for the upcoming World Championships in August. It feels like either the errata should have happened by now, or it should be unbanned until the risk is no longer theoretical.
- Anti-Time anomaly: As oof as the card is, the game is often too fast for this to matter now. I'd rather some modifications, but I do think the basic idea of a "board wipe" is a needed balance to the game on some level.
- Q's Planet : it doesn't say on the page why it's currently banned, and things that could slow the game down doesn't seem like a bad thing.
- Terraforming Station: seems like a card that doesn't need to be banned for power levels, but might need some strong tournament rules to define how it works. I don't feel one way or the other on this coming on or off, and would honestly prefer some errata to make it useful in the same game. I think banned should be primarily power related, and I don't see this being played.
- Subspace Schism: another card that doesn't say why it's banned. I'm guessing it's related to the five second time frame, but I don't see why it would be played.[/list]
 
By phaserihardlyknowher (Ben Daeuber)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#565408
Given the discussion last week, All Threes seems like a logical one. I'm in favor of more draw (and also more risks for large hands, while we're at it) and I'm still curious if people feel Hexany is still an overwhelmingly strong strategy.

Is it possible to get a write up of why some of these were banned if it's not already there? Some of them were offloaded into rules, some seem fairly obvious, but others I'm only speculating on. Scanner Interference, for example, seems OK with Atmospheric Ionization and Distortion Field nerfed, but I'm not sure when it was banned or why so I might be missing something.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#565409
Because I suspect no-one has thought about this one in ages: Red Alert.

In a world where you get 2-9000 free reports a turn anyway, is a card that requires a full card play to start up and uses your card play really above the curve anymore?
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#565410
AllenGould wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:33 pm Because I suspect no-one has thought about this one in ages: Red Alert.

In a world where you get 2-9000 free reports a turn anyway, is a card that requires a full card play to start up and uses your card play really above the curve anymore?
I think the problem with Red Alert is that you would be able to stack any and every card draw mechanism without having to worry about clogging your hand any longer. Most draw mechanisms these days have the drawback of not being able to play all the cards you draw. I don't want to imagine a world where we're getting more than 3 plays and draws a turn consistently. (3 is bad enough)
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#565411
JeBuS wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:38 pm
AllenGould wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:33 pm Because I suspect no-one has thought about this one in ages: Red Alert.

In a world where you get 2-9000 free reports a turn anyway, is a card that requires a full card play to start up and uses your card play really above the curve anymore?
I think the problem with Red Alert is that you would be able to stack any and every card draw mechanism without having to worry about clogging your hand any longer. Most draw mechanisms these days have the drawback of not being able to play all the cards you draw. I don't want to imagine a world where we're getting more than 3 plays and draws a turn consistently. (3 is bad enough)
Now, I'm imagining a world that doesn't do any supporting cards. Which means it's a "play engine" that you can't seed, can't download, have to draw into (or use a good ol' fashioned Tent to fetch!), then have to spend a normal card play to get down, and then *next* turn you can play stuff (assuming your opponent didn't just Kevin/Quinn the thing.)

I'm not saying that's not good. I'm just not sure it's still broken.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#565412
Is it possible to get a write up of why some of these were banned if it's not already there?
Yep. Please enjoy: Why Was That Card Banned? 2019 Edition
Do you think there is a card on the OTF ban list that should be released "on parole" without any changes?
Ranked from "yes definitely parole this card yesterday" to "this is a little out there but I think it's plausible":

Dixon Hill

Although Dix has always had vocal critics, more department staffers wanted to keep Dixon Hill legal than wanted to ban him. So why'd he get banned anyway? The decisive argument that carried the day was that banning him would give us a chance to "quickly" give Dixon Hill errata, which would make this Ultra-Rare card printable, because not all cards were printable back then. Well, that's just about the biggest backfire in the history of the ban list: it's been 11 years since Dix was banned, 8 years since all cards were made printable, 2 years of off-and-on talk about paroling him, and poor Dixon Hill is STILL stuck on the ban list. #FreeDixonNow

Smooth As An Android Bottom

...but cautiously. This card was banned for being part of "New Hexany," which depended on pre-errata Beyond the Subatomic. That's no longer a concern. To be fair: Ex-Hexany cards should come back into the pool one at a time, no faster than one every six months, just to make sure we didn't accidentally rebuild the Hexany. But there's no real reason to believe this card is dangerous now, and the reason it remains on the ban list seems to be sheer status quo bias.

What Does God Need With A Starship?

This was banned because Design was annoyed about having to design around it, not because it ever broke the game. Design said that banning it would allow them to develop cooler ships. I have not seen persuasive evidence for this in the seven years since WDGNWAS? was banned.

Tox Uthat

This card was banned for what I have come to conclude were really stupid reasons: a single, fairly isolated playgroup (with a very unique local meta) complained that Supernova was wrecking their local meta. That playgroup had an representative on the Rules Committee of 2011, though, and was able to convince a narrow majority of the Rules Committee (which controlled the ban list back then) that, since Black Hole and Sheliak were already banned, Tox+Supernova should be gone, too. (NOTE: Black Hole was successfully re-released with no changes a couple years ago.) There were, to my knowledge, no other complaints from any other playgroups anywhere in the world.

Supernovas genuinely scare my butt off, and Kevin Jaeger's saber-rattling about what he would do to me with them makes me even more scared. (He has indeed slaughtered many of us with Black Hole since it returned to the game.) But I'm inclined to parole Tox Uthat just because the reasons for banning it were so bad. If we re-release it and it turns out to be broken, okay, then re-ban it. That's why this is a "parole" and not a "full pardon." But right now, today, we have no real evidence that Supernova is broken -- except in a single isolated meta from 2011.

Anti-Time Anomaly

Yeah, I'm as surprised as you are. But Rachmaninoff made a good case here that ATA would actually be a good addition to the meta in today's low-turns, high-pace game. There's a good chance it would get rebanned before the end of its parole, but we'd learn a lot about both ATA and the game in that time -- and, if nothing else, that would make errata for it a heck of a lot easier!

Because I suspect no-one has thought about this one in ages: Red Alert.
I allllllllmost put this on my list today, but then it clicked with me that we kind of HAVE a balanced modern-day Red Alert!. It's called Staging Ground, and it's top-tier without being Tier 0 Broken City.

I think if you put "You may not play cards for free" on Red Alert!, that might well do the trick, especially since you have to draw and play it. But I'm not QUITE copacetic about letting it back with no changes... especially because I suspect Red Alert! would completely displace Staging Ground.

Scanner interference. I've soap boxed about it before..
I want this to come back without a [Ref] icon or its Scan/Full-Planet Scan hate (since Scan/FPS have already been nerfed through the ground into the Earth's mantle). That's the only reason SI isn't on my list.
 
By phaserihardlyknowher (Ben Daeuber)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#565413
AllenGould wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:46 pm Now, I'm imagining a world that doesn't do any supporting cards. Which means it's a "play engine" that you can't seed, can't download, have to draw into (or use a good ol' fashioned Tent to fetch!), then have to spend a normal card play to get down, and then *next* turn you can play stuff (assuming your opponent didn't just Kevin/Quinn the thing.)

I'm not saying that's not good. I'm just not sure it's still broken.
I don't want to derail this, but you have hit on one of my big wish list items for this game: a generic play engine. I completely get why play engines are limited and themed and I agree that they should be and by and large enjoy the flavor that brings to the game. But there are times where I'd really like to mix things up a bit, old school and this seems like a pretty decent compromise. Perhaps if you were unable to play any [RC] or [WC] or similar? But that's an errata and a discussion for another thread, I'd guess.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#565415
boromirofborg wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:24 pm -Persistent Individuality seems the oddest to be on the list at first glance, being banned because it was a WB preview card, and still being banned almost 2 years later. (So it hasn't been released yet?)
- Ceti Ell : The risk of a degenerate deck based on Khan and Ceti Eel is too high to allow this card to remain available for the upcoming World Championships in August. It feels like either the errata should have happened by now, or it should be unbanned until the risk is no longer theoretical.
- Anti-Time anomaly: As oof as the card is, the game is often too fast for this to matter now. I'd rather some modifications, but I do think the basic idea of a "board wipe" is a needed balance to the game on some level.
These three are absolute no without serious and I mean serious errata. Absolutely nothing has changed about why they were banned - namely that they each contribute to board wiping. This isn't MTG, this game in its current form cannot handle board wipes.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#565416
BCSWowbagger wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:49 pm
What Does God Need With A Starship?

This was banned because Design was annoyed about having to design around it, not because it ever broke the game. Design said that banning it would allow them to develop cooler ships. I have not seen any evidence for this in the past seven years since WDGNWAS? was banned.
Problem is, you can't make cool ships until you know what the new text is. I think the lesson is that banning a card doesn't open up design space - only errata does.

Personally, I like God's "here's two great things, opponent picks the one you get" phrasing - I think we should do more. But the two choices here might be just a bit *too* good - particularly on the opponent's turn.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#565419
AllenGould wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:00 pm
BCSWowbagger wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:49 pm
What Does God Need With A Starship?

This was banned because Design was annoyed about having to design around it, not because it ever broke the game. Design said that banning it would allow them to develop cooler ships. I have not seen any evidence for this in the past seven years since WDGNWAS? was banned.
Problem is, you can't make cool ships until you know what the new text is. I think the lesson is that banning a card doesn't open up design space - only errata does.

Personally, I like God's "here's two great things, opponent picks the one you get" phrasing - I think we should do more. But the two choices here might be just a bit *too* good - particularly on the opponent's turn.
I've been on some Design teams in the past few years. Perhaps my experience was unique, but at no point has anyone in a meeting said, "Oh, here's a neat idea for a ship but oh shoot we can't make that ship because we don't know the future state of WDGNWAS."

If anyone had said that, I would have replied: don't worry about WDGNWAS, it's banned, that's why we banned it, and whoever gives it errata is going to have to account for our new card, not the other way around.

Perhaps it's my own lack of imagination at work -- but I have been trying to puzzle out for years what these "cool ships blocked by WDGNWAS" were, and I've not come up with anything.

YMMV, of course. You in particular were in Design before I got there, are still there after my departure, and have been on way more sets than I have.
Personally, I like God's "here's two great things, opponent picks the one you get" phrasing - I think we should do more. But the two choices here might be just a bit *too* good - particularly on the opponent's turn.
Thing is, it was never that good. Looked good, but it was surprisingly difficult to play this at a time when it actually gave opponent a genuinely hard choice. In most game states, there's an optimal choice for the opponent to make, and it leaves the WDGNWAS player holding the short end of the stick. But the "overpowered WDGNWAS" deck has never been anything more than theorycraft -- and this was acknowledged at the time of its ban.

You know how you're always saying that speed solvers remain dominant over time because speed solver players are very effective lobbyists for banning balanced interference cards they simply don't like and don't want to have to tech against? WDGNWAS is exhibit A.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#565421
BCSWowbagger wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:49 pm
Is it possible to get a write up of why some of these were banned if it's not already there?
Yep. Please enjoy: Why Was That Card Banned? 2019 Edition
Do you think there is a card on the OTF ban list that should be released "on parole" without any changes?
Ranked from "yes definitely parole this card yesterday" to "this is a little out there but I think it's plausible":

Dixon Hill

Although Dix has always had vocal critics, more department staffers wanted to keep Dixon Hill legal than wanted to ban him. So why'd he get banned anyway? The decisive argument that carried the day was that banning him would give us a chance to "quickly" give Dixon Hill errata, which would make this Ultra-Rare card printable, because not all cards were printable back then. Well, that's just about the biggest backfire in the history of the ban list: it's been 11 years since Dix was banned, 8 years since all cards were made printable, 2 years of off-and-on talk about paroling him, and poor Dixon Hill is STILL stuck on the ban list. #FreeDixonNow

Smooth As An Android Bottom

...but cautiously. This card was banned for being part of "New Hexany," which depended on pre-errata Beyond the Subatomic. That's no longer a concern. To be fair: Ex-Hexany cards should come back into the pool one at a time, no faster than one every six months, just to make sure we didn't accidentally rebuild the Hexany. But there's no real reason to believe this card is dangerous now, and the reason it remains on the ban list seems to be sheer status quo bias.

What Does God Need With A Starship?

This was banned because Design was annoyed about having to design around it, not because it ever broke the game. Design said that banning it would allow them to develop cooler ships. I have not seen persuasive evidence for this in the seven years since WDGNWAS? was banned.

Tox Uthat

This card was banned for what I have come to conclude were really stupid reasons: a single, fairly isolated playgroup (with a very unique local meta) complained that Supernova was wrecking their local meta. That playgroup had an representative on the Rules Committee of 2011, though, and was able to convince a narrow majority of the Rules Committee (which controlled the ban list back then) that, since Black Hole and Sheliak were already banned, Tox+Supernova should be gone, too. (NOTE: Black Hole was successfully re-released with no changes a couple years ago.) There were, to my knowledge, no other complaints from any other playgroups anywhere in the world.

Supernovas genuinely scare my butt off, and Kevin Jaeger's saber-rattling about what he would do to me with them makes me even more scared. (He has indeed slaughtered many of us with Black Hole since it returned to the game.) But I'm inclined to parole Tox Uthat just because the reasons for banning it were so bad. If we re-release it and it turns out to be broken, okay, then re-ban it. That's why this is a "parole" and not a "full pardon." But right now, today, we have no real evidence that Supernova is broken -- except in a single isolated meta from 2011.

Anti-Time Anomaly

Yeah, I'm as surprised as you are. But Rachmaninoff made a good case here that ATA would actually be a good addition to the meta in today's low-turns, high-pace game. There's a good chance it would get rebanned before the end of its parole, but we'd learn a lot about both ATA and the game in that time -- and, if nothing else, that would make errata for it a heck of a lot easier!

Because I suspect no-one has thought about this one in ages: Red Alert.
I allllllllmost put this on my list today, but then it clicked with me that we kind of HAVE a balanced modern-day Red Alert!. It's called Staging Ground, and it's top-tier without being Tier 0 Broken City.

I think if you put "You may not play cards for free" on Red Alert!, that might well do the trick, especially since you have to draw and play it. But I'm not QUITE copacetic about letting it back with no changes... especially because I suspect Red Alert! would completely displace Staging Ground.

Scanner interference. I've soap boxed about it before..
I want this to come back without a [Ref] icon or its Scan/Full-Planet Scan hate (since Scan/FPS have already been nerfed through the ground into the Earth's mantle). That's the only reason SI isn't on my list.
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 already did that in 2e and it's partly why I don't play 2e anymore.

If you have to ask yourself "how bad could it be?" the answer isn't one you want. This game is supposed to be fun and playing out 9 dudes just to get ATA'd is not fun.

Just say no to:
ATA
Persistent Individuality
Tox Uthat
Ceti eel
Horghan
Romulan minefield
What does God need with a starship

To your immediate point above james, I am NOT a speed solver player and I'm telling you these are all NPE factories that I don't want to play with...
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to @Takket ! :D :thumbsup: […]

Opponents turn

Remodulation