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
#577748
Armus wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 2:41 pm Space is Dangerous. Bad stuff happens, especially to an unprepared player. That's not a "negative player experience," that's a "player experience" and one that can be learned from and used as a lesson to improve one's deckbuilding and play skills.

The former is bad and needs to be balanced out of the game. The latter is integral and if you muck around trying to "balance" out everything bad that could happen, you end up with a very boring game that nobody wants to play.
I like this summary.

(Although this meta discussion has taken us rather far afield from the [Ref] topic -- where, as others have pointed out, the drive to reduce them comes from geographically all over the world, not from Americans in particular.)
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#577749
BCSWowbagger wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 3:04 pm
Armus wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 2:41 pm Space is Dangerous. Bad stuff happens, especially to an unprepared player. That's not a "negative player experience," that's a "player experience" and one that can be learned from and used as a lesson to improve one's deckbuilding and play skills.

The former is bad and needs to be balanced out of the game. The latter is integral and if you muck around trying to "balance" out everything bad that could happen, you end up with a very boring game that nobody wants to play.
I like this summary.

(Although this meta discussion has taken us rather far afield from the [Ref] topic -- where, as others have pointed out, the drive to reduce them comes from geographically all over the world, not from Americans in particular.)
Yep, I think that was me @Armus.

As far as [Ref]'s go, if most (if not all) [Ref] are silver bullets to prevent an auto-loss to a particular card or group of cards, then perhaps the goal should be to fix those cards in order to make the [Ref] no longer necessary thus allowing us to reduce/eliminate the [Ref] pile? If that is the goal, it will take time but we need to start somewhere, and maybe we start with Defend Homeworld, maybe we start with another [Ref], but we have to start somewhere. If that is not the goal, then there may still be some merit in removing [Ref] from DH, which is what this thread is for; discussing DH and whether it needs the [Ref] anymore.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#577751
Professor Scott wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 3:43 pm
BCSWowbagger wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 3:04 pm
Armus wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 2:41 pm Space is Dangerous. Bad stuff happens, especially to an unprepared player. That's not a "negative player experience," that's a "player experience" and one that can be learned from and used as a lesson to improve one's deckbuilding and play skills.

The former is bad and needs to be balanced out of the game. The latter is integral and if you muck around trying to "balance" out everything bad that could happen, you end up with a very boring game that nobody wants to play.
I like this summary.

(Although this meta discussion has taken us rather far afield from the [Ref] topic -- where, as others have pointed out, the drive to reduce them comes from geographically all over the world, not from Americans in particular.)
Yep, I think that was me @Armus.

As far as [Ref]'s go, if most (if not all) [Ref] are silver bullets to prevent an auto-loss to a particular card or group of cards, then perhaps the goal should be to fix those cards in order to make the [Ref] no longer necessary thus allowing us to reduce/eliminate the [Ref] pile? If that is the goal, it will take time but we need to start somewhere, and maybe we start with Defend Homeworld, maybe we start with another [Ref], but we have to start somewhere. If that is not the goal, then there may still be some merit in removing [Ref] from DH, which is what this thread is for; discussing DH and whether it needs the [Ref] anymore.
Um... we started years ago with OTF and Fair Play, The Big Picture, and Intermix Ratio.

Then it got added to with the General Quarters and You Are A Monument rule.

So really the CC's position on [Ref] is twofold:

[SD] Rule-ify the ones they like
[SD] Errata the problem cards of the ones they don't.

Both prongs of that attack have served to reduce the need, power, and relevance of the [Ref] mechanic. How well that's been done, or whether the effort has made the game better, are opinions that I'll leave as an exercise to the reader.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#577752
Armus wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:48 pm You run something that loses to Writ and your opponent drops Writ on you, you can't get mad that you got Writ'd - you really did bring it on yourself.
I'm not suggesting that you didn't deserve to get Writ'd if you cheesed, I'm suggesting that it's unthematic and possibly unsporting for Q the Referee to be a secret strategy (hidden agenda).

Q the Referee is a police force. I come from an ostensibly open and free democratic society. My values are such that I believe in law and order, and that perhaps police have a place in our society, but that secret police absolutely have no business being a part of our society. I'd rather Q the Referee walk around in broad daylight with a badge.

In addition, it would get rid of some of the "timing" jank that I was replying to, and not give the first player a potential advantage. And not give veterans an advantage for knowing that, technically, the best strategic action to take is always to flip your referee. Imagine how frustrating it must be for a newer player to not flip first thing, then have their veteran opponent slip in that Scan, only for the newer player to go "Aha! I have the [Ref] card for that!"....and then only for the veteran player to go "Aha! You didn't flip your card in time, so having the anti-cheese will do nothing for you to stop my cheese!"
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#577753
Professor Scott wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:49 pm OG Ship was a dilemma, yes? In order to get the points, you had to destroy it, thereby passing it, yes?
Perhaps I misunderstood, but I believe the context was discussion surrounding the original "goal" of the game being passing dilemmas and solving missions.

Sure, OG Borg Ship was a dilemma, but if you built a Borg-hunting armada deck (which was very much one of the alternative "original goals" of the game, based on that point value), you weren't solving missions, and the fact that it was a "dilemma" was really only relevant for how the card was triggered. You weren't using it to bust up your opponents' mission-solving (as the real "goal" of dilemmas generally is in the viewpoint of "This game is about solving missions and facing your opponents' dilemmas"), you were just seeding them so you could score points for blowing stuff up once you were ready to.

The point is that decks based on simply not even trying to pass dilemmas and missions were a part of the game from the beginning. And that those decks also lent themselves well to frustrating your opponent's resources (if you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball! if you can blow up a Borg Ship, you can blow up an outpost!)
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#577757
DISCO Rox No More wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 4:35 pm
Professor Scott wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 12:49 pm OG Ship was a dilemma, yes? In order to get the points, you had to destroy it, thereby passing it, yes?
Perhaps I misunderstood, but I believe the context was discussion surrounding the original "goal" of the game being passing dilemmas and solving missions.

Sure, OG Borg Ship was a dilemma, but if you built a Borg-hunting armada deck (which was very much one of the alternative "original goals" of the game, based on that point value), you weren't solving missions, and the fact that it was a "dilemma" was really only relevant for how the card was triggered. You weren't using it to bust up your opponents' mission-solving (as the real "goal" of dilemmas generally is in the viewpoint of "This game is about solving missions and facing your opponents' dilemmas"), you were just seeding them so you could score points for blowing stuff up once you were ready to.

The point is that decks based on simply not even trying to pass dilemmas and missions were a part of the game from the beginning. And that those decks also lent themselves well to frustrating your opponent's resources (if you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball! if you can blow up a Borg Ship, you can blow up an outpost!)
That's fair, but the point I was making is that since it was a dilemma whether yours or your opponent's it was still points from dilemma and missions. Many folks played with self seeding point dilemmas even if they weren't Borg Ship hunting. I just lumped all of those strategies into dilemmas and missions for points.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577760
all over the world
Don't be overdramatic. Ref is not the biggest problem right now. DH mass download (and Ref is not the problem here, DH in its current form is...) and Protector/End Transmission are big issues. They are issues at hand. Please deal with them first, after that we can discuss long-term plans regarding Ref. I am still not convinced that the mayorrity of players see Ref as dramatic as you. Maybe mistaken, though.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577761
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 6:48 pm
all over the world
Don't be overdramatic. Ref is not the biggest problem right now. DH mass download (and Ref is not the problem here, DH in its current form is...) and Protector/End Transmission are big issues. And probably TOS-Feds. They are issues at hand. Please deal with them first, after that we can discuss long-term plans regarding Ref. I am still not convinced that the mayorrity of players see Ref as dramatic as you. Maybe mistaken, though.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577762
all over the world
Don't be overdramatic. Ref is not the biggest problem right now. DH mass download (and Ref is not the problem here, DH in its current form is...) and Protector/End Transmission are big issues. And probably TOS-Feds. They are issues at hand. Please deal with them first, after that we can discuss long-term plans regarding Ref. I am still not convinced that the mayorrity of players see Ref as dramatic as you. Maybe mistaken, though.
User avatar
Second Edition Art Manager
By edgeofhearing (Lucas Thompson)
 - Second Edition Art Manager
 -  
Community Contributor
#577763
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 6:49 pm
all over the world
Don't be overdramatic. Ref is not the biggest problem right now. DH mass download (and Ref is not the problem here, DH in its current form is...) and Protector/End Transmission are big issues. And probably TOS-Feds. They are issues at hand. Please deal with them first, after that we can discuss long-term plans regarding Ref. I am still not convinced that the mayorrity of players see Ref as dramatic as you. Maybe mistaken, though.
I think this is a subtlety of language issue here. He's not saying "all the people in the world want ref cards gone" (which this thread definitively disproves), he's saying "the people who want ref cards gone are not limited to a single geographical area."
User avatar
 
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577764
DISCO Rox No More wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 4:28 pm Imagine how frustrating it must be for a newer player to not flip first thing, then have their veteran opponent slip in that Scan, only for the newer player to go "Aha! I have the [Ref] card for that!"....and then only for the veteran player to go "Aha! You didn't flip your card in time, so having the anti-cheese will do nothing for you to stop my cheese!"
Yeah that was me, unfortunately. It wasn't horrible cheese, i just wanted to fetch a Mirror Image I think to get some card draws. It was the first tournament I had played in years, and I certainly know the timing rules, but simply hadn't used QTR before. It never even occurred to me that flipping QTR would not be a valid response to my opponent doing something susceptible to [Ref] "punishment" by another card.

Suffice it to say I know now to flip QTR as my first action in every game. Which kind of begs the question of why the heck it has [HA] is the only thing the [HA] accomplishes is HINDERING your ability to respond to cheese?

95% of all the [Ref] usage I see in my playgroup is either Mirror Image, or cycling obelisk offensively to Masaka Owner's hand.

I'd love to see the whole mechanical go away just because it is BORING. Wasting time in the game cycling ref cards, downloading masakas, getting QTR out of the discard pile, etc etc. It is a waste of time and boring to watch.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#577769
edgeofhearing wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 6:57 pm
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 6:49 pm
all over the world
Don't be overdramatic. Ref is not the biggest problem right now. DH mass download (and Ref is not the problem here, DH in its current form is...) and Protector/End Transmission are big issues. And probably TOS-Feds. They are issues at hand. Please deal with them first, after that we can discuss long-term plans regarding Ref. I am still not convinced that the mayorrity of players see Ref as dramatic as you. Maybe mistaken, though.
I think this is a subtlety of language issue here. He's not saying "all the people in the world want ref cards gone" (which this thread definitively disproves), he's saying "the people who want ref cards gone are not limited to a single geographical area."
:thumbsup:

Lucas is correct. Thank you for clarifying, Lucas.

For what it's worth, I still support the old policy (which predates me) of easing [Ref] out of OTF altogether, but I don't consider it a high priority. [Ref] is still important, but it's no longer absolutely essential to winning the game, and Tribunal is no longer a mandatory seed. Nowadays, I think the best way of dealing with them is to consider removing the [Ref] icon on a card if the card has already come up for errata for other reasons.

For example, Defend Homeworld came up because people were looking at getting rid of the involuntary battle trap, and that was a good opportunity to consider whether its [Ref] icon could finally be removed. (I think yes, but I don't actually get a vote.)
User avatar
 
By geraldkw
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#577772
BCSWowbagger wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 8:51 pm
edgeofhearing wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 6:57 pm
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 6:49 pm

Don't be overdramatic. Ref is not the biggest problem right now. DH mass download (and Ref is not the problem here, DH in its current form is...) and Protector/End Transmission are big issues. And probably TOS-Feds. They are issues at hand. Please deal with them first, after that we can discuss long-term plans regarding Ref. I am still not convinced that the mayorrity of players see Ref as dramatic as you. Maybe mistaken, though.
I think this is a subtlety of language issue here. He's not saying "all the people in the world want ref cards gone" (which this thread definitively disproves), he's saying "the people who want ref cards gone are not limited to a single geographical area."
:thumbsup:

Lucas is correct. Thank you for clarifying, Lucas.

For what it's worth, I still support the old policy (which predates me) of easing [Ref] out of OTF altogether, but I don't consider it a high priority. [Ref] is still important, but it's no longer absolutely essential to winning the game, and Tribunal is no longer a mandatory seed. Nowadays, I think the best way of dealing with them is to consider removing the [Ref] icon on a card if the card has already come up for errata for other reasons.

For example, Defend Homeworld came up because people were looking at getting rid of the involuntary battle trap, and that was a good opportunity to consider whether its [Ref] icon could finally be removed. (I think yes, but I don't actually get a vote.)
I missed a lot of this discussion but I think one thing that most people would agree on is that Defend Homeworld is still very worth playing even if you have to seed it/them.
User avatar
 
By winterflames (Derek Marlar)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577793
I have never depended on the [Ref] method of acquiring Defend Homeworld. I just seed the thing. The only time I have seeded a Civil War tent was when I had too many things I wanted in my tent and Saavik's download and Roger Korby's download were some of them. Easy decision, extra tent space, BOOM.
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#577795
Armus wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 2:41 pm I think you're overgeneralizing the term "battle" as applied to "NPE"

If I spam out 30+ weapons worth of ships on turn one and drop your Outpost on turn two (yes, that's happened in this game, and it isn't even that hard), I'm sympathetic if you want to call that an NPE.

On the other hand, if you put 10 Mains on an 8 shields ship on turn 4 and wander out into space, get stopped, and on my turn I roll over and blow you up, you have to question what role your own in-game decisions played in arriving at that result.

Space is Dangerous. Bad stuff happens, especially to an unprepared player. To borrow a term from someone (@Professor Scott?) That's not a "negative player experience" that's a "player experience" and one that can be learned from and used as a lesson to improve one's deckbuilding and play skills.

The former is bad and needs to be balanced out of the game. The latter is integral and if you muck around trying to "balance" out everything bad that could happen, you end up with a very boring game that nobody wants to play.
I don't necessarily disagree. Battling isn't always a NPE. However, I think the CC also needs to guard against turning STCCG into a game where people are just running around space battling/slice-n-dicing each other because I do agree it's rather simple to build a deck to drop alot of weapons or that is designed to personnel battle.
Vulcan Lander and its ability

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

Ignoring point losses & Timing

I would be interested in the answer to this as wel[…]

Greetings 'trek fans! As discussed in our Februar[…]

1EFQ: Game of two halves

First: Rescue Captives is OP, there should[…]