This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#575007
BCSWowbagger wrote: Sat Apr 09, 2022 2:35 pm Awesome!

You know, I was actually fiddling around with this, and thought about putting it in my little concept up there, but then I thought "nah, that's too complicated, Traditional players will hate it."
[Door] Battle Bridge Door: Weak & Cheap
Seed one (for free)* on Battle Bridge side deck (any number of [Tac] cards). You may only use [Tac] cards that have a printed ATTACK bonus of 0 or less.
That would include the new proposed "Generic Damage" tactic but also Crimson Forcefield, Close Quarters Combat (a nice boost for [Maq]), Evasive Maneuvers (we need more defensive Tactics like this), Plasma Energy Burst, and T'Pol/Soong Maneuver (those last two are just basically accidents, but happy accidents).

EDIT: I ALSO like the idea of other versions of BBD that force you to focus on specific subsets of tactics, like the "Target" tactics, but I feel like those additional versions of BBD should probably cost a seed slot. The free version of BBD should be pretty limited, in order to make the tradeoffs work.
I think this is an awesome concept, but I’d offer two more related points/thoughts.

1. No one has really discussed that using a BB offers additional benefits than battle, namely the access to a set of dilemma that requires them to work. Some powerful combos come out of this using tactics that are not useful to battle, for most decks, Isolytic Burst is the main one that comes to mind and also The Breen one that was banned in OtF. There should be a balanced cost for this access so it’s something to consider if there is a free version of the battle bridge.

2. In regards to balance, has the Committee considered making some tactics Unique and some ❖ ? That may be a way to achieve balance and diversity in building the side deck and bring back cards like the banned breen one. Every affiliation has a tactic that is native, so to speak, that could be ❖ and the speciality ones could be unique. Or maybe limited to x copies,

3. As a bonus thought, it also might be prudent to restrict some of the cards to certain affiliations. It doesn’t make much sense for a [Fed] deck that doesn’t battle to be stocked with isolytic bursts and breen ___ because of how well they damage ships with dilemma. That could not have been the intended use and may also promote appropriate side deck building diversity and a cost-benefit balance for playing certain cards.
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575010
I like the concept of Unique and ❖ but here's the problem I see. Say I stock 20 tactics including 2 copies of a unique in order to have a better chance of it coming up. I Damage a ship with a [Flip] [Flip] tactic, and wouldn't ya know I [Flip] both copies of the unique. Does that mean I only get 1 and the other is recycled? Do I get to [Flip] a replacement tactic, or do I just loose a tactic? Why should I loose a tactic when I did my due diligence to ensure I had a reasonable amount of other tactics (10-1) in my BBSD to avoid this from happening?
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#575011
You could always borrow from Raw Deal where Unique = 1/deck.

That probably wouldn't work in the general game at this point, but if we're talking about Tactics specifically, then having a one copy per Battle Bridge limit for certain tactics isn't unreasonable. May open up some design space as well.

Probably be a good idea to have some Design rules as well. (E.g., Maybe have Unique tactics [Down] when played, that way the opponent can choose whether or not to repair them or leave them on a ship knowing their opponent won't have access to it again while it's on there).

This may be a terrible idea, but it's the thought that popped into my head when I saw "unique tactics" as a concept.
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#575094
Armus wrote: Mon Apr 11, 2022 9:20 am You could always borrow from Raw Deal where Unique = 1/deck.

That probably wouldn't work in the general game at this point, but if we're talking about Tactics specifically, then having a one copy per Battle Bridge limit for certain tactics isn't unreasonable. May open up some design space as well.

Probably be a good idea to have some Design rules as well. (E.g., Maybe have Unique tactics [Down] when played, that way the opponent can choose whether or not to repair them or leave them on a ship knowing their opponent won't have access to it again while it's on there).

This may be a terrible idea, but it's the thought that popped into my head when I saw "unique tactics" as a concept.
I was just brainstorming ways to fix what I think is the problem with some tactics...which some are just too powerful and are played as the whole tactic deck. Breen Disruptor, for example.

Maybe an equally good way would be to create a set of building rules around the BB side deck. For example, the deck must be X cards with no more than Y copies of each card. Like MTG. That could limit the overstocking of the most powerful card types and also force diversity in building without having to re-design the entirety of tactics. A BB that must be at least 30 cards with no more than 3 copies of any one tactic card would be interesting and cards like Breen Disruptor wouldn't have to be banned anymore since the probability of drawing it as all three damage markers would be pretty low.

Also, as an ancillary effect, it would also change the way dilemma that use [Flip] less predictable and shake up that meta, too. I don't believe that STCCG has tried anything like this, but it could be something to consider.

EDIT: I realized that the game does have precedence for building side decks. Q's tent, for example, is limited to the x,y rule. It must be 13 cards with no more than 1 copy per card
User avatar
 
By ShipNerd
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#575356
My thoughts on tactics:

Add Battle bridge Doorways that open the side deck with other benefits, so that it is used more often.

a) add general use to an alternate Battle Bridge Door, like may download and seed otherwise unseen/useless dilemmas, or allow it to use cards people use anyway (download and seed Alternate Universe Door, Defend Homeworld etc.)
b) have a BBSD that says: only 1 personnel per damage dies (to have a defensive open and to limit the personal loss in ship battle)
c) add new tactics that have higher +/- for WEAPONS/Shields but no longer kills personnel.
d) add [DL] for not so usefull tactics on new ships that are released, so that the weaker tactics are used more often.
e) make rules or many usefull cards that connect the quadrants for interaction. most people wish that ship battle is as viable option. So a card (can be card that opens Battle bridge side deck or not) that downloads Bajoran Wormhole(s) and Barzan Womrhole. After all they are there all the time in canon trek. And/or connect the ends of quadrants, maybe with universal space in between for longer journeys. They could be free optional seeds such as sites are.
f) weaken the often used breen tactic unless you actually use a breen ship.
g) Make sure facilities are mostly save, even against all-out-battle decks (including delta quadrant facilites). E.g. by having a Battle Bridge Door variant that says so without the need for strategic base (or to download it, if that BBD variant is used).

You might also explain the Tactic rules on the card, if you delete the 2nd function of BBSD. The base game without tactics is fun too, though.
 
By liberty86
 - New Member
 -  
#578424
I love this conversation. Healthy debate. I wonder if the ideal solution is the committee build a brand new tactic decklist for use, that anybody could use that added variance to battles but usable by all factions. Then maybe individual existing cards could be added depending o the deck if they met the conditions to use them, assuming there was a cap.

Gives room for flexibility for decks to run matching cards, while giving a more generic, but universally useful, baseline for everyone to start from.
 
By liberty86
 - New Member
 -  
#579373
Next time I see my brother in August, we are going to play trying out this new idea for tactics:

Instead of cards providing ship stat bonuses, you roll 2 4-sided dice, one for weapons and one for shields. Those provide the bonuses you get for the battle, possibly getting bonus dice if more ships are involved as opposed to a single ship.

If you are in a situation where you are just looking for defense or attack, you can announce in advance you are diverting full power to weapons or shields, in doing so the dice for the stat you are diverting power away from gets cut in half, rounded down, then added for a bonus to weapons or shields. This way you could get nothing so there's risk, but when you really need a little extra help to survive or damage a big target you have a option.

You still use tactics cards for actual damage markers, that mechanic is fun and brings interest to actually taking damage, just building the deck accordingly to simulate damage in a variety of ways, but avoiding tactics that might be a little too bizarre or specific that aren't very useful in a average situation.

What does everybody think?
User avatar
 
By WeAreBack
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#579382
Reminds me of the Decipher Star Wars idea of drawing "destiny" (which had odds determined by specific cards in your deck, but usually in a 0-6 range).

There is a way to incorporate more randomness into the existing Tactics without changing the mechanic drastically.

You would do this by having Tactics card that operate based on what skills your opponent has on their ship. For example, you could have a card that offers an attack bonus of +1, with additional +1 for each Treachery you have present, -1 for each Treachery or Honor your opponent has present.

Since you get a choice between only two tactic cards, you would sometimes have to choose -- Monty Hall style -- between a bonus that is knowable and "what's in the box."

I firmly think we need a massive increase in variety of tactics usable
Question for noob

I still think I'm misunderstanding TMW. By saying […]

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[…]