This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#575623
There are still players that play with cards as written but with the Official Tournament Format rule set.

But let's pick apart everything I say instead of trying to make the game less complex and riddled with Negative Play Experiences.

And on the errata/ban, I have come to the conclusions after looking at other games as well as the players here on the forum and the one that I play with. And unfortunately, Ban seems to work the best as this will remove the card from the pool of eligible cards while errata changes the card's function but not the memory for the player which will make them play the card as remembered and not as now written. =/ That's the human brain for you. We can make cards better but not the players as we are all flawed by design.
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575626
Smiley wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:51 pm There are still players that play with cards as written but with the Official Tournament Format rule set.

But let's pick apart everything I say instead of trying to make the game less complex and riddled with Negative Play Experiences.

And on the errata/ban, I have come to the conclusions after looking at other games as well as the players here on the forum and the one that I play with. And unfortunately, Ban seems to work the best as this will remove the card from the pool of eligible cards while errata changes the card's function but not the memory for the player which will make them play the card as remembered and not as now written. =/ That's the human brain for you. We can make cards better but not the players as we are all flawed by design.
So your answer is BAN everything and make all NEW Cards? I hope whomever pays your wages never makes a clerical error.... They can't fix the mistake, they just have to fire you and hire someone else.
User avatar
First Edition Creative Manager
By KazonPADD (Paddy Tye)
 - First Edition Creative Manager
 -  
1E European Continental Runner-Up 2023
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Champion 2023
#575632
FFS

If my opponent travels to my location on turn 2 say, destroys my ability to play cards and solve missions… that is a negative play experience.

If I build a deck based on interacting with an opponent but fail to include any methods to travel cross-quadrant, that’s called being a dumbass OR bad deck building (whichever you prefer). You can still solve missions, score points, and potentially win. Definitely not a negative play experience. That would be “a play experience”. Adapt your deck and try again!
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575633
KazonPADD wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 7:21 pm FFS

If my opponent travels to my location on turn 2 say, destroys my ability to play cards and solve missions… that is a negative play experience.

If I build a deck based on interacting with an opponent but fail to include any methods to travel cross-quadrant, that’s called being a dumbass OR bad deck building (whichever you prefer). You can still solve missions, score points, and potentially win. Definitely not a negative play experience. That would be “a play experience”. Adapt your deck and try again!
Attachments:
riker-star-trek.gif
riker-star-trek.gif (1.4 MiB) Viewed 419 times
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575639
Smiley wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 7:32 pm Wow guys! Real classy. Inviting community and fun to engage with!
I think the point @KazonPADD and I are trying to make is that you are using NPE in a different way than he and I do, and I daresay, incorrectly in my opinion.

Loosing sucks, but that is a not a negative play experience, it's a play experience.

Facing someone that knows the game better than you, and pulls a trick that you didn't expect is not a negative play experience, it's a play experience.

Your opponent blowing up your only outpost so you can no longer report, sucks ass, but it's not a negative play experience, it's a play experience.

Exploiting countdowns with with repeated use of End Transmission with Amanda Rogers: Protector IS a negative play experience, because it locks you out of solving missions through no fault of your own.
User avatar
 
By Orbin (James Monsebroten)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#575646
Professor Scott wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:08 pm Your opponent blowing up your only outpost so you can no longer report, sucks ass, but it's not a negative play experience, it's a play experience.

Exploiting countdowns with with repeated use of End Transmission with Amanda Rogers: Protector IS a negative play experience, because it locks you out of solving missions through no fault of your own.
Personally, I don't see any difference between these two. Why is not preparing for encountering a battle deck any different than not stocking the cards that nullify End Transmission and/or Amanda Rogers: Protector?

-James M
User avatar
 
By stressedoutatumc (stressedoutatumc)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#575649
Smiley wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:51 pm There are still players that play with cards as written but with the Official Tournament Format rule set.

But let's pick apart everything I say instead of trying to make the game less complex and riddled with Negative Play Experiences.
The “O” in OTF actually defeats your argument. The old ways are not the official version of the game any longer and you certainly can’t ask for a fundamental change as to how to change quadrants based on a tactic and card wording that is no longer in the official game.

If you want to play physical cards that have been errata’d, that’s 100% on you to deal with the contradiction with the official game, my guy.
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575650
Orbin wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 9:11 pm
Professor Scott wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:08 pm Your opponent blowing up your only outpost so you can no longer report, sucks ass, but it's not a negative play experience, it's a play experience.

Exploiting countdowns with with repeated use of End Transmission with Amanda Rogers: Protector IS a negative play experience, because it locks you out of solving missions through no fault of your own.
Personally, I don't see any difference between these two. Why is not preparing for encountering a battle deck any different than not stocking the cards that nullify End Transmission and/or Amanda Rogers: Protector?

-James M
Because needing to stock say 12 Kevin's and 12 Amanda's is not prepping, it's manic paranoia, nevermind that this combo is being used for an unintended designer purpose. Countdowns are meant to countdown, and while using End Transmission to end your turn is fine, you aren't supposed to be able to play it every turn, which AR:P currently allows you to do.
User avatar
 
By Orbin (James Monsebroten)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#575655
Professor Scott wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 9:32 pm
Orbin wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 9:11 pm
Professor Scott wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:08 pm Your opponent blowing up your only outpost so you can no longer report, sucks ass, but it's not a negative play experience, it's a play experience.

Exploiting countdowns with with repeated use of End Transmission with Amanda Rogers: Protector IS a negative play experience, because it locks you out of solving missions through no fault of your own.
Personally, I don't see any difference between these two. Why is not preparing for encountering a battle deck any different than not stocking the cards that nullify End Transmission and/or Amanda Rogers: Protector?

-James M
Because needing to stock say 12 Kevin's and 12 Amanda's is not prepping, it's manic paranoia, nevermind that this combo is being used for an unintended designer purpose. Countdowns are meant to countdown, and while using End Transmission to end your turn is fine, you aren't supposed to be able to play it every turn, which AR:P currently allows you to do.
You're thinking too narrow if you only rely on Kevin and Amanda. Anij, Quinn, A Missing Day and Goddess of Empathy are also counters to this strategy as well as Only Logical and The Genesis Effect (if it's dilemmas you're worried about and you can guess right :) )

Really, what I'm trying to point out here is that there are ways to counter just about anything and it's a matter of how much you want to invest it prepare for it. In both of your examples a player gets into a state where they can't play the game (or more accurately they can't win the game) and in both cases you can learn from that experience and adapt.

NOTE: I'm not trying to say that combo-ing End Transmission with Amanda Rogers: Protector is a good thing.

-James M
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#575656
Am I missing something or isn't this strategy vulnerable to a repeated Oof! tax? You delay enough turns I can suck out the timed win 0-(-whatever) even if I am locked out of my missions.

Or you could go for the old school fuck you 6x The Line Must Be Drawn Here. -30 points the first time they try that nonsense and a few turns to let their Friendly Fires &co. tick out would make them think twice about bringing that cheese to a second event.
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575657
You missed my point entirely. The point I was making is that ET/AR:P is broken and thus creating an NPE. The Kevin and Amanda was an example of a simple counter. The point being, is that to repeatedly, turn after turn, counter this combo requires so much of your drawn resources that it pretty much prevents you from doing anything else, which results in the same NPE situation, damned if you counter and damned if you don't counter.

Blowing up one's outpost is not broken.

This combo is a likely candidate for errata anyway, but there is a difference between not being prepared (only having one outpost/report location) vs. being locked down by a broken combo that exploits a rules loophole and not having brought a ridiculous amount of counters that might otherwise clog your deck if you don't run into it.

OR we can just let this be the new Meta, and just add 25 additional cards to all your decks. I highly doubt anyone wants this.
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575658
Armus wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 10:17 pm Am I missing something or isn't this strategy vulnerable to a repeated Oof! tax? You delay enough turns I can suck out the timed win 0-(-whatever) even if I am locked out of my missions.

Or you could go for the old school fuck you 6x The Line Must Be Drawn Here. -30 points the first time they try that nonsense and a few turns to let their Friendly Fires &co. tick out would make them think twice about bringing that cheese to a second event.
So few decks can afford multiple Computer Crashes, I can't imagine many can afford multiple Lines just in the hope that they will be useful, but yes as @Orbin said, anything can be countered, but how excessive must the counter be to actually be effective?

Also it comes down to being able to anticipate the Meta, so maybe it walks through the first tournament and goes down in flames the next one. That doesn't mean the combo still isn't an exploit and NPE just because it CAN be countered with the right read and resources.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#575659
I personally would welcome a more counter- heavy meta. Too many people get away with too much bullshit.

On the other hand, you'd be amazed how even one well-timed counter can swing a game. Maybe it's worth a couple extra card slots for that kind of upside.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#575661
Professor Scott wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:08 pm Exploiting countdowns with with repeated use of End Transmission with Amanda Rogers: Protector IS a negative play experience, because it locks you out of solving missions through no fault of your own.
SIDEBAR: Is this a thing? Has someone done this? I've suddenly seen a bunch'a chatter about Amanda Rogers: Protector this week, and normally Amanda Rogers: Protector only exists in my brain as "that card that Rules always uses to demonstrate weird edge cases in the leaving-play rules."

I have little to offer on the main topic, because the difference between "NPE" and "PE" seems to come down to an impossibly subjective intersection between "player preferences" and "Design decisions about what the game ought to fundamentally be."
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

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

Opponents turn

Remodulation