This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#575594
Fake Person wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 12:57 pm I'd like a default action to jump quadrants. Difficult and expensive, sure, but I don't like "you must stock (and draw) specific cards or else you might not be able to interact with your opponent" scenarios. There's always weird anomalies to justify it.
Seed a Space Time Portal or a Wormhole Mission II (or multiples!)

Run Wormhole in multiples.

There, you may now interact with your opponent.

The "weird anomalies to justify it" are printed on cards, not baked into rules.

You want different cards? Great, talk to Design.

But the whole point of Quadrants is to show just how big the galaxy is, and getting from one end to the other isn't (and shouldn't be) a trivial exercise.
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#575600
All 4 quadrants in STCCG are treated the same, ie [MQ] is just another quadrant.

While [AQ], [1E-GQ] , and [1E-DQ] , are all in the same universe, the [MQ] is in a parallel universe. It should be more difficult to get to the [MQ] than any other, since the rest can be gotten to by just fuel and time. From a game standpoint that causes a problem. I think we should keep all 4 quadrants separate and they should all be difficult to get to, not impossible (just as they are currently). If Voyager had never been taken to the [1E-DQ] by the Caretaker, then they would be carrying out their missions, concurrently with the Vidians or the Hirogen or the Kazon. There would be no interaction. The game should be the same way. If you want to come to my quadrant, you need to bring a way to do that. The game should not simply provide it just because the player chose to sit down at the table.
User avatar
Chief Programmer
By eberlems
 - Chief Programmer
 -  
Explorer
2E European Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E  National Second Runner-Up 2023
#575601
I do recall times where Wormhole, Bajoran Wormhole, Barzan Wormhole, Multidimensional Transport Device, Quantum Slipstream Drive and Transwarp Network Gateway where all/most of the cards to travel between quadrants.
Now there is also a bunch to hop from mission to timeline and back into other quadrant version, even a mission switching on its own.
I do like the 2E rules for quadrants but I don't think that is the solution for 1E spaceline.
User avatar
 
By winterflames (Derek Marlar)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#575602
I think this comes back to the "why should the onus be on me" argument about On The Cards vs In The Rules.

And I see the arguments going back to that split in the populous.

I believe the cards should let you do things and the rules should prevent them. If you want to time travel/quadrant hop, bring a card. If you want to do the thing, you bring the stuff.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#575604
Armus wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 10:40 pmThe problem is, you "fix" enough things and you're playing a whole new game - I'm sympathetic to the argument that OTF is really "1.5e" because of the fundamental changes that were made to the "original" game for the sake of balance and convenience.
Well, on the one hand I can sort of agree with this, but, on the other hand, if you follow this to its logical endpoint, OTF is really "1.75e". The First Contact changes (even bigger, even more fundamental changes to the original game for the sake of balance and convenience) are the true "1.5e".

Beyond that...

Mostly I see modern 1E (and I do think we should just start calling OTF "modern format" and Open something "traditional format") as a restorationist project. Rather than evolving the game toward some unknown and perhaps alien destination, I tend to see our job as excavating and restoring what was already fundamentally fun and good in 1E.

OTF introduced a bunch of new rules, yes, but the intent (and largely the effect) of those rules was to restore the feeling of how the game was "meant" to be played in Decipher's vision without just blatantly banning entire expansions (like X-List did). Likewise, rule changes today are frequently trying to either (a) remove some unhelpful and unpleasant complication that was introduced after 1994 (like walking limits or the ANIMAL rules or the infamous ad hoc timing rules of 1995 that we're still stuck with today), or (b) make the new stuff that is actually good (like named-in-lore references or the Blaze of Glory space battle/damage system) fit into the original vision of the game better, to make it look like it has always been there as a whole organism (not gradually frankenstein'd together over the course of a decade).

So every new change (new cards, new errata, new rules tweaks) will hopefully bring the game closer to the original Tesh & Braunlich vision of the game, not further away. I think OTF has mostly succeeded at doing this (much moreso than the First Contact overhaul), although there is still a long way to go.

So perhaps we should instead call OTF "1.25e", for bringing the game closer to "true" 1E than the 1.5e released in December 1997. :)
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#575605
@BCSWowbagger I'd be a lot more convinced of this argument if today's game looked more like Golden Age Trek circa late 1999/ early 2000 and less like a slightly slower version of late 2000- end of 1e mass play/draw/ download fests that today's game is.

I'm not saying it's not better than the end of Decipher 1e - if it wasn't I'd still be retired - but based on what I've seen in my almost Decade back in the game, your argument that OTF/ modern/ whatever is restorative of OG 1e is either misplaced or flat wrong.

The fact that you yourself have said that revisiting the Golden Age was an eye-opening experience says a lot about just how different the game is today from 1999.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#575608
Armus wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 3:33 pm @BCSWowbagger I'd be a lot more convinced of this argument if today's game looked more like Golden Age Trek circa late 1999/ early 2000 and less like a slightly slower version of late 2000- end of 1e mass play/draw/ download fests that today's game is.
2022Trek looks more like 1999Trek than 2002Trek looked like 1999Trek. That's thanks to OTF.

I think it is also correct that 2022Trek looks more like 2002Trek than 2022Trek looks like 1999Trek. Those are not contradictory statements.

But OTF took the game in the correct direction, as far as it was able to push it given the constraints of 2010 and the decision to not straight-up ban every card produced between January 2000 and mid-2010 (a correct decision, IMO, but a huge limitation on how much could be restored). That's what I mean when I call OTF a restorationist project. It's not a complete restoration, but it points in the right direction, and further changes we have made since then have (mostly, IMO) pushed further in the right direction.
 
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#575609
Armus wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 1:16 pmBut the whole point of Quadrants is to show just how big the galaxy is, and getting from one end to the other isn't (and shouldn't be) a trivial exercise.
We shouldn't conflate "trivial" with a "requires a card." You can have a non-trivial method that doesn't require a card. Changing quadrants is largely trivial via cards, which is the advantage of running those cards. It doesn't mean cards need to be the exclusive way of doing something.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#575610
So, after reading a bit and looking at how I would design something like this at work I would make it a rule that you can always jump quadrant at a cost so that you never get locked out. Then add simpler/cheaper/faster/targeted ways to do it with cards so that players who want to do it specifically with their decks can do it as they wich. No need to force anyone to have to bring cards just in case as this is just a really Negative Playe Experience and makes the game harder/more complex than it has to be and only punishes players with less experinece/knowledge.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#575611
Smiley wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 4:15 pm So, after reading a bit and looking at how I would design something like this at work I would make it a rule that you can always jump quadrant at a cost so that you never get locked out. Then add simpler/cheaper/faster/targeted ways to do it with cards so that players who want to do it specifically with their decks can do it as they wich. No need to force anyone to have to bring cards just in case as this is just a really Negative Playe Experience and makes the game harder/more complex than it has to be and only punishes players with less experinece/knowledge.
I'm confuzzled on how there's any lockout risk here.

You know which quadrants you want in your deck, so stocking the (almost all seedable) movement methods in your deck seems pretty... expected to me?

If you're a combat deck, it's true you need to stock a few extras to get to all four, but again - you know this when you're building the deck.

Add the fact that *closing* any of those movement paths require very specific and largely niche cards, and I'm having trouble picturing the use case where someone is getting "locked out" here.

If we're saying players shouldn't have to know that they need a card to move quadrants, I would point out that argument also works for ships. Or personnel.
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#575618
Take into consideration that there are new or intermediate players out there that don't even know what a fed speed solver or Borg Battler deck is and they are just trying to build something fun and end up playing someone that brought an old school wormhole deck that drops you in a quadrant that you did not anticipate playing in or bring a [Ref] to counter. You will not have any fun playing this game then.

I would want to play a game that's fun for everyone and not just the one that remembered to bring all the contingency cards.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#575620
Smiley wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:04 pm Take into consideration that there are new or intermediate players out there that don't even know what a fed speed solver or Borg Battler deck is and they are just trying to build something fun and end up playing someone that brought an old school wormhole deck that drops you in a quadrant that you did not anticipate playing in or bring a [Ref] to counter. You will not have any fun playing this game then.

I would want to play a game that's fun for everyone and not just the one that remembered to bring all the contingency cards.
Um... what?

Unless they're playing OG pre-errata Wormhole that's not a thing.

And if they *are* playing OG pre-errata Wormhole, then that's their choice and that's not the CC's problem to solve. We fixed that card years ago.

You can lead a horse to water, etc...
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#575621
Smiley wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:04 pman old school wormhole deck that drops you in a quadrant that you did not anticipate playing in or bring a [Ref] to counter. You will not have any fun playing this game then.
True, but that's why we banned it. Wormhole was banned and now has errata that prevents this. Forced movement is really hard to do now. (It can be done, through stuff like Blade of Tkon, but not generally in a way that will ruin your day anymore.)
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

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

Opponents turn

Remodulation