This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#578370
But some players seem to like the [Ref] mechanic...
Go on. Mock me, boy. The Starks mocked me for years. Where are they now? :)
If you dislike Ref so much, fine, play without it. Dr. Noah aboard your ship, Fighting Words and the lack of Strategema, Scorched Hands and Containment Field and so on will most certainly do you good :) .
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
1E Cardassia Regional Champion 2023
#578405
Mogor wrote: Sun Jun 05, 2022 4:35 pm Its combinations like this that make me think we will never be rid of the referee
I disagree. In the Decipher days though, I completely agree. Decipher showed an unwillingness to errata cards. TrekCC shows no such hesitancy. I am sure that a lack of profit-driven motivation coupled with the ability to print any cards fuels that. Had Decipher been more liberal with issuing errata, we might never have even needed the [Ref] mechanic.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#578409
Its combinations like this that make me think we will never be rid of the referee
But why would you?? It is a valid choice. Take the risk or not. It is a strategic decision. Why is that bad for a game???? Why get rid of it?? It is a valid choice. And before you have altered all the cards effected you will need another 20 years. So life with it. To Ref or not to Ref :) . This is a tactical choice. For the full defense you have to disabandon red-shirting. Whilst ad it: Is Redshirting not bad, too????
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#578421
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Sun Jun 05, 2022 10:05 am
But some players seem to like the [Ref] mechanic...
Go on. Mock me, boy. The Starks mocked me for years. Where are they now? :)
If you dislike Ref so much, fine, play without it. Dr. Noah aboard your ship, Fighting Words and the lack of Strategema, Scorched Hands and Containment Field and so on will most certainly do you good :) .
All snark aside, I am genuinely interested in whether you would favor a [Ref]-based counter to the Amanda/Transmission deck. (Or finding a way to balance the existing [Ref] counter to this strategy so it can come back.) Or is this an issue that you think should be fixed differently -- bans, errata, or just let the meta figure it out using existing tech without CC involvement. I don't think [Ref] is the right approach here, but it is one possibility.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#578464
winterflames wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 6:06 am Why not take out the "or plays" from in the zone? If it nly seeds, then both players have to have been abiding the limits the whole time.
Until the one who seeds it decides it's no longer to their advantage to have it in play and Ref cycles it away... :shifty:
 
By Se7enofMine (ChadC)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#578474
AllenGould wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2022 12:47 pm
Dukat wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2022 6:54 am When will something be done about it?
Well, first question - did anyone at the *tournament* tech in against a known issue?

If I'm reading the shtick right, it's using Amanda Rogers to clear out the End Transmission. Which means it's vulnerable to Q2, Quinn, Line, Oof.. I'm probably missing a few.

Should we be jumping direct to the Balance Team, if no-one has tried using the existing tools yet?
This.

I think there is a big difference between something that is above the power curve with no way to stop it/slow it down and something that is above the curve but can be muffed up with other cards in the card pool.

In my home games, one of my buddies had a few games where he would stock a bunch of "loss or orbital stability" to slow me down (there was also another one that I cant remember). Anywho, I started stocking Kevin's and Amanda's and that problem has gone away.

If there is a meta curve going on that CAN be stopped by tech'ing against it, Im not sure thats BAN worthy. A small errata change? Sure, absolutely.
User avatar
 
By winterflames (Derek Marlar)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#578475
Armus wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 8:12 am
winterflames wrote: Mon Jun 06, 2022 6:06 am Why not take out the "or plays" from in the zone? If it nly seeds, then both players have to have been abiding the limits the whole time.
Until the one who seeds it decides it's no longer to their advantage to have it in play and Ref cycles it away... :shifty:
I'm sorry, I envisioned it as happening as they take the [Ref] off, since there is no point to a ref icon for something that can't be downloaded.
StateofSTCCG, who is currently listed as a forum troll [unconstructive and disruptive behavior], made this post. Responding to forum trolls is discouraged.
Display this post.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#578486
Did your playgroup know about this before the tourney? Why not just do one for the group. Save people time and not waste peoples weekends on overpowered game play non sense. #playersoverCC
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[…]