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
#586924
Hoffman won with MVB's KCA solver.

Battle Borg and TOS Feds were played a lot.

"Day 2 World Finals" for a game that takes 1.5 hours per round should probably not start at 6PM... everyone is too tired to play properly and/or do proper coverage by then.

The Championship game was a goddam mess to watch, and I know both players are quality players but I could also tell it was round 3 late at night -- it literally looked like somebody walked by and dumped a random box of Star Trek cards onto the table and walked away. I'm glad they at least could generally track what was going on...
 
By Klauser
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#587171
boromirofborg wrote: Sat Oct 01, 2022 1:11 pm Communication:
- Embrace giving rulings for more cards on how they interact and list the rulings on the card pages. Similar to how we accept that dilemmas have a dilemma resolution guide, it's not unreasonable for cards to have it as well. First stop to finding out how a card works should be the page of the card, not searching in the glossary. New cards should come with “release notes”, explaining the intent and guidelines for rulings.
Add my :twocents: to this suggestion.

(Warning ... old geezer post follows ...)

Back in the Decipher-era, the rules/product development staffers would post articles on a certain card or game mechanic. Usually no more than a long paragraph or two with the goal of getting the conversation flowing. I do see CC staffers doing this on occasion now, but worth considering making it a more regular item.
 
By StuartL
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#587197
Klauser wrote: Sun Oct 16, 2022 1:56 pm Back in the Decipher-era, the rules/product development staffers would post articles on a certain card or game mechanic. Usually no more than a long paragraph or two with the goal of getting the conversation flowing. I do see CC staffers doing this on occasion now, but worth considering making it a more regular item.
I think this is a good idea. There are a lot of cards where I, a very casual player, don't see the benefit, or why they are used in every deck. There are a lot of cards where I never seem to need half of the text on them. (Doorways being a prime example). I'm never sure if I'm just missing something or if the designers just really like putting 20 functions on a card.
Similarly, explaining some of the more basic ideas like when Persona A of a character is better than Persona B, would be helpful for those newer/returning players who find the sheer number of options difficult to navigate.
 
By NoComment
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#590269
make the game a real community project. as in everybody is allowed to propose/design cards and the community decides whether or not they become official. that way we could get like one new card every month.
the game should be treated like an open-source project with organic teams.
cut the waterhead off and stop sitting on the game like a private company. its a sluggish monstrosity with no vision or creativity at this point, just decaying power-hungry nerds protecting their self-given titles and positions
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#590272
NoComment wrote: Sat Dec 17, 2022 11:46 pm make the game a real community project. as in everybody is allowed to propose/design cards and the community decides whether or not they become official. that way we could get like one new card every month.
the game should be treated like an open-source project with organic teams.
cut the waterhead off and stop sitting on the game like a private company. its a sluggish monstrosity with no vision or creativity at this point, just decaying power-hungry nerds protecting their self-given titles and positions
We've done this with Will of the Collective.

The results have been... mixed, to say the least.
 
By NoComment
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#590273
Armus wrote: Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 am
NoComment wrote: Sat Dec 17, 2022 11:46 pm make the game a real community project. as in everybody is allowed to propose/design cards and the community decides whether or not they become official. that way we could get like one new card every month.
the game should be treated like an open-source project with organic teams.
cut the waterhead off and stop sitting on the game like a private company. its a sluggish monstrosity with no vision or creativity at this point, just decaying power-hungry nerds protecting their self-given titles and positions
We've done this with Will of the Collective.

The results have been... mixed, to say the least.
then fine-tune the process.
checking on it, it was a multiple choice process to end up with a card. not multiple players designing one and vote any of them into existence. horrible
you dont create a meal by asking the guests which ingredients to put in, you need one or multiple chefs doing their thing and let the guests decide what tastes best.
either way, running the cc like a company of random unfit people only "works", because it has the monopoly.
if f.e. charlie was a great CEO, then why isnt he running a real company?
in other words, the game needs a competition of ideas, not communism. why wanna prove again, that that always fails?
the game is too valuable to sacrifice it for ego or ideologic reasons imo
User avatar
 
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#590316
you dont create a meal by asking the guests which ingredients to put in, you need one or multiple chefs doing their thing and let the guests decide what tastes best.
It's kind of hilarious you argued for a community designed game and then proposed an argument for why the game should be designed exactly as it is now.
 
By NoComment
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#590347
Takket wrote: Sun Dec 18, 2022 2:41 pm
you dont create a meal by asking the guests which ingredients to put in, you need one or multiple chefs doing their thing and let the guests decide what tastes best.
It's kind of hilarious you argued for a community designed game and then proposed an argument for why the game should be designed exactly as it is now.
then read my post again. right now we have to eat what the cc shoves down our throats. there are no choices. but i guess people only learn by pain. right now its still time to change the cc and put their names on a hall of fame, for running the show 20yrs. after the game crashed and burnt, theyll be remembered as the team that was glued to their chairs for too long.
 
By Se7enofMine (ChadC)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#590352
A few points:

- Takket is right. You said exactly what he said you did

- i wonder ..you insist on railing against anything the cc doesor doesnt do and scream about change. If changes were implemented, would you participate in the growth of the game or would you still sit on your throne and scream about everything?

- having said that, your overall idea isnt bad. WotC should be more often. Card design/game direction should be more community involved. There are a very select group of voices and outside input appears to be frowned upon.

Edit: forgot. If folks want the current 'meta' of folks gone, the community will vote them out. That hasnt happened. Im sure we are all *insert insults here* because we disagree with you but the end vote still matters. The larger community is fine with the work they do. You arent. Thats how the world works.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#590356
Se7enofMine wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:00 am
Edit: forgot. If folks want the current 'meta' of folks gone, the community will vote them out. That hasnt happened. Im sure we are all *insert insults here* because we disagree with you but the end vote still matters. The larger community is fine with the work they do. You arent. Thats how the world works.
Attachments:
341938.jpeg
341938.jpeg (66.86 KiB) Viewed 825 times
 
By NoComment
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#590476
isnt the voting limited to cc interns and payed users? one crow doesnt attack another one.
trekccp, i hear you tramp

many people already chose to ignore the cc or got banned, so they dont care at all anymore.
most people are blind followers anyway, because they lack the energy and time to "fight the system". see political issues.
voting one out to get a replacement unfit person is just not doing it anyway

i dont have anything personal against anyone here, because i dont know them personally. maybe besides a few exceptions i had some games with and got backstabbed after..
i have something against the structure the cc is using. again, make it open source. dont copy private companies, copy working community projects.

its telling that the cc themselves dont notice they fall apart. one set per year is only one symptom. random bans of cards is another. random bans of critics is the most telling
people who chose authoritarian structures act accordingly...
be better

MOD EDIT (nobthehobbit, 2022-12-22): CoC-infringing content hidden.
Last edited by NoComment on Thu Dec 22, 2022 6:31 am, edited 9 times in total.
 
By NoComment
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#590477
Armus wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:29 am
Se7enofMine wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:00 am
Edit: forgot. If folks want the current 'meta' of folks gone, the community will vote them out. That hasnt happened. Im sure we are all *insert insults here* because we disagree with you but the end vote still matters. The larger community is fine with the work they do. You arent. Thats how the world works.
insert burning house "its fine" meme
User avatar
 
By geraldkw
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#590637
Se7enofMine wrote: Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:00 am A few points:

- Takket is right. You said exactly what he said you did

- i wonder ..you insist on railing against anything the cc doesor doesnt do and scream about change. If changes were implemented, would you participate in the growth of the game or would you still sit on your throne and scream about everything?

- having said that, your overall idea isnt bad. WotC should be more often. Card design/game direction should be more community involved. There are a very select group of voices and outside input appears to be frowned upon.

Edit: forgot. If folks want the current 'meta' of folks gone, the community will vote them out. That hasnt happened. Im sure we are all *insert insults here* because we disagree with you but the end vote still matters. The larger community is fine with the work they do. You arent. Thats how the world works.
I feel like there is room for more community involvement. Of course that requires community members to have the time and energy to engage and commit to some work. Those people also have to be capable of working with others without starting fights or name-calling over disagreements. That already narrows down the field of participants in a more open CC.

Perhaps the CC can brainstorm some new community involvement ideas similar to Will of the Collective (or even revamp WotC) and have a vote on which idea we should try? Some will of course be unhappy with whatever gets picked, and it might turn out to flop or need a 2nd or third try but I'd be interested in putting in some work if it means we all get to feel a little happier about where the game is headed.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Or maybe keep your unsolicited snark to yo[…]

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[…]