This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Prophet
#589063
Hello all, and happy Friday! I work in a bakery, so we're entering our incredibly crazy busy Holiday baking season, which means I've been busy and haven't been around as much. But work on 1E continues, as does discussion. One topic of a lot of focus lately has been the [Ref] mechanic and how it's been treated in the CC era. Today, we want to ask you what you'd like to see done with the mechanic.

On one end, there is the original use of the mechanic by Decipher. In this model, [Ref] cards are hard counters against mechanics, often to the point of essentially banning the strategy. Writ of Accountability would be a good example of this, as forcing a game loss for scoring too many points essentially bans the strategy from play.

The opposite end is a world where every abuse target by a [Ref] card has been removed from the game, either via errata or ban. In this state, referee cards are just not part of the game. And this has been the goal towards which most of the CC's work has been towards.

And in between, there are a host of options and many dials that can be turned. We'd like to know what you think should be done with the Referee mechanic? What role do you want [Ref] cards to have in the game? Did Decipher have it right? Or do you want them gone? Or do you have another idea for how we should proceed? We have our own ideas, but we want to hear yours!

We are committed to listening to your feedback and making course corrections. We are more than willing to admit when we've made a mistake and re-examine our previous decisions. Lately, we have been listening to the discussions about [Ref] cards and taking a hard look at what we're done and why. This discussion will help us understand what you want from this mechanic and determine if, and how, we need to course correct.

Have a great weekend!

-crp
User avatar
Director of Operations
By JeBuS (Brian S)
 - Director of Operations
 -  
1E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#589068
I'd like to see all the abusive stuff removed from the game, making [Ref] essentially useless. Then, once accomplished, why not transform [Ref] into something more of a "soft" counter side deck? I don't know what that looks like, but I'm sure lots of folks could come up with ideas. Maybe your Amandas and Uxbridges can live there with some Q2s and whatnot. Take the point box off them and make them [Ref] only. Then they leave play? Dunno. Like I said, lots of room there.
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#589075
Very close to what Jebus said.

________________________
As it stands now:

99% of strategies that get ref cards should be things that don't exist overall. Here's a more in-depth of why:

Writ is I think the golden example of what's wrong with he current Ref existence. It pseudo bans the strategies, but leaves the door open just enough for them to be played in the right meta. This sounds good in theory, but in reality, it something is abusive enough for the Ref mechanic to deal with it now, it's a major negative.

Q-Bypass, etc were turn 1 win decks. That was clearly bad for the game. But Writ didn't solve it, it made tournaments more random. Now rounds are coin flips where the game can be 100% decided before the game is over. That's not really fun for anyone, and might be acceptable if the game was actually played for high stakes, but it isn't.

Currently, the high stakes I play for is time. If I devote 5-8 hours of my life for a tournament, I don't need to win every/most/any games. I do want to feel like I actually played, however.

So current Ref is bad design. I makes it where you really *must* be playing 1-2 ref seeds ,or you stand a significant non-zero chance of not getting to play many rounds.
________________________


So the future:

Let's say all the bad stuff is gone. A ref of soft-counters sounds good. There should be more interactivity and more counters to everything. A game should have at least 3-5 Kevins and Amandas played, or viable. There should be counters to Tribbles, tactics, mission attempts, staffing of ships, etc. A ref deck there that helps with some of the safety rails would be good.

If I was to list current ref cards that kind of fit this, I would say:

Villagers With Torches
Mirror Image
Panel Overload
Scanner Interference
Oof
Scorched Hand
The Juggler

All of those hurt strategies and curb possible abuse while also not completely shutting them down. They also provide some interaction and self ways to nullify.

Those are good examples of counters that wouldn't exactly be worth a card on their own, but are cool to have.
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#589077
I agree with these takes as well.

Is the strategy so broken that you automatically lose without the right counter? Then it shouldn't even be part of OTF in the first place. Ban/errata is the right tool.

There is a place for low-cost counters to strategies which are strong but not overpowering. [Ref] can sometimes be the right tool for this.

The difference is that nobody should feel obligated to run [Ref] cards at risk of getting blown out of the water by a first-turn win or something like that. I've never liked the [Ref] mechanic for several reasons -- it's bad game design, risk should be borne by the player trying a broken strategy, not by the opponent playing defense. There are a lot of subtle timing issues that even experienced players get wrong. And to top it off, it's not even thematic. If anything, I think Q would be delighted if someone found a loophole in a scenario he set up -- when Sisko punched him he didn't turn into a referee, blow a whistle, and say that Sisko lost the game for breaking the rules. Instead he remarked that Sisko was different than Picard and had to change tack... exactly the opposite of how the Q the Referee mechanic works in the game.

If the CC is taking a comprehensive look at [Ref] cards, I strongly encourage a look at the associated timing and action rules, since [Ref] cards interact very strongly with "valid response", "hidden agenda", and "suspend play" timing rules (all of which are thorny on their own), sometimes in counterintuitive ways. It's also a problem that the first action of the game is generally untouchable by [Ref] cards.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#589089
[Ref] as a mechanic (i.e. Q the Ref, Civil War, and Tribunal) needs to die in a fire.

Counters, OTOH, need to be more feel-good. It should cost a seed slot, and it should be a meta decision, and when you guess right you should feel (and be!) rewarded in real game terms, not just "congrats, you spend this seed slot and didn't lose to BS".
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#589093
Ref cards put the onus on the player being abused by the opponent and not on the one playing the abuse. That being the abuser needs to put cards in his deck to not be abused by strategies that were always a bad play experience and unfun to play and specifically play against. The opponent doesn’t need to put anything specific in as they are just running their strategy as usual.
So smooth out the game by removing all the Ref cards by removing all the cards that make the game unfun for the target of cards referred on the Ref cards.
So for the sake of the game removing the mechanic would probably be the best course of action.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#589094
Smiley wrote: Fri Nov 18, 2022 5:46 pm Ref cards put the onus on the player being abused by the opponent and not on the one playing the abuse. That being the abuser needs to put cards in his deck to not be abused by strategies that were always a bad play experience and unfun to play and specifically play against. The opponent doesn’t need to put anything specific in as they are just running their strategy as usual.
So smooth out the game by removing all the Ref cards by removing all the cards that make the game unfun for the target of cards referred on the Ref cards.
So for the sake of the game removing the mechanic would probably be the best course of action.
Sure, that makes logical sense, but it falls onto the slippery slope of "what makes the game unfun?"

What's the limiting principle there?
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#589096
Armus wrote: Fri Nov 18, 2022 5:49 pm Sure, that makes logical sense, but it falls onto the slippery slope of "what makes the game unfun?"

What's the limiting principle there?
I think we could restate that as "if we don't want a player doing X, we should be preventing X via errata or ban rather than printing Y and telling every other player on the planet to stock Y just in case." vs. "X is really good, so we'll print Y so there's interesting counterplay available".
User avatar
 
By Smiley (Cristoffer Wiker)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#589103
Armus wrote: Fri Nov 18, 2022 5:49 pm Sure, that makes logical sense, but it falls onto the slippery slope of "what makes the game unfun?"

What's the limiting principle there?
Sorry, I used the term unfun here to try to make my point come across as simple as possible. I can try to find a better word down the line for you.

The important part is that as a designer, I'm always in the search of the "fun" in games. That's not MY "fun" but players' "fun". This we can learn through watching others play as well as discussing the game with players.
User avatar
 
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#589109
Mr. Ramsey, what do you think we should do with [Ref] cards?
Image

Seriously... CC I think you already know where you are at with this. Are you making new ref cards? Are you going to make a ref card to counter the Empok Nor/STP/Masaka/STP drop deck that won a tournament? Of course you aren't because that is an AWFUL idea. The mechanic is already dead you are just stringing it along on life-support for Decipher's sake 20 years later.

Let it go!

I can tell you another thing I hate about Q-ref that annoys the heck out of me..... the freaking cycling. We already have LONG turns with unlimited actions. So as I'm dozing off at the table while my opponent counts his cunning for the 43rd time to make sure he has the right people on his ship, thelast thing I want is to watch him spend even 5 seconds cycling a ref card before he ends his turn. It is a BORING mechanic that only exists to answer the question "how can people actually stock these things and still have a functional deck?" and waste precious time.

QT:CW cut that down SOME

The reality almost all the [Ref] cards who's game text actually gets used is for OFFENSE anyway. What percentage of all actual gametext usage is for:

Obelisk to get Masaka
Mirror Image (which just lets you draw cards, doesn't stop your opponent)
Pre-errata Defend Homeworld

Probably a pretty large number. So how much defense are people actually playing with these?

What I wouldn't mind is something like this....... errata off all the [Ref]

change QT:CW/QTR/Tribunal in some way to do something like this........

QT:CW: Blah blah same game text as before except: Put any 13 cards you want here and they gain the [Ref] icon. one copy each. face up

QTR: Download any [Ref] from you QT:CW that is a valid response to something opponent just did during their turn. NO CYCLING.

So you can stash some cool counter cards in there you won't see otherwise to support some thing you are worried about for your deck, and it only works during OPPONENT'S turn so defense only. Magnetic North if you have a bunch of small ships. Narrow Escape. Stick Amanda and Kevin in there. Heck stick a WOLF in there if you are worried about transporter phobias lol and i can use my "regular" face down q's tent cards for offense as normal.

That's all just brainstorming but... kill the mechanic either way.
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
#589113
Anyone who plays me knows I’m not a fan of the whole Ref mechanic, however if other players want the option for non-offensive mechanics like Villagers, Mirror Image, Containment Field (now it can’t leave play), Strategema etc then I’m fine with that. I don’t think the game needs Ref to counter the really offensive strategies, those should be fixed instead. That way newbies don’t need to learn the complexity of Ref until they’re ready and won’t auto-lose vs Ludwig’s Empok deck.
User avatar
 
By Enabran
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
2E Austrian National Second Runner-Up 2022
#589117
Takket wrote: Fri Nov 18, 2022 11:53 pm Seriously... CC I think you already know where you are at with this. Are you making new ref cards? Are you going to make a ref card to counter the Empok Nor/STP/Masaka/STP drop deck that won a tournament? Of course you aren't because that is an AWFUL idea.
Why should they? Such cards already exist!
 
By Winner of Borg (Stefan Slaby)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
1E European Continental Champion 2023
1E Austrian National Champion 2023
2E Austrian National Champion 2022
1E Borg Region Regional Champion 2023
2E Borg Region Regional Champion 2023
#589120
i used to like the ref mechanic. some of my best 1E memories include ref cards. i remember winning my first regional against an abusive deck by simply bringing the correct choice of ref cards. i remember stranding an opponent's ship in a worlds final by flipping Obelisk of Masaka at the right time. i remember how Panel Overload and Scanner Interference used to make scanning balanced and fair, back before the OTF bans and subsequent errata made it completely useless.

the ref mechanic has also created an interesting niche in 1E's "cost" ecosystem. a ref card could be readily available, yet cheaper than a full seed slot. this is exactly the right cost for certain effects (e.g. the "mulligan" provided by Obelisk of Masaka), and by now, it is the long-established cost for some cards! by removing the ref icon from Defend Homeworld errata has unduly increased the cost of this widely used card.

there used to be a wide spectrum of ref cards available. some were indeed hard counters to very specific abusive strategies (e.g. Writ of Accountability), but many others were much more nuanced. the complex rules of White Deprivation were offloaded onto a ref card! others are soft counters that add strategic options to a wide range of situations and decks, only hitting abusive decks harder (e.g. Scorched Hand, pre-errata Containment Field, In the Zone). ref cards were a great way to retroactively add small costs to undercosted cards. and some even had small positive effects for the player, a reward for using the ref mechanic at all (e.g. Obelisk of Masaka, Defend Homeworld).

balanced ref cards are cool because you have to deal with them frequently, you have to build your decks ready for them, so your strategies aren't allowed to get abusive - but you don't have to deal with them all the time, sometimes you get lucky games where you get to enjoy the full benefit of your cards and strategies without the extra costs. a bit like OTF's quadrant rule?

i do agree that the hard counters can die in a fire. i find hard counters in all forms boring, ref or no ref. even without a ref icon, the CC has continued to create hard counters, and they were more reckless with them because those were harder to use. some hard counters created by the CC have horrible consequences for strategies that were only slightly above the power curve (e.g. N'Rana vs Nanoprobe Resuscitation, Shrouded Assailant vs Handshake). these cards are very similar to Writ of Accountability: rarely played, because few players find space and play mechanics for the necessary cards, yet completely devastating against the right opponent.
these are also the very cards that have pretty much ruined 1E deck building for me. would you want to build a complex deck around NR or Handshake only to be beaten by the random people who happen to bring the correct counter? i would have very much preferred counters to these strategies to be more readily available with ref icons, yet more nuanced in their effects!
the more nuanced ref cards are the interesting ones. the cards that block certain abusive strategies by compound costs, yet also see a little use in regular games. we need more of those!

plus, the ref mechanic is at its best when players have to think about *which* ref cards to bring because they simply can't bring them all. there used to be around 30 ref cards! but your war against the ref icon has whittled choices down to the point where players just bring everything remotely useable, and keep forgetting dead / erratad ref cards in their piles simply because they don't need the slot for anything else...
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#589130
+1 to all the deal.with the hard counters via ban/errata. (Edit:. So balance really should be going through ref card by card and effect by effect and get it all placed on a side - this includes already banned stuff. Keep or go and then Thanos snap it. Insert my obligatory BRING BACK SCANNER INTERFERENCE)

Ref should continue for soft tech. The juggler, Villagers and oof! for example.

I would like to see ref expanded for other "soft tech". If all ref has is 13 or less cards than there's no real choices and if something exists it needs choices. So to that end, I would like to see other "this would be fun or good for the game buts clearly shown it's not worth a seed slot - IE - I would like to see Kobayashi Maru scenario and temporal investigations get a ref icon in this theoretical situation. Plus some other new cards that have limited effects but would add decision making capacity for those who want it.
User avatar
Executive Officer
By jadziadax8 (Maggie Geppert)
 - Executive Officer
 -  
2E North American Continental Semi-Finalist 2023
ibbles  Trek Masters Tribbles Champion 2023
2E Deep Space 9 Regional Champion 2023
#589145
There are currently 26 cards with the [Ref] icon. They seem to break down into the following categories:

OTF Rule, so Banned
Fair Play
General Quarters
Intermix Ratio
The Big Picture
You Are a Monument

Banned in OTF Due to Offensive Use
Shape-Shift Inhibitor
In the Zone
Scanner Interference

Still Fully Relevant (some have obsolete functions)
Mirror Image
Villagers with Torches
Containment Field
Intruder Alert!
It's Only a Game
Obelisk of Masaka
Q the Referee
Reactor Overload
Strategema
White Deprivation
Oof!
Scorched Hand
The Juggler

Could Be Relevant (most functions obsolete)
HQ: Orbital Weapons Platform (Strategema outclasses it)
Access Denied (one the rare case you share a mission with your [BO] opponent
Feedback Surge (See Above)
Panel Overload (This one could go in either place, if your meta has lots of Spacedoor abuse, I guess)
Writ of Accountability

So, you can still build a full Civil War Tent, but there's basically no meaningful choice in that deckbuilding option.

When I came back to the game in 2017, I don't think I fully grokked the idea of OTF. This means that my early decks contained a Civil War Tent and basically the 13 [Ref] cards in the Still Fully Relevant category. This was definitely due to memories of Decipher brokenness. As I have gotten more comfortable in this game, I have built fewer decks with a CW Tent.

I think that these days, I would like to see the following happen regarding the [Ref] pile:
  • Carefully consider what strategies we as an organization want to curb by [Ref] cards. For instance, should we add a [Ref] icon to Goddess of Empathy to curb [1E-Int] spam? What about on Asteroid Sanctuary to allow people to hide from armada decks?
  • Errata all remaining cards listed on current [Ref] cards so that they're not abusive.
  • Errata the [Ref] cards so their obsolete functions are gone and the named cards are delisted (like we did with Going to the Top on Containment Field). If we fix all cards and strategies on a [Ref] card, it can be banned in OTF.
1EFQ: Game of two halves

Honestly, I don’t think I’ve re[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

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

Opponents turn

Remodulation

It started in mid-2013. At that time it became sta[…]