This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
First Edition Creative Manager
By KazonPADD (Paddy Tye)
 - First Edition Creative Manager
 -  
1E European Continental Runner-Up 2023
1E Omarion Nebula Regional Champion 2024
#596246
Hey all - happy Friday - and welcome to your latest Friday Question!

It was meant to be a question from Charlie this week, but he’s away at the minute so I offered to fill in! But that in itself got me thinking…

If you were 1E Director for the day, what’s the one small change you would like to make?

Obviously, I’m not talking sweeping or groundbreaking changes here. Something small and achievable in a short timescale? Maybe you’d ban that one problem card you have an issue with? Or unban one you think is actually OK? Maybe you want to tweak an attribute that’s always felt off to you? Or fix some dodgy PAQ-era wording that doesn’t flow right?

Let us hear your views!
User avatar
 
By Professor Scott (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Trailblazer
#596269
KazonPADD wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:16 am Hey all - happy Friday - and welcome to your latest Friday Question!

It was meant to be a question from Charlie this week, but he’s away at the minute so I offered to fill in! But that in itself got me thinking…

If you were 1E Director for the day, what’s the one small change you would like to make?

Maybe you want to tweak an attribute that’s always felt off to you?
@Armus If you don't say Dorian Collins, I am gonna be disappointed!
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#596271
Professor Scott wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 4:39 pm
KazonPADD wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:16 am Hey all - happy Friday - and welcome to your latest Friday Question!

It was meant to be a question from Charlie this week, but he’s away at the minute so I offered to fill in! But that in itself got me thinking…

If you were 1E Director for the day, what’s the one small change you would like to make?

Maybe you want to tweak an attribute that’s always felt off to you?
@Armus If you don't say Dorian Collins, I am gonna be disappointed!
Oh I'd errata the shit out of Dorian Collins if they ever let me near the errata button.

I think they're smart enough to not give me the access though... :shifty:

I think @KazonPADD was directing that last bit at me...
User avatar
Director of Operations
 - Director of Operations
 -  
#596274
I'd give George and Gracie and Dr. Gillian Taylor the TOS Movies icon (since, you know, they were in one of the TOS Movies), so that my asshole Admirals trying to train them to retrieve photon torpedo casings from the bottom of the Pacific can do so without having to stock 4x Cetacean Institute in their draw deck to do so.

/rant
User avatar
 
By WeAreBack
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#596281
Make it so the Borg get tripped up on the same things as the rest of us, with "scouting" redefined as a type of mission attempt.

No more of this nonsense of getting to push past cards that block "attempting" without even having to play Adapt: Negate Obstruction. Why bother with cards that say "You must have a ship here to attempt mission" ("God") or that the mission "may not be attempted by a player with less than 50 points" (Dead End) if some decks just ignore this?

Mission Debriefing and Villagers With Torches should affect Borg too.

At a minimum [1E-TNG] [Bor] should have to put up with such a rule as the "price" of getting back The Ultimate User, to counterbalance how much easier scouting becomes with Relentless.

Same for point loss. Edo Probe, White Rabbit, Hazardous Duty and similar cards aren't worthwhile if some decks just ignore the point loss.
User avatar
 
By Takket
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Participant 2024
#596287
KazonPADD wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:16 am Hey all - happy Friday - and welcome to your latest Friday Question!

It was meant to be a question from Charlie this week, but he’s away at the minute so I offered to fill in! But that in itself got me thinking…

If you were 1E Director for the day, what’s the one small change you would like to make?

Obviously, I’m not talking sweeping or groundbreaking changes here. Something small and achievable in a short timescale? Maybe you’d ban that one problem card you have an issue with? Or unban one you think is actually OK? Maybe you want to tweak an attribute that’s always felt off to you? Or fix some dodgy PAQ-era wording that doesn’t flow right?

Let us hear your views!
I'd ban Adapt: Negate Obstruction. Y'all's [Bor] can figure out how to get past a dilemma you ran into last turn like all the rest of us. Or at least tone it down (once per game, and/or remove the [SCC] so it is a bad probe)
User avatar
 
By Exon
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#596290
Roll back the IKC > IKS changes to Klingon ships.

Yes, I know what Memory Alpha says, but that can easily be chalked up to differing English translations of the "original Klingon."

It was internally consistent within 1E until the editing started to accommodate 2EBC cards that are no longer part of the game. I find the discrepancy unreasonably annoying.
 
By Yalenus
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#596293
jjh wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 7:35 pm New affiliation = Tholians.

(I'd have to do A LOT of work in one day)
Work which I for one, would be forever grateful.

Remember, a vote for Loskene in March Madness is a vote for punctuality!

In my case, other than introducing a web worth of tholians?

An audit of the banlist, to see if there was anything that could come off it in light of cards added since the banning in question.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
1E Andoria Regional Champion 2024
#596332
I get every card off the ban list with Errata as needed. I've proposed conservative errata on nearly every card on there already.

#freescannerinterference
User avatar
 
By boromirofborg (Trek Barnes)
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2023
#596338
If we are going for *sweeping* changes:

- tactics side deck is now manditory and free, doesn't require a Battle Bridge Door (but may get a benefit), and, hull damage doesn't apply to player-controlled things. (So you can't lock someone out of playing people, but you can cripple their ships and snipe their personnel.)
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#596345
Hoss-Drone wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 4:25 pm I get every card off the ban list with Errata as needed. I've proposed conservative errata on nearly every card on there already.

#freescannerinterference
That's exactly what I'd do
User avatar
 
By WeAreBack
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#596356
And how did I miss this obvious one? New TNG versions of Morgan Bateson and the U.S.S. Bozeman (which would be "Captain Bateson" and "Starship Bozeman") issued with the [1E-AU] [CF] icons.

Consistent with all other [1E-AU] [CF] characters who exist in TNG, Captain Bateson would not be a persona version of Morgan Bateson, and in fact would be ❖. (His lore could describe him as "typical" 23rd century captain, which he assuredly was before coming forward in time, as well as the mandatory cheers/Fraiser joke), but otherwise unchanged. The [CF] [1E-AU] [1E-TNG] Starship Bozeman would be Unique (in keeping with the unwritten "no universal ships with universal matching commanders) rule and have to have a [CF] staffing requirement, lose any Borg bonus and probably some weapons, in order to prevent it becoming the universal second ship downloaded on Turn 1 in [Fed] [1E-TNG] deck using Reunite Legends.

Notably, Batesons's skills of Leadership and Stellar cartography are missing on the existing ❖ [CF] [1E-AU] [1E-TNG] personnel, so he perfectly fills a hole in the Make a Difference Again deck. (I know we're supposed to use some other ❖ [1E-TNG] as part of these decks, but it would be nice to be able to have the other regular non-intelligence skills would be Medical, Biology, Archeology, Diplomacy, Law and Music, but as it is you can't get past dilemmas like A bad end without outside help.)

I know there is a TNG [1E-AU] set planned, so this seems like an obvious way to fill out this new deck type.
User avatar
 
By WeAreBack
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#596357
And how did I miss this obvious one? New TNG versions of Morgan Bateson and the U.S.S. Bozeman (which would be "Captain Bateson" and "Starship Bozeman") issued with the [1E-AU] [CF] icons.

Consistent with all other [1E-AU] [CF] characters who exist in TNG, Captain Bateson would not be a persona version of Morgan Bateson, and in fact would be ❖. (His lore could describe him as "typical" 23rd century captain, which he assuredly was before coming forward in time, as well as the mandatory cheers/Fraiser joke), but otherwise unchanged. The [CF] [1E-AU] [1E-TNG] Starship Bozeman would be Unique (in keeping with the unwritten "no universal ships with universal matching commanders" rule) and have to have a [CF] staffing requirement, lose any Borg bonus and probably some weapons, in order to prevent it becoming the universal second ship downloaded on Turn 1 in [Fed] [1E-TNG] deck using Reunite Legends.

Notably, Batesons's skills of Leadership and Stellar cartography are missing on the existing ❖ [CF] [1E-AU] [1E-TNG] personnel, so he perfectly fills a hole in the Make a Difference Again deck. (I know we're supposed to use some other ❖ [1E-TNG] as part of these decks, but it would be nice to be able to have the other regular non-intelligence skills would be Medical, Biology, Archeology, Diplomacy, Law and Music, but as it is you can't get past dilemmas like A bad end without outside help.)

I know there is a TNG [1E-AU] set planned, so this seems like an obvious way to fill out this new deck type.

Serious question: how many [1E-Fer] basic blo[…]

HP010 and RiF

Aside from "Because Decipher," this a[…]

I will dm you @doctorjoya . Looking forward to th[…]

1EFQ: Into Recovery

https://i.redd.it/mm25lh0wfqg71.png With […]