Takket wrote:More of a request than a question but can we get a 2025 “what rule should die in a fire?” Thread going?
Good idea! Request accepted. Remind me of this promise if you don't get a die-in-a-fire thread by March 1.
sekce31 wrote:What is the best way to summon you to gain a ruling? (If any?)
This is a very good question. The short answer is "tag me." Performing the summoning dance is worth bonus points, honestly. Performing the
correct summoning dance is worth even more bonus points. (Did @soggy_amphibian know that we'd still be making that joke more than a decade later?)
The longer answer, though:
I used to be very very active on the Rules Questions board, and then I became Rules Manager and stopped. That's partly because I have less time to read and reply, but the main reason is because the risks are higher now. I can put "if it's not blue it's not official" in my signature all I want, but, the truth is, my opinion carries a ton of weight now. At best, I can shut down healthy discussions. At worst, I can make
mistakes which spread confusion and (on rare occasions) panic about the rules. My errors now reflect badly not just on me (which I don't mind), but on the entire Rules Committee and all the hard work they do, and, to some extent, on the rules themselves.
This makes me shy about posting. I feel it's often better for the game if I float above the fray, taking notes, and then render a verdict a few months later (after a thorough discussion with the Rules Committee). Sometimes, one or two Rules Committee members are already involved the discussion, and I can count on them to give good, correct, persuasive answers while I lurk the thread. As a big-time poaster, lurking can be frustrating for me, and I'm sure it can also be frustrating for people who just want an
official answer ASAP, but I think it's healthiest for the game if the official answers you get are reliably correct (even if it takes longer).
Obviously, though, I
do make exceptions, especially when I'm tagged and/or summoning-danced. If I'm tagged multiple times and don't reply, I've probably brought it to the full Rules Committee for discussion.
(Feel free to draw your own inferences about what that means for the Scientific Diplomacy thread. I will tell you that I have been closely following that thread since the morning it was posted.)
boromirofborg wrote:What card do you wish didn't exist because of the rules headaches involved?
I reserve the right to come up with a better answer later, but, off the top of my head, all six Combo Dilemmas. If you force me to pick one,
Alien Parasites & REM Fatigue. They're in the game now and we have to respect them (and we do!), but I do think Enhanced Premiere in general was a mistake and that anyone with a time machine should advise Decipher against it.
What rules do you wish didn't exist? This can be from a. rules manager, or a personal, or a developer level.
Repairs should start the turn you dock, not "at the end of your first full turn spent docked." Full turns are a surprisingly hard concept for players to manage in their heads, and we've moved away from them in most other places.
If I were dictator, I would rename the "Alternate Universe" icon to something that more directly describes what the AU icon
does. If a card has the icon, you are
restricted from playing it without permission, so I would rename it the "Restricted" icon. I think that would be easier to explain to novice players. I tried to sell this to the Rules Committee in about 2021 and they all looked at me kindly, but with absolute bafflement.
Oh, and facilities: personnel and ships can't play outside their native quadrants. That's a good, simple, clear rule. Facilities, by contrast,
can play outside their native quadrants, but, if you do, some of their built-in features automatically "switch off" by rule. That's
not a good rule, and the advent of
A New Earth (which places outposts outside their quadrant by literally changing their native quadrant -- a
great idea which is how it should actually work) has made the default rule for facilities even more confusing for players who can't keep the two systems straight.
Unfortunately,
![Borg [Bor]](https://www.trekcc.org/forum/images/smilies/icon_borg.png)
players rely on this rule (for
Transwarp Hub in the Alpha Quadrant), so there's nothing we can do about it unless we first give
![Borg [Bor]](https://www.trekcc.org/forum/images/smilies/icon_borg.png)
an alternative. (Balance is in the business of breaking decks, but Rules isn't.)
Dukat wrote: ↑Fri Jan 10, 2025 10:06 am
If you could change a rule, purely based on your personal preference, and not based on actual deliberations/requirements/sets/whatever, simply because you would personally like to see it (maybe it would make a deck work that you always wanted to build, but could not, because of those pesky rules in place) - what would it be?
Ooo, that is a good one.
I think battle could be more exciting. I've never playtested it, and it has nothing to do with current sets or anything, but I was quite fond of the battle rules I came up with for
Wolves Among The Sheep a few years ago:
When attacked, the defending player may choose to dispatch one or more untargeted staffed ships from his defending force to participate in separate engagements with one ship in the attacking force. Defending player may do this multiple times, diverting a different attacking ship each time. These engagements are resolved separately. Any ships in the attacking force not separately engaged in this way proceed to attack the original target.
(This is similar to Multiplexor Drone engaging multiple ships in OTF-Complete, except that each engagement draws its own current tactic.)
The winner of the battle is the force that inflicted the most total HULL damage across all engagements (to a maximum of 100% HULL damage per ship).
An example:
For example, a
force consisting of I.K.C. Gr'oth, I.K.S. Molor, a Battle Cruiser, and a Class-J Cargo Ship attacks a
force consisting of Starship Enterprise, Starship Constellation, Starship Constitution, Starship Defiant, and Columbus. All ships involved are staffed. The Klingon player announces that her force is targeting the Starship Enterprise.
The Federation player chooses to dispatch Starship Constellation to engage I.K.S. Molor, Starship Constitution to engage the Class-J Cargo Ship, and Starships Defiant and Columbus to engage the I.K.C. Gr'oth. This leaves only the Battle Cruiser from the original force to engage the Starship Enterprise. The additional engagements now resolve in the order the defending player declared, with the original attack resolving last.
First, Starship Constellation (6-6-5) engages I.K.S. Molor (6-6-5). Both players draw three tactics and select a current tactic, which they reveal simultaneously. Klingon player uses Frontal Assault (+3/+3). Federation player uses Classic Phaser Banks (+3/+3). Both sides score hits. Constellation receives two drawn damage markers for a total of 65% HULL damage. Molor receives the Classic Phaser Banks as a damage marker plus a drawn damage marker for a total of 60% HULL damage.
Second, Starship Constitution (6-4-6) engages the Class-J Cargo Ship (6-4-4). Federation tactic in this engagement is another Classic Phaser Banks (+3/+3). Klingon tactic is Maximum Firepower (+6/-3). Constitution receives a hit in the attack, for 60% HULL damage. In the return fire, Class-J receives a direct hit. 4 more copies of Classic Phaser Banks go on the Class-J, for a total of 120% HULL damage -- but this is only counted as 100% damage.
Third, Starship Defiant (6-6-5) and Columbus (5-1-3) engage the I.K.C. Gr'oth (currently 9-15-11, thanks to Captain Koloth's special skill, Tactical Console, and Captain's Log). Since she has been denied access to the original target, Starship Enterprise, in this engagement, Klingon player chooses to have I.K.C. Gr'oth attack Starship Defiant instead. Klingon player uses Pulse Disruptor (+3/+2). Federation player uses another Classic Phaser Banks (+3/+3). Starship Defiant receives a direct hit, for 115% HULL damage (rounded down to 100%). I.K.C. Gr'oth is undamaged.
Finally, Starship Enterprise engages the Battle Cruiser and scores a hit for 60% HULL damage, receiving no damage in exchange.
Once all engagements are complete, damage marker gametext is resolved. Casualties are taken and ships with 100% HULL damage are destroyed. In total, the Federation player dealt 60% + 100% + 0% + 60% = 220% HULL damage across the four engagements, while the Klingon player dealt 65% + 60% + 100% + 0% = 225% HULL damage. The Klingon player is the winner of the battle and may now add one Klingon development and/or remove one Federation development at this mission.
Dispatching for separate engagements is entirely at the defender's option. If defender has more ships than attacker, defender may divert all enemy ships from the original target. (Original target neither fires WEAPONS nor is fired upon in the battle, but is still stopped after.) Defending player must decide on any engagements promptly.
It's probably broken, but I always felt that a really big space battle between opposing armadas should feature multiple engagements, with potentially multiple ships on both sides blowing up.
Indeed, I think there are several very interesting ideas in
Wolves Among the Sheep, but the overall product was not something forum-goers were interested in, alas.