Check out the trials and troubles of the first Will of the Collective, where the community designed a card for the first time!

Which version should become the final game text for Consume Me!?

Option #1 (Top Deck)
32
57%
Option #2 (Stop a weenie + top deck)
24
43%
User avatar
Director of First Edition
By MidnightLich (Charlie Plaine)
 - Director of First Edition
 -  
Trailblazer
#11311
Well, once again, it was too close to call. That means we have another run off between the two choices. Here they are, for your viewing pleasure:
Option #1 wrote:Image
Option #2 wrote:Image
Since the two options have been placed on the template, you can see how much wiggle room there is for lore, which was a consideration for some of you. You'll notice the cost is still not filled in. I asked Brad about this, and he tells me that the dilemmas can't be costed until their type is known. Unfortunately, we can't determine that until we choose the storyline for this card - which is coming up next week.

So, sound off, let your voice be heard. Debate, discuss, and decide which version will go on to the next step!

-crp
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#11318
As the submitter of the regular text on Options 1, I feel like I should probably take some time pointing out why I think it is the better option.

First of all, I'd would like to say that I am pleased that both versions presented here have text that places itself on top of its owner's dilemma pile for easy and reliable set-up/comboing with a Consume dilemma placed just after in the stack, rather than having to just be consumed by luck given the general lack of dilemma manipulation of one's own pile. In fact the only difference between the two options in that Option 2 has text for a conditional stop of of a single low-cost personnel while Option 1, does not have this text. However, I think Version 1 is the better choice for two primary reasons: 1) cost; 2) elegance.

With respect to cost, I think the important thing to remember about Consume Me is that it has its primary effect only if one gets lucky (the dilemma happens to be on top of one's pile when a Consume dilemma is used), or, through the "self-placing" text, in combination with a Consume dilemma in the same stack. Thus an important feature of the dilemma is that its eventual cost need be low enough to be effectively used in combination with other dilemmas that also have costs of their own. Otherwise (if the cost is too high) it will not see very much play because it becomes too expensive to both include the dilemma in the stack and play other dilemmas that will actually stop the mission attempt. In my opinion, this is the reason why the otherwise powerful dilemma Overwhelmed seems to see little to no play these days; at a cost of 4, it is simply too expensive to consistently use in combination with other dilemmas. Although I am not on the Design Team, I feel that the reliability that the self-placing text will lend to Consume Me's skill-targeted kill (that is immune to certain forms of death-prevention) will cause the dilemma to cost about 2 (give or take 1, IMO) alone, a cost I feel will be sufficiently low to be used in combination with the necessary consume dilemma and perhaps one more dilemma as an additional set-up or wall. The additional stopping text on Option 2, I feel, will increase the base cost of Option 1 by 1 or 2 counters, resulting in a dilemma cost that I predict will be 3, 4, or perhaps a little more (depending on how conservatively the Design team base-costs a dilemma like Version 1). In that scenario I feel the cost of Consume Me will be dangerously approaching a cost-benefit threshold that appears to have been crossed by Overwhelmed and would therefore be less likely to see widespread play. As a general principle, until the value of when-Consumed text like Consume Me's primary effect has been evaluated by widespread play, I feel it is probably safer to go with a cheaper option.

With regard to elegance, I am not refering to beauty or luxury; I am refering of the quality of being concise, simple, and succinct. Consume Me is the first of what can later become a new class of dilemmas that have their primary effects when Consumed. I feel that that particular inovation should be the focus of the dilemma. For my part, I felt like the self-placing text was essential to providing much needed reliability and playability to that class of dilemma in general. On the other hand, Option 2 includes additional text which is not particularly related to the primary effect of Consume Me; it is different, focuses on a different design goal (addressing "weenie" decks), and tacked on in addition to the primary effect. Essentialy it is two different dilemmas printed concurrently. In my opinion, while it may have certain play value and my make the dilemma more "interesting," I feel that it distracts from the primary focus of the innovation of Consume Me's primary text. And this is what I mean if I say I believe that Version 1 is a more elegant deisgn than Option 2.

Thank you for listening.
Last edited by CFHollister on Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
 
By charlie
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Grand Nagus
#11349
The there will be a little more room for lore (which in admission, I don't always read). I also think that this will keep the cost down. This will make it a little more appealing to players.
User avatar
Ambassador
By Linkan (Torbjörn Lindquist)
 - Ambassador
 -  
Architect
#11356
As the submitter of the regular text on Options 2, I want to argue for my point of view.

1. I agree with CFHollister that Option 1 is cleaner, but that in itself I don't see as an argument for either option.

2. I don't have any insight in the costing table, but I do not beleave that Option 2 will be too expensive to play with. I would say it should have costing at the most 0.4 above option 1, wich could mean that everything else aside, it could even have the same cost in the end, or it can perhaps cost 1 more. Too bad this can't be taken into account when voting in this step. The way I see it, I don't think that the dilemma is powerful enough to have a very high cost, if dual 2-3.

3. With personell like Jadzia, random selections is no longer "too good". I think that should be taken into account when it comes to costing.

4. Option 2 can be used to do something even if you don't get a consume dilemma in your draw. Without a consume dilemma, Option 1 is a "dead card" and I think we got enough of those by planet/space-specific dilemmas when opponent is trying the other.

All in all, I prefer Option 2 as I see it more versatile, but still not so "good" that it has to be "overprised". Thats why I didn't add a random stop, just conditional random stop.
 
By jonnyboy
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#11363
I think that Linkan has a point about option 2 being useful even without a consume dilemma. I must, however, agree with CFHollister's two points.

The cost threshold is important: if one dilemma were capable of producing both a stop and a kill, while probably also enabling another dilemma (such as triggering a second kill with TT), it seems to me that that dilemma's cost would need to be fairly prohibitive, thus limiting its play potential.

I also think that the elegance factor is fairly important. I don't actually get to play very much, since I don't know anyone else in my area that plays. The little trek ccg time that I do get involves playing with my wife, who can be easily frustrated by complicated dilemmas. I can imagine her trying to sort out what option 2 actually does and getting annoyed. Certainly, we cannot base our decisions solely on how inexperienced players may react, but I think that the most concise, elegant design would avoid problems with players of all levels. "Consume Me" introduces a new mechanic, and I think that it should introduce that mechanic as straightforwardly as possible.
User avatar
 
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#11383
I voted for #1 for a simple reason: I think it's better to start with the simplest version of the mechanic (this dilemma goes on top to set up Consume), see how that plays out, then get fancy.

All the other ideas are good cards, so once we establish the "consume me" mechanic, they can be revisited and added as twists.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Socialite
#11394
When i think about it - version 2 seems like it would have to have a minimum cost of 3. Using Hard Time as a template (a removal with no overcome dilemma) cost 3 seems like it would have to be the floor. Brad has said Hard Time is undercosted but in this case its not a complete removal but simply a stop. I can see this dilemma being cost 3 under version 2. Under version one I imagine it will be cost 0-2.

I'm personally persuaded by the argument that i'd rather NOT have a dead draw. Version 2 for me.
User avatar
Second Edition Design Manager
By The Guardian (Richard New)
 - Second Edition Design Manager
 -  
#11403
What I think people aren't costing is the kill. And a powerful kill it is. You are paying to setup a pretty spectacular hit and at the same time essentially reduce the cost of a Consume dilemma. That alone warrants the cost of (at least) 3. Sure fire kills are normaly around a cost 4. Then, add on your stopping cost. I'm fine if luck or deck manipulation gets this thing to hit for free, but setting it up has got to cost you, especially if Tragic Turn is coming up next. You guys are undercosting it and assuming Option #2 will be cheap. I doubt that very much.
User avatar
 
By Altoid
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#11421
The cost of "Consume Me" is moot for it's killing part (when it gets placed by another dilemma, its cost is effectively zero no matter what is printed on the card).

When taking into account the cost, only factor in how much the regular effect (the stop in #2's case) costs and the mechanic that it places itself on top of the dilemma pile.
User avatar
Second Edition Design Manager
By The Guardian (Richard New)
 - Second Edition Design Manager
 -  
#11428
Altoid wrote:The cost of "Consume Me" is moot for it's killing part (when it gets placed by another dilemma, its cost is effectively zero no matter what is printed on the card).

When taking into account the cost, only factor in how much the regular effect (the stop in #2's case) costs and the mechanic that it places itself on top of the dilemma pile.
Not at all. I agree that when the Consumed effect triggers, it adds nothing to the cost you have spent, but when that cost does come into play (it is played on the dilemma stack and revealed), part of its text is setting itself up for the kill. You have to take that into effect. Are you saying #1 would be a cost of 0? If so, that is way too good, especially coupled with the right dilemma. #2 raises the cost as its effect is 2-fold. That means the card is less useful.
User avatar
 
By DaSchemer
 - Alpha Quadrant
 -  
#11506
Altoid wrote:The cost of "Consume Me" is moot for it's killing part (when it gets placed by another dilemma, its cost is effectively zero no matter what is printed on the card).
nog and others like him would disagree
User avatar
Ambassador
By Linkan (Torbjörn Lindquist)
 - Ambassador
 -  
Architect
#11936
Well, to bad the dilemma will be useless unless you get a consume dilemma also. But if it is the Will of the Collective... Well, still two hours or so until end of vote, so theoretically it is still possible for my suggestion to win.
User avatar
Second Edition Design Manager
By The Guardian (Richard New)
 - Second Edition Design Manager
 -  
#11941
whampiri wrote:yip,with 15mins gmt to go it looks like we have binder fodder.
Keep it in your binder if you want to. Mine will be cheap enough to use.
Last edited by The Guardian on Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Q-Flashin'

Battle deck with The Issue Is Patriotism

I really enjoyed draft the couple times I've playe[…]

Hey folks. I'm bumping this thread to see what peo[…]

jadziadax8 MW treebel 40-35 Thanks for the good g[…]