For posting 1E deck designs for feedback from other players and members of the community.
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#496256
Didn´t play for a couple of years...

what are current OP decks?

My guess would be [OS] [1E-AU] [Fed] ?

any other?
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#496257
There's wide belief that Aggro Borg are OP, in various flavors, including Personnel Assimilators and Ship Battlers. (I tend to see them as simply one of the last good counters to blitz solvers like [OS] [Fed] . Aggro Borg struggle against decks that make modest investments in defense.)
User avatar
 
By Mr.Sloan
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#496267
its kind of sad that decks are either pure speed solver or kill everything battledecks.

would be great if someone would invent cards or something that encourage decks that can do both.

Homeworlds discourage pure battledecks. yet there is little that discourage pur solver. I think getting rid of super defence cards like ablativ armor or STP back to hand etc. would help.

and encourage cross-quadrant interaction. like a rule everyone may leave one end of the spaceline (stopped) and enter the end of another spacelines quadrant...
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#496275
LuthySloan wrote:its kind of sad that decks are either pure speed solver or kill everything battledecks.
I would describe it as the game's biggest problem right now, closely related to the even larger problem of the game not having enough turns.

As Charlie said a little while ago, on a scale of 1-10, 1E today is at like a 7, whereas a decade ago it was more like a 3. It's still a fun, playable game, despite these problems of pacing and deck diversity, and [OS] [Fed] has not completely dominated the way pre-errata Wisdom of Surak did (for example).

But if we could fix these issues, 1E would jump up to a 9 or a 10.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#496489
after playing for some time again now i must say the game kinda dropped in ratings for me lately.
i mean the main appeal came from the "roleplaying" tng thing.

adding ENT completely destroyed that feeling for me though. whats left is an overcomplex slowpace game of solitaire.

the game length never really felt problematic to me, but the wincons are kinda obscure and the biggest problem is the amount of cards on the table.

when my opponent seeds 10+ game engine cards, im instantly on ignore and just focus on my own game.

right now, the game lacks everything that makes it a card game. no hand discard, no draw or deckmanipulation and pretty much no interaction besides battle.
User avatar
 
By DarkSabre (Austin Chandler)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
#496505
LuthySloan wrote:its kind of sad that decks are either pure speed solver or kill everything battledecks.

would be great if someone would invent cards or something that encourage decks that can do both.

Homeworlds discourage pure battledecks. yet there is little that discourage pur solver. I think getting rid of super defence cards like ablativ armor or STP back to hand etc. would help.

and encourage cross-quadrant interaction. like a rule everyone may leave one end of the spaceline (stopped) and enter the end of another spacelines quadrant...

There are decks that can be annoyance decks or focus on one thing (such as Borg assimilation). I think there is still a spot where there are cards in the game that could be used to build a deck around a concept (Thine Own Self, Q-Net, etc) but people aren't thinking outside the box on it.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#496506
LuthySloan wrote:its kind of sad that decks are either pure speed solver or kill everything battledecks.

would be great if someone would invent cards or something that encourage decks that can do both.

Homeworlds discourage pure battledecks. yet there is little that discourage pur solver. I think getting rid of super defence cards like ablativ armor or STP back to hand etc. would help.

and encourage cross-quadrant interaction. like a rule everyone may leave one end of the spaceline (stopped) and enter the end of another spacelines quadrant...
I'm not going to rehash the whole thing here, but I won the 1e Manassters event last year with just such a deck.

Then Errata decided to kneecap Power of the High Command to the point where it's not useful (or at least, nobody has yet demonstrated that it is still useful)

This was a topic of extended discussion in one of Charlie's Office Hours last fall, where he was good enough to let me come on and air my grievances.

Hopefully there were some lessons learned and Design (and Errata) are working to depolarize the game and create options for a more dynamic environment. :cross:
 
By HoodieDM
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#496824
BCSWowbagger wrote: As Charlie said a little while ago, on a scale of 1-10, 1E today is at like a 7, whereas a decade ago it was more like a 3. It's still a fun, playable game, despite these problems of pacing and deck diversity, and [OS] [Fed] has not completely dominated the way pre-errata Wisdom of Surak did (for example).

But if we could fix these issues, 1E would jump up to a 9 or a 10.
Circa 2012-2014 when [1E-TNG] came out, it was at it's peak of like 9.5...

~D
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#496826
HoodieDM wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote: As Charlie said a little while ago, on a scale of 1-10, 1E today is at like a 7, whereas a decade ago it was more like a 3. It's still a fun, playable game, despite these problems of pacing and deck diversity, and [OS] [Fed] has not completely dominated the way pre-errata Wisdom of Surak did (for example).

But if we could fix these issues, 1E would jump up to a 9 or a 10.
Circa 2012-2014 when [1E-TNG] came out, it was at it's peak of like 9.5...

~D
Really? Seems there was a lot of calls for- and answers of - errata from that era. That hardly screams perfection (or even near-perfection)
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#496972
Armus wrote:
HoodieDM wrote:
BCSWowbagger wrote: As Charlie said a little while ago, on a scale of 1-10, 1E today is at like a 7, whereas a decade ago it was more like a 3. It's still a fun, playable game, despite these problems of pacing and deck diversity, and [OS] [Fed] has not completely dominated the way pre-errata Wisdom of Surak did (for example).

But if we could fix these issues, 1E would jump up to a 9 or a 10.
Circa 2012-2014 when [1E-TNG] came out, it was at it's peak of like 9.5...

~D
Really? Seems there was a lot of calls for- and answers of - errata from that era. That hardly screams perfection (or even near-perfection)
Yeah, we look back on the TNG era through somewhat rose colored glasses. I'm not denying it was a great time, but we do forget just how monotonous a lot of it was. The six viable decks were four TNG speed solvers that played identically in different colors, a Fer/ NA armada deck that killed outposts on turn 3, and pre-errata Bajoran Resistance plus EE. The core of the game was very well-represented, but it needed growth from new blocks -- and got it.
 
By HoodieDM
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#497393
BCSWowbagger wrote:
Armus wrote: Really? Seems there was a lot of calls for- and answers of - errata from that era. That hardly screams perfection (or even near-perfection)
Yeah, we look back on the TNG era through somewhat rose colored glasses. I'm not denying it was a great time, but we do forget just how monotonous a lot of it was. The six viable decks were four TNG speed solvers that played identically in different colors, a Fer/ NA armada deck that killed outposts on turn 3, and pre-errata Bajoran Resistance plus EE. The core of the game was very well-represented, but it needed growth from new blocks -- and got it.
TNG era was the best. The game was a play and draw wonderland. Plus every deck WAS viable. You also forgot Borg, Hirogen, and straight up Bajorans. That's 9 meta deck types. I bet if Kazon had the Kazon Voyager then, it would have been viable too.

The problem is design went completely the wrong way. They neutered too many TNG cards and then the DS9 block was terrible (largely due to Nors still not being what they need to be).

Then every new deck that comes out in a new block rotation is too OP now, so it truthfully has become whatever new flavor of the quarter coming into play is the latest thing.

1E's highest peak of play was also at this time. After CM was neutered and DS9 block failed to deliver, a lot of folks stopped playing which was sad.

~D
User avatar
 
By Spectre9
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#498076
Borg is overpowered and for some reason there is a flat out refusal to nerf it though bans.

I'm actually at the point where I just stopped playing the game because of it.

I feel like I let a lot of people down by doing this but I was really fed up. I made threads to get feedback but I got brickwalled by a heap of Borg fans with big status inside the CC.

No I don't feel like TOS Feds deserves free reign over the metagame but before you can begin nerfing them you have to nerf the deck that can blow up Starship Enterprise on turn 2 with very little counterplay.

It comes down to the fact 1E OTF is a Bo1 (best of 1) game. You don't get extra games to sideboard in defensive strategies. You can compromise the speed of your deck by adding in Ablative Armor and Strategema and escape pods and still lose, I've playtested it. Against properly prepared battle Borg with extra objectives to either assimilate you or blow up extra ships until you can't play the game you're always at a massive disadvantage.

Games that are won and lost before you even play are not just bad for the health of the game but they will turn players off faster than anything else.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
Community Contributor
#498110
I'm actually at the point where I just stopped playing the game because of it.
I'm very sorry to hear this, and hope it doesn't end up being a permanent situation.

I think we're stuck in an unfortunate loop right now re: Borg and OS Fed.

If you suggest nerfing OS Fed (or solvers in general), it's said that you can't, because then Borg aggro decks (and lockdown/control decks in general) would dominate the game.

If you suggest nerfing Borg aggro (or lockdown/control in general), it's said that you can't, because then OS Fed (and solvers in general) would dominate the game.

If you suggest nerfing both, it's said that you can't, because then the strong dilemmas of recent CC vintage would turn every game into a long drawn-out slog without adequate offensive weapons.

It all ties back into the overarching problem of The Pace.

I've had all these conversations more than once. Heck, I've been on both ends of more than one of them! And, the thing is, nothing I just said is wrong. It's just a Gordian Knot of interlocking escalations that we seem institutionally ill-equipped to handle, despite several institutional attempts to do so. (It's gone on for long enough that I think it's fair to say that there's real institutional dysfunction on this.)

I know the issue remains high on Charlie's radar, but... I don't know, it's a hard problem. For all his power (on paper), Charlie's still just one man.
 
By Se7enofMine (ChadC)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Moderator
#498141
BCSWowbagger wrote:
If you suggest nerfing both, it's said that you can't, because then the strong dilemmas of recent CC vintage would turn every game into a long drawn-out slog without adequate offensive weapons.
For some, this isn't a downside .. the long-drawn out part :)
User avatar
 
By Spectre9
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#498213
BCSWowbagger wrote:
I'm actually at the point where I just stopped playing the game because of it.
I'm very sorry to hear this, and hope it doesn't end up being a permanent situation.
I still want to play the game I just don't want to feel like I'm playing at a massive disadvantage if I choose to play non-Borg. Sure some local metas don't want to scare players away so people don't play Borg but things are different either online or at big tournaments.

I think we're stuck in an unfortunate loop right now re: Borg and OS Fed.
I don't think TOS Feds winning on turn 5 compares to Borg blowing you up on turn 2 and then hovering over you threatening you as you try to rebuild.
If you suggest nerfing OS Fed (or solvers in general), it's said that you can't, because then Borg aggro decks (and lockdown/control decks in general) would dominate the game.

If you suggest nerfing Borg aggro (or lockdown/control in general), it's said that you can't, because then OS Fed (and solvers in general) would dominate the game.

If you suggest nerfing both, it's said that you can't, because then the strong dilemmas of recent CC vintage would turn every game into a long drawn-out slog without adequate offensive weapons.
Ultimately nerfing both is the best option then you move forward and see if the meta is balanced. The last option that you didn't list is the worst option of all: DO NOTHING
It all ties back into the overarching problem of The Pace.
Nerf Classic Communicator [DL] and nerf Seven of Nine. We're not stupid people here, we know what cards are speeding up the clock. CC for busting dilemmas and preventing unforeseen stops and Seven for allowing Borg to staff their cube 1-2 turns earlier than they otherwise would be able to without her.
I've had all these conversations more than once. Heck, I've been on both ends of more than one of them! And, the thing is, nothing I just said is wrong. It's just a Gordian Knot of interlocking escalations that we seem institutionally ill-equipped to handle, despite several institutional attempts to do so. (It's gone on for long enough that I think it's fair to say that there's real institutional dysfunction on this.)

I know the issue remains high on Charlie's radar, but... I don't know, it's a hard problem. For all his power (on paper), Charlie's still just one man.
I've been waiting on the sidelines for 6 months since the Masters when these issues were raised and nothing has been done. Is it up to Charlie to do something? Is it just the off season?

Do I need to wait until enough people lose to the deck to see the same problems I have? Will this happen at worlds 2020?
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[…]