Discuss all of your questions, concerns, comments and ideas about Second Edition.
User avatar
 
By Naetor
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#459786
Anyone else find Nothing to Lose annoying? I hated it when I saw it, but thought giving it a chance and seeing how the meta evolves was the way to go. 2 months in and my opinion hasn't really changed. It just feels like it's too easy to know when it is a good or bad play for a dual, skill wall. But maybe others have different opinions. Am I just salty knowing any weenie deck and throw in Sigmund Freud? Or is Durg the evolution of Davies and I just haven't figured it out yet?
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Regent
Community Contributor
#459788
Yes. I teched for it in my Manassters 2 deck with Sigmund Freud and Cyrus Redblock, but those are two valuable card slots that I could have found other uses for.

Not sure if my tech paid off or not, but nobody threw it against me, so.... maybe?

At the same time, it's no more annoying than Rogue Borg Ambush, but that's not saying much, since RBA has been on my "way too overplayed" list for years.

*shrug*
Second Edition Balance Manager
 - Second Edition Balance Manager
 -  
  Trek Masters  Participant 2024
#459789
Those of us that have known the power of the Durg since he came into being welcome Nothing to lose to the dilemma pile. Come on gentlemen, climb aboard the Durg train! Plenty of room! :cheersL:
User avatar
Second Edition Rules Master
By Latok
 - Second Edition Rules Master
 -  
1E Australian Continental Champion 2019
2E Australian Continental Runner-Up 2019
#459797
It fits in most dilemma piles nicely so every deck is going to have to be prepared for it whether with ways to prevent the stop or to actually pass it. I like that it discards the hologram to pass.

The thing I don't like is that it really hammers the neuHQs with [Dom], [Baj], [Rom] having no native holograms and they can't use the ID style holograms or any of the [NA] holograms or other options like Durg. Out of those three affiliations only Tahna Los and Liam Bilby can pass it without cheaters.
User avatar
 
By Naetor
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#459806
durgforaday wrote:Those of us that have known the power of the Durg since he came into being welcome Nothing to lose to the dilemma pile. Come on gentlemen, climb aboard the Durg train! Plenty of room! :cheersL:
Every time I see the card, I remember you telling me how Durg is great in every deck... like 10 years ago. Lol! Maybe that's the point.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#459807
Finally! Nate reading my thoughts :) . That dilemma is annoying. It is the Quantum Incursions of 2E...
User avatar
 
By KillerB (John Corbett)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
Community Contributor
#459851
While Nat and I were [Fer] battling for a MN title last year I remember him grumbling about Dereliction of Duty. And he still won the game.

I found this off-putting. Not Nat personally, just the concept of players complaining about a card that slows down a deck they've been dominating with for years.

What's the alternative? Never having to adapt to new cards and constantly playing the same deck?

I hope Nathan keeps making people uncomfortable as Design Director. If nobody is "annoyed" then Design isn't doing it's job.

And Durg is the man. He's a Team Jersey hall of famer.
Second Edition Balance Manager
 - Second Edition Balance Manager
 -  
  Trek Masters  Participant 2024
#459873
I am honored to accept this award on behalf of The Durgster. He is currently on a smuggling run and could not be here in person but sincerely thanks you all !! :cheersL:
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#459888
I'm not really annoyed people play it. I'm more annoyed there aren't many options when deck building to account for it.
As I said. It is like Quantum Incursions. You are forced to include counters for it, no matter if opponent plays it or not.
User avatar
 
By KillerB (John Corbett)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
Community Contributor
#459895
Naetor wrote:I'm not really annoyed people play it. I'm more annoyed there aren't many options when deck building to account for it.
10 [NA]'s fit the bill. Tons of [NA] Holos. You have a brutal definition of 'many'.

Playing a Phase II HQ? You made that choice bubba, deal with it. Play a gain any skill card on a <4 personnel. Or just take the stop on the chin like a champ (and if your opponent made a sweet meta call and played more then one copy, tip your hat to them). It goes under. Not like this is a pre-errata Legacy situation.
User avatar
 
By KillerB (John Corbett)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
Community Contributor
#459896
Caretaker's Guest wrote:
As I said. It is like Quantum Incursions. You are forced to include counters for it, no matter if opponent plays it or not.
First half, the worst take. The second half, still pretty bad.
User avatar
 
By GooeyChewie (Nathan Miracle)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
#459903
Caretaker's Guest wrote:As I said. It is like Quantum Incursions. You are forced to include counters for it, no matter if opponent plays it or not.
There's a bunch of ways to deal with Nothing to Lose, not all of which involve changing your deck.

1) The obvious, stock personnel who can meet the requirements naturally. As John pointed out, you have several non-aligned options.
2) Skill gain on low-Integrity personnel.
3) Mass stop prevention, such as Bridge Officer's Test.
4) Cards which counter specific dilemmas, such as Adapt or Aceton Assimilators.
5) Purposefully count your personnel so that your opponent can only draw/spend 3, not 4.
6) Make more smaller attempts rather than fewer larger attempts so that all-stop dilemmas which get overcome isn't as big of a deal.

There's a few big differences which made QI worse. One, it wasn't technically a dilemma so practically none of the cards designed to work against dilemmas actually worked against it. Two, when you failed to pass QI, it went back beneath the mission. Three, even when you did tech against QI, the random nature of the requirements meant that truly teching against it meant you needed all six sets of requirements, not just any one.
User avatar
First Edition Art Manager
By jjh (Johnny Holeva)
 - First Edition Art Manager
 -  
#459909
Love the card.

Skills and keywords (and species) NEED to matter in deck design.

More please.
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[…]