Discuss all of your questions, concerns, comments and ideas about Second Edition.

Which do you find more edifying/interesting/fun as a player?

abilities that trigger in the play/draw phase
3
16%
abilities that trigger at some point during a mission?
8
42%
Orders
8
42%
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#563092
boromirofborg wrote: Mon Sep 27, 2021 7:40 pm It's interesting. I remember starting back in 95, and for the longest time, I cannot remember ever playing with anyone that hid the personnel. Usually when attempting you'd see who the personnel were, and when they were chilling at an outpost, they were all in a "stack" below the outpost.

When I was re-reading the rule book the other day, prepping to get a friend back in to it I realized that part of that is that the rules say when reporting, place them beneath the outpost.

So of course to a lot of us, beneath meant vertically, one slot below the outpost instead of "stacked under the outpost and then covered by the outpost."

I played in a fair amount of tournaments, including a few different decpihercons, and I don't remember hidden information being quite as big of a deal as it seems to be now. (I remember being very surprised by the discussion weeks ago about covering parts of the cards when revealing to an opponent.)

I'm sure it was and the years have just eaten away at the memory, but it seems if nothing else a very poor design to care so much about personnel and them do your best to make sure that your stars of the game are rarely seen by both players.

I wonder if playing a lot of games over AIM and Kedenya chat had something to do with hat, since usually being text based you had to be clearer about who was attempting what and where.

Respectfully, I also think that something that would make the game more accessible at the low end is a good thing, as long as the skill ceilings are kept high.

When it comes to the basic fantasy of why I play this game over other card games (not that I've played much recently, that I admit), I've never once sat down and thought, I enjoy playing memory game of 30-40 moving pieces and 4x that many possible skills and combinations.

It's seeing the what-if of the episodes play out, or watching the Borg assimilate Cardassia. All my fondest memories are around a long table fighting to flip that DS9/Nor back and forth, or try to get past dilemma combos. Not "which person had that skill.".
As a 1e player, it's different. You seed your dilemma combos, your opponent can either pass them or not. Seeing the skills your opponent's personnel have doesn't really change the outcome of a given mission attempt.

2e on the other hand, is an entirely different animal. Each mission attempt results in a player drawing and playing a certain number of dilemmas. The goal is to stop your opponent's mission attempt with as few dilemmas overcome as possible, because the more dilemmas that are overcome, the easier future attempts become.

As such, if you can track your opponent's skills and know what they're missing, then you may be able to stop them with only one (or maybe even none if you do it right).

That type of gameplay needs to be rewarded and encouraged, lest 2e devolve back to the soli-trek mission solving races of its early days.
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#563096
Sure, but even perfect information (which isn't really being suggested) wouldn't eliminate that, just shift it.

Right now, you need to remember every personnel they played, their skills, any relevant keywords, and the attributes to get what you are looking for. So you need two skills; memory and in the moment calculation of what dilemmas to pick.

Even with notes of what personnel were played and even what skills they had ( which would be extreme notes) you still need the tactical ability to pick the right dilemmas. All that is being lessened is the memory barrier to get there in the first place.

When it comes to games, there are reasons I typically don't want to win.

I don't want to win because I had a bigger wallet. (Solved by everything being printable in ST, and proxies being accepted in casual games in other games.)

I don't want to win because I know some esoteric interpretation of the rules. I want the rules of the game to be clear.

I also want to win because I played better then you, not because I have a better memory. Those two might be linked on some level, but I'd rather outplay on a chess level instead of a memory level.

All personal opinions of course.
User avatar
Executive Officer
By jadziadax8 (Maggie Geppert)
 - Executive Officer
 -  
2E World Semi-Finalist 2021
Grand Nagus
1E North American Continental Champion 2021
2E North American Continental Quarter-Finalist 2021
#563104
boromirofborg wrote: Mon Sep 27, 2021 10:17 pm I also want to win because I played better then you, not because I have a better memory. Those two might be linked on some level, but I'd rather outplay on a chess level instead of a memory level.
But here's the thing: having a good memory for your opponent's personnel is one of the skills that makes a player better in 2E.

Now, it's not THE essential skill. You can build dilemma piles that don't rely on skill tracking. I do it all the time, because I'm actually balls at it. However, I admire good skill trackers.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#563107
boromirofborg wrote: Mon Sep 27, 2021 10:17 pm
I also want to win because I played better then you, not because I have a better memory. Those two might be linked on some level, but I'd rather outplay on a chess level instead of a memory level.
I think you're implying disparity where none exists.

How many really great chess players are really great chess players because they've studied the game and memorized many different scenarios?

There are literal books written on single move openings and the lines that develop from them. There's more books written on counter-openings to those openings, etc.

Why is it good and Honorable for a player to win a chess game because they've done the prep work and can correctly anticipate - and counter- an opponent's strategy, but it's "just better memory" to hard stop a team with a well-placed Counterinsurgency Program?

I guess I'm not seeing the difference.
User avatar
 
By GooeyChewie (Nathan Miracle)
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Architect
#563109
At one point, the World of Warcraft TCG allowed notetaking. They also had several Rogue cards which relied on correctly 'guessing' the cards in your opponent's hand, some of which would afterwards reveal the opponent's hand. I built a deck to take advantage of these rules, writing down exactly what was in my opponent's hand. Despite being a fairly effective strategy, I stopped playing that deck very quickly because taking such copious notes ground the game to a halt.

I think most people would agree that some notes are reasonable. I think most people would also agree that there's some level at which taking notes becomes cumbersome and bogs down the game, like what I experienced with WoW TCG. The tricky part is determining where to draw the line. I think the existing rules should stay in place for Regionals and higher level tournaments. But if somebody, especially a newer player, is jotting something down every once in a while I won't complain, as long as it isn't interfering with the flow of the game.
Nu Trek 1E Set

cc is acting as if it were publishing a card game.[…]

What's Wrong with Achievements?

In addition to the already published, more rest[…]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!

Happy birthday to my homie @Corbinq27 !

Halloween 2021

The kids costumes are coming along this year. Spro[…]