This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#567260
I decided I want another thing for Christmas. Let’s get rid of or change the rules that allow for dilemma skeezing. Specifically cards like Nilz Baris and Anastasia komananov. Yes I get there are counters but their mechanic just really does break the game and tilt the favor even more the feds way. What I would like is a simple errata that says that special downloads cannot interrupt dilemma.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#567261
stressedoutatumc wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 8:28 am I decided I want another thing for Christmas. Let’s get rid of or change the rules that allow for dilemma skeezing. Specifically cards like Nilz Baris and Anastasia komananov. Yes I get there are counters but their mechanic just really does break the game and tilt the favor even more the feds way. What I would like is a simple errata that says that special downloads cannot interrupt dilemma.
I definitely agree with the sentiment in principle, but I've started to question whether (very limited) "bugouts" aren't a good thing.

The fact is that there are some dilemma combos that are literally unbeatable if you can't interrupt them. If there's zero bugouts, then these combos will dominate the meta and render a whole bunch of other dilemma combos useless. The result could easily be a devolution of the game into a more limited meta where you can only fight fire with marshmallows and deckbuilding becomes a function of who can rebuild their marshmallows the fastest.

So while it sucks to have your awesome combo cracked by a bugout, in this case I'd say be careful what you wish for...
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#567285
Armus wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 8:54 am
stressedoutatumc wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 8:28 am I decided I want another thing for Christmas. Let’s get rid of or change the rules that allow for dilemma skeezing. Specifically cards like Nilz Baris and Anastasia komananov. Yes I get there are counters but their mechanic just really does break the game and tilt the favor even more the feds way. What I would like is a simple errata that says that special downloads cannot interrupt dilemma.
I definitely agree with the sentiment in principle, but I've started to question whether (very limited) "bugouts" aren't a good thing.

The fact is that there are some dilemma combos that are literally unbeatable if you can't interrupt them. If there's zero bugouts, then these combos will dominate the meta and render a whole bunch of other dilemma combos useless. The result could easily be a devolution of the game into a more limited meta where you can only fight fire with marshmallows and deckbuilding becomes a function of who can rebuild their marshmallows the fastest.

So while it sucks to have your awesome combo cracked by a bugout, in this case I'd say be careful what you wish for...
I actually have a really good reason. Maybe a couple.

[1] Limited bugouts wouldn't and aren't a bad thing in of itself. BUT, combined with turbo bonus point scoring, it's a VERY bad thing. A 2-mission win seems to be in the current meta, and doesn't seem to be going away. So, If I can bug out of two dilemma sequences with the aforementioned cards, then I am essentially rendering 1/2 of the game (dilemma building) inconsequential. Even I can do it just ONCE, than that is a huge boon to me if I can also spot where the dead end is. I do agree that bugging out with a card like The Needs of the Many or Polarize Hull Plating or even Not Programmed to Respond make sense, but being able to see, then completely stop an attempt makes the game silly to some extent. I have the same argument for a card like Mortal Q/Mortal Quinn that completely deletes multiple dilemma. I think CC agrees with me to some extent, given errata to cards like McCoy or Sato that used to nullify dilemma all day.

2. Forcing or encouraging the game to need 3-4 missions to win is a GOOD thing. It actually levels the playing field in the same way a shooter video game having a medium "time to kill" levels their game genre. Honestly, the game has gotten a little out of hand with 2 mission win decks. Yes, they should still exist, but they should not be so easy to do. I'd say that the Genesis Device should be on the chopping block for the same reason. By allowing and even forcing a player to encounter 3-4 dilemma combos, it actually validates that part of the deck building process. It could be argued that the reason that most decks (including mine) are running 12+ seed cards that arent dilemma is because we kinda know the opponent will only see 2/6 combos anyway, so that part is less important than turbocharging my start. I know that I have fewer chances to stop my opponent if they are scoring 50+ with every mission.

3. Not to be naïve or argumentative, but I haven't seen any combos that are absolute stops and need to be cheesed to pass. I'm open to learning something new, but I pay attention and the super lock dilemma combos aren't really a thing mostly because the CC has done a good job preventing or errata'ing them out of game. Too, I'd rather see creativity and thought of the players going into coming up with these dilemma rather than the super cheesy Nilz and Anastasia work-arounds which take absolutely no thinking other than put them in your tent or stock multiple copies or have a hologram door to download. I think those cards, specifically, and cards that stop a dilemma combo after seeing it should be stopped. Dilemma is such a crucial part of the game and it should be respected as such.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Champion 2021
#567326
dilemma play is dead ended anyway, bugouts or not.
i dont think "soloplay" is the future of the meta
bring some interaction, dont rely on dilemma play if you want to stop 2 mission wins.

but in order to make the game more accessible, id bring SD on the same level as interrupts
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#567341
Ensign Q wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 3:16 pm dilemma play is dead ended anyway, bugouts or not.
i dont think "soloplay" is the future of the meta
bring some interaction, dont rely on dilemma play if you want to stop 2 mission wins.

but in order to make the game more accessible, id bring SD on the same level as interrupts
I wasn't saying anything about solo play.

Ironically, you are proving the point I was trying to make. If it weren't for the absolute cheese of Nilz and Anastasia, the dilemma WOULD be enough. It's only because those two cards can weirdly circumvent the dilemma that you are suggesting I need to do anything more. Dilemma IS THE INTERACTION.

I would kill a whole family of tactics and cards that let you circumvent dilemma. From my playgroup, people are scared to encounter dilemma and maybe don't really know how to effectively. But that is literally 1/2 the game. It shouldn't be allowed to be circumvented at all.
User avatar
 
By Ensign Q
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Champion 2021
#567356
on the upper end of games i never felt dilemma that asks for skills are effective at all.
personnel and reports had such a power creep, that they bring everything anyway. especially when you count in borg, which kinda is the benchmark for me.

soloplay means pure solver to me
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#567357
Ensign Q wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 8:56 pm on the upper end of games i never felt dilemma that asks for skills are effective at all.
personnel and reports had such a power creep, that they bring everything anyway. especially when you count in borg, which kinda is the benchmark for me.

soloplay means pure solver to me
I think you and you playgroup need to up your dilemma game, me thinks. The fact that you haven’t seen it doesn’t make it so that dilemma can’t stop and disrupt even the most powerful decks.

Again, if point out that what you said doesn’t serve as an excuse why dilemma skeezing should be okay.
User avatar
 
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#567372
Hoss-Drone wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 2:43 pm The bug out cards are the only thing keeping some dilemmas combos in check. Without them, control decks could very quickly take over the meta.
Sounds like you're threatening me with a good time. ;)
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
1E World Champion 2021
Architect
Community Contributor
#567373
Hoss-Drone wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 2:43 pm The bug out cards are the only thing keeping some dilemmas combos in check. Without them, control decks could very quickly take over the meta.
I buy this. It would be nice if we had a way of doing this that wasn't so ad hoc / faction-specific / abusive of the timing rules, though.
[Int] Generic Bug Out
Once per game, plays after a dilemma is revealed and before it is encountered. Mission attempt immediately ends. (This card may not be downloaded.)
([Bor] exclusion is deliberate.)

Just an idea.
User avatar
 
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Community Contributor
#567375
BCSWowbagger wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:39 pm I buy this. It would be nice if we had a way of doing this that wasn't so ad hoc / faction-specific / abusive of the timing rules, though.
[Int] Generic Bug Out
Once per game, plays after a dilemma is revealed and before it is encountered. Mission attempt immediately ends. (This card may not be downloaded.)
([Bor] exclusion is deliberate.)

Just an idea.
I prefer the faction-specific versions (because variety!), but I'd take this sort of generic one if you swap out the second part for "your turn immediately ends". (But that's my thought that a generic version of a card should leave room for specific ones to be better.)
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
1E World Champion 2021
Architect
Community Contributor
#567378
I could go with faction-specific ones. I just want to flush today's bugouts out an airlock because of their bizarro-world timing.

"So I can use Anastasia Komananov's Smoke Bomb download to get out of any mission attempt?"

"Yep. It suspends play."

"Oh, okay. I don't have Komananov yet, so, instead, I play this copy of Smoke Bomb from hand."

"No, that doesn't work."

"Uhhh..."

Every bugout we currently have in the game (except for The Gift) was actually designed to do something other than bug you out of a mission, but became a bugout card by accident -- which means few to none of them have appropriate bugout-related stories on them. Since interrupting a mission attempt is Very Very Special, I want lore that explains what makes each bugout card very very special. Instead, we have a game that includes both Near-Warp Transport and Scan Cycle Check, very similar cards as a matter of story... but one of them is a bugout because a card happens to [DL] it and not the other.

Maybe Design should design a generic bugout (like the one I pitched) that is not very good ("your turn immediately ends" is solid; I also thought about point loss), and then down the road individual factions can develop faction-specific bugouts (that are actually designed as bugouts for that faction, with appropriate stories) as needed.
User avatar
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#567407
BCSWowbagger wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 5:19 pm I could go with faction-specific ones. I just want to flush today's bugouts out an airlock because of their bizarro-world timing.

"So I can use Anastasia Komananov's Smoke Bomb download to get out of any mission attempt?"

"Yep. It suspends play."

"Oh, okay. I don't have Komananov yet, so, instead, I play this copy of Smoke Bomb from hand."

"No, that doesn't work."

"Uhhh..."

Every bugout we currently have in the game (except for The Gift) was actually designed to do something other than bug you out of a mission, but became a bugout card by accident -- which means few to none of them have appropriate bugout-related stories on them. Since interrupting a mission attempt is Very Very Special, I want lore that explains what makes each bugout card very very special. Instead, we have a game that includes both Near-Warp Transport and Scan Cycle Check, very similar cards as a matter of story... but one of them is a bugout because a card happens to [DL] it and not the other.

Maybe Design should design a generic bugout (like the one I pitched) that is not very good ("your turn immediately ends" is solid; I also thought about point loss), and then down the road individual factions can develop faction-specific bugouts (that are actually designed as bugouts for that faction, with appropriate stories) as needed.
Honestly, and this is just my opinion, but I'd rather see the game deal with dilemma than a shortcut. If an opponent cleverly locked me out, I think that is healthier than an opponent who was not ready be able to just straight up nullify a dilemma that I put a ton of time into thinking about how to set it up. Like you said, the cheese was unintentional. The way that it is mostly used was on accident and contrary to the lore. It's a loophole that should be cut. Only the players abusing it will be against it, I would guess.

I got a MW 70-45. Michael I went in expectin[…]

I recently investigated the STCCG in more detail ([…]

We Surrender!

yeah, hippo had the original working template. som[…]

You have to slide the front row to the side (left […]