This forums is for questions, answers, and discussion about First Edition rules, formats, and expansions.
 
By Dunnagh (Andreas Micheel)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Contender
#572739
Mhh... I might be wrong - just read through the rules and it does in fact seem to work. STCCG is hard...
User avatar
 
By geraldkw
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
1E The Neutral Zone Regional Participant 2022
#573024
SudenKapala wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 6:07 am
Dunnagh wrote: Mon Feb 28, 2022 4:23 am Also, people often forgot that [HA] cards enter face down - so downloading once the opponent attacked isnt working.
But isn't the downloading a "suspencion of play", and the [HA] -activation at the speed of "direct response"? Which would actually make it work?
Yes with Q the Referee you suspend play in the vast cosmic void between them saying they initiate their action and the actual initiation. By the time the action is happening there is still an opportunity for you to respond to it.
User avatar
First Edition Rules Master
By BCSWowbagger (James Heaney)
 - First Edition Rules Master
 -  
1E World Champion 2021
Architect
Community Contributor
#577618
PantsOfTheTalShiar wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 4:42 am Since the topic of Refs has come up in another thread recently, I thought I should finally get around to posting my thoughts on Defend Homeworld.

Let's consider why Defend Homeworld has the SECURITY download in the first place. It's what I'll call "dead card insurance." DH's first function is situational, so its designers gave it a second function that can be used in almost every game. That way, a player can include DH for its first function without the card being a dead card in matches where that function is irrelevant.

So let's say you have a card with both:
[SD] a function that's usable in only a subset of games, and
[SD] a function that's usable in every game
Which will get used more often? Of course DH's SECURITY download is going to be used more often than its homeworld protection download. That's a feature, not a bug. Not to mention that DH serves as a deterrent: its very existence reduces the likelihood of its first function ever triggering.

Now I know everyone's thinking by now, "well DH isn't even really needed for homeworld protection anymore since we have Strategema." Right, but DH has an additional role. By having both a [Ref] icon and an ability that's useful in every game, DH serves as dead card insurance for the entire Ref mechanic. It's the assurance of some ROI if you invest a seed slot into using Refs. So the gameplay impact of removing the Ref icon from DH will be to nerf the Ref mechanic and discourage players from using Refs.

Aannnnd... that's actually fine, if that's what the CC really wants to do. But if so, please write your article about how you want to discourage players from using Ref cards, because that is the gameplay impact of such a change.

If the CC really wants to nerf the Ref mechanic, I think there is better way to do so, which is to ban Tribunal of Q. Tribunal had an important job back when Refs were a lot more necessary, but now, so many of the current Ref issues are a result of Tribunal: repetitive play, Containment Field cycling, the fact that DH's SECURITY download is "free", etc. If players only have Q the Referee, then they have a resource to manage instead of a script to follow. This opens up the potential for interesting in-game decisions: e.g. If my opponent just played Kivas Fajo - Collector, do I want to cash in on some draws, or would I rather have a SECURITY download? Or should I save QRef in case my opponent STPs a ship under the influence of my Cytherians?

So Unpopular Opinion time: Defend Homeworld should be the LAST card to lose its Ref icon.

In the end, I don't really care about Defend Homeworld itself, I care about how the CC understands card designs. The fact that the CC considers "it's used offensively more often than defensively" to be a bug when it is in fact a feature explains a lot about how the CC struggles to make effective defensive or situational cards.
Just bumping this post specifically because it's still smart and I didn't say so at the time.

(Context: someone asked me about [Ref] cards and I, being me, re-read a bunch of old threads.)

(Personally, I do think DH should lose the [Ref] now. I think it should lose [Ref] precisely to discourage the [Ref] mechanic as a whole, and because I think this is a more conservative, low-short-term-risk/high-long-term-sustainability way of doing it than banning Tribunal or -- my preferred target -- Civil War. But it's important to recognize that everything Jason says about the dynamics of this change, and what it says more broadly about [Ref] and dead card insurance and our ability to develop defensive/situational cards, seem entirely correct to me. If we do it, we should be sure we're doing it for the right reasons is all.)
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Grand Nagus
#577624
I am opposed to this American politics of abolishing Ref as a game mechanic. I am not entirely sure if Ref mechanic is in the gamers community as unpopular as it might sound on the boards. It adds another strategic piece to the game. And it is not complex at all and not beginner unfriendly, on the contrary. However, in the case of DH or Containment Field I could live with changes to those cards. But in the case of TOS Fed, who are insanely powerful, I might argue that Containment Field in its current form is at least something that hurts them besides seeding 5+ Computer Crashes.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#577643
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:37 am I am opposed to this American politics of abolishing Ref as a game mechanic. I am not entirely sure if Ref mechanic is in the gamers community as unpopular as it might sound on the boards. It adds another strategic piece to the game. And it is not complex at all and not beginner unfriendly, on the contrary. However, in the case of DH or Containment Field I could live with changes to those cards. But in the case of TOS Fed, who are insanely powerful, I might argue that Containment Field in its current form is at least something that hurts them besides seeding 5+ Computer Crashes.
Not all Americans hate [Ref] cards...

... just what appears to be the majority of the 1e staff. :?
User avatar
 
By Keiimaster (Mathew McCalpin)
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577652
Armus wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 7:28 am
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:37 am I am opposed to this American politics of abolishing Ref as a game mechanic. I am not entirely sure if Ref mechanic is in the gamers community as unpopular as it might sound on the boards. It adds another strategic piece to the game. And it is not complex at all and not beginner unfriendly, on the contrary. However, in the case of DH or Containment Field I could live with changes to those cards. But in the case of TOS Fed, who are insanely powerful, I might argue that Containment Field in its current form is at least something that hurts them besides seeding 5+ Computer Crashes.
Not all Americans hate [Ref] cards...

... just what appears to be the majority of the 1e staff. :?
I would also submit, that it is unlikely that only Americans hate [Ref] cards...
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Grand Nagus
#577657
I would also submit, that it is unlikely that only Americans hate [Ref] cards...
Well, the only European I know who is constantly bashing Ref cards on the boards is Smiley. All the players I know from GB, Austria and Germany (and they are all pretty high-rated...) have no problem with Ref. Most whining about it comes indeed from Americans... And I wonder why. Most Americans seem to like it to keep it simple. Ref is simple...
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#577658
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:33 pm
I would also submit, that it is unlikely that only Americans hate [Ref] cards...
Well, the only European I know who is constantly bashing Ref cards on the boards is Smiley. All the players I know from GB, Austria and Germany (and they are all pretty high-rated...) have no problem with Ref. Most whining about it comes indeed from Americans... And I wonder why. Most Americans seem to like it to keep it simple. Ref is simple...
#notallamericans

FFS.... :roll:
User avatar
First Edition Creative Manager
By KazonPADD (Paddy Tye)
 - First Edition Creative Manager
 -  
Specialist
1E European Continental Semi-Finalist 2019
1E British National Runner-Up 2021
1E American National Runner-Up 2020
#577668
On behalf of UK, we mostly NEVER use [Ref] cards.

I don’t, Niall doesn’t, Gary doesn’t, Alex doesn’t, Lofty doesn’t…

Defend Homeworld gets seeded mostly, just for the Security download.
User avatar
 
 - Gamma Quadrant
 -  
Continuing Committee Member - Retired
Socialite
1E Andoria Regional Champion 2022
2E Andoria Regional Champion 2022
#577672
FWIW - I disagree with the idea that ref is simple and new player friendly bc I lost a new player to it and the more I thought about it the more he is right. The problem wasn't the cheese ref was meant to stop, but instead he felt that it's very existence meant he needed it to have it to stop "all these things I don't know about". Then he would see other players using offensively for DH, etc and concluded the whole thing was overwhelming which increased his already high stress over 1e complicatedness.

Thus collapsing his interest in 1e into a Black Hole of quitting.
User avatar
 
By Armus (Brian Sykes)
 - The Center of the Galaxy
 -  
Goateed
Community Contributor
1E American National Second Runner-Up 2020
#577673
KazonPADD wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 1:02 pm On behalf of UK, we mostly NEVER use [Ref] cards.

I don’t, Niall doesn’t, Gary doesn’t, Alex doesn’t, Lofty doesn’t…

Defend Homeworld gets seeded mostly, just for the Security download.
Yeah, which makes it extra funny when Niall @sexecutioner does Niall-like things and I hit him with Scorched Hand or Containment Field or other nonsense he isn't used to people playing against him!

:lol:
 
 - Beta Quadrant
 -  
#577676
Caretaker's Guest wrote: Tue May 24, 2022 12:33 pm
I would also submit, that it is unlikely that only Americans hate [Ref] cards...
Well, the only European I know who is constantly bashing Ref cards on the boards is Smiley. All the players I know from GB, Austria and Germany (and they are all pretty high-rated...) have no problem with Ref. Most whining about it comes indeed from Americans... And I wonder why. Most Americans seem to like it to keep it simple. Ref is simple...
Um, the first two posts in this thread are from Europeans. And yeah, what Brian said. I'm really not seeing the geographic bias here.

I personally don't have an issue with [Ref] being around as a strategic option, but I don't want it to be mandatory either (where you may auto-lose if you don't stock it).

The reason is that the [Ref] mechanic gets into the timing weeds pretty quickly. I like rules-lawyering, but I would *never* claim that [Ref] is simple. Just a few examples:

-Because revealing a face-down Q the Referee is not a valid response to a [Ref]-able action, whoever goes first can take an action free and clear, unless the opponent actually seeded the right card. For instance, if I go first and the first action of my turn is to play a Kivas, flipping a face-down Q the Referee is NOT a valid response and you can't grab a Mirror Image that way. Tribunal doesn't help either unless you specifically grab Mirror Image before I play Kivas. (For the same reason, old veterans know that the first action you take should generally be revealing Q the Referee. I used to slip in free Scans all the time from players who took another action first.)

-Similarly, Panel Overload may be a valid response to *playing* a Genetronic Replicator or Bynars, but not *using* one -- note that Panel Overload is worded so that discarding it in this way is a separate action, not an automatic effect on entering play. If you wait until I'm in the middle of a mission attempt or battle to download, reveal, or even use a face-up Panel Overload, it's too late. (I've taken advantage of this on many occasions too, with even experienced opponents messing up the timing.)

-Containment Field can be flipped as a valid response to a special download. Assuming no Tribunal of Q in play, can you initiate more special downloads (or even re-initiate the same one) *in response to Containment Field entering play*, suspending play to get these effects in before Containment Field resolves? (For all these questions, I'm not asking a gut response of what "should happen," can you justify using the timing rules in the Glossary whether this is allowed or not?)

-Or, what if both players try to get their own Containment Field in play at the same time (so they can control when/if it gets cycled)? Does it matter whether they are both revealing already face-down Containment Fields, or whether one or both players are suspending play with Q the Referee? (Be careful with the timing rules, remember they are hidden agendas which enter play face-down, and have to be revealed either as a separate action or as a valid response).

-In the latter case, what if both players have Tribunal of Q in play. I flip Containment Field face up, you attempt to suspend play with your own Q the Referee to download Containment Field before mine enters play. Whose Tribunal wins? Mine that says "no action may suspend play", or yours that allows you to "ignore any effect" (i.e. my Tribunal stopping you from suspending play) while downloading a [Ref] card?

-I do the Mr. Mister trick to draw my whole deck, which mainly consists of I've Been Waiting For You, EMH Program, and holograms. (Assume no Tribunal of Q, and playing with Open rules). You use Q the Referee to download Scorched Hand on me, but I suspend your Scorched Hand by playing an EMH Program, then suspend play again to swap it with another hologram, and repeat until I've played dozens of holograms and my hand size is below 12 and your Scorched fizzles. Does this work? (Decipher ruled that it does *not*, but their justification from the action rules is pretty mind-bending.)

These things are not at all simple and beginner-friendly, it requires knowing details of the timing and valid response rules. I mean, I love rules-lawyering and have been playing since 1996, and I'm not 100% sure about the answers above. This isn't complexity in the fun strategic sense, but in the rules-lawyering and parsing specific Glossary text sense. For an optional add-on mechanic, that may be OK, but certainly not as something a new player is expected to know.
User avatar
 
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
Grand Nagus
#577685
On behalf of UK, we mostly NEVER use [Ref] cards.
I know. But at least you seem not to support the crusade against the Ref-cards as a whole. I for my part like Juggling away a Ready Room Door or protect my Homeworld or prevent a Dr. Noah from boarding my ship (Niall... :) ) and and and...
User avatar
First Edition Creative Manager
By KazonPADD (Paddy Tye)
 - First Edition Creative Manager
 -  
Specialist
1E European Continental Semi-Finalist 2019
1E British National Runner-Up 2021
1E American National Runner-Up 2020
#577686
I don’t mind Ref being an option (each to their own), but the worst offenders need to go. Ref should protect, but shouldn’t be used offensively.
User avatar
 
By Dukat
 - Delta Quadrant
 -  
#577708
What the Caretaker said! Definitely!


I also see a certain way of how Americans like the game: Battle, Capture, interaction ... all not fun for them.
Not all Americans, but the bias is strongly towards a relevant majority.

Some might better be playing 2E, it seems it's more what they seek.

Ops isn't the perfect example, there are /images/[…]

Sorry everyone but due to recent scheduling confli[…]

To stick an oar in, and starting with "rememb[…]

Christopher Jansa, Psionic Hobo VS Daniel Giddin[…]