[Professor Scott]

Warping the meta should also include the metric of "does it make people not want to show up? Do people not enjoy the event?"

That's easy enough to fix. Players have to submit their decks publicly three months in advance, and then can veto each other's decks as "I won't show up if you play that". That way, you'll be guaranteed to only play against decks you like and that everyone will like your deck.

Right or Wrong, that sounds like a Gould idea!

[BCSWowbagger]

It isn't design's or balance's fault that folks flat out refuse to run Tribunal and Ref Tents at high-level tournaments - as far as I can tell, MVB was the only person who did and he beat 3 Aggro Borg decks at NACC as a result.

What would've happened if half (let's say) the players showed up with one less seed card and Tribunal/Ref Tents?

Aggro Borg would have been less effective (IMO). They probably would still have secured mod wins in some cases, but I think I would have mod lossed my first-round game, and we might have even seen some True Ties if all players were really stubborn.

This raises a really interesting question to me, as admittedly, someone who struggles to understand the mindset of players who compete at a high-level. Why would so many people play something, then, that is apparently so easily countered?

Because we didn't expect it to be actually countered.

Every deck in Star Trek Cards can be easily defeated by the right counter-deck. There is simply no way to build an effective deck that deals with everything, so you're always making tradeoffs -- giving yourself an edge in one matchup by sacrificing yourself to another. You invest more resources in defending against the decks and counters that you actually expect to see. If you go to a tournament thinking, "I've built a deck that can win any game," your deck will, most likely, lose every game, because it's too bloated and weighed down by counters to actually score points quicker than your opponent.

I can't speak for high-level players, and I do a lot less metagaming than some who are a lot smarter than I am... but, when I go to an event, I pretty much always have a list in my head of "bad matchups this deck autoloses against." I try to make that list relatively short and I try to make sure most of the decks on it aren't common decks... but there's always one I'm particularly worried about. Then I roll the dice and hope I don't face that specific deck. I usually win that dice role! There's only a few games in a tournament, and tons of possible deck types, so the odds are in my favor!

For example, I felt fine rolling into a tournament last year with an all-Neutral Zone deck that could get frozen for up to several turns by The Wake of the Borg, and almost certainly loses when that happens. I just bet on not facing very many Wakes of the Borg! That bet paid off! The one game where I did face Wake, I miraculously drew into my counter on Turn 2, and was able to neutralize it at minimal cost.

(Incidentally, this is why posts complaining that "[some card] is dead now because Superior Surgical Knowledge exists" are, in my opinion, misguided. [some card] might make your deck a bad matchup against Vidiians -- but that's okay! The vast majority of games aren't against Vidiians! You can still play the deck and then just accept that you'll probably lose to Vidiians!)

One of the overriding facts of the meta right now (in my opinion) is that, in the past ~4 years, it has gone from absolutely unthinkable to show up at a high-level event without Tribunal of Q, to almost unthinkable to actually bring a Tribunal of Q. Forget battle decks; I've been gleefully redshirting without a restriction from Civil War or serious fear of Villagers With Torches for years now! The Reign of Speed the past couple years encouraged this, because Tribunal/Civil War was a drag on your own speed, and everything you had needed to be devoted to speed.

However, that lack of defense encourages decks like Aggro Borg that can exploit the lack of defense. Players are (I hope) starting to remember that they need to invest some seed cards in defense (can't spend all 12 slots on jumpstarts these days!). Indeed, that was one of the things Vidiians were designed to encourage. "Hi, we have an Organ Bank! There are lots of ways to deal with that! Your deck needs to include one!"

However, this transition to more defense is still happening. I, at least, didn't expect to actually see more than 1 Strategema all day at NACC. I thought I might lose to that Strategema. Both predictions were correct. Other smart players appear to have made the same prediction. Predicting what's going to be played at the tournament is a significant part of succeeding at high-level play.

(I underestimated exactly how intense MVB's Strategema would be, but his was the only one I faced all day. Also, the sheer psychic pressure of playing against Aggro Borg sometimes leads Strategema players into making mistakes -- something I was counting on if I did face Strategema -- but MVB was unflappable and played wonderfully.)

[abargar7510]

I’ve been rereading this thread because it’s really interesting in many respects.

Given that the varied reactions so far to confronting these realities is "dont touch my deck size" and "make the games longer not shorter!" and no one wanting to discuss the shrinking player base.......

I mean, I want to, but I suspect people avoid it because it probably leads to some pretty uncomfortable truths that would need to be worked through to be overcome. Some of which were presented in the responses to my queries.

Kevin's recommendation to make Assimilate Counterpart bonus points (or alternatively, only objectives on missions count as non-bonus points) is a good one. This wouldn't ruin Aggro borg, but it would make it have to solve at least 2 missions for a full win, or even possibly a mod win.

This is probably a shitty suggestion because I don’t know what I’m doing, but what about making Assimilate Counterpart -only? BOBW was the only time the Borg ever did something like that, so the Trek-sense would fit. And TNG Borg decks are boring to play, even if very flavorful, because there’s virtually no interaction or opportunities for creative or artistic shenanigans.

[boromirofborg]

This is probably a shitty suggestion because I don’t know what I’m doing, but what about making Assimilate Counterpart -only? BOBW was the only time the Borg ever did something like that, so the Trek-sense would fit. And TNG Borg decks are boring to play, even if very flavorful, because there’s virtually no interaction.

Maybe and First Contact only. Since the card was printed in First Contact AND Data was assimilated as a counterpart in First Contact.

but then that doesn't do much for game balance.

[AllenGould]

Given that the varied reactions so far to confronting these realities is "dont touch my deck size" and "make the games longer not shorter!" and no one wanting to discuss the shrinking player base.......

I mean, I want to, but I suspect people avoid it because it probably leads to some pretty uncomfortable truths that would need to be worked through to be overcome. Some of which were presented in the responses to my queries.

Frankly, I think we need to be honest with ourselves and our expectations.

We have basically no marketing budget, no prize budget, and can't effectively leverage the IP that we don't properly have rights to (and outside of Picard they've completely rebooted the universe anyway). You can't walk into a store and find our game anymore. We are a strictly word-of-mouth operation, and even in our prime days we were a far cry from Magic (or even Wars and Rings over the years). We're not going to pull Lorcana numbers.

On the other hand, we are one of the few ongoing concerns out of the CCG Class of 93-94. (Only Magic and Vampire are still in print in any form). The sheer fact that we're still *here* should count as a success.

[abargar7510]

Given that the varied reactions so far to confronting these realities is "dont touch my deck size" and "make the games longer not shorter!" and no one wanting to discuss the shrinking player base.......

I mean, I want to, but I suspect people avoid it because it probably leads to some pretty uncomfortable truths that would need to be worked through to be overcome. Some of which were presented in the responses to my queries.

Frankly, I think we need to be honest with ourselves and our expectations.

We have basically no marketing budget, no prize budget, and can't effectively leverage the IP that we don't properly have rights to (and outside of Picard they've completely rebooted the universe anyway). You can't walk into a store and find our game anymore. We are a strictly word-of-mouth operation, and even in our prime days we were a far cry from Magic (or even Wars and Rings over the years). We're not going to pull Lorcana numbers.

On the other hand, we are one of the few ongoing concerns out of the CCG Class of 93-94. (Only Magic and Vampire are still in print in any form). The sheer fact that we're still *here* should count as a success.

I don't think you need an extensive marketing budget. There are a number of players out there that don't participate in tournaments. A couple of them responded to this thread, and indicated why they don't participate, all of which are addressable concerns given time and effort, and some creative thinking. A bunch more play on their own in side groups on Facebook, but I almost never see anyone cross-promoting their sanctioned events there. A ton of people don't have local playgroups, but the only reward for playing online as a new player is getting shellacked by people who are way more experienced. Part of the reason why I volunteered for the Director of Ops position was to help get prizes out quicker and easier, as that represents a tangible incentive for people to participate. Good, coordinated strategy could help to overcome all of this. I don't think anyone's expecting Lorcana-like numbers. That said, there's some low-hanging fruit that for whatever reason, isn't being picked.

[BCSWowbagger]

A bunch more play on their own in side groups on Facebook, but I almost never see anyone cross-promoting their sanctioned events there.

This is a great idea that, weirdly, never occurred to me!

[WeAreBack]

Fortunately, i think the answer is simple - Assimilate Counterpart needs to be bonus points. Right now, a borg deck can scout 1 mission, get a counterpart or two, or three with A Willing Companion and be hard to impossible to beat modified b/c that gets them to likely 65+. But thats the only thing that should be looked at imho and the rest of the issue is also that players need to understand this meta reality and push back harder on it with their deck designs.

I would support this along with the abolition of the "Bonus points are irrelevant" rule for Borg. Eliminating the ability to repeatedly score up to 30 non-bonus points without doing a mission is consistent with the CC's recent rulings/errata that basically try to force players to complete at least 2 missions in order to win.

For consistency, bonus points from Assimilate Species should probably also be bonus points.

Also, as I've argued numerous times, having Borg ignore bonus points is as silly as having a (non-existent) rule that Kazon can ignore dilemmas with a countdown icon or that Viddians ignore all dilemmas with Medical in the text.

Basically, I do not play point-drain dilemmas as a strategy because one affiliation gets to ignore them. That is, the rule that one affiliation ignores an entire class of dilemmas effectively renders that class of dilemmas binder fodder, which is bad for the game and not how anything was supposed to work.

[Armus]

For consistency, bonus points from Assimilate Species should probably also be bonus points.

Um... they already are?

points = real points
other points (and "even if playing Borg" points) = bonus points
All other points are irrelevant.

[LORE]

Um... they already are?

points = real points
other points (and "even if playing Borg" points) = bonus points
All other points are irrelevant.

It is confusing though because Ass Spec is a Borg Objective, yet it gets discarded. My general understanding is if the Borg Objective goes somewhere (i.e. on the person, on the mission, or on the ship) it is real points and everything else is bonus points.

As an aside, I think it bears mentioning that playing Aggro Borg requires a TON of in-game thinking and decision making and that is perhaps why not very many people play them. Personally, I test draw up to a hundred times before I play them, because I know certain things need to be automatic so I can focus on the decisions I will have to make based on what my opponent is doing.

[Armus]

Um... they already are?

points = real points
other points (and "even if playing Borg" points) = bonus points
All other points are irrelevant.

It is confusing though because Ass Spec is a Borg Objective, yet it gets discarded. My general understanding is if the Borg Objective goes somewhere (i.e. on the person, on the mission, or on the ship) it is real points and everything else is bonus points.

are real points if the points are directly tied. This is accomplished by a point box (e.g., Establish Gateway), direct card text (e.g., Assimilate Counterpart), or indirect card text (e.g., Contingency Plan).

Assimilate Species doesn't provide points, just bodies. The points come from Add Distinctiveness, which as a , means bonus points.

[Dunnagh]

I think the initial post puts it right:

but this game is going to die - and soon - if people aren't willing to make the time to go to events.

So the answer is: Make it so that people WANT to attend tournaments more.

Unfortunately, 1E has a wide history of people bringing un-fun decks to tournaments. Thats why was invented in the first place back then.
And I´m getting too old to spend my time with un-fun things. So if my opponent puts his 400 cards deck on the table, I´ll just concede. If my opponent destroys my outpost in the first turn, I´ll just concede.

Plus, I probably wont attend any more tournaments later, so have fun with even less players.

The game seems to be more about finding un-fun combos and fixing them than about actually playing the game (unless finding unfun combos IS the game)

If a deck dominates the meta and all the good players play the meta deck instead of finding a cool anti-deck that defeats this, then for me its unfun. I wont drive 6 hours just to see the same deck 4 times before dropping out.

edit: Just found another solution. Just make it equally unfun for the opponent to play. Just make sure the deck is shuffled properly EVERY time any card is downloaded. And obviously, there´ll be no dl-queues

edit2: on the topic of bringing un-fun decks: Has anyone ever tried to build a deck that will not allow the opponent to even start his first turn because you were downloading a lot of stuff and had to shuffle your deck properly every time? A normal 52 card deck would take ~7 riffle shuffles to be considered shuffled properly. How about a 600 card deck? That would probably take ~4 minutes each to be shuffled, meaning you only needed to download about 15 cards to end the game.

edit 3: found it. Just seed a lot of Q the Referee and use it to download The Juggler multiple times to shuffle your own deck. Bonus: Also works in opponents turn, preventing them from completing it ever.

[stressedoutatumc]

I wonder if a general rule, you can attack or you can attempt but you cannot do both on the same turn would, might be a step in the right direction. Deck limits happen in most games, but I'd hate to see that turn into a "rule of 4" like in MTG. I've always thought Borg were OP generally speaking, but yeah, Aggro borg sees to have taken over, since they slide around the Vidiian throttle but also have so many built in advantages. It also might suffice to just to ban Retask since it made sense more in the pre-obsession and pre-urgent warning days. Maybe rethink being able to seed gateways? donno.

[Lobo]

So the answer is: Make it so that people WANT to attend tournaments more.

Unfortunately, 1E has a wide history of people bringing un-fun decks to tournaments. Thats why was invented in the first place back then.
And I´m getting too old to spend my time with un-fun things. So if my opponent puts his 400 cards deck on the table, I´ll just concede. If my opponent destroys my outpost in the first turn, I´ll just concede.

-I would attend a tournament in Tulsa, maybe OKC. But only if it's an actual thing with lots of players. 3 people in an Arby's isn't a tournament, it's creepy.

And that's an insurmountable issue yer gonna have: there's no publishing or meaningful financial support for the game that yer gonna get now that it's officially 'dead' from the corp perspective.

When games are put to pasture, usually the ones that play past that expiration date are 'good' or better players. The tourney winners, rules people, and folks that worked for the company. Average or bad players move on. That's another problem yer gonna have with trying to bolster participation: y'all are (mostly) the cream of the crop when it comes to game skill and card familiarity.

Any newer player that isn't a hardcore gamer isn't going to want to play long when their 30-card draw Feds get obliterated by a steroided-up Nor recycler, or Borg Aggro, or ridiculous 10-15 personnel on turn 2 mission solver time after time.

This issue is why old MMOs let players 'catch-up' with a streamlined (or purchaseable) line to levle 85-90-whatever the cap is. Card games don't have a similar catch-up mechanic, so you'd have to have the resources and support to fuel that grassroots uprising and make it worth the player's time.

I don't see how a dead game can do that when they can't print cards. None of that is meant in a disrespectful fashion. I'd love it if the game were still 'alive' and i could still play. But the Continuing Committee in its existence has created an unintentional barrier to expansion. A small clique of former (again, mostly) good players from a dead game kept it going and designed all the cards. That's the biggest 'suitcase' problem any card game has ever seen. And it makes it intimidating and difficult to bring in new folks.

Some random thoughts to chew on, hope some of that made sense.

[AllenGould]

I think the initial post puts it right:

but this game is going to die - and soon - if people aren't willing to make the time to go to events.

So the answer is: Make it so that people WANT to attend tournaments more.

Unfortunately, 1E has a wide history of people bringing un-fun decks to tournaments.

I think this illustrates the problem - if all our events are competitive tournaments, where we keep score and track ratings and what-not, why are we surprised that people prioritize the metrics we're measuring? (Put bluntly - if you don't want me to try and win, why are you keeping track of my wins?)

As folks mentioned upstream, there seems to be plenty of games played, just not in the tournament system. Maybe we need to change our expectation of what an "event" is.

(Complete aside: I wonder if downloads and site visits are a better metric anyway - if people are downloading the cards to play games, that seems like a decent validation that we're still accomplishing something around here.)