Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

TP. Errata/ restriction debate!

- - - - - Thanks hundreds!

  • Please log in to reply
346 replies to this topic

#21
YEEZUS

YEEZUS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 413 posts
Poorly designed cards for one side of the force is a poor excuse for allowing them on the other side to balance things out.
  • BobaFett, TheEmpireBringsSexyBack and BakaMatt like this

#22
JustinMcBride

JustinMcBride

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 149 posts
In actuality, I don't think either of them are poorly designed. I think people just don't understand that it's not the same game it was 2 years ago, and they would do no better in creating balanced cards in objective sets.
  • paulvanhoorne and DMrules like this

#23
Scottie

Scottie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1968 posts
In my view you simply do not balance your game by introducing aspects that sole purpose is to remove a players ability to interact with the game, turn after turn. It's purpose is to essentially skip the LS players turn. Not that I think it is overpowered, because it is not consistent enough, simply that it is the type of thing that ought not to exist in a game.

Because FFG has restricted things in thier other products based on them creating similar damaging game states, I believe this also should and will be changed in some way.
  • scwont, BobaFett, Majestaat and 2 others like this

#24
scwont

scwont

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 850 posts

Why errata it? Wouldn't restricting it be a better solution? That way you shut down the abusive combo but don't hurt TP or Boba. Boba is fine if you are only able to bring him back with stay on target. Just my thoughts.

As a general principle I agree that restriction should be the first option looked at, rather than errata that changes a card's printed text.

 

In this case however I think it's a bad idea for TP and Boba to be separated completely. Putting Boba on a TIE Patrol is a strong option that shouldn't be denied to the DS right now.



#25
Ultramarine

Ultramarine

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 544 posts

I'd rather see Boba errata'd to say Character instead of Unit so his ability can't affect any Vehicles, which makes sense storywise.  Not to mention Rebel decks will hurt him a lot.  

 

 

BTW Training Procedures is an Action, so you can activate it during your opponent's turn right after he deploy a character but before he can put Enhancement on that character so Boba can use his ability.  Am I correct?


  • tierdal likes this

#26
tierdal

tierdal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2344 posts

In my view you simply do not balance your game by introducing aspects that sole purpose is to remove a players ability to interact with the game, turn after turn. It's purpose is to essentially skip the LS players turn. Not that I think it is overpowered, because it is not consistent enough, simply that it is the type of thing that ought not to exist in a game.

Because FFG has restricted things in thier other products based on them creating similar damaging game states, I believe this also should and will be changed in some way.

 

As always the voice of reason rings clearest. 

 

The play experience once Boba begins looping is just not fun...its not even fun to win that way,



#27
tierdal

tierdal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2344 posts

I'd rather see Boba errata'd to say Character instead of Unit so his ability can't affect any Vehicles, which makes sense storywise.  Not to mention Rebel decks will hurt him a lot.  

 

 

BTW Training Procedures is an Action, so you can activate it during your opponent's turn right after he deploy a character but before he can put Enhancement on that character so Boba can use his ability.  Am I correct?

 

Yes - thats half the problem



#28
Jarratt

Jarratt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3660 posts
I see 4 options

1. Restriction. Stops the combo but also means not legitimately decent fun with Fett and Tie Patrol

2. Reverse the rules clarification. Stops the combo and prevents the combo with the Cultist (which is pretty terrible anyway). Keeps Fett on Tie Patrols if you want. Doesn't change any of the cards and feels like the cards were designed this way in the first place. It's the least invasive, but possible has different ramifications down the line.

3. Limit Fett to once per turn. I'm not sure this helps the problem. You can still capture 2 units across turns. I guess if gives them a chance but it will still result in an eventual lockdown. Also limit 1 only has impact on this one combo. This is also an errata and the card only just came out.

4. Fett only captures when he enters play. Which is like option 2 but requires a major card errata.


I'm personally in favour of option 2. It seems the least offensive but I can't see the design process for future expansions that are in the works where the ruling might be important.

#29
tierdal

tierdal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2344 posts

Why isnt the option "Enters play" ... backstabber has it, why shouldnt fett? capture is arguable more powerful than 2 damage - and backstabber has a freaking ability to jump in as an action and is STILL limited



#30
Jarratt

Jarratt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3660 posts

Why isnt the option "Enters play" ... backstabber has it, why shouldnt fett? capture is arguable more powerful than 2 damage - and backstabber has a freaking ability to jump in as an action and is STILL limited


If that was what was printed on the card then sure. But it's not so while I think it's a possible change I think it's a bad change because it requires errata.

#31
DMrules

DMrules

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
Other games have survived combo decks. In Magic: The Gathering, for example, the Splinter Twin deck, which needs only 2 cards to go infinite, has survived in multiple formats, and merely widens the field and angles of win your deck must stop.

#32
commonenemy

commonenemy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 131 posts

I played my TP/Fett deck against a Rebel vehicle and a mono Jedi deck this morning. It went 1-1, and it won when it has the combo in place, which are Boba Fett, TP, and 2 vehicles for him to bounce around. Afterward, my brother who played against my deck thought that while the combo is strong, the deck only has any chance to win when the cards are in place. In the first game, not only was the Rebel deck a bad match-up due to the abundance of pilot enhancements, but I also did not see Boba Fett all game. Without the combo, the deck played like a dysfunctional TIE/vehicle deck with mismatched cards and I even get resource hosed because I was running a dual affiliation deck. 

 

I can understand why people are advocating errata/restriction on this combo, because it's a NPE and they don't want to deal with this combo, even if it doesn't happen every game. However, my small sample size suggest that it's not an auto win, just an annoying one when it does go off. I don't see why we can't wait until a Regional happens when this deck is put to the test, and then use its winning percentage as a proof for an errata or a restriction. 

I think it is good to restrict it because later cards might make the deck more consistent and powerful, just hit it now and be done with it



#33
tierdal

tierdal

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2344 posts

If that was what was printed on the card then sure. But it's not so while I think it's a possible change I think it's a bad change because it requires errata.

 

 

ya i agree - i guess i just dont understand why it wasnt printed that way :(



#34
Jarratt

Jarratt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3660 posts

ya i agree - i guess i just dont understand why it wasnt printed that way :(


Rules clarification was made after development of the cycle possibly. At the time of testing the ability of Fett and his use with Training Procedures might not have interacted that way.

It's probably the same as Tarkin. His card was likely developed before a clarification about blank enhancements losing their text and therefore who they can attach to.

Obviously Tarkin would have been broken normally without a limit 1 so he is fine regardless of the ruling.

I do kind of feel that both rulings would be more intuitive the other way, but that is in part due to other games I have played. This game isn't really like other games.
  • chunkygorillas likes this

#35
Jarrett

Jarrett

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 750 posts
Combo's fine. DS is on the verge of non-playable, it needs the objective in play, it's not the first infinite loop (although the other isn't as playable) and if you errata this you should also errata some of those overpowered LS cards, like Journey through the Swamp which is just as broken, but more consistent (you start the objective and auto shuts down the cards the Dark Side uses to win the game). LS also can protect itself with putting enhancements on their units. Seriously, it's not all that bad...
  • CharlieFilms likes this

#36
BobaFett

BobaFett

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3037 posts

DS is on the verge of non-playable

Thats laughable.

 

 

and if you errata this you should also errata some of those overpowered LS cards, like Journey through the Swamp which is just as broken

Maybe they will??

 

 

 LS also can protect itself with putting enhancements on their units.

 

Not before the DS takes their action window to capture that unit, but i'm sure you already knew that.....



#37
Jarrett

Jarrett

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 750 posts
No need to attack me. I think I know a little about this game to judge cards.

I did take that into account, but they won't be able to capture every unit, since there are actions in between. For crying out loud, one of the most playable LS set right now has two character enhancements. Also, honestly what's very playable for DS that has a huge win ratio against the field? That's right, nothing. However, I can just make up a really bad LS deck, take it into an event, and come in top 2 aka what I did in Arizona.

I think we should wait until after Nationals before people start crying things are broken. It's a strong combo, but you need to start an objective, and we all know how consistently that happens.

#38
LethalHobo

LethalHobo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 821 posts

No need to attack me. I think I know a little about this game to judge cards.

I did take that into account, but they won't be able to capture every unit, since there are actions in between. For crying out loud, one of the most playable LS set right now has two character enhancements. Also, honestly what's very playable for DS that has a huge win ratio against the field? That's right, nothing. However, I can just make up a really bad LS deck, take it into an event, and come in top 2 aka what I did in Arizona.

I think we should wait until after Nationals before people start crying things are broken. It's a strong combo, but you need to start an objective, and we all know how consistently that happens.


I don't see what the big deal is. You're right, Jarrett.

It seems like everyone complains before they even get a chance to play the cards (vima, boba). Turns out guys, those cards aren't that broken at all. You're relying on getting a 3-4 card combo off that rarely happens. Out of 12 games, I saw the combo once. ONCE. That's hardly something to cry over. In fact, I believe that game was still close, even though I may have won it.

If you want to rely on a gimmick deck, go for it. But be honest everyone.... We all know you wouldn't take a gimmick deck to world's or Nats if you were seriously wanting to win. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to prove a point.
  • paulvanhoorne, JustinMcBride and Jarratt like this

#39
Toqtamish

Toqtamish

    Conquest Rules Arbitrator

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPip
  • 3289 posts

Combo is very unreliable. Powerful sure but terribly unreliable. I don't think it's really that worthwhile a deck choice. 


  • pantsyg likes this

#40
yodaman

yodaman

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2743 posts

Played 3 games on OCTGN last night with a newly built Fett/Training Procedures deck against a Rebel ship deck piloted by doctormungmung. I tried, 2 TP, 2 Vader, 2 Fel, 2 Boba and 2 Slave Trade.    I only got TP once in my opening flop (the last game) and didn't see a Boba that game until it was too late to do anything about it as I wasn't drawing ships for some reason.  The first game I managed to flood the board with ships and Galactic Scum and win handily.  The second game was a little closer but I couldn't stop his rebel onslaught.  The last game, when I actually drew TP, I got crushed.