REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

SWCCG game play discussion.
Post Reply

How do you feel about the state of the game?

I'd prefer a full reset
37
26%
I'd prefer a revert to mass fix some major problems
70
49%
I'd prefer no changes at this time
36
25%
 
Total votes: 143

Wokling
Member
Posts: 427
Joined: February 8th, 2019, 11:26 am
GEMP Username: ototoi

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Wokling »

WiseMarsellus wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:06 pm
Wokling wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 2:16 pm
WiseMarsellus wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 9:55 am
one thing to keep in mind.

right now, all respondents have a definite idea of what the meta is as it exists right now. they also have an idea of what they would like either the reset, or a collection of card changes, to look like. now, those ideas will conflict with the ideas of other community members and presumably will conflict with the changes or reset as implemented. i suspect that many people answering that they would like change are doing so with the idea that it would be the changes they would like to see implemented. this pits the real state of the meta against an idealized future of the game
Thought I was following along until that last sentence. Were you not stating that there will be disagreement between players as to both (1) the meta as it exists now and (2) the imagined changes that will address the meta as each individual player conceptualizes it?
i think it is the case that many people will look at the meta as it exists now and conclude that there are problems. and then they will imagine solutions to these problems. so when they say, oh i want to see changes, what they often mean is, i want to see my imagined solutions.

but player b may not like player a's solutions. they may not address player b's concerns, or may change something player b likes. player a and player b may be both looking at the same cardpool and saying, yes, change something, but that doesn't mean that they agree.


not responsive to eric, but responsive to the thread as a whole: i personally would be interested in doing fairly regular (annual?) small tweaks, kind of like we did in the period between 2007 and 2009. if that were an option on the poll it is how i would have voted. such an approach is less vulnerable to the issue i bring up here, as the changes will be less major
My issue was the use of the phrase "real state of the meta." If you assume disagreement (i.e., subjectivity) as to the current meta, it's hard to say what is the real (objective) meta. I agree that there'll be a gap between changes expected and changes made for all parties involved, but that's fine.

As to your suggestion. I think Joe envisioned option 2 as embracing that idea. Option 1 is a full reset (everything goes except a select few), Option 3 is no change, and Option 2 is somewhere between the two poles. We'd then drill down and see where the community wishes to end up on that spectrum (for example, change 10-15 cards or change 100-150).



User avatar
Emkay09
Member
Posts: 407
Joined: September 26th, 2011, 4:01 pm
Location: Dortmund, Germany

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Emkay09 »

I like the meta at it is. There so many deck choices for both sides. But I can understand that some people don't like to play against certain decks. I do, too. But I think a small errata to the key cards should be done and NO reset.
Moritz Karge
-
Ralltiir Regionals 2015 runner-up
Ralltiir Regionals 2017 runner-up

User avatar
mrfahrenheit7
DS Region: Endor
DS Region: Endor
Posts: 935
Joined: May 12th, 2014, 11:07 pm
GEMP Username: mjturner

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by mrfahrenheit7 »

Agree most with wise of anyone so far.
I would be strongly in favor of regularly scheduled minor tweaks to the cardpool, maybe 1-2× per year.
In the poll I voted option 2 since I feel there are many changes that could/should be made. Moving forward, after cleaning some things up, I think errata/tweaking designs should be scheduled regularly like new set releases. This way problems dont have time to snowball so majorly and there is structure to when potential issues are addressed.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Mike Turner - 2017 & 2018 Montana State Champion, 2018 Washington State Champion
Hunter wrote:Someone just outhookied thehooky.

User avatar
lsrubin
DS Region: Yavin 4
DS Region: Yavin 4
Posts: 2893
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 6:05 am
Location: Silver Spring, MD
GEMP Username: lsrubin

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by lsrubin »

I think LMFBM, OA (possibly including ABR), Map, and Rops should probably be fixed/nerfed/whatever, but I do like everything else about the game currently. (Scum is fun as hell right now, Diplo is just brilliant design, etc.)

But I’m still not *totally* convinced that a reset/revert/recombobulation is the best way to fix those. For example, LS could get a shield saying “If opponent just used an objective to remove a card from Lost Pile (other than retrieval), opponent loses 2 Force.” That would hit Rops and Map pretty hard, and leave other decks alone. LMFBM could be errata’d to say “If Ewok Village on table, deploy on table” and that would fix a lot of issues. Etc.

I think the problems with the meta right now could potentially be addressed by 3-4 errata and/or new counter cards, and we don’t necessarily need to hit the panic button yet. Whether people WANT to hit the panic button is another story though.

I registered my opinion, but I’d say I’m agnostic on how the current meta issues get fixed. Do what you think is best, and I’ll play regardless.
☮ ♥ ⑦
arebelspy wrote:The magic was inside you all along, you just had to believe. <3
kcaton wrote:"Jesus Christ, is that Lenny!?"

User avatar
Cam Solusar
Member
Posts: 16871
Joined: November 23rd, 2002, 7:57 pm
Location: Sunny Southern California

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Cam Solusar »

One of the reasons I think that a reset is needed, rather than a tweak set, is that tweaks are going to be very hard to accomplish on the scale that they're likely needed right now. If tweaking is the solution, LMFBM probably needed to be tweaked 2+ years ago, which would have probably resulted in lower power versions of ABR, MAP, AOBS, ROps, etc, being released. Whether you think that particular card was the linchpin of the game's current problems is immaterial, but I think logistically you face a lot more long term instability by tweaking incrementally as opposed to just reverting the meta in one massive effort, figuring out what sort of lousy meta results, correct that meta, and then doing targeted tweaks as a matter of policy with subsequent new releases.

If tweaking is the answer, and said tweak set is 9-12 months out, that's A LOT of time for people to spend in a meta that is by all accounts increasingly intolerable to players. I hit my breaking point 9 months ago. Others are only just now starting to hit that point, but I think it goes without saying that the number is going to keep on increasing, and the more time is spent before something is reeled back, not only are more people going to have taken a break from the game, but also the unfortunate negative effects of any sort of tweak or revert are going to be increased.
Camden Y, Southern California
BrenDerlin wrote:These movies aren't called Star Battles, yo.

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16188
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by arebelspy »


mrfahrenheit7 wrote:Agree most with wise of anyone so far.
I would be strongly in favor of regularly scheduled minor tweaks to the cardpool, maybe 1-2× per year.
Me too.

I wonder though if it would annoy people.

Having to keep up with what the current version of something is. Having to reprint slips. Etc.

D&D has shown a reluctance to tweaking existing cards anyways.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 21948
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by chriskelly »

Cam Solusar wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:34 pm
If tweaking is the answer, and said tweak set is 9-12 months out, that's A LOT of time for people to spend in a meta that is by all accounts increasingly intolerable to players.
This is an incredible mischaracterization.

User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26171
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by JarJarDrinks »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 2:59 pm
JarJarDrinks wrote: It's why I asked this:
JarJarDrinks wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 1:12 pm
If I just think one card (ie: LMBFM/ABR/ROPS) is an issue and would like to see it changed where would I vote?
If the answer is the middle option than I think you didnt need the poll to tell u the outcome.
Don't vote, but express your opinion via typing words. Or vote 3, as that is what change one card is closest to.
lol @ Don't vote. Wouldn't having that as one of the options make more sense?

Also I disagree. I think it's closer to 2.
arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 2:59 pm
Option 2 was purposefully worded to be "mass errata Revert" rather than "a couple minor changes" so we could see if people wanted mass change or not.
If this is true than option 3 should have been "None or a couple of minor changes" as I'm sure I'm not the only person who voted for 2 and only wants 1 or 2 simple changes. I think you (maybe subconsciously) worded the poll to support your own biased opinion and I think the results shouldn't be taken into account because it tells us close to nothing.
dx_37 wrote:
October 2nd, 2019, 12:12 pm
I would be all for a reset if I get to be on the reset team
"Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."
- Bill Maher

"How you play the game is important. But for me, it's about if you win or lose."
- Derek Jeter

User avatar
Cam Solusar
Member
Posts: 16871
Joined: November 23rd, 2002, 7:57 pm
Location: Sunny Southern California

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Cam Solusar »

chriskelly wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:55 pm
Cam Solusar wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:34 pm
If tweaking is the answer, and said tweak set is 9-12 months out, that's A LOT of time for people to spend in a meta that is by all accounts increasingly intolerable to players.
This is an incredible mischaracterization.
It seems like more people are dissatisfied with the meta now than were 6 months ago, unless you think that is an inaccurate statement. Would "increasingly less tolerable" be a better/more accurate way to put it?
Camden Y, Southern California
BrenDerlin wrote:These movies aren't called Star Battles, yo.

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2708
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Corran »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:44 pm
mrfahrenheit7 wrote:Agree most with wise of anyone so far.
I would be strongly in favor of regularly scheduled minor tweaks to the cardpool, maybe 1-2× per year.
Me too.

I wonder though if it would annoy people.

Having to keep up with what the current version of something is. Having to reprint slips. Etc.

D&D has shown a reluctance to tweaking existing cards anyways.
I think I agree with this too.

An annual or semi-annual update to cards, especially if scheduled, would be good. MTG has regularly scheduled updates to their Banned & Restricted list. SWCCG doesn't have a banned list, but since D&D deals with those issues via errata, it would make sense. Either time it to coincide with a set release or schedule it for January and June. Along with this, a reset will be necessary eventually, even if we're talking about 10 years from now. It would be nice if D&D planned ahead for when it would occur, rather than waiting until there were a bunch of angry players or whatever.

Where we probably disagree is on the scale of such an endeavor. I'm talking about maybe five cards at a time. Right now, it would be something like ROps, OA, ABR, LMFBM, and maybe a shield for Map's recursion. This wouldn't be for cards like Anakin Skywalker who are versatile but not broken.
Check out Bad Deck Breakdowns, a Star Wars CCG Deckbuilding podcast, on the podcatcher of your choice or https://www.kendallcast.ninja
ketwol wrote: There are good cards which aren't frequently played and blow people out. You just have to invest some time and be creative ;)

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2708
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Corran »

Cam Solusar wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:03 pm
chriskelly wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:55 pm
Cam Solusar wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:34 pm
If tweaking is the answer, and said tweak set is 9-12 months out, that's A LOT of time for people to spend in a meta that is by all accounts increasingly intolerable to players.
This is an incredible mischaracterization.
It seems like more people are dissatisfied with the meta now than were 6 months ago, unless you think that is an inaccurate statement. Would "increasingly less tolerable" be a better/more accurate way to put it?
Up until yesterday, it seemed to me that people were happier with the meta than they were prior to the MPC when there were constant complaints about LMFBM. Over the summer, the deck became less popular on GEMP, and then that reflected at Nationals and Worlds. The meta is more diverse now than it was 6 months ago, and many of the people who are mad and outspoken now are the same ones who were mad then.
Check out Bad Deck Breakdowns, a Star Wars CCG Deckbuilding podcast, on the podcatcher of your choice or https://www.kendallcast.ninja
ketwol wrote: There are good cards which aren't frequently played and blow people out. You just have to invest some time and be creative ;)

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16188
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by arebelspy »

JarJarDrinks wrote:I think the results shouldn't be taken into account because it tells us close to nothing.
I mean, I didn't figure D&D had much interest in changing things, and CKellys first post in this thread made that clear, but throwing out data from what is clearly a lot of people who would like to see changes because of minor wording is pretty laughable. You're better than that, JJD.

You really think this poll tells us almost nothing?!

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16188
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by arebelspy »

Corran wrote: Up until yesterday, it seemed to me that people were happier with the meta than they were prior to the MPC when there were constant complaints about LMFBM.
V11 OMG power creeped past it with No Idea and Legends, with strong Diplo and OA builds coming out as well.

Less complaints about LMFBM does not mean happier with the meta.

In fact, if your argument was LMFBM was too strong, you may be even more unhappy with all the power creep beyond it.


User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26171
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by JarJarDrinks »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:14 pm
JarJarDrinks wrote:I think the results shouldn't be taken into account because it tells us close to nothing.
I mean, I didn't figure D&D had much interest in changing things, and CKellys first post in this thread made that clear, but throwing out data from what is clearly a lot of people who would like to see changes because of minor wording is pretty laughable. You're better than that, JJD.

You really think this poll tells us almost nothing?!
I guess it's good to know that 25% of the people think the game is perfectly flawless.
dx_37 wrote:
October 2nd, 2019, 12:12 pm
I would be all for a reset if I get to be on the reset team
"Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."
- Bill Maher

"How you play the game is important. But for me, it's about if you win or lose."
- Derek Jeter

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2708
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by Corran »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:14 pm
JarJarDrinks wrote:I think the results shouldn't be taken into account because it tells us close to nothing.
I mean, I didn't figure D&D had much interest in changing things, and CKellys first post in this thread made that clear, but throwing out data from what is clearly a lot of people who would like to see changes because of minor wording is pretty laughable. You're better than that, JJD.

You really think this poll tells us almost nothing?!
If your original intent with the wording was that option 2 suggested major changes, but many of the people responding in the thread chose that option wanting 10 or fewer cards changed, it's pretty clear that the results need to be taken with a grain of salt. Honestly, I misread the option as "Prefer a revert to a major fix."

If anything, the poll tells us how many more people read the forums than post in them regularly.
Check out Bad Deck Breakdowns, a Star Wars CCG Deckbuilding podcast, on the podcatcher of your choice or https://www.kendallcast.ninja
ketwol wrote: There are good cards which aren't frequently played and blow people out. You just have to invest some time and be creative ;)

User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26171
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by JarJarDrinks »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:16 pm
Corran wrote: Up until yesterday, it seemed to me that people were happier with the meta than they were prior to the MPC when there were constant complaints about LMFBM.
V11 OMG power creeped past it with No Idea and Legends, with strong Diplo and OA builds coming out as well.

Less complaints about LMFBM does not mean happier with the meta.

In fact, if your argument was LMFBM was too strong, you may be even more unhappy with all the power creep beyond it.
you edited out the part where he points out that it's still the same people complaining.
dx_37 wrote:
October 2nd, 2019, 12:12 pm
I would be all for a reset if I get to be on the reset team
"Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking."
- Bill Maher

"How you play the game is important. But for me, it's about if you win or lose."
- Derek Jeter

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16188
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by arebelspy »

JarJarDrinks wrote:
arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:14 pm
JarJarDrinks wrote:I think the results shouldn't be taken into account because it tells us close to nothing.
I mean, I didn't figure D&D had much interest in changing things, and CKellys first post in this thread made that clear, but throwing out data from what is clearly a lot of people who would like to see changes because of minor wording is pretty laughable. You're better than that, JJD.

You really think this poll tells us almost nothing?!
I guess it's good to know that 25% of the people think the game is perfectly flawless.
Not what that says. It says they prefer no change to a mass Revert or reset.
JarJarDrinks wrote:
arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:16 pm
Corran wrote: Up until yesterday, it seemed to me that people were happier with the meta than they were prior to the MPC when there were constant complaints about LMFBM.
V11 OMG power creeped past it with No Idea and Legends, with strong Diplo and OA builds coming out as well.

Less complaints about LMFBM does not mean happier with the meta.

In fact, if your argument was LMFBM was too strong, you may be even more unhappy with all the power creep beyond it.
you edited out the part where he points out that it's still the same people complaining.
Those nearly 70 people who voted for some big change to occur? Yeah, * em. They've been complaining for awhile, so clearly their thoughts are irrelevant.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 21948
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by chriskelly »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:14 pm
I mean, I didn't figure D&D had much interest in changing things, and CKellys first post in this thread made that clear,
Huh? That post says the exact opposite. It plainly states that we are reading it - and I’ve announced (a few times, in multiple arenas) that for quite some time we have had a plan in place to devote an entire set to change things.

However, I felt the need to make that first post because I felt a modicum of responsibility to let the community know that you’re not speaking with any sort of PC-sanctioned voice and your poll is a little wonky. I just tried to do it nicely.

It’s important everyone is aware of the limitations of the poll, and I made that post in hopes of steering players towards posting their thoughts in lieu of just clicking on one of three poll options, which are fairly flawed as many have pointed out. I mean, I don’t see how everyone wouldn’t vote for #2. Who could possibly not want “major problems” fixed?

Having said that, many players have been posting their thoughts and making insightful, and meaningful posts and I hope that continues. I thank them for taking the time in expressing their thoughts as those carry more weight to us than flawed poll results.

User avatar
SolaGratia
Member
Posts: 1392
Joined: July 14th, 2012, 7:08 pm
Location: SoCal

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by SolaGratia »

lets please keep this civil.

lets also make sure we are respecting the hard work many volunteers put into the game to give us what we have enjoyed and we are discussing either major changes or throwing out most all of the work or leaving as is. TBH if I had done all the d&d work I'd really struggle with scrapping all my investment.

rhendon
Member
Posts: 10859
Joined: August 24th, 2010, 12:58 pm

Re: REVERT - The Reset/Redux/Revolution/Reedit Discussion

Post by rhendon »

arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 4:14 pm
JarJarDrinks wrote:I think the results shouldn't be taken into account because it tells us close to nothing.
I mean, I didn't figure D&D had much interest in changing things, and CKellys first post in this thread made that clear, but throwing out data from what is clearly a lot of people who would like to see changes because of minor wording is pretty laughable. You're better than that, JJD.

You really think this poll tells us almost nothing?!
Yes he does. It is JJD. You missed him during the reset. It was much of the same stuff from him then.

Chris Kelly will listen and do what is best for the game and what the player's want (as long as it doesn't kill best for game). I trust him completely in D&D. Him and Emil being there are the best things for the game.
arebelspy wrote:
October 3rd, 2019, 3:44 pm
mrfahrenheit7 wrote:Agree most with wise of anyone so far.
I would be strongly in favor of regularly scheduled minor tweaks to the cardpool, maybe 1-2× per year.
Me too.

I wonder though if it would annoy people.

Having to keep up with what the current version of something is. Having to reprint slips. Etc.

D&D has shown a reluctance to tweaking existing cards anyways.
This sounds like rotation. This was discussed during the reset a lot. Hunter and I tried to push it because it helps fix a lot of things we are seeing now. People wouldn't go for it then. It was annoying. It allows D&D to release cards like LMFBM and other super powerful cards and know they will rotate out and power creep doesn't go up. It can stay constant for years because of no need to make more powerful options to fix past powerful cards. Those powerful cards will rotate out and meta will change back.

Hopefully Hunter will read this and can comment more on our attempts during reset for rotation and how it was hard enough to just convince people of the reset.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”