General thoughts post-Major

SWCCG game play discussion.
User avatar
TacoBill
Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: January 18th, 2003, 8:32 pm
Location: MD

General thoughts post-Major

Post by TacoBill »

I wanna take advantage of the fact that everyone is engaged in the game right now after (well technically, during) a major event to bring up some things that I think we can do better as a community. I tried to break these thoughts into different sections so that they could be discussed by the pertinent teams/advocates, but hopefully this is a good place to compile everything.

I hope no one takes this as any kind of personal attack or attack on what the PC is doing. I know a lot is going on behind the scenes, and live behind some of those scenes myself.

If anything I mention here is already going on, please, tell us about it. If things aren't, then lets figure out why and try to get things moving in the right direction for 2021 and beyond.

Meta concerns
-This is something I sent to various advocates (I've edited slightly) after the live Endor event this year:
I think effort should be focused on why DS can't compete anymore. Its generally small stuff (look at Corran vs Isard or Nute v vs Padme v, or Anakins Saber vs Dooku's/DJLv) so I don't know how much of that can/will be fixed. But each little new LS thing that has come out has hurt DS and their cards they've been getting is more to catch up with LS than hurt LS, if that makes sense. And the 'power cards' that traditionally has made DS better (EPP Maul, Blizzard 4, ZIMH) are not nearly as playable right now because of various counters.
-Taking out our team members (who play a good amount of No Idea), No Idea is winning 60% of its games in the OCS over the last 3 months (107 game sample). Its doing too much. I don't have the answer, but some themes keep popping up over and over with regard to what is deemed overpowered: +2 modifiers (or 2s in general, ie Stardust), pulling characters integral to the deck, canceling destinies (rather than targetings), too much text on characters. No Idea does all of these.
----People have talked about what the deck does too well here (viewtopic.php?f=304&t=74759) including some good ideas here (viewtopic.php?f=304&t=74759&start=180#p1309791)
-Again, taking out team members, CCT (65% WR over 60 games), IE (61% WR over 104 games), and Watto (68% WR over 47 games) are also over-performing. I would guess CCT is feasting on TRM, but the intersection of force pile searches, resource denial or stealing (R'tic), and general buffing of cards that need to be in decks (like the Console) is something to watch for. Watto, on the other hand has 2 major problem cards in Sebulba and R'tic. Its one thing to take a strategy of force denial using Jawas and Broken Concentration (which has a bullet now), its another to do it every turn with a character who's difficult to kill because he's never alone. Sebulba also runs contrary to the idea of the deck- putting a card down in Used Pile to cause damage should be a cost, not come with a reward. Not to mention he's a pullable 1/0 that can't be drained at and gets attrition +1 AND deploys free on top of that. Greg said it best here:
stealtheblind wrote:
June 15th, 2020, 3:35 pm
Is there not a difference between Ozzel and Sebulba? Ozzel is a body that accomplishes Watto's cheap set up. After that, he's forfeit fodder. Sebulba is also pullable and d0, so checks the setup boxes...but he adds a card to your hand in deploy phase the turn he's deployed and on subsequent turns when LS loses 2. Oh, and he adds a force generation, too. Those are two incredible upgrades relative to Ozzel, but you don't have to pay a steeper cost.
I think we're too far gone to do anything about IE at this point, to be honest, but I would hope when we have our next reset that we don't bring back virtual objectives that start ships on the table.
-Yes I know that its ironic to complain about how LS cards are better than DS cards and then show that 3 DS decks are winning at too high of a rate.
-You might notice I've left ISB off this list. ISB is sitting at a 53% WR over 186 games so I think that's working as it should. Our team is playing it with more success (70% WR over 66 games) so it does need looking at. I think you actually have a simple fix for ISB, and that is to not allow SSAv to work when you start a Coruscant site. That either takes activation away from the version that plops Gideon to the Square or moves the deck to starting the system. Either way, you still have to find more generation, which eats into starting effects. I was told this would kill the deck though, so others have suggested fixes for Gideon, like the one below.
-Other random erratas I'd (personally) want to see (a non-exhaustive list): Wokling not allowed to pull Projection, Escape Pod v allowed to pull Projection, Old Luke not pull Force Projection, Gideon pull a trooper at full price only if he deploys to a battleground, R2-D2 not going Used, and (likely a controversial one) banning Simple Tricks and Nonsense.
-Has there been any further discussion to something I've seen Jarad mention all the time in Slack, which is doing away with 'sets' and releasing cards in smaller batches? This would keep us from long downtimes between set releases where the meta is starting to be solved (due to the sheer volume of Gemp games, which is a good thing) and keep options fresh.


Tournament/Logistics concerns
-One of the biggest issues we have is a lack of redundancy. We have plenty of people willing to help with things, but they don't know where to go where they will be best utilized, or some people feel like they have to do more than they should and refuse help. It would be good to identify who is serving in what advocate roles and who is working with them on a team. For each event that we have (live or otherwise) we should be identifying a primary director, a secondary director, etc. Basically nothing should be 1-person deep because that person is going to inevitably burn out/leave the community/fall asleep on stream/etc.
-I think its time we created a position of stream coordinator. It shouldn't fall to the TD to direct who should be on stream and who is streaming it. This person can also provide links to the community, can answer people who want to stream with who/what they should be streaming, etc.
-Commentary should be looked at under the lens of teams. I'm not going to sit here on a 16-person team and tell you that we're doing everything right, but we should really look for this in live events where decks can't be changed as frequently. Top players doing commentary is fantastic, but
maybe a player shouldn't be doing commentary for a match where the winner will play their teammate (if you follow that).
-Pod play is good. Its increasingly likely that we will be running Worlds (or something similar to it) online, and we should make every attempt to accommodate players in different time zones that want to play. Even if not for 1 big tournament, running a 'major' starting at 5am EST would allow for Europeans to play while still possibly bringing in some East Coast players and Kyle (who will likely be up from the night before still). Additionally, running an event on West coast time would make it so they don't have to get up as early for an event. (Bastian has since raised a good point about making sure all players are subject to the same competition. While that is something I can definitely get behind, we wouldn't be the only game to run Day 1a/Day 1b of Worlds, even if we might be the smallest).


Communication concerns
-We as a community tend to react rather than plan ahead. We should be better about announcing things well in advance so people have plenty of time to see them (and there's time to have it trickle to the social media community, the players that aren't on there, the players that show up once a month, etc). Obviously Covid has thrown a wrench into these plans, but we know that there will be tournaments in 2021, so we should be developing and announcing plans for the 2021 tournament calendar along with backup plans for if/when these in-person events get canceled. We know they will need prizes, so we should be determining those now.
-In that same vein, it would be nice to know that each advocate has a plan for their position with regards to what they're looking to do in the next month/6 months/year/whatever. I think just getting this out will help them realize the number of people they might need to reach the goal or communicate early that they can't. I think a lot of the issues that pop up can be mitigated by this practice and a lot of criticism with regards to hitting goals can be answered.
-What does the PC need help with? Every once and awhile we see a call for volunteers, but especially taking into account redundancy, is there more that can be done?
-How often do different advocates/teams talk to each other? Is the prize team working with playtesting to maybe develop foil slips of cards that haven't been released yet? I know getting LSRSv at Endor was fantastic and we should be pushing more of that. Is D&D working with the tournament committee (or really just Adam and his stats, or a recreation of the CBT) to see what is dominating the meta and designing cards accordingly?
-One of the things the AGOT PC did was to collect e-mail addresses from everyone who wanted to be a voting member (they vote advocates to fixed-length terms and such as well, something else I've been told by several players we should look into). Then, they have used this collection to send out surveys about different legalities of cards, how often people play, what was a problem in the meta, etc. We should do something similar probably yearly or at least every 2 years to address reset considerations, banning vs erratas, tournament timeframes, tournament styles, etc.


Again, all I'm looking to do is start civil conversations about how we as a community can move forward in 2021 and beyond, and welcome all discussion.


Bill Kafer
Image
Cam Solusar wrote:What TacoBill proposes is ideal IMO.
Corran wrote:Honestly, Tacobill should just be the boss of SWCCG.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 23050
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by chriskelly »

Reporting this post because of the hate on Sebulba...

Hayes
LS Region: Kashyyyk
LS Region: Kashyyyk
Posts: 5078
Joined: February 22nd, 2009, 1:58 am

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by Hayes »

chriskelly wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 2:47 pm
Reporting this post because of the hate on Sebulba...
I'm guessing you're trying to be funny, but there is a lot of quality and substance to TacoBills's post. It's irreverent for the first reply from a red handle to be nothing more than a bad joke.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 23050
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by chriskelly »

Hayes wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:12 pm
chriskelly wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 2:47 pm
Reporting this post because of the hate on Sebulba...
I'm guessing you're trying to be funny, but there is a lot of quality and substance to TacoBills's post. It's irreverent for the first reply from a red handle to be nothing more than a bad joke.
No need to guess. It was funny. It's irreverent for people to not chill out or have fun with this game.

Also, I've said repeatedly (REPEATEDLY) how much we discuss this stuff and value the data.
#wrongbark
#wrongtree

User avatar
sac89837
Member
Posts: 10979
Joined: November 29th, 2007, 4:06 pm

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by sac89837 »

I think almost everyone of the card concerns is something we are discussing.

I am pushing for smaller faster sets as well. Maybe it will come true this year?
On a unicorn, riding a unicorn over a rainbow.

"Bounty Hunters don't do brunch."

User avatar
TacoBill
Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: January 18th, 2003, 8:32 pm
Location: MD

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by TacoBill »

sac89837 wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:20 pm
I think almost everyone of the card concerns is something we are discussing.

I am pushing for smaller faster sets as well. Maybe it will come true this year?
One of the things I miss most about the CBT (even if it wasn't updated as frequently as it should have been) is the watch list, because you knew where people in charge stood. You guys in D&D obviously have a lot on your plates, but if the CBT coming back is something that the powers that be don't want, could there be a watch list/possible tweak list that gets published monthly? If not monthly, then after majors/set releases? Just a quick blast that says 'Hey, we saw that R2-D2v was in 80% of decks and we don't like that, we're looking into ways to fix that. Also, CCT is winning 80% of its games, so we're looking at potential adjustments to the Console v and R'tic as well as developing a counter for the next set.'
Bill Kafer
Image
Cam Solusar wrote:What TacoBill proposes is ideal IMO.
Corran wrote:Honestly, Tacobill should just be the boss of SWCCG.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 23050
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by chriskelly »

To be frank, (almost) every time a public cbt thread is started, we start one internally or discuss on slack. So that’s probably a decent “watch list” indicator.

For example, a lot of us don’t think R2 is an issue at all but I’d expect a few changes to be pushed out that include him because of that public thread. Obviously timing is sensitive because of moving parts in the design process and other changes we want to make (errata on old cards or adjustment to future cards) and that there’s still an event going on.

User avatar
sac89837
Member
Posts: 10979
Joined: November 29th, 2007, 4:06 pm

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by sac89837 »

TacoBill wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:28 pm
sac89837 wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:20 pm
I think almost everyone of the card concerns is something we are discussing.

I am pushing for smaller faster sets as well. Maybe it will come true this year?
One of the things I miss most about the CBT (even if it wasn't updated as frequently as it should have been) is the watch list, because you knew where people in charge stood. You guys in D&D obviously have a lot on your plates, but if the CBT coming back is something that the powers that be don't want, could there be a watch list/possible tweak list that gets published monthly? If not monthly, then after majors/set releases? Just a quick blast that says 'Hey, we saw that R2-D2v was in 80% of decks and we don't like that, we're looking into ways to fix that. Also, CCT is winning 80% of its games, so we're looking at potential adjustments to the Console v and R'tic as well as developing a counter for the next set.'
This seems like a reasonable request. We should provide a more detailed list than we currently do.
On a unicorn, riding a unicorn over a rainbow.

"Bounty Hunters don't do brunch."

Wokling
Member
Posts: 502
Joined: February 8th, 2019, 11:26 am
GEMP Username: ototoi

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by Wokling »

Lots of really good thoughts here, Bill. Thank you for taking the time to write this. FWIW, I think it would be best to split this into multiple posts, to discuss the subtopics separately.

Meta
It is really interesting that your numbers show high win rates for certain dark decks.
But light is so much stronger. Light side has too many good cards across the board. Rescue, Wokling, Perim Scan and Hear Me Baby, Weapons Display, R2, Tantive, Rey, Solo, Ahsoka, General Leia, and so on. Generally, I like TRM and Legend against all the top dark decks. NI is oddly more metawarping however because it shuts down too many strategies, even though a number of dark decks are competitive against it.

Logistics
A stream coordinator is a fantastic idea.
Regarding your first point, I don't think there needs to be a formal change. Two of the most succesful events to take place recently were spearheaded by players. First you (Bill) ran the Jawa Cup, and now Robbie has run TMW. Step 1 for running an event should be contacting imrahil327. Perhaps step 2 should be creating a forum spot with a call for volunteers to properly staff volunteers?

Communication
That also sounds good to me. Get this man an official advocate position.

EDIT:
I have no insight into the amount of work that goes on behind the scene. I bet it's a lot, and it's fantastic that it all gets done. Thank you. I just really appreciate Bill taking the time to discuss in good faith the issues he sees with the game and for expressing his desire to volunteer and otherwise improve the logistics involved in running the game (his "Communication" section).
Last edited by Wokling on August 23rd, 2020, 3:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jedicon
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 915
Joined: June 28th, 2012, 2:06 am
GEMP Username: jokerking

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by Jedicon »

Lots of good ideas here Bill.

I particularly like the idea of a streaming coordinator position between now and Worlds.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 23050
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by chriskelly »

sac89837 wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:33 pm
This seems like a reasonable request. We should provide a more detailed list than we currently do.
For sure. If this would be helpful, I can start a thread up tonight.

User avatar
SmallDarkLines
Member
Posts: 2221
Joined: October 13th, 2014, 2:25 pm
Location: Ireland
GEMP Username: Tardis

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by SmallDarkLines »

I really like most of these suggestions.
Euros had a survey, and I remember a digital one a while back also - I'd like to see more of those, on a regular basis, and even possibly after each major or set release.
With regard to the data collection stuff, it was actually something that surprised me wasn't already being done (which is why I did a big breakdown of most played cards a couple of years back). Seeing which cards (virtual or not) are seeing regular play is definitely important. If a card is turning up in pretty much every deck, there's something wrong (either it provides too much benefit, or if it's a counter, the card it counters is too strong).

More transparency about what's happening behind the scenes would probably help too - if people don't hear anything, they assume nothing is being done, no matter how much work is actually being put in.
New or returning player? Click here for the information you need to know.

Beat me mercilessly on GEMP: Tardis
Say hello at an event:Darren
Image

Image

arebelspy
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 17308
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by arebelspy »

I agree with essentially all of that post. And think it should be used as a template to move the PC forward.

One part I disagree with:
TacoBill wrote: -Commentary should be looked at under the lens of teams. I'm not going to sit here on a 16-person team and tell you that we're doing everything right, but we should really look for this in live events where decks can't be changed as frequently. Top players doing commentary is fantastic, but
maybe a player shouldn't be doing commentary for a match where the winner will play their teammate (if you follow that).
For two reasons.

1) We don't have enough streamers as it is. Today I stepped in when Bastian was real tired and couldn't do it and no one else was able. Idk who these guys are playing next, but it was better to have it commentated than not.

2) It's not actually an advantage to commentate it. The commentators don't see anything anyone else does.

Like, if I commentate a game and the winner will play my teammate the next round, yes, I saw the game and could talk to my teammate about it. But if someone else commentated (say, Bastian), and I watched, I would still see the game, still see the same reserve verifications, etc.

If anything, me commentating is more advantageous for the guy not on the team--he gets to hear my thoughts. My teammate will already hear those thoughts, now the guy he's playing will get them too.

That's besides the whole could change decks thing.

If commentators got access to something other people don't get (say, decklists), I'd agree. That's unfair. But they don't. They see everything anyone else watching a stream or the game sees. So I just don't see any advantage they'd gain by commentating. It seems totally irrelevant to me who commentates.

In fact, it could be their next round opponent himself commentating it and I don't see an advantage they'd gain by talking about it out loud rather than watching it (if anything a disadvantage).

User avatar
TacoBill
Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: January 18th, 2003, 8:32 pm
Location: MD

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by TacoBill »

chriskelly wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:33 pm
To be frank, (almost) every time a public cbt thread is started, we start one internally or discuss on slack. So that’s probably a decent “watch list” indicator.

For example, a lot of us don’t think R2 is an issue at all but I’d expect a few changes to be pushed out that include him because of that public thread. Obviously timing is sensitive because of moving parts in the design process and other changes we want to make (errata on old cards or adjustment to future cards) and that there’s still an event going on.
And I'm pretty sure anyone that's worked with/in/around D&D knows that's the case, but the real TL;DR of this post is about communication. If you (D&D) overtly state "These are what we're looking at" that gives me more confidence than me thinking you're looking at things when maybe you aren't.
Bill Kafer
Image
Cam Solusar wrote:What TacoBill proposes is ideal IMO.
Corran wrote:Honestly, Tacobill should just be the boss of SWCCG.

Wokling
Member
Posts: 502
Joined: February 8th, 2019, 11:26 am
GEMP Username: ototoi

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by Wokling »

arebelspy wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:42 pm
If anything, me commentating is more advantageous for the guy not on the team--he gets to hear my thoughts. My teammate will already hear those thoughts, now the guy he's playing will get them too.
100% this. When I was commentating last weekend I gave my view on how to play certain decks, disclosing tech cards I've been considering for certain matchups, and so on: things I discuss with my team but otherwise am not sharing in slack or on the forums. If I really wanted to help my teammates, I wouldn't commentate and keep all of that in-house.

User avatar
TacoBill
Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: January 18th, 2003, 8:32 pm
Location: MD

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by TacoBill »

arebelspy wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:42 pm
I agree with essentially all of that post. And think it should be used as a template to move the PC forward.

One part I disagree with:
TacoBill wrote: -Commentary should be looked at under the lens of teams. I'm not going to sit here on a 16-person team and tell you that we're doing everything right, but we should really look for this in live events where decks can't be changed as frequently. Top players doing commentary is fantastic, but
maybe a player shouldn't be doing commentary for a match where the winner will play their teammate (if you follow that).
For two reasons.

1) We don't have enough streamers as it is. Today I stepped in when Bastian was real tired and couldn't do it and no one else was able. Idk who these guys are playing next, but it was better to have it commentated than not.

2) It's not actually an advantage to commentate it. The commentators don't see anything anyone else does.

Like, if I commentate a game and the winner will play my teammate the next round, yes, I saw the game and could talk to my teammate about it. But if someone else commentated (say, Bastian), and I watched, I would still see the game, still see the same reserve verifications, etc.

If anything, me commentating is more advantageous for the guy not on the team--he gets to hear my thoughts. My teammate will already hear those thoughts, now the guy he's playing will get them too.

That's besides the whole could change decks thing.

If commentators got access to something other people don't get (say, decklists), I'd agree. That's unfair. But they don't. They see everything anyone else watching a stream or the game sees. So I just don't see any advantage they'd gain by commentating. It seems totally irrelevant to me who commentates.

In fact, it could be their next round opponent himself commentating it and I don't see an advantage they'd gain by talking about it out loud rather than watching it (if anything a disadvantage).
So I guess this is more focused on streaming live play than it is steaming online play, since you can't change decks for live play. One of the things we should watch out for is if we have a hypothetical top-4 of you vs Hayes and Shaw vs BFred. Someone like Eric* should not be the commentator for the Shaw/BFred match if it can be helped, since he will see literally every card in both decks.

* Not saying Eric or anyone does or would do this, but if we can, lets get rid of potential conflicts of interest.
Bill Kafer
Image
Cam Solusar wrote:What TacoBill proposes is ideal IMO.
Corran wrote:Honestly, Tacobill should just be the boss of SWCCG.

Wokling
Member
Posts: 502
Joined: February 8th, 2019, 11:26 am
GEMP Username: ototoi

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by Wokling »

TacoBill wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:45 pm
chriskelly wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:33 pm
To be frank, (almost) every time a public cbt thread is started, we start one internally or discuss on slack. So that’s probably a decent “watch list” indicator.

For example, a lot of us don’t think R2 is an issue at all but I’d expect a few changes to be pushed out that include him because of that public thread. Obviously timing is sensitive because of moving parts in the design process and other changes we want to make (errata on old cards or adjustment to future cards) and that there’s still an event going on.
And I'm pretty sure anyone that's worked with/in/around D&D knows that's the case, but the real TL;DR of this post is about communication. If you (D&D) overtly state "These are what we're looking at" that gives me more confidence than me thinking you're looking at things when maybe you aren't.
Chris has just told us that anything on the Competitive Balance forums is discussed by D&D. Not sure there needs to be a sticky at the top of the CB forums saying, "D&D is now considering the following cards" with a list of all the cards in CB forums. But maybe it'd help because it at least signals "we hear you." Silence from known members of D&D on the CB forums does make you feel like D&D is ignoring the conversation. At the same time, I respect that D&D isn't and shouldn't be obligated to chime in on every thread. They should have the leeway to work on things privately.

User avatar
TacoBill
Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: January 18th, 2003, 8:32 pm
Location: MD

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by TacoBill »

Right, I wholeheartedly agree with your last 2 lines. Maybe a D&D sticky in the CB forums could say what they are thinking about doing (errata vs counters, for example) or maybe it is overkill. I just think that since we have generally been pretty closed about what goes on behind the scenes, this is an easy kill for getting more information out to the players.
Bill Kafer
Image
Cam Solusar wrote:What TacoBill proposes is ideal IMO.
Corran wrote:Honestly, Tacobill should just be the boss of SWCCG.

Jedicon
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 915
Joined: June 28th, 2012, 2:06 am
GEMP Username: jokerking

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by Jedicon »

Madmanwithabox wrote:
August 23rd, 2020, 3:42 pm
I really like most of these suggestions.
Euros had a survey, and I remember a digital one a while back also - I'd like to see more of those, on a regular basis, and even possibly after each major or set release.
With regard to the data collection stuff, it was actually something that surprised me wasn't already being done (which is why I did a big breakdown of most played cards a couple of years back). Seeing which cards (virtual or not) are seeing regular play is definitely important. If a card is turning up in pretty much every deck, there's something wrong (either it provides too much benefit, or if it's a counter, the card it counters is too strong).

More transparency about what's happening behind the scenes would probably help too - if people don't hear anything, they assume nothing is being done, no matter how much work is actually being put in.
This is 100% true, especially for those players who have not done any of the behind-the-scenes work.

User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 23050
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Re: General thoughts post-Major

Post by chriskelly »

I disagree about the information thing a bit (I’m one of the worst fight klubbers there is. I post pretty liberally in some threads and slack and in private message conversations and anyone who has attended a major with me and gotten the infamous group meal knows I’m always seeking feedback and bouncing ideas off of people), but if it makes people happy to have me codify the basic precept of my posts elsewhere, that’s fine. However i just don’t want it to be a sword against us in the event something happens not in the thread (for example, if not for a timing snaffu, there probably already would have been a r’tic errata. That wasn’t really in the public domain of late, so if we announced that I wouldn’t want someone complaining that they didn’t know it was coming).

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”