Flattening the Curve

SWCCG game play discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
chriskelly
Design Advocate
Posts: 22656
Joined: January 28th, 2003, 2:13 pm
Location: New York

Flattening the Curve

Post by chriskelly »

Hi SWCCGers!
As fall approaches and the leaves change outside, Worlds approaches and the meta is about to change in our galaxy far, far away. As has been discussed all over the forums and slack and Holotheatre and the CBT threads, the Competitive Balance Team has been doing their homework and due diligence in assessing the meta. After noticing certain decks to be well above the curve (there are soooo many spies among us!), some things that did not seem to make sense in the current state of the game (as per Robbie...) and some things were just not fun to play against (wait, he can use my Force on your turn too? When your Force pile is already full?!?!), we have made some pretty aggressive changes in the meta, with a conscious effort to "flatten the curve."

We realize that make changes to one deck can have a bigger impact on the meta than simply limiting that deck's presence in the meta. For example, impacting a deck's "natural predator" might cause that deck to suddenly dominate the meta. Or, just the same, scaling back just one deck might make another the clear and dominate deck for that side or it might cause a deck on the other side of the Force to no longer be needed as an option to keep something in check. So a conscious effort was made to look at many of the top decks and "flatten the curve," in an attempt to bring the strongest decks down the most and the stronger decks some, and the strong decks a bit, hoping to ensure several good, decent, equal deck options.

So, without further adieu, I present to you the 10/2020 Competitive Balance Errata:
The Competitive Balance Team wrote: •Kir Kanos (V)
[Reflections II - PM]
DARK - CHARACTER - IMPERIAL
POWER 5 ABILITY 3 FORCE-ATTUNED
Text: When deployed, may /\ a Royal Guard. During battle, if present at a site with an Imperial, once per game may cancel a non-[Immune to Sense] Interrupt.
DEPLOY 3 FORFEIT 4
[Warrior] [Set 8] [Errata]

•Moff Gideon [Collateral Damage (V)] 3
[Premiere - C2]
Lore: ISB leader.
DARK - CHARACTER - IMPERIAL
POWER 3 ABILITY 4 FORCE-SENSITIVE
Text: [Pilot] 2. Rebels here (and at adjacent sites if your E-web blaster here) are power -1. When deployed, may \/ an E-web blaster (or an Imperial stormtrooper) here for -2 Force.
DEPLOY 4 FORFEIT 6
[Pilot] [Warrior] [Set 12] [Errata]

•R'tic H'weei [Daroe (V)] 3
[Tatooine - R]
Lore: Jawa.
DARK - CHARACTER - ALIEN
POWER 2 ABILITY 2
Text: Once per game, may /\ Jawa Blaster or a card with "sandcrawler" in title or game text. During opponent's turn, if present at a Tatooine battleground and there is more than 1 Force in opponent's Force Pile, you may use 1 Force in opponent's Force Pile.
DEPLOY 2 FORFEIT 3
[Set 0] [Errata]

•Slip Sliding Away (V)
[Cloud City - R]
DARK - INTERRUPT - STARTING INTERRUPT
Text: If you have deployed a site with exactly two [Dark Side Force] (and no other locations), deploy a battleground site. Then, unless you have deployed Imperial Square or a site with "Palace" in title, deploy up to three Effects that are always immune to Alter. Place Interrupt in Lost Pile.
[Set 12] [Errata]

TO BE BLANKED:
Firepower (V)
Ability, Ability, Ability (V)



•R2-D2 (Artoo-Detoo) (V)
[A New Hope - R2]
LIGHT - CHARACTER - DROID
POWER 1 ASTROMECH DROID
Text: While aboard a starfighter, adds 2 to power, maneuver, and hyperspeed. While with a Scomp link, adds one [Light Side] icon here. Immune to Fire Extinguisher and Restraining Bolt.
DEPLOY 2 FORFEIT 4
[Nav Computer] [Set 1] [Errata]

•Saw Gerrera [Stay Sharp! (V)] 2
[Special Edition - U]
Lore: Leader.
LIGHT - CHARACTER - REBEL
POWER 4 ABILITY 3 FORCE-ATTUNED
Text: Attrition against opponent is +1 here for each of their characters present. Opponent may not reduce your Force drains here. Cancels Trooper Assault here.
DEPLOY 4 FORFEIT 6
[Warrior] [Set 9] [Errata]

•Make Ten Men Feel Like A Hundred [Firefight (V)] 5
[Endor - C]
Lore: Blank
LIGHT - EFFECT
Text: If Stardust on table, deploy on table. Nightfall is canceled. Saw is a spy. Rebel spies deploy -1 to Scarif. Once per battle, if you just drew a Rebel spy for destiny, may retrieve 1 Force. [Immune to Alter.]
[Set 11] [Errata]

•Stardust [Portable Scanner (V)] 6
[Special Edition - C]
Lore: Blank
LIGHT - EFFECT
Text: Deploy on Data Vault. At any time, may relocate Stardust to your spy present. During your control phase, if on your spy at a battleground you occupy, opponent loses 1 Force. If about to leave table, relocate to Data Vault (if possible). [Immune to Alter.]
[Set 9] [Errata]

They Have No Idea We're Coming [Covert Landing (V)] 0
[Endor - U]
LIGHT - OBJECTIVE - FRONT
Text: Deploy Scarif system, Data Vault (with Stardust there), and Massassi War Room.
For remainder of game, you may not deploy Jedi. Baze, Chirrut, and Rebel troopers are spies.
While this side up, once per turn, may \/ a Rebel starship (except Home One or [Reflections III] Falcon) or a Scarif site.
Flip this card if you control two Scarif locations.
[Set 9] [Errata]

Until We Win, Or The Chances Are Spent [Desperate Tactics (V)] 7
[Special Edition - C]
LIGHT - OBJECTIVE - BACK
Text: While this side up, your spies are defense value +2 (and power +1 if with Stardust) and are immune to Undercover. While Stardust on your spy, opponent may not cancel your Force drains at battlegrounds. Once per turn, may place a Rebel in your Lost Pile out of play to make a regular move with your spy during your control phase or cancel an attempt to target your non-Undercover spy with a weapon.
Flip this card if you do not occupy two Scarif locations (unless Rogue One at a Scarif site you occupy).
[Set 9] [Errata]

We Need Luke Skywalker [Save You It Can (V)] 7
[Special Edition - R]
LIGHT - OBJECTIVE - BACK
Text: Immediately place Luke out of play (ignore [Death Star II] objective restrictions, if any). For remainder of battle, opponent may not fire weapons.
While this side up, opponent's immunity to attrition is limited to < 5. Your Force drains are +1 where you have two unique (•) Resistance characters. Once during your turn, may peek at the top card of your Force Pile and Reserve Deck; place both cards (in any order) on top of one of those piles. Once per turn during battle involving two Resistance characters, may cancel an opponent's just drawn destiny to cause a re-draw.
[Set 11] [Errata]

•Wokling (V)
[Endor - R]
Text: Unless Massassi Throne Room on table, deploy on table. Your total Force generation is +1. Once per game, may use 3 Force to /\ an Effect that has no deploy cost and deploys on another card. May place this Effect out of play to retrieve 1 Force. [Immune to Alter.]
[Set 0] [Errata]

TO BE BLANKED:
Weapons Display (V)
Civil Disorder (V)
Why did you do this to these particular cards? Well....
- Kir Kanos: There has been a rash of characters designed with "Interrupt-style" game text. Decks are becoming more character-based and less "red." And whenever Design has wanted to make a powerful interrupt for battle, we either have to make it very high destiny or immune to sense. We wanted to be able to bring back some of that excitement of an Interrupt swinging a battle and then also that moment of "wait, is this Interrupt even going to go thru or does my opponent have a Sense?" This guy eventually became a design-constraint. We liked the theme of a Royal Guard "guarding," so we wanted to keep the text to some degree. But not to the "stack your star destroyer and cancel their Rebel Leadership in space" kind of good.
- Moff Gideon: we loved him. A true powerhouse from the Mandalorian. But he too easily fueled an ISB/Garrison beat, especially when he was deployed to the Square to get a Garrison for 2 Force. So instead of that (or a free Patrol), he can reduce their deployment or get a free trooper if you grab the unique 2/2 guys. Also, they are only servants to Gideon and have to go to his site, not anywhere the Empire needs. As ISB trooper/million guys/death stack became more common, it became apparent this guy had to get hit somehow.
- R'tic H'weei: this is one of the best designed virtual cards of all time, but the execution of allowing it on both turns was just too much. It was often an NPE to save Force for your opponent's turn only to have them steal it from you. UTINNIIII!!!
- Slip Sliding Away: this card opened up soooo many new decks and is really fun. Unfortunately ISB starting the Square + a 2/1 battleground was exactly what that deck needed to take over the meta. We wanted to change it in a way that the Square was no longer an option. However, should a day come where ISB needs more help, we are free to make a new Corsucant site with 2 DS Force icons that either isn't a 2/0 and/or doesn't make all Imperials cheaper.
- Firepower: Retrieval on a defense shield (that triggered off opponent putting more characters on table) always seemed odd. However these shields were often confused because they weren't mirrors and with Ghhhk and Lana combos (and Vader, Enforcer) they seem less needed.
- Ability, Ability, Ability: The Senate Defense Shields are very fair counters to the deck. I wouldn't expect any helpers for Senate at the moment, but at least now the deck can maybe be explored. Also, in general, +2 modifiers are the flipping worst.
- R2-D2: We liked this card but recursion in general often draws skepticism and ire and generally should be avoided or costed.
- Make Ten Men Feel Like A Hundred/No Idea: This was a clear attempt at disrupting the efficiency of this deck, which could go aggro early, control early, satisfy Battle Order by stacking deploy 2 (or 1), forfeit 7 guys with decent game text at a drain 2 site and a slue of ships that were pullable. Pulling Saw early was also unnecessary, as we making him a Resistance Agent, not only because Map was no longer the beast it once was, but also because it meant he could be retrieved with Where's Han, which pulled Han, Chewie and the Falcon, which turned Guts online. There was talk of just blending the left over effect text into the objective, but decided since it can pull its space fleet, letting the deck have a free effect slot for Menace Fades or Guts wasn't achieving the "nerf" we wanted.
- Stardust: this could have been lumped in with the above, but this was primarily so that decks that could not afford to start Imperial Decree (V) could still be viable.
- Saw Guerra: see Kir Kanos, above. But he now perma-cancels Trooper Assault, otherwise his attrition text would be worthless. Also, this guy doesn't let troopers push him around.
- Legend: The re-draw was often considered the most "NPE" portion of the objective, not just because of it's obvious ability of affecting your luck in battle, but also because it minimizes the strength and skill of tracking and discourages the DS from battling late game (in a deck that thrives in the late game with its pings and retrieval). But the re-draw was so iconic to the deck (Luke passing on his text to the objective), we wanted to keep it, but just thematically cost it. Now in order to pull off the Gold Leader in Gold 1 trick, you'll need more than just Poe piloting.
- Wokling: This one pains me too much to write, but the number of players providing feedback against TRM always came back to this. Initially there was a defensive shield that dealt with both Stardust and TRM's activation, but with the decision to errata Stardust, it became more apparent to just errata Wokling out of TRM instead of making a new shield.

When will this errata be in effect? In the world we are currently in, we don't anticipate any sanctioned "in real life" games soon, however we are currently working on getting the PDF ready and uploaded. We hope it will be there within a week's time. However, of more practicality, our GEMP slicers have gotten a jump start on this and it is expected to be ready and loaded into GEMP in time for Round 2 of the OCS playoffs. We purposefully did not want to issue errata in the middle of the Texas Mini-Worlds, both so we could use the later rounds to get more data and gameplay experience and to ensure we did not take away from the integrity of that event by having the finals played in a "stale meta" with players selecting their decks for the championship round knowing that it was going to be errata'd. We wanted to announce them all now though so those playing in Round 2 of the OCS knew about it when planning their games. However, as always, the GEMP meta is play it as it lies, so be advised that those who start their first game before the errata implemented may be playing their second game after.

What about Court? Court is certainly a top deck that we would have hit with an errata if there was one clear and obvious solution. However in our discussions it became more and more apparent that instead of attacking one or two V-cards, it would be better to handle Court thru "meta cards" (or bullets) in the next set that would counter things or help fight against what Court does well. Unfortunately this means that there will be a small window of a meta where the CBT changes are in effect but Set 13 is not yet out, so if you are part of a wretched hive, enjoy that time.

When is Set 13 coming out? Set 13 is entering its final production stages and will be legal for the Worlds event in December.

Thanks all and MTFBWY,
Chris



User avatar
TacoBill
Member
Posts: 5169
Joined: January 18th, 2003, 8:32 pm
Location: MD

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by TacoBill »

chriskelly, I don't care what Dan says about you on the SWCCG Twitch, you're alright.
Bill Kafer
Definitely on the Mount Rushmore of SWCCG players to live in Hawaii
Cam Solusar wrote:What TacoBill proposes is ideal IMO.

Bib Fortuna
DS Region: Endor
DS Region: Endor
Posts: 1881
Joined: October 31st, 2002, 2:58 am
Location: Springfield, OR
Contact:

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by Bib Fortuna »

I’m of the opinion that the change to Slip was unnecessary. Until we get a new Coruscant 2/0 site, ISB will be worthless. If we wanted to avoid the Gideon trooper swarm style decks, why not just a quick change to Gideon? “May not deploy to Coruscant” would be ideal IMO.

And we wanted to keep ISB from using the Square with Slip, why not change Slip so you can start with the 2/0 Coruscant system instead? Without the 4/1 starting activation ratio, ISB will not only fall off the top of the curve, it will fall off the graph entirely. The whole purpose of Slip was to give decks that had poor initial activation ratios (BHBM and TDIGWATT) a leg up in terms of competing with LS activation ratios.
They fly now!

rsersen
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1694
Joined: January 28th, 2017, 3:42 pm
Location: Hanover, PA
GEMP Username: rsersen
Contact:

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by rsersen »

I don’t think ISB is immediately dead. In theory it can still start 500 Republica with SSA, although a 5/2 start and two bg sites to defend (plus no Gideon/Square discount) probably knocks it out of the top competitive decks, yeah.

But I’m also so damn tired of playing against it, and watching it on every stream, that I’m not gonna shed any tears for it. Let it fall off for a bit, and come up with a new 2/0 to bring it back in a more balanced fashion.

Part of the problem with the DS meta the past couple years has been that there always ends up being one singular top deck, that just gets played to death until it gets nuked - AOBS, Map, ROps, Map again, now ISB. I’m cautiously optimistic that it finally looks like we’ll have a variety of options at the top now, with more hopefully coming in v13. 👍
arebelspy wrote:
May 13th, 2020, 10:16 pm
Agree with Ryan.
Image

Image

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16739
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by arebelspy »

I like them all but r'tic and wokling. I think r'tic should just cancel broken con. And wokling just made trm unplayable. That's a bummer.

Kir I also didn't think needed changing.

So 2 "meh don't like" one "strongly dislike", and I am neutral or like 13 of the changes (and mostly like, the vast majority even).

Good job overall.

Bib Fortuna
DS Region: Endor
DS Region: Endor
Posts: 1881
Joined: October 31st, 2002, 2:58 am
Location: Springfield, OR
Contact:

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by Bib Fortuna »

rsersen wrote:
October 9th, 2020, 12:00 am
I don’t think ISB is immediately dead. In theory it can still start 500 Republica with SSA, although a 5/2 start and two bg sites to defend (plus no Gideon/Square discount) probably knocks it out of the top competitive decks, yeah.
I’ll be honest, I forgot that 500 Republica existed. I was under the impression that every Coruscant site with 2 icons was either the Square or a Xizor’s Palace site. So I guess my “doom and gloom” outlook was a bit premature.
They fly now!

User avatar
Saladas
Member
Posts: 961
Joined: July 17th, 2006, 12:26 am

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by Saladas »

is there something in set 13 that is a soft counter for ls evasion? blanking firepower v completely is a bit drastic.

User avatar
Thekillerkiwi
Member
Posts: 618
Joined: December 31st, 2015, 3:18 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon
GEMP Username: killerkiwi
Contact:

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by Thekillerkiwi »

I am quite happy with all of these changes and look forward to a new meta soon. You guys have done a good job taking a hard look at all of the issues right now. I appreciate the detailed explanations and communication.

It might not all be perfect afterward but at least it gives us time to think about new strategies.
Brandon Baity

Please support my SWCCG Documentary - https://www.gofundme.com/star-wars-ccg-documentary

Check out my Youtube Channel - https://www.youtube.com/thenanashi

User avatar
CoffeePass
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: January 12th, 2019, 4:34 am

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by CoffeePass »

Very appreciative of this -- I think ISB and No Idea are slam dunks, I get Wokling (my main concern was TRM not being a player in the meta, but that was with ISB), and I think Legend will probably prove in the long run to need more than this -- big picture, I think it's fantastic D&D listened to feedback, watched the meta, and was willing to do so much at once. Really looking forward to Set 13!

User avatar
Madmanwithabox
Member
Posts: 2136
Joined: October 13th, 2014, 2:25 pm
Location: Ireland
GEMP Username: Tardis

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by Madmanwithabox »

I like most of the changes, especially the no idea ones.

Wokling... there were other ways to handle TRM, this seems very heavy handed.
Legend - I get the thematics, but part of the reason this deck runs Qui, Obi, etc is because the resistance character base is so thin on strong characters, other than the current mains. Set 14 is going to need to include more (playable) resistance characters to make this viable again.

Overall, with set 13 also taken into account, the meta should end up in a very different place.
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

aermet69
LS Region: Toola
LS Region: Toola
Posts: 5656
Joined: July 14th, 2009, 2:16 pm
Location: Denmark (Toola)
GEMP Username: aermet69

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by aermet69 »

CoffeePass wrote:
October 9th, 2020, 4:48 am
... I think it's fantastic D&D listened to feedback, watched the meta, and was willing to do so much at once. Really looking forward to Set 13!
Agreed. This is something I've been wanting for a while. The courage to do bigger changes.

And you have delivered on several occasions of late!
- Casper Jørgensen
aermet69 - Member of Team Copenhagen
"Team Copenhagen never dies. They just go to the bar and respawn."
~UK National Champion 2011. ~Worlds 2012, 10th place. ~German Nationals 2014, Runner-up. ~European Champion 2014. ~Toola Regionals 2015, Runner-Up.

solomon
Starter
Starter
Posts: 6
Joined: September 22nd, 2020, 9:57 am

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by solomon »

Seems like blanking firepower is unnecessary. Getting rid of the retrieval aspect makes sense but not the ping damage from evasion. Looks like someone’s gonna have to make an X wing + hyper escape + arcona Hidden base deck.

The_Emp
Booster Pack
Booster Pack
Posts: 141
Joined: December 3rd, 2017, 5:32 pm
GEMP Username: The_Emp

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by The_Emp »

Madmanwithabox wrote:
October 9th, 2020, 4:50 am
I like most of the changes, especially the no idea ones.

Wokling... there were other ways to handle TRM, this seems very heavy handed.
Legend - I get the thematics, but part of the reason this deck runs Qui, Obi, etc is because the resistance character base is so thin on strong characters, other than the current mains. Set 14 is going to need to include more (playable) resistance characters to make this viable again.

Overall, with set 13 also taken into account, the meta should end up in a very different place.
Yeah, while I agree with you, the difference with resistance characters is that so many of the original decipher cards don't target any resistance characters and only rebels. I would love for us to open up more of the natural Red card counters to resistance agents so we balance things out since resistance characters have a natural built in protection from a lot of the counter DS cards.

The_Emp
Booster Pack
Booster Pack
Posts: 141
Joined: December 3rd, 2017, 5:32 pm
GEMP Username: The_Emp

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by The_Emp »

aermet69 wrote:
October 9th, 2020, 4:58 am
CoffeePass wrote:
October 9th, 2020, 4:48 am
... I think it's fantastic D&D listened to feedback, watched the meta, and was willing to do so much at once. Really looking forward to Set 13!
Agreed. This is something I've been wanting for a while. The courage to do bigger changes.

And you have delivered on several occasions of late!
Couldn't agree more, X2. Take some risks and tweak the top decks and trouble cards, and add some helpers to the weaker decks.

The_Emp
Booster Pack
Booster Pack
Posts: 141
Joined: December 3rd, 2017, 5:32 pm
GEMP Username: The_Emp

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by The_Emp »

This statement makes me so happy, as it was one of the areas I observed was an issue in how we have been turning the meta towards:

“There has been a rash of characters designed with "Interrupt-style" game text. Decks are becoming more character-based and less "red." And whenever Design has wanted to make a powerful interrupt for battle, we either have to make it very high destiny or immune to sense. We wanted to be able to bring back some of that excitement of an Interrupt swinging a battle and then also that moment of "wait, is this Interrupt even going to go thru or does my opponent have a Sense?"”

Thank you D&D for be cognizant of this issue and working towards changing this element. Immune to alter effects stay on the board and give universal benefits. Characters are adding effect-like universal benefits but can add to power an control of locations in the game, and then be retrieved. Yes they can be killed and the text goes away, but I think that is outweighed by the benefit of a physical presence character as well as retrieval and addition to life force.

The_Emp
Booster Pack
Booster Pack
Posts: 141
Joined: December 3rd, 2017, 5:32 pm
GEMP Username: The_Emp

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by The_Emp »

I'm thrilled with almost all of these changes. Just my two cents for D&D to consider (if they hadn't already):

Wokling v & TRM - What if we had on wokling that it cost 1 force to play Speak or Wesa? That gives the early activation to help TRM off the bat, but slows its super fast early game activation ability, while still sustaining it in the mid-to-late game with the plus 1 activation it gives? I feel like this would help balance the 'timing' power issue of TRM without hurting it too much by blanking Wokling v.

Stardust Ping from 2 to 1 - I wouldn't mind Stardust pinging for 1 at the end of each turn, to give dark side more of a chance to fight against it. Would still give No Idea enough of a "bite" to be played but not hurt it too much.

Legend - This deck will be the top light side deck and I agree with others I think more changes are needed. What if we just added the text that it cost 1 force (to light) to cause a redraw? Decipher had set a precedent that the ability to cause a redraw was rare, and if you did it had a legit cost to do so.
Han Solo cost 1 force, General solo cost 2 force (to cancel BD), Captain Han Solo cost 2 force, Han's Dice was a Destiny 3 interrupt that cost 1 force.

Firepower v/Weapons Display v - What if we reduced down the damage from excluding or evading to just 1 force, would that make it not as NPE? Also, the retrieval reward for controlling a battleground system and site was good but somewhat did not encourage interaction, what if we added "And the opponent does not" so that there is a little bit more of a qualifier (while excluding the opponent deploying a card with ability) until the retrieval begins?
This to me keeps the idea of the shield intact but reduces down that power level. :???

rhendon
Member
Posts: 11332
Joined: August 24th, 2010, 12:58 pm

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by rhendon »

TRM has existed without Wokling. It can again.

Wokling also wouldn't surive another reset. So TRM gets a head start on figuring out a post Wokling world.

Berm
Reflections Pack
Reflections Pack
Posts: 247
Joined: May 26th, 2019, 5:43 pm

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by Berm »

I mentioned this in the earlier thread, but would have liked to open up Make Ten Men Feel Like A Hundred by allowing it to be played without Stardust. It is a minor change that allows flexibility. It's not that good of an effect that we need to limit it to a single objective. Kind of like how A Brave Resistance can be played in Old Allies and in other decks.

alphabeta
Enhanced Product
Enhanced Product
Posts: 563
Joined: March 20th, 2016, 7:25 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
GEMP Username: alphabeta; GalenErso

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by alphabeta »

Good idea to have LS pay 1 Force to cause a redraw w Legend. Can be a good one to consider for future nerfs.
In general I like a lot these changes. Looking forward to see the curve flattened!! Jawa format is so great, I hope we can come closer to it now.

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16739
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Flattening the Curve

Post by arebelspy »

rhendon wrote:TRM has existed without Wokling. It can again.

Wokling also wouldn't surive another reset. So TRM gets a head start on figuring out a post Wokling world.
That's bad reasoning. It has existed without it in a completely different power curve.

And it can't get a head start when it's not viable. It's nuking it until the reset. If I say "aobs is op, let's wipe shadows" do we give the deck a head start on the reset, or make it not good?

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”