Discussion for ASM

gogolen
LS Region: Coruscant
LS Region: Coruscant
Posts: 11290
Joined: May 2nd, 2005, 3:52 pm
Location: Somerdale, nj
Holotable username: gogolen
GEMP Username: gogolen

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by gogolen »

Your examples of BHBM and MWYHL are fair, but don't quite hold water. While the Emperor and Yoda/Luke are key characters in those decks, they are not the characters interacting (usually, sometimes people put the Emperor in play and not just at the Throne Room, that was a design error by Decipher).

MWYHL pulls two characters that are in isolation on a planet that no one can deploy to. Test 6 is also the only one that causes any damage to the DS, which is negated simply by having Vader at a battleground site, and its only once test 5 is complete that you can send Luke to interact. He spends the first 5-7 turns sitting on the sidelines. I don't think this should ever be cited as example of a card that we want to make other cards similar to.

BHBM was intended to put the Emperor at the Throne room (with Emperor's Power) and for Vader to bring Luke there to duel. It punishes the LS for not having Luke at battleground site if Vader is (and it doesn't let you pull Vader, but does let your opponent get any Luke over and over) If you pull Emperor to a battleground, there is no reason your opponent can't pull EPP Luke and setup a beatdown on him

CCT- Iggy is not pulled by the objective, but rather by a starting interrupt that gives you no effects(although now the site gives you 1 effect), and a smaller hand size to compensate for you starting with a BH+weapon+prison in hand.

TIGIH starts Luke on the table at a non-battleground, but he is captured immediately by a score of DS characters (any imperial), and having an imperial at the db cancels both the drain and force generation where Luke is.

All of these starts have drawbacks to the mechanic that involves pulling your main character. ASM did not have that drawback. It let you pull your main character (for -2) to ANY site you occupy. So drop any character and then pull your main wherever he is most needed. Maybe you'd like to send him the Endor DB to kill Luke in a TIGIH deck? Or to the Audience Chamber against Profit?

Some would contend that LS being able to start a Jedi w/saber was the drawback, but prior to Mace MOFO being created, most players found that starting the Jedi usually led to a huge beatdown and massive overflow. Most people stopped starting the Jedi for just that reason.

So while I think this objective had some interesting stuff to it, I think it needs quite a few adjustments.


Image

PC Store Manager
Kevbozzz wrote:I agree 100% with Gogolen's responses.
Now streaming games on Youtube & Twitch- please subscribe to my channels- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjqwgj ... Xu5T9vp4AQ
Twitch- https://www.twitch.tv/gogolen

NEW & RETURNING PLAYER ARTICLES- https://forum.starwarsccg.org/viewt ... 32&t=50486

User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26223
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by JarJarDrinks »

gogolen wrote:Your examples of BHBM and MWYHL are fair, but don't quite hold water. While the Emperor and Yoda/Luke are key characters in those decks, they are not the characters interacting (usually, sometimes people put the Emperor in play and not just at the Throne Room, that was a design error by Decipher).

MWYHL pulls two characters that are in isolation on a planet that no one can deploy to. Test 6 is also the only one that causes any damage to the DS, which is negated simply by having Vader at a battleground site, and its only once test 5 is complete that you can send Luke to interact. He spends the first 5-7 turns sitting on the sidelines. I don't think this should ever be cited as example of a card that we want to make other cards similar to.

BHBM was intended to put the Emperor at the Throne room (with Emperor's Power) and for Vader to bring Luke there to duel. It punishes the LS for not having Luke at battleground site if Vader is (and it doesn't let you pull Vader, but does let your opponent get any Luke over and over) If you pull Emperor to a battleground, there is no reason your opponent can't pull EPP Luke and setup a beatdown on him

CCT- Iggy is not pulled by the objective, but rather by a starting interrupt that gives you no effects(although now the site gives you 1 effect), and a smaller hand size to compensate for you starting with a BH+weapon+prison in hand.

TIGIH starts Luke on the table at a non-battleground, but he is captured immediately by a score of DS characters (any imperial), and having an imperial at the db cancels both the drain and force generation where Luke is.

All of these starts have drawbacks to the mechanic that involves pulling your main character. ASM did not have that drawback. It let you pull your main character (for -2) to ANY site you occupy. So drop any character and then pull your main wherever he is most needed. Maybe you'd like to send him the Endor DB to kill Luke in a TIGIH deck? Or to the Audience Chamber against Profit?

Some would contend that LS being able to start a Jedi w/saber was the drawback, but prior to Mace MOFO being created, most players found that starting the Jedi usually led to a huge beatdown and massive overflow. Most people stopped starting the Jedi for just that reason.

So while I think this objective had some interesting stuff to it, I think it needs quite a few adjustments.
So what you're saying is there are exceptions the the rule "Objectives should not pull main characters"? I agree.
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
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

Well, since everyone but myself seems to think that the Objective needs significant changes, start suggesting.

Qasur suggested Pulling Droids instead of Grievous/Dooku and a forfeit bonus to presence droids.

Caldred suggested "Occupy 2 Battlegrounds, Opponent loses 1 force"

What else?

gogolen
LS Region: Coruscant
LS Region: Coruscant
Posts: 11290
Joined: May 2nd, 2005, 3:52 pm
Location: Somerdale, nj
Holotable username: gogolen
GEMP Username: gogolen

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by gogolen »

How about if you start Grievous at a 2/0 location and make him have to walk through a couple locations to flip the objective, to symbolize his escape.
Image

PC Store Manager
Kevbozzz wrote:I agree 100% with Gogolen's responses.
Now streaming games on Youtube & Twitch- please subscribe to my channels- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjqwgj ... Xu5T9vp4AQ
Twitch- https://www.twitch.tv/gogolen

NEW & RETURNING PLAYER ARTICLES- https://forum.starwarsccg.org/viewt ... 32&t=50486

User avatar
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

gogolen wrote:How about if you start Grievous at a 2/0 location and make him have to walk through a couple locations to flip the objective, to symbolize his escape.
An interesting start. Would the Prisoner also be starting with him? Could make the Chancellor's Quarters, Train Tunnel, then Docking Bay the chain of movement, basically requiring 3 turns.

gogolen
LS Region: Coruscant
LS Region: Coruscant
Posts: 11290
Joined: May 2nd, 2005, 3:52 pm
Location: Somerdale, nj
Holotable username: gogolen
GEMP Username: gogolen

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by gogolen »

RybackStun wrote:
gogolen wrote:How about if you start Grievous at a 2/0 location and make him have to walk through a couple locations to flip the objective, to symbolize his escape.
An interesting start. Would the Prisoner also be starting with him? Could make the Chancellor's Quarters, Train Tunnel, then Docking Bay the chain of movement, basically requiring 3 turns.
Yeah, deploys as an escorted captive of Grievous (may not be transferred). And since you can't elis a captive you can't cheat and jump to the end.
Image

PC Store Manager
Kevbozzz wrote:I agree 100% with Gogolen's responses.
Now streaming games on Youtube & Twitch- please subscribe to my channels- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjqwgj ... Xu5T9vp4AQ
Twitch- https://www.twitch.tv/gogolen

NEW & RETURNING PLAYER ARTICLES- https://forum.starwarsccg.org/viewt ... 32&t=50486

User avatar
qasur
Member
Posts: 5326
Joined: February 25th, 2009, 11:33 pm
Location: Gulfport, MS

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by qasur »

I would say no to that b/c this is symbolizing Grievous "capturing" Palpatine and using him as a hostage. Not about Grievous escaping from his ship.

User avatar
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

gogolen wrote:
RybackStun wrote:
gogolen wrote:How about if you start Grievous at a 2/0 location and make him have to walk through a couple locations to flip the objective, to symbolize his escape.
An interesting start. Would the Prisoner also be starting with him? Could make the Chancellor's Quarters, Train Tunnel, then Docking Bay the chain of movement, basically requiring 3 turns.
Yeah, deploys as an escorted captive of Grievous (may not be transferred). And since you can't elis a captive you can't cheat and jump to the end.
I'd be cool with that. At that point, because Grievous is already on the table, changing the deploy to Droids would actually work with the way the event is supposed to play out.

Make a better IG-100 Guard Droid and it'd be great.

Are we still considering getting rid of the Ping DMG and Tunnel Vision Text? I'd be ok with Caldred's text in this new situation as we'd be getting more BGs to mess around with. I think the Tunnel Vision part is just too good to drop.
qasur wrote:I would say no to that b/c this is symbolizing Grievous "capturing" Palpatine and using him as a hostage. Not about Grievous escaping from his ship.
What? Are you saying that the Objective is supposed to be Grievous getting off the ship or capturing Palpatine?

User avatar
stevetotheizz0
Member
Posts: 5599
Joined: January 10th, 2012, 11:43 am
Location: Philadelphia, Pa

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by stevetotheizz0 »

I really like ASM in that it mirrors profit.

I agree that the wording is really bulky, strangely so just to do an incredibly intuitive task of moving insidious prisoner in either of two directions.

Maybe if you can't pull Dooku or Grievous, and there is no ni chuba na, it'll cut down on the beats.
I also don't like the full global immunity to grievous hidden on a site.
And maybe LS should be able to drain. That seems like an unnecessary disadvantage.
And the DB text, that could just be easier.



But I like the fact that DS has a deck that functions somewhat like profit. I think that type of deck is good for the game. It basically is focused on the ground and does whatever it can to encourage some big battles there. I like battling. And mains. And battling with mains, against mains.

With Grievious, and without Galen the deck is still properly powered with Dooku, Grievous and Maul. It would need some droids to go with them however, the bodyguard droids were great imo.


BTW - I wouldn't like it as much if grievious was at a 2/0 b/c the early game battles were the best part for me playing with/against the deck.

User avatar
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

While I don't agree that LS should be able to drain at the Prisoner's location, (mainly because it turns any 2 into a 3 and any 1 into a 2) the mirror objective should absolutely be able to Drain at the Prisoner's location, especially if the Clone Troopers bring back bonuses to drains at Palpy's location.

User avatar
voxaroth
Member
Posts: 528
Joined: July 27th, 2012, 8:17 pm

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by voxaroth »

I like the tug-o-war mechanic a lot. Other than that, I'm not in love with the rest of the objective.

User avatar
Darth_Link
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 8455
Joined: May 24th, 2011, 4:43 am

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by Darth_Link »

stevetotheizz0 wrote:I really like ASM in that it mirrors profit.

I agree that the wording is really bulky, strangely so just to do an incredibly intuitive task of moving insidious prisoner in either of two directions.

Maybe if you can't pull Dooku or Grievous, and there is no ni chuba na, it'll cut down on the beats.
I also don't like the full global immunity to grievous hidden on a site.
And maybe LS should be able to drain. That seems like an unnecessary disadvantage.
And the DB text, that could just be easier.



But I like the fact that DS has a deck that functions somewhat like profit. I think that type of deck is good for the game. It basically is focused on the ground and does whatever it can to encourage some big battles there. I like battling. And mains. And battling with mains, against mains.

With Grievious, and without Galen the deck is still properly powered with Dooku, Grievous and Maul. It would need some droids to go with them however, the bodyguard droids were great imo.


BTW - I wouldn't like it as much if grievious was at a 2/0 b/c the early game battles were the best part for me playing with/against the deck.
Yeah, basically my thoughts as well. Love the objective. Just removing the grievous download, jedi start, change to inv hand and make the DS player play a 1/1 docking bay would be enough in my book.
Emil W. Sweden
ImageImage

User avatar
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

Bumping this for some more discussion.

I really do like the idea of starting Grievous and having him move along the path to bring Palpy to the Invisible Hand.

I still think the Tunnel Vision effect is a great section of gameplay the deck provides. It's not automatic like other decks as it has a way to be stopped even if it is by losing 2 force, but that's the best part of the mechanic due to the mind games.

Changing up the sites to be the Invisible Hand would be great flavor to the deck and at some point creating an actual Invisible Hand would be sweet as well.

aermet69
LS Region: Toola
LS Region: Toola
Posts: 5576
Joined: July 14th, 2009, 2:16 pm
Location: Denmark (Toola)
GEMP Username: aermet69

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by aermet69 »

I'd say ASM is a much better 'ground only' platform to have around than HDv. ASM doesn't flat out stop a space deck, it just tries to race it with even more damage and spreading out - thus creating risks and risk assesment during play.
- 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.

TB
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 4120
Joined: July 8th, 2010, 8:10 pm

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by TB »

Darth_Link wrote:
stevetotheizz0 wrote:I really like ASM in that it mirrors profit.

I agree that the wording is really bulky, strangely so just to do an incredibly intuitive task of moving insidious prisoner in either of two directions.

Maybe if you can't pull Dooku or Grievous, and there is no ni chuba na, it'll cut down on the beats.
I also don't like the full global immunity to grievous hidden on a site.
And maybe LS should be able to drain. That seems like an unnecessary disadvantage.
And the DB text, that could just be easier.



But I like the fact that DS has a deck that functions somewhat like profit. I think that type of deck is good for the game. It basically is focused on the ground and does whatever it can to encourage some big battles there. I like battling. And mains. And battling with mains, against mains.

With Grievious, and without Galen the deck is still properly powered with Dooku, Grievous and Maul. It would need some droids to go with them however, the bodyguard droids were great imo.


BTW - I wouldn't like it as much if grievious was at a 2/0 b/c the early game battles were the best part for me playing with/against the deck.
Yeah, basically my thoughts as well. Love the objective. Just removing the grievous download, jedi start, change to inv hand and make the DS player play a 1/1 docking bay would be enough in my book.
This.
Results:
European Championships 2014 - 3rd place
European Championships 2013 - 8th place
Toola Regionals 2013 - runner up
European Championships 2011 - 5th place

User avatar
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

aermet69 wrote:I'd say ASM is a much better 'ground only' platform to have around than HDv. ASM doesn't flat out stop a space deck, it just tries to race it with even more damage and spreading out - thus creating risks and risk assessment during play.
Agreed. I enjoyed not having to ridiculously worry about having a complete and total space package to take on my opponent. It sucks against HB, but other than that, the lack of space doesn't dominate the deck.

Hayes
LS Region: Kashyyyk
LS Region: Kashyyyk
Posts: 4731
Joined: February 22nd, 2009, 1:58 am

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by Hayes »

The objective did too many things too well.

As Gogolen outlined, there are drawbacks and restrictions or limitations with each other character download. Plus, Blaster Rack gets Grievous his saber.

Fully immune characters en mass are not good for the game. Han in profit doesn't get full immunity.

Profit doesn't get to pull locations, but ASM does.

Profit only gets bonus damage from specific characters, but ASM gets the damage from any random controlling a location.

Plus there is text everywhere and the prisoner is a [mod edit] up wall of text.

User avatar
Shadow 13
Member
Posts: 16385
Joined: October 30th, 2002, 6:34 pm
GEMP Username: shadow13

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by Shadow 13 »

ah nostalgia. Out of all the cards i helped create, ASM and the Insidious Prisoner were my favorite. it was much simpler before development added stuff like the coruscant docking bay and the LS be able to move the Prisoner (that created a ton of text on various cards).
ryan french
rebel strike team founder
two-time washington state champion
rhendon wrote:why not just elect a puppy as president, or mikefrench.

User avatar
RybackStun
Member
Posts: 1680
Joined: February 22nd, 2013, 12:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, California
GEMP Username: RybackStun
Contact:

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by RybackStun »

Hayes wrote:The objective did too many things too well.

As Gogolen outlined, there are drawbacks and restrictions or limitations with each other character download. Plus, Blaster Rack gets Grievous his saber.

Fully immune characters en mass are not good for the game. Han in profit doesn't get full immunity.

Profit doesn't get to pull locations, but ASM does.

Profit only gets bonus damage from specific characters, but ASM gets the damage from any random controlling a location.

Plus there is text everywhere and the prisoner is a

Message from moderator

up wall of text.
The limitation is which character you get and ONCE per game. A deck like BHBM can download the Emperor as many times as it can. Same with MWYHL. Yes the context of it is that either Yoda/Luke are stuck on Dagobah until testing is complete, or The Emperor can have limited location deployments, but those are still powerful pulls.

It's a stipulation of having the Prisoner on the table. It's not like the text makes him immune to weapons or any other source of getting rid of a character, just Attrition. It takes VERY little effort to hit him with a weapon and you can just as easily barrier him so the DS can't battle with or move him.

ASM gets to pull a grand total of 3 locations, one of which can already be pulled through an interrupt. BFD.

Profit still maintains a strong presence across those locations with those characters. ASM has to be careful with their characters holding sites otherwise they can get blown out, also no Imperials so there is a restriction...

I agree that there is tons of text, which is why we are here to help clean that up without making the deck useless, or look nothing like it did before.

User avatar
agnos
Member
Posts: 8526
Joined: February 20th, 2008, 2:27 pm

Re: Discussion for ASM

Post by agnos »

My problem with ASM was that the flip condition while thematic at points, was exceptionally easy to do and unflipping it was exceptionally hard usually. Between the heroic droids and Oh Shut off and Force Field and Garindan, it just got to be way too much in general. I for the most part liked the flipped bonus and thought it was a neat "fixed" watto. I'd like to see it focus less on moving a non-character but effectively a character card and more based around gaining "control" of the prisoner.
Image

Post Reply

Return to “On Deck Discussion”