LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

macgyver221
LS Region: Dagobah
LS Region: Dagobah
Posts: 6589
Joined: June 7th, 2006, 10:36 pm
Location: Reno
Holotable username: Macgyver221
GEMP Username: macgyver1

LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by macgyver221 »

The "unpiloted ship that pulls a matching pilot and vice versa" mechanic is bad. There, someone had to be the one to say it. They are simply too efficient.

If you want to play matching ships, you play combat response/squassin and build a deck around it. You get access to really good helpers like All Wings combo and I'll take the leader. You end up with a really strong package, but you have to put in some work.

If you want to play "splashable ships" you save yourself deck space and get some useful things in bargain, but you don't have access to all the nifty little helpers. (when have you ever seen SRF/WYB played with ZIMH and friends?)

If you ever want to see squassin/combat response in a mainstream deck again, please, do not re-release these cards.

It will "suck" and "space will be boring" until people remember how to build decks without these crutches.



User avatar
imrahil327
Tournament Advocate
Posts: 30784
Joined: July 3rd, 2006, 3:51 am
Location: San Diego

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by imrahil327 »

I'm pretty unconvinced that releasing exactly Lando Unlikely + Lady Luck and one of the two Fetts + Slave SOF, and then not making any more, would result in us never seeing matching ships aside from them again. Obviously the combo of Fettdad+Fettson+Slave SOF+Sonic is too easily a full splash space package, but cutting half of it out would still result in them being ubiquitous? I don't buy it. I fully expect space weapons to be back in short order (Xwing gun/Baron's gun at least), which if the cards in my first sentence were re-released, could easily be made to be susceptible to them. Both personae are also competing with the maintenance versions of themselves again, so there's a real cost there.
Image
Hunter wrote:Sebulba's W-L record is like...Always and 1. Tebow's is nowhere near that percentage.
allstarz97, about M:TG wrote:I feel like Michael Jordan playing baseball.

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

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by RybackStun »

I'm with Chris on this. Bringing back Lando/Luck and Boba/One with some changes to make them worthwhile to their ships but not ridiculously powerful will not be bad for the game.

Those two combos DO NOT stop decks from including Assignments/Response.

User avatar
Hunter
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 14889
Joined: February 10th, 2003, 3:27 am

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Hunter »

macgyver221 wrote:The "unpiloted ship that pulls a matching pilot and vice versa" mechanic is bad. There, someone had to be the one to say it.
Are ya sure? Are ya sure someone had to be the one to say it?

Because I thought it went without saying.

I'll just say "Duh" and then move to the next thread.

macgyver221
LS Region: Dagobah
LS Region: Dagobah
Posts: 6589
Joined: June 7th, 2006, 10:36 pm
Location: Reno
Holotable username: Macgyver221
GEMP Username: macgyver1

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by macgyver221 »

It's not that they STOP anyone from including them. It's that it obsoletes them. Why burn a card and a starting effect slot when you can just get it anyhow?

@ Hunter- you should point this out to all of the people in the "vote for your favorite on deck card" thread.

User avatar
imrahil327
Tournament Advocate
Posts: 30784
Joined: July 3rd, 2006, 3:51 am
Location: San Diego

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by imrahil327 »

macgyver221 wrote:It's not that they STOP anyone from including them. It's that it obsoletes them. Why burn a card and a starting effect slot when you can just get it anyhow?
It obsoletes them in decks that choose those specific combinations, I guess. I don't recall seeing any decks that ran one ship, one matching pilot for that ship, and still played Combat Response even before they came out, though, so even that isn't strictly true.
Image
Hunter wrote:Sebulba's W-L record is like...Always and 1. Tebow's is nowhere near that percentage.
allstarz97, about M:TG wrote:I feel like Michael Jordan playing baseball.

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

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by RybackStun »

macgyver221 wrote:It's not that they STOP anyone from including them. It's that it obsoletes them. Why burn a card and a starting effect slot when you can just get it anyhow?

@ Hunter- you should point this out to all of the people in the "vote for your favorite on deck card" thread.
Your effectively saying that a two card combo makes entire space packages obsolete. That is an inaccurate statement. One ship and one pilot will not be better than a deck that has the whole set of ships placed there, even if said ship and pilot can pull 1-2 destinies in space.

Throwing together a package of Rogues and Home One is going to be better than JUST Lando/Luck

Throwing together Saber Squadron and Executor is going to be better than JUST Fett/Vette

We'll see in the coming months if the game needs Lady Luck and Slave 1, but I still don't think that those two combos will make any other space package obsolete, especially if you remove the BD and immunity from Jango and possibly the EXTRA BD from Lando.

macgyver221
LS Region: Dagobah
LS Region: Dagobah
Posts: 6589
Joined: June 7th, 2006, 10:36 pm
Location: Reno
Holotable username: Macgyver221
GEMP Username: macgyver1

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by macgyver221 »

I've got newborn hangover, but when I'm thinking more clearly, I'll try and state my case more eloquently. It would seem that Hunter agrees, so maybe I'll just [Hunter Signal] and let him win the thread.

User avatar
imrahil327
Tournament Advocate
Posts: 30784
Joined: July 3rd, 2006, 3:51 am
Location: San Diego

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by imrahil327 »

macgyver221 wrote:I've got newborn hangover, but when I'm thinking more clearly, I'll try and state my case more eloquently. It would seem that Hunter agrees, so maybe I'll just [Hunter Signal] and let him win the thread.
I'm positive that Hunter could do just that, but it's not especially sporting of you to just pass it along like that :P
Image
Hunter wrote:Sebulba's W-L record is like...Always and 1. Tebow's is nowhere near that percentage.
allstarz97, about M:TG wrote:I feel like Michael Jordan playing baseball.

User avatar
Hunter
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 14889
Joined: February 10th, 2003, 3:27 am

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Hunter »

imrahil327 wrote:
macgyver221 wrote:I've got newborn hangover, but when I'm thinking more clearly, I'll try and state my case more eloquently. It would seem that Hunter agrees, so maybe I'll just [Hunter Signal] and let him win the thread.
I'm positive that Hunter could do just that, but it's not especially sporting of you to just pass it along like that :P
Well he didn't even post the Warya Signal yet, so we'll have to wait for now.

Hari Seldon
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1289
Joined: May 9th, 2010, 6:46 pm

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Hari Seldon »

Bad idea I think. I don't trust design to bring back this mechanic in a balanced way. The only way it would work is if the rest of the characters/ships text was fairly modest, (ita<5 at the most, perhaps a draws 1 if unable but not adding 1 as those characters did previously, etc.). I would rather a set or two come out to prove that we have learned from our mistakes before we bring this mechanic back, and don't feel like the game will somehow be worse off if it never comes back. Now, if people just like Lando in his own ship, a pilotless Lady Luck for squadron assignments decks would be nice if it was balanced, or a "Lando in Lady Luck" card that had decent stats (something similar to Boba in Slave 1 (v) perhaps) would be good enough to find space in decks I think. But character/ship combos that break the power curve of typical matching combos AND pull their own ships as was the case with these examples pre reset seem like a path we should try to avoid going down, especially so soon.
allstarz97 wrote:...and thematically, as everyone is referencing on this thread, why are people not mentioning the part where mace windu is crying like a little *, gets his hand cut off and then gets thrown out a window?

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2800
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Corran »

Why is it that nobody has issues with "character in ship" cards, but these (perhaps op) two packages ruin the entire built in combat response mechanic?
Check out Bad Deck Breakdowns, a Star Wars CCG Deckbuilding podcast, on the podcatcher of your choice or https://www.kendallcast.ninja
dvphimself wrote: https://www.twitch.tv/kendallcastnetwork/ is my favourite SWCCG channel.
seitaer wrote: Corran's streams are great, even if he likes the last jedi

Grathrax
Reflections Pack
Reflections Pack
Posts: 156
Joined: June 12th, 2004, 12:17 am
Location: VA
Contact:

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Grathrax »

Corran wrote:Why is it that nobody has issues with "character in ship" cards, but these (perhaps op) two packages ruin the entire built in combat response mechanic?
Because they have limitations, like no immunity, maintenance costs, or low forfeit values. Or in the case of ZiMH, an easy counter (Wedge in RS1 (v)). In short, Super Slave I gets to pull its cake from the reserve deck, eat the cake, and have it too.

And I wouldn't say that "no one has a problem with them" - a lot of people really hate ZiMH and HCF.

Also, thematically I don't like SS1. The Fetts are known for being killing machines on the ground, not in space. It doesn't make sense to me that the only Boba Fetts worth playing are maintenance and EPP. And I don't understand how you can justify a setup built around an adult boba and his father working together, either (yes, weird things happen in the game that wouldn't in the movies, but the game doesn't actively try to make it happen).

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

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by qasur »

The Fetts are notorious all-around, including many heists in space.

But story aside, this mechanic is terrible. Squassins does not need to be built into a ship or pilot. It is right up there with Ackbar v and Rebel Leadership on efficiency; use interrupt to pull 1/2 combo, which pulls other 1/2 then that interrupt has great gameplay afterwards.

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2800
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Corran »

Grathrax wrote:
Corran wrote:Why is it that nobody has issues with "character in ship" cards, but these (perhaps op) two packages ruin the entire built in combat response mechanic?
Because they have limitations, like no immunity, maintenance costs, or low forfeit values. Or in the case of ZiMH, an easy counter (Wedge in RS1 (v)). In short, Super Slave I gets to pull its cake from the reserve deck, eat the cake, and have it too.

And I wouldn't say that "no one has a problem with them" - a lot of people really hate ZiMH and HCF.

Also, thematically I don't like SS1. The Fetts are known for being killing machines on the ground, not in space. It doesn't make sense to me that the only Boba Fetts worth playing are maintenance and EPP. And I don't understand how you can justify a setup built around an adult boba and his father working together, either (yes, weird things happen in the game that wouldn't in the movies, but the game doesn't actively try to make it happen).

I agree that the super fett package is OP. I don't think anyone is arguing for it to return as is. I'm talking about the mechanic itself. I think it's an interesting design option that would allow for something a little more powerful than a ship with a built in pilot, but not as powerful as a pair that requires combat response. It's also an interesting way to keep Lando and Boba's maintenance versions in check.
Check out Bad Deck Breakdowns, a Star Wars CCG Deckbuilding podcast, on the podcatcher of your choice or https://www.kendallcast.ninja
dvphimself wrote: https://www.twitch.tv/kendallcastnetwork/ is my favourite SWCCG channel.
seitaer wrote: Corran's streams are great, even if he likes the last jedi

User avatar
Darkness
Member
Posts: 447
Joined: July 6th, 2005, 11:32 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by Darkness »

Why do we need this mechanic when we have something so similar?

This is an extreme form of card efficiency, with it there should probably be an extreme drawback. I'd relate it to permanent weapons.
Todd Johnson

teh_brainiac
LS Region: Bespin
LS Region: Bespin
Posts: 1067
Joined: November 26th, 2007, 8:13 pm
Location: hogwarts

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by teh_brainiac »

Agree here. Pulling it's own matching pilot is really strong, and way too efficient.
just an above average minnesotan

User avatar
JarJarDrinks
Member
Posts: 26229
Joined: November 4th, 2003, 10:01 am

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by JarJarDrinks »

Just take Hunters argument for the PoA mechanic and apply it here. It's fine to do but when u combine it w/ other powerfull stuff, it becomes bad and OPed.
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
quickdraw3457
Multimedia and Special Projects Advocate
Posts: 25946
Joined: September 3rd, 2003, 5:10 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
GEMP Username: quickdraw

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by quickdraw3457 »

JarJarDrinks wrote:Just take Hunters argument for the PoA mechanic and apply it here. It's fine to do but when u combine it w/ other powerfull stuff, it becomes bad and OPed.
Aw man, I made that post in the PoA discussion and hunter takes the credit for replying "x4" to it :(

This is probably fine to do on lesser cards that aren't mains with tons of support cards, but at that point I wonder if it would be worth playing. Like if there was a Corran + matching X-wing that had this text, how good would it have to be to play over regular corran? Or if it was just a random TIE it would have to be at least ITA < 4, draw a BD or do some other useful text to receive consideration for a tier 1 deck.
Matt C. - Pittsburgh, PA
Image
Hunter wrote:quickdraw is right

macgyver221
LS Region: Dagobah
LS Region: Dagobah
Posts: 6589
Joined: June 7th, 2006, 10:36 pm
Location: Reno
Holotable username: Macgyver221
GEMP Username: macgyver1

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by macgyver221 »

This is probably going to wax theorhetical, so just hang with me.

If you're going to use 2 cards to do what you could get away with 1 card for, it has to be demonstrably better than what you could do with one card. The reason that the "people in ship" cards are used is that they are so efficient.

If you released a generic card with the combat response and vice versa text on it, there wouldn't be a lot of room for much else on it, so it better have something good.

But once you open up that can, you create the centerpiece of your space package. You don't need to run a lot of ships, just run what you need to get your package up and going and throw in a lot of red helpers (that are high destiny and speed up your combo). After that, splash in a few ancillary people with good text and maybe a ship or two. Toss in an AO- it's high destiny and the best ones typically pair well with cards that don't have built in pilots. Your ship doesn't have a built in pilot (but really it does). Now, all those red cards like WYB can be used to support the few other cards you tossed in.

End result- a decent space package that doesn't require much investment. Destiny creep.

No one is going to argue that every single saber squadron pilot together is better than your one uber ship when it comes to battling. But having your one uber ship saved you so many slots that you can afford to do a lot more with your deck.

Take baron with guns. Needs combat response v. Needs a way to get the gun (inconlosses or the used 5, probably multiple guns), then all the standard fare for matching ships. End result eats up a starting slot or two and has no versatility outside of space. It's hella good, but takes a dedicated deck.

There's a reason that squassin hasn't been seen much in recent years- why play it when you can do uber home 1, uber acs, uber fetts, uber lando... Those cards are so much more flexible and efficient. Auto set up ship leaves all your starting stuff free and frees up a ton of room to give it helpers and set it up faster.

TLDR: if you want matching ships, congrats, we have a way for you to reasonably play it. Run combat response.

I would LOVE a good boba fett and slave I pair. Just make us use combat response to get it.

Post Reply

Return to “On Deck Discussion”