LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

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 »

Again, you are talking about decks that have nothing to do with each other. Matching decks are not splashable space decks, and vice versa.


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.

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 »

... the point is that there is no reason to play a matching deck when you can get it (or very close to it) without the investment.

*** EDIT ***

Lets take a look at LS space options for a sec.

Errant venture- good SD that pulls a pilot and becomes better with that pilot.
Booster in ship- good ship that pulls an ok pilot
Lando/Lady luck- great ship that pulls a pilot.

If you were to run all three of these (many decks did some combination), you get all the benefits of matching ships without the investment.

I'm ok with booster in ship- it doesn't pair well with all wings, etc. That kind of "ship pulls pilot" mechanic is ok. Not a huge fan, but I can accept it.
Last edited by macgyver221 on August 11th, 2014, 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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:... the point is that there is no reason to play a matching deck when you can get it without the investment.
...the point is that is incorrect. There are plenty of decks that still want to play matching ships. Having exactly one of each for each side is not going to spell the death of Combat Response, UNLESS they are at the previous power level, which is not at all what (most of) the people who want them back are advocating for.
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:... the point is that there is no reason to play a matching deck when you can get it (or very close to it) without the investment.
Incorrect. Having one ship does not equal having a ship package. Since Home One, Lady Luck, and Super Slave One will not be at the same power levels as before, players can run whatever space they feel appropriate.

komitadji
DS Region: Tatooine
DS Region: Tatooine
Posts: 204
Joined: December 3rd, 2013, 5:43 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by komitadji »

If you tone them down far enough, then what's the point of the built-in Squassin? Why not just make a cool piloting Lando and the Lady Luck, and let them run off Squassin normally? In order for them to be successful as splashable space without significant other support, they have to be pretty dang powerful on their own.

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 »

imrahil327 wrote:
macgyver221 wrote:... the point is that there is no reason to play a matching deck when you can get it without the investment.
...the point is that is incorrect. There are plenty of decks that still want to play matching ships.
Please point me towards any of the "plenty of decks" in the legacy era that ran squassin.

Restore freedom? perhaps.
Jedi pilot shenanigans? were better without get to your ships.

All of the other decks that ran it were fringe decks or were dead in the competitive scene.

Just for you, hunter.
Attachments
Warya signal.jpg
Warya signal.jpg (25.68 KiB) Viewed 1525 times
Warya signal.jpg
Warya signal.jpg (25.68 KiB) Viewed 1525 times

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 »

We aren't talking about Legacy though.
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.

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 »

There won't be any in the reset meta either, if you release junk like this.

As is, there are still precious few decks that want to run matching ships.

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:There won't be any in the reset meta either, if you release junk like this.
*.
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
dorshe1
Member
Posts: 8422
Joined: June 13th, 2013, 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Holotable username: dorshe1
GEMP Username: dorshe1
Contact:

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by dorshe1 »

macgyver221 wrote:There won't be any in the reset meta either, if you release junk like this.

As is, there are still precious few decks that want to run matching ships.
Image

Thanks!
Image

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 »

*.

Such a productive discussion.

User avatar
dorshe1
Member
Posts: 8422
Joined: June 13th, 2013, 3:57 pm
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Holotable username: dorshe1
GEMP Username: dorshe1
Contact:

Re: LadyLuck/Slave I are bad for the game

Post by dorshe1 »

macgyver221 wrote:*.

Such a productive discussion.
Hey, that makes it at least 2x more productive than any of the other stupid reset discussions.

Step 1) I want this
Step 2) That is stupid
Step 3) Is not
Step 4) Name calling
Step 5) Open new thread

Thanks!
Image

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 »

macgyver221 wrote:Please point me towards any of the "plenty of decks" in the legacy era that ran squassin
No that's not how this works. YOU point out the decks that previously ran squassins that were obsoleted by Lando/Lady Luck.
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

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 »

@ Dorshe/JJD

Not an opinion. Has been played out in the meta over the last several years. There is a noticable trend- as we release better splashable space cards, there is less reason to play matching ships.

- matching ships are clunky. how often have we been unable to make pairs because something was hiding? I remember kevin joking that he considered running 2x harc seff in qmc just because that guy is no where to be found when you need him.

- matching ships are less efficient from a deck space perspective

- matching ships require a dedicated starting slot.

If you give people access to good ships (particularly with matching without the effect), it overwhelms the positives from "matching" and phases them out of the game.

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 »

macgyver221 wrote:If you give people access to good ships (particularly with matching without the effect)
OK, now explain the particularly please. Why not say: (particularly with battle destiny adding) or (particularly with high immunity) or (particularly with any other benefit).

You have yet to even attempt to explain why matching pairs that pull eachother are worse.
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

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 »

JarJarDrinks wrote:
macgyver221 wrote:If you give people access to good ships (particularly with matching without the effect)
OK, now explain the particularly please. Why not say: (particularly with battle destiny adding) or (particularly with high immunity) or (particularly with any other benefit).

You have yet to even attempt to explain why matching pairs that pull eachother are worse.
Last post, first page.

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 »

macgyver221 wrote:
JarJarDrinks wrote:
macgyver221 wrote:If you give people access to good ships (particularly with matching without the effect)
OK, now explain the particularly please. Why not say: (particularly with battle destiny adding) or (particularly with high immunity) or (particularly with any other benefit).

You have yet to even attempt to explain why matching pairs that pull eachother are worse.
Last post, first page.
I was counting that post when saying you have yet to even attempt to explain why matching pairs that pull eachother are worse.

What would be worse, rereleasing Lady Luck and Lando or making a Lady Luck w/ Lando as a permanent pilot and all the same text as both Lando and the Ship?
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
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 »

If you make Lando in Lady Luck, it would not be near 100% of what it was before. It also would not be pullable with AWRI&DS, which is much the point. It's only partial text not related to ship is either to provide immunity or do something else. It woukd a std EPP Ship.

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 »

AWRI is a multiplier. It's a destiny 5 "copy" of the ship that has good secondary function when you draw it. If you got a second copy of the ship in your hand, it wouldn't be a "dead" card, but it would be far less useful.

That's a huge problem with these cards.

Make it like Bossk in Bus non V and I'd have no problem with it.

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 »

macgyver221 wrote:AWRI is a multiplier. It's a destiny 5 "copy" of the ship that has good secondary function when you draw it. If you got a second copy of the ship in your hand, it wouldn't be a "dead" card, but it would be far less useful.

That's a huge problem with these cards.

Make it like Bossk in Bus non V and I'd have no problem with it.
Can't tell if you're purposefully evading the question since Bossk has nothing to w what we're talking about. Simple question:

Are you saying that you'd have no problem w/ it if did everything that Lando in Lady Luck currently does, including immunity and adding a BD all for 5 force as long as it was a single card as opposed to 2?
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

Post Reply

Return to “On Deck Discussion”