Operatives?

[Corran]

The other day, I built an operatives deck and played it on GEMP. It wasn't good, and my opponent didn't pull either operative shield, but I was also playing a first draft of a deck that had sub-optimal cards. I did manage to flip, have a power 5 operative, pull off a force drain bonus, and draw an extra destiny in one battle(still lost pretty handily). The game felt very similar to many of the early testing games I do for the podcast.

I'm curious if anyone else has revisited operatives in the virtual card era, and what you think would need to happen to make them viable(without being broken).

[Advocate]

There might be a card in there that Troy tested in the set drop-down that isn't legal that helped operatives for fun play. Not sure if it's there still.

I have informally wondered if the errata for operatives are even needed anymore because of stuff like Sentry and the Diamond shields.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Corran]

There might be a card in there that Troy tested in the set drop-down that isn't legal that helped operatives for fun play. Not sure if it's there still.

I have informally wondered if the errata for operatives are even needed anymore because of stuff like Sentry and the Diamond shields.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

Yeah, I don't think it's super necessary, but when I talk about building an operative deck, I'm also not talking about building a deck with 30 operatives. I'm more interested in a deck that sets up at 3 BGs to flip and has a fragile character who adds a battle destiny and adds to drains. Sort of like how MKOS builds usually only have 3 or so non-uniques of their Rep's species.

Also(and I'm going to tread carefully to not venture into Dream Card territory here), the idea of an objective that can set up on any planet is really interesting to me. CRv and CPv have sort of filled this role, but it would be nice to have an objective that had a standard flip condition of controling x sites and then offered some standard bonuses on the 7 side. Operatives giving extra bonuses for using a particular character type is also an interesting concept.

[Madmanwithabox]

Yeah - operatives were nerfed into oblivion by the errata.
The shields alone seem to be more than enough to keep them in check, but it would need careful play testing to ensure they were balanced without the errata.

There’s a bit of a knee jerk reaction to operatives because of that infamous Worlds - but it’s a shame to have a whole bunch of cards effectively unplayable due to bad memories.

[Gergall]

Please don't make operative helper cards without unnerfing them first. Otherwise people would have to memorize the operative rules to play the deck.

#UnnerfOperatives

[Madmanwithabox]

Please don't make operative helper cards without unnerfing them first. Otherwise people would have to memorize the operative rules to play the deck.

#UnnerfOperatives

Agreed on that - having to check the AR for the big chunk of extra rules is a pain.

For the GEMP coding guys - would it be a ton of work to create play testing versions of just a couple of the operative characters, that aren’t affected by the errata?
I’m sure I’m not the only playtester willing to see if they can be brought back. That data can then be used by design to determine what to do. If there are issues, just virtualising one of the shields may be enough to cover any really bad interactions.

[Corran]

Please don't make operative helper cards without unnerfing them first. Otherwise people would have to memorize the operative rules to play the deck.

#UnnerfOperatives

Operative rules basically just say:
1. Operatives cannot control a site or initiate battle alone
2. You can only have one operative at a site
3. If you have 2 operatives at a site, one is lost

right?

Maybe, if somebody wanted to do virtual operatives, we could just make them ability = 0.

[AdmiralMotti89]

There’s a bit of a knee jerk reaction to operatives because of that infamous Worlds - but it’s a shame to have a whole bunch of cards effectively unplayable due to bad memories.

For me it also sucks especially that there are a ton of planets that would otherwise see play, even if they merely have diamond sites

[AdmiralMotti89]

A starting interrupt that has you play an effect related to operatives and a site related to operatives (+2 more ITA effects) where the opposing side's text lets them play an extra shield would be cool at first glance.

[Corran]

There’s a bit of a knee jerk reaction to operatives because of that infamous Worlds - but it’s a shame to have a whole bunch of cards effectively unplayable due to bad memories.

For me it also sucks especially that there are a ton of planets that would otherwise see play, even if they merely have diamond sites

This is really the biggest reason I wish there was a way to make operatives playable. It would open up a half dozen potential platforms to try on each side without having to design a brand new objective for each one.

[OrehRuoy]

Please don't make operative helper cards without unnerfing them first. Otherwise people would have to memorize the operative rules to play the deck.

#UnnerfOperatives

Operative rules basically just say:
1. Operatives cannot control a site or initiate battle alone
2. You can only have one operative at a site
3. If you have 2 operatives at a site, one is lost

right?

Maybe, if somebody wanted to do virtual operatives, we could just make them ability = 0.

Maybe Ability = 1/2. They can't be dumber than creature vehicles.

[gogolen]

I would think we could do a round of PT to see how they work without the errata rules. They can definitely spread out quickly, so that could still be a point of concern.

[Corran]

I would think we could do a round of PT to see how they work without the errata rules. They can definitely spread out quickly, so that could still be a point of concern.

This sounds like a great idea.

[TechTerror]

Can you imagine the field day that No Idea would have pulling the Ounee Ta shield and deploying almost every single character in the deck for free to the Renegade planet? We would surely have to nerf Ounee Ta and No Escape shields and effects somehow. I feel like it is a large undertaking to devote the resources to balancing all of that out but I could be wrong.

[OrehRuoy]

Ds objective could say spaceport sites are immune like rops. Those are the fairest sites.

[Advocate]

I would think we could do a round of PT to see how they work without the errata rules. They can definitely spread out quickly, so that could still be a point of concern.

It would be interesting to see top players like you, Desai, haid, etc having an operative event to see if it's competitive of we just scrap the rules as a test.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[OrehRuoy]

Reversing the operatives rules code wise probably isn't too bad as its unique and I don't think would affect other things

[fungineer]

Overall, I think tbiesty's dream card set for operatives, which may or may not have combined with eliminating the "operative rules" was the best solution. I think it's all still on there, and was on GEMP for a while, but I think there's a snowball's chance in hell D&D would ever consider it.

[TheLuhks]

I would much rather see Dantooine Base Operations get some help rather than Operatives.

[sjacree]

While I think they could have done something better than nuking operatives. Operatives do not feel very star wars-y, and I'd rather play with and against other decks.