One more errata Part Deux

SWCCG game play discussion.
User avatar
seitaer
Member
Posts: 2063
Joined: July 14th, 2012, 1:35 pm
GEMP Username: seitaer

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by seitaer »

gogolen wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 7:56 pm
Great, now QMC takes less damage while running away all game. Sounds fun to play against
Yeah I don't understand this errata at all. People have been wanting the shields to be mirrors for years, not blanked.



Jedicon
Anthology
Anthology
Posts: 752
Joined: June 28th, 2012, 2:06 am

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by Jedicon »

Corran wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 10:00 pm
I'm super curious what will happen now that LS can run away again.
Guessing it becomes a grab target, which frees up Handle and RITC for more fun times.

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2897
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by Corran »

Jedicon wrote:
October 2nd, 2020, 12:26 am
Corran wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 10:00 pm
I'm super curious what will happen now that LS can run away again.
Guessing it becomes a grab target, which frees up Handle and RITC for more fun times.
That LS text held back a ton of LS run away cards, not all were interrupts. This is super interesting and could make or break stuff.
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
Madmanwithabox
Member
Posts: 2140
Joined: October 13th, 2014, 2:25 pm
Location: Ireland
GEMP Username: Tardis

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by Madmanwithabox »

Certainly the riskiest card (or non card) seen so far - it opens up a lot of LS evasion cards that previously didn't see play, but for good reason. I have a feeling this one is going to come back as a softer version in a later set (perhaps stacking the movement cards on a new shield is a good way to stop the recursion from getting out of hand).
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

alphabeta
Enhanced Product
Enhanced Product
Posts: 567
Joined: March 20th, 2016, 7:25 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
GEMP Username: alphabeta; GalenErso

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by alphabeta »

Agree w madman.
I liked that the DS shield prevented abusive evasive strategies. Agree that 2 loss was too much, couldve been 1. But Hyper Escape & co will be back... it feels like DS now must run more grabbers to compensate for the disappearance of that shield

Pb w the LS shield was that it punished barrier.

Anyway happy that the retrieval part is gone...

User avatar
hyvee_doughboy
Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: September 13th, 2008, 8:44 pm
Location: Maple Grove, MN

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by hyvee_doughboy »

First of all, I applaud the PC for taking some bold moves by tweaking things. I'd much rather see action and spicing things up than having things get stale.

I'm concerned about this one though. Specifically this:
FlorisV wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 10:38 am
DS has Chief Retwin (you can let him sit in a starfighter to protect from weapons) and Defel with Sunsdown, more expensive and combo heavy.
Image
I'm super curious what people think about this too. Chief Bast got errata'd for doing something similar (though with Bast it was free). Not sure what the LS player could do about this.

Regarding Arcona: Walseth actually had a deck a while back that used The Shield Is Down (V) to let the Arconas react away for free. Even with the shield, it was often worth it b/c it equated to the force-loss from Maul cloaking. I really don't want to have to start packing counters for random stuff like this.
Tom M. - Maple Grove, Minnesota

arebelspy
Member
Posts: 16769
Joined: July 14th, 2005, 4:45 pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by arebelspy »

Demotion.

Hazardville
LS Region: Tatooine
LS Region: Tatooine
Posts: 699
Joined: January 28th, 2018, 5:37 am
GEMP Username: Jagteq

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by Hazardville »

hyvee_doughboy wrote:
October 2nd, 2020, 8:50 pm
First of all, I applaud the PC for taking some bold moves by tweaking things. I'd much rather see action and spicing things up than having things get stale.

I'm concerned about this one though. Specifically this:
FlorisV wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 10:38 am
DS has Chief Retwin (you can let him sit in a starfighter to protect from weapons) and Defel with Sunsdown, more expensive and combo heavy.
Image
I'm super curious what people think about this too. Chief Bast got errata'd for doing something similar (though with Bast it was free). Not sure what the LS player could do about this.

Regarding Arcona: Walseth actually had a deck a while back that used The Shield Is Down (V) to let the Arconas react away for free. Even with the shield, it was often worth it b/c it equated to the force-loss from Maul cloaking. I really don't want to have to start packing counters for random stuff like this.
You don't want to have to start playing Lana Dobreed/Sacrifice and Darth Vader Emperor's Enforcer?

Retwin has to hide in a ship, like Bast did, otherwise he'd just get shot on the first action against basically every LS deck. Chewie Protector is still an option even if that happens.
Justin Miyashiro
Image

User avatar
chrknudsen2
Member
Posts: 517
Joined: February 10th, 2018, 10:41 am
Location: Hørsholm, Denmark
GEMP Username: chrknudsen

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by chrknudsen2 »

Image

User avatar
timeofyouppi
Member
Posts: 1154
Joined: January 28th, 2014, 7:12 pm
Location: New Jersey
GEMP Username: timeyouppi

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by timeofyouppi »

this is a bad change. there were better ways to change the shields like mirror them and make the force loss 1 instead of 2. i liked the retrieval part but dont mind it going away. removing them is worse than not changing them at all.
Ban Monnok and Grimtaash

User avatar
quickdraw3457
Multimedia and Special Projects Advocate
Posts: 26058
Joined: September 3rd, 2003, 5:10 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
GEMP Username: quickdraw

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by quickdraw3457 »

timeofyouppi wrote:
October 6th, 2020, 8:35 am
this is a bad change. there were better ways to change the shields like mirror them and make the force loss 1 instead of 2. i liked the retrieval part but dont mind it going away. removing them is worse than not changing them at all.
I truly believe they added nothing interesting to the game. The retrieval part did nothing to encourage interaction like it was originally designed for. The barrier protection was out of hand, forcing dark decks to start decree (yes, that was partially due to no idea too, but the barrier force loss required this as well). The move away text is truly unnecessary on a shield when there are so many commonly played counters already, not to mention that is part of the identity of the light side and what helped make this game asymmetric to begin with.

If anyone makes top 8 at the next major with multiple Arconas in your LS deck I will eat my words and send you some signed cards. And even then I probably won't be that sad because how cool is it that you might play a 1 ability non-unique alien from A New Hope after 13 virtual sets?
Matt C. - Pittsburgh, PA
Image
Hunter wrote:quickdraw is right

User avatar
CRG
Member
Posts: 1392
Joined: October 17th, 2017, 8:10 am
Location: Bespin
GEMP Username: CRG

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by CRG »

quickdraw3457 wrote:
October 6th, 2020, 8:55 am
If anyone makes top 8 at the next major with multiple Arconas in your LS deck I will eat my words and send you some signed cards. And even then I probably won't be that sad because how cool is it that you might play a 1 ability non-unique alien from A New Hope after 13 virtual sets?
Walsetmd wrote:ping!
(it's his favorite card)
Primers and Decklist/Match up/Game Libraries for: Hyperdrive (V) and Hunt Down. Teach your kid SWCCG!

TRM Farm apologist and member of:
rsersen wrote:
February 25th, 2020, 1:51 pm
MYWHL club
Image

Corran
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2897
Joined: June 20th, 2004, 4:53 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio
GEMP Username: corran
Contact:

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by Corran »

I liked the shields, but it would be so cool to see arconas in competitive decks.
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

aermet69
LS Region: Toola
LS Region: Toola
Posts: 5657
Joined: July 14th, 2009, 2:16 pm
Location: Denmark (Toola)
GEMP Username: aermet69

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by aermet69 »

In general I like this. However, what I would not like is, if the PC then creates high impact characters and interrupts that use this function of moving away from battle. This is one of my gripes about the changes to the free shield.
- 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.

User avatar
quickdraw3457
Multimedia and Special Projects Advocate
Posts: 26058
Joined: September 3rd, 2003, 5:10 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
GEMP Username: quickdraw

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by quickdraw3457 »

aermet69 wrote:
October 6th, 2020, 11:47 am
In general I like this. However, what I would not like is, if the PC then creates high impact characters and interrupts that use this function of moving away from battle. This is one of my gripes about the changes to the free shield.
I truly don't know what's in the pipeline for D&D but I highly doubt this is in the cards for future virtual sets.
Matt C. - Pittsburgh, PA
Image
Hunter wrote:quickdraw is right

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

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by The_Emp »

TheLuhks wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 7:44 am
I disliked the retrieval mechanism on these shields. It often penalized you for trying to deploy things to reinforce your own battlegrounds, which is completely viable and not something that should be shielded against.
Yeah I could understand this. Perhaps we could in the future look at tweaking it so that it required Your side to occupy a battleground site and system, and unless opponent occupies a battleground site and system, you retrieve 1 force. A small change that would probably delay the early retrievals.

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

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by The_Emp »

arebelspy wrote:
September 30th, 2020, 8:14 pm
I like it.

I also wasn't with the haters, but if I were thinking about the card, I'd just want one damage, not 2, and the retrieval is eh. So I'm good with them going.

I think I'm quite happy with like 8 of the 10 proposed changes. Good work so far 👍
X2, Super happy to see these either be mirrored, or if we must have them be gone.
Want to specifically point out I think the damage of 2 was excessive.
I would actually be totally fine if the shields were mirrored and only caused 1 damage per exclusion, as well as remove the ridiculous ability for it to be played retroactively to either damage the opponent or retrieve.
I actually would be in favor of the shield if we had those changes, along with the proposed change to retrieval requirements I commented on the above post.
**Hoping D&D reads these posts :) **

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

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by The_Emp »

gogolen wrote:
October 1st, 2020, 7:56 pm
Great, now QMC takes less damage while running away all game. Sounds fun to play against
I'm looking at it a little differently, hoping that QMC and City in the Clouds objectives become more relevant again and thus expand the decks played again. Dark still has a lot of counters so I don't think it'll suddenly become unbalanced. Or perhaps we could examine 'watering down' the objective to make it less costly to exclude/move away as well as put slightly stricter requirements on the retrieval aspect.

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

Re: One more errata Part Deux

Post by The_Emp »

Madmanwithabox wrote:
October 2nd, 2020, 1:51 pm
Certainly the riskiest card (or non card) seen so far - it opens up a lot of LS evasion cards that previously didn't see play, but for good reason. I have a feeling this one is going to come back as a softer version in a later set (perhaps stacking the movement cards on a new shield is a good way to stop the recursion from getting out of hand).
X2 good prediction and great suggestion about stacking!

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”