Some notes about the Rick Garfield interview.

I hope you all read it, whether or not you are planning on buying the SW:TCG.

I have only a few notes:

"Q: This game evidently uses dice to resolve conflicts. What type of dice are we going to be rolling and how is this integrated into the game? What do the dice add to the game?"

"[Richard Garfield] Dice were included for a lot of reasons. It seems with characters you want the outcome of the conflicts to be less deterministic than in a game like Magic. It is OK in Magic if a bear always beats an elf, but it wouldn't feel right if the outcome were so predetermined in a Star Wars universe conflict..."


At least someone gave an understandable, clear reason for the whole die rule! I feel alittle better about that.


"[Mark Rosewater] The initial set has 180 cards. It focuses on Episode 2: Attack of the Clones."


If this set is coming out in April, would that make playing the game before May 16th be spoiling?!? I don't wanna be spoiled. Maybe I'll buy it and not play until I see AOTC.



Anyone else have any observations?

 

[Richard Garfield] The game focuses on combat, and in fact was inspired by miniatures games. There are duels (more precisely personal combat), ground war, and space war. These three categories in fact are the three theatres of the games conflict, and each turn battle rages in each of them. When a player has won two out of the three theatres they win the game.

This sounds pretty bland. I hope there's more to it than this. Combat should take place somewhere. All of the previous Star Wars card games involved some form of location, but there's no mention of it here.

I really fail to see why someone who wins personal and ground combat but loses space combat should win the game. Logically that just makes no sense to me. ... Well, I suppose that was the situation in Episode I, where the heroes won the space conflict (against the droid control ship) and the personal combat (the duel, and the Queen taking back the throne room) but lost the ground combat (the Gungans vs. battle droids). ... But I'm still not convinced. You should have a more complete victory over your opponent than just "best two out of three".

One thing's for sure. This game will never be able to stack up to SW:CCG. Young Jedi maybe, Jedi Knights possibly, but SW:CCG never.

Ah, well. I'll still give it a chance.

 

"It seems with characters you want the outcome of the conflicts to be less deterministic than in a game like Magic. It is OK in Magic if a bear always beats an elf, but it wouldn't feel right if the outcome were so predetermined in a Star Wars universe conflict..."

What does that mean? The cards will still have different numbers of dice to roll as "power". I am trying to understand how that is different from regular power/battle destiny and weapons with destiny in SWCCG.

Also.... what is miniatures?

 

It's not different... they just think if they add more it'll keep you from looking for the wizard behind the curtain... problem is, it's a translucent shower curtain cuz most players are wise to these little tricks and play on words that are meant to make the game sound more versatile than the previous, but I got sick of rolling dice back in my D&D days... yes, D&D not AD&D, I'm that old... well, I just couldn't afford AD&D, the D&D books were given to me...

Darksteps...

 

It adds a degree of random luck so the guy getting his ass handed to him feels he might still have an outside shot at winning the game, or in the least, appearing respectible.

 

I am trying to understand how that is different from regular power/battle destiny and weapons with destiny in SWCCG.

In SW:CCG, a Jawa in a battle with Darth Vader without a weapon had no chance of inflicting any damage on Vader, while the Jawa was almost a sure bet to be forfeited through attrition.

With dice, a Jawa could inflict at least a little damage to Vader, if he's lucky enough. It's still a sure bet he's going to get creamed by Vader, but Vader won't escape unscathed.

 

I just suddenly realized something. Decipher could say that they released so many SWCCG sets this year to get a lot of product out before they lost the license, for the players to have a lot of fresh stuff.
However, they knew the license was in jeopardy when they CREATED Jedi Knights. According to this interview, the new SWTCG was pretty much developed by the time Jedi Knights first set was released. What is up with that??

 

I'm just reading between the lines here, I don't know anything first-hand or official....

Yes, Decipher probably knew their license was in jeopardy when they developed and marketed Jedi Knights. JK was probably an attempt by Decipher to persuade LFL that they were worthy of keeping the license. Obviously LFL was not happy with SW:CCG and Young Jedi, so JK was an attempt to appease them. Look at how JK directly addressed all the supposed "weaknesses" of both Star Wars:CCG and Young Jedi.... I suspect JK was an attempt to beat WOTC at their own game. (No pun intended.)

Decipher sure seems to have tried, but their efforts seem to have fallen flat. They managed to get a JK promo card in the last SW trilogy video, but because they had to rush it the whole game changed between then and now, and now that card is simply a novelty item.

Decipher had grand plans for a JK league, making up league kits and everything (when was the last time we saw league kits for SW:CCG or YJ?). But they just couldn't seem to EXECUTE those plans very well. They had prerelease parties, and everyone seemed INTERESTED in the game, but interest never translated into significant SALES, it seems. I don't think Decipher marketed it very well. (I have other suspicions regarding marketing ... maybe another time....)

It's tragic, really. Jedi Knights had lots of good things going for it. But it couldn't compete with SW:CCG, or even Young Jedi. There just isn't room enough in the CCG market for three different Star Wars card games ... that's one thing LFL got right in their form letter. I've said it before, if Jedi Knights had been Decipher's FIRST (or maybe even SECOND) Star Wars card game, it probably would have been incredibly successful, and this board would be all about Jedi Knights instead of SW:CCG.

 

Hahaha! ROTFL!

But you see, T2Q, that's my point. That scenario is much more fun than an automatic "My Dark Lord Of The Sith (for which I paid $20 on eBay) smashes your $0.05 Jawa into little pieces." I've complained before that SW:CCG games all too often come down to who's spent the most on their decks. A little more randomness in the game would not be a bad thing, IMHO.

 

I think Decipher made a good effort to enable players to build a deck without getting tons of main characters, but in order to make a lot of those decks with a lot of commons work you need multiple copies of commons. In my experience that was MUCH harder to do than find the mains I wanted.

 

Yeah? Try getting the 25 TIE Scouts you need for a deck . I really had to scrounge around to get those bad boys.

 

T2Q,

I should let this drop, it's not that big a deal, but I want to make my point clearer....

The point I was making with the Jawa vs. Vader example is that yes, a Jawa should probably always lose a battle to Vader, but every once in a while a Jawa should be able to at least inflict SOME damage on Vader.

For example, assume in the new game Vader has a power 7, health 6 ... and a Jawa power 1 and health 1. Vader rolls 7 dice, 4 of them are "hits". The Jawa only rolls one die, but it comes up a "hit". The 3 hits on the Jawa kills him, but Vader still takes one hit, dropping his current health to 5. Maybe conceptually the hit against Vader isn't necessarily a "wound", but represents some extra effort Vader had to go through to kill the pesky little Jawa.

That's a little more interesting than the automatic "Vader wins battle against Jawa, lose 5 force" in SW:CCG. Yes, I know battles are almost never that simple in SW:CCG, but still....

 

If someone left a Jawa alone and you could only make them lose 5 Force, you need a better deck or a smarter strategy

I'd just like to point out that you're forgetting the speed statistic. Vader would probably STILL escape unscathed from the unarmed Jawa since I'd imagine his speed to be much higher than the Jawa's. If Anakin's speed is 60, I'd give Vader maybe a 50 (that suit slows him down some), and top the Jawa out at like 10. So Vader rolls his 6 or 7 dice, and kills the Jawa before he even has a chance to do anything. Unless of course Vader rolls below 4 on all 6 rolls, and the Jawa gets a hit, but in my opinion, that's a little too random.

BTW, there ought to be a rule that a single die is used for all rolls in a game, for all players, or else have dice be handed out before tournaments. I don't want to end up playing some kid who brings loaded dice (not that I intend to play at all, but I'm sure no one would enjoy that).

 

I've complained before that SW:CCG games all too often come down to who's spent the most on their decks. A little more randomness in the game would not be a bad thing, IMHO.

This will be no different with the new game. It's just a draw back of all CCGs. Besides, with enhanced packs and anthologies, and DS2 starters, D made it easy and affordable to get mains.

 

About the loaded dice thing, I heard there is some microwave procedure you can do in your own kitchen. There would have to be something to prevent cheating, like tourney directors providing the dice, maybe as part of the entry cost. They really aren't that much money.

 

I think I spent about a dollar on d6's I needed for AD&D (the good kind, mind you, with the rounded vertices). So it shouldn't be that difficult to distribute dice in a tournament.

 

This will be no different with the new game. It's just a draw back of all CCGs.

Yes, but it is a question of degree. Decipher's YJ, JK and LOTR games all have deck-building rules that help mitigate the need for rare cards. Also, the rare cards in those games are not THAT much better than the non-rares. But in SW:CCG it seems to me a rare card's gameplay value is usually several degrees higher than a common/uncommon card. As I said, it's a question of degree.

Then there's the issue of ultra rares. In their first four sets of SW:CCG mains were not just "rare" but "extra-rare", remember R1 vs. R2? And as if they didn't learn their lesson then, they come out with Ultra-Rares again in Death Star II. (Decipher finally got it right with Alternate Images.)

And finally, there's the issue of how SW:CCG's rares are "specialized". Ben Kenobi is a great card, but he only deploys on Tatooine. Son Of Skywalker has great game text, but he only deploys on Dagobah or Cloud City. Do you realize I have no reason to put both of these powerful mains in the same deck?? I know this is part of the game design, to help immerse players in the story, but it's a little annoying having to try to collect every version of every main so you can build different decks.

Besides, with enhanced packs and anthologies, and DS2 starters, D made it easy and affordable to get mains.

The only mains in the anthologies were weak versions of Fett and Jabba in 2nd Anthology which are practically useless, and Prisoner 2187 and Artoo in Red 5 in 3rd Anthology, specialized cards for specialized decks.

The cards in the enhanced packs were great, but enhanced packs are not exactly a great value unless you're a new player.

 

The only mains in the anthologies were weak versions of Fett and Jabba in 2nd Anthology which are practically useless

I found Jabba to be quite useful, but you're right about Fett. What was up with that?

and Prisoner 2187 and Artoo in Red 5 in 3rd Anthology, specialized cards for specialized decks.

Red 5 with R2 a specility card? I don't see that at all.


The cards in the enhanced packs were great, but enhanced packs are not exactly a great value unless you're a new player.

I disagree. I got more packs and some great insert cards. I was disappointed we didn't get EI enhanced.


But in SW:CCG it seems to me a rare card's gameplay value is usually several degrees higher than a common/uncommon card. As I said, it's a question of degree.

Major character? Yes. Everything else? No. I mean, they've got some crap rares in SW:CCG (seekers, anyone?) And I still hold Tie-interceptors are the most power DS card in the game (which are a common).

 

>>>Yes, but it is a question of degree. Decipher's YJ, JK and LOTR games all have deck-building rules that help mitigate the need for rare cards.


You must have been playing a different JK than me. In the game I played, you needed 4-5 each of your rare Hero, their weapon (sometimes rare), their chief supporter (almost always rare), I Have You Now, and That's No Moon. Granted those last two were probably more in the Premiere environment than later, but I stopped buying after 2 boxes of Premiere, since the rare necessity was insane (although I still looked at the cards online, and if I were still playing, I'd need to get ahold of 5 copies of Engage At Point-Blank Range, and just forget about making a Fett deck). If anything, JK had a rule that you need tons of rares, since it had that "nothing lasts more than 2 turns" rule, and you'd want your good cards out every turn. In SWCCG I could have just one Vader, and if I could get him out, he'd often stay out for a good long time.

>>>Also, the rare cards in those games are not THAT much better than the non-rares.

I think that's only LotR you're thinking of. And even then not always. Usually the rare version of a main is much better in a particular decktype than the common/uncommon version, such as Frodo, Boromir, and Merry. There are, of course, some who are not, like Legolas, Gandalf, and Pippin (cuz you KNOW everyone's out to discard your Shire tales). There's also Sam, whose rare version is completely useless (unless Bill The Pony absolutely ROCKS DA HIZOUSE, but even then we won't get to use him till the third set). But unlike SWCCG, at least there ARE common and uncommon versions of mains. You do need multiples of a few key rares in LotR, depending on what your deck is.

>>>But in SW:CCG it seems to me a rare card's gameplay value is usually several degrees higher than a common/uncommon card. As I said, it's a question of degree.

With the exception of mains, however, you rarely need more than 1 or 2 copies of any given rare. 1 copy of any rare objective is enough, the same for rare Epic Events. Rare effects that you'd want are usually ones you can start (like the objective-boosters in Tatooine), and there's so many ways to pull a copy of just about anything out of your deck that you usually don't need too many multiples. The other thing about SWCCG is the deck cycling mechanic of the game. This makes it much easier to find whatever you're looking for since you can draw whatever you want, not just one card a turn or evening up to a set number. In most any other game, fat chance getting that rare that you just NEED to get out if you only had one of it and its at the bottom of your deck when you shuffle at the start. I think the big problem with a lot of games and the money issue is not the rarity of cards, but the need for multiple copies of the same hard-to-get card. Given singles buying, trading, and just pack-opening luck, anyone stands a good chance of being able to get any particular rare they need. The problem is getting 4 or 5 copies of it. To be fair, SWCCG had this problem too, especially with the Fixed cards in the SE starters (oh, to have 25 Wookiees, Sandtroopers, Disruptor Pistols, and Ralltiir Frieghter Captains...)