Who has done a better job capturing the feel of Star Wars in card games?

Discussion in 'Games: CCG, TCG, and Boardgames' started by SithDooku, Jul 11, 2002.

?

Who has done a better job capturing the feel of Star Wars in card games?

Poll closed Mar 24, 2012.
DECIPHER 39 vote(s) 67.2%
WIZARDS OF THE COAST 19 vote(s) 32.8%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. C-3PX Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2002
    star 6
    CCG all the way!
    Comment Edited Out: Keep the flaming down. 24 hour spank
  2. VinDyr01 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Jan 2, 2002
    IMHO, WoTC's version of the card game has my vote. Their version is clean, simple, and easy to learn. New players care above all for simplicity.

    However, I wish to pose a question to those who have said it earlier:

    How is it possible that a card game to capture the "feel" of the movies? That statement doesn't sound right to me.

    Peace,
    VinDyr01
  3. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    Look at my lengthy post in this thread.
    In particular, this statement:


    The SW:CCG was also very, very story driven, especially with the introduction of "objective" cards in 1998. Objectives give you a goal you have to achieve, like blowing up the Death Star or training Luke to be a Jedi, and once you achieve your objective you get certain benefits or your opponent suffers certain consequences. But even besides objectives, you have elements in the game that let you use the Death Star to blow up planets, duel Jedi, make Kessel Runs, blow up the Hoth Shield Generator, dodge asteroids, collect bounties on captured Rebels, carbon freeze characters, feed captives to the Sarlaac or the Rancor, buid the second Death Star one piece at a time, blow up the second Death Star, podrace, win political control of the Galactic Senate, turn Darth Vader to the Light Side, or turn Luke to the Dark Side!


    THAT'S how you "capture the feel" in a card game.

    I haven't spent a lot of time on this thread here, because it was obviously a loaded question to begin with. SW:TCG obviously does not "capture the feel" of Star Wars as well as SW:CCG. But people are just voting for their favorite game. That's fine, that's their perogative; just shows you how much stock you should put in polls....

    :)


  4. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    You may be right that this probably is more of a poll of what game you like, but that is what really counts. Whether one captures the feel better than the other or not it all boils down to what is more fun for that player to play.
    SWTCG lends itself more to quick games, easy to learn, and fun to play. Almost anyone can learn it, and that makes it playable to a wider base, and hence in my book makes it a better game.
    One of your points are the Objectives (which are still just words on a piece of paper and require actions by the players and their imaginations, like any game) which came out in '98 for a game that came out on '95. In 2005 SWTCG will have even more elements that closely attune it to SW, and I am sure it will still be easy to pick up. Strategy does not equal complicated. The two are often mistaken as the same thing.
  5. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    Don't get so defensive, Bacca, you know I don't have anything against SW:TCG... :)

    You may be right that this probably is more of a poll of what game you like, but that is what really counts. Whether one captures the feel better than the other or not it all boils down to what is more fun for that player to play.

    Of course. That's why I haven't spent a lot of time on this thread. The question is loaded, and ultimately doesn't matter anyway. So we have a lot of people ignoring the true purpose of a loaded question ... do you see why I haven't spent a lot of time on this thread??? :)


    SWTCG lends itself more to quick games, easy to learn, and fun to play. Almost anyone can learn it, and that makes it playable to a wider base, and hence in my book makes it a better game.

    Key words being "in [your] book". Others feel differently, of course. I like SW:TCG and Jedi Knights, and I love Young Jedi ... all of which are easier to learn and play than SW:CCG ... but I still like SW:CCG more and think it is a better game than all of them.


    One of your points are the Objectives ... which came out in '98 for a game that came out on '95. In 2005 SWTCG will have even more elements that closely attune it to SW, and I am sure it will still be easy to pick up.

    Well, that remains to be seen, but I'm not holding my breath. I was underwhelmed to learn about the two new "mechanics" added to SW:TCG with the Sith Rising expansion -- Stun and Overload. Those don't add anything to "capturing the feel of Star Wars".


    Strategy does not equal complicated. The two are often mistaken as the same thing.

    I wasn't making that point. I'm not discussing strategy or complexity. I'm discussing "capturing the feel of Star Wars" which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with strategy or complexity.

  6. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    I wasn't getting defensive, at least not in a jumpy way. I was just addressing a few points in yours and many others comments in the thread, I wasn't just addressing yours. :)

    As for Stun and Overload, they did add a new interesting aspect to the game. I am having a blast with my Sith Rising cards!
  7. Restrainingbolt Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 12, 2002
    star 4
    Forget it Artie ... you'll never get him to go along with anything that might favor the SWCCG. I felt this thread was a joke when it first started. Just an opportunity to get both camps to go at one another. Each game has it merits. Trying to "prove" which is better is just asking for controversy, and that is exactly what this thread is trying to get people to do. Your assessment of it being a vote for the game of choice is exactly that.

    R'Bolt
  8. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    Forget it Artie ... you'll never get him to go along with anything that might favor the SWCCG.

    Now I'm getting defensive. When false statements are made against me.
    I have no problem with the CCG. All I have ever done is defend the TCG against people that continually slam it, most of whom know little about it or went into it deciding to hate it and will never change their mind no matter what happens with it. I am not anti-CCG, I am pro-TCG. It is not the same thing.

    Edit: Thought twice about it and decided to edit this down to an abridged version, and sent the rest via PM
  9. Restrainingbolt Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 12, 2002
    star 4
    Sorry I missed the extended verion. Must have been good.

    R'Bolt
  10. Darth_Raine Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 3, 2002
    star 2
    SW: TCG is awesome.
    Love the cards, the pictures, the ease of play, the DICE (dice rock by the way).
    Excellent game for pick me ups, & extended play periods.
    SW: TCG Capture the feel for me.
  11. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    Yeah, take it down a notch, R'bolt. Bacca has never bashed the CCG, he just likes the TCG better ... just the opposite of me ... which is why Bacca and I have such interesting discussions! :)

  12. Restrainingbolt Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 12, 2002
    star 4
    Look... best I stay away from threads like these because they're fuitile in my opinion. I'm just personally making an observation, Artie. Personally I have a problem with anyone who feels the "need" to run a fine tooth comb through "everyones" (and I do mean everyones) posts relating even in the mildest way with reference to the TCG. The need to write an editorial comment whenever someone says something even mildly unflattering belies (IMHO) an insecurity about the game they hold so dear.

    I don't see any Star Wars CCG players running around these boards "slamming" the TCG (at least not anymore). Personally, I rarely comment about the TCG (for which I might add, it's been implied that I do). There are numerous posts that do in fact bash the CCG (it's too complicated, Decipher sucks etc), and I don't see Red84, myself, or anyone else for that matter running an "editorial" opinion after each and "every post" as a rebuttal.

    I refuse to get caught up in a tit for tat on this issue. It's not worth the high blood pressure. After all it's only a game.:) I've got stuff I'm doing that is a heck of a lot for fun (for me at least). Personally I'm "relieved" that WOTC "isn't" getting the CCG. Let a good thing rest.

    The TCG advocates are entitled to "their opinion" and that's exactly what it is, their opinions. I'm entitled to mine. I've resisted saying negative things about their game. Let people say what they will. I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it.

    R'Bolt

  13. Darth_Raine Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 3, 2002
    star 2
    nice post R'bolt. As a TCG supporter I certainly don't like people bashing the game Im paying good money to play. Saying that I dont like the TCG'er that bash the CCG, It truly does no good except to make the basher look infantile and a whiner.
    I just started posting on this board, I normally post on WotC site and its still being hit every now & thenby CCG lovers saying how TCG sucks, dice suck (how can dice suck, dice rule), and that the game has no depth and blah blah blah, In defense I tell them that CCG is "its dead, its over nobody listens to techno", normally gets a rise out of them but hey they came onto the official WotC site bashing so they deserve what they get.
    Anyways the respectful, repsonsible post as above is the proper way to post.
    Cant wait for ANH set, really want that death star card, even if its a 20 build.
  14. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    Mea culpa, R'bolt. I read too much into your earlier post. I apologize. See what happens when astromechs like me get too close to you restraining bolts? :)

    But to comment on one point in your last post, I don't think defending something necessarily implies an insecurity toward it ... any more than criticizing something implies hostility toward it. I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. Sometimes you defend something because you feel strongly about it.... I feel that is the case in Bacca's situation. He truly likes the new game, and defends it and promotes it when he can.

  15. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    Exactly Artie. I am not insecure about the game, I just do not like to see it misrepresented from my vision of it (and the vision of others who like it). I am also extremly concerned about TCG'ers feeling welcome here, something that has been difficult but is getting a lot better.

    I came to these boards to talk about the TCG and I defend it when I see something to defend. Talking about these games is the reason for the existence of this board.

    RB, you may not think the TCG gets slammed but it does in little subtle ways as some have outlined above about the dice issue, etc.

    RB said:"Sorry I missed the extended verion. Must have been good.

    I sent it to you RB via PM (Private Message) last night. :)

  16. Restrainingbolt Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 12, 2002
    star 4
    Darth Raine wrote:
    "As a TCG supporter I certainly don't like people bashing the game Im paying good money to play. Saying that I dont like the TCG'er that bash the CCG, It truly does no good except to make the basher look infantile and a whiner."

    Well you see the problem here in this thread is "essentially it's premise".

    Which game does a better job?
    Decipher
    WOTC

    What would you expect from a thread like this. I'm still of the opinion that threads like this should not be allowed because they pour salt on "still open wounds" for many a former SWCCG player. They open the doors for comments slamming one anothers games.

    R'Bolt
  17. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    To some degree, true. It does tend to start up pointless arguments.

    But the thread itself and it's intended reason for being here doesn't really do any harm as people debate in a calm and proffesional manner why they think one game represents SW over the other. WotC did make the claim that the TCG represents the intense climatic SW universe battles (I cannot remember the actual statement), so a debate on this point is not bad. It also lets WotC, (who reads these boards) see how a small fan base (the "onliners") react to the game and it may be the catalyst for changes for the better.

    Many think the CCG does a better job representing the movies, because of the thematic elements of the gameplay such as objective decks.

    Others think that the TCG does a better job because it recreates intense simultaneous battles. (The CCG has battles as well, but arguers of this point believe that the TCG method of battling based on speed and rolling dice is a lot like a real battle where both parties are constantly fighting against odds).

    So in itself, the thread is not really harmful and can create some good discussion and debate. Not everyone reacts this way and that is where it gets out of hand, especially when people make it personal.
  18. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    Well, to return to the original topic...

    (The CCG has battles as well, but arguers of this point believe that the TCG method of battling based on speed and rolling dice is a lot like a real battle where both parties are constantly fighting against odds).

    Let's examine this in more detail. TCG battling at its most basic level involves only two things, as you've mentioned above:

    1. Speed
    2. Rolling dice


    Let's look at speed first. In all four Star Wars CCGs/TCGs, conceptually all of the actions in a battle happen simultaneously. But for practical gameplay purposes you can't do that, so you have to impose some sort of order to the actions. (The only game I've played where all actions actually happen simultaneously is in the wonderful war strategy game "Diplomacy".) SW:CCG and JK have alternating actions to impose order -- you take an action, then I take an action -- YJ has it's face-down "battle plans", and SW:TCG has speed.

    But how can it be more realistic having a battle where the battle order is predetermined by a card's speed? No matter how hard I try, my C-3PO can not attack before my Obi-Wan. You can not claim that that is more realistic than SW:CCG or JK, where battle order is decided as the battle progresses by the players.



    (I'll have to talk about dice later ... I gotta run ... sorry!)

  19. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    Actually 3-PO can attack first if you use cards to enhance his speed.

    I am not trying to slam SWCCG, but I never really thought the adding up power and destinies was a very accurate application of battle. To me it is kind of like two armies counting their men and their combined strength, seeing which one was more powerful who in turn the parties agree "wins", then both sides shoot a few people for attrition that they agree would have died if there was a battle.

    Don't get me wrong. It is an elegant and fun concept, and great to play. However the speed and dice aspect in SWTCG seems to represent the actual battle better. It is like two armies attacking each other. The fastest naturally attack first and hit first. Playing the game is like a slow motion battle being played out right before your eyes.

    There was an interesting post at Rebelbasers.com (I'm sure you saw it Artie) that mentioned a quote from some message boards where soldiers get together and talk about Real Wars (as we do about Star Wars :) ). The quote goes:
    "From an Army tank crewman:

    "My unit went to NTC in 1996. In one of our inbriefs, we were told that the MILES settings gave the OPFOR T-80s a 90% PK frontal against an M1A1 within 2000 meters. That was absolute horse****. The numbers were changed to 50% before our rotation began."

    The MILES system is used to play a sort of laser tag in training. This training is taken very seriously, and is the closest a fortunate soldier will get to actual combat. And how do they resolve their hits or misses?

    Rolling electronic dice, basically. As the above quote indicates, the OPFOR (meaning whoever is playing the "bad guys" in the exercise) has a 50% chance of killing the target. Worse, this kill might be just a mobility-kill, meaning the track gets blown off the tank, but the enemy gunner still gets to return fire.

    Just something to think about next time you're about to rant about how lame dice are and how much they screw up games.

    Where I found this:
    http://63.99.108.76/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000913.html "


    Also, while I understand many people's right to dislike dice, I have no problem with it. At first I thought I would hate it, but it adds a very unique concept to card games, at least unique to me. It is just fun. And it fits well within the game, even for bad rolls, because there are things you can do later in the game to "overcome" the bad result. And good and bad dice rolls work both ways.
  20. Darth_Raine Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 3, 2002
    star 2
    Dice rule!
    As well the fan base over at WotC is growing, more & more new names everyday, as well as good posts from those people even if its been answered before in a previous thread 10 pages down.
  21. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    Bacca,

    That whole discussion only addresses the topic of dice, not speed. "Speed" -- as well as Young Jedi's hidden battle plan method -- are not very realistic. Don't misinterpret me: SW:CCG's and JK's method of "alternating actions" isn't realistic, either! But in my opinion, an "alternating action" method where I can choose which of my characters is attacking and which of your characters is being attacked is more realistic than a "speed" mechanic where I am FORCED to attack with this unit now and that unit later.

    So let's talk about dice for a minute. That post you copied was interesting, but all it argues for is some sort of random number generator. We all know there are no real, physical "dice" involved in these war games these people are playing.

    Well, if all we are discussing is whether or not there should be some random element in the game, we are ALL in agreement! :) It is a card game. It involves a deck of cards, and the next card you draw is random, ergo, there is a random element in the game. Every CCG/TCG has a random element to it.

    The question up for discussion right now is not whether dice in general are a realistic way to portray battle, because any random element will suffice for that, whether it is dice or drawing destiny. No, the question up for discussion now is this: Is the way SW:TCG utilizes dice "realistic"?

    The problem I have with dice in SW:TCG is that they completely determine the outcome of a battle. Obi-Wan's skill plays no part in whether or not he hits Count Dooku. It is completely up to the dice. It's as if Obi-Wan has no power or skill in and of himself.

    Let's digress for a moment. You said:

    I never really thought the adding up power and destinies [in SW:CCG] was a very accurate application of battle. To me it is kind of like two armies counting their men and their combined strength, seeing which one was more powerful who in turn the parties agree "wins", then both sides shoot a few people for attrition that they agree would have died if there was a battle.

    First of all, your post belies a common misunderstanding of what it means to "forfeit" a character in SW:CCG. A character who is forfeited is not "dead". He is simply knocked out of the foreground of the game for a time. That's why a forfeited character may return later in the game. It's the same in SW:TCG, of course. If you "kill" Dooku, you can still build another version of him and bring him back into battle. In SW:CCG, a character isn't "dead" unless they are "placed out of play", which you should know is less common of an occurence than forfeiting; an out of play character may NOT be redeployed for the remainder of the game.

    So, looking at it as "battle damage" and knocking characters back, I personally find this more realistic than SW:TCG. Luke Skywalker has a certain base level strength, so does Darth Vader. That's natural. Vader's base strength is higher than Luke's, so everything else being equal, Vader is going to cause battle damage. Now, both of these characters have enough ability that they can draw battle destiny and cause attrition. That's the random element, of course. With that random element thrown in, Luke just might outpower Vader, and cause him some damage, maybe even enough to knock him off the site. Then again, he might not.


    So that's my problem with the dice. Inherently there is nothing wrong with them. But in SW:TCG they determine everything and I don't think that's realistic. A random element should add incremental value to your unit or character, not define the sum total value all by itself. Battling realistically is a combination of skill and luck, but in SW:TCG it is ALL luck.

    So that's why I don't think SW:TCG battling is "more realistic" than SW:CCG battling: Speed enforces a battle order which you otherwise might not choose to do, and dice (or any random element) are relied on TOO MUCH to determine the outcomes of battles.

  22. Zoombini Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 10, 2001
    star 2
    Without a doubt: Decipher. The WOTC game just feels empty and totally unsatisfactory when you play it.

    Also i just hate the fact that there are 3 areas: space, ground,character. Where is the feeling of all the exotic locations in the Star Wars universe, like Kamino or Dagobah or Hoth,....?

    But most of all, it revulses me to throw those dice. Everything depends on them and so basicly this game is a game of pure luck => no strategy at all. All you have to do to win the game is a professional dice-thrower.

    Edited out flammatory description, please keep comments about the respective games away from statements like calling a game "pale". See this thread where the policy us all getting along was laid out.
  23. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    Artie,

    I still disagree that Speed is not more realistic since speed in real life determines alot, and speed can still be modified with other cards as in real life sometimes a guy gets an second wind, etc.

    However I understand with your points about dice and to some degree I agree with them as outlined in your analysis. From that perspective I can understand how dice randomness "rules" the battle a bit too much.

    From my perspective however, of liking the dice randomness, it is a nice touch to the game. I just like the way it works with the game and how it adds new aspects to modify, etc. I think it is a very realistic way to battle with cards, even if we do not agree it is the most realistic. Someone once said
    'rolling dice is not elegant" and I once agreed with that, even as a staunch supporter of SWTCG. Now I like the dice and I feel they are elegant because of how they work with the game.

    While I also agree the individual cards "skill" does not currently add too much to the actual strike through the dice roll, there are other helpers on the card are starting to individualize characters skill, such as the new ability Stun. Soon we are supposed to see abilities that add and subtract to the actual die number rolled itself so that a 3 becomes a 4 or a 4 becomes a 3, etc, and that will allow for an individual's skill to strike and dodge (at least that has been the supposition because the words "natural six" on the critical hit implies this for the future).

    All in all I am not disagreeing with what you said above, I am really saying those things do not really bother me because it adds to the game to my enjoyment.

    Even so, I still get hosed with dice rolls. For example I had Mace Windu B going first in the battle and a choice to kill Aurra Sing who had 1 hit left to die, or take out a character (I think a Tyranus) with no hits and 4 health. I payed 1 force to add 2 power to Mace, rolled 8 dice against the 4 health character thinkng my odds were real good. Only 3 hit, so I didn't kill the character who in turn got to strike at me next as did Aurra Sing. I could have definitely taken out Aurra and sustained less hits against myself. The dice screwed me basically because normally 8 power is pretty good. But I just grinned and beared it and moved on, and took them both out next turn :) It is just how the game works and to me it works well.
  24. Artie-Deco Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 23, 2001
    star 3
    No doubt about it, Bacca, the dice make for interesting and exciting game play! I was only discussing dice in terms of the topic of this thread: capturing the feel of Star Wars....

    But "speed"? Really doesn't have anything to do with true "speed", all it does is establish a battle order....

    You never should have gone after Tyrannus, you know. You stood a much better chance of knocking out Aurra, and saving your 2 force for later....

    :)

  25. Bacabachaui Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jan 24, 2002
    star 4
    "...so basicly this game is a game of pure luck => no strategy at all

    There is a lot of strategy in it. Maybe not as much as you think or would like to see as compared to SWCCG, but there is a lot more than people claim.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.