Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Hida77

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Dallas, Texas, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I personally think they have to reprint them to some degree. Would the game be the same if Luke was only some to-be-released "Farmboy" or "Training" version as opposed to "Jedi Knight"? Same with Vader. If we only had Pre-suit Vader, would people be happy? I personally don't think so. I do think that reprinting them exactly as they are may not necessarily happen, but at minimum a tweak to cost/ability/health/die wouldn't be too much to keep it fresh, even if the card was very similar otherwise. It would still make you need to get the newer version so no "omg wasted legendary" syndrome, but also bring those characters to a place where they felt more or less impactful as the game required and prevent people from just playing the same old deck arc after arc. Being able to get old cards is irrelevant if the old cards are rotating out anyway. I'd prefer if/when they reprinted Jedi Luke (for example) that they tweak him slightly to fit in more with the arc at hand. For example, MRP'ing/adjusting Rey in the next Core to be 10/13 cost to break up some of the shenanigans would make perfect sense and keep her in the game if we assume that she doesn't see another version prior.
  2. Jango, but aggro decks in general, not really him specifically. I find games that are over fast to be quite irritating. It reminds me of Hearthstone (pre-pirate nerf) right now. If you don't/can't kill a character in the first 3/4 turns of the game, you may as well not bother in many cases. It just makes it skew towards rolling well/drawing well early which is not very fun. I am very afraid that the existing aggro decks getting more efficient characters/upgrades will make this worse. Hyperloop. Not because the deck is particularly dangerous in general, but because when they accomplish the combo the game gets pretty infuriating. EDIT: Those are both dislikes. of course. As far as Likes go, basically anything else but specifically: Mill Decks - Because its interesting and it makes you think differently Control-y decks like Vader/Raider - Because again, it takes thought and while the punishment for failure can be harsh, you feel like you have more control over it. Combo decks - I suppose Hyperloop technically fits here, but I am specifically talking more about decks which seek to abuse a specific interaction or card without going infinite.
  3. /Thread? Eliminate the biggest issue and complaint seems to be the most obvious way to at least get us back to whining about cards/decks. The top 6+ threads on this forum all being about the supply and demand of the game really says a lot. And I am a "part of the problem" guy who has a full playset+ and preordered a similar amount of SoR.
  4. I actually agree with the OP. Make a political move and distract us from our angst. It works in America. Have an controversial topic? Do something news-worthy and distract everyone from the topic and hope they forget. Do they need to be articles per say? I'd be fine with "Batch 1, enjoy!" being the only text LOL. I know what you mean, but there are low-budget options. They could easily throw a few podcasts a bone and not have to do any major work themselves.
  5. I think the fact that they came out and did a second run of Awakenings "but this is the last time guys!" kinda says it all don't you? They are essentially saying "yea, there isn't enough out there, but this is our last mulligan; from now on, it is what it is". The general concern is that if they continue to have shortages release after release what that means for the player base. I, personally, seriously doubt that they will get it under control by SoR, which leaves me to hope that they get a handle on it on the xpack after that. But I do think if we go 1-2 releases after SoR with no/little improvement, that the player base and the game on the whole will suffer as a result. Whether that is true or not remains to be seen. I think a lot of the knee-jerk is that the single largest complaint about the game is the shortages. I think we can all agree if they can get a better handle on how much to produce (even if it is only a single run) then the game will be just fine. The article they posted, however, doesn't give me that warm fuzzy "everything will be fine" vibe. It kinda felt like "we have gotten a ton of complaints so we are fixing it this one time, but never again!". That is not exactly what the people who can't buy product currently were hoping for. Honestly, I don't know if the marketing/PR team at FFG just doesn't understand or what. They would have done a lot better by saying "we recognize that our first run did not meet the demand and as a result we are doing another print run to try to fix that issue. Going forward we have adjusted our processes to try to better anticipate and meet the demand with our print runs. We do not generally plan to do multiple runs going forward, and it was our intent to only do single runs, but we recognize that the game has been vastly more popular than we anticipated and are trying to rectify that discrepancy. We expect to be able to meet the demand going forward, but will constantly re-analyze if we were successful in our later releases." Or something like that. The difference is you can read that as FFG recognizes an issue and are trying to fix it, but are hoping to avoid doing this in the future. Whereas the current article reads more like "we are doing another run because of all the complaining, but this is the only time we will ever do it. Get used to it". At least to me.
  6. Not sure but that Maz Upgrade is looking preeettyyy goooood.... We can only see 4 sides on the 1 cost card but there is 1Focus/2Focus(!)/1Resource/1Resource.... I am already excited to play that card and I have no idea what else it does.
  7. I get what you are trying to say, but the perception of cheating is a much bigger deal than specific game play interactions to the integrity of the tournament. You are right though, as I said. If I couldn't explicitly tell, I'd probably warn the player in question to stop and move on. If he persisted then it would give me ammunition to issue a game loss or DQ later.
  8. High five! I have judged events though, and in my opinion if this question arose, I would be very skeptical if he used the word "strategy" in his explanation of why he did it. That is subjective and I would want to watch the player in question to decide for myself if he was just OCD/superstitious about it or acting to influence the outcome of course. I will say that his description in this thread would definitely make me think it was the latter though. And the marshal/judge has a lot of power to do what he feels best in that situation. I would probably at least issue a warning to stop. If it was obviously malicious enough, then obviously more.
  9. I agree, but being competitive and being a WAAC player are not the same, no matter how much people like to try and group them. This is a perfect example of that.
  10. Intent is the difference. That is up to the judge to decide.
  11. Rule of thumb: if you have to ask "Would you guys consider that cheating?" the answer is yes. Yes it is cheating. That covers 99% of all these types of questions. You know there is a question because your conscience is telling you it feels wrong. It feels wrong because it is. You know this before you asked the question. Is holding dice a special way before rolling them cheating? No, not in and of itself, although I would expect if your opponent noticed it he would be highly suspicious. I would be. Many of the ways you can influence a dice roll start with that. Is holding the dice and using some sort of special "technique" to always "roll" what you want cheating? Yes, no question. The whole point in having dice is to provide a random element in the game you have to contend with and play around. If you are trying to circumvent or somehow control the dice outside of what the rules allow, you are cheating. That is the definition. cheat CHēt/ verb gerund or present participle: cheating 1. act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination. 2. avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill. "she cheated death in a spectacular crash" Also, it is offensive that you tried to paint "being competitive" as trying to do such things. No, that is not being competitive. Being competitive is learning the mechanics of a game and acting within the rules to win more than you lose. It is explicitly NOT cheating. I have known many "casual" people to cheat and many many more competitive people who wouldn't be able to live with themselves if they won knowing they cheated their opponent. cheating has nothing to do with a person being casual or competitive.
  12. Fair enough, just making sure you were aware. Lots of Marshals/Judges may not be rules experts, etc. That's all I am saying.
  13. You are aware that most Marshals and Judges are Store Owners and players willing to run tournaments, not a special title outside of the rules from FFG. It's not like Magic. You are going to get a wide variety of opinions. There's no test or anything at this time.
  14. FFG Website https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/more/organized-play/tome/client/ You'll need a login.
  15. FWIW, you can run Destiny from TOME already as well. You just have to do "custom" and type in the parameters for Destiny. I have done it and it works fine. I assume FFG will eventually update it (prolly around Worlds , when they will need it themselves) to have a "Destiny" template so you can skip the typing in stuff. Cryodex is also a great tool, not trying to rain on the parade, just informing.
  • Create New...