Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Toqtamish

Focus on Your Objectives - Deckbuilding Article

85 posts in this topic

 The best part of this article is: 

Star Wars: The Card Game™ is coming. 

 

I can't wait anymore… How much time before the launch… 1 month or 2.  For sure, we'll have this game before Christmas and that's a terrific news.

 

May the force be with you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was very excited when this popped up in my RSS feeds today. It's great that we're getting close enough to release for these previews, can't wait to see more. Got thirteen new card previews and everything! Keep 'em coming, FFG, and get this game out as soon as you can. Hopefully this article will assuage some concerns others have been having over deckbuilding in this game.

One question: where did the term "pod" come from? It's what I've been using to describe what FFG calls in this article "objective sets," and I've seen others using the word "pod" as well. Until this article, it was what I assumed was the official terminology for them. Was FFG calling them "pods" at GenCon, or is it a term borrowed from another game? I'll probably continue calling them pods; it's far less cumbersome than "objective sets."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, basically they're saying "we know you are wary of the idea of not having complete control of your deck, but these are the ONLY logical ways that the cards could possibly ever go together anyway, so yeah…OBJECTIVE SETS!!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alpha5099 said:

One question: where did the term "pod" come from? It's what I've been using to describe what FFG calls in this article "objective sets," and I've seen others using the word "pod" as well. Until this article, it was what I assumed was the official terminology for them. Was FFG calling them "pods" at GenCon, or is it a term borrowed from another game? I'll probably continue calling them pods; it's far less cumbersome than "objective sets."

I think Corey called them pods in the GenCon demo video. It does feel nicer than "objective sets" though, yeah!

I am very pleased to see this new preview - it somehow makes it more real that this game really will be coming out! I also feel that the original decision to scrap the co-op game has less to do with popular opinion and more to do with the actual design, as surely the huge backlash that has been going on about this deckbuilding thing would have caused another U-turn before release. 

Looking forward to seeing what Eric has to say about this in the upcoming previews, too - he comes across as one of the most intelligent game designers out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

herozeromes said:

So, basically they're saying "we know you are wary of the idea of not having complete control of your deck, but these are the ONLY logical ways that the cards could possibly ever go together anyway, so yeah…OBJECTIVE SETS!!"

I've been a fan of the deck-building aspect of this game since it was announced at GenCon, but I have to agree with you, Herozeromes -- that is exactly the impression I got from this article too.

As for the name, I never liked "pods." Sure, "objective sets" is longer, but you could shorten it to "sets" and still be fine. I'm glad "pods" is out the window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Budgernaut said:

As for the name, I never liked "pods." Sure, "objective sets" is longer, but you could shorten it to "sets" and still be fine. I'm glad "pods" is out the window.

Team Pod for life! You'll never take it away from me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alpha5099 said:

Budgernaut said:

 

As for the name, I never liked "pods." Sure, "objective sets" is longer, but you could shorten it to "sets" and still be fine. I'm glad "pods" is out the window.

 

 

Team Pod for life! You'll never take it away from me!

That made me smile. happy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meaxe said:

 The best part of this article is: 

Star Wars: The Card Game™ is coming. 

 

I can't wait anymore… How much time before the launch… 1 month or 2.  For sure, we'll have this game before Christmas and that's a terrific news.

 

May the force be with you

It comes out in December, you can see the release month on the Upcoming page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alpha5099 said:

Budgernaut said:

 

As for the name, I never liked "pods." Sure, "objective sets" is longer, but you could shorten it to "sets" and still be fine. I'm glad "pods" is out the window.

 

 

Team Pod for life! You'll never take it away from me!

I like that better than Pod People. 

Yub yub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

herozeromes said:

So, basically they're saying "we know you are wary of the idea of not having complete control of your deck, but these are the ONLY logical ways that the cards could possibly ever go together anyway, so yeah…OBJECTIVE SETS!!"

To be honest this isnt at all the way it came across to me. It seems more like they're saying "Yes, we could make yet another card game where you choose every card and make every decision based on one cards usefulness against one other cards usefulness, but we've chosen something new. We want to give you fewer but more significant choices where you have to weigh six cards as a block against six other cards asa block, which is a whole new challenge".

I really liked this preview, I'm actually very interested in seeing how the deck design turns out :) 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think the part that gave me the impression it did was when it said:

"Do I have enough resources for the more expensive set? Are there enough enhancements in my deck to make good use of the Battlefield Engineers? If I draw Trench Run, is there enough firepower in my deck to take advantage of it?"

When I first read it, it made me think, "Well, yeah. Why would you ever include Battlefield Engineers if you didn't have many enhancements in your deck? Why would you ever include Trench Run if your deck was focused more on focusing your enemies than dealing damage?"

But after rereading it, I am seeing more of what I saw before this article. Maybe my deck couldn't use those two cards, but maybe the bonuses granted by the objectives are exactly what I need.

If, for example, I was running a focus-deck, it might be nice to have Rebel Assault in the deck to increase my otherwise weak damage-dealing capability. If I had a deck with few enhancements, it may still make sense to take Mission Briefing for the card draw and Mon Mothma for her ability to give +1 edge. Then if I get Battlefield Engineers in my hand, I can use it for 3 edge instead of two, making good synergy out of an otherwise dead card.

So there is a lot more going on than the narrow scope the article revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Budgernaut said:

So there is a lot more going on than the narrow scope the article revealed.

It's only the first article. Plenty more to come and the rulebook in likely a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was allso good to start with something that is unique to this game: the new way of building your gaming deck. Can we now start to speculate how many objective sets are needed to really make diverse deck types?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While the deckbuilding mechanic is no longer my problem with Star Wars: The Card Game, I am glad it was the first issue to be addressed. The tension I've seen here and elsewhere regarding set-based deckbuilding has given me much concern for the game's initial reception. I hope that fans of the saga will at least give it a chance before dismissing it as CCG blasphemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarthWMaster said:

While the deckbuilding mechanic is no longer my problem with Star Wars: The Card Game, I am glad it was the first issue to be addressed. The tension I've seen here and elsewhere regarding set-based deckbuilding has given me much concern for the game's initial reception. I hope that fans of the saga will at least give it a chance before dismissing it as CCG blasphemy.

Yeah, this game definitely faces a bit of an uphill battle. Between those who are disappointed that it isn't the co-op game that was first announced, and those that are wary of the deckbuilding, there are going to be a fair number of detractors right out of the gate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

alpha5099 said:

MarthWMaster said:

 

While the deckbuilding mechanic is no longer my problem with Star Wars: The Card Game, I am glad it was the first issue to be addressed. The tension I've seen here and elsewhere regarding set-based deckbuilding has given me much concern for the game's initial reception. I hope that fans of the saga will at least give it a chance before dismissing it as CCG blasphemy.

 

 

Yeah, this game definitely faces a bit of an uphill battle. Between those who are disappointed that it isn't the co-op game that was first announced, and those that are wary of the deckbuilding, there are going to be a fair number of detractors right out of the gate.

 

You are assuming way to much about the detractors.  To say the game has an uphill battle because there are some vocal people that refuse to look at the game because it isn't co-op (and such people existed in opposition to the game being co-op originally) or don't like a deck building mechanic they've barely seen is pretty presumptuous.    The vast majority of the people that will buy this game are not going to be posting on the forums about it at all, let alone pre-release

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

herozeromes said:

So, basically they're saying "we know you are wary of the idea of not having complete control of your deck, but these are the ONLY logical ways that the cards could possibly ever go together anyway, so yeah…OBJECTIVE SETS!!"

Honestly where are you pulling this stuff from?  We understand you are mad at FFG but you are really grasping at straws that are not there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ScottieATF said:

 

alpha5099 said:

 

MarthWMaster said:

 

While the deckbuilding mechanic is no longer my problem with Star Wars: The Card Game, I am glad it was the first issue to be addressed. The tension I've seen here and elsewhere regarding set-based deckbuilding has given me much concern for the game's initial reception. I hope that fans of the saga will at least give it a chance before dismissing it as CCG blasphemy.

 

 

Yeah, this game definitely faces a bit of an uphill battle. Between those who are disappointed that it isn't the co-op game that was first announced, and those that are wary of the deckbuilding, there are going to be a fair number of detractors right out of the gate.

 

 

 

You are assuming way to much about the detractors.  To say the game has an uphill battle because there are some vocal people that refuse to look at the game because it isn't co-op (and such people existed in opposition to the game being co-op originally) or don't like a deck building mechanic they've barely seen is pretty presumptuous.    The vast majority of the people that will buy this game are not going to be posting on the forums about it at all, let alone pre-release

 

 

Perhaps rather than being brief I should have written my case more holistically, knowing that you would pick apart the literal meaning of my message. Indeed, while I've seen the vocal detractors online, as stated in my first message, I've also mentioned the game to CCG players at the LGSes I frequent, and to other friends who play casually, almost all of whom have expressed a neutral-to-negative opinion about the set-based system. I can't speak for other areas, obviously, but at least in my area, there does not seem to be much support for the game, other than the fact that it's Star Wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarthWMaster said:

ScottieATF said:

 

alpha5099 said:

 

MarthWMaster said:

 

While the deckbuilding mechanic is no longer my problem with Star Wars: The Card Game, I am glad it was the first issue to be addressed. The tension I've seen here and elsewhere regarding set-based deckbuilding has given me much concern for the game's initial reception. I hope that fans of the saga will at least give it a chance before dismissing it as CCG blasphemy.

 

 

Yeah, this game definitely faces a bit of an uphill battle. Between those who are disappointed that it isn't the co-op game that was first announced, and those that are wary of the deckbuilding, there are going to be a fair number of detractors right out of the gate.

 

 

 

You are assuming way to much about the detractors.  To say the game has an uphill battle because there are some vocal people that refuse to look at the game because it isn't co-op (and such people existed in opposition to the game being co-op originally) or don't like a deck building mechanic they've barely seen is pretty presumptuous.    The vast majority of the people that will buy this game are not going to be posting on the forums about it at all, let alone pre-release

 

 

Perhaps rather than being brief I should have written my case more holistically, knowing that you would pick apart the literal meaning of my message. Indeed, while I've seen the vocal detractors online, as stated in my first message, I've also mentioned the game to CCG players at the LGSes I frequent, and to other friends who play casually, almost all of whom have expressed a neutral-to-negative opinion about the set-based system. I can't speak for other areas, obviously, but at least in my area, there does not seem to be much support for the game, other than the fact that it's Star Wars.

Marth I was not commenting on your post, yours just got wrapped up in quotes with his.  Though I do not understand why you are being so quick to get defensive.  It's a forum.  People agree and disagree on a forum.  You are viewing it as personal for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the deck building is very innovative and an exciting new take on things. I am glad to see FFG try something new. This game will be fine, not only does it have the Star Wars backing it up, it has an exciting new system behind it. Right now Star Wars is even hotter than usual due to the recent changes with Lucasfilm and the upcoming new films. The last two LCG's have sold better than any others I have seen and this one looks set to do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ScottieATF said:

 

ScottieATF said:

 

 

Marth I was not commenting on your post, yours just got wrapped up in quotes with his.  Though I do not understand why you are being so quick to get defensive.  It's a forum.  People agree and disagree on a forum.  You are viewing it as personal for some reason.

Except you only disagree. I have yet to read a post of yours that hasn't been a critique of someone else's post. So while I may have sounded like I took it personally, the truth is I was just a little bit bothered. Also, both of our posts were expressing the same opinion on the same issue, so I'm sure you can understand why it was difficult to decide whose argument was being criticized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The "negative/neutral" opinion, or for that matter the positive opinion, of the local playerbase is an oddly contagious thing. If one player starts expressing his strong negative to his friends, pretty soon that negativity is echoed back from disparate groups in the area. The same happens when one or two players start expressing very positive opinions. Experiment sometime with starting one of these chains and see what happens :)

Aside from that little musing, I have the opposite experience from my crowd. A lot of them seem to like the deck building concept, they like that the sets are themed and carry a natural "feel" to the deck, they like that there are fewer choices and that it is a lot quicker to build decks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0