Suggesting New Virtual Cards to the Designers

Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 12:18 pm

Post by Leon » Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:49 am

Part of the reason for asking was that I do not know which rules are and are not used with virtuals at the moment. It seems they assume german promo's to be playable with Reforging V for example, but I have not seen that explicitely confirmed or denied. Same goes for the 9 nazgul in a company UEP.

User avatar
Thorsten the Traveller
Council Member
Posts: 1609
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands

Post by Thorsten the Traveller » Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:49 pm

Well, They Ride Together mentions explicitly it's possible for the nine to gather, and reforging wasn't designed for german promos of course, I seem to remember it was asked about somewhere at some point, but all rather implicit I suppose (in fact I didn't know I could use Das Pack until Nico told me the day of the tournament at worlds, and Joe seemed a bit surprised to see a Mumak at his doorstep in Old Forest too :lol: , well it's a forest, there live many beasts!).

Jambo wrote:
The power of virtual cards in what they can bring to the game means there's no real need for UEPs. UEPs were designed as unofficial errata for the normal rules...
:? This argument I don't get. You want to fix rules via designing new cards? Sure, some hiatus in strategies can be filled, cards can be made stronger, the game more balanced, but what does that have to do with sneakin' being true stealth and other obvious (or outrageous) mistakes?

The UEP are also designed for a playgroup that doesn't like these mistakes, on a casual basis, agreed, but in my view the virtual and UEP playgroup overlap considerably. Supposing you accept a UEP in casual game, why would you not accept it in a virtual game? Only where these don't match, conflict, or collide forteriori, there should we be careful. Or you'd want in virtual tourneys to not play the balrog 3 minder rule?

Bandobras says leave it to the organizers to decide. Hmm, well, yeah, but sometimes you have to push a little, if there's resistance you'll meet it and you know where you stand, and this is not for worlds, it would make things alot easier/clearer.
Stone-age did not end because man ran out of rocks.

Posts: 471
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:39 pm

Post by Ringbearer » Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:07 am

The problem is that the UEP are kidna widely spread. There are some I agree, but most I disagree too. Its hard to make a stand considering UEPS. I think organisers should say for themselves which UEPS they wanna use.

For instance: I dont like the nagzul UEPs or the river UEP, but I agree with the Hog 2-minder. Others have different opinions about it.
"I used to roll the dice, feel the fear in my enemies eyes."
- Coldplay, Viva la Vida.

Gaming is life, the rest is just dice rolls.
- John Kovalic, Dork Tower

Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 12:18 pm

Post by Leon » Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:49 am

I think there are only a few UEPs that I would not use in virtual games:
the river UEP
nazgul at home UEP
elflord UEP maybe

The rest seem pretty ok and I would like to see them used. I think the virtual designers or the active group here on the forum can agree on a list that could be used.

The more extreme option, which some people would probably protest against, is evaluating and playtesting UEPs in virtual games and trying to get the 3 or so UEPs that are really unbalanced of the accepted list. I do not know if this is done at all and want some discussion about what is usable first.

Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Location: Córdoba, Argentina

Post by marcos » Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:04 pm

i think that using UEPs or not in a tourney is completely in the hands of the tournament organizer...

Posts: 888
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by Jambo » Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:26 am

The reason why UEPs have not been incorporate into VCs as default is because of exactly what's happened in this thread. Everyone has a list of UEPs they like and those that they dislike, and in that sense, getting a consensus over agreed 'modifications' is more trouble than it's worth. VCs are different in that they're created in a set. As such, once created there's no debating which are in use and which are not. They're all in and that's that. On top of this, VCs are easier to manage and create on the GCCG software than are UEPs and this makes them a more appealing option to players.

Don't get me wrong though, I still like UEPs and if ever I was to play the vanilla game again, I'd always prefer one that uses UEPs. Unfortunately, due to the fun of VCs, I haven't actually played a game of normal MeCCG for as long as I can remember.

Ultimately, as Marcos and others have said, the format is always up to the tournament organiser.

Edit: As an aside, I really doubt anyone playing VCs is going to abuse Sneakin' or get arsey about Flies and Spiders, but your mileage may vary.


Return to “Showcase”