Hello everyone! May you all have a joyous week!
Question of the week: Why are there "coaster" cards? It seems that in every wave there is a card or two that people relegate to the binder and unanimously decide not to use, for various reasons. These cards have gone through the design and development process, and as I doubt that the designers are making bad cards intentionally, they must have had a reason, and in testing they must have been used, right?
So what do you think? Do the designers have a different meta in mind? Are they introducing interesting options for a playstyle that doesn't care about fleet optimization?
@Sabelkatten I read that this list is actually doing well in a tournament so maybe you're onto something. Name: Tourney Fleet
Commander: Plo Koon
Venator II (100)
• Plo Koon (26)
• Clone Navigation Officer (4)
• Flight Controllers (6)
• Expanded Hangar Bay (5)
• Thermal Shields (5)
• Tranquility (3)
= 149 Points
Pelta Transport Frigate (45)
• Projection Experts (6)
• Parts Resupply (3)
• Redundant Shields (8)
• TB-73 (5)
= 67 Points
Consular Armed Cruiser (37)
• Clone Navigation Officer (4)
• Radiant VII (1)
• Bomber Command Center (8)
= 50 Points
• Luminara Unduli (23)
• Anakin Skywalker (19)
• 6 x ARC-170 Starfighter Squadron (90)
= 132 Points
@Sabelkatten I would just go with a cheaper defensive retrofit or none at all. Reactive Gunnery could work, especially with the evade-giving title.
Bad cards are usually considered bad not because people took one look and considered them trash--it's because they've been tried time and time again (See: Overload Pulse) and they just don't work the way they seemed they would on paper. The hours put into playing the game by Developers and Playtesters are overshadowed by the collective experience by all players worldwide once something's been released.
Redundant Shields probably looked better to developers than Reinforced Blast Doors on paper, because you'll lose shields faster than hull. But in reality if you put this upgrade on a small/medium ship you'll be better off with RBD, because it's 3 points cheaper and a small/medium takes only one/two rounds to destroy so the RS timing only results in 1-2 shields recovered at best, and that's not worth 8 points. Never put it on a large; ECM / EWS are significantly better (preventing damage is better than patching up damage) and1point cheaper. It's also overshadowed by future upgrades like Projection Experts / Shields to Maximum!
@CommodoreGardner I think because it's 8 points for 1 shield on maybe 3 or 4 turns. ECM saves brace, which accounts for 1+, etc.
I've been playing since the beginning, and consider myself a decent, middling player. I'm confused by Redundant Shields being quoted as the prime example of a bad card. Cluster Bombs I get, but why is RS regarded as a super bad card? Is it the point cost, opportunity cost versus other Defensive Retrofits, opportunity cost versus other Modifications, or something else?
Well I think there are more kinds of "bad" or unused cards. First, there are the command fixing ones, (Liaisons, officers let you change your command before you reveal it, etc) these were added to help new players and big ships I suppose. Just people discovered if you play well you simply don't need them, plus they are not very cost effective. The other type is the ones that see play very seldom, like Wide-Area Barrage or Flechette torps, which have their niche uses but considered sub-optimal because either too situational or requires too much building around them and even if that happens they are still meh. And there are the plain bad cards, like Redundant Shields... But I guess majority of the cards have seen play at a point since the release, and they just come and go as the meta shifts. Or if they haven't, there is still hope for some of them (looking at you Hot Landing).
It’s possible that cards are designed with future upgrades in mind at the time. I’m guessing that some are just work on their own sort of cards that are just for one off situations. Or possibly as I have yet to play the 2 campaigns are some more designed to work in that environment instead?