So, Travis and I had a chance to sit down and talk to Paul about a wide variety of things. Mostly related to the meta and how the design of some older cards/ships will affect the future going forward, and what FFG might be doing in the future to help mitigate some of the design hurdles caused by Biggs, R3A2, Mindlink, Autothrusters, etc. Only a few minutes of this are a Hearthstone podcast sadly, Paul keeps us moderately on topic!

http://carolinakrayts.libsyn.com/listener-two-a-paul-heaver-story

Then, when we free Paul from the prison known as my hotel room, Travis and I (and later Tyler!) follow up and discuss the future of the game - potential rotation formats, a ban list, and what some of the real problem cards out there are that are fun for a time, but maybe we've had enough of!

Listener Two Point Five: Well Paul Said Bombs Are Fine, So I Guess Bombs Are Fine
http://carolinakrayts.libsyn.com/listener-two-point-five-well-paul-said-bombs-are-fine-so-i-guess-bombs-are-fine

Is this the untitled Han Solo prequel of podcast episodes, then?

1 hour ago, Mangipan said:

Is this the untitled Han Solo prequel of podcast episodes, then?

Yeah, if they could announce the name of that this weekend, it would really help us out...

Actually really good podcast. Good set of questions. Just one point of criticism. You tend to interrupt Paul a lot- the joking around and funny asides are OK, but not when he's talking. He tended to turtle up a bit because he was waiting for you guys to finish. Great insight here though, really well done guys!

9 hours ago, Johen Dood said:

Actually really good podcast. Good set of questions. Just one point of criticism. You tend to interrupt Paul a lot- the joking around and funny asides are OK, but not when he's talking. He tended to turtle up a bit because he was waiting for you guys to finish. Great insight here though, really well done guys!

It's important to always interrupt your guests so they know who's in charge..

Seriously though, thanks for the feedback! We'll have to figure out if it's an interview or a conversation next time and actually stick to it.

I do appreciate that you guys have been focussing a lot on the cascading effects of nerfs and buffs over the past few episodes, but I still wonder about whether that is considered enough when people call for nerfs to rebel regen and Biggs in particular. Both of those elements have been around since the very beginning of the game, and I doubt there's ever been a rebel ship designed without the designers considering how it plays with Biggs and (if it has the slot) R2-D2.

I'm thinking about ships like ARCs, T-70s, E-Wings - none of them are huge in the meta right now, but where you do see them, it's because they're supported by one or the other (or both) of those rebel pillars, and that's not a coincidence - they were designed entirely with that in mind - not as the only way to play them, but they were capped (in terms of stars, pilot ability etc - in game power level) at a point lower than they otherwise would have been if Biggs and regen weren't things, and that goes back the entire run of the games production history. Essentially, you're right that Biggs and regen represent significant constraints on Rebel design space - but they're constraints that literally every rebel ship in the game since day one are built within.

I don't think nerfing Biggs or regen would kill every rebel ship - the VCX would be fine, the K wing would be fine, TLT Y-wings would be fine - but it definitely would have a lot of cascading effects, and (as is the nature of cascading effects) the fixes to those would cause more issues, which cause more issues etc. etc.

That said, I'm a rebel player, so there's likely an element of self interest here. But it strikes me that the older and more entrenched something is, the harder it is to change it, and the greater the risk that doing so will make things worse.

11 minutes ago, MacchuWA said:

I'm thinking about ships like ARCs, T-70s, E-Wings -

I will bet you several dollars that worlds will feature all three of those ships pretty well.

2 minutes ago, Timathius said:

I will bet you several dollars that worlds will feature all three of those ships pretty well.

I would take that bet if you we're willing to make it that they'll show up without support by Biggs and/or regen droids.

49 minutes ago, MacchuWA said:

I do appreciate that you guys have been focussing a lot on the cascading effects of nerfs and buffs over the past few episodes, but I still wonder about whether that is considered enough when people call for nerfs to rebel regen and Biggs in particular. Both of those elements have been around since the very beginning of the game, and I doubt there's ever been a rebel ship designed without the designers considering how it plays with Biggs and (if it has the slot) R2-D2.

I'm thinking about ships like ARCs, T-70s, E-Wings - none of them are huge in the meta right now, but where you do see them, it's because they're supported by one or the other (or both) of those rebel pillars, and that's not a coincidence - they were designed entirely with that in mind - not as the only way to play them, but they were capped (in terms of stars, pilot ability etc - in game power level) at a point lower than they otherwise would have been if Biggs and regen weren't things, and that goes back the entire run of the games production history. Essentially, you're right that Biggs and regen represent significant constraints on Rebel design space - but they're constraints that literally every rebel ship in the game since day one are built within.

I don't think nerfing Biggs or regen would kill every rebel ship - the VCX would be fine, the K wing would be fine, TLT Y-wings would be fine - but it definitely would have a lot of cascading effects, and (as is the nature of cascading effects) the fixes to those would cause more issues, which cause more issues etc. etc.

That said, I'm a rebel player, so there's likely an element of self interest here. But it strikes me that the older and more entrenched something is, the harder it is to change it, and the greater the risk that doing so will make things worse.

I think you're right, but the argument was that Biggs is, and will continue to be, a large design restriction for Rebels.

I don't think it's good that rebels ARE designed with biggs in mind, nor that they rebel players feel compelled to bring him in all lists. Similarly, I don't like that imperials seemed to have been designed with palpatine in mind, and now that he's gone, imperial squad design is incredibly competitively limited (though I completely agree it's painful in the short term).

That said, now that Palpatine is nerfed, I [hope] FFG can make some new, interesting design changes for imperials to get them out of the primarily one-trick-pony aces they've been given. The new turreted ship is a great step.

Edit: Also, if Biggs was gone, they could release new updates to old ships without the Biggs design constraint, and hopefully refresh those ships.