I have started performing statistical analysis on the combat and technology cards in StarCraft to get more detailed information for planning my attacks and building during play. A friend of mine wonders whether this should be allowed, as he believes it could be the case that the game designers intentionally limited the information on the reference cards to allow for more uncertainty and exploration of the system than more thorough information might prohibit.

This leads to an interesting set of questions regarding the game. Would the designers consider more detailed reference sheets as breaking the system? Are other player's technology deck and discard piles, and the event discard pile, fair game for players to root through? Are players required to reveal orders that they do not execute when taking the event card option? When players buy a new technology, do they have to read major and minor combat values and tell how many cards there are in addition to revealing special abilities? Do players have to tell whether they are adding any purchased technology cards to their hand?

What, precisely, was the intent of the designers when it came to the openness of information? If any of the designers read this, I would greatly appreciate their input on the matter, but other players' interpretation of the system will also be beneficial.

I think rooting through discard piles and studying the cards extensivly takes all the fun out of the game. Don't take it too seriously. You should play to have fun, not to win. Besides, if you do study the game too much, it puts your friend who hasn't study the game at a big disadvantage. Personally, I never look at the discarded cards or any of what you mentioned, aside from knowing what technology cards he purchased and if he imediately put the tech in his hand. I hate playing with people who rifle through every detail of the game because it ruins the experience for everyone else. Just my opinion though. Have fun dude. Duuuuude!

I don't see any problem with looking through discard piles to determine what you have a chance of seeing. It is open information and should be used.

Experienced players don't need open information during the game, because they should already know and remember much more rules/tricks/strategies than beginners. The rules book is really imprecise and does not explain many important details (e.g. how some ability works vs other abilities), so people who know them (or at least realize the issue) will always have advantage.

I saw some of my opponents even irritated when I used such knowledge to win. It's almost the same feeling for opponents like being cheated, so if you don't like to discourage other players, learn the game only as well as it's necessary to play.

cyb3r said it perfectly

I am not an experienced player. I have played maybe seven complete games, and I play with the same people each time. Furthermore, I was planning on sharing the sheets with them, letting them decide whether they wish to use them. I am not trying to get an edge over them so I can dominate them, but so that I can eliminate the mistakes that keep me from enjoying myself.

Essentially, the only time I enjoy myself during a game is when everyone plays as best as they can (or, I suppose is more accurate, as well as is possible). I do not enjoy trouncing others or being trounced, and I find it interesting when people make good decisions during games. While I feel irritated when my efforts do not work out, I would rather have tried my best than to lose because of a mistake.

When nobody make mistakes, the game is won by the player who:

- had best starting position / luck

OR / AND

- didn't have to fight too much to win

At this point, when winners / losers realize this, they can blame rather rules instead of own decisions. It's almost impossible to set up a fair game for each player, which would end leaving sheer satisfaction from wining and no bad emotions after defeat. In this board game, at least. Perhaps more elements (cards, planets etc.) could fix it - if only they would make no more problems for players, like ruining the balance or another imprecise rules...

I agree that, in any game that involves chance, who wins in a perfectly played game is always decided by chance. I think SCBG does a very good job trying to eliminate chance's role as much as possible, such as the order stack paradigm that enables the last play in the turn order to have the biggest influence on what gets executed when. The point is, I feel much better when I can't look at how I played and say, "I should have done this instead" (excluding, of course minor tactical issues that depended on knowing what card(s) somebody played in their skirmished).

While this discussion has been interesting, it is a bit off-topic. What I need to know is not whether certain actions, such as rifling through discard piles or performing statistical analysis of decks, is useful, but rather whether they are legal. If I create detailed stat sheets for each race that, in my opinion, help players to understand the races better, it is far less interesting to me whether other people think it is a waste of time (as I clearly disagree ) than whether such information was intentionally excluded from the game because the designers thought it would ruin the game.

Does anybody know if the designers visit this forum, or would I need to submit a formal rule question to get adjudication on the matter?

If you have a rules question don't ask us, ask FFG and get an official answer.

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_faq.asp

gamecoder said:

Looking through opponents tech deck seems ok, and event discard pile, but not the combat discard pile !

Why? The rules clearly states that any technology/research must be shown and even explained to the opponents, thus it cannot be invasive to see what other options they have to upgrade. We usually (i've only played 10 times) dont read out all text and values but if e.g. buying an Observer we state "i can now be Observer in all battles if i pay one gas". As only golden research allows to put one card in hand (or take another event card) it should be mentioned, although in a multicard buy you doesn't have to say which.

Same with Event cards, you must always show the events you choose to discard, thus they are both official and open information.

I'll say the intent is rather clear: Everyone should be able to play and understand the rules even if not having played before, while all strategy and combat is kept hidden to maximize the sneakiness of your actions and combat cards.

It also simulates the drone scouting of the CG, you'll know which tech the opponent has, but not which and how many troops until you face them.

/Y

Hmm, i'll have to change my opinion a little. It clearly states that discarding cards in a battle will be face up, thus it must be official/open cards, but it doesn't clearly state how the hand culling is handled ...

gamecoder said:

My opinion:

All research cards must be shown to players anyway. So we pass them around. If you want to write it down, whatever, just don't take a lot of time for the sake of not slowing everythign down.

Same for combat cards. You have to show them anyway, so if you want, you should be able to see them in the discard pile. Again, you shouldn't be taking up too much time doing it though (if you do it repeatedly, just write it down).

As for the other opinions on "fun"...

It's fun if EVERYONE has the same attitude. So, if everyone wants to look at discard piles and memorize chances and etc., then it's fun. If only ONE person does it, though, then it's not fun.

I think it would be up to a "house rule" for this type of thing, as "fun" is subjective. Our play group is relatively serious and so it's okay, but if there's newer players involved we ease off on the "statistics" and just play more randomly.