UEPs on GCCG cards as a additional errata

Post by **Vastor Peredhil** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:17 pm

Hi all,

I was wondering...

UEPs could be easily added into the errata text's of the cards on GCCG

we would highlight the start of the UEP text with

UEP: (Unoffical errata proposal; correction of the text)

then add the UEP and be done with it, most guys will never find out there is an UEP, but one looking for it, will finally be able to do so.

Pros: UEPs reach a broader audience and so might find a higher rate of acceptance

Cons: People might think we are issuing offical errata (which don't)

mfg Nicolai

Post by **Vastor Peredhil** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 8:36 pm

Bring it on, how I jus love negative people, who vote no, without reasons

"No-voter" reveal yourself to my wrath

Bandobras Took · Post by **Bandobras Took** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:40 pm

I don't think it  will cause too much confusion to do so; at most it will just spur interest in the UEP process in general, which I feel to be a good thing.

And for those of us interested in playing UEP games, it will make it that much more convenient.

Ringbearer · Post by **Ringbearer** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:31 pm

I agree on this as well, as long as its clearly seperated, but it seems Nico has this covered. It can be handy for the formats in which things matter, aka dream acrds by example.

Leon · Post by **Leon** » Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:36 pm

I am in favour of this if it can be done clearly enough. Please, if anyone votes against this, explain yourself. We like some discussion.

Beornd · Post by **Beornd** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:24 am

I voted clearly yes, because thats the main problem in our game to much erratas and most newbies play most of the cards wrong. They need our help especially and than their access is much easier.

In the real game (cards) we do not have this possibilty.

Sauron · Post by **Sauron** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:21 pm

Why would you vote yes to adding non-official errata?  If you're tryign to get offical errata cleared up?

Post by **Vastor Peredhil** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:57 pm

Hi Brian,

I am not getting what you want from me,

All I am doing is asking people, who like to play either UEP format or DC format (in which all UEPs are accepted as standart) to vote pn an easy tool to look it up.

I do not claim that this UEP errata should be offical or anything, and it can be easily distinguished from the offical other errata

mfg Nicolai

P.S. Oh, I know you and Dam just hate the format, but time will tell that you guys are wrong

Pikachu · Post by **Pikachu** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:29 am

At least one of the "no" voters said something...

Sauron · Post by **Sauron** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:55 pm

I was not referring to you Nicolai.

I was quoting Beornd

I voted clearly yes, because thats the main problem in our game to much erratas and most newbies play most of the cards wrong. They need our help especially and than their access is much easier.

If you're trying to clear up erratas and teach newbies, why would you make the erratas even longer on gccg than they currently are?

a newbie is going to do a help on a card and now see
Card Name
Text w/ errata
DC/UEP
Text

Which is more confusing than just having the offical erratas.

Post by **Vastor Peredhil** » Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:15 pm

right I better add DC errata as well, thx

mfg Nicolai

Bandobras Took · Post by **Bandobras Took** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:57 am

I tend not to get hyper about rules in casual GCCG games for that very reason -- rules are confusing to say the least.  Certain Nations Cup games are an entirely different matter.

asphalt · Post by **asphalt** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:28 am

I voted "no" because adding more and more unnecessary infos simply makes everything more confusing and complicated for newbies. If you want to add UEP text, at least keep it separated from the official errata text by means of a different shortcut (which is CTRL+H for the text with official erratas).

I think that it would be way more useful implementing on GCCG a system allowing players to discover immediately on their own which cards have official erratas, and which ones have UEPs. At the moment, a GCCG player can only find out if a card has an errata by reading the text on the card picture, hitting CTRL+H, then confronting the displayed text with the text on the card's picture and check if there's any difference. Players who don't know exactly which cards have erratas would really appreciate a function listing all the cards in their currently selected deck which have erratas, instead of discovering the presence of erratas by chance during a game with a more experienced player who has the embarassing task to say "sorry man, but that's not the card's effect", and receiving as a response "WTF? that's exactly what's written on the card!" and so on.  :roll:

Thorsten the Traveller · Post by **Thorsten the Traveller** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:09 am

Not that I know anything about programming and such, but to my limited knowledge, if it can be done, how confusing can this actually be?:
Title
Cardtext with Errata (E)
text
UEP

Or indeed just mention 'UEP' and make a shortcut. Nb. (E) stands for Errata, you shouldn't have to mention what the erratum actually is, just the new text, if people want they can look up the old version, right? Lists with errata and UEP's don't work even if you've got them opened to the side, you just forget to look at them while playing, I suppose that's why this idea came up in the first place.

Anyway if people can actually master working GCCG out! then their intellect should be big enough to not get totally confused with a simple UEP add at the bottom for their convenience. To suppose otherwise must be an insult to their intellect (and might also be regarded as political statement against people possibly using UEPs

)

asphalt · Post by **asphalt** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:04 am

My point has nothing to do with people being not smart enough to distinguish an UEP from an official errata: I trust in mankind.  :)

I simply meant that adding unrequested infos (UEP's text in this case) that most players find totally useless is simply annoying: why don't we add a nice biography of the artist who made the card's illustration too, then? There would be nothing complicated: the displayed text would simply be:

Title
Cardtext with Errata (E)
text
UEP
artist's biography

The answer is simple: 99,9% of the players would simply don't care about that unrequested biography.  :roll: If you're curious of the artist's biography you can just make a search on the internet. If you exasperate this reasoning somebody may show up suggesting

Title
Cardtext with Errata (E)
text
UEP
artist's biography
card's name in other languages

somebody else would suggest

Title
Cardtext with Errata (E)
text
UEP
artist's biography
card's name in other languages
list of popular decks using this card

and so on, with the argument "it's just one more info, it doesn't add up much to the number of lines already displayed".

The more stuff you add, the more lines will be displayed on the screen when hitting CTRL+H. Most players just want to read the official card text and check if there's any official errata. Redundant lines just annoy them and force them to scroll back the lines over and over when they want to read old lines for any reason: remember that there's just one window which is shared by
the chat messages
the informations about the cards which are bought
the decks/sets which get registered
the people who log in and out
and so forth.
If you want to play w/ UEPs you can just find them on this forum. GCCG should stick to the essential IMHO.

Or indeed just mention 'UEP' and make a shortcut

If you refer to a link with the forum's thread where the UEP text is to be found, that would be a lesser damage. This would add no more than just 1 line to the stuff displayed when hitting CTRL+H. Anyway I would vote "no" to that too, because we would end up adding redundant stuff over and over in the future, according with people's occasional fads.

Imagine yourself buying a newspaper at the newsstand, and you're given a whole 20 volumes encyclopedia in addition.
"No, thanks, I don't need it"
"It's free, it comes with the newspaper"
"No, thanks, I'm just interested in today's news"
"No way, you MUST take it, you have no choice"
Does this give you an idea of how most people would feel with the UEP's text implemented in GCCG?  :)

MeCCG.net

UEPs on GCCG cards as a additional errata

Do you want the UEPs as an addition to the errata on card in GCCG?

UEPs on GCCG cards as a additional errata