Memory Alpha

Talk:Star Trek Customizable Card Game

Back to page

41,684pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Add New Page

This article should include (at the least) mention of the differences between 1st and 2nd editions, a description of the development of the game, etc. Maybe someone more familiar with this stuff can give it a shot. --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 20:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Added a few things for differences. When I research a little more, I will add more info. ----Willie 15:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Also, I will be expanding the card lists. I am a collector of the First Edition and I have build databases for both Editions. I will take on this project in the comming days. ----Willie 17:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Naming issues Edit

I think individual expansion sets of this game should not just be prefixed with "CCG:". The official title of each set is "Star Trek Customizable Card Game" + "EXPANSION TITLE", so if the (eventually qualified) expansion title alone isn't enough for some reason, the title should be the complete official one ("Star Trek Customizable Card Game EXPANSION") or at least, as Sulfur suggested, "Star Trek CCG EXPANSION".

Also, it's a "customizable" card game, not a "collectible" one ;) -- Cid Highwind 20:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

If that is the case, then should we not re-name everything that says "The Next Generation" or "Deep Space Nine" with "Star Trek: The Next Generation" or "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine." I don't wish to be rude, but this is a Star Trek wiki. If we preface the CCG with "Star Trek," then we should preface everything that officially has "Star Trek" in front of it with "Star Trek" so that we have the complete official title on everything. But, since this is a Star Trek wiki, one wouldn't think to look for a "Lord of the Rings" CCG or a "Star Wars" CCG here. Also, all of the expansion pages link from the CCG page which has the "Star Trek" in front of it. ----Willie 12:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

PNA Removal Edit

I was wondering if anyone else thought that the PNA could be removed from this article. The differences have been added, as well as card lists that weren't listed before. Card lists are being built, see CCG Roster. The article itself seems pretty good to me. ----Willie 19:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Rules Link Edit

The link for the "Decipher's Star Trek CCG rules page." doesn't appear to be working anymore. Anybody have a different link for this?--Morder 22:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems that Decipher's entire website is down right now. Don't know when it will be back up. I know they were doing some upgrades recently. ---- Willie LLAP 03:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Website is back up. Just so you know. ---- Willie LLAP 14:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Isn't this apocrypha? Edit

I've noticed Mainphramephreak is adding a lot of background references from this card game as if this was a valid background source. I thought games like these are considered apocrypha in Memory Alpha... --Pseudohuman 23:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

They are, and adding them in indented italics indicates "outside 'real world'" information. Without getting into the semantics of otherwise un-intrusive inclusions, the fact that they are stated as coming from CCG is essentially an automatic indicator that these come from an apocryphal source. --Alan 23:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so adding apocrypha from any licenced work to the main text of articles as notes in italics is okay. Cool, I'll keep it in mind. --Pseudohuman 10:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Alan, do I need to change the way that I add these references? I would be happy to do so. When I started, there were several other references like this, and I just continued on with what I saw. Thanks! :) ---- Willie LLAP 14:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, background notes are generally allowed - the trick is to do it in moderation... While single sentences can be included using indented italics, longer paragraphs should be added to a "Background" or "Apocrypha" section. This apocryphal information should never dominate the article, though. If it becomes too much, it might be better to just add a link to the Memory Beta wiki at the end of the article and add information from licensed works there.
Simple notes, as done via {{CCG name}} for example, seem to be well on the safe side. ;) -- Cid Highwind 21:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I will go through and check to make sure I haven't gone overboard. Thanks!! ---- Willie LLAP 21:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I think in your case Willie, you're fine, that is just to say that any future inclusions outside of this specific scenario don't spin the situation out of control. --Alan 21:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Fan-made cards Edit

Animated Series (release: 25 October 2009) While there are many fan-made cards, there are few complete sets available. Decipher, while owning the rights to all of the franchise, never made a set based off this series. This 131 card expansion is entirely fan-made and of the highest quality. This is solely a work of art by the creators. This set is available for free download at the Trek Authority website.

I removed the above, as fan-made cards are just another form of fanon. We don't have fan-made TV episodes or books, we shouldn't have cards. This also seems intended as an advertisement.--31dot 14:48, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki