I am also familiar with OCTGN and am looking for folks to play with in a casual way. OCTGN does have a friends list. Maybe we can start organizing the few of us that would like to play online via this thread (feel free to copy and add your name)?
OCTGN (A:NR) players:
Got it, and that sounds about what I’d expect. I never had an issue with the base game that I thought needed to be fixed (beyond never wanting to play Boomer again, ever), but that’s not to say that the game couldn’t be improved.
On Eldritch…
That should have been included in the base set. They’re selling you a handful of cards for $20.
I think we could question whether the base game would still have been the same MSRP with FL’s cards in it. I think I got a crazy amount of stuff in a box for the $40 I paid for EH, but I won’t argue that EH probably needed some more cards in the encounter and mythos decks from the start.
I haven’t played Elder Sign except on the iPad. Where Fantasy Flight also “supports” the game by selling add-ons with a high noise-to-signal ratio. You’d almost think there was a pattern here!
Elder Sign (the board game) has only one, supposedly pretty good, expansion. The new expansion looks to be adding some cool mechanics and more cards, but I suppose judgement will need to wait until it actually out. I’m not experienced enough with the game and it’s expansions, but maybe here’s a counter-example to the pattern of high noise-to-signal expansions.
I have no idea how many/how much the Elder Sign IAP is, but FFG is hardly the first company to release a cheap base app and sell additional IAP. But if it’s excessive and the quality isn’t there, I can understand the disappointment.
…as I explained above with Netrunner. What if I introduce a friend to the game and he stars playing? How do we keep pace with each other? Most likely, we don’t. What if I meet someone else who plays? What if someone who’s more into the game introduces me to it? What if I’m not lucky enough to have a regular group and I play at my local gaming store with other people with varying commitments?
Again, I can only draw from my experience with X-Wing and what I’ve read about Netrunner, so hopefully someone more into the game can comment. I’m making a bit of a leap assuming Netrunner and X-Wing are similar in their experience, but my understanding from what I’ve read regarding FFG’s LCGs and Netrunner specifically is that it’s true. So here goes…
In X-Wing, I can buy a core set and a few additional add-on ships (say $60-70 total) and I can play with the guy who has 6 copies of everything. I can play with the guy who has only bought the core set. I can play with the guy who spends the same money, but buys different ships. Can I win against all of them? You bet.
Case in point…one of the well-known successful lists is the TIE swarm. It’s just 7-8 TIE fighters, and it’s been around since the beginning of the game. There’s been dozens of ships released since then, but there are still people who play that list and succeed.
So again, assuming Netrunner’s scene is similar…I’m not sure I understand the concern about keeping pace and playing with people of varying commitment levels. I play X-Wing with people who are new, who are old, and who are more into it and I almost always have fun. I don’t feel compelled at all to buy the latest and greatest by the meta or because I can’t win.
Here’s the deal, Gedd: tabletop gaming is inherently social. Fantasy Flight’s business model splinters that aspect of their games in exactly the same way as, say, a first person shooter with DLC maps. Some players have them, some players don’t, and rarely the twain shall meet.
I would argue that, at least with their LCG and X-Wing, FFG has done everything they can to make sure the community isn’t splintered. It’s more akin to a first person shooter who lets players buy different weapons and classes, but balances them against the core content in such a way that they don’t provide an advantage, only more variety.
Again, I’m not deep into it, but let’s take a look at it from the LotR LCG perspective. I’ve got a core set and one adventure pack. From what I understand, I should be able to play through a scenario with the guy that has a dozen decks he’s built from every card out there. He has a lot more options, and likely he’s got a deck that is more customized to him and yes, even a little more powerful than mine. But in the end, we can play together and have a great time. How’s that not creating an environment that’s enabling for more social experiences instead of splintering?
I’m sure a lot of hardcore Netrunner fans with a vested interest in convincing themselves their game – and therefore time and money investment – is great will swear by some magical middle ground where the new cards are useful and yet they don’t push the power curve up. You’ll hear the old canard about how it just “gives them more options”. What does that even mean? I’ve got plenty of options in the base set because the game is designed that way. But “more options” sounds to me like a way to cover up the fact that you’ve bought a handful of superfluous cards, with one or two that push the power curve higher.
Tom, I know we’re both making a lot of assumptions, but I think you’re being too quick to dismiss the third possibility. More options simply means different ways to play. Just because you have a lot of options in the base set, doesn’t mean there can’t be more. Again going back to the FPS example, you can create a bunch of different weapons or abilities in a game by adjust variables or implementing new mechanics. They can be balanced along a power/penalty curve to prevent them from creating an unfair advantage. Why is it so hard to imagine a well-designed card game where the same thing happens?
I will give you one thing here. In every pack of cards there are likely a good number of cards that aren’t going to be as interesting. But what might not interest you now, may interest you later with cards from other packs, or may work well with a deck someone else built.
Regarding the likelihood of X-Wing’s continued success if FFG stopped releasing expansions…
Please. It’s the licensing and nothing more. That Fantasy Flight is also milking their fans has very little to do with the game’s popularity. That’s insane. That’s like saying The Avengers would have tanked if the studio wasn’t making a sequel! :)
Eh, I don’t know. There’s a segment of the market here that gets bored very quickly and always wants something new to buy/play. I had a guy who was watching me play someone else tell me if FFG didn’t get the new faction I mentioned earlier into the stores within a week that he was going to sell all his stuff and stop playing. It’s likely just crazy hyperbole, but I definitely believe the game wouldn’t hold some people’s interest if they weren’t introducing new stuff regularly.
Let me see if I can sum up some thoughts here, and please correct me if I’m wrong on my assumptions of your stance:
Tom: FFG releases a lot of expansions of mixed quality for their board games.
I can definitely agree.
Tom: FFG holds back content from their base games in order to sell expansions.
I can agree, although I think that, at least in some cases, they do so in order to keep base MSRP costs down and make the game’s a little less overwhelming in new cases. However, are they primarily money-motivated here? Probably.
Tom: FFG’s LCG model makes it difficult, if not impossible, to get involved with otherwise great games.
Disagreed, as I explained above. I think if anything they’ve gone out of their way to make sure the games are accessible to players of different commitment levels. I also think there’s financial motivations in them doing so. After all, today’s casual player could become tomorrow’s serious player (and therefore buyer). Making the game easier to get played also helps the long-term health (and therefore profitability).
Tom: FFG milks their licensed properties.
No argument. As Tom Mc says, Imperial Assault is a perfect example. At the game’s launch there was a huge number of add-ons (mainly miniatures and additional characters mostly) available for the base game. To some degree that goes back to keeping the base game reasonably priced, but yes, it also generates a ton of income. And I fully expect they’ll keep doing the same thing as much as possible. One man’s milking is another man’s support though.
Tom: No other board game publishers (or at least those listed) are as bad as FFG.
Probably true, but that may simply be because the don’t have the resources and licenses. I really doubt that Z-Man, given FFG’s money, licenses, and other resources, would act much differently. Maybe some of the smaller publishers with a bit more altruistic viewpoint, but otherwise they’re all in it to generate profit.
Okay I’m set up in OCTGN, username ‘agapepilot’. I’d love to get a friendly game going to learn the interface again.
So lately I’ve been getting a little interested in Netrunner. I like to watch the Team Covenant coverage of X-Wing championships, and they also feature a lot of Netrunner matches. I’ve tried watching the Netrunner matches a few times, but couldn’t follow what was going on because a) it happens so quick and it’s not always clear what’s happening and b) the commentary is geared more for those really familiar with the game. But I was still somewhat interested, so I watched a few how to play videos, and watched the 5 or 6 Netrunner matches from FFG’s world championships. I still don’t fully understand everything that’s happening, but I at least get the basic flow and can see why things get exciting at certain moments.
I’m not that interested that I’m ready to go all in and pick up all the current card sets or anything, but enough that I would like to give it a try at some point. But that’s not really my question here. What I wanted to ask for those who are into the game is this…from the matches that I’ve watched, it seems like the meta in Netrunner is really, really narrow right now. From what I can tell, there are hundreds of cards (600+?) in the meta, but almost match, the players were running nearly the same decks, with very minor variations. There’s only one runner deck I’ve seen so far that stood out as different, and it seemed really shocking to the commentators.
So is this the case? Is there much variety at the higher levels? One of the things that I’ve always liked about X-Wing (yes, different game, but some similar concepts) is that the meta, while certainly having some strong lists, is still pretty varied. You see people at Worlds playing all sorts of different lists and it really makes the game more interesting. So far, from what I’ve seen, Netrunner seems more about playing very similar decks, and it’s more about playing them better than your opponents. So is that really the case?
The very top tier of Netrunner can be quite narrow (and that’s what you’ve seen for the World Championships), but for most decks familiarity with the deck you’re playing is really important to play well, and there is a wide variety of competitive decks that are just slightly less good than the very best decks. So as a new player, you can pick up a wide variety of powerful decks and its going to be your play skill that’s the limiting factor for a long time before any lack of variety at the very top of the competitive scene causes you any problems.
If you go look at recent tournament results on Stimhack (http://stimhack.com/tournament-decklists/), one of the main Netrunner community sites, all 4 corporation factions and all 3 runner factions are represented in the winners of the last 7 tournaments on there. To me, that’s a decent indicator that the game’s in a healthy state.
Thanks for the info Thesper. Good to hear the game overall is in a fairly healthy state. Hopefully FFG can do something to get the top tier to differentiate a bit as well, but it may just be the nature of the high-end competitive players to focus on a much smaller subset of the meta.
And none of it ultimately affects me in any way as a potential player (not interested in NR as a lifestyle game), but I do enjoy watching the competitive stuff from time-to-time just to get a glimpse of the game mechanisms at that level. Unfortunately I’m not sure the game lends itself to spectating much unless you’re really familiar with the card pool. The stuff that happens instantly isn’t too bad, but the runs themselves, primarily when and how ice is broken, are generally not explained enough as they’re occurring to really understand it all. Someone will start a run, and you’ll see the result as cards are accessed, but I generally have no idea what the runner did to get through (or not). Is it any different for an experienced player watching?
I’d estimate only 20% of the card pool is used competitively, with maybe another 30% showing up as odd extras in specific decks. Many of the virus cards, for instance, are used exclusively in the Anarch core-set id Noise, but much elsewhere. (Some of the virus cards are ubiquitous!). This is a shame, but some cards will be better than others. At least older cards that have found no use do seem to have their time in the sun when new cards that combo well with them show up.
One unfortunate particular function of that is that a lot of the ice and the icebreakers tend to be the same (at least for each faction, though even that is diversifying lately). That makes the maths very quick (e.g. ‘everyone knows’ it takes a Datasucker counter and 3 credits to go through Ichi 1.0). So for experienced players watching, it’s pretty clear what the runner did to get in.
I actually think Netrunner is at its best, particularly for non-competitive players, played in a draft cube - if know the rules and can find one of those happening, you should go along. It will be crazy and overwhelming, but it will be for everyone since it will involve cards even experienced players will have to read twice.
Thanks for the feedback Fifth!
So after looking into Netrunner a little more, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in showing a newbie the ropes via some online format? I’ve got Tabletop Simulator or would be willing to do what it takes to get setup in Octagn/Jinteki/Vassal. I’m considering ordering the core set, but would really like to try a few games before doing so.
Jinteki seems to have taken over as the preferred variant for most people, from what I can tell. Haven’t really dabbled in it much myself other than creating an account and watching some videos.
…And now, it’s going away. At least the Android version is kaput.
All good things.
Amen to that. It was a good run. Now I have to fill out my somewhat out of date collection before it gets too expensive/hard to find.
Loss meme rears its head again.
This seemed somewhat unexpected from FFG’s side. They released a revised Core Set about a year ago, and still have a deluxe expansion to ship.
I’m actually puzzled as to what, exactly, was licensed - the ‘Netrunner’ trademark?
Game mechanics. It’s still largely based on Richard Garfield’s original design.
I don’t think you can trademark game mechanics.
You can license them, even if you can’t trademark them.
You can also apply copyright, not to mechanics per se, but to specific implementations of those mechanics. Since many cards are the same from the original game, that falls into copyright.
Game mechanics could be patented, but I don’t think it’s the case here.
Despite their somewhat unfriendly bussiness model, FFG is very good about actually licensing gameplay systems from the original designers rather than to plagiarize them and change them so they don’t fall under copyright. Credit where it’s due. That’s both laudable (since it’s not strictly necessary given lawyers good enough) and unusual in the boardgame space. They did that for their Dune game, and the also bought A Handful of Stars to release their own version of the system, as well as this one.
So this was a ‘goodwill’ licensing, rather than a necessary legal thing?
I suppose it makes sense in terms of clearing up all the potential IP conflict issues, rather than proceeding into murky waters.