Jump to content



Photo

Is this custom identity balanced?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Bleached Lizard

Bleached Lizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 750 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 07:19 AM

Shaper
Link: 1

You may not include more than 2 copies of any Hardware card in your deck.

Deck: 50
Influence: 25


Edited by Bleached Lizard, 23 January 2014 - 07:19 AM.


#2 etherial

etherial

    Member

  • Members
  • 286 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:42 AM

Completely broken.



#3 stormwolf27

stormwolf27

    Member

  • Members
  • 623 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:45 AM

yeah. limiting only hardware copies and upping the influence by 10... way way op... especially with shaper


"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka


#4 Bleached Lizard

Bleached Lizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 750 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 09:08 AM

Keeping the same ideas in mind, what numbers would be appropriate?



#5 CowboyHatValor

CowboyHatValor

    Member

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 09:38 AM

Current identities reduce influence by 3 for a five card reduction...maybe 50/18 in the other direction?



#6 etherial

etherial

    Member

  • Members
  • 286 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 10:47 AM

The issue is that the limitation is not a real limitation. 2xConsole is fairly normal for non-Desperado. Most other Hardware is not urgent to get into play and nobody really cares if they have 3x in play.


  • CommissarFeesh likes this

#7 Bleached Lizard

Bleached Lizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 750 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:39 AM

So +5 to deck size = +3 influence

 

The special drawback (only 2 copies of each Hardware card) essentially equates roughly to an extra +5 deck size; if we take five Hardware cards as an average for a runner deck, then that's five extra card slots that have to be filled with something else.  So another +3 influence...?

 

So we're up to +6 influence.

 

I've never really understood why having extra influence is such a big deal.  Having +3 influence basically equates to having *one* extra 1-influence card in your deck (three copies, obviously).  Doesn't seem like it would be game breaking.  Why does it require a drawback to counter-balance it, when all other identities with the standard 15 influence limit just have advantages (without drawbacks)?  It seems more as if the official cards with extra influence limits are just starting off small and testing the water before allowing bigger influence limits *in case* something breaks, not necessarily because it *will* break.  :/


Edited by Bleached Lizard, 23 January 2014 - 11:40 AM.


#8 Bleached Lizard

Bleached Lizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 750 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 11:46 AM

The issue is that the limitation is not a real limitation. 2xConsole is fairly normal for non-Desperado. Most other Hardware is not urgent to get into play and nobody really cares if they have 3x in play.

 

Good argument.  Hmm... What if I also disallow Consoles?


Edited by Bleached Lizard, 23 January 2014 - 11:47 AM.


#9 stormwolf27

stormwolf27

    Member

  • Members
  • 623 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 12:14 PM

 Why does it require a drawback to counter-balance it, when all other identities with the standard 15 influence limit just have advantages (without drawbacks)?

Because it's just that... standard. They have their own advantages without counter-balances because the advantages that the standard core identities have don't really break the game that much. 10 extra influence is quite a big deal, especially when you consider, for this identity anyway, how many good cards the shapers can use without having to spend any influence. Giving them 25 to mess around with equates to some pretty broken deck ideas.

 

Also, limiting hardware is not really a downside at all. I haven't run more than 2 copies of any single hardware, console or otherwise, for the longest time.

 

If you limited it to being nothing from a specific faction or no more than one copy of icebreakers, or something similar, it might counteract the huge jump in influence for 1 extra card from what most people run with the standard 45 deck minimum.


"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka


#10 CommissarFeesh

CommissarFeesh

    Member

  • Members
  • 469 posts

Posted 23 January 2014 - 12:29 PM

You can't just equate 5 cards to 3 influence either. You have to work it out according to the individual card. Look at the Collective - they had a proposed 55-card minimum deck, and only 5 influence points, because their ability would have been very powerful.

 

Adding three influence also does NOT simply equal one extra card - that's a very narrow way of looking at it. What you're doing is opening up a whole new range of options, as there are MANY ways to reach 18 influence by varying the cards in your deck - just adding three copies of one card into a deck build for a different ID that already had 15 influence used is not necessarily making the most of what you have.

 

Especially in Shaper, where you can just toss in a single three-influence program and know you can install it mid-run. And that's just one more option, among many.

 

As for your limitation - I agree with the others. I'll happily run a deck with little-to-no hardware. It's easily built around, and you're not going to feel the effect. You'd need something more debilitating, like needing one more AP to win, or increasing the first damage each turn by one.



#11 Bleached Lizard

Bleached Lizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 750 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:45 AM

Good points, all.

 

What about just limiting *all* cards to a maximum of 2?  Would that become more balanced?

 

Am also thinking of changing the faction to Anarchist as well.  Reducing the influence to 22 is also a possibility.



#12 stormwolf27

stormwolf27

    Member

  • Members
  • 623 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:31 AM

Good points, all.

 

What about just limiting *all* cards to a maximum of 2?  Would that become more balanced?

only problem with that is, now you're really opening up the variety of influence uses. Cause that 4 influence card you wanted to run 3 copies of? now you get to add 2 copies of a 2 influence card or 2 each of 2 different 1 influence cards. With that much influence, it's really hard to find a downside.


"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka


#13 XerxesPraelor

XerxesPraelor

    Member

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 07:27 AM

It's still a restriction, and a pretty big one at that. No three account siphons, sure gambles, datasuckers, and so on. I think it would probably be balanced like that. It opens up the variety of influence uses, but that's a good side, not a downside. There's still enough restriction to be fun, and it's not overpowered, so who cares?



#14 etherial

etherial

    Member

  • Members
  • 286 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 08:47 AM

You're still looking at a faction with the best card draw and best tutors in the game.


  • CommissarFeesh likes this




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS