Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Runix

  1. What is this I don't even.... Let me put it another way. The Euro approach is about designing a game system, and then building the theme and components around it. That seems to have been the idea with Elder Sign: it's a dice-rolling game that someone built a Cthulhu theme around. The other approach, in contrast, is to start out with the theme and components and built a game system around them. (I can just see the Tides of Iron developers, standing around a huge pile of miniature soldiers and map components, and asking each other: so, who's going to design the game that will use all this stuff?) For the other titles in the Arkham series, I suspect that that's how it went - they started with investigators, weapons, spells, monsters, and a map, and asked, how can we turn this into a game? I don't see Eldritch Horror as being purely one approach or another. Rather, it would seem that they started with a clear idea of both the theme (Cthulhu) and the gameplay (fast, story-driven) and built the game and its components around that. It's not the pure Euro approach of moving blocks around on a board with just a hint of a theme . . . but it's certainly not the other approach, of a massive map with huge numbers of bits and a rulebook whose only purpose is to give all that stuff some reason for existence, either.
  2. (Skipping the flame war . . . ) The purpose of the Nightmare Mode expansions, as I see it, is to pacify the players who are constantly complaining that the game is too easy. A secondary reason may be to quietly assess the level of interest for very hard scenarios; if they sell very few of the Nightmare Mode expansions (as I think likely), then they'll know how many players are interested in that difficulty level. At the risk of being cynical, I don't think it will shut down the complaints. Every relatively easy quest that is released - every single one - they complain, as if they expect every single quest to be Difficulty 11. The idea that that may not be what all players want completely escapes them. But at least now there is a reasonable response: think the recent quest is too easy? Have you beat Escape from Dol Guldur in Nightmare Mode with your solo deck yet? No? If what you want is difficulty, then why are you playing recent quests that you know will be less difficult than the Nightmare Mode quests?
  3. My initial thoughts on this new entry in the Arkham line: less Ameritrash, more Euro. FFG has long been known for its entries in the Ameritrash category, and Arkham Horror was first in line, with all the requisite features: big board, long play time, mechanics loaded up with "chrome", and lots and lots of fiddly bits. (Granted, Arkham Horror was initially a bit light on the mountains of plastic bits that Ameritrash games are known for, but that oversight has subsequently been corrected with the release of the miniatures.) And expansions - lots and lots of expansions. A veritable Tides of Iron for the lover of Lovecraft. Eldritch Horror seems to be moving away from all of that. The board is smaller, the mechanics seem tighter, the fiddly bits fewer, and plastic is nowhere in sight (although I am confident FFG will be willing to sell some suitable plastic bits to the diehard if-it-doesn't-look-like-Axis-and-Allies-I-won't-play-it crowd). The preview focused on what appear to be carefully designed, interlocking mechanics - more the mark of a Euro design than an Ameritrash design. One significant variation from the Euro trend would be more emphasis on the flavor - which I think is one thing FFG does get right. Elder Sign (another move away from Ameritrash and toward Euro in design) was criticized for being light on the flavor, and I think they've taken that to heart. I don't really have a specific thought on whether this is designed to replace Arkham Horror - I think it's more designed to draw a wider range of gamers in. Gamers who would look at a gigantic layout with massive piles of cards and bits and would instinctively say "no thanks" may take a closer look at this one, and I think that's the goal. FFG has no fear of endless expansions - just look at the LCGs - so its presence doesn't automatically mean no more for Arkham Horror.
  4. That would be me. I have played Arkham Horror and enjoy it, but in general, it's too long, too big, and too loaded up with stuff that seems to be there for no other reason than to make it long and big, and that goes double for the expansions. Also, the flavor is a bit on the bland side relative to the RPG and even the LCG. I'm happy to play it, but can't see myself getting it for my own collection given the price and the size. I am hoping that the new entry will be more compact in both time and space requirements, and with stronger flavor. If that's the goal, I'm interested.
  5. I'm reluctant to mention it, but one significant factor that may be impacting perceived difficulty is the simple fact that not all players are playing by the same rules. In a competitive game, there is always the opponent there to keep you honest. In a solo game, there isn't, and even in a cooperative game you can get away with a lot more than in a competitive format. As such, I suspect there are any number of "house rules" being implemented that significantly shift the difficulty curve. (I also suspect that there are a certain number of players who studiously avoid errata and official rulings and just play the cards the way they think they should be played, rather than be unhappily surprised that Zigil Miner has been nerfed into the ground.) To take a specific instance, it's been admitted on these forums that a certain number of players take a very expansive view of the mulligan rule. Taking more than one mulligan may not seem like a big deal, but given how critical certain cards are in certain decks, I think it is. I won't claim innocence on this one - I will confess that I've done the old "whoops I didn't mean to do that let me just undo my last action", which in a competitive game I likely would not be able to get away with. But I wish I could be confident that the players who are going on about high win rates and how winnable the game is if only the rest of us knew how to play would confirm that they were playing strictly "by the book" - but I'm not confident that that is always the case.
  6. This is a great move, and will very likely tempt me back to playing the game. I had quietly dropped the game for a number of reasons, but most prominent of those was the difficulty. It felt like the loudest advocates of the game were - to borrow FFG's terminology - "Boromirs", players who apparently think that a 10% win rate is too high and Sleeping Sentry was the FFG designer's finest moment. FFG literally was "turning it up to eleven" on difficulty, and since I had no interest in that, I had no intention of sticking around. FFG has, wisely, decided to cater to a wider audience. The masochists now have their difficulty 11 decks that will require a hundred play-throughs before they can defeat it with their every-OP-card-in-the-game solo deck, while those of us who just want to enjoy the theme while experimenting with interesting deck builds will be able to do so without getting repeatedly drubbed by bad card draws. Granted, those of us who play on Easy Mode will have to endure the condescension of the hardcore gamers, but in my mind that's less of a price to pay than having to hate the game because of painful win/loss ratios on the scenarios.
  7. The new expansion is out, and it looks great, strongly recommended.
  8. OK, so it's not quite that simple - you would need another location to attach the Bootlegging to, since you'd be running that and the Blackmoor at the same time. And no, there aren't enough Yithians to stack the whole deck with them . . . not yet, anyway. But still, someone needs to give this a shot.
  9. One more reason that Crypsis isn't junk: it can break untyped ice, like the recently spoiled "Whirlpool", coming in the next expansion. Granted, I think FFG will naturally be very cautious about releasing ice that broken by conventional breakers - and Whirlpool is certainly situational, and a one-time-use - but that means having an AI breaker available will have real utility above and beyond deck speed and size optimization.
  10. Question that came up in a recent game: can Three Bells trigger even if one or more players do not have any characters? The card text, for reference: "Pay 1 and exhaust The Three Bells to have each player choose and sacrifice a character." My read is no, but I can see it either way. According the FAQ 1.5, "A player cannot trigger a card effect that requires him to choose a character, support card, or story card if there is no card of that type that he is able to choose." However . . . that may mean only that the triggering player must be able to choose a character; that is, a player may be able to trigger it if he has a character but his opponent does not (although it would be a rare case where that would be beneficial). Next question: can Ipiutak fire off Three Bells? My read is no, but again, I think it's close. Ipiutak reads "after a character you control was chosen as the only target of a triggered effect . . . " As far as I can tell, Three Bells will have two targets chosen (by two players). An alternate reading, however, would see Three Bells as triggering two effects, each of which has one character as the only target, which would allow Ipiutak to respond. Finally, not a Three Bells question, but related: can Ipiutak fire off Temple of R'lyeh? My read again is no, but again, I think it's vague. Temple clearly chooses the opponent as the target, with the opponent then sacrificing a character. There's only one character that is ultimately impacted, but I think technically it's not a target, as "choose" is not used in conjunction with it - unless it's implied? The faculty and students of Miskatonic University await the court's verdict with great interest.
  11. Danigral said: Hmmm, Azathoth may slot into my ST/Yog deck. Between all the bounce and Path of Blood, it may be fairly consistent to trigger him. When playing against Hastur, he would probably be tucked away as a resource though… I'll have to try this against you next time we meet up. You aren't the only one building an ST/Yog deck.
  12. Dimensional Rift is cheaper, but there are more things that can go wrong with it - e.g., getting stolen. The one advantage of Azathoth is that there are very few things the other player can do to stop it (Power Drain is one option, but there aren't many others). And the best combination with Azathoth is Initiate of Huang Hun, or alternately Lord Jeffrey Farrington. But for that combination, you really need to make certain your opponent doesn't have a Power Drain handy.
  13. Don't worry about a second Core Set for now. Just build a Corp deck and a Runner deck and try them out. You'll quickly get a feel for which strategies you like, which cards are working well for you, which you can swap out, etc. Once you have a feel for the game, it should be easier to pick out which expansions you need. But to be honest, so far the designers have been very good with adding value to the game. The fact that solid decks can be built out of just the Core Set alone is a credit to the designers, as is the fact that I feel like every expansion has had something of significance for all seven factions. Some of the other LCGs, I've picked up expansions where I've flipped through the cards and thought, "nope, nothing here", but that hasn't happened for me with Netrunner yet. So you really can't go wrong.
  14. I would buy these if they made them as well. My guess is that they are already in the works, and that for artwork they will be using Corp logos and Runner identities.
  15. Getting another core set should provide you enough of the singletons to put together competitive decks, as pointed out above. But it also lets you build more than one Corp and Runner deck; I find that to be useful, as it allows me to have "standard" Corp and Runner decks I can use to test my experimental decks against without having to dismantle every time I want to build a new deck.
  16. A lot of good suggestions. I'll post my own, though some of them are repeats of the above - but that just means you're getting good advice. Priority for ice: one on HQ, one on R&D, two on the server you plan to install agendas and critical assets on, in that order. Double up on HQ when you get a chance. You can't take the chance of uncontested runs against your hand or your deck, and you can't take the chance of an easy Inside Jobs against your mission critical server. Against Criminal or Noise (Anarch): ice on Archives, after HQ and R&D are protected, to shield against Sneakdoor Betas and Noise's ability. If a Medium comes out, you may want to layer additional ice on R&D. Likewise with ice on HQ if a Nerve Agent comes out. For structuring ice on your mission critical server, use the following order: Root (agendas/assets/upgrades) Cheap ice with "End the run" Expensive ice Cheap ice, ideally with a server-wide enhancement (e.g., Chum) Prioritize getting the first two ice out quickly, even if you don't have cash to rez the expensive ice, as it will still protect against Inside Job. Your innermost ice will protect the server, which is why it needs "End the run". When you get the cash or a Priority Requisition you can rez the expensive ice, then add another layer or two on to protect further against Inside Job and to drive the cost of running the server way up. Don't invest too much into one huge piece of ice, or Parasite or Femme Fatale or Emergency Shutdown could ruin your day. Spread the ice out, and only use big Toll Booth type ice when you can do so efficiently, e.g., when you're awash in cash or you get a Priority Requisition. Toll Booth and other cards that have costs that the Runner can't bypass are very valuable, but again, don't rely too much on them. Runners do not (yet) have anything that impacts the entire server, so you can in fact have a super-server without worrying about the Runner whipping out some magic tool dismantle it. And the more ice you have, the more powerful ice enhancement effects - like what you get with Chum or Sensei - become. For income, deploy Pad Campaign as quickly as possible, even in an unprotected server - its trash cost is high, so even if the Runner trashes it, that click and four credits she burned could still be a win for you, at least in the early game. When you have some cheap ice to spare, you can add some protection to raise the cost for the Runner to kill it, but don't waste a lot of resources trying to save it. Early on, you may be better off running Melange Mining Corp for fast cash rather than advancing agendas. Early cash is enormously helpful in getting your ice and upgrades rezzed so you can start advancing agendas with some degree of safety. Agendas are often safest in hand early in the game. If you have iced up HQ - and ideally, if you have multiple ice on it - every run against HQ comes at a cost, and has a chance of failure if the Runner accesses a card she can't trash. (Exception to that is if the Runner has Imp or Nerve Agent out, in which case holding cards in hand can be dangerous, and you are better off installing or playing them as soon as practical.) On average, drawing cards will reduce the proportion of agendas in hand, so while it is counter-intuitive, the best approach to reducing the chance of an agenda being picked off from HQ is to draw more cards. Ice and operations can both be accessed from HQ with no risk to you other than the information the Runner gains, so if you don't need them right at the moment, they can pad out your hand and reduce the chance of an agenda getting stolen. (But again, watch out for Imps and Nerve Agents.) Put at least one very dangerous trap in your deck, like an Edge of World. It will force the Runner to play cautiously and will severely punish overly aggressive Runner play, which is all to your advantage. If you have no serious threats in your deck, you are giving the Runner a huge amount of freedom to take big risks. And last, but certainly not least . . . Bluff! It's not easy, especially for new players who are accustomed to the safe, calculated play that a lot of CCGs and other games encourage. But it is very important in this game. The best way to learn is to do it, the more unpredictably, the better. Put a trap in a heavily protected server and a valuable agenda in a lightly protected one and see if the Runner picks the wrong server to run against. Trash an agenda from your hand if the Runner looks like she may be serious about running against HQ and you don't have anywhere to install it. Install ice that you honestly don't have the credits to rez, just in case it might prompt the Runner to think twice about a run - etc., etc. Bluffing is critically important in that it creates doubt in the Runner's mind, which may force the Runner to either behave less efficiently or be punished for reckless play.
  17. Messenger said: My critique of using Crypsis as an early way to make runs is that it delays the Runner in setting up a more permanent- and more efficient- ability to break into Corp servers. Again, we go back to card slots, cash and clicks. You say that searching through your deck for more specific icebreakers is a waste but so is paying to install Crypsis, loading Crypsis with a counter, getting the cash to power it, etc. and then tossing Crypsis when it doesn't have a counter or you finally have something better (all of this I experienced in my experiment). All those costs each time you use it will eventually accumulate to drain your resources in the long run, even if you don't use Crypsis that much. The problem here is that you are assuming the game goes into the long run. That's a questionable assumption. Out of the box, the game definitely favored a long-run approach for Corp, as a significant portion of ice had high costs, and the Corps were stuck with expensive agendas that took multiple turns to advance. That simply isn't the case any more - Corps now have options that let them run a much faster game, with cheap ice, accelerated card draws, and cheap agendas that can help them get a very fast advantage. You are absolutely right in that deploying Crypsis will set the Runner behind in assembling Voltron. But it's entirely possible that the Corp is running an early game gambit that will set the Runner even further behind in assembling Voltron, unless the Runner does something about it immediately (e.g., NBN with an installed card that is very likely Breaking News, with Big Brothers and Account Siphons to follow). The real value of Crypsis is not in a direct comparison with other breakers, where as you have noted, it is consistently less efficient, and where it is taking up space that the Runner's long-term rig will eventually need. It's in the speed of the threat that the Runner can deploy, and in forcing the Corp to behave defensively. If all the Runner has out is a Yog.0, sure, that's a great breaker in the long run - but that gives the Corp enormous freedom, as he can safely assume that the most threat the Runner can bring in the next turn is a one-off Inside Job. He can drop a barrier and a sentry, and nine times out of ten the Runner won't be able to touch the server - and that can extend several turns out with bad card draws. With a Crypsis in place (and Special Order can bring up a Crypsis early if absolutely needed), the Corp can't make any safe assumptions, and will have to put significant defenses on every target of value. Even if the Crypsis is never used, the value of the threat it poses is significant in forcing the Corp to play less efficiently. (Speaking of Yog.0, that relates to another use for Crypsis - as a backup system in case a highly efficient but limited use breaker isn't cutting it. Yog.0 will very efficiently dismantle most code gates, but not an Hourglass or a Toll Booth. Crypsis is a virtual necessity for decks running Yog.0, Mimic, etc. that are not relying on Parasite or Femme Fatale for assistance.) Again, the advantage is definitely not in efficiency, especially in the long term - it's in speed, and for certain specialized decks, in deck size efficiency.
  18. I will second the recommendation for What Lies Ahead. The extra agendas are very important - not just because some add considerable power to their Corps (especially Project Atlas), but because they give the Corp real options in shaping the set of agendas they have in their decks. No more trying to get by with less-than-useful agendas - so Corps that don't focus on tagging the Runner can drop Private Security Force for a more relevant agenda, and so forth. Other than that, just poke through the spoilers at CardGameDB and look for highly-rated cards, like Fetal AI for Jinteki or Emergency Shutdown for Criminal, and pick expansions that have the most useful cards for the strategies you're considering.
  19. As mentioned above, Criminal has been strongest since launch since they have good early game options, and Corps haven't always had good answers. I do think that's changing with more options for the Corp, though. There's more cheap ice available so Corps can get a double wall of ice up on HQ and other critical servers early at not too much cost, complicating things for Criminals that rely on Inside Job for easy runs. Also, super-cheap ice can be dropped on Archives to slow down a Sneakdoor Beta strategy. And Chimera can easily shut down early pressure (albeit at a cost to the Corp in credits). So long-term, I think both Shaper and Criminal will come into their own as games start going longer - and that's particularly true with Shaper getting a big slug of cards in the upcoming boxed expansion.
  20. Special Order and Test Run can be better backup plans for getting critical icebreakers in place, but they're not always better than Crypsis. When would Crypsis be the better choice? When you don't know what you're facing, for one thing. Consider a second turn run at a server with an unrezzed ice and the Corp holding a few credits. You can take a dummy run at the server, see what the ice is when the Corp rezzes it, then on the next click, Special Order the requisite icebreaker and on the third click do the real run of the server. . . . Unless that ice turns out to be Neural Katana. Whoops! Crypsis provides a nice one-card solution to that problem, and in the same number of clicks. Install the Crypsis, power it up, then do the run on the server. Regardless of what you encounter, you can deal with it, no need to scout the server (unless you're really hard up for credits, in which case you probably shouldn't be running). Another situation where Crypsis beats Special Order or Test Run? Chimera. Got three Special Orders handy?
  21. In following the CoC balancing, they certainly will use banned and restricted lists, but it can be a reasonably short list of cards on either. Usually when massive balance problems present themselves, they can be traced back to one card, so sometimes the simplest solution is to take one card out of the mix. But overall, the CoC designers have been using new card releases to try and address broader balance problems. I think that's a great approach, and one that players actually enjoy rather than grumble about. In Netrunner, I suspect most balance issues can be cured through new card releases, as the mechanics of the game don't have windows for the sort of endless recursion strategies that lead to card bans/restrictions in CoC and other deckbuilding games.
  22. I like the deck, and I like the approach. Weyland is the usual Corp for attrition strategies (Scorched Earth, etc.), but I think NBN can do it as well. One specific comment, I think you are absolutely correct on including traps. Even if the trap is never sprung, it's an effective move from the metagame perspective; the very presence of a trap in the deck, even just one, forces the Runner to play carefully (e.g., forcing an include of something like Infiltration, even if it reduces the efficiency of the Runner's deck). As such, I think virtually every Corp deck should include a trap, even if it's just one card, so that Runners can't get lazy in running on servers they haven't scouted, or keeping not enough cards in hand to survive a significant direct damage trigger. I think that there's a card that plays the same role for the Runner, but there's another thread where that's being debated.
  23. The problem is in viewing Crypsis as a be-all-end-all icebreaker, when it's no such thing. It's a backup system that in most cases is less efficient than the main tools which generally do the job better. It is also a backup which in many cases is less effective than other tools (Special Order, Test Run), and since more than one backup may not be needed, won't fit in every deck. But just because it isn't a be-all-end-all that doesn't fit in every deck doesn't mean it's useless. Shapers who are playing the long game and are intent on building the perfect rig may not need it, and Criminals who have lots of tools for getting around troublesome ice may not use it . . . but that still leaves Anarchs. And for Anarchs it's an especially good fit, as it works well with other virus cards that are likely to be in the same deck. Anarchs are also more inclined to use non-icebreakers to get their work done, so having an AI icebreaker (other than Wyrm, which is very situational) is handy. The important thing to understand about Crypsis is that it is not about credit efficiency (obviously), nor even all that much about utility (although it does have some) - it is more about memory slots and deck efficiency. Crypsis is a good fit for a deck which has a lot of non-icebreaker tools it uses to get at Agendas, but for backup needs some icebreaking capacity in as little memory and in as few cards as possible. Runners who have allocated a third of their deck and most of their MUs for icebreakers are not going to need Crypsis; Runners who want to keep the number of icebreakers in the deck to a minimum and who want to use as few MUs as possible for them are going to get the most out of Crypsis.
  24. Toqtamish said: This thread was 7 months old. Why rez it ? He scored a Priority Requisition and didn't have anything else to play it on.
  25. vermillian said: Dear FFG: Please include dice. Also, spinners, coin flips, comparing alphabetically the first letter in the bottom card in your deck's title / artists name / keyword, rewards for wearing having certain colour of clothing / gender / age / sexual orientation / trivia knowledge about cyber punk, penalties for time of day, temperature, humidity or radioactivity. Align a randomness system to a geiger counter if possible. Additionally, please refer to specific cards with other cards, design cards that reward players for playing against people using particular specifically named cards that do nothing if that player does not have that card in play. ~Your friend and long time player of about 75% of all CCGs out there. I think you forgot ante.
  • Create New...