Originally published at: The NISEI Board plays… Anonymous Tip - StimHack
Discuss the latest article here.
1 Like
Curious about the thinking behind the question of what level of OP should permit NISEI staff to play. Is the principle that with early knowledge of card design/development and prior insight into any MWLs and playtesting, that this could give those staff an unfair advantage?
Or is it just that it’s thought it wouldn’t look good for staff from the organisation running the events to also be playing in them?
Just wondering what people think about this?
I think it’s perfectly fine for Nisei staff to participate in any level of tournament play, but maybe not with cash prizes. This is different than employees of FFG OP participating in tournaments.
I don’t think this is true, or at least, if it is an advantage, there is also a disadvantage in thinking of cards in a context that doesn’t exist yet, warping perceptions of power level.
2 Likes
I agree, I wouldn’t have a problem with NISEI staff from any role playing in OP events, plus I would worry that if any such restriction was in place, it could discourage people from applying for NISEI roles as they also want to be able to play the game we all love!
4 Likes
Just as a thought for future surveys, you might want to include definitions for some of the slang and nicknames. I’m assuming “onesies” is 1 core, 1 big box, 1 data pack?
9 Likes
Oh, I totally misunderstood, then, I thought Onesies meant Android Netrunner Pajama Parties
8 Likes
Are those a thing? Because that would be fun.
Great suggestion!
2 Likes
I totally misunderstood that! I thought it meant “limit one of every card”, Professor-style. Your format is much more approachable.
Plus one playset of any single card.
Would have love to know who the author was. RC doesn’t mean anything to me.
RC is NISEI’s Community Manager. I’ve updated the article for clarity.
I totally thought onesies was ‘highlander’ - I am not in favour of suppporting “onesies”, I am as regards ‘highlander’ (no more than one copy of any given card, maybe with an exception for agendae).
Basically I don’t like more than one format with a limited card pool (standard). It’s simply a pain practically in terms of building decks and moving cards around.
Sounds like there’s some work to be done on defining formats 
Regarding the “What level tournaments should board members be allowed at”, this should only apply for people who have access to additional information. People like Shanodin and RC shouldn’t be subject to that.
1 Like
Oh, I forgot to say that sometimes the present is more futuristic than the game (ex: those electric monocycles).
We would like to stick to a single policy to make things easy and clear. In addition, because of the nature of the way our online workspaces are set up, everyone has access to each other’s information. This gives us a lot of flexibility and cooperation, but it does make it difficult to prove to snyone that individual members of NISEI don’t have access to any given information.
With no more expansions coming, I don’t see a point in having the first two cycles remain out of the game. It seems silly. Anything problematic can just be banned.
The new cycles was designed with the first 2 cycles going out of print in mind. No card exists in a vacuum and it has been hard enough finding such elegant balance with things as they are. The game is always a smoothing out and an evolution.
One could argue that rotation cycles should have been shorter all along for this reason maybe or that it would have been nice if it had kept going. But dumping all the old cards into the current card pool that were never designed to go together would be inelegant.
It might be a fun novelty format to mess around with and if you want to with your own meta or whatever, go nuts of course.
2 Likes