[quote=“moistloaf, post:18, topic:3667”]
Flickerwisp might have stated my own opinion better than myself.
If I had to throw out a number, I’d say 25% of the ANR card pool is usable, and I think that’s generous. I personally think this is an unacceptably low figure, especially in a game with no collectible factor. Honestly, I’d rather have two well-designed, game-changing big boxes a year, that have been thoroughly and seriously play tested, than a bunch of data packs that by and large consist of cards that the vast majority of players will never play with once.[/quote]
The LCG model is probably too lucrative for FFG to change, but I agree that releasing whole cycles at once might be better from a playing perspective especially in terms of determining what’s legal for tournaments and the like.
[quote=“moistloaf, post:1, topic:3667”]
What do others think of this quote? It is totally contrary to my own beliefs about ANR design in its entirety, from ‘early’ to current. Perhaps by ‘early’ Lukas means the first couple Cycles, which would make more sense.[/quote]
I think this conservative approach is especially seen in the early IDs. There are 15 Corp and 13 Runner IDs in the Core Set through Honor and Profit. Of these, only 2 Corp, RP and EtF, see seriously play. The Runner side a bit more diverse, but Kate, Noise, Andy are probably played much more frequently compared to Reina, CT, Whizzard, or Gabe. IDs are what make Runner/Corp match-ups diverse and interesting, but when players only use 2 of a possible 15 Corp IDs, there are probably serious questions about play-testing and realistic views of the “meta”.
Though Spoiler-Ken did say awhile ago that ANR 29 totally changed his opinion about Lukas and co. for the better so maybe we just have to wait until then.