Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

FFG Floor Rules

Yeah that’s true, I misread that. Fair enough

i was in a comfortable spot in the first regional i played earlier this year. i was fairly new to Netrunner, having only played for ~5 months, and i really wanted to make the cut. i considered asking my opponent for a split, but i didn’t know how he’d take that. i didn’t know that the majority of players near the top (it’s at least true in America) don’t care about the rules regarding intentional splitting, and if they don’t want to, they’ll just say they don’t. i was concerned he might report me to the judge. i knew he was a very good player, and i thought there was a realistic chance he could sweep me and i’d be on the bubble for making top 8

next to me (one table below), my friend, audibly enough that i could tell, asked his opponent to split. his opponent agreed. the guy in first place was already ahead of me and guaranteed a spot, so that’s one in the cut. the two next to me have split, so that’s three. we’re comparing this to the worst case scenario (i’m swept), so that’s four. i now know, for certain, that if two of the other top tables have agreed to intentionally split (and i still don’t know if they did), i will miss the cut if i’m swept. it’s very clear that if i want to get a guaranteed regional playmat (a real accomplishment for me at the time, having been new to the game), a split is in my interests, but as i mentioned earlier, i was reluctant to risk asking my opponent

so, we play the games, and i win both. i’m now 2nd seed overall and my opponent barely missed the cut. he explained to me after, that when he mentioned we would both probably make the cut if we both won one game, he was implying he’d like to split, but of course, i misinterpreted this being in the wrong frame of mind

my opponent missed the cut that day because he did not take a split we know i would have agreed to. at least one table of players who were lower on prestige/SoS than he agreed to intentionally split, which put both of them above him. i know one table did, but i only really know because it’s very uncommon to report players for colluding. if the community were to “crack down” on it, they’d just split in a more concealed manner. in this situation, my opponent would have been rewarded for doing worse in the tournament. had he played either of the two players one table below us (or potentially others that agreed to split below them), he’d have made the cut

there is no way to police this rule, and there is MORE injustice when only some people are able to intentionally split. for every player to be on equal footing, we have to assume we are all able to ignore the rule (possible), or we all have to abide by it (impossible). i’ve never taken a split at an official FFG event (i took one in the GLC finals where i finished 1st seed anyway), but if i’m faced with another situation like i was at the aforementioned regional, i will take the opportunity to break the rules. i hope everyone else does the same


Regardless of anything else, is this really true at the tournaments you play at? Netrunner tournaments to me suggest cheek-by-jowl gaming with other players, tight schedules and in the case of “big” tournaments all the top players up at the same end of the hall with bystanders and judges alike naturally taking most interest in those games. In your experience, would strangers meeting for a game of Netrunner at the top tables towards the end of the pairings (when this behaviour is apparently most advantageous) really be able to very easily have the time and the privacy to have such a discussion and make such an agreement, then play out the games for show ensuring the “correct” sides winning, without anyone else overhearing or cottoning on? Would it be really be so easy to do that the risk of getting caught and kicked out was so negligible as to make it worthwhile?

Edit: @anon50033301’s post details perfectly someone else at the next table being aware of it. The problem there seems to be being aware of someone else cheating (in a way that you are acutely aware will disadvantage you, no less) but not doing anything about it! Forget thinking “I’ll be at a disadvantage if I don’t cheat”, if Josh had piped up and the cheaters had been thrown out, then both he and his opponent would have been more likely to make the cut!

1 Like

The world thanks you for sweeping that guy who was so threatening my spot in the top cut :slight_smile:

1 Like

I suppose it makes me simple but If the goal of a given tournament is to weigh your own acumen against others then asking for or accepting such a thing goes against the point of the whole exercise to begin with. It serves only the needs of an individual’s ego or material desire, not that of an A:NR community. Certainly not a competitive environment.

Perhaps i’m missing lack of care as a reason.

Also it doesn’t do any favors to the people who want to stick around to watch those who are on their best game for the day either.


It definitely happens at major events. Once you realize that, it becomes obvious that the rule is awful for everyone.


How hard is it to understand that unenforceable rules hurt the game? The rules against concedes and IDs are profoundly silly.


in my post, not only do i address this, i dispel the myth that the community can be able to “crack down” on these things by self-policing, which i can only assume you are ignoring

i could report my friend from my meta, but that would only prevent one instance of cheating, and it’d only prevent said instance of cheating one time. in the future, he and others would continue to cheat in a more concealed manner as to not be detected. the only thing i’d have accomplished is getting my friend disqualified and shifting the number of players eligible to cheat over one table. you cannot effectively self-police this rule in the long term


It’s sad that people will break the rules (even ones they disagree with) to gain an advantage. But not massively surprising. I think it’s a point in favour of playing single game rounds though, so that unofficial IDs aren’t an option.

Concession should absolutely be allowed.

It’d be interesting for sure; but plenty of people would be pissed if it wasn’t structured enough to allow equal play of both sides, and that is worse than the spectre of an ID.

@anon50033301’s example only proves that IDs have an effect on the game. In a rare turn of events, I agree with @popeye09. @anon50033301 failed to enforce rules, because he didn’t want to not because he couldn’t and many people were probably prevented from entering the cut because a bunch of people decided to not play netrunner, and the guy he was facing legitimately should not have been in the cut (he was swept).

Sorry guys. I call em as I see em. You don’t ignore the right thing because its “hard”.


If people were really intent on doing the same thing, wouldn’t single game matches just lead to them agreeing to intentionally stall the game out to time for a point apiece?

I agree wholeheartedly with this.

To draw an analogy: you technically can’t enforce the law when it comes to murder. Not every murderer is caught, but the more witnesses and people who see and report the murder give them a higher chance of being caught.

There are a lot of “but if we cracked down, maybe people would cheat in secret!”, which is exactly how every other cheat works. This doesn’t mean we catch it all, but it does mean that it’s nothing special and it’s still possible to catch people who try and cheat secretly. I’ve never seen anybody ID at the top tables of a Netrunner tournament, and if you’re having a problem with cheating in your area, maybe the cheaters (especially if everybody knows who they are) should be banned from future events if they continue to cheat?

Whatever way you want to look at it, banning IDs does make it less likely for people to ID and makes it enforceable to catch people that do cheat. You can’t catch every cheater at Netrunner for things like shuffle cheating, but that doesn’t mean we should let everybody cheat whenever they want, but the more they cheat the more likely it is for them to get caught.

Anyway, whatever your views on IDing are, regardless of whether you think it should be legal or not, IDing at an event where IDing is illegal is blatant cheating, should not be regarded as acceptable, definitely not encouraged, and may prevent people who deserve to be in the cut from being in the cut. If you are in a situation where you see two people ID, report it. Don’t complain about IDing happening if you’re happy to let people ID. If I saw somebody next to me shuffle cheat, I’d report that too; cheating is cheating and we shouldn’t be content with allowing any cheating. Despite my views, I’d be happy to ID in a tournament where IDing is legal if I thought it gave me the edge, but IDing when it’s not legal? That’s cheating. Do not encourage it.


I don’t think single game rounds would be acceptable to the community anyway, because of the concerns about playing sides a non-even number of times. But if people are trying to game the system like that. (a) It’s easier to spot and therefore judge it, and (b) You can award games that go to time less than half the full number of points.

1 Like

Not going to stop it from happening. People can bury their heads in the sand, or cry foul after the fact as much as they want. But by not allowing it by rule, you are only giving certain players an advantage over others. It is much better to just allow them (because there is nothing inherently wrong with them anyways) and level the playing field for everyone.


It’s tough, because you not only have to point it out, but you also have to prove it. The feelbads about being incorrectly punished for colluding to split would be pretty big. As TO I’d have to be pretty convinced, and have seen it myself, that people are colluding in order to award any punishment.

There’s no ambiguity about it though. If the tournament does not allow ID, agreeing with your opponent to split (not defending R&D and not attempting to score agendas as corp, for example) is inherently wrong. It’s breaking the rules of the tournament in order to give yourself an advantage over other competitors.

I have never seen it either. I’m surprised others have.

edit: I agree with everyone who says that it should be pointed out, if and when it’s against the rules to ID.

never ID’d at an FFG event, but just throwing in my support behind the idea that unenforceable rules like banning IDs hurt the game.


So we should make it legal to stack your deck and shuffle cheat because if it’s possible for some people to cheat and get away with it, we should make it the standard course of action?

I don’t like the argument that “oh, well we can’t stop it from happening so all bets are off”, because that applies to any other kind of cheating. IDing is one of the most easy cheats to notice happening and punish. Should we allow all of the cheats that are harder to spot? Should we have a disclaimer that it’s okay to shuffle cheat if you’re a professional magician because it’s hard to catch them anyway?

Netrunner’s very different to Magic. Allowing splitting makes it significantly harder for Swiss to properly select the right people for the cut. It can be intimidating to only need one win out of two for both of you to get into the cut, but if one of you sweeps the other then the other probably didn’t deserve to be in the cut. You’re putting somebody in the cut who shouldn’t be there. When you play N rounds of Swiss, you should play N rounds of Swiss as otherwise tournaments cannot be accurate.

An example I used above is that in a ~32 player tournament with 5 rounds of Swiss, one could win the first two rounds then split the next three for a 7-3 record. This would secure a spot in the cut at many tournaments, including the BABW Finals (32 players, 5 rounds). Believe it or not, the best way to find the best players at a given tournament is to play more games of Netrunner. Two rounds of Swiss is not an appropriate number to secure a spot in the cut of a big tournament, and not playing your games can mean that some people make the cut who shouldn’t have, and some people don’t make the cut who should have.


Yeah, the real “win” would be for people to be worried enough about the social opprobrium and concerned about the embarrassment of even being suspected of cheating that they wouldn’t dream of even looking like there were trying to cheat. That only comes about by the community pushing the issue when they see it.

As far as enforcing it goes, in the absence of clear evidence (which I suspect might be many cases), one would hope that the issue being raised could (rather than “punishment” as such) lead for instance to the TO noting that suspicions had been raised and reminding the players of their duty to play properly, keeping an eye on that game to check it is legitimate and quietly keeping tabs on those players at the start of their next matches. That sort of response should be able to ensure as much as possible the integrity of the current tournament, but more importantly reinforce that community intolerance of cheating. If you have a community where even players who see themselves as “fair” think they need to cheat, you’re going to have to start reinforcing the message to change the mindset!

If even people who don’t agree with the practice feel they need to hold their nose and cheat because there is no risk and plenty of reward, if you don’t have the evidence to emphasise the risk (kicking them out), it ought to at least be possible to try and ensure that there is no reward (check that the match is played out properly).

1 Like

Let’s be crystal clear on this point, as I have seen this argument made before and it needs to be stamped out.


This statement is 100% false

The judge cannot, and must not pass judgment on the way a player plays the game. A player can play however they wish as long as it is allowed by the rulebook. If I don’t want to defend R&D, I don’t have to. And indeed, I have played a number of games recently where I decided not to defend it, for various reasons, for better or for worse. A judges role is to make sure the games are played by the rules, not to decide whether someone is “playing correctly”.


I 100% agree, you can’t judge the way people are playing the game. But if you wanted to guarantee that you lost the games you were playing as corp, that would do it. So you could go through the motions of playing the game knowing that each player would win their runner game. That’s why I agree that it is difficult to adjudicate on a situation where a player accuses another of trying to ID. Which is why people don’t generally accuse others, which means it’s seen as acceptable. If it is against the rules, it isn’t acceptable. No matter your personal opinion on whether or not it should be against the rules.