Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

My ANR Hack - A set of house rules and errata ( Latest Version 1.4.1 )


#41

Update Version 1.3.1: Changlog:

  1. Corporate Troubleshooter is no longer a connection. This probably isn’t necessary given the cardpool i’m intending to extend this Hack to, but in case i do ever decide to include the latest post Mumbad cycles it’s pre-emptively included.

  2. Minimum deck sizes have increased by 1.5. This might seem like a fairly major change, but it has always been my intent that players would be need to build bigger decks in the Hack version of the game, and it has become apparent to me in responding to posts on this thread just how much of what i’m hoping to achieve in the Hack relies directly or indirectly on those bigger deck sizes. So rather than necessitate a process of finding the ‘optimum’ deck size through play, and rather than risking that this optimum deck size is not high enough often enough, i’ve simply increased minimum deck sizes to roughly the minimum deck sizes i expect will be needed in the Hack. Doing this also has the benefit of ( probably ) retaining the differences between deck sizes deriving from different minimum deck sizes on different identities.


#42

Greetings all!
I am not new to the game, thought I am still a novice. One thing I love about the game is the community, and the love I feel I see everywhere. The love might be just friendliness or courtesy, often between strangers, but on the internet it goes a long way.

While it is true that @totsuzenheni asked for feedback, and many of you are giving it, thereby doing him/her/other and the community in general a favor, I feel some posts are not as polite and courteous as they could be.

Notice that I do not bring up evidence of whether OP is indeed not taking feedback well, or which poster is being mean. It doesn’t matter; any toxicity harms everybody.

OP made a house rule game. Whether it’s awful or not, criticque is only as good as how it is put. You can say it’s awful nicely as well.

Also, please note that for all my caution I am biased towards OP. I have tried designing games. Making a game, even a variant, is tough. Being naked on a community by asking for feedback is courageous.

I feel we can show OP love by:

  1. Hating the variant and not saying anything about it. Not all of us have the time.
  2. Hating the variant and pointing out the cause, while being courteous. Yes, you are doing OP a favor ( I notice that some of you have gone through the trouble of researching the links OP provided ) but to what end if you are not polite / friendly / courteous? It isn’t personal. OP is not the problem; the game is. ( as in it has probkems )
  3. Do not care about the game, but care about a fellow runners efforts.
  4. Care about the game.

Thanks for reading!

Tl;dr: OP / criticquers are not the problem. The games problems are the problem.


#43

Update Version 1.4.1: Changlog:

The errata for Weyland Consortium: Because We Built It contained an error that has been corrected. It read:

When your turn begins, you may pay X◊ to place an advancement token on a piece of installed ice that can be advanced. X is equal to the number of advancement tokens on that piece of ice.

It has been corrected to read:

When your turn begins, you may pay X◊ to advance a piece of installed ice that can be advanced. X is equal to the number of advancement tokens on that piece of ice.