Is the staff eligibility for playing in tournaments decided yet? As I became a TO exactly because I wanted to have tournaments to play in, my decision to apply or not depends quite heavily on this answer
Great question! Our community survey closed recently so we are still working through the data. The overwhelming majority of folks agree that NISEI members should be allowed to play in some form of organized play, but we still need to determine from the data the appropriate level at which to recuse ourselves, if any. NISEI members may be asked to not participate above a certain level, so bear that in mind, but please apply if you are interested at all because you will certainly not be prohibited from playing completely (and maybe not at all)!
Unfortunately any prohibition, even Worlds only, is a deal breaker for me. Would it be possible for you to first analyze the survey, announce the final decision on this issue (I feel it may be important for quite a lot of people) and move the application deadline to let’s say 72 hours after this announcement? I don’t want to apply just to have to back out afterwards.
Quick Q: discord / no discord ?
Okay we pulled a report on the data and it was very one sided. Our first policy on the matter will be no restrictions on NISEI members playing in competitive events.
Do bear in mind that event staff at a given event will be required to not participate in that event, just like current rules already prohibit (for tournaments above store championship level).
The NISEI Board has already set up a private Trello and Slack for communications.
13 posts were split to a new topic: Keywords and rules text
Unfortunately Netrunner can’t take up all of my time so I’m catching up on some questions I missed. Thanks for your patience!
Asked in this thread:
No. With an exact copy of a card, all relevant data is preserved and functionally unchanged. It is possible that people using a “template” which they fill in digitally and then print out could (accidentally or maliciously) slightly modify the text of a card. Most players wouldn’t notice because they know what the card does, but a newer player could be fooled.
At the moment, no. I recognize this isn’t ideal but consistency is key with proxies. In the near future we plan on releasing print-and-play copies of cards affected by errata.
I think at the moment this is an extreme edge case, but as long as a Tournament Organizer verified that all card backs were identical and they are reasonably similar in size/construction to Netrunner cards, then yes, I would not take issue with this.
We’ll be posting a group photo around the first day of the event so you can put faces to all the names, and we’ll be wearing NISEI nametags as well. Don’t be afraid to come up and say hi!
This is a valid concern and was definitely taken into account. Not everyone has access to a color printer and we wanted to make the game as accessible as possible. Consider that very few of your opponents in a tournament will be using proxies, and of those players, it’s likely that very few of their cards will be proxies. I do not anticipate this becoming a major issue but if it does I am happy to reconsider the policy. Per your other points: yes, all proxies must be inspected and approved by tournament staff and marked on decklists.
We’ll just have to start giving NISEI-released cards convenient names and using those
I think the competitive model of Store Champs -> Regionals -> Nationals -> Worlds is reasonably effective and we will be emulating it but improving. That said, GNKs and Store Champs are especially important because I know that’s how we’ll reach the greatest number of players. We are planning on more Regional events as well!
Anonymous question: Are there any plans for developing more Terminal Directive style scenarios for Netrunner and if so how can people apply to help with that?
Most likely yes! I would very much like to continue that. It will likely come after at least the first card designs come out.
If you’re interested in helping, feel free to submit an application and just mention that’s what you’d like to focus on.
Not everyone has a color printer at home, but most places with a population big enough to have a Netrunner tournament also have a population big enough to support a print shop. I think the general rule should be that only color proxies are allowed, with local TOs allowed to apply for an exception if they show that in their area getting proxies printed in color is indeed hard unless you own the printer.
Access doesn’t only mean physical access, there are economical factors to consider as well.
Some people can’t colour print. If there warm wasn’t a printer in my office I wouldn’t even be able to black and white print.
One solve for players who have lower quality cards than their opponents (B/W proxies, for example) would be to ask them to inform their opponents before each round. This way you don’t do the give away “Look for longer”, because you can make sure you just read every card name instead of recognising it.
Whilst this isn’t ideal (because it’s basically a bluff every time you don’t see a proxy) it would at least warn the player that it is a possibility.
I don’t think this is a valid reason to require color proxies. In the near term, the proxies would be of copyrighted cards/images, this puts people in a legal grey area with print shops that make money from printing FFG’s cards.
I don’t think printing color and black-and-white copies has any difference from legal point of view. And also I don’t think any court (at least in Europe) would try to prosecute someone for small scale copying of an out-of-print game, as it would be hard for FFG to argue that this loses them money if the real cards are impossible to buy.
The problem is that with those rules a player can turn up to a tournament with a fully proxied deck printed in black-and-white in low print quality, making the live of each of their opponents miserable and possibly gaining some competitive edge. And no TO will have any rules backing them if they want to stop this.
My response was to your post in the context of this thread that said:
So, I’m not debating if there’s a legal difference between B&W and Color proxies. There obviously isn’t. But, saying that players that don’t have color printers should go to a print shop is not a good solution.
It’s not likely to matter legally, but on moral grounds NISEI shouldn’t ask players to implicate local businesses in legally-dubious transactions. I think the moral/accessibility concern > competitive advantage.
I think removing more obstacles from all kinds of players joining or continuing the game is much more important. Plus, all proxies need to be inspected by an event leader, so if it’s there’s a concern over the proxies being low enough quality to affect gameplay, there’s already a rules backing to disallow them:
- Legible and easily identifiable.
- Approved by a tournament leader before the event begins.
It was explained that proxies need to announced before the tournament to the TO this sounds fine to me.
Hey! I intentionally didn’t apply for the first phase, so I was wondering when the next phase of position applying is going to happen? Or do we just contact the core team and submit our application, year round?
You might find this useful:
Deadline is tomorrow (today?).
Aside from a few very specific roles where we want a large number (TOs, Judges, translators, etc), we’ll only be accepting applications when people have to step down. At that point, the relevant board member will give me the details to put in an announcement.
Is there a way we could look into standardizing a format for small NAPD Multiplayer events and running them about as frequently as drafts? I’m kind of curious how that would settle if people are given the opportunity to explore it, and what ban list would properly balance it.
Edit: My first thought might be to run it as a 3 person team tournament, where a match consists of a 3 person runner team playing each of the 3 people on the corp team in series, with table talk allowed.