Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

NISEI Questions Thread


#66

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.


#67

The idea that I’ve seen thrown around is 4 person teams, where one player plays as the NAPD Vs the runners from the other team, and the runners from your team play Vs the other team’s NAPD player.

Doing it your way requires six games per round. Which seems absurd.

EDIT: Also, I’m reasonably against making tournaments for it. It’s a fun format, having this kind of thing made ‘official’ seems like it might take something away from it.


#68

I think it could work for a KoS type event. Not 100% competitive.

Also the first card to ban is employee strike.

On a different note, I don’t think Nisei would go wrong putting out some faction IDs for the format (ID abilities of 1 corp and 2 divisions from the same faction for instance?), and maybe making some simple rules edits.

e.g. When a runner is flatlined, the corp can take 1 agenda from the runner’s score area and add it to the corp’s, or whenever a runner steals an agenda or trashes a corp card they gain the infamy token.


#69

EStrike is not as bad as it seems. Have you every played the format bofer doing the statement?
All 3 Runner would need to have it active to have it in effect all the time. On the other hand the corp would just clear one, instead of all of them.
The point is, if you are building especially against this ID the corp will lose.

Sorry, back to the topic!


#70

No I haven’t played. I realise you’re correct about strike though which is good. I had assumed it would work the other way so as to avoid having multiple currents active.

Just looking at the format, it seems cool, but also tough for corps and it looks like they’re basically locked in to rushing with FA to close which is a shame. I’d like to see it picked up and worked on as I assume that FFG would’ve put more work into it and maybe turned it into the next big box had the game not been cancelled.


#71

Nah i had thought of it as 3 games per round with sides being picked ala top cuts in events but your way is good too. I don’t much care how it happens as long as people have fun.

I also don’t think running a formal event at a low priority without a stratified structure like regionals/nationals/worlds cheapens anything. Obviously people can run or not run whatever they want but it kind of makes sense to ask NISEI for direction when an event format like this hasn’t been crystallized.


#72

NAPD format is on the list of things to look at - it’s just not a priority at the moment with Core2019 in testing, OP2019 being planned and NISEI Set 1 in the design stage.

We’ll get to it though, have no fear.


#73

How do I join a play testing group?


#74

I’ve been meaning to ask about Core2019 since I saw the article yesterday. Why do you think there is a need for it? Are you not concerned that it might alienate people with limited collections?


#75

Yes! Can’t reveal too much detail at the moment but expect more after FFG’s license expires on 22 October.

Short answer: yes. Long answer:

I have personal opinions regarding IDs and 241s but those aren’t really relevant here. I recognize that banning them is unenforceable. In many situations that arise in competitive play an ID or a 241 is the optimal move. Banning them will effectively incentivize breaking the rules, and let’s be clear that this would be a very easy rule to break - again, basically unenforceable. Bearing in mind that a nonzero number of players will ID or 241 anyways at all major tournaments, this does nothing but hurt honest players.

Absolutely! If you are interested in helping run events locally, please drop me a line on slack @icecoldjazz; that’s the best way to get in touch.

Our goal is some time in Q1 2019. We will also be making some changes to keep the meta new and exciting very soon, though, so Always Be Running!

@CryofFrustration:

Introducing a new core set, when paired with rotation (which will be happening at the same time), is a great opportunity to shake up the meta and keep things new and exciting. This first NISEI core set will not include any “new” cards, just ones printed by FFG. Still, there are cards we would like to “rescue” from rotation, cards currently in the revised core set which we feel need to go, and old, already rotated cards that may be returning :slight_smile:

There will be distribution options geared towards new players. Again, before FFG’s license expires, there’s not much we can discuss regarding that at this time but expect a major announcement around the end of October.

@rumirumirumirumi:

Not my department, but I believe David will be recruiting more playtesters soon. Feel free to message him on slack @divadus.


#76

Do you plan to introduce a tournament format using single game rounds into tournament rules, so that TOs who want to get rid of IDs/241s can simply use this format?


#77

Once I’ve got the playtest coordinator position finalized (which should be before the end of the coming week), I am looking to begin wider playtest recruitment. From there, a standardized playtesting application process will be put in place, the advent of which will be addressed in an official NISEI announcement.

As Austin says though, in the meantime anyone can feel free to contact me via Slack if they think they have the requisite chops and available time commitment for playtesting.


#78

Playtester signup here : https://goo.gl/forms/USVwNOZjMMooh1nl2 :slight_smile:


#79

I was going to post in the comments of the Personality Profiles post, but it looks like it’s now closed. It’s not quite clear when some of the minor roles, like Judge, T.O., and Rules Associate (i.e. all the roles I signed up for), will be filled. It’s a bit confusing because I don’t see any of the new people assigned to these roles. As far as I can tell, only some of the roles listed in the application/survey post have been filled.

Are these the roles that are awaiting further confirmation? Or, are these the types of roles were NISEI would take on as many as apply as long as they are screened for competence/being good humans? Or, have they discontinued/delayed (some of) these roles being filled?


#80

A: This is the first wave of onboarding roles. Additional roles will be filled at a later time. As I understand, some of the other major roles needed additional consideration.


#81

Thanks for your response. Does “Rules Associate” count as a major role?


#82

Yup, Rules Associate is in final consideration right now!


#83

Tim,

Tournament Organizer and Judge/Event Staff were two positions that are different than the rest we opened up in that this is a channel for people to express interest in Organized Play. We are building a massive database of interested parties that we will reach out to when the time comes to begin scheduling events.

If we have a specific need for additional Judges or staff at a large event, we will draw primarily from those applicants.

Sorry for the confusion!


#84

Thanks Austin, that clears things up. Are you still vetting the applicants? Or, is more that if someone goes through the effort to volunteer and filling out the form than you’ll have them?


#85

As long as they aren’t known to be terrible we have given everyone the greenlight.