Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Turning Netrunner into a team deck-building game


#1

Here’s the thing: I’d like to come up with a Netrunner draft variant that I can play with friends who aren’t Netrunner players themselves, but are board gamers that know Dominion. The scale would be fairly modest - with 3 Cores and 1 of each data pack & expansion to work with, and considering the time requirements, I’m thinking a reasonable approach would be to have 4 players, 2 each as a team building a corp and runner deck together after a cube draft. Each player gets to play four games total, first switching decks against the same opponent, then switching opponents. If possible, teams would consist of one Netrunner player, and one newbie.

Has anyone here tried something along those lines?

The goal for the cube wouldn’t be to have as many different cards as possible, or even to be of a particular large size. Can someone who’s got experience with drafts recommend a good size for the card pool?


#2

It’d be hilarious to dominionize the runner side, with a little work it’d be possible to make something work using disposable breakers and operation econ.

But uh, there’s lots of stuff about cube design out there. Having players collaborate on their plays isn’t a bad idea.


#3

If players don’t know Netrunner, the best format is a faceup draft, like Grid or Rochester Draft. So that they can see all the cards and know what they do. This does take away elements of the bluff game that goes into Netrunner Corp, but we’re doing this for the sake of new players, so I’m ok with it.

In case you don’t know, here’s the rules for Rochester/Grid. (There’s other formats as well, I think Winchester and Solomon are the faceup ones. I keep confusing Winchester and Winston draft formats though…)

Rochester Draft. Build the packs normally, but only open one at a time, and display all the cards on the table faceup. Each players picks one card in Horseshoe order. (Four players: A, B, C, D, D, C, B, A, A, B, C, D, D… etc) until the cards are gone. Next player opens their pack and repeat the process. (A opened first pack, so B opens his first pack and start the Horseshoe with B.)
Pros: Everyone sees every card. Every card is drafted. Equal number of cards in each player’s pool. Works with any number of players.
Cons: Everyone sees every card. Takes a long time, relatively. No mystery of what other people are drafting. The ‘wheel’ position of the horseshoe can be unduly powerful.

Grid Draft:
For only two players. Make nine-card packs, and then open each pack in turn, displaying them face up in a 3x3 grid formation. In turn, each player picks either a column or a row. Swap player order each pack.
Variant: You can try getting a third player in on this, giving them the ‘leftover’ after the first two have picked. Rotate the player order with each pack. I’m not sure this is good, but it exists as an option to try and add players to this format.
Pros: Everyone sees every card. Not every card is used. Quick draft format for two players.
Cons: Only works perfectly with two players. Possibility of unequal amount of cards in each player’s pool. Due to card layout, can prevent certain strategies from being viable.


#4

I got my terminology a bit confused; I’m familiar with grid drafting, and that would be the default method I’d start with. 2 players draft corp, 2 draft runner;with enough table space, teammates can advise each other, if necessary. Then the teams build the decks together from their card pool.

What I’m not certain about is if it makes sense to have a bigger set of starting cards than for regular draft (3 breakers, 2x Armitage, etc.)


#5

maybe better, rather than different. Femme/Snowball/Peacock as “medium quality breakers” might be better than the common Pipeline/ForceOfNature/Aurora “minimum quality breakers”.