Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Would you like a Netrunner 2.0?

It was NRDB in review.

He meant over The Siphon Spam Meta, I think

2 Likes

I am sure it wasn’t your intent but that came off super condescending, fun fact, I was there too, I have been playing since the core set.

your experience may have been different but people complained in much the same manner that archetypes were ruining the game.

the game has weathered the storm of a large card pool remarkably well and we live now in a meta where more archetypes are viable than ever. I call it a good place even if certain tedious archetypes exist.

4 Likes

Some people would rather play a 1 deck vs. 1 deck meta where the interactions are very meaningful and there are bountiful opportunities for player skill and good choices, and minimal impact from variance.

Some people would prefer to play a 30 deck vs. 30 deck meta where there are tons of different deckbuilding options, but oftentimes the way two decks stack up will make lines of play shoehorned and linear and leave the outcome of the game to autopilot and seeing how the draws resolve themselves.

I’m in the former group, I could probably play Protoss versus Protoss or Prepaid Kate versus Capricious Foodcoats for dayz.

If netrunner is supposed to delve into the second category as much as it is acting like it intends to do, it might need sideboards or something.

4 Likes

Whilst there are enough good cards in ANR 1.0 that make a game worth playing there are a lot of cards that don’t see play, and some others that dominate simply because they are relatively ‘overpowered’ in some way, so i’d like to see either a core set 2.0 or an ANR 2.0. I think something along the lines of Willingdone’s suggestions in his look back at the core set would be good ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUDvQgsqlPk&list=PLBHiTkdWCxnRWrdceoGbLN7l1eWeUs4an ). Whilst i wouldn’t necessarily want to see rules changes i wouldn’t necessarily be against them either.

I would not buy into a Netrunner 2.0 unless it was like 10-15 years down the road and involved a totally different medium due to technology advances. (I dunno like Augmented Reality VR shit) (I really enjoy Netrunner in it’s current form and find re-set threads to be dumb)

Core 2.0 would be okay, but I would probably be annoyed if it made my 3x core sets invalid.

1 Like

There’s nothing wrong with the game that print on demand and a ban list couldn’t fix

3 Likes

I’m in the first camp as well, but if you want to hear about sideboards keep your ears peeled for a podcast dropping this Monday…

2 Likes

For me, follow-up Core sets would contain the best cards from the last X cycles, but with proper influence costs, balancing, and errata included. I will miss my boy Eli. This is my best chance to hang on to what we have! =P

3 Likes

I’m tired of the constant doomsaying threads.

19 Likes

I think there’s just not a whole lot to talk about until the next spoilers come out, so people default to “the end of times” mode. We just need to figure out what to do with all those terrible tracer cards in the genesis cycle, and make caprice and jackson 3 more inf each. Yes, 7 inf caprice.

Still thinking that new core sets every now and then, consisting of a good pool from the previous released card cycles/boxes is a good way to make the old players happy (since they don’t need to buy it) and give newer players a great entry point.

2 Likes

Ew. 10chars

Thrones 1.0 was so fun last year the real problem was the barrier to entry and the weird rulings/erattas. This could have been fixed without a reboot I think but it would have taken maybe a “patch” box and a new rule set. I think 2.0 has been successful but I don’t want to see 2.0 for Netrunner personally. If there was a 1.0 tournament next week I would for sure attend the meta was wide open when I played and the games were super interesting.

What they really should do is sit down in a room and actually figure out their LCG model because I feel it needs to change for the long term health of the game. I could be wrong but it feels like LCGs to me personally release too slowly and have too small of a card pool even with rotation. A large issue is that 40% of the card pool is evergreen. Hearthstone is attempting to fix the “Evergreen” issue by changing evergreen cards I guess I wouldn’t mind seeing that if they insist that core + deluxes are always around.

3 Likes

Rules are too complicated. Some examples:

  1. There are seven phases (that’s ok), but some of them have pre-frame-action action window, some don’t. This is an example about “exceptions” of the rules.

  2. You can not use reaction at the end of a phase. This is an example about “exceptions” of the rules.

  3. For keywords, some of them are actions, some of them are not. There is a keyword which doesn’t actually exist in the game (deathbound). This is another example about “exceptions” of the rules.

  4. There are two types of resources (gold and influence) which don’t make true differences in gameplay.

  5. There are two types of classifications of cards (traits and crests) which don’t make true differences in gameplay.

  6. There are two types of jump-in mechanics (ambush and shadow), which are different but the differences they provide can’t beat the complexity they provide.

And there are many more. I don’t even want to introduce anyone new to the game since I think it takes too long to handle all the rules. (So many minor pieces.)

This is not the biggest reason to reboot. But fixing all these types of rules is my favorite part about AGOT2nd.

3 Likes

I only played core set AGoT, but wasn’t there this weird moribund rule where characters can die, but you can still use them as sacrifice targets because they don’t go into graveyard immediately?

Moribound makes things complicated, and that complicated six-step response system is the reason of many problems. But it doesn’t cause the problem you talk about: (if a moribound destination is determined you cannot change it without card effects, so if someone is already died you cannot sacrifice them anymore without card effects.). Actually in the first edition if you want to response to something what you can do is more “regular” since there is a big chart describe it. One of the advantages is that you can use leave-play effects once.

The second edition simplify the whole system. Now it is much more streamlined using the “reaction/interrupt” system. However this causes some other problems like, if you are able to kill someone twice at the same time, you can use his/her leave-play effects twice.

For ANR, maybe they need to address some of the core set IDs (Kate, HB) to achieve a more diverse meta. This could be done by releasing newer versions of these IDs and then banning the core set ones. Absolutely no need for a reset in my opinion.

I just thought AGOT just didn’t use half of the cards in any sort of competitive format

What I’d actually like is a sort of massive rotation. They release a new core, and then those are the only legal cards. So while your old collection exists for casual play,mans can be combined with the new collection in casual, only the new can be used in competitive.