|
ConorT posted:Most of the corp starting decks have problems generating credits. Beanstalk Royalties (Weyland, gain 3 credits) seems like a 'must-have' corp card and should be in any deck you make. I recently tried to learn the game by playing the starting decks with a buddy who had also never played before. The first game, he played a few cards and then pulled a snare on a run and flat-lined immediately. In the next game we played he was absolutely petrified of running into a trap and stopped running almost entirely while just building up credits, while I as Jinteki failed to make any money at all and couldn't activate my defenses. He eventually built up a large credit advantage and steamrolled through all my ice (most of which I couldn't rez anyway) to win. Like bobvonunheil, I wasn't very happy with how the game played, but reading this thread makes me feel like the problem is with the starter decks and player inexperience and not the game itself. So my question is: Does anyone have any suggestions on what cards I would put in the corp and runner Starter Decks for the purpose of teaching the game while also having a good time?
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 05:35 |
|
|
I've played a few games of Netrunner now and the starting corp (Jinteki) just seems to get rolled. It takes forever to get credits and a cruel runner will just hurl themselves against any ice you throw down and force you back into poverty over and over again. There seem to be far too many agendas and not nearly enough ways to generate credits or defend them. As long as the corp is sitting on less than four bucks, there's next to no way for the runner to get caught unawares and flatlined and against Jinteki it's so very, very easy to keep the corp poor. Is my general strategy for the corp wrong? I end up throwing down ICE on HQ/R&D on turn one. I use the credit generating agendas like you're supposed to (throw down undefended, rez on your opponent's turn}. I lose in what I feel should be mid game. I usually have 1-2 ICE on R&D, 1-2 on HQ and 2 ICE covering a server where I try to advance agendas. I find myself continually burning turns for money. Is Jinteki entirely about baiting the runner in and flat-lining him? Am I simply setting up remote servers too quickly? Should I spend the first eight turns doing nothing but setting up huge ICE stacks on HQ and R&D?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
Sokani posted:So my question is: Does anyone have any suggestions on what cards I would put in the corp and runner Starter Decks for the purpose of teaching the game while also having a good time? In my opinion, run HB or Weyland as the Corp starter and Shapers or Criminals as the Runner starter and you can do just fine with starterdecks. From there you should develop a good feel for deck building and be on your way. Jintek is a great corp with really drat strong cards, but their big downside (intentionally so, in my opinion) is that they have problems getting credits. On top of that, with Snare being in their starter, they have a non-readily-apparent reason why having money in the bank is even more important than otherwise and also why running on them willy nilly when they do have money in the bank is a potentially game ending idea. Basically, I don't think the Jinteki starter is a good starter to learn the game with, from either the corp or the runner point of view. Ohthehugemanatee posted:Is my general strategy for the corp wrong? Let me link you back to my previous post on the subject: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3493657&pagenumber=65&perpage=40#post407535292 Also, yes Jinteki is certainly strong with traps and can pursue a flatline strategy. I have a very fun to play deck that does exactly that. However, there's 2 important caveats. This deck actually works better against more experienced players, as it aim is to win by playing corp in such a radically different way that people get pushed outside their comfortzone, causing them to make mistakes, and then having a myriad of ways to punish those mistakes and make them fatal. Secondly, it requires building your whole deck around this to the point that winning by scoring agendas very much becomes secondary. In faction, Jinteki is more about making the runner scared and limiting their options, forcing them to play safer, slower and less flexible. This should hopefully gain you time to score some agendas, notably Nisei Mk2, which, combined with using Junebugs to bluff and waste runner resources, then allows you to score the last few points you need. As such, I think cards like Neural EMP can be easily dropped when not going for a dedicated flatline strategy. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Sep 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 20:30
|
|
|
Had a great couple of 5-person Space Alert games last night - first game one of the crew immediately had the wrong card down, we used the "slip up" (or "trip up"?) rule to fix that but because all his actions were delayed for the rest of the game, our wonderfully synchronised weapons fire and generator charging was completely screwed up and the two supposedly dead threats totally obliterated the Red Sector; second game we had it dialled and killed all but one threat, escaping with an undamaged ship! That was on easy difficulty though  Advice request time - my friend is considering buying either Cyclades or Chaos In The Old World. We've seen that both have pretty good reviews from various places (Shut Up Sit Down, Rob Florence, and people here seem to like CITOW), but aren't sure which would be best. They will primarily be played with 3 people, so any advice on either of those games playing particularly well or badly with 3 players?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
tactical_grace posted:Advice request time - my friend is considering buying either Cyclades or Chaos In The Old World. We've seen that both have pretty good reviews from various places (Shut Up Sit Down, Rob Florence, and people here seem to like CITOW), but aren't sure which would be best. They will primarily be played with 3 people, so any advice on either of those games playing particularly well or badly with 3 players?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
tactical_grace posted:Advice request time - my friend is considering buying either Cyclades or Chaos In The Old World. We've seen that both have pretty good reviews from various places (Shut Up Sit Down, Rob Florence, and people here seem to like CITOW), but aren't sure which would be best. They will primarily be played with 3 people, so any advice on either of those games playing particularly well or badly with 3 players? While I like Chaos in the Old World a lot, I would not play it with 3 people. The game is very obviously balanced for 4 players, and I am not even sure which chaos god to dump for a 3p game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
Cool, thanks for the quick responses, seems to be a strong case for Cyclades.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:In my opinion, run HB or Weyland as the Corp starter and Shapers or Criminals as the Runner starter and you can do just fine with starterdecks. From there you should develop a good feel for deck building and be on your way. Thanks for the advice, I'll do that next time GrandpaPants posted:While I like Chaos in the Old World a lot, I would not play it with 3 people. The game is very obviously balanced for 4 players, and I am not even sure which chaos god to dump for a 3p game. You really can't dump one. Chaos in the Old World with less than 4 is terrible, you'd be better off with Cyclades. Both games are worth having though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Let me link you back to my previous post on the subject: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3493657&pagenumber=65&perpage=40#post407535292 Thank you very much. You must have posted that before I picked the game up. I do like Netrunner, but there's some counter-intuitive things that go on and its helpful to have a general idea of how things are supposed to go. I was actually looking at Chum last night thinking it was probably the worst card in the deck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
I played my first (and only so far) game of Chaos with 3, we left out Khorne. I was Slanesh and won the game handily through dial ticks. A large portion of the board was left unused/uncontested. It definitely was missing something, but I wouldn't say it was terrible; I learned the mechanics and had a great time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
Question about building a Corp Netrunner deck. In the back of the book it tells you that you need X amount of total Agenda points in a deck. For 45 cards you need 20-21 Agenda Points, however it only allows you 15 points of influence for cards from other factions. Now I'm guessing that even though each Faction's cards don't even have an icon for influence, its a 0 cost. Basically, any of the agendas can be used in any deck. Right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
Nope. If a card doesn't list an influence cost, you can't take it out of faction at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
Tendales posted:Nope. If a card doesn't list an influence cost, you can't take it out of faction at all. Ok, thought that might be the case since the neutral agendas have the '0' influence cost listed. Unfortunately that doesn't give you a lot of options for Agenda switching in just the core set. You're pretty much stuck with the same options for each deck. Hope that expansion set comes out soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
CitOW is a fantastic game with four, but only four. No matter which god you take away, you are missing some form of balance. I have been playing a lot of 2-4 player 'Lords of Waterdeep.' I have played it with 5 and remember it being extremely good then, also. The game mechanics are really nothing new, but I would recommend it to people just starting the hobby as a beginner 'worker placement' game. Also, the theme (with creative people) is a lot better than other similar games. You send a bunch of wizards and warriors out to complete quests instead of trading wood and stone for wagons. Finally, the absolute best part of the game is that it is very portable. The box insert is among the best I've seen. As far as set-up goes, you can keep almost everything in the box. In other words, the game has very few loose pieces sitting in undesignated places, so it places great in restaurants with larger tables (like booths). Furthermore, the game plays in about an hour so you don't feel like you've extended your welcome. I wouldn't dare play a game like Dungeon Lords or Agricola at restaurants as a bump of the table could send dozens of little cubes flying, but Lords of Waterdeep keeps everything pretty much perfectly contained. My friends and I played it at a local sports bar a couple of times over beer and chicken and had a great time. The only issue is that playing a dungeon and dragons branded board game at a sports bar tends to get odd looks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
I hope Mice and Mystics can pop up on Amazon sometime soon 
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
Harlock posted:I hope Mice and Mystics can pop up on Amazon sometime soon I just hope the pre-orders actually ship someday. edit: Oh, they're still open: http://www.plaidhatgames.com/store/18
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:I just hope the pre-orders actually ship someday.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
PaybackJack posted:Ok, thought that might be the case since the neutral agendas have the '0' influence cost listed. Unfortunately that doesn't give you a lot of options for Agenda switching in just the core set. You're pretty much stuck with the same options for each deck. Hope that expansion set comes out soon. Yeah I can't wait for it come out so I can throw Priority Requisition in the garbage. It is a bad agenda.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 22:30
|
|
|
ConorT posted:Yeah I can't wait for it come out so I can throw Priority Requisition in the garbage. It is a bad agenda. It's currently the worst agenda but not because it's a bad agenda, in my opinion. The problem is that because you have no agenda customization options, the runner knows you're running 3 3-point agendas (except maybe NBN) and that is a hell of a lot of information for the runner to have before you even sit down. I feel that once you can choose not to run any 3pointers, or only 1 or 2, that Priority Requisition can be a very strong agenda.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
quote:I have been playing a lot of 2-4 player 'Lords of Waterdeep.' I have played it with 5 and remember it being extremely good then, also Yeah, I quite like Waterdeep. On the first couple plays it felt like the strategy was going to collapse and everyone would be doing the same thing every game - but it has proven more resilient than that. The different quest types actually do lend themselves to slightly different play styles, and in general there's more to the game than I gave it credit for. And it still has its initial draws: it's quick, simple, and generally well made. The game's even better if you get the custom Meeples for it (it's just some dude that makes them - some kind of laser cutter or something). I can't vouch for this site in particular, but you can see what they look like here: boardgamewarriors. They're super-duper awesome, and make the game a lot more flavorful. My only complaint left with the game is that getting the right early plot quests is far too important. If you can find one of the "when you take A, get B" type plot quests early, it's usually very strong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2012 23:01
|
|
|
If you had a 2nd base set for netrunner you could not use priority req. :hmph: Also priority-reqing out Hadrian's Wall is really funny.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Deviant posted:If you had a 2nd base set for netrunner you could not use priority req. :hmph: That's not true. You can only have 3 copies of a card in the deck so you're still stuck using both Priority and Private Security.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:It's currently the worst agenda but not because it's a bad agenda, in my opinion. The problem is that because you have no agenda customization options, the runner knows you're running 3 3-point agendas (except maybe NBN) and that is a hell of a lot of information for the runner to have before you even sit down. I feel that once you can choose not to run any 3pointers, or only 1 or 2, that Priority Requisition can be a very strong agenda. This is true. I never thought about it before, but the corps will probably get stronger as more and more cards add diversity to their decks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience with both 7 Wonders expansions (Cities and Leaders)? From what I'm hearing, Cities sounds like it adds more overall depth to the game. But is it worth it/does it work without the Leaders expansion too?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
littlewashu posted:Does anyone have experience with both 7 Wonders expansions (Cities and Leaders)? From what I'm hearing, Cities sounds like it adds more overall depth to the game. But is it worth it/does it work without the Leaders expansion too? I've played with cities a few times and I'm not a huge fan of it. It adds some new cards and extends the game a little bit but I'm not sure it's worth the money. I have not tried the team variant though. I quite like leaders; it allows you to plan a bit of an overarching strategy based on what leaders you can draft. There's not reason you can't put them both in but they both do make the game longer to setup and pack away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 03:21
|
|
|
littlewashu posted:Does anyone have experience with both 7 Wonders expansions (Cities and Leaders)? From what I'm hearing, Cities sounds like it adds more overall depth to the game. But is it worth it/does it work without the Leaders expansion too? I have them both and its hard to imagine playing them without the expansions once you get a few games under your belt. Adding both to the game adds maybe 4-5 minutes to the total play time, once you know the new icons. Leaders can create an over arching strategy to can be really powerful if played right. Some people complain that it adds too much of an element of randomness, but I don't see it, at least not more than the rest of the game. Cities adds a little more player interaction with card that force people to lose money or avoid conflict. They feel really balance to me, though. The team variant is fun as hell. If you can get a large, even numbered group, I'd recommend trying it out. I might not have gotten either expansion if I had paid full price since $30 is a lot for how little you get, but both are really fun. Edit: They do increase set up time, but not by much. Maybe a couple of minutes total since you just add X number of cards per player. Best thing about both expansions is they fit in the original box without any fuss. enigmahfc fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Sep 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 03:49
|
|
|
quote:Does anyone have experience with both 7 Wonders expansions (Cities and Leaders)? From what I'm hearing, Cities sounds like it adds more overall depth to the game. But is it worth it/does it work without the Leaders expansion too? I'm just going to re-iterate that the team variant is awesome. Cities doesn't give nearly the shakeup that Leaders did, but it's definitely positive - and lots of the cards make more sense with teams (for example, your ally can take your science dupes so that you can Mask them). My group has literally not played anything else since we started doing team Wonders; the game is way deeper when you start doing combined strategies around your civs and leaders (which are different every game, naturally). And yes, Leaders does add a fair bit of randomness - the leaders vary a lot in strength, some work very well together, sometimes they're the center of your strategy, and sometimes you just get garbage and end up burning your leaders for coins or Wonder stages. Anyways, I'd definitely get Leaders before Cities - but I also suggest just getting both. Like enigmahfc said, it's hard to imagine playing without the whole game now. And while you're buying stuff, it's worth getting the Promo boards (Catan and Manneken) if you're going to play with 6 (our usual number). It's nice to be able to give each person the choice of 2 Wonders - otherwise you can get stuck with less-effective team combos (none of the civs are bad, but some combos don't work well for Teams). And Catan is one of our favorite boards overall. Edit: teams does take much longer to play; pretty much every card choice will take a little conference with your team-mate. But that's a good thing - there are almost no auto-picks, pretty much every decision is interesting and important. jmzero fucked around with this message at 05:15 on Sep 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 05:12
|
|
|
I started taking pictures of our Risk Legacay board after each game, hoping it would make for a cool series. Here is the finishes product, the story of our world. I think it would be a great way to write a review of the game, if it weren't for the fact that it is full of spoilers by it's nature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 22:56
|
|
|
littlewashu posted:Does anyone have experience with both 7 Wonders expansions (Cities and Leaders)? From what I'm hearing, Cities sounds like it adds more overall depth to the game. But is it worth it/does it work without the Leaders expansion too? I like both expansions. Leaders grew on me after a while. Cities is growing, but haven't played enough. Haven't done the team variant either. They're worthy purchases. I disagree about "only adding a few more minutes". I find between separating and adding cities cards, adding/shuffling/distributing/choosing/passing/playing leaders, and then playing an additional round add about 10-15 minutes per Leaders/Cities game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
Game night last night. Did 4 player carcassone, my first game of it. Liked it a lot. Very simple, very cutthroat. Much like Catan in the sense that it makes you curse luck if you lose, praise your strategy if you win. I don't see it being a great 2P game, so dunno why the box suggests it's ideal for 2P. Did one game of Space Alert. First introduction to battlebots and internal threats. I tried to be captain, but ended up basically being security chief, focused on internal threats almost exclusively. Fortunately, there were 3 other players primarily focusing on the external threats. Without really planning it, we compartmentalized our efforts very well, with the end result being a nearly flawless victory. We killed all 5 threats, took no damage, and only had one disabled battlebot to show for it. The only way we could have ended with a higher score would have been to look out the window. Is a score of 27 normal? It was more fun than most of the other games so far. Even my gf, who'd really disliked the game thus far, didn't mind this game so much, even if she didn't have a single action for 8-12 because nobody had suggestions as to what she should do. I think we're still waiting to lose badly, and it hasn't happened yet. Finished with 2 games of 7 wonders, which was great fun. Just did the standard set of cards, 5 players. It's such a great game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
Played my third round of Android tonight with my brother and another. Was a fairly standard game with one really awesome moment. My brother had been playing Raymond and kept sitting in one place and using nothing but light twilight cards for the entire second week. However, he used them in such a manner that he never got seven on his hand at any one moment. Until the last turn and BAM, I hit him with the background card that remove all his favours. We calculated he lost about 40 points in that card alone. He still won though because that strategy was almost unblockable but it was still fun.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2012 23:53
|
|
|
Just played 3 games of Android: Netrunner as HB, Shaper, and HB again. Awesome game, I'll be playing this one a ton. Question: When an ice subroutine trashes a program, who chooses which one is trashed?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
Malloreon posted:Question: When an ice subroutine trashes a program, who chooses which one is trashed? The corp unless otherwise stated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 01:18
|
|
|
Malloreon posted:Just played 3 games of Android: Netrunner as HB, Shaper, and HB again. Awesome game, I'll be playing this one a ton. The controller of the card doing the trashing chooses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 01:24
|
|
|
Did anyone with Eclipse buy those plastic population cube holders? Are they a must buy or am I better off getting a couple of games under my belt before I rush off and buy them?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 01:24
|
|
|
dishwasherlove posted:Did anyone with Eclipse buy those plastic population cube holders? Are they a must buy or am I better off getting a couple of games under my belt before I rush off and buy them? I bought 'em and I think their worth it. Much faster to set up and no danger of knocking the cubes all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
Can we get a link to where to buy them? Eclipse would be so much easier to play if those cubes didn't go sliding all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
My dad just emailed me this -- a website called Tanga is having a huge board game sale. Some decent stuff mixed in with a lot of crap -- mostly notable for Travel Blog for $8.99, which is cheaper than I've seen anywhere else. Anything else good in here? https://www.tanga.com/deals/massive-board-game-markdown?internal_campaign=highlighted_links
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 03:25
|
|
|
Aerox posted:My dad just emailed me this -- a website called Tanga is having a huge board game sale. Some decent stuff mixed in with a lot of crap -- mostly notable for Travel Blog for $8.99, which is cheaper than I've seen anywhere else. Factory Fun for $10 seems like a pretty good deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 05:35 |
|
|
Aerox posted:My dad just emailed me this -- a website called Tanga is having a huge board game sale. Some decent stuff mixed in with a lot of crap -- mostly notable for Travel Blog for $8.99, which is cheaper than I've seen anywhere else. I liked The Swarm, but eh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 05:52
|
|