profligate said:

Toqtamish said:

Please don't put words in my mouth.

You don't get a complete playset. That's the whole point. Not unless I am prepared to buy 3 core sets which, IMO, is a pretty tall order and quite unreasonable on the part of FFG. It didn't need to be this way, but it is and so I am not prepared to get on board.

signoftheserpent said:

Right back at you. If you read my post you will notice I was talking about the monthly packs. You do get complete playsets there. You don't need 3 core sets by any means. One is plenty. And as the expansion packs comes out it is even less likely you will need extra core sets. Anyway it really is your loss. It is an amazing card game.

signoftheserpent said:

CCG and TCG are the exact same thing they just changed names in the early 2000s. LCG completely different distribution model makes it very different from TCGs. They are more about player skill and deck building rather than who can afford the most copies of the booster packs/boxes.

signoftheserpent said:

signoftheserpent said:

No, it isn't. Distribution is part of the definition. What you said was "It's exactly the same thing, whether it's called an apple or an orange or a peach. They are all the same. The only variant is some aspects of taste." (Go ahead, say I'm putting words in your mouth; I'm making a specific point.)

A LCG has a fixed distribution. You and Joe buy a starter set each, and you both get the same cards. Identical in every way. You both buy booster 1, and booster 2. You still both have exactly the same cards. You've both spent the same money (theoretically, as long as you bought from the same place. We'll leave the vagaries of retail out of this) for the same items. You are as competitive as each other.

A CCG/TCG has random distribution. You and Joe buy a starter set each, and have the same cards (although this is relatively recent - I remember buying starters with different cards and random distribution). You both buy 5 boosters. You get 5 copies of the same rare, he gets 5 different rares. Because of how his deck is structured, only one of those 5 is useful to him. You, however, have yours structured to use all 5. You are more competitive, but have spent the same money.

Going further, you could buy a thousand boosters, and never get the one rare you need to complete a deck to the specification you want. And that is because you're gambling on unseen cards in a sealed pack. You never know what you're going to get. With an LCG, you know you're going to get specific cards in a starter, and specific cards in a specific booster (which you only have to buy once).

Don't use the distribution stick to beat a dead horse, it's been done a thousand times over the last few years with the various LCGs. They are not CCGs, by definition. If you don't want to buy it because you're a completionist, that's completely fine, but in answer to your initial question of "enough copies"? Yes, you do.

I play single starter, and I've played against those with two or three. I've won and lost games against both, but at no point did I feel like I was missing out because I didn't have three of everything. I played original Netrunner when it was a CCG, and I couldn't afford to shell out for booster after booster. I still won games against people who spent twenty times or more what I did, because I played what I had. I didn't "what if" or "if only", and the game is well balanced.

Play the game, see if you enjoy it. There's no point buying it if you don't. If you do, then swallow your pride and pick up a core set, maybe two (and from what others have said, you should be able to find two for the MSRP of one) and keep on enjoying.

EDIT: Freaking ninja'd! That's what I get for writing War and Peace!

I find the attitude of the fanboys incredibly rude 'swallow your pride'? You dont' know what you are talking about.

It doesn't matter how amazing the game is; FFG's decision to curtail distribution as they have is - again - a bad decision. That they keep doing this is bizarre and ill informed. Anyone with any experience playing these games will know just how much of a mistake that is. You should never curtail deckbuilding options like this.

You're not curtailed anymore than if you decide to only buy 10 booster packs instead of 30.

I don't get this attitude at all. People seem to be acting as if any criticism posted would compel FFG to take their game away from them.

The core set is incomplete. You always need as many copies of every card as you can run in a single deck (at least, personally any more IMO is silly). That's how card games work. You need the options. Expecting people not to take the game that seriously is doing yourself a huge disservice. Unfortunately FFG don't see it that way, and for no reason i can discern.

This may be a great game, but since it's publishers have made what i consider to be a very flawed decision and since it can be played online without needing the actual product…

again, sign, can you play magic the gathering with a single purchase? Is a booster pack an incomplete distribution?

The core set is fully playable. By design. it IS customizable, quite a fair bit. Is it a fixed distribution, curtailing blind purchases that plague CCGs? Yes. It satisfies all FFG promised it to be.

You seem to be asking us to apologize for something we don't see as a 'mistake', but you do. That is your opinion. We are operating on different levels of expectation, and each time we try to iterate that, we perceive you to be reacting in a way that is further and further from indicating that you understand our point of view.

I understand your point of view. Your definition is that 'playable' means 3x of a card. FOr some people it means 6x (so they can make two decks with 3 of some cards). Some people feel the core set is a complete set. Perception. Please try to understand our point of view. Thanks.

I've no idea, I don't play Magic nor am I interested in doing so. What Magic, or any other product, does is completely irrelevant. I have also not said that you can't play this game without 3 copies either. That is also not the point.

having at least 3x (if you want 6x, go for it, that's a separate issue as well) is essential if you want to play the game seriously because you will need those choices to hand. I will not countenance any game that operates in that way, whether it's 3x or 4x or whatever, that doesn't give you any way to get those cards but to buy multiple copies of the core set like this, especially when that means buying increasing amounts of cards you won't use. It's not even as if you could trade for these cards. This was a huge oversight and I would love to know what FFG's reasoning on this is.

signoftheserpent said:

Despite my better judgement, I'll indulge you. My guess? They stand to gain more by offering a reasonably priced and balanced starter set that gets people into the game than offering an overpriced or unbalanced starter set that turns people off the game.

Clearly, you feel strongly about this and seem to not want to get into the game for the reasons you stated, so I think we all win if you just move on and find another game and community that you feel comfortable endorsing.

This thread started me thinking:

Has there ever been a customizable game (a game in which you "build" your deck/force before playing) that offered a full playset in the introductory box? I ran down the list of the most popular customizable games on BGG, but I didn't find any that offered a full playset:

Android: Netrunner - no

Summoner Wars - no

Mage Wars - no? (not sure about this one)

Lord of the Rings - no

Heroscape - no

Netrunner (original) - no

Dungeon Command - no

A Game of Thrones - no

Warhammer: Invasion - no

(If I'm wrong about any of the above, feel free to correct me with a strong blow to the face).

I ask because I think it's fair to put FFG's distribution system in context with other popular games of a similar type in the market. It seems like most of the games above offer a fixed distribution, non-full-playset "game-in-a-box," (I think Magic offers this with fixed distribution decks, right?). If we're going to call FFG's core set distribution "bad," then is there any company that produces customizable games that made a "good" decision in this regard?

I can't speak for everyone, but I for one was burned out on the CCG model of distribution.  I played the original Netrunner and Lord of the Rings TCG competitively at the local level.  I spent hundreds of dollars on card sets and doubt I could ever say I had a "full" play set of anything.  I simply couldn't shell out enough $$ to stay competitive, so both games had to go.

When Netrunner came out my first thought was "holy smokes someone republished it".  My second thought was "I'm not going to buy back into THAT crack habit" (i.e. buying box after box of boosters).  A month later I decided to actually research it and discovered the LCG distribution model.  Now I own two starter sets, my FLGS has my name on their list to pre-order the expansion packs, and I'm trying to get something going locally.

So while I generally agree that the distribution of the starters isn't perfect, I think it is good enough and promotes the game well.

Okay: the Core Set is "incomplete".

As per your opinion, signoftheserpent, you have no reason to get into the physical version of the game.

There. Done. No more argument, no more drama.

(Messenger goes back to eagerly looking forward to What Lies Ahead and figuring out how to integrate What Lies Ahead with his decks made from his one, single Core Set.)

Why do people bother answering these threads with arguments when we can just link to any (or all) of the dozens of threads this has already been discussed in?  Topics like these have been argued to death in numerous threads in every other LCG forum, you would think someone would just creat a thread in the general LCG forum with links to every "I'm uspest with the core set" or "I want a completion pack" thread so we can just point at it.  Are the "I'm mad at getting 3 copies of X card" threads too new to be included alongside the previous two topics?