I am saying that you posted what you did the way you did because of emotion, not because of facts. That you thought there was an understanding between you and the various people who owned the rights to Netrunner and apparently they had a different opinion on the relationship. That Trace/Link being removed was speculation on your part based on a single card that tagged a runner without running a trace and that is not a logical assumption to make given how little information we have about the game.

Emotional reactions to things the we care deeply about are understandable and unavoidable. Posting about them is avoidable though. I think the time you've taken off has hopefully allowed you to get some perspective and distance. It is fine if you have opinions on how you would have preferred things to have gone, but they didn't go that way. It is better for everyone, and for both games, if we all learn to accept this is the reality of things and move on from there.

I'm sure FFG is aware of all the opinions being expressed too some amount and will do what they can to get the largest audience possible for this game. That is almost certainly going to mean disappointing some of the older players. For some of them no changes are acceptable and any version that does not allow their old cards to be used will be panned. It is sad but true. From a business perspective FFG should not even attempt to interact or cater to these players.

Some of the older players will be happy with the game if it is just loosely based on the game they remember and loved because there will be leagues of new players and new cards coming out on a regular basis that will be easily available for a reasonable price. From a business perspective FFG has no reason to not try to make the largest most attractive game for these fans as possible. 

Somewhere in between are people who would love this game with any and all changes but will be instantly unhappy and suspicious of any changes or updates to the game. They won't let go of "their" netrunner. They will constantly harp about how the old game did things and always view the original game as the superior game. FFG may reach out to these players in an attempt to show how great this game is, personally I think most of them will be so locked into their mindset it will only dawn on them a year or two later that perhaps this game is a worthy successor to the original Netrunner, and maybe a couple years after that maybe even come to realize that some of the changes made in the system are improvements (considering the track record FFG has with LCG's and the 16 years of evolution and development of the customizable card game genre I think it is fair to say there is a decent chance there will be actual improvements to the game).

I can't help but wonder how many of their playtesters are old Netrunner players and how many of their feedback began and ended with "This isn't the way Netrunner did it," filled with "You're ruining my game" in between.

Me I can't wait to get my paws on the cards and see what changes have been made. Muy list of changes that would be seen as immediate improvements are as follows:

1. Get rid of dice. (It is a card game. I just can't love a card game that requires me to use dice anymore)
2. Simplify Trace/Link. I liked it, didn't love it, Teaching it I never saw anyone who did love it. The game within a game actually bogged the system down in my opinion.
3. Strict card limits. I've ranted about this here and there and everywhere. The reason why Netrunner was SO popular in sealed was because you didn't have to deal with this.

That is pretty much it. As a fan of the old game I'll view every other change with suspicion and fear. Okay, that is lie. Factions intrigue me… but I still kind of fear them. They have been handled in their other games marvelously well… so I have a kernel of hope I am nursing, but I really want more info about how they are going to be intergrated. I am about half way through the first novel in the Android universe. It is very cool. It is a murder mystery with deep philosophical questions poised that I have a feeling are never going to be sufficiently answered in this book. I hope the factions come across well and add to the games theme rather than detract from the games mechanics.

 Penfold, 

Loved your post. You distilled my sentiments to a T.

However, I have high hopes for FFG's rendition of Netrunner; though I can't profess much experience with the original, it struck me as a bit unwieldy, what with the multitude of chits and counters. I have every confidence that FFG will make a game worthy of much enjoyment, even if the simplifications strike some as blasphemous defamations. 

I have total faith in FFG. Despite the lumpy distribution for the base set, I'm totally loving the Lord of the Rings LCG. If FFG can make a decent LotR card game, they can revive Netrunner.

Penfold said:

*slow clap*

Treguard said:

*joins slow clap*

MarthWMaster said:

*clapping gets a little louder and faster*

Penfold said:

Hi and thx for your reply, 

I'd like to see the game and the rules to speak and analyse the supposed changes . 

i hope i'll like AD:N as i love NR, really . 

i'm very impatient ;)

I'm just hoping against all hope that they don't do the 3x restrictions. I'd be ok with like 6x, but 3x ruins so many fun decks. PLEASE don't kill the Rio/Siren or Doners or TagMe or ….

swingjunkie said:

6x restriction doesn't work well with LCG model because there is no single market. It would be too hard to get play set of the cards. 3x restriction is easier to manage with expansions and core set. For me it is important that I can make almost any kind of deck quite easily and cheap (in some CCGs this can be much easier than LCGs because of the single market). Needing to buy 6x Core set to get enough of some card would be total killer for me.

FFG can also do some quite similar cards so limit can be 2x3 of almost two different cards (so practically 6x or 9x etc). But there are problems with CCG and LCG model but I don't think bigger card limit or no limit works in FFG LCG without rethinking the whole LCG distribution. 

 I have a feeling the "6x" or even the "9x" or "12x" configurations will be possible just like Surreal suggested, in the form of similar cards…

If we have faction cards, then it might be reasonable to assume that simple card archetypes can be re-used as multiple cards with minor adjustments to reflect the strengths and weaknesses of each faction.

For example, picture a standard concept: a 3 STR Code-Wall icebreaker that boosts +1 Str for 2 and breaks subroutines for 1.

One faction might get it for slightly cheaper install cost. Another might get it with a memory usage reduction. Yet another might have it be 1 higher strength but then make boosting more expensive.

If they're all named differently, then in theory you could have 9 cards with approximately the same effect in your deck.

Big Head Zach said:

Or they could just make such a wallbreaker a Neutral card. I don't think we've seen any neutral runner cards, but I imagine they would exist for vanilla programs such as this.

Penfold said:

Pulled my old cards out for the first time in over a decade and played with the two starter decks I still had in the original box (sadly, my other cards were not lovingly stored and are in less-than-great shape, for which I am ashamed). I hadn't forgotten how much I loved the game, though playing for the first time in so long, I didn't play well. And I'm damned if I can remember how to build a deck. But, wow, am I glad it's coming back.

Factions interest me a lot. I'm excited about the idea that we might be able to play widely different styles of decks, with different strengths and weaknesses (as in AGoT) based on what faction we choose. I haven't seen anything but Runner factions as yet (either I've missed it or nothing's been revealed about Corps) but I hope both sides have them. For me limited card pool of base plus only one expansion didn't provide enough deckbuilding variety (I always have loads of different decks for any of these games, I'm not one for just playing one or two decks all the time). Factions suggest we'll have more of it.

I can't argue against simplifying Trace/Link, provided it remains the significance it had in the original. Hitting a Trace should be a big deal. Nor can I argue about getting rid of dice. I'm not sure about card limits, though. I suspect it'll be there since it's so standard in the industry (pretty much always with good reason), but it really depends on implementation.

I do Know this: If they bring back Black Dahlia with the original flavour text, I'll be a long way toward being pleased with the reboot.

Amuk said:

There are actually more Corp factions than Runner (4 Corp, 3 Runner). The details are in the description subsection of the product page, but here is what we know (copied verbatim):

• Haas-Bioroid leads the work replacement revolution with its bioroids, humanoid machines possessing artificially-intelligent minds developed from careful braintaping.
• Jinteki are their main rival in the labor solutions market. Jinteki excel at producing genetically-engineered clones, some of which are even capable of working in the vacuum at the top of the Beanstalk.
• NBN owns what you think and dream, with the largest and most pervasive media network ever conceived by man streaming everything from music to threedee, news to sitcoms, and classic movies to sensies.
• The Weyland Consortium has expanded since its construction of the space elevator; the Consortium now leads the way in construction of cutting edge facilities on Earth, the Moon, and Mars.

As you can see, however, there isn't much information to go on. The Runner faction descriptions give a little bit more away about what will differentiate them (Criminals seem to be leaning towards bit generators and viewing the Corp's hidden cards, the Anarchs deal in viruses and the Shaders have the best equipment/upgrade potential). 

Anarchosyn said:

Excellent. Thanks! I can definitely see some hints as to deck styles there. And all straight out of the board game, too.