Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
18 Posts

Android: Netrunner» Forums » Rules

Subject: Why the Nerfs? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
C Spiekerman
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thinking a lot about Jinteki lately (wonder why!?), and wonder about the nerfing of two cards in particular, but there's probably more.

Braintrust: as is, the overadvance benefit is rarely, if ever, good enough to use. I wonder why it was necessary to cost 2 advance/1 bonus? Why not 1 for 1 like Atlas and Vitruvius? I'm thinking a lower benefit threshhold would have made Braintrust much more worthwhile, make it a pretty damn good 4/2, but I don't think overpowered. Enabled Cell-Portal even!

Neo-Tokyo Grid: Why only once per turn? Why only "in server" excluding the "protecting server"? If they removed the latter I think this card is playable. If instead they removed the former, it would be a damn good card (perhaps higher rez cost?). But I don't think overpowered, unless they removed both restrictions.

Thoughts?

Any other cards that would be more playable, but not overpowered,
without some particular restriction?

Perhaps Because We Built It would be good without the restriction to advancing only ICE? Others?


EDIT: oops, meant to put this in General, not Rules, Sorry! soblue
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nate K
United States
Utah
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cspieker wrote:

Braintrust: as is, the overadvance benefit is rarely, if ever, good enough to use. I wonder why it was necessary to cost 2 advance/1 bonus? Why not 1 for 1 like Atlas and Vitruvius? I'm thinking a lower benefit threshhold would have made Braintrust much more worthwhile, make it a pretty damn good 4/2, but I don't think overpowered. Enabled Cell-Portal even!


...I don't know. Because part of Jinteki's shtick is their weak agendas?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alejandro G.
United States
Hurst
Texas
flag msg tools
Sometimes you have to roll the hard six.
badge
I'm getting my men...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.

Hello there.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Keddie
Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
kurthl33t wrote:
cspieker wrote:

Braintrust: as is, the overadvance benefit is rarely, if ever, good enough to use. I wonder why it was necessary to cost 2 advance/1 bonus? Why not 1 for 1 like Atlas and Vitruvius? I'm thinking a lower benefit threshhold would have made Braintrust much more worthwhile, make it a pretty damn good 4/2, but I don't think overpowered. Enabled Cell-Portal even!


...I don't know. Because part of Jinteki's shtick is their weak agendas?


I suspect they were worried that making it one-for-one might be TOO powerful. As-written, it's so actually hard to get even a single-credit discount on your ICE (install-advance-advance, next turn advance three times and score if it wasn't stolen) it's rarely been worth it until now - I think Mushin no Shin MIGHT actually make this viable (Mushin, then next turn advance twice and score; still have a click).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick Jamet
France
Paris
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cspieker wrote:
Any other cards that would be more playable, but not overpowered, without some particular restriction?

I think of GRNDL: restricted to 10 influence, one bad pub, and... Blackmail in the same datapack ! wow
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christopher Barnett
United Kingdom
Northwich
Cheshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The difficulty of braintrust may well have something to do with Cell Portal. If you could make a discount of 2, or even 3, then infinite, then cell portal could become very very nasty indeed.

Even discounting that (I may well be overestimating on that one), a solid runner strategy has always been to bleed the corp dry (running other servers, account siphon etc), before running on the server you want. If you could rez nasty ice for free or near free, it would completely negate that as a strategy. It might not be broken, but it would be unpleasant to play against.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Neufeld
Canada
Burnaby
British Columbia
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
cspieker wrote:
Braintrust: as is, the overadvance benefit is rarely, if ever, good enough to use. I wonder why it was necessary to cost 2 advance/1 bonus? Why not 1 for 1 like Atlas and Vitruvius? I'm thinking a lower benefit threshhold would have made Braintrust much more worthwhile, make it a pretty damn good 4/2, but I don't think overpowered. Enabled Cell-Portal even!


As has been pointed out: a 3/2 is already strong. If you could buy yourself a single extra turn to score it under your version (scoring it as with 5 tokens because the Runner gave you a scoring window), you now save 2 credits off EVERY. SINGLE. ICE. This would make Government Contracts and Gila Hands Arcology look like child's play, pure and simple. Do it twice, and most of Jinteki's ICE is now free to rez.

cspieker wrote:

Neo-Tokyo Grid: Why only once per turn? Why only "in server" excluding the "protecting server"? If they removed the latter I think this card is playable. If instead they removed the former, it would be a damn good card (perhaps higher rez cost?). But I don't think overpowered, unless they removed both restrictions.


Okay, for the "once per turn" question - Shipment From SanSan, Trick of Light, AstroScript Pilot Program. Advancing cards in the server is now actually GIVING you money. Who needs San San when you can advance cards for free? NTG is better with slow drip advance, or agendas that can't be scored in a single turn because it offers a discount of 2 credits on them.

For the "protecting server" question, NTG + Tennin Institute gives you a token for your Trick of Light battery AND a credit, without the Runner being able to do anything except Parasite the (possibly unrezzed) Ice. Subliminal Messaging is already amazing, think how much bigger this can be on HQ or R&D.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
xpiredsodapop wrote:
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.


Uh, really? you can't playtest something and then nerf the effect of the originally defined cards?

It is possible that the initial design just wasn't that strong and no "nerfing" occurred. But it is also possible that different versions were tested including stronger versions.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alejandro G.
United States
Hurst
Texas
flag msg tools
Sometimes you have to roll the hard six.
badge
I'm getting my men...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.


Uh, really? you can't playtest something and then nerf the effect of the originally defined cards?

It is possible that the initial design just wasn't that strong and no "nerfing" occurred. But it is also possible that different versions were tested including stronger versions.


If the OP was involved in the creation process of the mentioned cards and had played them before their release, then I could understand that.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
xpiredsodapop wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.


Uh, really? you can't playtest something and then nerf the effect of the originally defined cards?

It is possible that the initial design just wasn't that strong and no "nerfing" occurred. But it is also possible that different versions were tested including stronger versions.


If the OP was involved in the creation process of the mentioned cards and had played them before their release, then I could understand that.


Agreed, but if we are to assume they were tested, one would assume that the specific values on the card were calibrated for some reasons. So perhaps his word "nerf" isn't accurate, but it doesn't make the discussion useless, or meaningless.

Your response came of as somebody trolling, which probably was your intent, in an effort to call the whole discussion stupid.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Keddie
Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
mfl134 wrote:
Your response came of as somebody trolling, which probably was your intent, in an effort to call the whole discussion stupid.


Pot, Kettle. Kettle, Pot.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alejandro G.
United States
Hurst
Texas
flag msg tools
Sometimes you have to roll the hard six.
badge
I'm getting my men...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.


Uh, really? you can't playtest something and then nerf the effect of the originally defined cards?

It is possible that the initial design just wasn't that strong and no "nerfing" occurred. But it is also possible that different versions were tested including stronger versions.


If the OP was involved in the creation process of the mentioned cards and had played them before their release, then I could understand that.


Agreed, but if we are to assume they were tested, one would assume that the specific values on the card were calibrated for some reasons. So perhaps his word "nerf" isn't accurate, but it doesn't make the discussion useless, or meaningless.

Your response came of as somebody trolling, which probably was your intent, in an effort to call the whole discussion stupid.


I'm sorry you took it that way. I appreciate you taking up the defense of the OP though. Your actions are commendable.

My issue was with the word nerfing. The cards were not nerfed. Had FFG released an update changing the strength of say.. Eli 1.0 to 2 from it's original 4. Then I believe that would be considered nerfing.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CommissarFeesh wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
Your response came of as somebody trolling, which probably was your intent, in an effort to call the whole discussion stupid.


Pot, Kettle. Kettle, Pot.


hmm?

One of the reason that I like the bgg community was because it has people who are generally nice to one another. I saw a comment that seemed to go against that and was surprised.

I'm definitely missing how I am trolling here, I thought I was just speaking up for a fellow geek.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mfl134
United States
Havertown
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
My words literally betray me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
xpiredsodapop wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.


Uh, really? you can't playtest something and then nerf the effect of the originally defined cards?

It is possible that the initial design just wasn't that strong and no "nerfing" occurred. But it is also possible that different versions were tested including stronger versions.


If the OP was involved in the creation process of the mentioned cards and had played them before their release, then I could understand that.


Agreed, but if we are to assume they were tested, one would assume that the specific values on the card were calibrated for some reasons. So perhaps his word "nerf" isn't accurate, but it doesn't make the discussion useless, or meaningless.

Your response came of as somebody trolling, which probably was your intent, in an effort to call the whole discussion stupid.


I'm sorry you took it that way. I appreciate you taking up the defense of the OP though. Your actions are commendable.

My issue was with the word nerfing. The cards were not nerfed. Had FFG released an update changing the strength of say.. Eli 1.0 to 2 from it's original 4. Then I believe that would be considered nerfing.


Thanks for the explanation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alejandro G.
United States
Hurst
Texas
flag msg tools
Sometimes you have to roll the hard six.
badge
I'm getting my men...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
mfl134 wrote:
xpiredsodapop wrote:
I don't think this qualifies as a nerf. Nerfing would be if the cards you were mentioning were already printed as you discussed and then changed into the state they are in now.

Goodbye.


Uh, really? you can't playtest something and then nerf the effect of the originally defined cards?

It is possible that the initial design just wasn't that strong and no "nerfing" occurred. But it is also possible that different versions were tested including stronger versions.


If the OP was involved in the creation process of the mentioned cards and had played them before their release, then I could understand that.


Agreed, but if we are to assume they were tested, one would assume that the specific values on the card were calibrated for some reasons. So perhaps his word "nerf" isn't accurate, but it doesn't make the discussion useless, or meaningless.

Your response came of as somebody trolling, which probably was your intent, in an effort to call the whole discussion stupid.


I'm sorry you took it that way. I appreciate you taking up the defense of the OP though. Your actions are commendable.

My issue was with the word nerfing. The cards were not nerfed. Had FFG released an update changing the strength of say.. Eli 1.0 to 2 from it's original 4. Then I believe that would be considered nerfing.


Thanks for the explanation.


No problem. I felt that a full explanation was required and logical...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Louis Schiffer
msg tools
In regard to the OP.

The problem is that that there are a broad swath of effects and abilities where fiddling the numbers can transition from OP to UP very quickly and a company like FFG will want to hedge. As has been mentioned the Brain trust very quickly becomes overpowered if you adjust the numbers. It an unfortunate result of certain numbers adding up quicker than others.

Also, could you imagine NTG with Thomas haas if you could get your credits back multiple time per turn?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Neufeld
Canada
Burnaby
British Columbia
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
LouisSchiffer wrote:
Also, could you imagine NTG with Thomas haas if you could get your credits back multiple time per turn?


Oh man, I didn't even think of that one. Win on top of Win!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jan Bazynski
Poland
Warsaw
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
kurthl33t wrote:
cspieker wrote:

Braintrust: as is, the overadvance benefit is rarely, if ever, good enough to use. I wonder why it was necessary to cost 2 advance/1 bonus? Why not 1 for 1 like Atlas and Vitruvius? I'm thinking a lower benefit threshhold would have made Braintrust much more worthwhile, make it a pretty damn good 4/2, but I don't think overpowered. Enabled Cell-Portal even!


...I don't know. Because part of Jinteki's shtick is their weak agendas?


Really? The faction that has the best 4/2 and 5/3 in the game? after h&p jinteki has a comfortable situation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.