Category: Jason Waddell

Android: Netrunner Full Review

By: Jason Waddell

Last month I gave my initial impressions of Android: Netrunner, wherein I introduced the basic ideas of Android: Netrunner and gave my thoughts after my inaugural 90 minutes with the game. Since then I’ve had the opportunity to play against a variety of opponents both on- and offline, and can now offer a fuller assessment of the game’s design.

One of Netrunner’s marquee selling points is that it is a non-collectible game. The core set and subsequent expansions come packed with a complete playset of each included card, eliminating the need to reach for your wallet whenever you wish to create a new deck or tinker with an existing one. Although this sounds like a universal positive, it does come with significant design baggage: the same product has to satisfy both beginners and veterans alike.

Android: Netrunner is a deep and complex game, often to the point of being intimidating for a beginner. Several cards were either misplayed or misinterpreted in my early matches, and I found myself ending each playsession to scour Google for clarifications on cards or plays that didn’t quite make sense to me. The problem is apparently widespread, as despite a rather lengthy rulebook and supplemental online FAQ from Fantasy Flight Games, many gameplay elements remained unclear.

wyrm netrunneraccount siphon netrunner card

By contrast, a game like Magic: the Gathering is both more complex than Netrunner yet simultaneously more accessible. Wizards of the Coast have spent years lowering Magic’s barrier to entry, from the beginner-friendly “Duels of the Planeswalkers” recruitment program, to a pipeline of products designed to ease players into the more fully-fledged environments. I spend my days playing and writing about one of Magic’s most advanced formats, but I started with low-power decks that practically played themselves.

Netrunner is certainly better suited for learning under the tutelage of an experienced player, but for those without the luxury, I do hope you’ll power through, as Netrunner’s gameplay is both deep and rewarding.

The primary gameplay mechanics used in Android: Netrunner are resource management and bluffing via hidden information. The two mechanics blend to form an experience that is simultaneously tense and playful. Rather than sell you on the concept myself, I turn to the words of Richard Garfield, Netrunner’s original designer:

When one player knows something that another player doesn’t a world of game opportunity opens up. This opens the door to game theory – where there is bluffing and misdirection, and the play of the game can leap from the dry statistics of the rules into things like reading the opponents and smelling fear. At its best it allows a heady mix of intuition and reason that is hard to match. Hidden information is not appropriate for all games, but I never design any game without considering it long and hard.

Like luck in games, hidden information can increase the breadth of players that will play it. Whenever I learn a new game with no hidden (or inconsequential) information I know there are some players in my playgroup that will make that game a misery to play. They are not doing it to be abusive – but they can’t help themselves when the optimum line of play is there to be calculated. Even the luck of dice may not reduce their calculation – because they can always seek the probabilistically best move. But if there is meaningful hidden information they can’t overcalculate because they know that other people might be misleading them. And they also can make more arbitrary moves because they know that this may mislead the opponent.

– Richard Garfield, “Design Lessons from Poker

I’m a statistician by trade, and people are often surprised to discover that I don’t enjoy games with complete information. If a game state can be solved, my brain yearns to solve it. The wheels turn and turn looking for an answer, and I can’t turn them off. This is immensely dissatisfying. I don’t play games to solve problems. I play games to play.

As Richard Garfield notes, one of the secret benefits of hidden information is that it can cut down on analysis paralysis. You can only process things for so long before you shove your chips in one direction or another.

snare netrunner cardaccelerated beta test netrunner deckaggressive secretary netrunner

A key element of the design is that the card types Assets, Agendas and Upgrades are all played the same way: face-down on the table. With exception to depleting the Runner’s hand of cards, the Corporation’s only path to victory is “advancing” 7 points worth of Agendas. To advance an Agenda, the corporation spends one credit and one click (action) to place an advancement token on a face-down agenda. The above “Accelerated Beta Test” is worth 2 points and requires 3 advancement tokens to be scored. In total, scoring this agenda requires 4 actions: one to play the card from your hand onto the table, and three to advance it. By design, the corporation only has three actions per turn. Fully advancing an agenda almost always requires passing the turn back to the Runner with an Agenda on the table.

Such, the “safe” play is to first build up a defense of “ICE” to guard the agenda before playing one to the table. On the runner’s turn, he or she can make a “run” at one of your servers, which may or may not be home to an agenda. If they survive the gauntlet of ICE you have placed in front of them, the runner steals the Agenda and scores it for themselves. Of course, as the corporation, you can’t simply hold your Agendas in hand until there’s a well-guarded server waiting for them. No, Netrunner’s design is far too clever for that.

Two mechanics introduce an interesting tension to this dynamic. Firstly, the runner can make a run at just about anything. They can make a run at the corporation’s hand to access a random card from the corporation player’s hand. The runner can make a run at the corporation’s deck (to access the top card) or discard pile (to access all cards there) too. Secondly, the corporation player is required to include a certain number of agendas in their deck.

The Runner will run at anything that isn’t nailed down. As the corporation, a valuable tool against this constant assault is the power of misinformation. The inclusion of assets like Aggressive Secretary and Snare! in your deck allows you to disguise your intentions and slows the runner down by forcing the runner to prepare for the worst before attempting a run.

breaking news netrunner
An Agenda that can be played and fully advanced in one turn. However, its benefit (giving the runner 2 tags) expires at the end of turn. Well designed tension all on one card. 

This system of mechanics allows the player to imbue their play with an incredible degree of style. Like Poker, Netrunner is less a game of mistakes than it is a game of opportunities. Two players with different temperaments can attack the game with different strategies, even with the same deck.  An aggressive player bears more risk, but can get away with certain gambles that a conservative player cannot. And like poker, sometimes it’s best to randomize your playstyle as to not give your opponent the gift of free information.

Like all card games, Netrunner is host to its fair share of randomness. Netrunner takes a novel approach to variance management. The corporation and runner players get 3 and 4 “clicks” (actions) per turn respectively, and clicks can be used in a number of ways. At any point, you can spend one of your actions to draw a card or a credit from the bank. This is not the most efficient way to draw cards or earn credits, but the availability of these options smooths out the game enough to prevent the “pointless” games that can occur in other card games like Magic while still ensuring that duels play out differently from game to game.

noise identity netrunnerkate mccaffrey identity netrunner

Best of all, Fantasy Flight Games has managed to create a game whose play is both diverse and consistently interactive. The game’s 7 factions (3 runners, 4 corporations) attack the game from very different angles, but the fundamentals of the game’s beautifully designed rules system holds it all together. The corporation must include Agendas in their deck, and the runner must find a way to steal said Agendas.

Android: Netrunner comes together to form an experience that is far more than the sum of its parts, and is hands down the most innovative and engaging new game I’ve played in the last decade. For a heady mixture of hidden information, bluffing and interactive resource management, look no further.

Discuss this article in our forums.

Channel Waddell: Cube Draft #1

By: Jason Waddell

My latest ChannelFireball article launched this morning, and this one is a change of pace from previous installments. Here I record one of my own paper drafts, and share my picks and matches. I’m eager to hear feedback on the format, as I could certainly produce more of these if readers are interested.

Discuss this article in our forums.

Dragon’s Maze Cube Review: Director’s Cut

By: Jason Waddell

There’s a saying that “it takes a big man to admit when they’re wrong”. In reality, the prerequisites are much less specific. For one, the gender requirement is rather antiquated. Moreover, admitting you’re wrong doesn’t necessarily constitute an apology. Maybe you’re a scandalized politician forced to make a public statement, thereby laying the groundwork for your eventual mayoral campaign. Further, you don’t even have to be wrong. Perhaps your spouse won’t cook dinner until you two finish this argument, and you had an early lunch.

As you may have surmised, I’ve been wrong. Not “Evan Erwin hyping Time Reversal” wrong, or even “UnSkewed Polls” wrong, but wrong nonetheless.

effenA

Before I get to my actual apology, I’d like to issue a theoretical apology. In another universe, had middle school Jason had the opportunity to play with this card, he would have childishly referred to it as “effen A”. I know that’s not a risk in this reality, but if you believe in the multiverse theory, somewhere there’s a Jason Waddell obnoxiously using this terminology at an eastern Michigan FNM. If I could correct him, I’d tell him to pronounce it as it’s written in the Oracle ruling: “far slash slash away”

On to the actual apology. In my ChannelFireball Dragon’s Maze Cube Review, I panned Far // Away for not being sufficiently powerful relative to my 360 card environment. Of course, that didn’t mean I wasn’t going to try it. Even before the article was published, I had pre-ordered a copy for testing. Now, I’m not one to universally say “don’t knock it until you try it”, but when the opportunity cost is less than the cost of most Taco Bell menu items, I tend to give cards their fair shake.

When the card arrived in the mail, I slotted it in for Repeal for testing. It turns out that the card has everything I’m looking for in a cube inclusion. It’s fun, flexible, skill-testing, and produces some splashy plays. I was concerned that an expensive Edict would rarely hit the most profitable target, but often with some set-up you can arrange a blowout. I really love the dynamic of Fuse cards, as you weigh early plays against late-game advantages. Far // Away can be cast for 2, 3 or 5 mana, and the most effective mode will change from game to game.

As a note, the last time I saw this in action, was off of a Duskmantle Seer flip. I argued that the CMC was 3, but both my opponent and his teammate said the converted mana cost was 5. Our local judge was missing in action, so I deferred to their “wisdom” and let my opponent take 5. Apparently they were wrong, but who can argue against democracy? (EDIT: Nope, apparently I was wrong all along. Does that make me a big man?)

Blood Scrivener

I was rather enthusiastic about Blood Scrivener, but it’s been a few drafts now and he’s yet to draw a card. Maybe we’ve been unlucky? I’m going to keep testing, out of hopeful optimism, but he might just be worse than his flavor text. Zombie Piker is really not what I’m looking for in that slot. Has anybody else had better experience with Blood Scrivener?

Ral Zarek

No actual apology here, Ral Zarek has performed pretty much as I expected him to. I will say though, I’ve been a little surprised at how often the +1 ability is just a complete blank. I’ve activated it in many board states where it simply provides no value. There was a lot of talk before this card came out about how flexible and interesting the tap/untap ability is, but I’ve yet to have it not be either obvious or useless. Wizards has a long history of printing Izzet cards that are meant to be creative but somehow miss the mark. Hopefully someday they’ll capture the flavor a little better.

All said though, Ral Zarek feels very appropriately powered, and I stand by my decision to put him in and take out Ajani Vengeant.

Discuss this article in our forums.

Gold Digger (Playsession Report)

By: Jason Waddell

As a displaced American living in Belgium, I’ve learned that things work a little differently in this part of the world. For one, the school year runs much later. While our North American counterparts have already jetted home for the summer, Belgian students are in the thick of cram season. Secondly, and more egregiously, nobody around here watches Arrested Development. Few have even heard of it. I could have come dressed as Gene Parmesan and nobody would have even noticed.

The convolution of these two factors led to me interrupting my 15-episode marathon for a less-than-full-table draft. Monday evening’s draft was a mere six player affair, but one that I went into quite confidently. Most players don’t realize how different six-player drafts are from 8-player drafts, and I’m here to share one sexy secret you won’t find in Cosmo. What’s the difference?

There’s only six players.

Let me elaborate. Let’s take the simple and incorrect assumption that each player will play a two-color deck. In a six-player draft, only six of the ten guilds will be occupied. This leaves four of the guilds completely unoccupied. It’s the perfect set up. Gold cards are flowing like it’s 1849, and with only six players at the table, some players even let the gold cards in their colors wheel. Prep your energy bar wrappers, it’s time to smuggle some gold!

So what’s the plan? Cut the entire table from fixing, then reap the rewards of your Midas touch in Packs 2 and 3. For best results, commit to the strategy early and don’t be afraid to put all your Anns in one basket.

And commit I did. Within the first seven picks I collected four fetchlands and a Lotus Cobra. That’s the set up. Having hamstrung the entire table’s ability to get greedy, you set up some truly preposterous late-draft packs. Pack 3 Pick 5, for example, presented these two cards.

Bloodbraid ElfShardless Agent

I took the Bloodbraid and wheeled the Shardless Agent. All told, I snagged 11 gold cards, which is about half the gold cards present in the entire draft pool. When you pursue a gold strategy, you have to play to the natural strengths of the cards. The assortment of gold cards in most cubes skews heavily towards three and four-drops, so you need to plan your curve accordingly. This means a midrange build, with mono-color cards filling out the lower end of your curve.

I 3 – 0’d with the following:
golddigger
(click to enlarge)

Memorable Plays:

My Round 3 opponent wrecked me one game by playing Furnace Celebration, then cracking Fetchlands for four turns straight to obliterate my board. Goodbye Shardless Agent, Flametongue Kavu and Deathrite Shaman. As a killing blow he Entombed for Hellspark Elemental, sacrificed it end of turn to Goblin Bombardment and payed 2 for Furnace Celebration to deal the final 6 points of damage.

In Game 3 of Round 2, I was up against the ropes against a really good tripod (three Birthing Pod) deck. I didn’t have any artifact removal, and despite playing two Cascade creatures, sided in Daze to try and keep a birthing Pod off the table. On the draw I played a Turn 2 Tarmogoyf, then Dazed his Turn 3 Birthing Pod to pump my Goyf to a 4/5. This clocked him out before he could get his absurd Reveillark, Sun Titan, Angel of Serenity madness online.

MVP:
Growth Spasm

Growth Spasm is the most fun three-mana ramp spell on the market. I cast it three times this draft, and not once used the Spawn token for mana. Instead, I turned it into a 5/5 dragon twice (thanks Sarkhan), and sacrificed it once to the glory of the Hypnot Falkenrath Aristocrat.

Team Victory

As it was a six-person draft, we ran it as a 3v3 team draft. My team (me, Costa and Gert) won 6 – 2.
draft10

Costa’s undefeated deck:

costa
(click to enlarge)

That’s all for today. I went the whole article and couldn’t think of one Kanye reference.

Discuss this article in our forums.

Channel Cube Cast: Black

By: Jason Waddell

The fifth installment of ChannelFireball’s “Channel Cube Cast” is online, and it’s of special interest to me as it discusses a pair of articles I wrote about remodelling my cube, with a focus on bringing black aggro up to par. As of this moment, I haven’t had time to listen to it, but look forward to their comments. Listening to the Channel Cube Cast always reminds me that cube design, like any design, is a very cultural thing, shaped by your experiences. I can imagine that cubing in a Magic hotbed like San Jose is significantly different than cubing in Antwerp, Belgium.

When I wrote the articles, I got an email back from editor Andy Cooperfauss with a message along the lines of “thank goodness you wrote these, I was about to have to write them so that we could discuss them on the podcast”. Of all the cube writers, Andy’s design approach is the closest fit to mine philosophically. He is very environmentally concerned, and will disregard traditional “cube design rules” to create a better experience. His cube plays not only Rebel errata, but also errata on things like Cursed Scroll (activation cost of two).

It’s also pure conjecture, but I imagine they might take issue with some of my card choices. Something like Reins of Power is super unconventional, and I’ve left out some “obvious” archetype cards like Graveborn Muse. I stand by the approach of design not always giving players exactly the best tool, opting for cards that have a bit higher fun and splash factor (Disciple of Bolas).

All said, I’m really looking forward to listening to the podcast later today, and as a designer there’s nothing more flattering or useful than having other players take the time to really dissect your design elements. This is the third time they’ve discussed one of my articles, and it’s always a joy to listen to.

I’ll post more detailed thoughts in the forums later on, but for now, feel free to share your opinions in this thread.

Update, 12:44 – After giving the podcast a lunchtime listen, I realize this podcast was structured a little differently than the previous ones. The conversation focused more on Andy’s ventures into his black section renovation, and less on the actual articles referenced. I agreed with many of Andy’s conclusions, and although he mentioned in the podcast that he doesn’t find breaking singleton necessary for the archetype to work, he is running 2 copies of Bloodghast and 3 copies of Gravecrawler in his current cube list.

If there is one critique to be made, it’s that I get the impression that the cubes in that region have very isolated archetypes. There was an entire podcast about whether mono-color or multicolor aggro was better, for example, which I found hard to relate to. Perhaps the better question is, from a design standpoint, which works better in a draft environment? This is an item I touched on in The Poison Principle, and I think that having the strength of your cube being in monocolored archetypes leads to more problematic drafting dynamics.

I left the following comment:

If I were to pick one bone, it’d be with the notion that the black cards are creating just another “mono red” or “mono white” deck. Like any set design, it depends on what you do with the rest of the set. It can be pigeonholed if you only include one player’s worth of sacrifice cards, but if you increase the critical mass and make it a more central part of your cube-wide design, you end up with multiple players fighting for the same materials to use in decks that have very different texture.

To take a ridiculous example, you could make a Metalcraft archetype in cube (or any other set) and fill it with only cards that a single deck wants, or make artifacts a more critical part of your design (ala Scars of Mirrodin) without that same sort of mechanical isolation.

The “pigeonholing” of archetypes is one of the worst elements of MTGO Cube design, and with real sets there’s a much greater emphasis on finding ways for the various parts to fit together rather than just making “the ___ deck” work.

There was also a nice comment left by Frodie Brancis:

tl;dr – hypothesis: cubes need to be redesigned from the perspective of giving each colour some identity thing to actually do, as opposed to just the best cards from each colour, as black will always be on the bottom of that barrel.

Cube design is definitely shifting from its roots of jamming the best context-independent cards, and as was pointed out in the podcast, this approach lets you dig deep into Wizards’ cardpool and pull out fun cards like Pawn of Ulamog for inclusion. They also mentioned Puppeteer Clique, which is a card that had been suggested to me that I simply never got around to finding a copy of. I’ve put it on my list for my next order, and look forward to trying it out.

Last of all, Andy touched on a really important aspect of these aggro-sacrifice decks. They’re fun to draft! They’re fun to play! They work as “aggro-combo” decks, without the baggage of problems that are typically associated with cube combo archetypes. It’s really entertaining to play an attacking deck with so many lines, so much versatility, and the ability to play beatdown and board control at the same time. When we’re looking for updates to our cubes, this is what I think we should be striving for. Not just balance of colors and archetypes, but introducing strategies that are exciting and splashy at the same time.