Thanks FFG! 8 factions ! WOW ! I just want to give you 150$ to have a decent experience, loving it!

Thanks FFG! 8 factions ! WOW ! I just want to give you 150$ to have a decent experience, loving it!

How would 27 core sets be required for a decent experience? At most you'll need three for a complete playset?

I too am amped. Not sure I'm getting a full 27, though. Probably just one for the out-of-the-box experience, and if I find I need more, finish off the playset.

Is this a troll thread?

Either that or he's thinking that he'll need three core sets, *assuming* that there'll be 8 deluxe boxes and *assuming* that they'll be only 1x each, he'll need 3 each of those, that would be 27 items...but is based on extremely specious and almost-certainly-false assumptions.

I'm baffled.

3 Core sets. Conquest players aren't complaining, it means the starting card pool is on the order of 250 cards rather than 83 cards.

Yeah, 10 cards per faction at 3x apiece...THAT is ever going to be viable. Some people want the freaking moon on a silver platter I swear to the gods...

This thread gives me ulcers.

~If the Core Set contains less than full playsets of one thousand different cards (three thousand pieces of cardboard), or costs even a dime over five bucks, I will refuse to buy this stupid game and badmouth FFG on Twitter!

I've only been lurking on this forum for a little bit. Am I correct with the impression that most people here are fine with potentially having to buy 3 core sets to have the complete collection? Like this is just an accepted thing among FFG fans?

I've only been lurking on this forum for a little bit. Am I correct with the impression that most people here are fine with potentially having to buy 3 core sets to have the complete collection? Like this is just an accepted thing among FFG fans?

Yes.

A core set with a full playset of all cards would either be prohibitively expensive or dramatically impoverish the card pool.

I've only been lurking on this forum for a little bit. Am I correct with the impression that most people here are fine with potentially having to buy 3 core sets to have the complete collection? Like this is just an accepted thing among FFG fans?

It provides the choice of buying for casual gaming(maybe 1x or 2x core) or going full-blown competitive(3x core). I think it's a reasonable way to go about it, and you may not even need 3x core sets to build a competitive deck, depending on what point in game's life you started playing and what kind of decks you are building.

It mostly depends on the copy limit for the game (how many copies of each card you're allowed to put in your deck). That copy limit should be between 2 and 4 (Star Wars has a copy limit of 2, the rest of FFG's LCGs have 3 and Doomtown Reloaded has 4): too many copies means you're going to see the same cards over and over and single copies means very unstable decks (unless you're choosing, like with AGoT's plot deck, but that works only for a very small deck). You should be able to get a complete collection with at most 3 Core Sets, without too many "wasted" cards (that was a real problem with AGoT v1 and A:NR), and have a nicely sized card pool. That last point depends on how many factions there are in the game and how they constrain the deckbuilding: for instance, Conquest has many factions (7 in the Core Set, 9 planned) and the factions are a very important constraint in the deckbuilding (no splashing, limited alliance possibilities, very few neutral cards, some cards are exclusive to a faction), so it needs a big card pool in the Core Set (the same goes for AGoT v2, which has 8 factions and no splashing); on the other end of the spectrum, there's Doomtown Reloaded, which has only 4 factions, lots of neutral cards (only one type of card is divided into factions, though it's an important one), allows unrestricted splashing (though some cards are harder to splash than others), and has no cards exclusive to a faction: it can get away with a significantly smaller card pool (a little under 150 cards) than Conquest or AGoT v2 (which need around 250 cards).

Well, as a Conquest Player I'm certainly not happy that I have to buy the same product three times. I bought one new, and then got my second core set second hand, and two is where I'm sticking.

I'll be the same when this comes out. I'm looking forward to it, but I'm not going to buy more than two, even if that leaves me worse off.

You have to draw the line somewhere - I would have been happy to have some factions come later, like the Tyranids and Necrons are in Conquest, if it mean't less reliance on more than one core set.

I want to play these games competitively, but I hate the idea that if you don't own three core sets you don't have a chance - it's the kind of "pay to win" mentality that's corrupting videogames at the moment as well.

I will quite happily buy into this product until they stop supporting it, but it grates me they deliberately set things up so that I have to buy more than I need.

Well, as a Conquest Player I'm certainly not happy that I have to buy the same product three times. I bought one new, and then got my second core set second hand, and two is where I'm sticking.

I'll be the same when this comes out. I'm looking forward to it, but I'm not going to buy more than two, even if that leaves me worse off.

You have to draw the line somewhere - I would have been happy to have some factions come later, like the Tyranids and Necrons are in Conquest, if it mean't less reliance on more than one core set.

I want to play these games competitively, but I hate the idea that if you don't own three core sets you don't have a chance - it's the kind of "pay to win" mentality that's corrupting videogames at the moment as well.

I will quite happily buy into this product until they stop supporting it, but it grates me they deliberately set things up so that I have to buy more than I need.

It's not that you have to buy more than you need, it's that you don't want to buy as much as it would benefit you to.

Three core sets is hardly "pay to win."

If anything, the Three Core Set model provides some nice granularity to buying into the game. People often ask about them all combining into one product, but that would just end up being as expensive as three cores to begin with (OK, maybe a bit cheaper, as there's some savings on packaging). If that's the product they offered, every single player would have to put that money up, which would likely be over a $100 (maybe a bit cheaper online).

With the incomplete Core Set, you can buy in as much as you want. You want to try out the game, see if you like it? Buy one. Want some more deckbuilding options? Buy two. Want the complete set? Buy three.

This is, after all, a card game, and you have to buy the cards to play. If that's Pay to Win, all right.

Not to mention, these games are sold at places like Barnes & Noble. Friends who happen to be fans of the books and/or HBO show walk in, see the game on the "George R.R. Martin" table, and buy it. They are looking for a casual experience, and a way to explore their love of the series in a new way. Are they going to spend $100+ for that experience? No.

That's the point though - it's not marketed like that, is it?

If FFG had the balls to say on the box "BTW, you need more than one of these if you want to go to tournaments", I could respect that - they are being open about the fact that you have to invest more than you think you have to invest, as it wasn't clear when I first bought into the game (being an LCG noob, I had no prior experience). But they don't.

Hypothetical: I don't get to spend a lot of money on boardgames etc... so I have to spread things about. I buy one core - I want to take it competitive, but I come on here and literally everyone is saying "lol no, get three cores".

But I already have one core. I can't really afford a second core, let alone a third - so right there, I've been priced out of competing in a card game I really like. Pay to win is an extreme way of phrasing it, to be sure, but there exists a potential situation where players are divided purely by how much money they are comfortable spending.

Would they consider setting up a Semi-pro league for people with two core sets? A casual league for people with only one? I doubt it.

I fully admit the effect is lessened the more expansions come out, so it's not like I'm going to forever be handicapped.

Cores are only like £20 now, but they were 30 when I first bought in. Conquest was good because there wasn't so much redundancy in the second core. Only really the Warlords and a few other cards, and then the components. But I can see the third having massive redundancy.

I don't want to go all "I'm a grown up" because I know there are other people my age and older here, but for me it's about disposable income and getting the maximum out of it. You have no idea how annoying it is to spend money on redundant components. It feels like such a waste and OMG I CANT AFFORD THE MORTGAGE THIS MONTH AAHHHHH.

TL:DR: I'm genuinely looking forward to this game coming out, gripes about core sets etc... aside.

More cards, more options. If they built the core set to be complete out of one or only two core sets, then the initial starting card pool would be extremely limited. It's not about "making" you buy three core sets, it's that an initial card pool of as many different cards as possible is best for the health of the game.

Personally I'm pleased as punch at the notion that there won't be the extremely steep diminishing returns for 3 core sets that Netrunner has to deal with.

If FFG had the balls to say on the box "BTW, you need more than one of these if you want to go to tournaments", I could respect that - they are being open about the fact that you have to invest more than you think you have to invest, as it wasn't clear when I first bought into the game (being an LCG noob, I had no prior experience). But they don't.

But the group I just described isn't planning on going to tournaments. But they're the ones driving much of the sales; if they weren't, FFG would be marketing specifically to gamers. But gamers are by their nature going to know full-well about the need for multiple core sets, because they will read the whole rulebook cover to cover long before going to a tournament, and the absence of a complete playset is plainly stated in the rulebook. And most LGS's that actually host tournaments for a given game are going to have copies of the core set for you to purchase there as well, if you're the very-last-minute type like me.

When I first started playing first edition competitively, I did not buy my second core set until about 3 months after I bought my first. My third came about a year later. Basically, I only bought them when I felt I needed enough copies of certain cards for some decks I was building or bringing to tournaments.

That being said, I still had a LOT of cards I had to buy to catch up to the first edition card pool. Buying 3 core sets right now, or gradually, is a BARGAIN compared to when I first started playing competitively in first edition. It may be annoying to buy 2 - 3 core sets, but keep in mind that this game is being marketed to casual gamers as much as it is competitive. Providing both casual and competitive gamers options is really the way to go and likely the primary reason the core set would be sold the way it is out of the box.

When I started playing, the Oldtown Cycle had just finished up, and the Lanni box had only just been announced. So after that first core, I had two more cores, 36 chapter packs, and five deluxe expansions before I was caught up on the full play set. I remember first looking up what the recommended next purchase was after the core was, and was a little disappointed to see it was a second core, which yeah, it's a little anti-climactic. Here, more of the cards you already own. I did buy it right away (along with a copy of Refugees of War), though I think it was another year or so before I got around to Core #3.

Even then, I fully support the Three Core model. It works well, and it's clear that FFG is getting better at avoiding excess cards from multiple purchases, so it really shouldn't be an issue.

Even then, I fully support the Three Core model. It works well, and it's clear that FFG is getting better at avoiding excess cards from multiple purchases, so it really shouldn't be an issue.

This is true. I believe I only had to recycle a two sets of cards from my second Star Wars Core Set, which is not that bad, when compared to the amount of excess material in A Game of Thrones . It's clear they've learned much since their initial foray into fixed distribution.

A core set with a full playset of all cards would either be prohibitively expensive or dramatically impoverish the card pool.

"Prohibitively expensive". Oh please.Stop believing this crap and stop misinforming people. If you think that what you say is true, then why do 220 cards in LCG core sets cost as much as 500 cards in Dominion?

There are several factors at play. The first is licensing costs (although those should be independent of the number of cards included, it does diminish profit margins). Having not played Dominion, though, I suspect the real costs are in the cardstock (and cardboard components, like tokens). Differences in cardstock make for very large differences in printing costs. When we printed our Podcast promo cards to hand out at Worlds, the difference in between the grade we used (still somewhat transluscent when held up to light) and the next grade up was almost 2-fold - and would be much closer to what FFG uses.

I really do think that the profit margins on core sets are quite slim, and that money is recovered on Deluxe boxes and CPs, especially considering development costs must be lower on subsequent products.

A core set with a full playset of all cards would either be prohibitively expensive or dramatically impoverish the card pool.

"Prohibitively expensive". Oh please.Stop believing this crap and stop misinforming people. If you think that what you say is true, then why do 220 cards in LCG core sets cost as much as 500 cards in Dominion?

Also, out of those 500 cards released for Dominion, there are only about 32 unique cards. That, along with the very simple design and art used on the actual cards, means that development costs are very different. this is the classic Apples and Oranges argument. They are both fruits, but not close enough to draw any actual comparisons.

Also, out of those 500 cards released for Dominion, there are only about 32 unique cards. That, along with the very simple design and art used on the actual cards, means that development costs are very different. this is the classic Apples and Oranges argument. They are both fruits, but not close enough to draw any actual comparisons.

Development of what? Development of already developed mechanics and artwork for the First Edition? Please, sir.

While you completely sidestep Istaril's points. Please, sir.