OK, so I'm moving past the initial giddiness and the time has come to know whether I should love the Core set or at best tolerate it as a necessary evil to endure so you can get into the game.

So, what is the card distribution like? Are we returning to the wholesome goodness of 1x per card so you can buy three Core sets to get a full playset with no card waste, or are we keeping with the irrationally lumpy distribution of Lord of the Rings where you get 3x some cards, 1x or 2x others, so that you still have to buy three Cores but end up with a ton of wasted cards and a smaller useable collection to show for it.

Well nothing has been said yet. You have to get 3x core set anyway I guess. There is also 7 new "factions" so there has to be many different cards in the core set. AGoT only had 4 in the core but we don't yet how factions work in Netrunner. My guess and hope would be 1x of each card. I just hate the situation when I want to have couple different decks playable and some decks want to include the same card. I am not a big fan of any FFG core set situation.

Wild speculation: Core has 252 including 7 unique identity cards. So that makes 245 cards and that divided by 7 is 35 per "faction".

Currently, I just play Call of Cthulhu which also has seven factions in the Core set (plus Neutrals, which may not exist in this game). It has 1x copies of all cards in the Core set, so there is a clear precedent for it.

I realize nothing has been said, I just wanted to bring up the question hoping that someone from FFG might answer it, or that if someone did find the information they'd post it here as well. Also, I was curious to see whether anyone would stick up for the lumpy distribution model and to get a sense for how many people thought this was an important question for them.

I understand and accept that I'll have to buy 3 Cores either way, but it's my hope that after doing so I will have 3 copies each of 252 cards, and not something like 3 copies each of 150 cards and a bunch of surplus cards to dump in the trash.

FFG always produces core sets that offer playable decks for all factions that do not have to be constructed. This allows new players who have zero LCG or TCG experience to play out of the box. This leads to 3x 2x and 1x of certain cards every time. It is extremely unlikely they will change from this model. Yes the 2x cards are stronger and the1x cards are usually the strongest. However 3 core sets for a full playset is usually the same cost as a single booster box of other randomized card games. You still save a ton of money and get a playset of the core game.

I agree that 1x each card is by far the best distribution model and I hope that is the case with Netrunner. It was easier for me to buy 3x CoC Core set because I felt that every card came to potential use. Worst case would be if there were only about 20 single copy cards. I wouldn't feel comfortable buying new core set just for a few cards.

chaosvt said:

Except it doesn't lead to that every time. As I pointed out, Call of Cthulhu doesn't use this model, the Core set has exactly 1x every card - no duplicates at all. I am hoping they will return to this model which they have already used in the past. It may not be a deal breaker for everyone, but it will be for some and for others it will dampen their enthusiasm for the game, potentially causing them to evangelize it less. I know I would be less happy if I had to throw away a big pile of duplicate cards. You're saying you wouldn't be? That if I told you that you could end up more unique cards for the same price that you wouldn't be interested in that?

Also, it doesn't matter what a booster box of a totally different type of game costs, that's irrelevant. I don't play any CCGs specifically because they are money grabs, that's what's so great about the LCG model.

Comparing to something more relevant, look at monthly pack costs. The first Core set is a good deal. $40 is getting you 252 cards compared to $15 getting you 60 cards in the monthly pack. The break-even point is about 160 cards. The second Core set may not even reach that number if it's the lumpy distribution model. The 3rd pack is definitely a bad deal, you're only getting any value for the 1x cards, and there likely aren't enough of those to make it a reasonable value per dollar ratio. $40 for the final 20 cards as in Surreal's example would be quite annoying.

If the expansions will have the established 3x each card model, then I hope the core set will either have 1x or 3x each card.

Not to blow things out of proportion, at *worst* it means having some extra cards you can toss out or maybe donate to other new players who only have a single Core set. I'd like it to be 1x everything but I can deal with it if it isn't. Just like there really OUGHT to be an add-on pack that you can add to a single Core set that brings it up to 3x everything, then it wouldn't even matter what the Core had. But this doesn't exist despite being requested for years in the other games, and I doubt it will appear now. Likewise, FFG has already chosen their model for the Core set and I don't think they will change it now, but that doesn't mean we still don't want to know what it is. Then we can make our plans and get any remaining nerd rage out of our systems before the actual launch

3x everything in the Core set won't happen. The purpose of the Core set is to introduce the game to a new player and that requires that they get to see a decent sized pool of cards. Tripling up on everything is in direct contradiction to this goal, so I don't think it's possible.

Making the 1x card Core Sets for CoC and AGoT were quite easy to do and less costly for FFG due to the fact that they simply could reused the old cards (and especially the old artwork) to create these sets. The could choose the cards from quite a big existing card pool and simply add a white border to them and be done with it.

For WH:I, LotR and for A:N they had/have to create all new cards (artwork) for the whole box, which not only takes time, but also increases the initial costs for the game.

I wouldn't really be surprised if they reused the 3x2x1x system like they used for WH:I and LotR, although I definately would prefer a 1x type of core set, of course.

Isn't it ironic David, how everyone wants a more intuitive core set card distribution but would not be surprised if they continued on with the precedent set in W:I and LotR? What does that say about what consumers expect from FFG? Speaks volumes to me.

My position of course is one of three things. 1x or 3x or nothing. I prefer 1x though and think how CoC and AGoT handled it was an excellent way to distribute those products.

I refused to buy into LotR because of the distribution model and will do the same with netrunner if they insist continuing on with that business model.

I don't mind spending more money, what i do mind is wasteful products. LotR certainly is wasteful if I buy three cores just to get the few extra cards to pad out the LotR set to 3x and have a couple hundred extra cards that nobody wants or needs.

$80 extra bucks to illustrate horrible consumer ethics and wasted cellulose resources is not the kind of product format I want to or will patronize.

I wont say anymore on that matter though as one post on this forum is enough. I will vote with my dollars later depending on where FFG takes this.

I will not buy this game if they stick to the 3x/2x/1x distribution in the core set. It's either all 1x or 3x for me. I own three LotR core sets bc I'm one of those completist minded guys. But I rather don't play Netrunner at all if they should stick to the LotR distribution for this.

Shelfwear said:

Then you won't be buying it. I'll buy your copy as my second. FFG stance is and always has been it is better to have card diversity over quantity. And you don't need 3 of every card. I own 2 sets of AGoT as it gives me extras for more decks.

I don't care what you do and I don't care what you think what I need or not.

I won't start another deck building game where the core set distribution doesn't match the individual card limit and the distribution in the expansion packs.

Toqtamish said:

So, if the core set is 1x each of 252 cards you won't buy it , seems like a pretty bad way to decide what games to play. The original Netrunner played so well in singleton or highlander that I thik you'd be cheating yourself out of a great game, just my two cents.

Toqtamish said:

I don't think anyone expects 3x cards, nor does anyone really want that as their first choice. What people want is 1x everything in the Core set. That's the ultimate in terms of diversity, so it doesn't violate their stance. AND they've done it before with Call of Cthulhu, so there's precedent. 3x is an option for the collectors but nobody thinks there is any chance of it. It's only mentioned at all for completeness, so let's stop obsessing over it as if people were saying they ONLY want 3x.

1x is what we are hoping for. The lumpy 3x/2x/1x distribution is considered less desirable, that's what we're NOT hoping for. We would be shocked as hell, but we'd accept 3x. Hell, I'd even accept 2x and deal with splitting a second Core with a friend. But that doesn't mean we expect or really want these things, our first preference has always been for 1x and I feel that is a realistic way to release the set.

Shelfwear said:

Angry much.

None of the LCG's have ever had 3x copies of all of the cards in their core set. And never will. FFG has made this very clear several times.

Cthulhu is the only LCG that has 1x the cards. The others have 1x & 3x or even 1x/2x/3x like the LotR core set box did.

Edwin20er said:

He didn't say that. In fact, no one in this thread said that. He said the exact opposite.

People can say what they wish, but you only have a choice to buy the game as FFG makes it, or not at all.

It's like the stupid $8 hot dogs at the ball park. Nobody wants to pay $8 for a hot dog, but your alternatives aren't that great either. You can tote in your own food which probably won't be hot, or go hungry.

Face it, FFG can pretty much publish it however they like and if you want the game you'll buy it the way they give it to you. Not enough people will take a hard stance against the mixed distribution to put much dent in the bottom line so if they feel this adds their casual sales enough to offset a few lost sales to the serious fans plus the lost sales to competitive players who decide to only get 2x Core sets because of diminishing returns then they'll do it.

And, they've already made that call, probably months ago. All we want to know is which one they picked so we can start rationalizing how we're going to live with it.

dboeren said:

This could be both true and false.

There is no way they can tell if people who refuse to buy a product that they otherwise would simply because of distribution unless they get feedback that says so. Since most consumers who refrain from buying products do not tell a company why they chose not to, then we are left with a self fulfilling prophecy by FFG.

Apparently, plenty of people call those who prefer a rational distribution to be the "overly vocal minority" (as if they have any evidence that they are the minority) yet those very same voices may be for those who refrained from purchase.

No telling either way.

But your greater point of "love it or lump it" still stands. And I agree. But I doubt anyone from FFG will comment in this thread short of "The Spaniard" (Peterson) commenting directly.

Best bet is to email FFG and ask them directly since the likelihood of a reply on their own forums is next to nil. They read it, make no mistake. But their employees are muzzled pretty tightly on public fora.

Hellfury said:

That is exactly what he said. He said he will not buy it if "doesn't match the individual card limit "

Toqtamish said:

Shelfwear said:

Hellfury said:

I agree. Sales that never occur leave zero feedback about WHY they never occurred. This is why the often touted "vote with your wallet" doesn't really work very well. You only vote when you buy something, and you can only vote Yes. When you don't buy something, you are abstaining. There is no entry on the ballot for "I won't pay for this and here's why".

Hellfury said:

He said in reply 12 that if the core set distribution does not match the limit and distribution model that the exansions do he won't buy it, that's all I was saying.

EDIT: I was merely pointing out that he's contradicting himself and I hope he does get into it as that's one more player in a game I'd love to play.

dboeren said:

Yes. IMO also 1x is the best trade-off between card diversity and the demands of completionist players. 1x of each card allows new players to buy 1 core set and test the game, while they are looking at a big card pool, thus making the game more attractive for the casual/indetermined player. And it allows long-term-players (and I hope FFG realizes that they are getting a lot of money from them accululated over time) to complete their card pool without buying cards for the trash bin.

In LotR, there have been some rants just because of the distribution model (when you're buying the 3rd core set, you're doing this for just 13 cards!) and Christian Petersen even made a statement about it. So I hope FFG is aware of this issue for A:N. For a competitive game, card pool completeness is much more important than in the cooperative LotR…

Everybody is saying what distribution system makes the most money for FFG. I don't think it so simple. FFG already can have a bit bad reputation with some players and it is sometimes seen as McDonald's of game industry. If you want to redo a classic game you want to make it good and plan it carefully. Otherwise your games won't be taken very seriously. This is especially bad for LCG. But anyway I am super excited of this new game because I didn't have chance to play original game much.