I've just read the new tournament rules and I'm kind of frustrated. As a TO I have just enough on my head with Netrunner (starting with the GN Kits availability and not ending with their quality), but all in all - at least I never had to track all stats of each game and there were some things that made ANR so much different from other games.

1. Netrunner players had to play it to the end, even if they were obviously loosing the game. The reason was that the first tie-breaker (in a league where str. of schedule didn't had much point while avoiding used pairings) we used were the score points, so the more you have, the better. Of course, as in many other games, the strength of schedule was also used as an additional tie breaker when it was needed.

FFG changed that in 1.2 TR to the point where we don't need to count scored AP of the players who lost the game - or at least it is now an additional (and third in the row) tie-breaker. This also means the players can just forfeit a match as they don't actually need the APs they might score before losing the game.

Instead we are now required to follow every player's Corp/Runner progress (and there is no tool for doing it from FFG, there is no tool that does this the easy way at all) as a FIRST tie-breaker. Why? It is pointless, and it stresses enough the players and makes TO's work much more complicated. At this point the game is biased to runners anyway.

2. No bonus prestige - again, now you don't get more when you win the two matches in the round. Same applies to byes. I think it was not necessary to make this change but then FFG have much broader overview of the tournaments (I have no idea how though, as there in no sanctioning of every event) so they might have observed some problem with bonus prestige. IMO byes helped a lot to help new players who rarely win matches and especially helped in leagues. The bonus prestige also meant players were always playing at their best to avoid rewarding their opponent with the bonus. The only negative side was that sometimes they just faced weaker player (new one, it is a new game so it happens often) and they scored a lot. But then again - pairings rarely put the top league player against a new one, so this bonus usually went to other players from the bottom of the ladder.

I really hope FFG could explain these rules changes as they seem irrational to me.

The problem with the 6 prestige setup was that it pretty much put flat-line oriented corp decks at a disadvantage. As these decks more care about finding ways to kill the runner and often have agendas that are forfeited to help that along. Having to score at least 4 agenda points each game to even compete really discouraged that play.

On the other side, fast-advance and early-aggression runners (criminals) where favored over the rest. Being able to net several agendas early one put you at a much better chance at winning the extra 2 points in a match. Slower corps and factions were at a disadvantage due to this.

I honestly think the change is a good thing as the bias (while still there) has been significantly reduced.

Example. If I win a game 7-0 or 7-1 with a fast-advance corp deck, I pretty much only have to score 1 agenda to win the match. Same is true for an aggressive runner.

Getting agendas fast and early was much more in your favor than trying to set-up a beefy rig or trying to setup a kill-combo on the runner. With the change, the tourny-specific meta is much more balanced.

As a TO myself, the changes have actually simplified the spreadsheet that I made to keep track of the league I run as well as the mini-tournament.

All-in-all, I think this is a good change for the tournament scene.

Having spoken with players now - I probably overreacted and you might be right with this allowing some different mechanics (as one of our players pointed the old system didn't favor cards like data dealer, false lead and archer , for example).

On the other hand we are losing the one system that makes league scores different. Nevermind, we wait and see.