2293: Scorched Earth

0293_001

Had the pleasure of playing a game of Netrunner this evening. I still don’t know the game all that well, but with each new game I’m learning new things about it — most notably what cards to expect to come up against, how to counter them and, most importantly, what not to do.

Tonight, the main lesson was the existence of a card on the Corporation side called Scorched Earth; this is an Operation (something that takes effect immediately when you play it) that, for the low, low price of just 3 Credits, allows the Corporation to immediately and unavoidably do 4 damage to the Runner if the Runner has a Tag on them. Given that the Corporation deck in which Scorched Earth appears has a number of security programs that automatically give the Runner a Tag, Scorched Earth appears to be a very real and constant danger, and the way to deal with it is to ensure that you don’t end a turn 1) with a Tag on you and 2) with less than 4 cards in your hand. As it stood, I did end the turn with 3 cards in my hand and a Tag on me, meaning that the 4 damage immediately and unavoidably killed me horribly. And after I was doing so well at stealing my opponents’ Agenda cards, too.

I really like Netrunner, even though I haven’t played a whole lot of it so far. It’s very strongly thematic, despite being a game in which you primarily focus on the mechanics of the cards you play. The lore is clearly very well thought out, as the various Corporation and Runner decks available are very consistent in their overall themes — one Corporation deck (Jinteki) is all about being sneaky and laying traps for unsuspecting Runners, while others focus on acquiring income, Tagging the Runner or all manner of other nasty things.

I don’t yet know the game well enough to feel confident about building my own deck, but the starter decks that the basic Core Set comes with are providing more than enough variety for me to be getting on with. Given that it’s pretty rare you’ll get through a whole deck in a single game — in fact, the Corporation loses if they get through their whole deck — I find that I’m still seeing new cards with each new game I play, which is nice, though not necessarily entirely conducive to developing effective strategies for the game. I am at least getting a feel for how the different factions play; tonight I played the Anarchs faction of Runners, who have a strong emphasis on playing Virus programs, which become more powerful and effective over time or through repeated use. This has, I think, so far been my favourite Runner faction to play, but I don’t think I’ve had the opportunity to try the Criminals yet, who, I believe, focus on acquiring money, which is very important. (I, in fact, struggled a bit for cashflow in this particular game until the neutral Armitage Consulting cards came out, allowing me to earn a little more per turn rather than a measly 1 Credit for 1 Click).

I’m interested to play more. I don’t know if I’ll ever be good enough to play at a tournament level or anything like that — probably not, to be honest — but I certainly enjoy the experience of playing it. It’s a game that is surprisingly straightforward to understand once you decipher the basic rules (and the non-standard, asymmetrical terminology it uses for different parts of the play area) and, more importantly, pretty quick to play, too. It’s easy to set up, highly portable and expandable, though I will likely hold off on acquiring new packs of cards for it until I have a better handle on the basic mechanics and the ways the different factions handle.

We’ll hopefully be playing a bit more tomorrow. Now I know to watch out for that damned Scorched Earth cards, I can hopefully survive a little longer without embarrassing deaths such as the one I suffered this evening!

2282: What Kind of Gamer are You?

0282_001

An email thread between me and my friends earlier extended to well over a hundred messages, and only part of it consisted of us casting aspersions on each other’s sexuality or threatening to cave each other’s heads in with Ikea shelving. No; the most interesting part of it was the part where we decided to discuss what games we’d find mutually pleasing to play on our vaguely regular Tuesday night board gaming sessions.

The struggle we have, you see, is that our group is split kind of down the middle. Two of our number — Tom and Sam — very much enjoy strategic, competitive games that they can train to be good at and quite reliably destroy the rest of us at given any opportunity they have. Their favourite game is Agricola, a game which I respect enormously from a mechanical perspective, but absolutely positively cannot get my head around from a strategic perspective. I can make the most perfect farm in the world and still lose due to not having enough points on cards or bonus points or whatever, and it’s enormously frustrating.

Tom and Sam, meanwhile, have played a bunch of the game both in its tabletop and mobile app formats, and consequently know it rather well — what strategies work, what combinations of cards go well together, and a sensible sequence of actions to take. The rest of us, on the other hand, do not have this knowledge and tend to struggle our way through the game, usually fairly secure in the knowledge that we won’t be victorious.

My friend Tim and I are essentially the “opposite” to this. We enjoy cooperative games in which the entire group plays against the game itself — or perhaps plays against a single adversary player, as in games such as Descent and Advanced Heroquest. For the most part, we have nothing against competitive games, enjoying plenty in our own right, but our preference tends to be for cooperative, heavily thematic games that encourage a touch of role-playing. If we do play a competitive game, we enjoy those that have an element of randomness to them, such as deckbuilders or those where dice rolls are a central mechanic — games such as Thunderstone, Carcassonne and Catan are among our favourite competitive games.

The wild card in our group is James, who has garnered something of a reputation among our little ensemble as being “the backstabber” — largely due to his enthusiasm for the game City of Horror, in which attaining victory is mostly dependent on being as much of an asshole to the other players as possible while maintaining a facade of apparent cooperativeness in the early stages.

As our email discussion proceeded, James explained his approach in a bit more detail. For him, it’s less about outright backstabbing and more about pushing the boundaries of the game’s rules to see what is possible. For example, in our last game of Agricola, he decided to see if the game — which, for the most part, has little direct interaction between players save only one person being able to take each action space at a time — could be played in an outright adversarial manner. Deliberately taking aim at both Sam and Tom — whom, you’ll recall, are considerably better at the game than the rest of us — James decided to sacrifice any and all of his own scoring potential in the name of trying to make life as difficult as possible for Sam and Tom, hoping that either Tim or I would win. It was an entertaining exercise, for sure, though I still didn’t win.

These gaming archetypes conform to how we tend to play video games, too. Tim and I tend to favour either narrative-heavy single-player experiences or cooperative affairs such as Warhammer End Times: Vermintide, whereas Sam and Tom are big players of hefty, competitive games like Civilization V. James is somewhere in a middle, a little less keen (or able?) to break the boundaries of the rules in video games, though he noted specifically that the thing he enjoyed most about Grand Theft Auto Online, which we’re all playing semi-regularly at the moment, is being able to show up to each session dressed in an increasingly outlandish, freakish outfit to make us all laugh. Once again, making his own fun. (James, never quite able to shake off that “backstabber” reputation, is also the player most likely to shoot you in the face with a shotgun if you enter the same square mile of map that he occupies.)

Finding games that we all enjoy can be quite challenging at times, but it does happen sometimes. The aforementioned Grand Theft Auto Online is suiting our needs for video game multiplayer fun at present, for example, while this evening we ran two simultaneous learning games of Android: Netrunner for those among us who are less experienced to pick up the rules ahead of a planned “boys’ weekend” of gaming at the end of the month, during which we’re hoping to play a few games of Netrunner.

We left our email thread with the promise of coming up with a short(ish)list of games that we’d all be happy and excited about playing come a Tuesday evening, rather than our attempted “rota” system that we’re currently using. We haven’t quite perfected our list yet, but I’m confident we can find a selection that we’d all be happy to sit down for a game of.

Assuming James doesn’t break the game, of course.

1471: Netrunning, Again

It was supposed to be one of our regular gaming evenings tonight, but two of the usual five participants were unable to make it, so the remaining three of us decided to try something a little different — concentrate on a single, two-player game and really get a feel for it.

The game was Android: Netrunner, which I talked about a short while back, and after tonight I feel I have a stronger grasp for the “feel” of the game and how it works.

In particular, what I’ve found interesting is quite how different the various factions play. The recommended starter decks — Jinteki for the Corporation player, Shapers for the Runner player — include an interesting balance of abilities, but can often see a game ending somewhat quickly. The Jinteki deck in particular is rammed with traps to set for the Runner player, most of which do various types of “damage” to him, causing him to discard cards and lose the game completely if he has to discard more cards than he has in his hand.

A key part of the Jinteki deck strategy appears to be making good use of these traps. One, known as Project Junebug, is particularly deadly in that it can be quite well “disguised” as one of the point-scoring Agenda cards by spending credits to “advance” it, then unleashed when an unsuspecting Runner hacks into it, only to discover an ambush waiting for him that does more damage than your maximum possible hand size early in the game. I won a game in this way this evening; my friend Tim likewise won one against my other friend Sam by making use of a similar strategy, though this time by simply setting two identical traps, luring Sam into the belief that one was an Agenda and the other was not, but actually revealing after the fact that both were deadly Project Junebug cards. Nasty.

Part of what is clearly the most interesting thing about Netrunner came out in our game this evening: it’s as much about reading your opponent’s psychology as it is about playing the optimum cards. In my game against Sam, for example, I left an Agenda card completely unguarded for a significant part of the game, building up defences in front of my other cards — including Project Junebug, which I then proceeded to “advance” in order to further cement the appearance that it was, in fact, an Agenda. By the time I laid some defenses in front of the previously unprotected Agenda and started to advance it, Sam was firmly of the belief that the more well-guarded card was the more valuable one — and from there, I was able to eliminate him easily.

Conversely, when Sam and Tim played one another, they tried different decks. Tim tried the Criminals Runner deck, while Sam went for the Haas-Bioroid corporation. It was quite hard to get a feel for how the Criminals deck played — it appeared to be quite focused on attaining a decent amount of wealth, which can subsequently be spent to enhance your capabilities during a “run” — but the Haas-Bioroid deck was a clear contrast from Jinteki. While Jinteki is all about bluffing and setting traps, Haas-Bioroid is all about setting up impenetrable defenses that are quite difficult for the Runner to get through. Conversely, a Criminals vs Haas-Bioroid match went on for significantly longer than the Shaper vs Jinteki matches we had previously tried — and rather than the games ending quite quickly, this matchup resulted in a much more protracted battle in which either side could have feasibly won.

I’m yet to delve into the more complicated side of building your own deck to play the game with, but even the differences between these starter decks are fascinating. I’m really looking forward to having the opportunity to play the game again and see how differently the other factions play to one another.

1450: Netrunning

Putting the more formal board game posts on hold for a moment because an idle mention of them during a staff meeting yesterday may have led to us doing a bit more board game coverage over on USgamer in the very near future. So yay for that!

I did want to talk a bit about a tabletop game, though — Android: Netrunner, which I got a copy of for Christmas.

Android: Netrunner is a two-player “living card game” based on the customisable card game of the same name from a few years back. (A “living card game”, for those unfamiliar, follows many of the same principles of customisable card games — primarily the ability to build your own deck of cards prior to playing a match — but provides additional cards through static, predictable expansions rather than randomly mixed booster packs) It’s a particularly interesting concept in that it’s asymmetrical — the two opposing “sides” in the game have very different goals, mechanics and even terminology.

The concept of Android: Netrunner is classic cyberpunk: anarchic, rebellious “runners” are attempting to undermine the powerful “corporations” who run the dystopian future in which the game is set. They go about this through hacking into the corporations’ systems to disrupt them from advancing their agendas; meanwhile, the corporation is steadily building up its defences against intrusion.

In gameplay terms, this means that the two sides have very different roles to play. The corporation’s role is primarily defensive and involves protecting particularly precious pieces of data from the runner player, setting traps and generally messing with the runner’s head. The runner, meanwhile, must build up their resources and equipment to such a degree that they can — hopefully — safely bypass the corporation’s security countermeasures and steal the precious “agenda” cards required to win the game.

I tried the game for the first time with my friend Tim this evening. We played several games, all of which were over relatively quickly. In the first case, I, playing the runner, was flatlined on my second turn for attacking what I thought was a safe bet to score some points, only to fall foul of a booby trap, lose all my cards and consequently be eliminated. In a subsequent attempt where we swapped roles, Tim successfully managed to acquire the seven points’ worth of “agenda” cards required to win, but it was a close-run thing — the server in which the last agenda card was hidden was heavily protected, and if Tim had played just a little less carefully he would have been obliterated by my security measures.

Obviously it’s very early days yet, but I enjoyed the game very much. The cyberpunk theme is much more than window dressing — the cards you play are all very much thematically appropriate, and the initially confusing terminology starts to make a lot more sense when you start thinking about what you’re actually representing when you play your various cards to the table.

It’s going to be a challenge to learn how to play effectively, though, I feel. It’s clear that being reckless can result in swift and merciless defeat very quickly, but this is good — it prevents games from dragging on way too long with a foregone conclusion, and instead allows you to gather everything up, shuffle your decks and try again with minimal fuss. This is exactly what this sort of game needs — not everything needs to come in epic packages of an hour or more.

Tim enjoyed himself, though, as did I, so hopefully we’re going to be playing it at least semi-regularly. I’m keen to try it with my other friends, too — I think it’s the sort of game that will be very interesting to observe how different people play.