6 replies to this topic

[wallet]

.

[istaril]

I'm glad you guys brought up the judge policing game states - I had meant to delve into that deeper after Flea Bottom, but it slipped my mind.

 

The competitive integrity thing is an interesting point. I can tell you the process for spoilers that we get (as I've passed spoilers on to other casts too). If it's something you're interested in doing as a cast, you can talk to Evan (Pipes on these boards) about getting some to share as well. I think the goal is to generate some excitement, but also to be a contribution by FFG to help drive people to some of the community content they might not typically visit, and help engage the community in that way. 

 

Generally we only receive a spoiler once it's the next product to be released, and we can release it as soon as it's released to us. We include it in our next cast (and most other sources, e.g. Q&TR, that I've worked with, do the same). So while we do have advanced knowledge of the individual cards by, depending on where it falls in our release schedule, that's only as much as about 9 days before we could air it.

 

More comments as I keep listening, of course. (Hah, I really enjoyed you calling a host out on the Czech Republic!)

 

As for testers getting an unfair advantage... I think you're right in saying we just have to take our lumps there. Obviously, we need testers, and obviously, those testers need to know the cards - and I don't think there's a real incentive or reason in place for FFG to ban testers from tournaments (and even then, it would only push the problem down the road; I'm sure you'd have testers acting as sources for non-testers who can compete). I've been a part of the testing process in the past, and while I can't discuss the process, I can at least say that I feel like it hurts my competitive play as much as it could help. Playing games in 2 or 3 different "metas" (in the environment sense) with cards that are in flux is... hard. Sure, if you were a tester and just waited till cards were finalized then started prepping for a specific tournament, guessing at the environment it would be in, you would have a pretty big advantage... but that advantage shrinks a little when you consider that people had a much shorter notice that (for instance), Called to Arms would definitely not be legal at Gencon. 

 

So... yeah, in summary, I agree with you guys on the judge thing, the restricted list, the playtesting, and even the rules complexity being something that'll smoothen out as we become more familiar with what the rules structure does. Crap. That's a lot of agreement. Good thing you guys got to the Natalie Dormer bit so I can be at least a little repulsed!

 

Meta-wise "kinda quiet", come on - tons of lovely international tournaments. Called to Arms was a fantastic pack . 

[wallet]

.

[IMABUNNEH]

Playtesting really isn't a huge advantage. By the time it comes to a specific tournament, you've been playing however far in the future, you have to revert. Having playtested other games, when you're trying to build a deck for an environment that's like a year behind you (I know it's a bit closer for FFG) it's actually difficult to remove yourself from that. Coupled with trying to work out what you're opponent may be holding, and second guessing yourself on whether that card's actually out yet or not.

[YEEZUS]

i have never listened to your podcast before, but i was at the gym watching a girl on a treadmill bounce up and down on the stationary bike getting a workout in, and i put your latest episode on.  it was really good.  a nice change of pace from the 10 identical casts that others post each week

[America]

pretty good cast, fam

[Letux]

Other problem with playtesting is memorizing a card then having it change a few times. It can screw you up more than you think.