Android: Netrunner General - /anrg/

Someone should add in the ONR database to the OP, if only for nostalgia's sake.

From last thread, was thinking, Spoilers on a surface level looks like Gang Sign, which might explain why they are so close mechanically. But Spoilers cannot benefit from a multiplicand effect (HQI) and you cannot manipulate the state of R&D the way you can manipulate the state of HQ by your moves and board states.

A bit late, but yeah, best summation of why I immediately thought Spoilers needed to have an innately stronger effect than Gang Sign to actually represent an equivalent investment in value.

It's kinda sad to see the NA champs at GenCon reduced from 2 days/flights to just 1 leading to the top cuts.

>>54919311
That's an excellent point, though I will say as OP that the header post is getting a little tight.

>>54919339
I dunno, while gang sign's stacking is very powerful (and it's something I'll be glad to see going) it also has the possibility of screwing you over, which Spoilers does not.
Spoilers also advances milling a little, and you could in theory set R&D up, though it'd be highly impractical.

I do find it interesting how two such similar cards were practically together - obviously a small mechanic they wanted in San San.
Speaking of San San, kinda amazing how much better the flavour is in some packs than others

>>54919594
Browsed the OP links and see if any are worth removing.

Any reason to have blackat and acoo in there? I know some people use meteor still but netrunnerdb is pretty much the best and maybe most used. Could probably collapse Card List etc. and Deckbuilding Resources into a single paragraph too.

If we want to really keep it clean we could dump blog links and podcasts into a single pastebin, especially the deader ones. I can see why they should be in the OP, but new players would probably rather ask the thread directly for any questions anyway. Of note is it's been a while since self-modifyingcode and netreadyeyes updated, and canlaugh.com is completely gone.

File: b19be3ac603559e70653bb08a8445cca-d8znb84.png (986KB, 761x761px) Image search: [Google]

986KB, 761x761px

>>54919838
I'll be honest, I just post that shit - of the ones you mentioned I haven't visited any more than like once or twice, and really the """official""" deckbuilder (cardgamedb) should probably be on there, seeing as it actually beat out db for once with Crimson Dust

>>54919594
>Spoilers also advances milling a little

Best case scenario, if you manage to set up all three copies before any score, you're looking at milling 9 cards generally with the general agenda set up. I think that's worth a lot less than the potential accesses you get from Gang Sign, even counting the possible screw ups. AND because of HQI support, you can get al lot more too with GS.
Ties back to anon's previously mentioned vanilla feel of crims I suppose: it's not flashy, but it lands you points.
I guess my point is that the milling is too little, and the potential Archives accesses worth less.

>>54919459

Never cared enough to even notice a difference.

>>54919838
>Any reason to have blackat and acoo in there?

Choice? The tools are here and working. We all have our most comfortable tools.
I like Blackat myself when building.

Blogs are a difficult choice, you don't want the data to die, you want it available to those that might need it, but yeah, no update in a long while. I think the pastebin would be a decent compromise.

>>54919926

I like the official one, I just wish the mistakes were corrected. There's been some on that thing since at least Mumbad that are still here.

>>54919926
>>54919997
>deckbuilders
I don't know, I'm never one for over-redundancy, especially since OP is usually reserved for "number one things that you would point to a newcomer". But I've never made a thread, so I guess I'll leave that your discretions.

>blogs
They would be available, newcomers just need to dig in a little deeper to find the blogs, which if anon is willing probably won't be a big issue. I'd vouch for Why I Run, Autocard sentence, and Worlds of Android stuff to be in there too, since they fit under Extra Resources for those that want to look for them.

You know those String Theory decks, where only 5 cards in the entire deck *aren't* events? What are some cards that are like Oracle May, in that they reward you for having almost exclusively one kind of card in your deck?

>>54914405

> As that other anon mentioned,do you think there's anything those new cards do that wasn't being done by older cards, in different ways? If only AS/FAO/Parasite and Medium + virus support?

I'm assuming "AS" is Akshara Sareen? Nobody reasonable uses that for obvious reasons.

FAO and Parasite/Medium Viruses have counters in the sense that while you lose a turn for the viruses, you CAN stop them from completely steamrolling you outside of them running multiple times to get the virus counters back on Medium.

FAO isn't that bad outside of recursion, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms in regards to the game design that we'd be opening.

> I'm thinking what would be an issue worth investigating is the range of decks. How specialized they need to get to to create their win condition vs how many opposing strat they can decently face. I don't think the game is in that bad a spot on that front. But as I say, beware of hunches.

This is where my problem with the game comes in: You have to "predict the meta" and then slot in "silver bullets" and then "install before they use their wombo combo cards" said silver bullets. That's *too many steps/bullshit* to counter steamrolls/shenanigans.

IMO you shouldn't need to "slot in these cards" to counter strategies like Counter-Surveillance and tag-me because you weren't considering that strategy to be on the table. There should be hard limits on the cards in regards to accesses.

Deep Data Mining, for instance: "One Card for each unused Memory Unit UP TO 4" which means the base 4. If said base 4 is completely used, it uses your additional installed ones up to 4.

R&D interface? +3 if all three are installed, otherwise it's +1 access per the card.

Which is FAR MORE reasonable because at the most you're going to multi-access 7.

This is what I'm getting at when I said FF designs cards in a vacuum and doesn't see cases where you'd go "that's total bullshit and I'm not sure how that got past their designers" when--

File: 1481193442090.jpg (298KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 500x400px

>>54921360
>I'm assuming "AS" is Akshara Sareen? N
Little card called Account Siphon, maybe?

>>54921360

-- "legacy" format is added.

Rubicon Switch (forgetting which one is the older one right now) + Black Guard is a notable example of a combo that should have a hard limit but seemingly doesn't because Fantasy Flight never looked forward/back and saw that interaction.

It's telling that a lot of the cards that have come out recently have needed Eratta's done to them.

Again: I like the game, but a lot of the shenanigans/bullshit not being able to be stopped/countered in mid-run/turn is what bothers me about the game mostly. There has to be something like an "instant" level card that doesn't need to be installed that you can go "yo, hold up: I'm stopping this bullshit right here with this card" to at least flatten the power-curve/bullshit that is there currently.

Or they need to take a good hard look at the design of the game currently and start worrying about trouble-some combos and tamper the power level down a bit.

Because, IMO: You shouldn't feel like "that's bullshit" because you didn't pack certain cards for certain strategies. You should be able to "roll with the punches" and not have instant-level 20+ multi-access cards installed that you can't do shit about because you weren't "predicting that" "meta."

>>54921388

Ah, that slipped my mind. Account Siphon in a vacuum isn't that horrible.

Account Siphon + recursion is HORRIBLE unless you're playing like Skorpios or have ARC Lockdown and other such exile cards. But that goes back to "how the hell did that get past FF in regards to shenanigans that should be told 'yo, no.'?"

>>54919997
>Spoilers
I've played both and I have to say that, while Gang Sign put huge pressure on the Corp to only score while having no agendas in HQ, Spoilers felt more comfy in the sense that it mills, denying cards and potentially trashing an agenda or two to pick up later seemed to pay off better.
Of course, both tactics were kind of neutered by Jackson (dealing with Flood and Mills) so I gather both cards are going to get better after rotation.

My signature play during a league (that I won) was Spoilers-Turntable. I let the Corp score the big ones, but then I traded the crap and the mills for it.

>>54921360
>>54921392

>FF designs cards in a vacuum and doesn't see cases where you'd go "that's total bullshit and I'm not sure how that got past their designers"
Or a counter card could be coming out that shuts down that strategy. Which will probably happen, but in like pack 5 of the next cycle.

Let's look at the actual complaint: not having a counter if you did not include one during deckbuilding. Say we get a new Operation subtype that lets you play the operation during paid ability windows. How is having this card around any different from slotting already available silver bullets? What if the card didn't work outside of tag me situations? Would you still slot it for fear of a 20 card dig? What if it was a simple "Play only during a run. End the run." Now it works everywhere. But imagine the outcry from the other end. I bet it'd get MWLed fairly quickly. Even Jackson and Moon with their paid ability window shenanigans already get an awful lot of complaints, I doubt it would be any different with this hypothetical subtype.

Let's look at it a different way now. One thing that I would like to point out is that Counter-Surveillance doesn't "steam roll" out of nowhere. They are steadily gaining these tags every turn, waiting for a response from the corp, until they have the wombo combo cards in hand to score the win. If they can't build up tags, credits, or lose combo pieces, then they can't fire it. So your target would obviously be to aim for that weakness. And the easiest method is actually to just play Closed Accounts because then they can't pay for the 10+ credits needed to fire the access.

Why consider such solutions at all? Because in the end, the onus for including and finding a response to runner strategies is ultimately on the corp. By going tag me turn one the runner is posing a question, and what matters is your answer. And including answers at the possible cost of being useless is *calculated risk*, something not unfamiliar corpside.

>>54922069
>>54921360
>>54921392
But of course, you don't want to build for a meta, because maybe you won't ever see it. Honestly, I can't think of any competitive game where a meta *doesn't* develop, where you don't need to adapt to the everchanging situations, and you can just play the same deck over and over and do decently. Even in fighting games you're picking up what moves the opponent keeps using, you're considering what counters you have to that move, and then you're implementing that thought process towards winning games. Especially in games with a hugeload of moving parts, there's bound to be ones that rise up into prominence, and get spammed by all the competitive players. And say you do have a deck that can beat all other types of decks. Would there be a reason to play any other deck if your aim is to win? Shouldn't a deck capable of beating everything be an outlier instead of a goal?

Like, I feel your frustration, Counter-Surveillance does seem - no, *is* - very overbearing, but I can't shake the feeling you're going about this the wrong way, which is wanting an instant solution with little effort on part of the player.

>>54921360

Let's got at it the other way: some elements are part of the game, and forgoing any solution to the problem they pose is a deliberate choice that should come with consequences.
If for example, one refuses to slot any solution to damage, well damage being an integral part of the game means sometimes one won't be able to just bite the bullet.
As should be.

Conversely, if one so chooses to play a deck that is all about damage, one can't really complain when meeting a deck like, say, the post-Mars self-damaging one, which is all about being enabled by said damage.

It's not so much that the decks needs more and more silver bullets, as much as the fact that people have managed to just ignore whole swathe of the other side wholesale for so long was an aberration, and hyper specialized decks being shut-down by their natural predators is as should be.

>>54921866

Oh I've played Spoilers, and I'll play it again, I just think it's a rather weak card that you have to want to play. Even in dedicated milling decks it suffers from a huge case of so-called "46th-card syndrome".
Which to a point is understandable, s they probably don't want to have too many support effects to snowball out of control. Damned if they do, damned if they don't; poor designers.

>>54922069
>>54922081
>>54922773

Honestly, the whole "ability window priority" needs to a total overhaul, from top-to-bottom, IMO.

It's not so much "you need to play these during this window" instant-like's, I want, but more counter-counter-counter abilities.

Take "Fall Guy" for example. It prevents a card from being trashed. Why couldn't you make that into a non-installed instant-level counter-card ability that can only be played during a run?

> What if it was a simple "Play only during a run. End the run."

I'm not asking for subroutines like that to be an instant-level counter. I'm asking for something like:

> Play only during a run: The runner can only access 1 additional card. Use this only if a card ability allows multi-access.

Bit of a mouthful, but what I'm wanting is less snowball shenanigans to where BOTH sides can shrug off a card ability and be like "well, that sucked but I'm still in the game" and less "holy shit, what the fuck was Fantasy Flight thinking!?"

> Let's look at it a different way now. One thing that I would like to point out is that Counter-Surveillance doesn't "steam roll" out of nowhere. They are steadily gaining these tags every turn, waiting for a response from the corp, until they have the wombo combo cards in hand to score the win. If they can't build up tags, credits, or lose combo pieces, then they can't fire it. So your target would obviously be to aim for that weakness. And the easiest method is actually to just play Closed Accounts because then they can't pay for the 10+ credits needed to fire the access.

Again: That requires 1) Knowing their gameplan and 2) having those counter-cards abilities in.

Like I get your example, and I shut down Joshua B, instantly (which was their method of gaining tags) but at that point they were able to tag themselves with other card abilities and there was very little I/the Corp can do to throw those card abilities out on their turn other than pray they won't use it.

>>54922937

(Fucking comment limits)

> It's not so much that the decks needs more and more silver bullets, as much as the fact that people have managed to just ignore whole swathe of the other side wholesale for so long was an aberration, and hyper specialized decks being shut-down by their natural predators is as should be.

Sure. At the same time:

> But of course, you don't want to build for a meta, because maybe you won't ever see it. Honestly, I can't think of any competitive game where a meta *doesn't* develop, where you don't need to adapt to the everchanging situations, and you can just play the same deck over and over and do decently.

There's nothing *inherently wrong* with a "meta"-game happening. There's something inherently wrong when your options are limited to "hope you include these in your deck otherwise enjoy snowball effects happening where you can't do anything but take it on the chin and hope nothing bad happens."

I'm more complaining about the game design more than the "meta." There really should be NO card that allows a 20+ multi-card access like that. Like, it's an extreme corner case so I give FF some slack, but the fact that the game design has no hard "you can only multi-access up to X (say 7, but maybe less post-rotation) cards because any more means you can nearly instantly win the game" and other such non-sense (Temujin credit swings on empty archives) really begs the question why some of the design is the way it is.

File: Dutch Community Fan Art promos.jpg (59KB, 960x584px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 960x584px

>>54922937
> Play only during a run: The runner can only access 1 additional card. Use this only if a card ability allows multi-access.
Because the game should be played around planning and developing resources. No *Counterspell* bullshit ala MtG. If you want to stop something, you need to prepare for it, install it like an upgrade or an asset.
In the example it's already mentioned, the pieces a tagme anarch play are striking and obvious. They are signalled several turns in advance, you just don't know when is everything going down.

The synergy of the cards is pretty strong, but it's not unfair like Val Blackmail DLR bullshit. or Andy DLR with 4 mill a turn, maybe more.

I find the recent trend of jank decks aimed at accessing the entire R&D really amusing. It started back with Hayley's Dyper, but then we got Highway Robbery, which was followed by the Bug Out Bag combo in Los, and now this Counter Surveillance.
I love this game.

>>54921209

I'd say most support dedicated support cards to certain types: Replicator/Bazaar/Inside Man;Calling in Favor/Off-Campus Apartment/Hostage; /Power Nap; The Supplier? Comet?

>>54922069
>And the easiest method is actually to just play Closed Accounts

The All Seeing I is one influence.
The All Seeing I is *one* influence. And I wouldn't really call that a silver bullet.

>>54922937
>That requires Knowing their gameplan

The fact that you list that as a negative is weird to me, and I wonder how much of that sentiment is pivotal in our difference of opinion on the matter. I love *having* to read my opponent's deck. And I positively love being confronted to new unknown crazy strategies. The pleasure of having to try and figure it out on the fly is definitely worth losing one game over.

>>54923234
>Bug Out Bag combo in Los

Haven't met that one. Color me interested.

File: Data and Destiny Banner.jpg (92KB, 1050x300px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1050x300px

>>54923234
The most adorable mongoose

>>54923317
ASI isn't so much a bullet as much as it's an NBN weapon - seeing as they haven't expanded tags out other than a very minimum, using ASI is pretty fraught, despite the 1 inf (that said, i'd love to see HB/Jinteki use it)

I agree with you on discovering a cool new deck by losing to it though

Aaaaaaand it's official:

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/8/17/all-sectors-on-alert/

>>54923317
>Starlight Crusade Funding/Power Nap

Sorry, I accidentally a bit. For a change.

>>54922974
>"hope you include these in your deck otherwise enjoy snowball effects happening where you can't do anything but take it on the chin and hope nothing bad happens."

I keep going back to that comment. I'll go back to what I was saying: I think the default state of the game *should* be one that include solutions to all problems. Removing them should be the outlier. The fact that the outlier has been the normal state for so long *is* the problem. The fact that people that have been building average decks with basic solutions to most problems they could encounter have been said to be playing "shit decks" for so long is the problem, in a way.

>>54923598

I love it in Nisei kill: Cerebral Cast -> ASI is one mean come-back when they think too much of your Fumiko Yamamori implied kill plan.

>>54923740

While I'm at it: killing the runner by way of Voter Intimidation? Extremely satisfying.

>https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/8/17/all-sectors-on-alert/
>This means that, in a single turn and at the cost of a single credit, they could install an agenda like Posted Bounty and defend it with a triple-advanced Asteroid Belt —which it can rez for free!

I don't want to be mean to the people writing those blurbs, but why did they have to chose Posted Bounty, given how bad it is in that specific situation? Makes me sad.

>>54923353
I misremembered, it was Bug Out Bag and Whizzard, or any anarch really.
Bug Out Bag to draw the whole deck, then smash HQ with Fear the Masses for the mill. Repeatedly. With Amped Up clicks.

https://netrunnerdb.com/en/deck/view/960666

File: Apex cries.jpg (241KB, 1050x836px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1050x836px

>>54925652

File: Kraken.jpg (224KB, 870x650px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 870x650px

>>54925686
Speaking of sad tentacle-y things in cyberspace

>>54923317
All Seeing I doesn't really do much to Counter Surveillance decks besides getting rid of Mercs though, you'd still need a follow-up card.

>>54927771

Depends on the rig, but getting rid of every resource pieces on the board BUT Jarogniew for one credit and a click is pretty great value.

>>54927949
Sure, but CS decks in particular usually don't have important resources to trash. Closed Accounts atleast might buy you a turn, assuming you've been building up enough ice to survive a Siphon and tax their credits to below their tag amount during the CS run.

>>54928082

The trouble with CA being Free Mars.

>Sure, but CS decks in particular usually don't have important resources to trash.

I don't know that the builds have stabilized yet. The few I've played against still used DLR/Joshua B. - though that's soon to be history for most. ASI removes everything that protects Jarogniew. Trouble is more: Mercs, Obelus, or both? And even then if Obelus is here, as likely, I'd be totally willing to go a route that hasn't been popular in a long while: just Scorch to get rid of cards, as long as it won't be prevented. Forget the kill.
The point being I guess CA is a short term solution, ASI is about slowing the build up to manageable levels over mid-term.

Old Hollywood is another fun short term solution.
Forcing a Holmegaard or Hudson 1.0 - is 2.0 coming soon? seems warranted - to fire via everyone's favorite PSI-sop could also work. And it's not as if those moving pieces were complete losses against other matches then...

>>54925652

Haven't build him for a while, and have to wonder: add Reaver and some of the last two cycle's cards, can you make an Apex deck that just tosses the Apocalypse plan aside? Would be an interesting direction to take.

>>54929359
>The trouble with CA being *Mars for Martians*

Sorry about that.

>>54929359
>The trouble with CA being Free Mars
Of course, which is why I mention surviving a Siphon.

Free Mars is a Priority Event, so you can't use it multiple times in a turn. Following a Closed Accounts, they would only have a single click between playing Free Mars, installing CS, then firing it. The runner would have enough credits make the CS run, but not fire CS itself. If the ice on both HQ and RnD cost them more than 10 credits (or maybe 8, since Siphon gives an extra 2 tags to pay for), then firing off Counter Surveillance wouldn't yield them anything.

And I agree with Scorching for the sake of getting rid of cards, but it does depend on the board state though. ASI -> trash Mercs -> Scorched is much more favourable while there's <7 cards due to Obelus. It's also a 2 card combo, which you might not always have the luxury of firing together, depending on the number of copies.

So basically, different solutions for different situations. There's no harm in including both, but it does depend on the rest of the deck.

>>54929903
>>54929927
>Free Mars is a Priority Event
Why embarass me so

File: IMG_9006462165990.jpg (82KB, 960x799px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x799px

>>54929927

Browsing through the ONR database, it's striking how many early ANR cards were inspired by the older versions. One could say it would even be for the worse, since those designs might've unintentionally set a weird standard to follow. I think I like ONR Link better though, the need to have *some* dedicated link cards or risk losing all traces could've messed with runner side deckbuilding the same way agendas and ice mess with corp side.

File: pattels_virus.jpg (29KB, 281x400px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 281x400px

>>54932177
Well, I blame more the changes than the copycats.

>>54932177
Mimic's cost got hugely buffed, for example. like 7 -> 3 or something.

File: startup_immolator.jpg (23KB, 277x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 277x400px

>>54932741
I mean, I couldn't find a parasite in all this.

5 hours for announcements? Where are our gencon insiders?

>>54934431
I saw on reddit that there was no netrunner on display at their booth. We'll probably have to wait for the panel for info.

>>54932768

This becoming Crecentus was an inspired change.

File: superglue.jpg (33KB, 200x295px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 200x295px

>>54935373
Actually, Crescentus was just superglue.

File: crash_space.jpg (41KB, 200x295px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 200x295px

>>54932741
Some changes were for the best though.

>Crash Space
>Gain [1] at the start of each of your turns. All trace attempts are automatically successful, and give you a tag in addition to their other effects. If Crash Space leaves play, lose [2].
>A: Trash Crash Space.

>>54935466
The current Crash Space effect was from one of those vehicle cards I think. Why they didn't just keep the cars I don't know though.

Still nothing from the inflight report?

>>54937411 Nope, and it looks like there won't be.

>>54937658

Only 'news' is probable rotation before worlds due to next cycle starting late in the year.

Shame! Shame!

>>54937809
>>54937658
RIP Netrunner.

scoops for the scoops god:

Cycle 8 is Damon designed. There might be mild adjustments from Boggs, but primarily a Damon product. Cycle 9 has been tested. Both of these products have been tested with Core 2.0. I have this on good authority.

I fully expect us to see an annoncement of Core 2.0 - and no, nobody knows when this is coming out/what it actually is - and Cycle 8 _in maybe a month or so-ish_ + the new rotation. I personally expect Core 2.0 to not immediatedly be a physical product, but to be a new legal card list implemented immediatedly at the same time as Rotation (bear in mind that Rotation now happens when they announce it, not by any product release)

>>54938260
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and ask whether you know if it'll be an X-Wing type core and exist next to the 1.0 with the latter maybe heavily MWLed, or replace it entirely with certain cards being entirely illegal for play?

From a fucking audience question, rather than the report itself:

>New cycle is delayed but will arrive before end 2017. Rotation will be happening early, before worlds. - Andrew Navarro

So no Whiz or Jackson at worlds, which should be interesting, and Boggs has basically been given a couple of months to go over whatever turds Damon left in cycle 8 and make sure it works.

>>54938260
More or less what I am hearing on the floor at Gencon too.

First Cycle 8 was a huge mess past anything we have seen before. Boggs had to a bunch of work to make it passable and marketing is fighting him most of the way. When it was ready to print they pushed it to the back of the queue for L5R core sets.
We have not heard anything as L5R is bigger than FFG expected and Netrunner might get pushed back again for a 2nt core run or to move up cycle releases. There is a 50/50 chance that we won't see anything new out of Netrunner till early 2018.

The future of Netrunner was going to be relaxing Cycle releases and do more Terminal Directive style boxes but it flopped so hard that they canceled all 3 they had the pipe line so Netrunner is kind of in limbo for releases outside of very slow cycles.

Odds are Netrunner will be a "legacy" game by 2019.

I have been seeing Netrunner players publicly announcing the game is dead and trying to buy L5R cores off people.

>>54939799
Worlds is going to be 100% remote spam.
No Whizzard or Scrubber to deal with remotes.

Tons of good remote toys are still legal so unless we get a new MWL on top of the rotation the Worlds meta is going to suck.

>>54939889
I suspect we will get a MWL with the formal rotation announcement - Boggs has been good on keeping that updated-ish at least

>>54939889
Which is stronger, Counter Surveillance Tagme or Asset Spam Prison?

>>54937809
Aaaand I am done.
Off to Legend of the Five Rings!

>>54939917
That's probably what to expect. What do you think will be there?

Friends in High Places
Estelle Moon
Counter Surveillance
Obelus?

Does anyone feel the Netrunenr kind of died from not being inclusive?
The game is like 99% white dudes in their 30s.
FFG likely saw how gross the games community is and wanted to drop it.

File: Xxbng.jpg (96KB, 1338x716px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1338x716px

>>54940376

File: 1502850921797.gif (140KB, 379x440px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 379x440px

>>54940376

File: 1434656529071.jpg (14KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 625x626px

>>54940376

File: boom_would_be_more_suitable_now.gif (4MB, 300x418px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 300x418px

Is the netrunner comunity so disapointed about gencon that they shut downt jinteki(.)net or does it happened regulary?
I'm back from genesis cycle and wanted to check the new meta.

>>54941912
Might just be something odd with jnet right now. Actually surprised that its down

>>54941912
Owner of Jnet was ranting in chat during inflight and said he is shutting it down.

Dear lord. That's quite all disappointing.
This is really, really bad PR, and could have some bad repercussions for the future of the game.

Stay tuned I guess.

Is this time to quote T.S Elliot Hollow Men?

>The future of Netrunner was going to be relaxing Cycle releases and do more Terminal Directive style boxes but it flopped so hard that they canceled all 3 they had the pipe line

Damn. Very, very sad and disappointed if true. TD wasn't perfect, but I definitely think it was a step in a *good* direction.

>>54941996
pls tell me this is true and post a screencap

Hayley as ID
Saker, Peregrine, and Golden as breaker suite
Dhegdheer, Multithreader, and Sahasrara, all for the purpose of discounting shenanigans with the birds.
I'd still be better off using Kate

>>54941996
>>54942492
Owner of jinteki.net previously shut it down over an argument, so this wouldn't surprise me. However, I cannot confirm that this has happened again.

>>54942631
yeah i remember the drunk rant about his ex girlfriend, shit was hilarious

>>54942474
Maybe if we're lucky, they're reworking the TD sequels to have more streamlined gameplay?

>>54942617

I was not expecting that conclusion. The birds didn't take the hit.

>>54942762

As of right now "wait and see" is all we have left. I hope FFG understands it's not a great idea to let anxious people simmering for too long.

I'm kinda smirking at all the people going "no Whiz and Jackson at worlds!" like it was some incredible news. Did they expect some magic replacement solution in the the very first data packs of next cycle?

The replacements are going to be mostly what we already have.

what a fucking ruse

>>54922937
The biggest flaw of non-installable cards is that it circumvents, the primary resource of the game, Clicks. It just doesn't work.

I'm taking the current card pool. Printing the latest MWL and saying "This is the best Netrunner now and forever".
How wrong do you think I will be in a year?

>>54942631

Wasn't it due to crimson dust being implemented this time? Should be back up by now?

>>54942474

Bit strange to hear that when Moons are so prevalent, and it's not exactly meant to be core set levels of sales right?

>>54945941
>Bit strange to hear that when Moons are so prevalent

Would confirm what some of us have been saying: competitive sales are probably far from the bulk of sales.

>>54945689

You're far from the only one thinking this. Some people have been planning this since D&D.

Part of why I think the current silence will do a lot more hurt than might be imagined: it's just going to comfort some that were hesitant in the decision .

>>54944024

I do think they've been way too liberal in their experimentation with paid ability windows. Have been lamenting since SMC and Clone Chip, they severely underestimated the value. I don't know that it's just the click economy though Yeah, the possible click compression is very strong, but also the interstitial play in itself has huge value, and there' also the possibility of playing things during runs.

>>54946478

Wait, shouldn't competitive be making the bulk of said sales in this case? Gotta have to get TD to spam out Moons after all. And at the very least it should at least be equal to any of the existing deluxes.

Still, was kinda saddened TD didn't bring in an influx of new players.

>>54947275

If all competitive players bought TD, but the sales are still considered abysmal, then two possible answers are that the competitive pool has shrunk terribly in the last few months (could always be that), or if it is stable enough that the competitive pool never amounted to that much of the sales volume anyway.

I wonder if Netrunner would have retained popularity if there was a metaplot of sorts ala L5R?

Something akin to those 2 voting events (the Chronos Protocol and that other one the Collective lost) we had but more frequent?

>>54948599
Maybe. I probably won't ever play L5R - mandatory two core is way too expensive - but I'm definitely keeping up with the short stories they post every two weeks atleast. The main problem with ANR for new players has always been that learning curve though, not the lore.

>>54949241
>mandatory two core is way too expensive

As opposed to the mandatory 3 cores in ANR?

>>54949945
>mandatory
I've only had one core and never needed more. And I can atleast play single core ANR with a friend with full decks, and even get some customization in, instead of the half decks of L5R, and the fixed decks filled with singles of AHLCG. ANR definitely gives the most bang for your buck out of all FFG LCGs.

>>54950216
ANR core set definitely gives the most bang for your buck, I mean.

>>54949945
Bullshit. 2 cores is recommended for tournaments to get fullsets of many cards. But it's definitely not mandatory. 3 cores? Totally unnecessary. Only reason for that is to get a third Desperado, and just as easily you can ask a friend to lend it to you.

>>54951049
On the subject of 2 cores, Core 2 is still a thing. FFG just loves being stupid and seems to hate Netrunner. Maybe they want to delay the pain that Anarch players will feel in losing Medium, Yog, Parasite, and Deja Vu. Or Crims losing Siphon. Who knows?

>>54951579
Core 2 is not a thing, quit spreading this baseless rumor. next cycle is Damon-made, Boggs-fixed, and the cycle after is pure Boggs and might not even happen, We don't know jack about boxes.

>>54949945

Even back in the early days you could get by with a single core depending on which faction (ie not crims or NBN) you played.

File: Mason Bellamy.jpg (1MB, 1364x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1364x1000px

>>54951687
I could have sworn either Boggs or Damon talked a little on Cycle 9, but yeah, he's having to go through 8 with a fine-toothed comb.

Something Core 2-ish has been floated around, talked about, whispered about, and quite possibly playtested for a long-ass time, but other than that we know nothing

Could be replacement, could be like X-wing, it might have died in development, FFG's higher-ups might can it for reasons known only to them, printing capacity for large sets might be all taken up with L5R... the possibilities (and thus rumours) are endless

>>54951789
I think they are using Boggs fixing Cycle 8 as a convenient excuse to tank ANR to leech its players into L5R.

File: What we need right now.png (64KB, 300x419px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 300x419px

>>54951865
It's an unfortunate fact that LCG's compete largely with each other for players - I can totally understand not wanting to drop something big during another game's launch, but it's both very unfortunate timing and pretty poor handling - I highly, highly doubt they want to kill anything.

I also totally buy that cycle 8 needs a bit of fixing, or at the very least they want to make sure the players aren't going to be up in arms and bitching when it does launch - again, totally understandable, just pretty badly done.

If in a couple of weeks Boggs jumps on a few podcasts - and he's shown a total willingness to do so in the past, on MWL issues and admit he was over-cautious on one of them - and he just frankly spells out that he's got to look at the post-rotation "very carefully" making sure it's right and balanced "for the health of the game", I'd be a bit more accepting.
He can't trash Damon (defamation and all that), but just saying it needs a review, maybe mention the printers or something - honestly, he should just do what he did when he took over again, that really helped with a lot of lukewarm opinions.

Oh, and a MWL, seeing as it's the closest thing to an ANR product they can put out for a while - Moon and Moose on 2 would probably do most of the trick

>>54951992
It'd help if the marketing team did not hate Boggs and his unwillingness to listen to them.
They are more or less going to kill off Netrunner by delaying releases and doing no announcements to make sure the devs know their place at FFG.

>>54951579
>>54951687
Kay. Also, NBN loses Astroscript and Breaking News. Haas-Bioroid loses Accelerated Beta Test and age-old ETF. Weyland loses bloody Scorched Earth, which is a big deal for 'Core only' players but much less so for those with access to BOOM! Again though, you'll find out when FFG gets their heads out of their asses and agrees to put the damn thing out.

>>54952024
Hopefully this kind of inter(intra?)-FFG feud isn't true, you'd think the higher ups would atleast care about it if it costed them money and/or the player base, and shut it down quickly.

>>54952226
FFG works off what they call the "Magic Number" for games, If the RoR falls below that number then marketing will back burner a game for higher profit projects. Terminal Directive flopped and a lot of people held off on Red Sand packs to see what it looked like later. That dropped Netrunner below the threshold and has kind of killed it.

Toss that on top of the now terminal case of dying game syndrome that Netrunner has at this point. I honestly don't expect Netrunner to be around by the end of 2019. They need to drop a product for the next LCG anyways. Star Wars and Lord of the Rings both make a higher RoR than Netrunner right now.

File: biotic labor art.jpg (44KB, 700x474px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 700x474px

>>54952200
HB without core loses there, well, core

>>54952574
I mean - they're not losing everything. Pic-related, they are keeping Biotic Labor. And they're holding onto Ash. But ABT and ETF are major losses.

>>54919002
First time poster
What's everyone's opinion on Jackson Howard?
I feel like you're gimping yourself or playing some out there deck if you DON'T use him

>>54952690
That is the prevailing zeitgeist on the card, yes.

>>54952690
Well, you are wrong. Jackson is a crutch. The problems it solved actually made the players more reliant on him to solve them. To the point they blame bad luck on not drawing him instead of learning how to play the game. It engenders passivity. It's a shield in a game that should be about offensive action and reaction.

>>54952690
I've played several decks without Jackson. He's not 100% necessary in every deck, but he's just an amazing utility card. Most decks would need a good reason to not run him.

Plus Noise exists, and as long as he does, the corp will need recursion. As soon as Friends is on MWL, and Jackson rotates, we will see a resurgence in Noise.

>>54952795
Fuck off, Damon.

>>54952690
I wouldn't call myself a good player, but I haven't seen the need to use him myself, since I would rather the influence elsewhere. He is undoubtedly good though, my decks feel surprisingly faster with some draw cards, and HQ feels less full if you can shuffle agendas away. Having the ability to do both at will is always a boon.

>>54952985

Another anon here, but I do agree with most of that really.
We've had that conversation several times already. Jackson is way too good, too much value in one card, and he has warped the game completely.

They could just errata Noise to be "first virus each turn. But no.

>>54952795
/r/iamverysmart

>>54953894
>>54952985
Thanks for your input. Anything to add?

>>54954013

http://imgur.com/a/BKj9J

New MWL for German nats that got pulled last min or somesuch. Prob real?

Runner level 1 Aaron, Clone Chip, Parasite, Temujin, Wyldside, Yog
Runner level 3 DDoS, Blackmail, Faust, Rumor Mill, Sifr
Corp level 1 Architect, Bio-ethics, Mumba Temple, Mumbad City Hall, Breaking News, Sansan City Grid
Corp level 3 Adjusted Diagnostics, Friends in High Places, Sensie Actors Union

>>54954238
I wouldn't mind if it were, but people are going to complain again about David off the list.

>>54954306

Who knows why that and Moon are not on the list though. Like I say, 'probably real'.

>>54954306

Yeah, D4V1D is a weird choice, but then it's in a weird spot..The card by itself I think fills a necessary niche - the increase in playable high strength high subroutine ICE makes it so. The problem to me arises when you pair it with Cutlery.

Had D4V1D been "prevent from firing" instead of breaking, I think it would be a lot less aggravating right now.

>>54954238
Friends being MWL 3 is probably gonna hurt corps more than help it I bet, especially with trashing corp stuff not being made any weaker. Oh well.

>>54954238
I really hope it isn't true, Moon should be put on there somewhere.

>>54954327

Also, there seems to be a hard cap of 20 cards total for the List, so perhaps that might explain the strange in/exclusion of certain cards.

Been testing the new "rotation" card pool with my worlds group.
So far we are debating just not going, game is nearly unplayable.

>>54954581

Define "unplayable".

>>54954611
Corp can kill or asset spam with almost no way to stop them.
There is no real counter to Noise mill and he still has all his fun toys.

The game has mostly devolved into "Will Noise RNG win before I kill him?"
Playing anything but Noise more or less auto loses (highest non-noise deck is 30~% win rate).

>>54954581

Somehow I have a feeling the first pack of cycle 8 would be mostly bleh cards anyway to not encourage extra MWL-candidates, so perhaps that pool wouldn't be that far off...

File: posters.jpg (814KB, 3060x1496px) Image search: [Google]

814KB, 3060x1496px

>>54957484
Looks really derpy full size

Any newer regions you think that would make cool posters?

Just some thoughts on how I feel Anarch's main core was mishandled.

So, we know how the three Runner factions are supposed to represent three different styles of play. Shapers are supposed to represent runners who can constantly get in anywhere, given enough prep time. The corp can try to mitigate this by hastening the clock, or build up higher defenses. Meanwhile, Criminals are supposed to represent the runners that can get in when they need to, whether this is by some sort of tomfoolery or a carefully executed plan of attack. Corps can protect themselves by baiting out these high power runs, or have some sort of surprise that they can't plan against.

Anarchs are defined by their disruptiveness. They directly mess with the corp's plans, which can create a weakness that they can exploit. Now, where I think they dropped the ball with here is that while disruptiveness should be either constant, or strong, they should not ever be both, that is they shouldn't ever snowball. Using Parasite as an example, putting it on a piece of ice makes it weaker, letting you break it for cheap, a hole to sneak into. But the trashing ability removes that ice from the server, basically widening that hole until the corp can patch it up.

This kind of thing really shouldn't have happened; disrupting what the corp's actions and altering their game plan is already a strong ability, effectively *forcing* the corp to respond instead of giving them the choice to accept a hole in their plans is why Anarchs - atleast current ones, I know early Anarchs were considered pretty weak - are constantly going strong.

>>54957713
Then there's also the frequently discussed matter of how Anarch's own weaknesses got patched up. Being disruptive should've either had drawbacks, or weak enough that it becomes negligible or manageable. However, Anarchs instead get the ability to cover those drawbacks, when that should've been the weakpoint that the corps could exploit. We're seeing this in the current Counter Surveillance decks, where there is a plan of attack for the corp (tags), but is shutdown by multiple cards (Mercs, Obelus, M4M), leaving corps without a way to respond.

I mostly had this train of thought because it feels like there is something directly wrong with the design philosophy for Anarch cards. Like certain cards were made very disruptive because they didn't think it was disruptive enough, or cards that patched weakpoints because they were afraid of leaving the faction with drawbacks and make it too weak. Might be that certain cards just get passed through during play testing, but I see Mercs and its "1 additional prevent meat damage per tag" and can't help but feel it's a design choice thing.

>>54957713
Right now I'm out but I want to read this later.

>>54957713
>>54957737

Looking at it another angle (because I'm not sure about disruption being an Anarch only thing - Account Siphon is still the Crim defining card; ICE trash may have been terribly under-costed, but derez still is a comparable form of disruption;CBI Raid may still be stillborn for now, but it *was* an attempt at another form of disruption) Anarch were supposed to be the high variance faction. The win big lose big faction. Just compare Medium to R&DI.

One trouble to me is that it's been less and less true, with the rigs becoming just as meanly efficient as the other two faction's and the drawbacks becoming way too easy to sedate for my taste. Sifr being the easy target. But just look at the latest cry-foul darling: Counter Surveillance. Had I designed that card, it would have an added clause:"Only use that ability if Counter Surveillance was already installed at the start of your turn". Could have been bypassed by cards like DaVinci, but at the core it would have still been about the possible (tag) interaction(s) with the corp. Instead of being a double event that doesn't say it's name.

File: 1396638867235.jpg (34KB, 264x314px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 264x314px

Based on all of the drama I'm seeing, I'm glad that my local meta died and I stopped buying cards.

>Migrating to L5R

I've seen what FFG have done to ANR/Conquest/AGOT. FFG somehow keeps repeating this pattern of

>Amazing game with great potential
>Broken meta evolves
>Colossal fuckup from FFG
>Change to fix fuckup fucks player base
>Game withers until death

Mark my words, L5R will meet the same fate. FFG has these great designers making great base systems, and then fucking it up over time. No exceptions.

>>54960028

Another thing, and that's where I think the issue is close to unsolvable, is that when actually high variance cards are released, they're "not playable" for a significant portion of the competitive crowd. The Anarch card pool is filled to the brim with cool cards that are high variance or high risk/high reward, potentially very powerful, and instantly derided on release - Look at how Persephone and Severnius have been received. Amusingly some of those cards become the next cry foul once people have managed to negate the weaknesses.
I mean, look no further than DRL for an example of that. I remember people chuckling at me for playing it, once.

Add to that a significant number of people quite simply not liking high variance and high risk/high reward, feeling like they've been robbed of their victory by sheer luck, as if the risk taken by their opponent wasn't part of strategy at the deck-building stage.

>>54960054
The main reason for Netrunner's death was Damon Stone and he is gone now.
Conquest was killed by Games Workshop being well games Workshop and pulling 40k rights.
Game of Thrones 2.0 is amazing and only getting better.

L5R is going to live a long life, it is much easier to design for than Netrunner just by the nature of being a dueling game and has their best names behind it.

>>54960054
Really the main reason I see people jumping ship is that most of them are old L5R players that started playing card games again with Netrunner and now are moving back to L5R.

>>54960144
>The main reason for Netrunner's death was Damon Stone and he is gone now.

Do you really think so? Seems pretty ridiculous to me.
Disregarding all the rumors of direct higher up interference, I don't think any game of this complexity, with that many strings attached that are not under the control of the lead designer - you may put the 6 month MWL rule on Damon, but then that's forgetting to credit him with the MWL being a way he managed to bypass the extreme errata/ban/edit resistance from the company he worked for in the first place, for one - will ever not get messy.

Hell, if you looks at the biggest problem cards, they're still cards that come from when Lukas was lead.
Core is still the biggest elephant in the room on many respects, quickly followed by the big boxes, and the fact that those are ever-green is not under the lead designer's purview.

Quicker rotation might have helped on some respects that was wasn't under the Lead designer's control either.

Going back to the Anarch point just up there, look at, say, Berserker. It's a very cool, interesting, and on some respects I thin very *healthy* design. Trouble is is has to coexist with all the balance mistakes that preceded it, meaning only draft/sealed players and people who love to experiment will ever really deal with it. And power-creeping it to sexify it... well, we got Sifr already, didn't we?

>>54960582
Core Netrunner is perfect. the issue was Damon fucking up the cycles and not keeping up with it.

>>54960840

Oh, I hadn't realized. Go on then...

>>54960028
>>54960066
You could see Siphon and derez as disruptive, but you can also see it as part of the tricks Criminals have in that they contribute towards getting in for that one run. Both of these, except Siphon in large amounts, don't actually force the corp to divert resources to mitigate. Compare vanilla 3 click Siphon use and viruses that require purges every now and then.

And from a design angle, having high variance as the design philosophy behind Anarch cards could be erroneous, simply because as you say, once you remove the variance, those cards become the next OP cards. Had they been designed with a different perspective or goal, there might not have been an opportunity for players to abuse those cards after a "solution" to that variance pops up. For example if DLR was to be purely disruptive over high variance, it could be "At the start of your turn, if you are tagged, lose one click. The corp then trashes the top card of RnD."

>>54960840
Core Netrunner was designed with short term balance in mind and without consideration for future cards. Hardly perfect.

>>54963870

Going to quote a post I wrote around the end of Spin cycle, which I think, given the conversation at hand, is interesting to see in retrospect.

>when I play Criminal, I play AS for the disruption first - if anything for the taking more than the gaining. Though I'm not spitting on more creds. When I play it within an Anarch deck, I *need* those gained creds, AS is a major fuel provider in those decks.

>>54964205
Perhaps it's wrong of me to view Siphon as only a "big run" enabler. Let's look at it as a disruptive card. As said earlier, disruptive cards should be either strong, or constant, but never both. Looking at it as a run enabler, then there isn't really anything wrong with Siphon; 5 credits is a lot, but recoverable atleast in two turns, and you only have one other click to do a thing if you want to remain tag free. But when you look at it as a disruptive card, we see that even in core with Deja Vu that you can play it multiple times consecutively, increasing the time required to cover up that weakpoint while opening others, effectively snowballing the corp to a bad state.

Perhaps when Siphon was designed, the testers/developers fell into the same trap I did and didn't look at it as a disruptive card, atleast not in the sense that I've outlined above. It's a high impact card for sure, but the fact that that impact can be dealt multiple times (making it both strong and constant) was probably overlooked. If we wanted to avoid the constant part, Siphon probably could've RFGed itself after being played.

>>54965271
As a follow up, I do wonder how the game would've been if they were more aggressive with self-RFGing cards. Might've nipped a decent amount of abusable probems in the bud.

>>54954698
>Corp can kill or asset spam with almost no way to stop them.

What of: Bio-Modeled Network, Biometric Spoofing, Caldera, Citadel Sanctuary, Crash Space, Feedback Filter, Guru Davinder, Heartbeat, Jarogniew Mercs, On the Lam, Paparazzi?

>There is no real counter to Noise mill and he still has all his fun toys.
Allele Repression, Defense Construct, Museum of History, Preemptive Action, Whampoa Reclamation, Shannon Claire, Restore, Clone Suffrage Movement, Archived Memories, Director Haas Pet Project, I guess Fiends in High Places despite the MWL is still a possibility, Hades Fragment if you can Rush it, Jinteki Biotech, Seidr Laboratories (+MCA Austerity Policy and Load Testing if Noise goes full non-interactive).

I don't think you're devoid of tools, really.

>>54966814

Those anti-Noise cards are way less helpful considering most/all does nothing on his turn where he does most of his 'magic'.

The damage prevention are either expensive (net) or trashable one way or another (meat). Granted the second is less hopeless but still...

>>54967541
>The damage prevention are either expensive (net) or trashable one way or another (meat)

That's the whole point methinks. They saw how Plascrete turned the whole ill conversation into a basically binary non-interactive proposition - Plascrete on = no kill, plascrete off = death, and instead replaced it with secondary interactive solutions that have to be supplemented by the proper strategy.

I can't see how that's a bad thing for the game.

>Those anti-Noise cards are way less helpful considering most/all does nothing on his turn where he does most of his 'magic'.

Again that's the whole point: you have a set of tools that can be used against Noise without completely shutting down support milling from other IDs - by letting them a window of action ro capitalize on.
You may dispute the execution the execution, but again I can't see how at least the intention itself is bad for the game.

>>54965271
>disruptive cards should be either strong, or constant, but never both

But that's the thing: DLR wasn't both. It's a resource you can only play when tagged. It was never meant to stay long on the table.
Counter Surveillance is potentially very strong but it isn't a constant.
If you look at Medium, the real problem isn't so much its innate power as the way head-locking and (especially) ICE destruction enables it.
Hell looking at Parasite, I don't even think the ICE destruction is *that* bad, the problem is the ability to turn it instant and more or less costless (ie Datasucker). As I said in previous thread, when you have to wait 5 turns for the ICE to fizzle out, or have to pay the Wyrm tax, Parasite is a lot more honest.

Mostly though, high variance cards by themselves I don't think are bad. They come tied with innate weaknesses you're supposed to have to juggle with (though as I said I wish CS had to stay on the table a bit before being playable).

The problem is that some cards are considered "bad" because they are high risk-high reward cards (the same way cards that offer the other player a choice are considered bad) and then only become considered good competitively once you can build to basically ignore the weaknesses (or choices offered to the other side).
And seems to me all too often the cards that are released that negate those weaknesses are released because no one wants to play risky cards in the first place, so the designers decide to offer support.

That's why It think there's no way out really.

>>54970375
Just to reiterate, the statement I'm making here is that "cards with the purpose of disruption should have been designed to be either strong or constant and never both, to prevent snowballing, that is, forcing a bad situation onto the corp that they are usually incapable of responding to."

DLR is variable in that if you use all 4 clicks or more to trash stuff, it is strong, and if you can keep it on the table for multiple turns, is constant. Keep either of this in line, then it is disruptive, but wouldn't have snowballed.

Counter Surveillance, despite being game-endingly strong, is not a disruptive card. It does not force the corp to use up resources to stop it, rather, it doesn't give the corp a chance to respond or recover at all; there is no snowball. There's probably a different type of card this would fall under, likely the same as Maker's Eye/Legwork.

Medium sits somewhere close to DLR; it being a constant (the need to purge every so often) is what makes it disruptive, and its exponential and limitless increase in strength (especially in addition to other enablers) is what allows it to snowball. Same with Parasite. Both if these cards, if they only had their constant parts, would allow much less of a snowball, or honest, as you say.

Hopefully you can see from a design perspective that had they followed this kind of design rule, they would've come out with less snowbally cards. Looking and designing disruptive cards with a "high risk high reward" goal just isn't right, especially since the natural flow is to then give the tools to mitigate that risk. It's not that I disagree with your thoughts on high variance cards, but more that we're likely trying to make unrelated points.

>>54970761
>Looking and designing disruptive cards with a "high risk high reward" goal just isn't right

I think that's a core point on which we'll have to disagree. Some of us like those lines of plays. I loved to play DLR when it was still a very risky card, and am kinda mad that whenever I pull it out now, I'm looked out at like I'm the antichrist.
Some cards are to be designed for people that aren't the competitive crowd too.

>but more that we're likely trying to make unrelated points.

I'm not sure really, I'm thinking we're not looking at it from the same perspective.

>DLR
>if you use all 4 clicks or more to trash stuff is strong
>if you can keep it on the table for multiple turns is constant

DLR was designed to be strong because it was meant to be a transient interactive flare effect. When it was released, the corp was *always* in reach of being able to trash it - even from zero credits with no board state, it could always just spend the turn clicking for two credits and trash it.
So you're looking at DLR as the problem card, and I'm looking in the direction of Fall Guy, Wireless Net Pavilion (as soon as I saw that one, I knew DLR's competitive time was come) and to a lesser extent Paparazzi.
I want my cards to be interactive. I want me and my opponent to make choices, and I tend to look at cards that prevent or negate those choices - especially base game verbs - with suspicion

>>54971245
>Some cards are to be designed for people that aren't the competitive crowd too.

Was having that talk actually yesterday: to competitive players, cards like the Deva are quoth "binder-fodder" but to a few people like me, sure we couldn't make a full Deva deck work properly - as well as we wished at least, but it was still incredibly interesting and fun to play and worth existence just for that. Gave us a way to play Netrunner that was completely different in its own way. And they couldn't have just given us a "version that works" because the card is interesting *thanks* to its imperfections. Not in spite of them.

>>54971245
>So you're looking at DLR as the problem card, and I'm looking in the direction of Fall Guy, Wireless Net Pavilion (as soon as I saw that one, I knew DLR's competitive time was come) and to a lesser extent Paparazzi.

It's less that I'm blaming a particular card, it's more to do with the design behind it. If we start with "high risk, high reward", then the natural flow is to go "low risk, high reward", which is what Fall Guy and Pavillion are. Say DLR was the following:

Data Link Reversal
At the start of your turn, if you are tagged, trash the top card of RnD. You may only use this effect to trash up to two cards in a single turn.

This is a less strong, but more constant DLR. Fall Guy and Pavilion would've made it harder to trash, but it becomes a lot more manageable. It is disruptive, but beyond having three on the board with Pavilion and three Fall Guys (which is practically way too late, and Pavilion itself is a big no no that boosts the constant aspect), salvageable, because two a turn isn't horrendously fast.

I'm not saying it *isn't* a high risk high reward card, I'm not saying you *shouldn't* make any high risk high reward cards either. I'm saying that disruptive cards should have taken the points I have stated in order to prevent a situation where snowballing - the 5 cards a turn with no way of getting out of it of DLR + Siphon spam being an example - could happen.

>>54971527
>It's less that I'm blaming a particular card, it's more to do with the design behind it.

Same as I am. I think as a designer you don't want to create too many and too good preventions effects, too many cards that negate the base verbs, the base choices the game offers.

Not one card is to blame for DLR becoming the monster it is now. It's the sum of it all: being able to safe-tag without ever interacting with the corp, being able to prevent all the fatal damages you're supposedly risking for being tagged, being able to make trashing prohibitively expensive, being able to prevent the prohibitive trashes, being able to access all cards in Archives without ever running at all.

And I have much more of a problem with the base design of those cards all those cards which can be summed up as: "allowing you not to play the game", than with a card that demanded that you play several dangerous aspects of the game in exchange for a strong but short lived effect.

The limit wold have been safer long term, but then limiting Salvage, Woodcutter and Tyrant was safer.

>>54971768
So we're not actually at a disagreement then, since most of your deductions still fall in line with the "strong vs constant" design theory I have for disruptive cards.

>but then limiting Salvage, Woodcutter and Tyrant was safer.
While unrelated, I do think the requirement for advancing, especially pre-Priority Construction(?), is already a decent limit.

>>54970761
>>54972039
As a proof of concept and thought experiment, let's use this design philosophy to make a brand new disruptive card. First we decide a goal; I'd like something that interacts with bad pub. Then we decide if we want to make it strong, or constant. Let's go for constant first. As an easy target, we'll have it mess with the corp's money. If it's constant then it will need to be installed. For purpose of ease to mitigate, let's make it a virus card.

>Defamation Worm
>Cost 2 - MU 1
>Program - Virus
>At the start of your turn, place a virus counter on Defamation Worm if the amount on counters on it is less than the number bad publicity that the corp has.

>At the start of the your turn, the corp loses credits equal to the amount of virus counters on Defamation Worm.

Here we have something that is relatively weak at first glance. However we can see that there is a possibility for snowballing whether due to having multiple installed, or somehow boost the number of virus counters on it. And the key here is the interaction with credits; if the corp loses too much, then it is too strong, since they would struggle to cover it up. If the corp loses too little (though even a 1 credit drain can still end up sizable), then it would be "uncompetitive" (see Lamprey).

>>54972404
>At the start of the your turn
the corp's turn*

So, since the line between strong and weak is on the credit disruption, and is very thin, let's pick a different target. Let's go with HQ cards.

>Defamation Worm
>Cost 2 - MU 1
>Program - Virus - Unique
>At the start of the corp's turn, they must reveal cards in HQ equal to the number of bad publicity tokens he or she has, and host those cards onto Defamation Worm.

>At the end of your turn, return corp cards hosted on Defamation Worm to HQ. Return any hosted cards to HQ if Defamation Worm is trashed.

>Trash Defamation Worm if the Corp purges virus counters.

Let's ignore whatever rules malady the pedantic can find from this and assume it works as intended: the corp reveals and temporarily loses access to cards in HQ at random at the start of their turn, and this repeats every turn. This is disruptive; hosted cards could be something they wanted to play in retaliation to the runner, or agendas they wanted to hide. At the same time it won't ever do more than just that, and it is manageable enough that you could ignore it in the long term, but still have access to a way to stop it. A program install, trash DW -> run HQ play wouldn't be snowballing, as it stops immediately after the run.

Hopefully this serves as a decent proof of concept that if disruptive cards were designed with "strong vs constant" in mind, then less snowbally cards could be made. It's probably not perfect though, so feel free to pick apart the theory or the card if you feel like it.

File: lamprey.jpg (145KB, 800x509px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 800x509px

>>54972423
>>54972404
They're both pretty strong - the second guarantees a card trash from HQ, and the first takes the corp's money without you doing anything

>>54973014
How did you get the guaranteed card trash? Purging at 4 with 2 on the card would indeed force a trash, unless you played down to 2 cards and go back up to 3 on the next turn. Or purge with CVS.

>>54973181
Start of Corp turn, card goes on
[corp turn]
[runner turn]
End of Runner turn, card goes back to HQ
Start of Corp turn again

Unless the second sentence means it never trashes a card on it, but that just takes cards out of HQ which is kind of odd

>>54973447
Yeah, that's what it's meant to do, it definitely wouldn't trash anything, just puts cards away for a turn and switches it around each time. It was pretty awkward to word correctly. Basically a runner triggered Glenn Station that temporarily removes more cards with higher bad pub.

Talking of milling, a card I'm still surprised didn't catch in the asset spam meta is Gravedigger. Getting two on the table gives you a pretty decent engine.

>>54972039

Where we fall in a disagreement is that I do not in any of those cards you cite as snowballing lies the issue, or that they are the ones that are in need of correcting. They are more likely to be the ones to be corrected, because it's easier to patch at the point of least resistance, but in the long run I think the lesson to be taken is about the others.

You seem to want cards that are built weakened so as not to snowball. I want those powerful cards that could possibly snowball, but without cards that by themselves or in correlation will make the natural counters to snowballing impossible. Which is a lot harder to attain. And I certainly in no way fault the designers for it happening. It's insanely hard to get that kind of balance, especially in a game this young and that got so much experimenting going on about where to take the design space.

>>54974277
I agree. I think the Asset trashing Val people is trying to make would benefit a lot from this. But the alternative are also good.

>>54974277
>Gravedigger
Jackson made the slower mill card pointless.
You needed spam mill like Noise or targeted mill like Keyhole.

I can see it coming back during worlds tho.

There is what I have for my worlds test deck now:

Worlds Noise

Noise: Hacker Extraordinaire

Event (9)
3x Déjà Vu
3x I've Had Worse
3x Sure Gamble

Hardware (5)
2x Clone Chip ●●●●
3x Grimoire

Resource (2)
2x Aesop's Pawnshop ●●●●

Icebreaker (2)
2x God of War

Program (27)
3x Cache ●●●
2x Clot
3x Datasucker
2x Gravedigger
2x Hivemind
3x Incubator
3x Lamprey
3x Medium
2x Parasite
2x Progenitor
2x Trope

15 influence spent (max 15, available 0)
45 cards (min 45)
Cards up to Free Mars

--------

So far 72% win rate out of 30 games

>>54976612
Was going to ask why no Imp but I remembered Imp is leaving too.
Looks fairly good, Just comes down to RNG to see who can see Agendas first from the looks of it.

>>54976612
Do you actually need Grimoire?

>>54976979
Helps with the MU and to kickstart some viruses.
Starting with a token on God of War is nice for the rare times I need to use it.

>>54974762
>You seem to want cards that are built weakened so as not to snowball. I want those powerful cards that could possibly snowball, but without cards that by themselves or in correlation will make the natural counters to snowballing impossible.
Ah, that's fair. We're still actually saying the same points, just running parallel; I prefer designing cards that don't allow snowballing (which doesn't mean it has to be weak by the way), you prefer to have the opening for counterplay remain unclosed in follow up cards. Both still correspond accordingly to the "strong vs constant" theory (DLR is potentially strong, so newer cards should avoid from making it constant, or atleast not overly so), and I agree that achieving that balance is difficult. Hindsight is 20/20 after all, which my theory has the benefit of doing.

>>54976612
Do you put any counters on God of War then remove the tags, or do you just hope you never need to use it?

>>54976612

So what's the worst match ups for him?

>>54952680
There's no fucking way HB is losing ETF, that would be retarded

>>54984711
I can't believe Jackson Howard does experiments on special needs children

>>54984826
You all thought he was the savior the Corporate World needed, but in the end he was what the Corporate World deserved.

File: Sunshine Junction.jpg (69KB, 640x533px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x533px

>>54984711
Love the "puppet master" big in the background - I think even when his motives are pure (and I reckon most of the times they are) he probably comes off as unnervingly creepy and cheerful.

>>54984826
Not special needs, just having fun

>>54984879
That's clearly a special needs helmet, I should know

File: Licence Aquisition.png (2MB, 1200x1085px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x1085px

>>54984891
Nothing to do with the (child-proofed) holo-projector then?

Pic related is cool, shame the effect isn't thematic, or even all that great, other than reinstalling SanSan

>>54978965

I didn't mean weakened as in "powerless", but as in "with reduced amplitude".
And yes your way is better for future-proofing, but, and that' why I was mentioning the advance-only-while-rezzed suite up there, future-proofed cards are useless if no one wants to play them. And that's the other risk you're running.

>>54976612

I wonder how that would fare against an updated version of my old Dockland Crackdown deck.

>>54984804

How so? What's the rational besides "it's so much more powerful than anything else", which is why people want it out in the first place?

>>54984879
>Love the "puppet master" big in the background

And now I realize a bit late it's probably what that 5/3 agenda is all about.

>>54984950
>Pic related is cool, shame the effect isn't all that great

Recur, install and rez for free? Not good enough? Damn, what do you people want?
Also the funniest target is Corporate Town.

File: City Surviellance.jpg (146KB, 1024x896px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1024x896px

>>54985363
>Also the funniest target is Corporate Town.
Shit, yeah, that's amazing.

Was mainly going off how few assets and upgrades cost more than a couple of credits, plus we're a bit spoiled by FIHP on the recursion front.

NBN control a lot of things - anything you do might be a result of NBN manipulation, you wouldn't even know. They may not be as obvious in their evil ways as the other corps, but there's none more insidious

So... O2 Shortage.

First, before anything, I love the base design of the card, that's my jam. I know I'll play it.
But then I think, core problem: it's been designed to be an exact averaging out of Neural EMP and Biotic Labor.
Trouble is, I think, the two propositions are *not* going to ever be perceived as of equal value. I'm thinking Mr. Stone thought being able to damage the runner in unpreventable form, *without the runner having done anything to warrant it* was strong. And I while I personally agree, I don't think people are ever going to see it as one more click strong.

One more click is a winning move. As long as you have at least one remaining card in HQ, the runner has to acknowledge the risk of you scoring a 3/2. 15% closer to scoring victory + potential stronger position from the would-be agenda effect. This *is* the choice you'll want the runner to make the vast majority of times.
One card discarded at random from the runner is actually good I think. Unpreventable damage equivalent *is* good. But - all the more since it cannot threaten a kill itself. - it takes a LOT more work than a single card in HQ for it to become a credible victory threat.
As *should be*.

So my take is that the cost should have been lower to embrace the fact that the two choices offered are of different value. I think I would have made it one credit myself.
Early game it becomes pretty interesting, as one card removed at random from the grip for 1 credit would be a pretty valuable FA/NA rush tool.
And late game, being able to turn your set up - which I think would be a cost worth more than the 3 credits you gain from simply not slotting Biotic Labor instead of this anyway - for a one credit = one click proposition would give it value as a game closer.

>>54986315
For me, as it stands, it's a pretty big meh. As you mention, the Runner have to respect the click, so the card actually reads "Pay 3 to do 1 unpreventable damage that can't flatline". It took Chronos Protocol to get Neural Katana viable as a non-flatline option, because the trade of a card of a card is not powerful enough as a tax.
If instead the card trashed a number of events to represent the choking, or let you pick. That would be another story.

>>54986315

Another way to look at it I guess, And I I know it almost makes it sound like I'm contradicting myself here but: as the corp, at three credits a pop, most people are not going to bluff a scoring just to land that removed card from grip.
At one credit a pop, it's definitely worth consideration. The end result of getting that click at a suboptimal moment, when you can't really capitalize on it, is bad, but not crippling.

>>54986528
>It took Chronos Protocol to get Neural Katana viable as a non-flatline option

I gather you meant Neural EMP? If so don't think I agree. You could use it as a form of pressure in damage erosion builds early on in the existence of the game, and create scoring window for a Nisei. That wasn't bad at all.

File: IMG_9254009485895.jpg (41KB, 631x850px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 631x850px

>>54986672
I see your point, and I raise you A PUPPY.
I've actually never seen NEmp used in such a way, even when I've been playing since C&C.
Sounds like something I should try.

>>54986315
Expanding a bit on your thoughts, it is pretty obvious that the two effects, outside of specific situations, are unbalanced when compared to each other. A click for the corp has immense value, most obvious being FAing a 3/2. Meanwhile losing a single card is hardly a problem in the long run, though again, certain situations could make that undesirable, especially since Runners do have abilities that let them clicklessly draw. Going by that, the card lost to the discard might not even be worth a click, not to mention the 3 credits lost playing it.

I'll try applying the strong vs constant theory to see if it's applicable here.

"The Runner may place 5 power counters onto their ID. If he or she does not, gain two clicks. Otherwise, at the start of the Runner's turn, until there are no more power counters on their ID, they must remove a counter, and trash a card from their grip."

This turns the card into a much heavier decision, since losing a card for 5 turns will be felt, even after lessening the blow and letting the Runner choose which card to get rid of. There's also hilarious synergy with Helium-3 Deposit, which I'll happily leave.

Another way would be for the card to do *something* regardless of the Runner's choice. Even a simple "Gain 5." before the choice would make it much better.

>>54986978

Don't know how well that would fair in current card pool. Still worth a try I guess. If only for experimentation's sake.

File: Marcus Batty Art.jpg (64KB, 826x600px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 826x600px

>>54988950
Yeah, while Mining Accident isn't a star card by any measure, compared to O2 it's much closer to the mark - neither option is good for the corp, but they're long term/short term choices.

Also, check this magnificent motherfucker I found

>>54990303
>Yeah, while Mining Accident isn't a star card by any measure

Them's fighting words.
Mining Accident is a *very* good card at the very least. The removal from game was the only way to keep it from becoming a monster.

>>54990632
Mining Accident is the Account Siphon of Anarchs.

>>54990708

I don't like it one bit... but that's a pretty good sum up.

What do you think Soon^tm means? Is he making a pun to the next cycle/box theme?

>>54990708
I'm making a asset control deck with Valencia using Bad Publicity (through Investigative Journalism & Mining Accident) and keeping the corp poor with Account Siphon and potentially Lamprey (haven't decided yet). It's a fun idea, but I haven't been able to play locally for a while; so testing starts tomorrow

>>54990829

Seems like a reference to something I don't have the referent for.
Alternatively, it's a way to mock corporate newspeak in a self-deflating manner that tries to put the speaker out of reach of both the rock of management and the hard-place of public opinion.

>>54990850

I'm playing a Reina variation on this right now. Diwan, Network Exchange, Xanadu and Cortez (overkill, but I'm just packing a lot of uniques for fun's sake; not a competitive deck, at least in this form. The Archivist. Just wanted to go back to basics. Having a blast.

I really like that corporate self-trashing feeds Gravedigger. Remove that ICE to get rid of my Rook? Oh well, let's trim that R&D then.

>>54992478
You're not going for a full anti moose deck. Every card is installable and unique, so if you remove anything its gone for good.

I said this as a joke, but that should be a viable deck build at some point. Unique cards are more powerful since you know they can't stack, so you just play one of each unique and pick up a boatload of slightly over the power curve bonuses. Who cares about consistency when you have power.

>>54990632
Yeah, point -more what I meant was there's not a deck it immediately slots into

>>54992478
I actually love using Cortez in a deck based around derezing ice and force rezing ice with Forged Activation Orders; since it helps increase the price of ice for a rich corp. Plus it's a fun card to use.

>>54994339

Headlock Reina. Pay the Five credits - if you even can - I get to continue ramming you for free. Give me the bad pub and I'll get to do the same eventually.

>>54994557

I really like Cortez from a design standpoint. Contrast with Xanadu in light of all that conversation we've had about balance in the thread. The hurting corp as much or more while it is rich but not at all when it's poor and more vulnerable, with less econ margin is pretty good.
Bonus point for hurting the general abuse of multiple subs more.

>>54994557

Rubicon Switch in that Reina deck has been murder against certain decks. Rez that vanilla for 3/4 credits and I'll derez it for a click. Good times

>>54995190
I love making the all powerful Fairchild 3.0 9 credits to rez with Cortez, it actually forces the corp to think a bit when making a decision, espeically if Rubicon Switch is on the board.

>>54985363
Because it would be suicide for FFG to actually ban cards from the core box. It would quite literally kill the ANR scene at my local, I know that for a fact

>>54990303
Technically Mining Accident is different from O2 Shortage since that card offers a manipulable choice. You can force the bad pub if the Corp has no credits, and while that's technically doable with O2 Shortage (force the click gain when the runner has 0 cards in hand), it's a whole lot harder to achieve.

File: Space Ice.png (891KB, 1200x418px) Image search: [Google]

891KB, 1200x418px

Fire wall or Asteroid Belt in an advancable deck?

I went with Asteroid originally, but I'm usually high cash (Mass Comm is a godsend, and Priority Construction is great too), so I'm thinking I might want to go for the one that gets bigger - thoughts?

>>55001887

Going for Red Planet Couriers? Then AB is good to have (esp once rezzed) since you won't feel too bad about the 'lost' advancements.

>>55001887
With David out of MWL you might aswell consider Hadrian Wall to tax them.

>>55001948
Wait, was that official yet? Or did it come off last time and I forgot?

>>55001976
Not yet. But I trust it will be. It happened before. German sites disclosing documents on Netrunner before they should.
But I changed my mind, if David comes off the list it is the more reason to not play Hadrian wall.

>>55001887
If derez shenanigans are rampant or its an RPC deck, then Asteroid Belt. Otherwise Fire Wall is tons more taxing.

File: Government Takeover Full.jpg (892KB, 1191x1000px) Image search: [Google]

892KB, 1191x1000px

>>55003028
Yeah, it's RPC, but Takeover so it's not like I do it more than once

>>55003335

Might we well go with AB then, assuming you have ice wall in addition, since being able to rez it for cheap/free can be important considering you need about 5-9 creds to RPC out the takeover (including using a biotic). You never know when you might need all the creds.

>>54997045

I have a feeling there's a strong case of "damn if they do, damn if they don't" whatever they chose to do to solve game issues. FFG will have the hard task to chose the lesser evil.

That being said I find it interesting: are people running tournaments with core-only card pools (or close) where you are? Or do they enforce tournament ban lists even when not playing competitively?
No sarcasm, genuine questions.

>>54999680
>force the click gain when the runner has 0 cards in hand

Technically, force the click if the runner is just one card short of credible kill range. Alternatively, force if the runner fears losing a central piece held in grip.
Agreed it's much more of a gamble, but I can't help but think we're all overstating it to a point. Do you rez your Ronin when Hacktivist Meeting is on the table and the EMP you need for the kill in HQ? Do you risk your starting hand Security Nexus or do you think the corp getting that two pointer is the lesser evil? (Not to mention, the chance of that bluff actually landing a 3/2 is going to be severely lower once rotation hits, with only 4 of those still in the game, two of them being unique, and one being Merger)

>>55001887

Give the current state of derezing, I'm thinking giving Space ICE a chance to prove itself might not be too bad an idea.

>>55003668
>O2 Shortage
Looking at specific cases doesn't really help since you can't predict when such cases will happen. You could probably engineer it to happen more often I suppose, the two Salem cards would help, as would the other grip reveal cards.

After that though, say you are aiming for a particular card. In a full grip, that's 1 in 5. And unlike the runner running to HQ, you're not gaining as much.

File: Mass Commercialisation - Broadcast Square Android.jpg (2MB, 1510x1200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1510x1200px

>>55003481
Mass Comm is a godsend - it (and Priority Construction, but I was doing fine with Kaguya) were just the sort of thing Advancible Ice needed.

Still a bit WIP, especially on the ice (and I'm going to be sad when Punitive, Jackson and Atlas go), but this is what I have so far, and it does well

Weyland Consortium: Builder of Nations
44 cards
Influence: 12/12 ●●●●●●●●●●●●
Agenda points: 18
Tournament legal
Agenda (7)
1 Government Takeover
2 Hostile Takeover
3 Project Atlas
1 Vanity Project ●

Asset (5)
2 Anson Rose
3 Jackson Howard ●●●

ICE (13)
2 Asteroid Belt
2 Colossus
3 Ice Wall
2 Mausolus
2 Shadow
2 Wormhole

Operation (19)
2 Biotic Labor ●●●●●●●●
3 Hedge Fund
3 Mass Commercialization
2 Priority Construction
3 Punitive Counterstrike
2 Red Planet Couriers
3 Restructure
1 Shipment from Kaguya

I might go Whampoa and/or Preemptive for Jackson, and I'm thinking maybe Hortum for Shadow as well, but overall it's been very solid despite the GT risk

>>55003847
>Looking at specific cases doesn't really help since you can't predict when such cases will happen.

You're not aiming, that's the thing. Looking at it as a player that only wants certitudes is missing the point.You're taking a gamble. Both players are. That's why I think the card is overcosted. You're not taking a gamble on the price of a sure thing. I'm probably going too low with 1 credit, that's my love of rush speaking, but the price shouldn't have been higher than 2 I think.

The runner conceding the click gives you a strong play, but also gives you information. There is a strong possibility a card in the grip the runner just doesn't want to risk losing. Alternatively, the runner thinks you're bluffing.
I'm probably discounting a card like Bioroid Work Crew way too much in our situation. BWC expends the threat range of that free click to 4/2s.

>>55004052

I'm so glad it looks like advance-able ICE are going to have their time.

File: Blue Sun.jpg (90KB, 486x648px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 486x648px

>>55004210
I feel slightly bad about it being solitaire-y (I don't do much while I wait for the 3 cards and 9 credits), but things like ice destruction would screw me over, so I feel there's enough counterplay.

I do reckon a less RPC-focused advancable ice deck could still do well though, or it's getting there - I'd have to look back at glaciers and weyland decks and see what could be done.

One thing I have just thought of:
>Be Blue Sun
>PriCon a space ice.
>Rez, or get EBC to rez it
>RPC
>Pick up space ice for profit

>>55004210
If you look at the card as a gamble more than an effect you absolutely want, then yes, 3 credits is definitely overcosted. As it is it has difficulty being something you'd throw out as a bluff, nor does it present the runner a difficult choice. The corp has a lot more invested into the gamble than the runner for an often mediocre reward at that. Perhaps one day some sort of new Accelerated Diagnostics-type card and deck will do some shenanigans, but as is it will have difficulty in finding a deck slot.

Again, interesting how just 2 credits can change the viability of a card so much.

>>55005705
Another thing I thought about after posting was that even at 0 credits, is it still worth splashing into a deck? If you're relying on it for information, than we could likely categorize it as a tactical card; it has it's uses while still being flexible enough to play in other situations. When you want your deck to do a thing as consistently as possible, would there be room for a card that might not do as much work as a different one?

>>55005705

May just be me, but I don't think I can look at that card any other way than it being a gamble.
The potential bluff is the main value to me. Something I all too often miss, which is sad in a game about asymmetry of hidden information.

There something beautiful to my mind to the double whammy of early high risk gamble of O2 into a firing ABT.

>Again, interesting how just 2 credits can change the viability of a card so much.

As I say about Reina: one credit is one credit is the difference between victory and defeat.

Another thing to take into account; the value of credits, clicks and cards is elastic. Biotic is honestly costed because you can always change it into a winning move. That click is worth a lot less when you cannot. It has value. Getting that free click in a rush deck like NEXT, that is all bout keeping its initial momentum can be worthwhile even when it doesn't land you an agenda. Not 3-credits worthwhile though. Killing your threat threshold hurts you more at that early point in the game.
And by the time you reach that part of the game when the click could be worth 3 credits anyway - if you ever do... well Biotic is much better in that spot, because while the one credit economy isn't worthless, it is not worth the risk of being denied anymore.

And sure, you can build to turn O2 into a certainty. But that building costs a lot more than the one credit you gain from not playing Biotic Labor.
So yeah to me, the gamble/bluffing aspect is where the value of the card lies. And it needs to be cheap for it to be attractive.

>>55006197
To me it's more of a "give the runner two bad choices and benefit from either one" card. An since even Damon equates it to a Neural EMP + Biotic, that was likely the intent, just that the power level on one of the choices falls a bit short of the other.

File: Hellion Beta.jpg (184KB, 1208x1080px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1208x1080px

Anyone ever use the robo-kitty?
I just found the art today

>>55008814

I used to love slotting Hellion Alpha Test as a wild card. Getting a fully charged Kati Jones off the board when the runner is on low econ and fully expecting to be back on track following turn is must.
Also lovely as a way to deal with an over-protected DLR if they don't expect it ("I'm not trashing it, you're just going to have to rerun one of those now fully armed centrals)".

I'm sad to say I have yet to even slot the beta test, but I haven't played any deck where it would have fit in a while.

File: willo.png (61KB, 300x418px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 300x418px

>>55010669
Sounds cool - trash-stuff subs actually firing these days (or ever) is kinda rare enough that they don't see play, but things that sneakily fuck with cards are always fun.

File: Weyland Vanity Project.jpg (331KB, 1023x1080px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1023x1080px

Pretty sure this is from New Angeles, but I wouldn't be surprised if it turns up later - not with the same name though

File: Weyland Stock.jpg (89KB, 700x450px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 700x450px

>>55014483
Guess it's also where this is from

>>55016999
>>55014483
This reminded me that my group has had New Angeles for close to two months now and haven't played it yet. Gotta get it to the table soon.

>>55018309
Dude, you MUST play it. It's one of my favourite games, if not the most.

File: Esmeraldas.jpg (70KB, 640x512px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 640x512px

>>55018309
It looks really cool, wish I had a group for that sort of thing.

Especially like the additional dimension you see with the Major/Minor specialities of the corps - Weyland was obvious, having Construction/Security, but things like NBN's Media/Biotech, HB also having Construction, and Globalsec having Media as their secondary (which is more "information", but still) - it's an extra aspect you don't think of so much.

Also the captions on some of the assets that you fight over are great:
>"Definitely not psychic"
for Caprice
>"Crime solving machine"
for Floyd
>"Not known for subtlety"
for Mills

>>55018425
Ah, someone speaking from experience!
It's that good? Any stories?

Since we've been talking old cards. Let's reminisce.

Always found it interesting how cards like Hellion were trying to future proof a problem that basically ended up not existing.
Dishing the bad pub was trying to prevent select Operation traces being used as a way to force the runner into expenditure (though at the start of the game I suspected we'd get something like IHW for money, allowing bluffing; never came to pass though), forcing your hand into playing them as a sure thing.

The thing is, playing Operation traces as a sure thing ended up being the default play for mostly anyone. And playing, say, a SEA source to force the runner into poverty ended up a narrower, more exceptional move.

Comparatively, with Power Grid Overload, you can see how the designers feared that move. You *know* from the look of it this one was mostly made to force the runner into expenditure, but the " amount by which your trace strength exceeded the Runner's link strength" clause defangs it, with the runner just having to pay up to one credit of difference to the piece of hardware that needs saving.
There's hints of the designer fearing Weyland econ being overbearing to the runner. To a level I don't think we ever witnessed.

>>55018425
Any recommended do's and don'ts for the first game?

>>55020090
Support for trace-to-make-the-runner-poor tactics did come pretty late (Stinson), probably because of that fear you mentioned. And why that tactic isn't more popular is probably the same as above: the investment needed corpside outweighed the punishment runner side. Now with Stinson atleast you get to make that money back quickly.

The trace mechanic itself does require a bit more investment than other lines of play though, especially when the runner can just Siphon you after the trace. Too bad the dedicated link cards from ONR (setting your base link and pumping them were paid abilities, and costs varied depensing on the card) didn't stick around, it would've made deckbuilding for link as important as picking ice breakers so as to not instant fail traces. It would've made playing trace cards more interesting too, since corps would have the regular 1-to-1 pump and runners would be more efficient or inefficient depending on the card they have.

>>55020206

Yeah, the changes to link from ONR is still one of those where the jury's *still* out for me.
I actually like the change in dynamic from the original, but then, and that's something I've lamented since Genesis, you basically have to want to play the trace game most of the time.

Took them a long time to find a proper balance with Tracers too. But I think they finally managed to find decent ratios on those.

>>55020090
>To a level I don't think we ever witnessed.
Yeah, I think they were just being justifiably cautious there - a huge factor in NBN's dominance is their control over one of the game's 3 main resources - cards, which are probably the hardest to use.
For Weyland the resource focus was cash, and Haas has clicks - if either of those had gotten off as lightly as NBN did when it came to controlling their power, they'd be far more dominant.

Though I do think it was a shame that when they looked at Weyland and their relationship with money one of the things they greatly misjudged was saccing stuff for cash, which they clearly thought would work.

>>55020291
I still think tracers tend to be underpowered - on ice, anyway, operations and upgrades are good

>>55020333
Ice traces definitely need a bump up, especially since subs don't fire that often. Even simple gearchecks should be atleast base strength 4, it'd have to do something damn hurtful (remove the runner's heap; deal 3 brain damage, etc.) if it warranted being any lower.

>>55020333
>Yeah, I think they were just being justifiably cautious there

Oh definitely, I don't want this to sound like a blame on the designers. Very tricky stuff to balance.
And I certainly think they haven't done a bad job of it overall.

>I still think tracers tend to be underpowered

Really? Looking at post D&D str/trace/rez cost ratios, I find most of them pretty honest from both sides of the table. Everything is not Archangel with its 6/6/4, but even something a bit puzzling at first sight like Executive Functioning at 1/4/2 makes sense to me.

>>55020206

I'm thinking the changes had two main negative effects:
- swap the base infrastructural cost of Link/traces, so to speak, from runners to corp.
- as a consequence of sort, make Link perfectly optional at building stage.

Now, one the positive effects is that it freed trace as mechanic for experimentation. You really have to narrow traces to ungodly levels when the runner is going to lose mostly any as long as no Link hits the table.
Then it exploded the ceiling. Which I think is dangerous but cool. Being able to go "I put 30 credits on that trace" makes for memorable moments.

>>55020707
>Being able to go "I put 30 credits on that trace" makes for memorable moments.
So you weren't able to pump traces back then? Would explain the crazy numbers.

But yeah, pushing it completely on the corp was probably too much, if it was shared then there would be less on the corp's plate, which I think balances around way too much already. Atleast the "normal" builds anyway.

>>55023065
How'd an NBN drone get into Jinteki offices anyway

File: 9806564_orig.jpg (181KB, 638x563px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 638x563px

>>55018548
>stories
This one game I allied with my objective, always including him in all my plans and profits. This way I could more or less control what his actions were (the guy in particular is really unpredictable otherwise). This way he felt we were partners in crime trying to get over the rest. In the very last turn he was going to win this auction that would put him over me. He gave me a single capital point, winning me the game. It was a really tense moment for me.

In this other game we had two "problem players" meaning whenever they played together WEIRD STUFF start to happen. In this case they went all for the profit, getting a fuckton of money but putting us at 9 of threat in a single turn. Giving me doubts on whether one of them was a federalist (my gut feeling told me from the beginning the federalist was a different player).
In the end the federalist didn't had to do anything while the threat kept thriving. Fast Forward last turn of the game. The Federalist was revealed when we had no other choice but to trust that player to win us the game.
The betrayal was BRUTAL.

>>55020206
>do's and don'ts
Keep watch of who is the last player to bid an offer, he's the one who has the most power during the votation unless a different player has more bidding power (cards in hand) and is willing to spend them.

Placing PriSec are just as good as they are bad when new figures spawn.

Card advantage is huge. And NBN is great at that. But nobody decreases unrest when they just can remove outage tokens.

>>55020707
I find the recent boost on traces pretty scary. They indeed boosted the trace game for Corps, but that's not necessary a good thing.
The old traces were kind of weak, that's true, but I'm not sure they were intended to fire all that often to begin with, not unless the Corp boosted the trace a bit.
Most traces were in the 2-3 range, which meant that a Runner without link had to pay just that much to ignore it. It's like breaking the subroutine with a Knight or Darwin.
Now they are double that. Meaning the Corp doesn't have to boost it. And at the same time the rez cost of such ICE is half what they used to be. Keeping NBN Corps rich by reducing their costs across the board.

File: museum of history.jpg (73KB, 600x530px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 600x530px

>>55024267
Sounds pretty intense - so you got Federalise'd then, in the second game?

>>55026850
Around the 5th game. For the 3 first games no federalist appeared, then we got a federalist that got hold of the card that allows to swap their card with the one left out because it was pretty difficult for her to influence the rest of us without revealing herself as federalist.

>>55023898

Through the door like everyone else, it was just careful not to touch anything.

>>55021471

I love that it might open more granular effects on trace spending, as experimented in constellation ICE and Net Quarantine.

>>55024610
>I find the recent boost on traces pretty scary.

On that I tend to agree. I just think scary is good in that case.

>I'm not sure they were intended to fire all that often to begin with
>not unless the Corp boosted the trace a bit

Here I don't agree though, I'm thinking they *were* meant to fire a lot more often. Just not to *land* that more often.

And I like what they've done with traces. A point of link is one credit *per* trace. Add the generally necessarily stronger runner econ (with slight power creep that wen alongside the tracers' to boot), and you can see I think why tracers needed that boost. They're now stronger in the beginning, they can still be broken, but you might be tempted to let it fire, and as the games enfold, your traces are worth less and less against Link packing runners.

Compare Resistor good gear check ICE that breaks for peanuts once a breaker is out and can still be gotten through by a runner willing to spend (same goes for,say Executive Functioning which is a cool way to pack a mean punch early game, unless I'm mistaken, I think the cheapest you can land a brain damage if timed right) With Waiver or Thoth high str, high traces but an effect that is modular and on some respects under runner control and can snowball.
And Assassin I guess sitting in the middle.

File: 1485220150776.jpg (226KB, 427x640px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 427x640px

Is anyone else experimenting with self-damage decks?

File: clan vengeance art.png (481KB, 601x481px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 601x481px

>>55033698
No, but I ran up against one a little while back

Having your entire hand burned away isn't great, especially if you're holding combo pieces, even small ones like biotic. And bringing kill to a deck that intends to hurt itself could go badly unless you can muster a lot, all at once, and before they start trashing your hand (it's especially annoying right after you land tags).

>>55033698

Definitely. Several even. Never been so happy to meet a Komainu on the table. Those PE/PU decks that are all about stacked micro-damage hate you.
As I said previous thread, kinda sad of how non-interactive they can get.
Dummy box is being the monster I expected in support (in general). Persephone loves it.
Haven't been able to multiple Vanadis in one turn yet, but I'm not losing hope.

Clan Vengeance + Officer Frank can allow you to leave HQ in shamble for the whole game and is a real threat to any corp that needs to keep sensitive cards there.

Overall I'm thinking strict rush with maybe a side of kill does best against it so far. Really need to resurrect one of those old anti-econ deck corp deck with current toys. I'm thinking it could have its time in current meta.

>>55021471
>So you weren't able to pump traces back then? Would explain the crazy numbers.

Made me realize some things are self evident to me, but obviously not people that did not play ONR.


So ONR traces:
- the trace value represents the maximum bid of the corp.
- The link source of the runner represents its base strength and the credit to link ratio to augment link.
- draws are won by the corp
- bids are blind and simultaneous.

To simplify, ONR traces are a huge PSI game with the trace value representing the cap for corp,and the runner being unable to bid unless the proper resource is installed. The trace dynamic was about trying to guess how much the other player valued the effect of the trace, and for the runner whether paying to go beyond trace limit was worth it.

In ANR, a trace is a question, on ICE most of time asked by the runner to the corp: "how much do you think that effect is worth"? It introduces a small bluff element runner side.
As such, I definitely think, tracers should fire more often. That's what the base design of the new trace mechanic wants, so to speak.

>>55035694
>>55036611
I'm attempting to find a way to use self-mill to mill both HQ and R&D; the new Anarch resource seems to be interesting in that regard considering how it seems to help if you smack yourself in the face a bunch in one turn.

>>55041103
Alright I threw something together and I figured I would bump the thread with it. Money is the only real concern that I would potentially have; but I think if I throw a copy of The Shadow Net into the deck that should alleviate most problems.

Alice Merchant: Clan Agitator

Event (13)
2x Career Fair ●●
3x Day Job
2x Hacktivist Meeting
3x I've Had Worse
1x Knifed
1x Levy AR Lab Access ●●●
1x Spooned

Hardware (11)
3x Archives Interface
2x Maw
1x Net-Ready Eyes ●●
3x Respirocytes
1x Skulljack
1x Titanium Ribs ●●

Resource (18)
2x Bhagat
2x Citadel Sanctuary
2x Clan Vengeance
3x Daily Casts
2x Laguna Velasco District ●●●●
2x Officer Frank
2x Salvaged Vanadis Armory
3x Street Peddler

Icebreaker (6)
2x Mimic
2x Paperclip
2x Yog.0

Program (2)
2x Datasucker

15 influence spent (max 15, available 0)
50 cards (min 50)
Cards up to Terminal Directive

Since it's been sent my way: I commend the bad publicity guys for trying to alleviate the current climate, but I'm afraid they're not going to defuse much unless they bluntly ask: "people are worried, what about the future of the game?"

Having to infer things tends to temper results.

>>55041103

Thing I love about those decks (when interactive) is how they completely twist on their heads some game assumptions. You're positively beaming when sitting across a Komainu.

Also:
"Why are you not rezzing any of that spiky ICE Mr. Jinteki?
- No-no reason."

Vanadis is lovely.
I'm wondering if you can mix the old self-milling Trope/Fear the Masses deck with Persephone and some of the rest of masochist set into a working dedicated milling deck...
Probably not, but that should make for very fun experimentation.

>>55041753

Seem like a solid base from which to start building.
3 Archives Interface though? Me I'd rather second copies of Skulljack and Brain cage, better chance to draw, and cards you can freely lose damage after install.

>>55042856
Oh yeah, gotta give that a listen

>>55042856
>>55042856
I'll probably switch those archive interfaces (at least 2) for another Skukljack and a Brain Cage. I had 3 because I couldn't think of what else to slot to be honest.

On the subject of Persephone; I was actually experimenting with it in an Ape deck because that way I get more of a benefit from letting subroutines fire. I think it's working alright; it definitely feels good forcing the Corp to mill 3 or four cards.

>>55041753
Needs more Mad Dash, obviously. I'd also slot some AI breakers. As a matter of fact, I'd probably drop the core breakers and go full conspiracy breakers, so you can get them ready while you trash them for damage.
In that case you need more money. If you are planning on using Maw often, might aswell include Aeneas. Although since you are not using multiaccess they are not at their full capacity.
3 day jobs and no sure gamble seems weird, but since you are playing street peddler maybe you should cut on events a bit more.

>>55043566
What AI breaker would you recommend for a deck like this? I couldnt think of any in-faction at the time, but I was throwing this together. As for switching to conspiracy breakers, while it is a good idea, I figured I could use the powers of Titanium Ribs to help keep those crucial cards in my hand and mill less important ones. But, I can do some testing and see which works better

>>55044157
My default is Knight.

>>55041753
I keep reading clan agitator as clan alligator.

>>55045333
I'd love to see some MSpaint fan art of that.

>>55044598
I love Knight, definitely a good choice. I've been in the habit as building my decks for post rotation, so that's the lack of knight reason, otherwise it would fit right in. As far as money, I might include a bloo moose or two to help filter out cards that I want to shuffle back in with levy.

To the Daredevil Nero anon, mind if I ask for the latest iteration of the non-Faust deck? Planning on basing a deck from that if possible.

>>55050410
Sure thing; would you like the Aumakua version or the non-AI version?

>>55051695
Non-AI version please, though Aumakua sounds intriguing. Does it replace Faust?

>>55051920
For the most part yes. It also removes a lot of the Daredevil combo since you want to have it paired with Reflector; but thats because I think I am allowed to place virus counters on it since I don't think that counts as using the program. not sure though.

Here is the LLDS version of the deck that I just recently upgraded. Most of your money is to come from Au Revoir runs and Jak Sinclair Aeneas runs.

Nero Severn: Information Broker

Event (9)
2x Account Siphon
3x Forged Activation Orders
2x Inside Job
2x Legwork

Hardware (10)
3x Daredevil ●●●
2x GPI Net Tap
2x LLDS Memory Diamond ●●
1x Recon Drone
1x Rubicon Switch
1x Sports Hopper

Resource (13)
1x Aaron Marrón
3x Aeneas Informant
1x Earthrise Hotel
2x Gang Sign
2x Jak Sinclair ●●●●
2x Rosetta 2.0
2x The Turning Wheel ●●

Icebreaker (5)
2x Abagnale
1x Femme Fatale
1x Mongoose
1x Paperclip ●●●

Program (8)
3x Au Revoir
3x Cache
2x Tapwrm

14 influence spent (max 15, available 1)
45 cards (min 45)
Cards up to Terminal Directive

>>55052362
Thanks! I'll probably switch around the breaker suite for something a little less daring, looks good though. Might be able to get the MU requirement low enough to ditch the Diamonds and fit in a second Paperclip. I know Recon Drone is a pet card, but any success with it in practice? And were the GPI Net Taps worth the slots?

>>55052539
If you're playing for post rotation; the GPI Net Tap's are definitely worth the slot, simply because they're a safe way to keep your combo going. As far as Recon Drone; it works well against Jinteki, but not really against everyone else.

>>55056727
>simply because they're a safe way to keep your combo going
What do you mean by this exactly? It's only single use so you can't mean for the forced jack out ability atleast. Is it just for knowing all unrezzed ice and targeting a proper server to run to?

>>55057705
Well, it's mainly used to check ice to make sure that it's safe to faceplant into. And if it's a sentry you don't really care because you're Nero and can safely jack out.

>>55057843
Ahh, right. And if they're not rezzing the outermost for some reason then you'll still get to see the next card and choose to jack out since it exposes on approach. Neat. You don't get Au Revoir credits on ETR, correct?

Have to say it again, but the card synergy here is pretty exciting. Definitely a fine base to build from, looking forward to getting it running.

>>55058147
You do not get the Au Revoir credits on ETR, you are correct. I'm excited to keep testing these decks to find new combos; especially once we start getting news on the new cycle.

Forged Activation Orders also helps as a corp tax, and safety feature for you. Expose a helpful sentry or something the corp can't pay for? Just rez or trash it and make the board state even easier!

File: 12085.png (251KB, 300x419px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 300x419px

I'm depressed because all those people calling this beauty of Criminal engineering *shit*
Sure, it's not the Be-all and end-all, but it's a really interesting type of "icebreaker".

File: GPI Net Tap.jpg (95KB, 750x552px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 750x552px

>>55060043
I think it's a cool idea, if a bit hard to use

>>55060043

I think it's a cool card, and with all the derezzing option we have now, it' not as if you needed to use it on anything but the viable targets.

God I'm going to miss Rook, now that we have all those cool toys.

File: Jarogniew Mercs.jpg (99KB, 783x701px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 783x701px

Obelus, Counter-surveillance, Siphon and Stimplant are painful together (add Noise, Mercs, various viruses, conspiracy breakers to taste)

>>55060043
To be fair you can see it as a clickless, non-same turn, slightly more expensive Rubicon Switch. Viable targets are usually the ones with a rez cost higher than its strength, preferably of a difference 2+.

>>55065500
That sounds quite tasty. I'll throw something together and try it at my LGS next week.

>>55046516
>>55043566
>>55041753
I've come up with a solution to my monetary issues. Stimhack is my current idea; I'd be switching out Daily Casts most likely. Plus, it allows for more damage to accrue, which is always fun. As before, the only other idea I really have is Bloo Moose or Armitage Codebusting at the very worst. and yes I know that liberated accounts is the best, but I am attempting to gear this for post rotation, especially since we aren't getting any new packs before worlds . Maybe Technical Writer would work well in this deck or something.

I am considering replacing Laguna with the traditional Ajdusted Chronotype+Wyldside combo, but I am unsure as to which would work best for a deck of this style. The freeing of influence would allow me to include a copy of Temujin Contract which would solve nearly all monetary issues that the deck would have.

Side note: I think Bazaar might be fun, especially if I am holding 3 copies of Respirocytes and can mill my whole hand in one turn for fewer clicks.

>>55067420

Bazaar is fun, but I'm not convinced you have the proper hardware selection to make good use of it.

>>54960840
Core netrunner is half the problem....
I will only consider returning to netrunner if they release a Core 2.0

File: 1448419165009494.jpg (779KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

779KB, 1280x960px

What tokens do you use?

>>55072524
Default tokens only for now. I was planning on picking up a set of the recurring credits from team covenant, but I don't think they're making them anymore.

>>55072524
Default cardboard, but I need to get off my butt and try to play using the Scythe metal coins for 1s and 5s, if only for the clinking sound.

>>55073113
That sounds fancy.

File: aa0.png (336KB, 600x331px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 600x331px

My GenCon reaction

File: 1490281104796.jpg (14KB, 302x225px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 302x225px

>>55074226
Too true

File: Respirocytes.png (460KB, 602x443px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 602x443px

>>55067420
>mill my whole hand in one turn for fewer clicks.
Nice

>>55072524

Dice.

>>55074226

The weird thing is that the game is at the best it's been in a long while. But the worry is peaking alongside.

>>55079329
I don't know about best it's ever been, but at least there is some ID variety at tournaments at the moment.

The main concern I think is that player numbers are falling and we don't know anything about the game's future at a very important part of it's lifecycle, which is feeding into more players leaving. If they announce the most hype support they've ever had it's not going to mean much if it's just the same four people at game night every week.

>>55079550
My store support didnt make it through the 2nd cycle... Its been hard to stay in the game.

>>55080973
Man that blows... I only recently started playing and I was lucky enough to have a store in the area that continued to support the game.

>>55079550
How large is everyone's gaming group anyway? Mine only has about 3 - 4 active players, with a few dormant ones (doesn't show up often, doesn't update their cards/decks, etc.).

File: GRNDL Base.jpg (213KB, 593x675px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 593x675px

What's something you want to take on one last hurrah/abuse the fuck out of before rotation?

>>55085456

We have people that haven't upgraded since D&D.
Others that are likely to stop at Mars.
Not gonna miss any card, even post rotation I'll have people with whom to play them.

>>55083066

The weirdest thing now that think about it, is that the number of local players has grown - we're closer to 30 than 20 nowadays, while the community has shrunk.
I play the game about as much with people in home context, organizing Netrunner gatherings of 2-6 people, as I do at the club. Hell, technically, I play he game more because of that.

File: 1479297421632.jpg (406KB, 574x1600px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 574x1600px

>>55083066
When I started playing last year there was only 1 other active player at my local group with a few dormant ones. Another player joined our group recently, and the other long time player became dormant because of AGoT. So I guess it's only one other consistent player besides myself.

>>55085456
My Palana glacier deck that my friend borrowed won a game thanks to Caprice, so there's that. And another friend remarked how cute it was to see Snowflake when playing against that same deck.

Mr Stone vs God of War.

Amusing games.

>>55090082

Also, my favorite loss in a long while Jemison-FA-ed Meteor Mining into a BOOM!
Because sometimes, you do need to to be taught humility when feeling too secure with that 10+ cards Obelus grip.

I'll have to say though, a BOOM! is the last thing I expected in that deck.
Lovely.

>>55085456
GRNDL rush in general, I love Supermodernism.

Runner, I'd like to play Reina Roja like she was supposed to play. Maybe with the conspiracy breakers help?

>>55085456
Celebrity Gift and showing the Runner 2 The Future Perfect, 3 Snare! I swear there is nothing more satisfying.