Recommend
18 
 Thumb up
 Hide
186 Posts
[1]  Prev «  2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6  Next »  [8] | 

Android: Netrunner» Forums » Strategy

Subject: [DECK] Gabriel Santiago - Pure Scumbag Tactics (Plugged In Winner, San Mateo) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jesse M
United States
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
hoobajoo wrote:

Being more forgiving of mistakes is not the same as the mistakes not mattering in the first place. You won't win a major tournament while not playing totally on-point, so you should run a deck that maximally rewards that. If you're not playing near-optimum to begin with, well then, you weren't going to go far no matter what deck you play.

Gabe has the stronger economy across the course of the game; Andy just gets to play more out the gate. Keep in mind that both decks use roughly the same event-driven economy and tools to rig up, but only one gets the bonus from the ID card.

I ran into a situation last night playing my variation of your original deck with 3x parasite 3x quality time where the correct play wasn't immediately apparent.

I was playing against NBN Making News, early game scored a few AP, and spent most of my resources killing drip econ and ice. I drew hoping to get some econ and got a Femme instead. With 2cr left this was not what I wanted to see. I knew the corp was running snare because I trashed one from his hand when he was low on credits. Now he had enough to fire one off. This put me in a spot where I couldn't really run on HQ or R&D, which were at that moment not difficult to get into.

How would you play a situation like this?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Piotr Jekel
Poland
Torun
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wrathofmine wrote:
Your initial post and comments hoobajoo made me realize why i was better Gabe player when I was novice (yes ) than now.

I am sorry to say it but I am pretty confident that such a statement is simply not true. You could have had better results, but you certainly were not a better player. You could have played on auto-pilot without regard for any threats. Most likely, you did not read your opponent nor take calculated risks. You just ran... and when you run you often score, especially when the corp is down, has bad draws, or when agendas cluster in R&D.

I have seen it time and again. A novice player takes Gabe or Andromeda and runs headless. No backup plan, no strategy, no thinking. If the corp cannot rez ice, agendas get stolen. If the corp struggles economically because of early siphon, runner blind accesses cards. Mistery solved.

I remember playing against you some time back and in comparison I am certain that you are now a much better player.



1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jesse M
United States
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
SneakySly wrote:
hoobajoo wrote:


Being more forgiving of mistakes is not the same as the mistakes not mattering in the first place. You won't win a major tournament while not playing totally on-point, so you should run a deck that maximally rewards that. If you're not playing near-optimum to begin with, well then, you weren't going to go far no matter what deck you play.

Gabe has the stronger economy across the course of the game; Andy just gets to play more out the gate. Keep in mind that both decks use roughly the same event-driven economy and tools to rig up, but only one gets the bonus from the ID card.

1. You totally misread me. I said nothing about player mistakes at all.

2. The claim that Gabe's economy is stronger seems simply incorrect on it's face. The economy in this deck is visibly weaker than the best Andromeda decks. You run strictly less burst economy cards, less long term economy cards, and less desperado.

3. This deck also is simply less able to connect with it's siphons than Andromeda. No Crypsis and no breakers means you *will* have less consistent access to the breakers you need to siphon. Period.

2. As far as burst events, the only difference is that Andy decks run some combination of Easy Mark and Infiltration but I think it's important to notice that Armitage Codebusting can be pretty bursty. I also like running Bank Job with Gabe, which isn't in the thread's decklist, but that's my preference. Say you run 2x easy mark and 1x infiltration. Gabe easily makes that up on HQ access over the course of the game, and in a more efficient way.

If easy mark and infiltration make Andy's economy stronger than Gabe then you could make the argument that putting Diesel and Quality time in Gabe would make Gabe more consistent than Andy, which I don't think anyone would agree with.

Late game Andy really shines with Kati Jones and R&D interface, but early game Gabe econ is stronger, which can hopefully prevent the game from reaching a point where a Kati Jones is necessary.

3. For your example this deck would just use Parasite + Datasucker. Crypsis would be better if you cannot get the corp to Res the ice on HQ or if you don't have datasucker tokens, but then he gets really expensive fast. I think both types of decks are on even ground as far as getting in to account siphon.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Braithwaite
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
hoobajoo wrote:


I touched upon it a bit, but it definitely deserves to be developed more. Two reasons stand out to me, beyond simply running one-of each breaker (which works well in Andromeda too). The first being the mulligan, and the second being card trashing. Andromeda will essentially always have a 'nuts' draw, giving you a lot of information, and typically extra economy or flexibility. Now Criminal doesn't really need this extra start, as their decks, especially this one, are very modular. They don't have a central engine card like ProCon or Magnum Opus that they need to draw turn 1, or the flounder without.

Yes they do; Desperado. Games with turn 1 Desperado are much stronger than those without it, and it provides comparable gains to the cards you listed; Pro Contacts upgrades the base action of drawing a card by 1 credit, Opus provides the same upgrade to the base action of taking a credit, and Desperado provides the same upgrade to the base action of making a run.

hoobajoo wrote:
But the flip side of that is the mulligan decision becomes a lot more difficult and more nuanced without a card to auto-mull for. Gabe has to evaluate his hand, look at the economy, options, attack angles, and whatever 2 and 1 ofs that might show up. And then keep in mind that the corp choosing to mull or not also changes things: the value of Sneakdoor (or the opportunity cost of a Sneakdoor-less hand) is less if the corp kept, for example, because it indicates there are few agendas right off in HQ. This is a lot harder of an evaluation to make for a 5 card hand than a 9 card.

Having worse options available to you does not mean that your decisions are harder to make. Against a specific corp that has either kept or mulliganed, your starting hand will have a certain expected ability to win you the game. There will also exist an expected ability to win of the average random configuration of 5 cards from yoru deck (9 in the case of Andy), and your job when deciding to mulligan is to determine as best you can whether the expected ability for that hand is above or below average, the degree to which it is above or below average, and whether or not you should seek or avoid risks in that specific game/matchup (maybe you keep a 45th percentile hand because you know that you'll probably win with that anyways, whereas a 10th percentile hand might lose you the game).

hoobajoo wrote:


Card trashing is more of a razor's edge with Gabe, because he doesn't get that turn 1 economic buffer that Andromeda typically opens with. For the most part the two decks install roughly the same cards, but Gabe has to manage his money more carefully, and the easiest way to lose it is making poor calls on trashing cards. There are some cards that are really important to trash as soon as you see them, like Melange, Jackson, or Adonis, but especially the 5-cost cards can present a difficult decision. If you waste money killing a Marked Accounts in R&D, and later you don't have the money to install Yog to respond to an Enigma stopping your HQ pressure, that represents a big tempo loss, and a bad trade on your part.


Bad example aside, because nobody should ever trash a Marked Accounts from R&D unless it's end-game and they are paying 5 credits for an extra access, this just sounds like a weakness of the deck. Part of what makes Andromeda strong is that she creates an early economy lead which can be leveraged to maintain that lead over the course of the game. Trashing is a big part of that. Having to wait even one extra turn to trash a rezzed Adonis, PAD, or Marked Accounts means more credits for the Corp, which is an example of how resources are more valuable the earlier in the game you get them. Speaking which:

hoobajoo wrote:


Gabe rewards this with massive Sneakdoor Beta synergy and a stronger ID across the game (Andromeda doesn't give you anything Gabe can't do) to promote aggression. It also makes it much easier to make runs on HQ cost-neutral, which puts a lot of heat on the corporation right from the start.

Gabe can't begin turn 1 with 9 cards in hand. Thus, he can't start turn 2 with 5 cards in hand, 9 credits, a Desperado, and a Datasucker with 1 virus counter on it. He can't give you as many turn 1 Desperados as Andromeda can.



This idea that Andromeda's identity is somehow "blank" after turn 1 is completely baseless, and I'm shocked by its prevalence. It gives you 4 bonus cards; assuming you play down to 5 cards in hand on your first turn, then you have those 4 bonus cards for the entirety of the game. If Gabe had played 4 cards on turn 1, then he would have 1 card in hand on turn 2, but Andy has 5.

Over the course of the game, Gabe's ability is likely to give you more than 4 cards worth of resources, but he gives them to you very slowly, over the course of a long game. Moreover, he is likely giving you the most value in games that you were going to win anyways. Andromeda gives you her bonus resources immediately, which allows them to be leveraged for more value. Further, despite popular opinion, it is the lategame which favours the runner and the early game which favours the corp, so the fact that Andromeda can set up quicker than Gabe, thanks to getting all of her bonus resources at the beginning of the game, makes it more difficult for rush decks to sneak agendas past you.


Quite frankly, this whole thread feels like a humblebrag; "gosh, this Gabe deck has little room for error and is only better than the popular decks when played to near-perfection. Good thing I'm able to do that".
13 
 Thumb up
1.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Glenn Glenn
msg tools
mb
I have been playing a lot of shaper recently, and when I built something reasonably similar with this deck, the only thing I missed was self-modifying code. I havent actually tried it yet, I actually just had the idea looking at the most recent comments.

indexing might have to go, but what you get is a reliable instant speed tutor, which you can lay down preemptively. I think this would go a long way towards consistent early entry for siphon. It also plays great with faerie to keep your one-of Corroder or yog from destruction. Install parasite is just icing. Really tasty icing.

You could even go so far as to remove a parasite for a clone chip too, which could obviously recur the parasite, but would also be an insurance plan for lost breakers and can snap a faerie or a self modifying code back for double duty.

You would lose out on the sheer power of indexing (or makers eye, which I like more, and you can run 3 in the same spot), but you gain lots of tricks and consistency. And you get it without the sometime awkward timing of special order or the need to expose potentially dangerous ice with face checking or FAO.

I also think this would make the deck a lot more forgiving, at least being able to recur one lost breaker, and increases early game chances of successful runs. Being able to have a sure way into hq for siphon (smc, probably can't rez 2 ice), or a way into a 2 ice remote (inside job + smc) is kind of a big deal, especially if you can just insta-parasite the ice in either situation. And a breaker and smc means that faerie is on hand at all times, and is also fantastic w/ clone chip as well.

The only real change might have to be -something +desperado, because smc does create mid-game memory weirdness. Especially with sneak door.

Edit: probably makes masanori pretty good, because you can actually use him mid early game and have much more success.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth M
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
running_bear wrote:
Quite frankly, this whole thread feels like a humblebrag; "gosh, this Gabe deck has little room for error and is only better than the popular decks when played to near-perfection. Good thing I'm able to do that".

Well yes, it's a deck tech thread written after winning a major tournament.

You'd better believe I was bragging my ass off (as politely as possible) when I made deck techs after winning a regional.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Giovannetti
United States
Woodinville / Bothell Area
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
running_bear wrote:
[q="hoobajoo"]


This idea that Andromeda's identity is somehow "blank" after turn 1 is completely baseless, and I'm shocked by its prevalence. .


100% agreement. That view shows a complete miss-evaluation on Andromeda.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Presley
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SneakySly wrote:
running_bear wrote:
[q="hoobajoo"]


This idea that Andromeda's identity is somehow "blank" after turn 1 is completely baseless, and I'm shocked by its prevalence. .




100% agreement. That view shows a complete miss-evaluation on Andromeda.

Just as a reminder, I never said that; don't get caught up in attacking this strawman, thinking it informed my decisions. I agree with you that is a very shallow evaluation of Andy, though I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Anthony Giovannetti
United States
Woodinville / Bothell Area
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
hoobajoo wrote:

Just as a reminder, I never said that; don't get caught up in attacking this strawman, thinking it informed my decisions. I agree with you that is a very shallow evaluation of Andy, though I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off.

Right, never said you specifically thought that. It is however a view posted in the second post of this thread. No strawmen here.

hoobajoo wrote:

I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Presley
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SneakySly wrote:
hoobajoo wrote:

Just as a reminder, I never said that; don't get caught up in attacking this strawman, thinking it informed my decisions. I agree with you that is a very shallow evaluation of Andy, though I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off.

Right, never said you specifically thought that. It is however a view posted in the second post of this thread. No strawmen here.

hoobajoo wrote:

I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off


If you are going to criticize things I did not say, I'd ask you to leave the thread. If you, or anyone else, have any questions about things I actually DID say, I'll be happy to answer them. If not, I kindly ask you to stop posting. This thread already has too much chaff as it is.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Braithwaite
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
hoobajoo wrote:
SneakySly wrote:
hoobajoo wrote:

Just as a reminder, I never said that; don't get caught up in attacking this strawman, thinking it informed my decisions. I agree with you that is a very shallow evaluation of Andy, though I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off.

Right, never said you specifically thought that. It is however a view posted in the second post of this thread. No strawmen here.

hoobajoo wrote:

I think the general vector of its sentiment isn't too far off


If you are going to criticize things I did not say, I'd ask you to leave the thread. If you, or anyone else, have any questions about things I actually DID say, I'll be happy to answer them. If not, I kindly ask you to stop posting. This thread already has too much chaff as it is.

It would only be a strawman if someone attributed that view to you, but nobody did. I specifically made that a separate paragraph from my responses to your specific points to demarcate that those statements were not a response to you, but a more general comment. Sly's comment was similarly not attributing the position to you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Braithwaite
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
talain wrote:
running_bear wrote:
Quite frankly, this whole thread feels like a humblebrag; "gosh, this Gabe deck has little room for error and is only better than the popular decks when played to near-perfection. Good thing I'm able to do that".

Well yes, it's a deck tech thread written after winning a major tournament.

You'd better believe I was bragging my ass off (as politely as possible) when I made deck techs after winning a regional.

Plenty of people who placed well at Plugged-Ins are posting deck lists, but this is the only one I've seen which has said "this deck is better than what everyone else is playing, but only if you pilot it really, really well".
2 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Presley
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
running_bear wrote:
talain wrote:
running_bear wrote:
Quite frankly, this whole thread feels like a humblebrag; "gosh, this Gabe deck has little room for error and is only better than the popular decks when played to near-perfection. Good thing I'm able to do that".

Well yes, it's a deck tech thread written after winning a major tournament.

You'd better believe I was bragging my ass off (as politely as possible) when I made deck techs after winning a regional.

Plenty of people who placed well at Plugged-Ins are posting deck lists, but this is the only one I've seen which has said "this deck is better than what everyone else is playing, but only if you pilot it really, really well".

If you don't like my deck or disagree with my conclusions, that's fine. But attacking my perceived lack of virtue adds nothing to the discussion, and is the height of sophistry.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
hoobajoo wrote:
Yeah, anti-Gabe Jinteki deck is maybe not killed outright just by Deus X being a card in the meta, but it at least kneecaps it. The first way to build with this Gabe in mind is to be able to throw a cheap remote up to score out of. Agendas in HQ are just waiting to get pilfered, so the sooner you can get them on the table safely, the better. The second way is by using ICE to maximally interfere with running on centrals. It can often be better to just let me have a run on HQ or R&D for a few turns to hide the identity of an ETR ICE, so it can still effectively block events when they come up. Chimera and Grim are two very good cards against this deck. Grim is great central server protection, and is an excellent ICE to be second or third on a remote. Chimera is great sitting at the base of a remote, but it is also good for stopping event runs on centrals as well.

Going to paraphrase, to make sure we’re both on the same page: the response to this deck is to play more small ETR ice than usual, and also to set yourself up to reliably score agendas out of remotes early in the game. You also want to ice HQ and R&D, but you may not actually rez said ice if it prevents you from scoring an agenda. You are mainly icing centrals to stop event-based runs (specifically account siphon, and an early indexing. Indexing to a lesser extent, because that’s better to play mid- or late- game).

Basically, what you’re advocating are rush decks and a rush playstyle, correct? Jopejope’s article on HB rush lays the groundwork for what you are getting at. Running_bear’s HB rush deck might be a more recent example. However, NBN can also do this (1, 2?). So can Jinteki (1, 2). Weyland as well (1, 2). Each of these decks has distinguished itself at some point in time (in a major tournament, during OCTGN league play, or during OCTGN general play if you trust those data). However, some of these specific decks may be outdated or even obsolete because of meta shifts over the past year. Regardless... rush decks, as a general rule, are strong decks. In fact, the archetype probably arose as a reaction to Gabe’s early-game dominance (I didn’t begin seeing rush decks until about the 3rd datapack, which I believe is when Gabe was most pervasive?).

If rush decks are a (relative) weak-spot for your deck, what’s the next iteration of it? Given that rush decks do well against your Gabe deck (they may not beat it more than 50%, but they perform better than other archetypes), and that people should be playing them more often, do other non-Gabe decks gain value?

Is there a particular reason why running three corroders is not good advice here?


hoobajoo wrote:
A lot of the anti-PST ideas are just strong ideas for the corp in general. I do think bioroids, especially Ichi 1.0 and Viktor 2.0, make excellent central-server speed bumps, while not being too vulnerable to Shutdown, though some hard ETR is necessary to not just let Siphons and other events through. Most of the things corp could do to really meta hard against this have existing silver bullets in other decks that make them less reliable over all. E.g. Snare has Deus X, Caduceus is weak to 1 link runners who currently comprise a lot of the field, and bioroids can be run on click 1.

Generally I think it's best to focus on making your corp deck as strong and as fast as possible, with the ability to snowball advantages into further advantages. If you manage to shut Gabe out for a turn or two, you need to be able to capitalize on that super hard. NBN is the best at doing this with Astroscript and SanSan chaining agendas; Weyland is a close second in that department, but makes up for it by forcing Gabe to slow down a bit initially to play around SE.

Out of curiosity, why do you think Weyland is a close second? My bet would actually be on an HB rush deck that utilizes SanSan city grid... something like Running_bear’s HB rush deck, or AlexFrog’s old HB deck. It uses SanSan in the same way, does not have the extra power of Astroscript, but can still close out a game with Biotic Labor, plus having more income from the ETF ability. Doesn’t Weyland utilizing Scorched have silver/bronze bullets in the form of plascrete (which is packed in lots of tourney decks?). Maybe the evidence is against me on this one, given how many Weyland decks are winning plugged-in events. Is there maybe a particular reason why it’s hard to play around SE, even with x3 plascretes in deck?

On one thing, I totally think you’re right though: If you want to get a leg up against your particular Gabe deck (and probably most tournament Gabe decks) you need to be able to snowball an advantage into further advantages. This is probably good advice against all runners. I suspect it is least effective against Andromeda though (see below). The short-list for cards that leverage an advantage into more advantages are:

All fast-advance cards (early agenda point advantage means you don’t have to protect remote servers any more -- fast advance instead).
SanSan City Grid
Astroscript Pilot Program
Biotic Labor
Trick of Light
??

SanSan is deadly because it lingers around on the table once it’s used. The runner absolutely has to deal with it. Astroscript is even better, because the runner CAN’T deal with it. The others are just solid.

Cards that turn an economic advantage into new ways of winning:
SEA/Scorched
Ash

Cards that create click deficits / turn click deficits into opportunities to gain an advantage:
Snare!
False lead
The threat of junebug/Fetal AI

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a tournament-winning corporation deck that DOESN’T include at least two of these cards.

One thing to note about Andromeda vs. Gabe: It’s harder to get such an advantage against Andromeda in the first place. If you do, that’s awesome, and you can exploit it. But because Andromeda more reliably has econ, specific solutions, and net damage insulation earlier in the game, this type of advice is less effective against her.


hoobajoo wrote:
I touched upon it a bit, but it definitely deserves to be developed more. Two reasons stand out to me, beyond simply running one-of each breaker (which works well in Andromeda too). The first being the mulligan, and the second being card trashing. Andromeda will essentially always have a 'nuts' draw, giving you a lot of information, and typically extra economy or flexibility. Now Criminal doesn't really need this extra start, as their decks, especially this one, are very modular. They don't have a central engine card like ProCon or Magnum Opus that they need to draw turn 1, or the flounder without. But the flip side of that is the mulligan decision becomes a lot more difficult and more nuanced without a card to auto-mull for. Gabe has to evaluate his hand, look at the economy, options, attack angles, and whatever 2 and 1 ofs that might show up. And then keep in mind that the corp choosing to mull or not also changes things: the value of Sneakdoor (or the opportunity cost of a Sneakdoor-less hand) is less if the corp kept, for example, because it indicates there are few agendas right off in HQ. This is a lot harder of an evaluation to make for a 5 card hand than a 9 card.

Card trashing is more of a razor's edge with Gabe, because he doesn't get that turn 1 economic buffer that Andromeda typically opens with. For the most part the two decks install roughly the same cards, but Gabe has to manage his money more carefully, and the easiest way to lose it is making poor calls on trashing cards. There are some cards that are really important to trash as soon as you see them, like Melange, Jackson, or Adonis, but especially the 5-cost cards can present a difficult decision. If you waste money killing a Marked Accounts in R&D, and later you don't have the money to install Yog to respond to an Enigma stopping your HQ pressure, that represents a big tempo loss, and a bad trade on your part.

Gabe rewards this with massive Sneakdoor Beta synergy and a stronger ID across the game (Andromeda doesn't give you anything Gabe can't do) to promote aggression. It also makes it much easier to make runs on HQ cost-neutral, which puts a lot of heat on the corporation right from the start.

Starting hand variance has something to do with that (Andromeda has more starting hands, but their values are less variable). Gabe benefits more from mulligan skills. Gabe sometimes has to trash software (specifically Sneakdoor), whereas Andromeda’s rig tends to be incremental (by Andromeda, I mean something like AlexFrog’s ‘The Deck’). Gabe’s rig-building is necessarily more complicated than Andromeda’s rig building. From my personal experience, Gabe has to switch where he’s attacking more often than Andromeda. Andromeda’s attack plan is a little more straightforward. Again, Gabe has to make a few more decisions and they’re a little more complicated. This probably comes down to the presence/absence of sneakdoor and RDI. Andromeda’s overhead for making runs is usually much cheaper, too, because of breaker selection and datasucker (your Gabe deck CAN install datasucker, Andromeda decks ALWAYS installs datasucker). Managing income is more complicated in Gabe decks.

Gabe is more skill-dependent than Andromeda. I can 100% get behind that statement. His decisions are more complicated, and there might even be more of them. This doesn’t necessarily mean Gabe has the higher performance ceiling.

I think when Andromeda first came out, he did. Andromeda was mediocre when she first came out (IMO). What pushed her over the top was RDI. When R&D runs are cost-effective, RDI becomes absurd. Andromeda/Sucker makes R&D runs cost-effective.

The game’s landscape may change, and Gabe may indeed have the higher performance ceiling once again, but right now I have my doubts. Gabe’s probably always going to be more skill-dependent than Andy simply because he has more deck/draw variance, but I doubt that he always will (or even does right now) have a higher performance ceiling. There are probably even clever ways to test this hypothesis (if you put any weight in OCTGN data).

One last thought. Right now, I think that Andromeda and Gabe have a sort of parasitic relationship:

The best way to play against your Gabe deck (and I propose, all aggressive Gabe decks) is to play a corporation rush deck. This means playing a few extra small ETR ice and having strong early econ.

Andromeda with fixed strength breakers and datasucker is a strong response to rush decks.

The response to Andromeda is to include strength-pumpers to deal with the fixed-str breakers. Alternatively, you can also play really high-strength codegates and sentries. However, right now none exist. If we begin seeing some str 7+ codegates and sentries (hey... cell portal), other tech options against Andromeda might emerge.

Right now, Gabe can benefit from Andromeda’s weaknesses by playing breakers that are cost-effective against strength-pumping effects (Faerie, Ninja, Peacock, Aurora!). However, Aurora is shitty in most other instances. Peacock is weak to a very common ice (Enigma). Faerie an Ninja are both strong. In most cases, though, Femme is stronger than Ninja. Faerie is limited-use.

Both Gabe and Andromeda can fight against str-pumpers by including Crypsis. Crypsis deals with pump effects as long as you have econ advantage.

Andromeda benefits from tech against Gabe. Gabe does not similarly benefit from tech against Andromeda. In the vacuum of Andromeda vs. Gabe, and enough meta-game stabilization, Andromeda is the clear choice. Gabe might be superior in particular playgroups if the players haven’t learned about rush decks.

When you include Katman into the mix, Gabe can benefit from one of Katman’s weaknesses (high-str advanceable ETR ice) in the form of emergency shutdown and Femme. However, Andromeda will typically run emergency shutdown too. Relative to Andromeda, Gabe’s benefit from Katman’s presence is close to null. Even so, this isn’t a huge issue for Katman; most good lists I’ve seen include x1 Femme and recursion as a solution to this problem. We can probably discount the likelihood of this threat in competitive tourney decks.

My understanding is that another of Katman’s soft spots (I don’t want to say counter) is the Grim/Rototurret split. This also isn’t *too* pleasant for your particular Gabe deck. Faerie and Parasite clearly help mitigate the issue. Andromeda can deal with it as well (Crypsis). So can most other Gabe decks (Faerie, Ninja, Crypsis). I’d say say this soft spot of Katman’s does not provide Gabe with any more advantage over Andromeda.

The other Katman soft spot I am aware of is str-pumpers, which also happens to be minor tech against Andromeda. That’s already been covered above. Gabe might get a slight edge here, but Andromeda has built-in ways of dealing with it (Crypsis). Null-to-minor benefit for Gabe.

I don’t take any other runner decks seriously right now Until I see new decks to make me consider otherwise, I kind of feel like the Andromeda vs. Gabe argument is solved for competitive events: Andromeda benefits more from Gabe’s presence than Gabe benefits from Andromeda’s presence. The Andromeda > Gabe pecking order is true even when you throw Katman into the mix.

Gabe *could* be better than Andromeda in the current meta context *if* Andromeda's parasitic benefit is outweighed by Gabe's raw strength. I don't know of any evidence or valid reasoning that suggests this might be the case (however I agree he has more skill-dependence).
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
Quote:
Gabe *could* be better than Andromeda in the current meta context *if* Andromeda's parasitic benefit is outweighed by Gabe's raw strength. I don't know of any evidence or valid reasoning that suggests this might be the case (however I agree he has more skill-dependence).

This strikes me as something of an overanalysis. I know that when I make a Corp deck I don't consider Andromeda or Gabe a factor in my deckbuilding. Runner decks are disparate enough that tailoring to face a certain archetype IMO rarely makes sense-- sure, we all tweaked our ICE composition so as not to get rolled by Atman, but aside from that my changes for any specific deck are generally minimal.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
fetterkey wrote:
Quote:
Gabe *could* be better than Andromeda in the current meta context *if* Andromeda's parasitic benefit is outweighed by Gabe's raw strength. I don't know of any evidence or valid reasoning that suggests this might be the case (however I agree he has more skill-dependence).

This strikes me as something of an overanalysis. I know that when I make a Corp deck I don't consider Andromeda or Gabe a factor in my deckbuilding. Runner decks are disparate enough that tailoring to face a certain archetype IMO rarely makes sense-- sure, we all tweaked our ICE composition so as not to get rolled by Atman, but aside from that my changes for any specific deck are generally minimal.

When I am making a serious deck, I ask myself a series of questions:

1. Can I diversify my ice STRENGTH any further without changing deck performance?

2. Can I diversify my SPECIFIC ICE without changing deck performance? e.g., Enigma and Viper serve similar functions but are different ice with different stats. Same with Grim and Rototurret. Diversifying ice means your deck gains a more graceful decay against breakers that would otherwise cause major swings in the game (e.g., Yog.0, Mimic).

3. Can I change my deck in any ways so that it can end the game any faster, without sacrificing overall performance? Being able to rush is probably the most important thing a conventional corp deck can do (IMO).

4. Do I have a way to fight against R&D Lock? This is a complex one that might involve draw power and ice selection.

5. If the runner gains a large enough credit advantage to be able to access 100% of cards I put in remote servers, do I still have a way to win the game?

6. Can I play around credit denial?

I started asking #1 because of Katman. I started asking #3 because of Gabe and Noise (though it applies to both Katman and Andromeda as well). #6 was because of Gabe (but applies to Andromeda too). I started asking #2, #4, and #5 because of Andromeda (though #4 also applies to Katman, and #2 + #5 apply to all three runner decks).

I kind of think this sort of overanalysis structured, obsessive iteration is fundamental for making high-performance corp decks. I don't consider Gabe, or Andromeda, or Katman specifically when building a corp deck, but I do consider the issues they embody.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trevor Godley
Canada
flag msg tools
fetterkey wrote:
Quote:
Gabe *could* be better than Andromeda in the current meta context *if* Andromeda's parasitic benefit is outweighed by Gabe's raw strength. I don't know of any evidence or valid reasoning that suggests this might be the case (however I agree he has more skill-dependence).

This strikes me as something of an overanalysis. I know that when I make a Corp deck I don't consider Andromeda or Gabe a factor in my deckbuilding. Runner decks are disparate enough that tailoring to face a certain archetype IMO rarely makes sense-- sure, we all tweaked our ICE composition so as not to get rolled by Atman, but aside from that my changes for any specific deck are generally minimal.

That was the only part of that post that struck you as an overanalysis?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
hollis wrote:
When I am making a serious deck, I ask myself a series of questions:

1. Can I diversify my ice STRENGTH any further without changing deck performance?

2. Can I diversify my SPECIFIC ICE without changing deck performance? e.g., Enigma and Viper serve similar functions but are different ice with different stats. Same with Grim and Rototurret. Diversifying ice means your deck gains a more graceful decay against breakers that would otherwise cause major swings in the game (e.g., Yog.0, Mimic).

3. Can I change my deck in any ways so that it can end the game any faster, without sacrificing overall performance? Being able to rush is probably the most important thing a conventional corp deck can do (IMO).

4. Do I have a way to fight against R&D Lock? This is a complex one that might involve draw power and ice selection.

5. If the runner gains a large enough credit advantage to be able to access 100% of cards I put in remote servers, do I still have a way to win the game?

6. Can I play around credit denial?

I started asking #1 because of Katman. I started asking #3 because of Gabe and Noise (though it applies to both Katman and Andromeda as well). #6 was because of Gabe (but applies to Andromeda too). I started asking #2, #4, and #5 because of Andromeda (though #4 also applies to Katman, and #2 + #5 apply to all three runner decks).

It seems like those are just fundamentally good things to put in your deck? The first one is the only one that strikes me as contingent on what runners are playing, and it's somewhat redundant with the second.

I also think there are definitely more than three relevant decks in competitive play, though that's a separate (and long) story.

hollis wrote:
I kind of think this sort of overanalysis structured, obsessive iteration is fundamental for making high-performance corp decks. I don't consider Gabe, or Andromeda, or Katman specifically when building a corp deck, but I do consider the issues they embody.

Sure, that's fair. My point is simply that I don't think people are saying "Better take Corporate Troubleshooter so I can beat Andy," I think they're saying "Better take Corporate Troubleshooter because it's a good card." Therefore, I think the elements of your post regarding which runner benefits more from people tailoring against the other are somewhat misguided.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Neuberg
United States
California
flag msg tools
fetterkey wrote:

Sure, that's fair. My point is simply that I don't think people are saying "Better take Corporate Troubleshooter so I can beat Andy," I think they're saying "Better take Corporate Troubleshooter because it's a good card." Therefore, I think the elements of your post regarding which runner benefits more from people tailoring against the other are somewhat misguided.

In other words, screw the meta, I'm just going to put good cards in my deck?

People certainly play this way, but I don't think it's a particularly productive attitude. When you build a new corp deck and test it against your Criminal-playing friend, and Account Siphon absolutely wrecks you, do you say "well, not everyone will be playing Account Siphon so whatever..."?

In a vacuum, Access to Globalsec is a pretty bad card, but if 90% of the people in your local area played trace-heavy NBN:MN, you can bet its stock would begin to rise.

I don't think many people play corporate troubleshooter because "it's a good card". I think people play it as a counter to specific other cards, such as crypsis, and in conjunction with other cards, such as Grim. If you deck is 100% barrier ETR ice, Corporate Troubleshooter is a pretty bad card.

Being able to analyse and predict the "meta" is a valuable skill in any tournament-level deck building game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John F
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Is there a particular reason why running three corroders is not good advice here?

Ever since reading that I added x3 Corroder into my Gabe formula. I have never really felt comfortable dropping down to x2 yet.(Come on FFG, give me a Criminal fracter that can compete)

I am intrigued by the OP formula but going down to x1 Corroder makes me itchy. :/
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
shango2 wrote:
In other words, screw the meta, I'm just going to put good cards in my deck?

IMO Netrunner doesn't have enough of a meta at this stage to justify this type of preparation. The only specific Runner cards that I plan for when making Corp decks are Account Siphon and to a lesser extent Atman. The only Corp card that I plan for when making Runner decks is Scorched Earth.

If 80% of the field was the same Andy deck, you can bet that I would be taking direct precautions. But not only is the field not that skewed, but people are running very different decks out of Andy.

shango2 wrote:
People certainly play this way, but I don't think it's a particularly productive attitude. When you build a new corp deck and test it against your Criminal-playing friend, and Account Siphon absolutely wrecks you, do you say "well, not everyone will be playing Account Siphon so whatever..."?

Account Siphon is one of the two cards that I think you really need to care about when deckbuilding for Corp, simply because-- as with Atman-- it can produce a huge swing when not countered but can also be largely mitigated with good preparation.

On the other hand, there are some powerful cards-- like Stimhack-- that you don't really prepare for because there isn't really a great way to counter them. Account Siphon, Atman, and Scorched Earth are interesting in that they are potentially very swingy cards that you can generally mitigate by careful play and deckbuilding. Most other high-power cards aren't like that.

shango2 wrote:
In a vacuum, Access to Globalsec is a pretty bad card, but if 90% of the people in your local area played trace-heavy NBN:MN, you can bet its stock would begin to rise.

Sure, but thus far Netrunner doesn't seem to indicate anywhere near that level of stability in even local metas.

shango2 wrote:
I don't think many people play corporate troubleshooter because "it's a good card". I think people play it as a counter to specific other cards, such as crypsis, and in conjunction with other cards, such as Grim. If you deck is 100% barrier ETR ice, Corporate Troubleshooter is a pretty bad card.

I run Corporate Troubleshooter in decks that have Destroyer ICE and aim to establish solid R&D defense because it makes them much better. I definitely don't run it to counter Crypsis, as IMO the fundamental rules of the game counter Crypsis and I'm usually glad to see my opponent put Crypsis on the field.

In fact, when I put Corporate Troubleshooter in my deck, I don't have any particular Runner card in mind. It is good against a wide swath of cards that happens to include basically every Sentry breaker, and thus naturally synergizes with Destroyer ICE-- which also tend to have the biggest impact on the Runner aside from very lucky early damage.

shango2 wrote:
Being able to analyse and predict the "meta" is a valuable skill in any tournament-level deck building game.

Sure, but IMO Netrunner doesn't have anything close to a stable meta at this stage. If you look at the Plugged-In tour results, faction representation is extremely disparate across events and the decks that are winning are very mixed as well. I think it will be a long time before I make decks that care about specific other decks in the environment rather than specific cards.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arto H
Finland
Helsinki
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
trevaur wrote:
fetterkey wrote:
Quote:
Gabe *could* be better than Andromeda in the current meta context *if* Andromeda's parasitic benefit is outweighed by Gabe's raw strength. I don't know of any evidence or valid reasoning that suggests this might be the case (however I agree he has more skill-dependence).

This strikes me as something of an overanalysis. I know that when I make a Corp deck I don't consider Andromeda or Gabe a factor in my deckbuilding. Runner decks are disparate enough that tailoring to face a certain archetype IMO rarely makes sense-- sure, we all tweaked our ICE composition so as not to get rolled by Atman, but aside from that my changes for any specific deck are generally minimal.

That was the only part of that post that struck you as an overanalysis?

You should see the discussion about MTG tournaments. But I wish Netrunner could grow more and more to this direction also.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
aHein wrote:
You should see the discussion about MTG tournaments. But I wish Netrunner could grow more and more to this direction also.

Oh, I do too-- I'd love to have deckbuilding decisions that intricate and complex-- I just think that isn't where we are right now.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drake Villareal
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
fetterkey wrote:
aHein wrote:
You should see the discussion about MTG tournaments. But I wish Netrunner could grow more and more to this direction also.

Oh, I do too-- I'd love to have deckbuilding decisions that intricate and complex-- I just think that isn't where we are right now.

Yep, I find my decks lack a true overall strategy at this point, and are more just "overall goodstuff, with hint of synergy".

Rush is a playstyle at this point, you can build a deck to capitalize on it, but ultimately, you have to pilot it fast as lightning for it to be a "rush deck". Same thing with fast advance, you have to attempt to fast advance cards, not just build a FA-deck and play "old-school" installing and advancing over several turns.

This goes for almost any deck-type, it is more just a host of good cards, slightly tilted in one strategic direction, and played heavily in that direction.

I don't think we'll be making the truly tough or creative choices until the 3rd big box at least.

By this I mean, we'll reach the point where a FA deck constructed for FA will be almost unplayable as a normal deck.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Tu
South Africa
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Some really interesting analysis going on in this thread, loving it

I probably can't contribute meaningfully enough with more analysis but I'd just like to say that Netrunner is ENTIRELY a game of meta. It's complex Rock Paper Scissors.

Hollis' gabe vs Andy analysis is very good, unless someone can refute it by raising more analysis I think it's spot on.

Similarly, saying Netrunner deck construction is about "good cards" is simply untrue.

Troubleshooter is only good if
a)limited strength breakers abound
b)killers aren't popular first installs
c)corp can regularly outecon runner
D)Atmen

Atman is good if people are building similarly strengthed ice in their decks
Plascrete is great if scorchers are everywhere
Account siphon is good if there aren't much asset Rez defense/meaningful tag punishment (psychographics for example can definitely eat an unprepared siphon runner)
E3 is for Bioroids hence HB.
Morningstar is GREAT against and in the right setup
Etc etc. These are all commonly known things.

So yes, a bigger card pool will make this even more true, but what we have doesn't negate the need to think meta.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6  Next »  [8] |