Recommend
18 
 Thumb up
 Hide
186 Posts
[1]  Prev «  3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7  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]
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
Tuism wrote:
Hollis' gabe vs Andy analysis is very good, unless someone can refute it by raising more analysis I think it's spot on.

One thing worth pointing out... Kordan11 and I were talking a bit afterward. He raised the argument that the major weakness of most Gabe decks is fast-advance and heavily fortified centrals. Being able to rush agendas is good; fewer for him to scoop in HQ. But fast-advance is really what pains him. I'm inclined to agree after thinking about it. Also impairs Andy, but probably not as much as it hurts most Gabe decks. You kind of want Andy running remotes, so datasucker tokens don't pay off. Hoobajoo's deck is probably better than most Gabe decks against FA because of ice destruction and datasucker. Dunno if it would be a notable difference or just a marginal one, however.

Thought it was a point worth adding.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
Tuism wrote:
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

Aside from b, which I don't think is really relevant at all, you only need to fulfill some, not all, of those conditions. For instance, if the runner has infinity money but is running Atman/fixed strength breakers, Troubleshooter is still good and you don't need to outecon them.

Similarly, if the runner isn't running limited strength breakers or Atmen but you can outecon them, Troubleshooter is good.

If the runner has substantially more money than you and has traditional breakers set up, you've probably lost the game already!

Anyway, Netrunner may be a game that is largely meta-dependent, but at present we don't have a stable meta and therefore good decks are IMO made based largely on "let's take good cards" and much less based on meta concerns. I usually spend 2-4 slots in my deck on meta concerns and the entire rest of the deck on taking good cards.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
fetterkey wrote:
Anyway, Netrunner may be a game that is largely meta-dependent, but at present we don't have a stable meta and therefore good decks are IMO made based largely on "let's take good cards" and much less based on meta concerns. I usually spend 2-4 slots in my deck on meta concerns and the entire rest of the deck on taking good cards.

Meta considerations are less developed than they could be. Sure. That seems like a natural consequence of "the game is young". Decks are based largely on "let's take good cards" and less on meta concerns. If we formalize this as "how many tech cards you include vs how many 'good cards' you include" sure, you're probably right, and it kind of sounds like that's how you're trying to formalize it. I think this is probably a poor way to formalize the impact of meta concerns on ANR deckbuilding though.

There's quite a few cards I simply won't play competitively anymore; they are very very powerful in the abstract and if I were building a deck purely on "the absolute value of a card" they would be autoincludes quite often. But because of beliefs I have about the larger cardpool, I don't play them. For instance:

Chum (Yog.0 / datasucker)
Noise (Jackson Howard; Corp decks have become too fast)
Indexing (I lean towards Makers/RDI because of Jackson Howard and Atlas)
Chimera (Parasite)
Data Raven (Tagme strategies)
Datapike (Yog)
Viktor 1.0 (Yog)

These are all "good cards" in their own right. However, because of broader considerations, their playability is decreased. Inclusion of meta-cards maybe takes up 5-10% of my deckspace. However, "addressing meta concerns" probably takes up 90-95% of my deckbuilding time.

If you're building decks by taking good cards and throwing them together, then going no further in your thought process, I will have to concede that you and I are playing very different games of Netrunner. If you're making card valuations in the context of the larger cardpool, I don't quite understand how you can say that deckbuilding is less about meta concerns and more about taking good cards (in the context of competitive decks).

If you want to get a decent measure of how much meta consideration could go into deckbuilding during competitive play, you're probably better off looking at how strong the contingencies are between card values:

For each card in the cardpool:
Calculate value of each other card if that card is removed from game

For each card in the cardpool:
Calculate variance of its value ratings

Sum variance of value ratings over all cards

If you look at the possible complexity of deckbuilding with respect to meta concerns this way, I kind of feel like the obvious conclusion is "there's quite a bit, given the size of the cardpool". Most of the complexity centers around a few key cards (e.g., Yog, Account Siphon, Parasite, Atman, Noise, Jackson Howard, Scorched Earth, to name those that immediately come to mind).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Nelson
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
fetterkey wrote:
Tuism wrote:
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

Aside from b, which I don't think is really relevant at all, you only need to fulfill some, not all, of those conditions. For instance, if the runner has infinity money but is running Atman/fixed strength breakers, Troubleshooter is still good and you don't need to outecon them.

Similarly, if the runner isn't running limited strength breakers or Atmen but you can outecon them, Troubleshooter is good.

If the runner has substantially more money than you and has traditional breakers set up, you've probably lost the game already!

Anyway, Netrunner may be a game that is largely meta-dependent, but at present we don't have a stable meta and therefore good decks are IMO made based largely on "let's take good cards" and much less based on meta concerns. I usually spend 2-4 slots in my deck on meta concerns and the entire rest of the deck on taking good cards.

There is definitely a stable meta in netrunner right now.

A meta involves some number of the "best decks" that most good players will play versions of, and you can expect to face. As Martin has been saying, decks are fairly modular right now. If i see a shaper deck with pro contacts and smc and clone chip, i can guess how the rest of the deck will play. We know what the good cards are, and because of influence restrictions its hard to go rogue very much. When a new data pack comes out, there is always a period of evaluating the new cards, and sometimes a new archetype emerges, but that period doesnt last long, as we saw with Katman. Everyone assimilated that deck into the meta once it won gencon.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
Shango02 wrote:
There is definitely a stable meta in netrunner right now.

I'm really skeptical of this, I think the Plugged-In results clearly indicate that there are a wide variety of decks being played and people don't really know what's good, especially for Corp. I wouldn't be surprised if there were very strong Corp archetypes out there that nobody knew about.

Shango02 wrote:
If i see a shaper deck with pro contacts and smc and clone chip, i can guess how the rest of the deck will play.

Really? I would describe all three of those cards as staple elements that go into lots of different decks-- at the very least, you have conventional big-rig, Atman, and Parasite recursion archetypes.

Shango02 wrote:
We know what the good cards are, and because of influence restrictions its hard to go rogue very much. When a new data pack comes out, there is always a period of evaluating the new cards, and sometimes a new archetype emerges, but that period doesnt last long, as we saw with Katman. Everyone assimilated that deck into the meta once it won gencon.

I feel like there are entire identities that are generally unexplored by the community, much less specific deck builds. When I go to tournaments I definitely do not feel confident about what I might face. There are a few well-known builds that I am aware of, but I feel that there is a much vaster pool of "mystery decks" out there that nobody understands.

I would not be surprised at all if a rogue deck wins Worlds.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Justin
United States
Creve Coeur
MO
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
hollis wrote:
Chum (Yog.0 / datasucker)
Noise (Jackson Howard; Corp decks have become too fast)
Indexing (I lean towards Makers/RDI because of Jackson Howard and Atlas)
Chimera (Parasite)
Data Raven (Tagme strategies)
Datapike (Yog)
Viktor 1.0 (Yog)
Yog
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
fetterkey wrote:

I feel like there are entire identities that are generally unexplored by the community, much less specific deck builds.

Honestly, there arent. There are identities that lots of people spent lots of time testing, experimenting with, and tuning, and eventually came to one of the following conclusions on:

* Its a solid tier 2 deck (most tuned Whizzard decks fall into this category, for example).
* Its kindof okay but has certain significant flaws that keep it from being competitive, at least in the current cardpool. We will remember it for a future time if a card that does X is printed, because that could make it viable (Jinteki RP decks, Replicator decks, Professor decks, Cerebral IMaging decks, etc).
* Its utter trash because the very premise of the deck is flawed (Stronger Together decks, for example).


Its not that no one ever tried those ideas. People tried them, or at least someone good that they play with tried to make it work. But it just wasnt up to the quality of the tier 1 decks that you seen in the "Meta".


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
fetterkey wrote:

I'm really skeptical of this, I think the Plugged-In results clearly indicate that there are a wide variety of decks being played and people don't really know what's good, especially for Corp.

Where are all these different corp decks?

I see:

* A bunch of Weyland decks that are all pretty similar. Each has some particular twist but for the most part they are pretty similar.

* NBN resource denial decks, attempting to attack the runner economy, followed by scoring while the runner is crippled.

* NBN all-in rushy decks.

* HB fast advance decks with practically no Bioroids at all.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
Alexfrog wrote:
fetterkey wrote:

I feel like there are entire identities that are generally unexplored by the community, much less specific deck builds.

Honestly, there arent. There are identities that lots of people spent lots of time testing, experimenting with, and tuning, and eventually came to one of the following conclusions on:

* Its a solid tier 2 deck (most tuned Whizzard decks fall into this category, for example).
* Its kindof okay but has certain significant flaws that keep it from being competitive, at least in the current cardpool. We will remember it for a future time if a card that does X is printed, because that could make it viable (Jinteki RP decks, Replicator decks, Professor decks, Cerebral IMaging decks, etc).
* Its utter trash because the very premise of the deck is flawed (Stronger Together decks, for example).


Its not that no one ever tried those ideas. People tried them, or at least someone good that they play with tried to make it work. But it just wasnt up to the quality of the tier 1 decks that you seen in the "Meta".

I disagree. I consider Professor to be very competitive, for instance. But most people have not spent time testing him and he is in many respects a deckbuilding trap that leads to poor decisions for the average player. The same goes for NEXT Design.

Exile was only "discovered" as a competitive deck very recently-- if the Dirty Hands deck hadn't been posted most people would still have no idea that he was good. Similarly, Cerebral Imaging has at least one deck that has done quite well in tournament play, and is about to get much better with the release of Second Thoughts.

Ultimately, I think the community is far from thorough enough in its testing and that there are several good decks that people just haven't looked at enough to really understand. As I said earlier, I would not be particularly surprised if one of these rogue decks takes Worlds.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
San Jose
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Alexfrog wrote:
fetterkey wrote:

I'm really skeptical of this, I think the Plugged-In results clearly indicate that there are a wide variety of decks being played and people don't really know what's good, especially for Corp.

Where are all these different corp decks?

I see:

* A bunch of Weyland decks that are all pretty similar. Each has some particular twist but for the most part they are pretty similar.

* NBN resource denial decks, attempting to attack the runner economy, followed by scoring while the runner is crippled.

* NBN all-in rushy decks.

* HB fast advance decks with practically no Bioroids at all.
There was one non-FA HB deck that had a ton of ICE. Congrats brother in arms!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
fetterkey wrote:
I disagree. I consider Professor to be very competitive, for instance. But most people have not spent time testing him and he is in many respects a deckbuilding trap that leads to poor decisions for the average player. The same goes for NEXT Design.

Why don't you provide some deck lists you think stand a fighting chance of winning a major tournament? That would make for some more meaningful discussion and, in the absence of that possibility, at least some testing for those of us who are skeptical.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
hollis wrote:
fetterkey wrote:
I disagree. I consider Professor to be very competitive, for instance. But most people have not spent time testing him and he is in many respects a deckbuilding trap that leads to poor decisions for the average player. The same goes for NEXT Design.

Why don't you provide some deck lists you think stand a fighting chance of winning a major tournament? That would make for some more meaningful discussion and, in the absence of that possibility, at least some testing for those of us who are skeptical.

Making a good Professor deck is easy-- take any good Kate deck that doesn't rely on out-of-faction events, resources, or hardware, swap identities to The Professor, and add any of the following programs that the original didn't have: Medium, Nerve Agent, Imp, Sneakdoor, and Faerie. That alone should be sufficient to show why Professor is good, though obviously there is further tuning to be done.

NEXT Design is more complicated and my own testing isn't complete, but I have some fairly promising leads and hope to have a more thorough treatment posted up soon.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
fetterkey wrote:
Making a good Professor deck is easy-- take any good Kate deck that doesn't rely on out-of-faction events, resources, or hardware, swap identities to The Professor, and add any of the following programs that the original didn't have: Medium, Nerve Agent, Imp, Sneakdoor, and Faerie. That alone should be sufficient to show why Professor is good, though obviously there is further tuning to be done.

NEXT Design is more complicated and my own testing isn't complete, but I have some fairly promising leads and hope to have a more thorough treatment posted up soon.

You haven't actually provided a decklist. I don't know of any competitive kate decks besides Katman. Katman doesn't transfer to professor because of the reliance on desperado. And, to be honest, I am not entirely convinced that Katman stacks up to Andromeda/sucker with a large enough number of games.

I can evaluate and test decks. I can't do that to your promising leads, if you don't specify what those leads are. Dodging the request to actually provide concrete deck lists isn't lending any weight to your argument.

Being fun to play and having potential isn't the same as being competitive.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
hollis wrote:
You haven't actually provided a decklist. I don't know of any competitive kate decks besides Katman. Katman doesn't transfer to professor because of the reliance on desperado. And, to be honest, I am not entirely convinced that Katman stacks up to Andromeda/sucker with a large enough number of games.

I guess I should start with making a thread about a competitive normal Kate deck, then! Baby steps, baby steps...

Incidentally, I'm quite confident that Desperado is a mistake in Katman, but that's another story.

hollis wrote:
I can evaluate and test decks. I can't do that to your promising leads, if you don't specify what those leads are. Dodging the request to actually provide concrete deck lists isn't lending any weight to your argument.

Eh. I'm not willing to stake serious credibility on a deck that I'm not that confident in. My win rate with the NEXT deck on OCTGN is >90% at this point (which is also substantially higher than my normal HB win rate on OCTGN), but OCTGN doesn't mean a lot, and I want to at least take this one to some local events first.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
fetterkey wrote:
Eh. I'm not willing to stake serious credibility on a deck that I'm not that confident in.

fetterkey wrote:
I disagree. I consider Professor to be very competitive, for instance. But most people have not spent time testing him and he is in many respects a deckbuilding trap that leads to poor decisions for the average player. The same goes for NEXT Design.

It sounds like you either need to take off your rose tinted glasses, or take up a job in propaganda

I really want to take your opinion seriously (I like learning new things), but I'm struggling here. Looking forward to seeing a decklist thread.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
R. Fetterkey
msg tools
Avatar
mb
hollis wrote:
fetterkey wrote:
Eh. I'm not willing to stake serious credibility on a deck that I'm not that confident in.

fetterkey wrote:
I disagree. I consider Professor to be very competitive, for instance. But most people have not spent time testing him and he is in many respects a deckbuilding trap that leads to poor decisions for the average player. The same goes for NEXT Design.

It sounds like you either need to take off your rose tinted glasses, or take up a job in propaganda

There's a big difference between seeing that something can be competitive and actually having it fully tuned and ready to post. The latter also involves much more credibility (in both directions, of course).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Schneider
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmb
hollis wrote:
fetterkey wrote:
I disagree. I consider Professor to be very competitive, for instance. But most people have not spent time testing him and he is in many respects a deckbuilding trap that leads to poor decisions for the average player. The same goes for NEXT Design.

Why don't you provide some deck lists you think stand a fighting chance of winning a major tournament? That would make for some more meaningful discussion and, in the absence of that possibility, at least some testing for those of us who are skeptical.

Hollis, I'd be interested to see what you make of my Chaos Theory decklist. It has some elements from tag-me criminal, some elements from Katman, but with a blend of its own; in any case, I don't think I've seen anyone else running CT competitively since C&C. Its main weakness is vs. NBN, but it does very well against most HB & Weyland builds, and crushes Jinteki.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
aschneid wrote:


Hollis, I'd be interested to see what you make of my Chaos Theory decklist. It has some elements from tag-me criminal, some elements from Katman, but with a blend of its own; in any case, I don't think I've seen anyone else running CT competitively since C&C. Its main weakness is vs. NBN, but it does very well against most HB & Weyland builds, and crushes Jinteki.

I'm not Hollis, but I like the deck. First thing I tried after C&C was throwing Siphon and Same Old Thing into everything. Its strong.

Posting it here:

Event (21)
Quality Time x3
Diesel x3
Account Siphon x2 ****
Inside Job x1 ***
Levy AR Lab Access x1
Sure Gamble x3
Dirty Laundry x3
Escher x1
Indexing x2
The Maker's Eye x2

Hardware (5)
Clone Chip x3
Plascrete Carapace x2

Program (9)
Self-modifying Code x2
Deus X x1
Atman x3
Parasite x1 **
Datasucker x2 *

Resource (5)
Same Old Thing x3
Armitage Codebusting x2

*******************


Some thoughts:

* I'd try cutting Inside Job for something like Stimhacks/Femme. Or Alternately, maybe Imp. With Self Modifying Code, I prefer Stimhack over Inside Job against non-Jinteki decks. I also find that sometimes the game hinges on being able to tutor up a Femme mid run. For example, Atman decks are countered by Troubleshooter/Archer, if they dont have an instant femme available.

* Do you really need Levy Ar Lab Access? In my experience, I can win before running out my deck and needing it, except possibly against Jinteki. But Against Jinteki I have tutoring and recurring Deus X, so thats not a problem either.

* Does the deck improve by replacing Chaos Theory with Kate, and adding 5 cards? Modded and R&D interface seem like good additions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
Yeah, your deck caught my eye. I'm currently working my way through the plugged-in tour decks that I think look interesting. I will reply in your thread over the weekend.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jacek Wieszaczewski
Poland
Wrocław
Poland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Alexfrog wrote:
* Its kindof okay but has certain significant flaws that keep it from being competitive, at least in the current cardpool. We will remember it for a future time if a card that does X is printed, because that could make it viable (Jinteki RP decks, Replicator decks, Professor decks, Cerebral IMaging decks, etc).
Didn't a Replicator deck win one of the Plugged-in tournaments?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Asterisk CGY
msg tools
Alexfrog wrote:
aschneid wrote:


Hollis, I'd be interested to see what you make of my Chaos Theory decklist. It has some elements from tag-me criminal, some elements from Katman, but with a blend of its own; in any case, I don't think I've seen anyone else running CT competitively since C&C. Its main weakness is vs. NBN, but it does very well against most HB & Weyland builds, and crushes Jinteki.

I'm not Hollis, but I like the deck. First thing I tried after C&C was throwing Siphon and Same Old Thing into everything. Its strong.

Posting it here:

Event (21)
Quality Time x3
Diesel x3
Account Siphon x2 ****
Inside Job x1 ***
Levy AR Lab Access x1
Sure Gamble x3
Dirty Laundry x3
Escher x1
Indexing x2
The Maker's Eye x2

Hardware (5)
Clone Chip x3
Plascrete Carapace x2

Program (9)
Self-modifying Code x2
Deus X x1
Atman x3
Parasite x1 **
Datasucker x2 *

Resource (5)
Same Old Thing x3
Armitage Codebusting x2

*******************


Some thoughts:

* I'd try cutting Inside Job for something like Stimhacks/Femme. Or Alternately, maybe Imp. With Self Modifying Code, I prefer Stimhack over Inside Job against non-Jinteki decks. I also find that sometimes the game hinges on being able to tutor up a Femme mid run. For example, Atman decks are countered by Troubleshooter/Archer, if they dont have an instant femme available.

* Do you really need Levy Ar Lab Access? In my experience, I can win before running out my deck and needing it, except possibly against Jinteki. But Against Jinteki I have tutoring and recurring Deus X, so thats not a problem either.

* Does the deck improve by replacing Chaos Theory with Kate, and adding 5 cards? Modded and R&D interface seem like good additions.

Levy helps bring back recursions and events. I notice since all his economy isn't permanent, they will run out. It just makes that long game not a slowly losing one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Tu
South Africa
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My Chaos Siphon deck runs 3 Siphons and 3 Datasuckers - or 3 Siphons and 1 parasite 1 datasucker, depending on my mood

It's a strong surprise (most leave HQ open to start against Shaper, lol), and strong sustain too. Can run naked for quite a while.

But I consider it to be nothing new. 6 Siphons + Atman Sucker? In a 40 card deck? It's like the biggest duh ever
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Schneider
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmb
AsteriskCGY wrote:

Levy helps bring back recursions and events. I notice since all his economy isn't permanent, they will run out. It just makes that long game not a slowly losing one.

Yep, exactly. The deck is very bursty and tends to burn out quickly; Levy isn't always needed, but it's good for salvaging those games where all the corp's agendas are buried. Often I will discard Levy early and use my last SoT on it based on the game state at that point.

To the other points:
Inside Job has been helpful, but it does feel too situational for the influence cost, and I agree that stimhack usually does the same thing better. Femme feels too expensive for this deck though... maybe +2 stimhack, +1 datasucker? Or Faerie, which is a nice silver bullet against Archer & a few other things?

I tried Kate & it felt less consistent. 5 fewer cards does help in getting to your siphons faster, Kate's ability only saves 5 or 6 credits over the course of the game, and the free memory from CT actually makes a big difference (full rig is 2 Atman, 2 datasuckers & 1 free slot for clone chipped parasite or deus x). 1 Atman, 2 datasucker & SMC is nice too.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Braithwaite
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
hoobajoo wrote:
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.

There's a difference between attacking someone for a perceived lack of virtue and criticizing the tone they take in making their arguments. I think it's also pretty clear that I am interested in a discussion about your argument itself, as I made a fairly long post with some of my concerns, and only added a small aside at the end regarding tone. I would have much preferred for further discussion to be fueled by my more substantive points, but alas.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drake Villareal
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
aschneid wrote:
AsteriskCGY wrote:

Levy helps bring back recursions and events. I notice since all his economy isn't permanent, they will run out. It just makes that long game not a slowly losing one.

Yep, exactly. The deck is very bursty and tends to burn out quickly; Levy isn't always needed, but it's good for salvaging those games where all the corp's agendas are buried. Often I will discard Levy early and use my last SoT on it based on the game state at that point.

To the other points:
Inside Job has been helpful, but it does feel too situational for the influence cost, and I agree that stimhack usually does the same thing better. Femme feels too expensive for this deck though... maybe +2 stimhack, +1 datasucker? Or Faerie, which is a nice silver bullet against Archer & a few other things?

I tried Kate & it felt less consistent. 5 fewer cards does help in getting to your siphons faster, Kate's ability only saves 5 or 6 credits over the course of the game, and the free memory from CT actually makes a big difference (full rig is 2 Atman, 2 datasuckers & 1 free slot for clone chipped parasite or deus x). 1 Atman, 2 datasucker & SMC is nice too.

During our match I remember you drawing like no tomorrow as I raced to 5 points. But after a siphon/indexing (iirc) that was gg.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7  Next »  [8] |