Recommend
9 
 Thumb up
 Hide
53 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

Android: Netrunner» Forums » Rules

Subject: Toshi and Toshi Infinite Loop: Lukas answer. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Ony Moose
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
me wrote:
Dear Lukas,

For the new Jinteki Executive Toshiyuki Sakai, what happens with a loop of two Toshis? The Corp has Install, advance, adanced a Toshi the previous turn, and the runner makes a run. When the runner accesses Toshi, the corp swaps him for ToshiB from HQ. The runner chooses to access the ToshiB, which is then swapped back for ToshiA. This loop happens a few times. Which player is responsible for ending the loop? The FAQ says

"The Runner is always responsible for ending a loop that occurs during a run by jacking out, unless a card ability prevents that from occurring. If so, then it is the Corpâ?Ts responsibility to end the loop by letting the Runner through to the server."

However at this point the runner is already through to the server, and cannot jackout. The corp also cannot let him through, since he is already through. Does the corp have to choose not to swap swap Toshi (or swap him for something else) or does the runner have to decline to access?

If the runner has to decline to access, does the corp get to swap in whichever card they like for the final iteration of the loop? EG the runner says they'll run the loop 100 times, the corp then gets the opportunity to choose which card to put in, the runner *can't* then access, or can they choose? (But then you are back in the loop if its ToshiC!)

Does the situation change if the corp has an installed Alix T4LB07 which is gaining counters each time the loop happens?

Thanks!


Reply:

Lukas wrote:
Thanks for the question. The Corp can continually swap the two Toshiyuki Sakais. If the Runner continues to access the Toshiyuki's, and the Corp shows no sign of changing the cards, then a judge can be called over. It could be considered slow play/stalling on the side of the Corp. Hope that helps,

The Corp is the one who is making the choice to continue swapping; this choice occurs before the Runner choice of whether or not to access. Therefore, the burden is on the Corp to stop swapping before it is on the Runner to stop accessing.
22 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Keddie
Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Thanks for getting this answered. This was always going to be a contentious issue, and I'm glad we now have an answer (though I wonder how many people will disagree with it).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Double Plus Undead
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CommissarFeesh wrote:
Thanks for getting this answered. This was always going to be a contentious issue, and I'm glad we now have an answer (though I wonder how many people will disagree with it).


Good grief. Disagreeing with an official ruling? What are they going to do? Argue with a judge? If I play with somebody who tries to convince me that their "common sense" overrides official rulings, that will be the last time I play with that person.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Finkel
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So this means the corp has to present to the runner: "the following is my final swap", right? Alternatively don't swap in the Toshi in the first place (but it might be cute).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Keddie
Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
pirate_chef wrote:
CommissarFeesh wrote:
Thanks for getting this answered. This was always going to be a contentious issue, and I'm glad we now have an answer (though I wonder how many people will disagree with it).


Good grief. Disagreeing with an official ruling? What are they going to do? Argue with a judge? If I play with somebody who tries to convince me that their "common sense" overrides official rulings, that will be the last time I play with that person.


I don't mean during a game, I mean like how people still whine about Caissa/Scheherazade.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vincent Perry
United States
La Jolla
California
flag msg tools
Woot!
badge
I have overtext!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It isn't slow play if you have an Alix in play though.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CommissarFeesh wrote:
pirate_chef wrote:
CommissarFeesh wrote:
Thanks for getting this answered. This was always going to be a contentious issue, and I'm glad we now have an answer (though I wonder how many people will disagree with it).


Good grief. Disagreeing with an official ruling? What are they going to do? Argue with a judge? If I play with somebody who tries to convince me that their "common sense" overrides official rulings, that will be the last time I play with that person.


I don't mean during a game, I mean like how people still whine about Caissa/Scheherazade.


That's totally different. angry

Or so says a dude who just lost a bet over Sakai
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Keddie
Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
kobold47 wrote:
CommissarFeesh wrote:
pirate_chef wrote:
CommissarFeesh wrote:
Thanks for getting this answered. This was always going to be a contentious issue, and I'm glad we now have an answer (though I wonder how many people will disagree with it).


Good grief. Disagreeing with an official ruling? What are they going to do? Argue with a judge? If I play with somebody who tries to convince me that their "common sense" overrides official rulings, that will be the last time I play with that person.


I don't mean during a game, I mean like how people still whine about Caissa/Scheherazade.


That's totally different. angry

Or so says a dude who just lost a bet over Sakai


Hey, I was on the wrong side of the Caissa/Scheherazade debate.

I got over it. Everyone else needs to too
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yet another ruling from Lukas that seems to disagree with the FAQ...

Infinite Loops wrote:

If an infinite loop is created, the player responsible for the loop
must choose a number. The loop instantaneously resolves that
many times, and then ends. The Runner must jack out to end
an infinite loop that occurs during a run
, unless a card ability
prevents that from occurring. If the Runner cannot jack out,
then it is the Corp’s responsibility to end the loop by letting the
Runner through to the server


The access occurs during a run. Granted, "jacking out" isn't strictly an option for the runner at that point, but choosing not to access is effectively the same thing. Further, I'd argue that stating the runner must choose not to access is more in line with the established precedent.

I wouldn't be surprised if this ruling gets overturned next time the FAQ gets updated, much like the Woodcutter/Chum/Oversight AI debacle.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Finkel
United States
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Choosing not to access is effectively the same thing as jacking out the same way advancing a card is effectively the same as placing an advancement token on it. Which is to say, in this game, they're not actually the same thing.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah I actually think this was one of the few really interesting rules arguments of late, because neither interpretation strictly followed from the FAQ, so we had to argue that one of the standards was either more important or more relevant to the Sakai scenario (or else base our guesses on abstract game design considerations).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Toltz
United States
Boston
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
Your cat likes me more
badge
In brightest day / In blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power--Green Lantern's light!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Azeltir wrote:
Choosing not to access is effectively the same thing as jacking out the same way advancing a card is effectively the same as placing an advancement token on it. Which is to say, in this game, they're not actually the same thing.


Right. That's why I said 'effectively the same thing', which explicitly acknowledges the fact that it's not literally the same thing.

The FAQ puts the onus on the runner to end the loop during a run, if possible. The runner is able to end the loop in this case. Therefore, a ruling that the corporation must choose to end the loop is counter to the spirit of the existing ruling.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mychal
United States
Tempe
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Asmor wrote:
The FAQ puts the onus on the runner to end the loop during a run, if possible. The runner is able to end the loop in this case. Therefore, a ruling that the corporation must choose to end the loop is counter to the spirit of the existing ruling.

You can't just say the onus is on the runner to end the loop in this case. The rules specifically say that the runner must JACK OUT in an infinite loop during a run. Choosing not to access is not jacking out, so there is no "onus" of any sort stated in the rules as written. You can argue that it's "effectively the same thing" all you want, but I don't think that idea holds water from a rules perspective.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Keddie
Wales
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Issues of terminology aside, this isn't an infinite loop in the normal sense anyway. If a Corp can keep rezzing Cell Portal for no loss, the game state is not changing. However, with Toshi every time you swap him he could be a different card. The runner cannot know it's an infinite loop, hence the onus being on the Corp.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jonathan Trew
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mb
CommissarFeesh wrote:
Issues of terminology aside, this isn't an infinite loop in the normal sense anyway. If a Corp can keep rezzing Cell Portal for no loss, the game state is not changing. However, with Toshi every time you swap him he could be a different card. The runner cannot know it's an infinite loop, hence the onus being on the Corp.


I totally understand and agree, but it does seem to harm the card's own design space.
Granted if this loops more than 3/4 times then you have 2 bull-headed players and either there isn't a better play for either of them or they are being stubborn just to get a head-up on the opposition (I know this is more likely to happen in tourney settings, but then you can call a judge).
I would prefer the loop to be on the runner's onus as the design space and self-synergy of Sakai is already harming the corp once they start looping because they could legitimately want to mess with the runner's head and get them to keep accessing by doing the swap 2-4 times before dropping a trap (yes I know the net gain of Tosh is not for traps) but they are already risking that the runner might say "can't be bothered any more" and stop accessing while a Tosh is down.

Personally, I think Caprice is server defence for mathematicians and Tosh should really fit the same bill for Poker players/bluff masters so to say that the corp has to then be the first one to blink seems a bit backward.

Not that I'd go against the ruling as it will break the brinkermanship loop and hopefully avoid arguments, I just would have thought it went the other way. Nevermind!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derrick Billings
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Lukas said "it could be" slow play on the part of the Corp.

So don't slow play it. As the corp, once you have demonstrated the loop, you can simply say "I will execute this infinite loop as long as you keep running." At that point, per the rules, it's the runner's responsibility to jack out.

The situation Lukas is addressing is one of more obstinacy or slyness:

RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"
RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"
RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"

In that kind of a situation--which is viable--then it's not an infinite loop because at any point it could be "not-Toshi" and the corp is fatiguing the runner into bad decision making, trying to spot the moment when the runner is either committed to accessing, so they can drop in a trap or sneak down an agenda.

Unless he's ahead on points, there's five minutes left, and he's just stalling, in which case yeah, call a judge.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf Cordero
United States
Bolingbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Grimwalker wrote:
Lukas said "it could be" slow play on the part of the Corp.

So don't slow play it. As the corp, once you have demonstrated the loop, you can simply say "I will execute this infinite loop as long as you keep running." At that point, per the rules, it's the runner's responsibility to jack out.

The situation Lukas is addressing is one of more obstinacy or slyness:

RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"
RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"
RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"

In that kind of a situation--which is viable--then it's not an infinite loop because at any point it could be "not-Toshi" and the corp is fatiguing the runner into bad decision making, trying to spot the moment when the runner is either committed to accessing, so they can drop in a trap or sneak down an agenda.

Unless he's ahead on points, there's five minutes left, and he's just stalling, in which case yeah, call a judge.


Lukas clearly states that the burden is on the corp to stop swapping. This means that even if the corp says "I will execute this loop infinite times as long as you keep running" the runner will say "I will access infinite times as long as you swap for something/anything". Per Lukas' last line the burden is on the corp to either swap for notSakai or not swap, allowing the Runner to trash Sakai.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David
United Kingdom
Battersea
London
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The second post here expresses it perfectly for me: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1037942/who-is-responsible-f....

Lukas was just being more polite.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
CommissarFeesh wrote:
The runner cannot know it's an infinite loop, hence the onus being on the Corp.


But the corp does know that the runner will keep accessing?

I mean, I'm generally sympathetic to the above-linked post, but if the corp really knows that the runner is going to act as though the game state hasn't changed, it's only by virtue of the fact that the runner really knows that the corp isn't going to change the game state.

Given that the continuation of the loop presupposes knowledge that the other player is going to continue to do the same thing based on their knowledge of one's actions, it's an outright logical contradiction to claim that one player knows they're in a loop but the other one doesn't. If either player doesn't know it, then it's not a loop.

(Putting it that way does make me understand where the asymmetrical intuition is coming from, though. The runner has baaaasically laid their cards on the table (as it were) with the first access, and as such it's very likely (especially after access 2) that that the runner really is going to access whatever the corp lays down, but the corp has no way of knowing for sure. ...Mushin notwithstanding, it's just a stupid card.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf Cordero
United States
Bolingbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kobold47 wrote:
CommissarFeesh wrote:
The runner cannot know it's an infinite loop, hence the onus being on the Corp.


But the corp does know that the runner will keep accessing?

I mean, I'm generally sympathetic to the above-linked post, but if the corp really knows that the runner is going to act as though the game state hasn't changed, it's only by virtue of the fact that the runner really knows that the corp isn't going to change the game state.

Given that the continuation of the loop presupposes knowledge that the other player is going to continue to do the same thing based on their knowledge of one's actions, it's an outright logical contradiction to claim that one player knows they're in a loop but the other one doesn't. If either player doesn't know it, then it's not a loop.

(Putting it that way does make me understand where the asymmetrical intuition is coming from, though. The runner has baaaasically laid their cards on the table (as it were) with the first access, and as such it's very likely (especially after access 2) that that the runner really is going to access whatever the corp lays down, but the corp has no way of knowing for sure. ...Mushin notwithstanding, it's just a stupid card.)


The way I understand it, is that only the Corp knows if what he is about to do is going to put the board back into the same game state it was just in. The Corp here is choosing to provide the runner with the exact same choice/outcome scenario over and over. When the runner elects to access, they have no way of knowing if choosing the same thing over and over again will actually create the same board state. Even if the corporation pinky promises. Executives, especially Jinteki ones, are sneaky liars.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ony Moose
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The way infinities are dealt with in netrunner is the player upon whom the onus is to act has to name a number, and then execute the loop that many times.

Since you can't name infinite, and Lukas has ruled this is on the corp's onus the runner can always access Toshi the final time.

With Cell Portal, the runner has the chance to Jackout/Continue? Before the corp has the rez ice? option. This is why the runner has to name the number.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derrick Billings
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
captainraffi wrote:
Grimwalker wrote:
Lukas said "it could be" slow play on the part of the Corp.

So don't slow play it. As the corp, once you have demonstrated the loop, you can simply say "I will execute this infinite loop as long as you keep running." At that point, per the rules, it's the runner's responsibility to jack out.

The situation Lukas is addressing is one of more obstinacy or slyness:

RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"
RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"
RUNNER: "I access."
CORP rezzes Toshi.
CORP shuffles hand.
CORP Installs a card.

CORP: "Do you access?"

In that kind of a situation--which is viable--then it's not an infinite loop because at any point it could be "not-Toshi" and the corp is fatiguing the runner into bad decision making, trying to spot the moment when the runner is either committed to accessing, so they can drop in a trap or sneak down an agenda.

Unless he's ahead on points, there's five minutes left, and he's just stalling, in which case yeah, call a judge.


Lukas clearly states that the burden is on the corp to stop swapping. This means that even if the corp says "I will execute this loop infinite times as long as you keep running" the runner will say "I will access infinite times as long as you swap for something/anything". Per Lukas' last line the burden is on the corp to either swap for notSakai or not swap, allowing the Runner to trash Sakai.


I still disagree. Lukas specifically said, "The Corp can continually swap the two Toshiyuki Sakais."

If we take the reductio ad absurdam of not being permitted to continually swap Toshis, then we get to an instance where you access, I reveal and swap Toshi, then you access, I reveal Toshi, and because it's ostensibly my burden to end the loop, at this point I am no longer allowed to swap with a legal card. I can't accept that.

The rest of Lukas' answer specifically addressed a corporation who's exploiting this situation in order to stall the game, and his final sentence I think ought to be read in that context.

If Toshiyuki is sharing the server with, say, a SanSan City Grid and you've got an Imp token and enough credits to clean out the server, I reject the assertion that it's my responsibility to make a sub-optimal play.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf Cordero
United States
Bolingbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Grimwalker wrote:


If Toshiyuki is sharing the server with, say, a SanSan City Grid and you've got an Imp token and enough credits to clean out the server, I reject the assertion that it's my responsibility to make a sub-optimal play.


As a runner with an Imp token and enough credits to clean out the server, I also reject the assertion that I should have to make a sub-optimal play. Luckily we have a ruling: Corp has to stop swapping Sakai for Sakai over and over and over. You're allowed to swap for a legal card as many (finite) times as you want. At some point though, per ruling, the loop is your responsibility and it's on the corp to stop.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian H
United States
Anacortes
Washington
flag msg tools
Mess with the best, die like the rest.
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bayushi_david wrote:
The second post here expresses it perfectly for me: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1037942/who-is-responsible-f....

Lukas was just being more polite.


Exactly...what it comes down to is, if you are swapping Sakai over and over solely for the purpose of trying to force the runner to jack out due to annoyance, you are being a dick.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Evan
United States
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
captainraffi wrote:
The way I understand it, is that only the Corp knows if what he is about to do is going to put the board back into the same game state it was just in. The Corp here is choosing to provide the runner with the exact same choice/outcome scenario over and over.


The runner has the same choice (and the same epistemic status regarding that choice): access, thereby putting the game into the previous state, or ETR, thereby changing the game state. The runner who continues to access is also providing the corp with the exact same choice/outcome scenario over and over.

MavericK96 wrote:
Exactly...what it comes down to is, if you are swapping Sakai over and over solely for the purpose of trying to force the runner to jack out due to annoyance, you are being a dick.


But how is this not the same thing as accessing Sakai over and over solely for the purpose of trying to force the corp to let you through due to annoy--Ohhhhh, I get it. Y'all are reasserting the same undefended claim over and over hoping that I'll just give up in annoyance. It's meta.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.