Recommend
102 
 Thumb up
 Hide
64 Posts
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3  | 

Android: Netrunner» Forums » Strategy

Subject: Three Styles of Haas-Bioroid rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
Alexfrog wrote:

I posted it as 'HB fast advance' before anyone else posted it as 'HB rush' and then started using HBFA to mean something else. So you all used it wrong.

More accurately, my style is somewhere in between the two styles jopejope discussed. It is 'Rush' opening and then 'fast advance' follow through. And occasionally one of the two wont ever occur.

Because I am pedantic about preserving knowledge of historical ordering...

In original netrunner, fast advance clearly referred to "scoring cards out of hand". For instance, here is a passage about the O:NR'S deck archetype, psycho tycho:

Quote:
The strategy of Psycho Tycho decks takes the fast advancing of agendas to the limit, exploiting the combo Tycho Extension, Project Consultants, and ACME Savings and Loan. As soon as the first Tycho Extension is scored (either by slow-advancing it behind cheap Ice in the early turns, or by saving bits and scoring it out of hand with Project Consultants), you can win in one turn if one Tycho, one ACME, and one Consultants are in your hand. You install the Agenda, then install ACME and rez it - which nets you the 12 bits you need for the Consultants. That ACME also costs you an Agenda point is irrelevant, because the two Tychos give you one point more than you need to win. The synergy of these three cards is almost uncanny, which is why time and again players have been tempted to call for bans, restrictions, or "errata".

Source: http://www.arasaka.de/content/articles/trq/trq04/article5.ht...

Psycho tycho also happened to win quickly (so it was a rush deck to boot), but that was not a necessary property of the definition of fast advance. Most fast advance decks in a:nr tend to be rather slow to win. This was an idea laid out way back in oct/nov '12 in the context of astroscript pilot program (sorry -- could not find the relevant reference in BGG forum search).

Yes, your deck probably falls somewhere between 'fast advance' and 'rush', insofar as jopejope uses the terminology. No, other people have not been using the term 'fast advance' wrong (at least from a historical perspective).

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Quote:

Because I am pedantic about preserving knowledge of historical ordering...

Same!


My variation of HB deck DOES fast advance. Biotic, Trick, SanSan, and Archived Memories, for insta-scoring. Its a fast advance deck. so the name is appropriate. You dont have to fast advance four agendas to be a fast advance deck.


I first posted this version in March, calling it "HB Fast Advance":
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/953472/three-strong-deck-arc...
**********************************************
HB Fast Advance (the cheap ice variant):
49 Cards:

3 Accelerated Beta Test
3 Project Vitruvius
3 Private Security Force
2 False Lead

3 Biotic Labor
2 Trick of Light ******
3 Archived Memories
3 Hedge Fund

3 Melange Mining Corp
3 Adonis Campaign
1 Private Contracts

3 Ichi
2 Rototurret
1 Neural Katana ** (Sometimes the disruption from their turn 1 run into this eliminates a breaker, and they cant get into your remote as a result).
2 Shadow ** (Needed for consistent ability to use trick of light. Also great vs the Workshop Noise deck early on, as they are poor and the tag would wreck them).
2 Viper (Its amazingly strong against people without link).
2 Enigma
2 Popup Window **
3 Wall of Static
3 Ice Wall ***
**********************************

The deck has changed minimally. I like SanSan now over Neural Katana and a Shadow, and Eli's go in to replace those ice. And the code gate mixture changed some, adding some Viktor and cutting the others a bit. And maybe a 3rd Rototurret. Thats basically it. Differences of a couple cards like having 1-2 less ice and then putting in 3 Eve Campaign instead of those ice and a Private Contracts, are relatively small. Or changing the ice mixture slightly.

Then others posted two similar but different deck archetypes.
One of these is a "No remote" deck, which they also called "HB fast advance". (It might make a remote later on, but not for agenda scoring). This deck takes longer to win than my original version, but with less early risk.

The other of these got called "HB rush". Losing half the fast advance cards, it focuses more intensely on getting agendas through a remote as fast as possible. It drops some efficient (but non-end) ice, for things like Chimera, making sacrifices to increase the chance of successful early agenda scoring.



In original netrunner I played many fast advance decks.
Tycho/Project Consultants.
Artificial Security Directors/Corp War.
Executive Extraction/Unlisted Research Lab.
Unlisted Research Lab/Systematic Layoffs with like 15+ Hedge Funds.

They were all super broken.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Rockwell
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What do people think of the following:

* There are four styles of HB deck.

1) "HB No-remote" means that you just ice centrals and fast advance four times. You ice up R&D a lot. You might make a late remote to protect assets. This is jopejope's 'HB fast advance'. This deck plays trick of light but not SanSan. It plays less ice. (~15)


2) "HB Fast Advance" means that you make a remote early and try to score something in it (probably). As the game progresses, the remote's purpose becomes just protecting assets (or maybe a bluff). You then ice up R&D a lot and fast advance however many agendas you still need. This deck plays trick of light or SanSan or both (my preference is both). This is my 'HB fast advance'. It plays around 19-20 ice. It plays the opening like 'HB rush' and the lategame like 'HB No-Remote' (with an asset server, which no-remote might have build by then anyway).


3) "HB Rush"
means that you focus heavily on an early remote and pushing things through it as fast as possible, trying to get to 5 points with a 5/3 and a 3/2. Things are sacrificed to make this happen, such as having weaker centrals, and playing things like Chimera. You then probably fast advance one final agenda with a Biotic Labor. This deck plays SanSan, but not trick of light. This is jopjope's 'HB rush'. It plays around 20-21 ice.


4) "HB Super Server" Denotes large server versions. The stuff we played before Emergency Shutdown was a card. Include your Mandatory Upgrades, your Aggressive Secretaries, and your Oversighted Janus decks here. It plays at least 20 ice, but possibly even 23-25 for silly Betas. (Honestly, there are multiple styles of this deck. But its hard to name them all).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Hollis
Canada
Edmonton
Alberta
flag msg tools
Avatar
I kind of think that tying terminology to specific decks is ultimately a muddying and confusing practice. My take is that:

Rush: Refers to an attempt to get to match-point before the runner's rig is assembled.

Fast Advance: The act of scoring an agenda from hand in a single turn.

Economic Denial: Refers to an attempt to keep the opponent's credits below some critical threshold, X, at the end of each turn.

A deck that never makes remote servers, but instead relies on cards like biotic labor and trick of light exemplifies fast advance.

A deck that relies on a diverse range of small ice and other "gear checks" like Ash and Red Herrings to prevent the runner from accessing the contents of remote servers while 2-5 agenda points are scored behind them within the first 10 turns exemplifies rush.

A deck that runs many large ice, has a great deal of economic generation, puts priority on fortifying R&D and a remote server, and has ways of reliably keeping agendas out of HQ exemplifies economic denial.

A deck that will sometimes score agendas behind remote servers in the early game, but usually cannibalizes that server for economic assets, upgrades, and the threat of agendas displays aspects of rush, fast advance, and economic denial.

The problem with pinning terminology to specific decks is that most decks are actually quite complicated, and sometimes entertain multiple paths to victory. I suspect it would be rare to find decks that had Platonic purity when it comes to any sort of meaningful terminology; circles are a great concept. It may be practical to refer to a pizza as circular. However, using a pizza as a basis for your definition of circle is not useful.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth M
msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
I actually love Aggressive Secretary in the Rush style. In your Chimera+Inside Job Fodder remote it is the only trap that lets you turn back the clock even against a Crypsis deck or a Femme bypass. Secondly and of critical importance you can use it to protect SanSan even if the runner figures out it is a trap.

For about half the price of rezzing a second SanSan (assuming you draw into the second one) you can plop one down and advance it once. You threaten an 5-advance agenda and might get a hit and if not you can just leave it there until you draw into something to score.

Since it costs no influence I've found running with two to be quite invaluable.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Billy Martin
United States
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
I dislike arguing over semantics. I like getting my point across as efficiently as possible. I spent a paragraph at the beginning of the HB Fast Advance section explaining what I mean by Fast Advance.

jopejope wrote:

Lots of people these days are playing HB with Fast Advance. Fast Advance can be very powerful. However, there is a difference between playing "HB with Fast Advance", and playing HB Fast Advance. Any HB deck that has Biotic Labor could be considered "HB with Fast Advance". Heck, the HB Rush deck above could easily be considered "HB with Fast Advance" and yet in many ways it's almost the exact opposite of this deck.

I'm fine with Alex calling his deck a Fast Advance deck because I understand exactly what he means. Maybe you could more precisely call his deck "HB with Fast Advance". Tomato Tomato.

Actually, if I were forced to categorize Alex's deck into one of the three categories I listed, I would without question categorize it as HB Fast Advance, due to the agenda composition and the inclusion of Trick of Light and Archived Memories. There is no law that states an HB Fast Advance deck must never create a remote server. The fact that the list I posted goes to the extreme of not creating one does not mean that is a mandatory feature of the deck type. In fact, you could take the exact list I posted, play it against a Noise deck, and perhaps opportunistically score an ABT behind a Wall of Static or an Ice Wall if the right situation arises. Just because it doesn't need a remote server doesn't mean it can't create one.

I wanted to bring up HB Rush as a distinct style and contrast it with HB Fast Advance. You could easily look at the HB Rush list and say, "oh, yeah, that's a fast advance deck" but in so doing you are missing the main strengths of the deck and not fully grasping its key features. I've had a few times on OCTGN where I beat someone with the HB Rush deck and they say, "goddamnit, I hate HB Fast Advance, it's so strong". They only see the last turn where I Biotic Labored out an ABT for the win, or the fact that I had a SanSan they could never break through and trash, rather than understanding the full strategy that led up to that point.

The HB Rush deck is an HB Rush deck. It's an HB deck with fast advance, and it uses that fast advance as part of its overall strategy to close out the late game and win.

The HB Fast Advance deck is an HB Fast Advance deck. You could say it's a "no remote" deck if you want to be more specific. It's designed with the intention of not using a remote server for scoring agendas. But the style of the deck is Fast Advance, in the sense that it uses that as the primary method of scoring points and winning the game. That deck and Alex's deck share many of the same strengths and weaknesses. If you want to debate about whether one deck or the other is better or how they are different that is interesting. If you want to debate over what they should be called that is stupid.

hollis wrote:

Rush: Refers to an attempt to get to match-point before the runner's rig is assembled.

Fast Advance: The act of scoring an agenda from hand in a single turn.

These are definitions I can get behind, and I only point this out so that you understand what I am talking about when I use those terms.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Brooks
United States
Minneapolis
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mb
Orange Devil wrote:
BoShek wrote:

The inclusion of Mandatory Upgrades of course will break the Never Advance archetype and the deck I've included is the idea of the "HB Hybrid Deck".

A lot of using "Hybrid decks" comes from the runner not exactly knowing what you are going to throw at them. I feel that this approach will be powerful contenders for top corp decks.

Please everyone stop doing this. Runners benefit from having a toolbox, although some do go all in on a particular combo (big dig, noise shop, notoriety), corps do not tend to benefit from toolboxes, or hybrids, or a little bit of everything.

hollis wrote:
I kind of think that tying terminology to specific decks is ultimately a muddying and confusing practice.

A deck that will sometimes score agendas behind remote servers in the early game, but usually cannibalizes that server for economic assets, upgrades, and the threat of agendas displays aspects of rush, fast advance, and economic denial.

The problem with pinning terminology to specific decks is that most decks are actually quite complicated, and sometimes entertain multiple paths to victory. I suspect it would be rare to find decks that had Platonic purity when it comes to any sort of meaningful terminology; circles are a great concept. It may be practical to refer to a pizza as circular. However, using a pizza as a basis for your definition of circle is not useful.

The term "Hybrid" I was using was just this, a meld between rush, fast advance and economic denial. Depending on opening draws my deck can play any of these options and can transition between them. What makes the Hybrid nice is that it does "entertain multiple paths to victory" to quote hollis. Depending on my opponents deck and playstyle I have the option to counter in different ways.

The deck I purposed specifically attempts to rush a Mandatory Upgrades in order to be able to score any 3-2 OOH. Since MU is just one of several agendas there is no guarantee that I will draw it when required or at all during a game. Therefore there needs to be other ways to get closer to winning which means perhaps Rushing other agendas, Fast Advancing 3-2s. The whole while, the deck can sort of stall for a MU while putting down trash-able assets either to allow me to rez more ice or for the runner to spend money trashing it as well as including bioroids over centrals eating up time and money. Traps and upgrades might provoke runs on remotes as well helping to stall while I set up. The remote with multiple upgrades can also server as a "Never Advance" area for agendas; which is how MU gets scored or traps are advanced to mimic it (or other 5 advance agendas). It can do fine if none of the "combo pieces" come into play, but it does help.

An HB deck that tries to Fast Advance by including Trick of Light and also tries to get a lucky flatline with SE seems undirected and indeed too "stuck in the middle". The likelihood of somehow managing a tag to SE but also having targets for Trick of Light is really inconsistent. On the other hand, having Data Raven which can give tags (to allow for resource trashing) or else imply SE or other tag punishment (even though there really isn't anything besides 1 PSF) plays the middle in a more constructive way. Rather than ToL, using SanSan plays along the line of Never Advance since an installed unrezzed card could be anything. Even though SanSan might not be rezzed at all, it still contributes. If I need Fast Advance to help squeeze out a win early to beat a shaper whose massive rig is rumbling forward, or if every MU has been stolen, then it is my "back up plan". An odd trap or two is more likely to work than one if your opponent has seen a lot of them or you are playing a corp known for it (actually playing Jinteki). Even it's not always deadly (although it can be), if you pull off a single trap, it might (even temporarily) make the runner a little more cautious.

I'd argue that a well constructed "Hybrid HB" is more powerful than a single strategy deck since it is more flexible to deal with the runner better. The worst thing is to be all-in on a strategy and get paired up with your counter. It should definitely focus on one thing (in this case Never Advance in order to score MU, then score OOH) but having backups is important. This had become very apparent to me when playing Whizzard. He is more or less completely countered by a deck with no trash-able cards. Do I not play Whizzard because of these bad matchups? Many people choose to not play him because of the common asset-dry Weyland. (Oh right and of course because Noise's ability really should have been once per turn to be in line with Gabe and Mac and not stupidly useful) How do I deal with this? Make Imp a priority. There are 3 Djinns, 3 Imps, 2 Aesops 3 Parasites and 3 Deju Vu. This way, I can trash as many cards as possible. When there are assets or upgrades, Whizzard is the most prepared to deal with this.

I understand that real companies focus on efficiency and streamline to achieve such ends, but there is something to be said about diversifying. Hedge Funds can work.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thanks jopejope, as always, a very high quality post.

I'd love to see you do a blog or something with all your articles compiled in one place. With Netrunner, I find many pages/blogs lack quality, so you really have to be careful with all the information out there.
Your posts are always top notch!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alan Kennedy
United States
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
SalamanderJones wrote:
Thanks jopejope, as always, a very high quality post.

I'd love to see you do a blog or something with all your articles compiled in one place. With Netrunner, I find many pages/blogs lack quality, so you really have to be careful with all the information out there.
Your posts are always top notch!

Quoted for Truth!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Billy Martin
United States
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Thanks for the compliments!

The reason I don't have a blog is I feel my writings get more exposure if I post them here. I know I for one don't really find out about blogs unless someone tells me about them or sends me a link. But forums are easy to check every day and see what people are talking about.

If you want to see everything I wrote just click on my username and then click on "contributions" and then "threads". There isn't that much but it's all there. BGG provides good tools for stalking specific users. whistle
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Morgan
United States
Hattiesburg
Mississippi
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Jopejope, love your HB decks, they are extremely competitive. Props to you for putting them together. What do you think an HB Rush deck looks like now fter C&C?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Sutcliffe
United Kingdom
Manchester
flag msg tools
Avatar
Pifecta wrote:
Jopejope, love your HB decks, they are extremely competitive. Props to you for putting them together. What do you think an HB Rush deck looks like now fter C&C?

Ha! My exact question as well.

I think there's little to add from the last sets, really. You can tinker with the Ice setup by adding Eli 1.0 and Viktor 2.0, and argue whether Project Wotan is worth inclusion or not, but I don't think Creation & Control really did much to help Rush.


I'm going to try this:

2 Accelerated Beta Test
2 Project Vituvius
3 Executive Retreat
1 Project Wotan

3 Adonis Campaign
2 Melange Mining Corp
2 Eve Campaign

3 Chimera
3 Ice Wall
3 Caduceus
2 Enigma
2 Wall of Static
2 Rototurret
2 Viktor 2.0
1 Ichi 1.0

2 Biotic Labor
3 Hedge Fund
3 Green Level Clearance

2 Ash 2X3ZB9CY
2 SanSan City Grid

This is 45 cards rather 54 but retains most of the weighted percentages from the original Pre-C&C HB Rush list on the front page. In most cases the shift to 45 cards actually improves the deck's stats.

eg.
Economy cards were 27.8% of the deck, now 28.9%
Ice was 38.9%, now 40.0%
(The tradeoff is Upgrades/Biotics, but if you added a Biotic or Ash back in at the expense of an Ice, or go up to 46 cards, you can fix that)

Your influence cards were 15% of your deck, now 18% - you're more likely to see your best cards.

The Ice used to cost 3.0 on average, now it's 2.9. While getting cheaper it's got stronger (avg strength 2.0 vs old 1.9)

Most critically your Agendas are actually a smaller % of your deck (17.8% vs 18.5%(, when the main point of going to 54 cards was to prevent the runner finding agendas.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Sutcliffe
United Kingdom
Manchester
flag msg tools
Avatar
Magicdave wrote:
Pifecta wrote:
Jopejope, love your HB decks, they are extremely competitive. Props to you for putting them together. What do you think an HB Rush deck looks like now fter C&C?

Ha! My exact question as well.

I think there's little to add from the last sets, really. You can tinker with the Ice setup by adding Eli 1.0 and Viktor 2.0, and argue whether Project Wotan is worth inclusion or not, but I don't think Creation & Control really did much to help Rush.


I'm going to try this:

2 Accelerated Beta Test
2 Project Vituvius
3 Executive Retreat
1 Project Wotan

3 Adonis Campaign
2 Melange Mining Corp
2 Eve Campaign

3 Chimera
3 Ice Wall
3 Caduceus
2 Enigma
2 Wall of Static
2 Rototurret
2 Viktor 2.0
1 Ichi 1.0

2 Biotic Labor
3 Hedge Fund
3 Green Level Clearance

2 Ash 2X3ZB9CY
2 SanSan City Grid

This is 45 cards rather 54 but retains most of the weighted percentages from the original Pre-C&C HB Rush list on the front page. In most cases the shift to 45 cards actually improves the deck's stats.

eg.
Economy cards were 27.8% of the deck, now 28.9%
Ice was 38.9%, now 40.0%
(The tradeoff is Upgrades/Biotics, but if you added a Biotic or Ash back in at the expense of an Ice, or go up to 46 cards, you can fix that)

Your influence cards were 15% of your deck, now 18% - you're more likely to see your best cards.

The Ice used to cost 3.0 on average, now it's 2.9. While getting cheaper it's got stronger (avg strength 2.0 vs old 1.9)

Most critically your Agendas are actually a smaller % of your deck (17.8% vs 18.5%(, when the main point of going to 54 cards was to prevent the runner finding agendas.

Played this to 4-0 at my first ever Netrunner tournament.
:-D
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Griffin
United States
Renton
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I realize this is an older thread, but it's still one of the most helpful I've read so far regarding the thinking that goes into a corp deck build. I'd love to find more of this depth for runner if anyone has good recs.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Prev «  1 , 2 , 3  |