Android: Netrunner General - /anrg/

DtM looks good, but after playing without Jackson for a while, it feels kinda hard to find a place to jam them in.

Jua looks like a huge tempo hit for the runner if he isn't prepared for it. But idk if its worth the import elsewhere.

Yeah, it seems nice, but not super impactful - if nothing else, they can always jack out after all

Aimor looks like a pretty nasty ice, both in-faction, and for Skorpios in particular (when it can find the inf).

I think it'd have a bit more impact for me if turtle wasn't everywhere and devaluing traps to hell and back.

That said PU and probably Skorpios can still use it decently, and maybe some other lockout/heap removal decks if those ever come back

False Flags and Public Support, can it be done to 7?

Actually... Harmony Medtech: Mushin a False Flag, optionally advance as well, next turn dedicate and advance if you didn't last turn and score, repeat later to 6

FF is 2 inf, Dedication is 3 and powers up Ronin and Gene Splicer as well

Looks pretty nice yeah, though IDK how good traps are atm

Are there any cards even close to valentines-related?

Adonis/Eve I guess?

Me today when I found out my gf cheated on me

user you know what to do

To answer the question of the day, having played against but no with yet, corp side, really digging Reconstruction Contract. Gorgeous jank enabler.
Runner sire, probably By Any Means. Very anarch. Makes for interesting plays.

Not the best cards, but certainly the ones I've liked best so far.

If Swordsman were a lot more common, then perhaps those same trap ice would see more use as a consequence.

Bit less effective vs Anarchs, but other factions that usually run with just the turtle are in for a nasty surprise.

The new expose helmet, a lot lighter - and a bit more "cobbled together" than the previous, sleek, streamlined and over-expensive previous expose helmet

You need something to punish when they run for the False Flag too, don't think you'll have enough influence for that. 3 FFs, 2 Dedications, 1 BOOM maybe? Then splatter some Consulting Visits too.

Just getting back into this game after giving away all my old cards. Do I need to buy 3 of the core set again or are the 1x not as good this time?

Important x1s in Core 2.0 are Ash, SacCon, Aesop’s, Hostile Takeover, Hokusai, and maybe Stimhack & Special Order. So you probably won’t need 3 core 2.0s compared to 1.0.

So how many Magnum Opus should a typical Karbonesa deck run?

Is that a trick question?

So what would be the answer then? 1 would be nice, but one would have to worry about trashing then. I guess 3 is overkill, but would 2 be just as excessive?

I'd say just start with two, and see if you need to buffer or thin.
Test according to your meta.
A lot of Skorpios around probably warrants more than one copy, especially if you're going the self trash route to avoid the Wu side effect.
I have a friend talking about max copies of most everything and Paige Piper for deck filtering. Don't know if it would work, but I like the idea of that.

So what 2 IDs would end up as the Regionals double-sided acrylic prize this year?

Personally I’m hoping for Karbonesa and ASA, since both are actually decent IDs compared to some of the previous choices (lol Los and Jemison).

Idk, perhaps it's the mass-production (refined?) field model compared to the prototype Blackguard, even though it is ironically less 'common' due to increased influence.

Nah, I think the Blackguard is a piece of very high-end "commercial" runner hardware - you can buy it in a similar way (1 less inf) to how you can buy the Monolith, or to the Globalsec breakers - they're both build as a single massive unit for those groups who need a very high-end rig - corporate hackers, universities, intelligence service, military and prisec cyberwar teams.

Zamba to me looks more like a DIY rig made by a runner personally - less expensive, but also less available. Actually more than anything I think it's the USE of the hardware, rather than the hardware itself, that's more unique to the criminals who use it.

...

...

That moment when the lone Recon Drone you've been slotting in Khan just for fun saves you against Jemison Junebug shenanigans...

The card that lets you be CtM and have ARSE scored right from the get go, in any ID, or just double/triple down on that plan.
Or, more realistically, you can uninstall something, ideally something expensive - to be fair, it's not like anything put in the heap is ever there for all THAT long. It's not as bad as it used be before LARLA got MWL'd, but the top of the stack isn't all that much better, they still have to draw and install it again - maybe something in a drip econ vein if you've got literally no better targets

I'm interested in seeing where those uninstall effects go not that they power-creep-ed them a bit.
Would be kinda amusing for people to realize they were pretty good all along and the re-balance took things overboard.
Poor Hellion.

>Poor Hellion.
Sad Cat

I think it's really the BP that kills them

The BP sends me back to previous rambling about the change in trace mechanic between ONR and ANR.

In ONR, where traces introduced bluff, with some negotiating elasticity and stakes from both sides, in that BP could have been an interesting Damocles sword dandling over your head (and even then).
In ANR where traces are draped in certitudes, it doesn't quite have the same impact. You do or you don't, and if you do you know you're doing it for success.

Yeah, traces are very rarely not all-in affairs - you generally KNOW you're going to win.

I did like the idea those zodiac ice had with traces - that might be cool to see again/elsewhere. Just some way to make them more interactive, and ideally integrated better into the flow of the game

Interestingly enough, many such decks seem to run 0 instead, relying on other sources of income instead.

Interesting. Haven't met one in the wild yet.
Too slow to cheat, going with cheap disposable utility programs support instead?

I really liked the constellation/zodiac l ICE set. We still have 8 signs to go if they want to revisit in post D&D, 2.0 tracer paradigm. Would enjoy that myself.
The big trouble was that, Link was it seems to was rare enough to not need disincentive.

Its those origami-based decks as according to NRDB, which does look most intriguing and fun to try out. The other candidate being Oracle May-based.

The one I've seen was big hand Shaper, using Origami and Game Day to draw their deck, then Spycam and Bazaar with Tech Traders and Tech Writers.

Oohhhh shiny. Can't wait to play against that.

Another version runs Ekomind with Data Folding for money, and spam DDMs via Overmind/Lister. Hilariously effective Shaper BS ftw.

Ok, anyone running Ekomind gets the brain in a jar prize of excellence in my book.
That's neat.

Hopefully there would be one that wins a store champs soon. That would thrust her to the major leagues for sure.

Perhaps she would be the new Queen in Green once Hayley rotates.

There may be 8 more signs, but even if they released 4 more in the next cycle, the first 4 should be rotating out in less then a year assuming no delays or extra releases before the next cycle.

ANR traces would've been much better off as a sort of secondary breaker, where you need specific cards in order to even pump your link strength like in ONR.

I like the zodiacs too, I think any trace card that gives incentive for the corp to pump outside of surefire situations - "value" traces basically - would be good trace design. Only problem with the zodiac implementation is often they end up as just "the corp may pay X credits; if so, do Y" subs.

Bumping with awesome fan arts.

Well Midseasons did have the "by how much your spend exceeds the runner's" - so a version of that might work: if you spent more than the runner do X, if you spent at least 3c more than the runner/at least 5c, do Y (so if you did both it'd be X and Y)

X being the "by how much you exceed link" part I assume? If Y triggers at "atleast 3 credits more", then you'll likely be self-vamping more often than not. Noy sure what other ways besides the zodiacs method are available to incentivize paying into random traces.

The more damaging change I think was going from simultaneous to sequential bid for traces. There's a bluff element to ONR traces that is completely gone.

Cute.

Cancer
Cost 2
Sentry Tracer
Str 4

Trace 4- if successful, the runner trashes one of his or her installed cards. For each two credits spent on the trace, the corp may turn one runner card facedown. When the corp's next turn begins, turn all facedown cards face up.

"Research in that... *thing* finally paid off"

(Way too powerful, but I just dig the idea)

Nah, I think there's two ways - double reward:

>Trace 2: if successful, trash a runner resource. If your trace exceeded the runner's trace by at least 4c, trash all non-virtual resources

For a double reward trace, the runner has incentive to spend even if they won't win, or alternatively it rewards a massive pump the runner won't contest so you don't vamp yourself in vain

The "failing forward" would be more like the zodiac:

>Trace 2: if successful, give the runner 1 brain damage. f your trace strength is 5 or greater, do 1 net damage.

This means you always get some reward for pumping, which I think is probably fairer (but still a bit shit as a subroutine)

>Trace 4- if successful, the runner trashes one of his or her installed cards. For each two credits spent on the trace, the corp may turn one runner card facedown. When the corp's next turn begins, turn all facedown cards face up.
Temporarily disabling runner cards would be very neat, funny side effect against Apex.

>Trace 2: if successful, trash a runner resource. If your trace exceeded the runner's trace by at least 4c, trash all non-virtual resources
This isn't really any different than the usual tracer subs, but it is definitely stronger. I guess the point is to force the runner to spend into the trace to avoid the secondary effect?

>>Trace 2: if successful, give the runner 1 brain damage. f your trace strength is 5 or greater, do 1 net damage.
I agree that this is a worser sub since it is functionally just "Deal 1 net damage if the corp spends 3 credits." most of the time. Maybe with a higher trace strength these would look more menacing?

I wasn't implying either should be subroutines - I'm just talking about traces in general.

Trace-as-subroutines I feel should be much nastier than they are currently

Ah, then trash resource is definitely no different than current available traces, even more so due to the click requirement. You'd still aim for traces when it hits the hardest instead of throwing it around for "value".

>For each two credits spent on the trace by the corp, the runner must turn one of his or her installed card facedown.

There, much better that way.

>funny side effect against Apex

Fully intended. I love the idea of a rather powerful piece ICE of borne out of research on Apex being basically part of Apex's set up.

bump

Post your bets on what you think will be changed on the next MWL.

Paperclip and CI/VLC/UVLC[pick one] restricted.

Defensive agendas continue to dominate, but SSL is new enough that it won't get hit.

Something in the GPI Net Tap deck gets hit. It could be errata (GPI unique?), but the thing is over the power curve.

Paper Planes is allowed to exist, becomes the worst deck in the meta. There's just no way to hit it without banning some very innocuous cards (I guess there's equivocation?). It warrants an emergency restriction on Origami and whatever is used to mill the corp.

MWL hasn't mattered here for a while, couldn't even tell you what's on it right now.

The GPI Tap combo isn’t that great vs asset spam or decks which can afford to rez spiky outermost ice consistently.

Origami decks looks more likely to spam DDMs with strength 14 AI breakers then milling. Nothing otherwise bonkers with her decks otherwise.

Hnngh

Definitely one of CI's power cards, though hopefully not one of the Clearances. Mostly because there is little reason to not play CI over the other IDs. Very likely Aumakua, loathe am I to admit that it should, way too prevalent in any deck of any faction. Other decks of note are too new to hit, restricting or banning anything there would just be a terrible knee jerk reaction.

Let's be honest, it's funny to even see GPI being discussed for the list.

The other frankly unexpected inclusion for the current list is Gang Sign. Honestly didn’t see that coming compared to the other obvious candidates.

Amusing that it only took 2 cards for a power combo to come out. Wonder what other "whenever" cards are available that would only need a few support cards to be viable.

Gang Sign was touted as unhealthy for the game (broken?) a few times I think, I think it was the UK meta that specifically advocated against it. Maybe it'll get removed?

Gang sign is there for specifically allowing "sit on your hands and win with literally 0 runs" and nothing else.

GPI being mentioned is kind of funny, to be sure, but it probably just needs an errata so they don't stack exposes. I'm not sure how you'd word that, but it seems the easiest way - "a card cannot be exposed multiple times in the same approach step" or words to that effect

Gang Signs sounds more like some random meme deck then anything remotely seriously game breaking. It certainly didn’t make much of an impact at Worlds for one thing.

Just make it unique.

When two memes battle each other, the stronger more stable meme wins. Which is why Gang Sign has trouble winning against CI, doubly so because CI's ability directly counters the common way to win with Gang Sign.

Problem with Gang Sign is that, as much as people hate it, being able to camp remotes and force agendas to pile in HQ *is* part of the Crim color pie. And it needed support - R&D lock needs to focus on only one server. R&D (which is both a strength and weakness). HQ lock (so to speak) needs to threaten the remotes and needs access to HQ.
Trading one corp score for one access? I think it was fair - especially in JH times. At least not unwarranted.

And as noted, the corp that really doesn't like that has solutions. HQ size increase.being one. Ambushes being another (disposable HQ, if only).

I think it's Gang Sign in combination with HQI that makes it strong. A score for 1 access, maybe 3, is fine. A score to access what is often your whole hand though, is probably what tilts it over the line.

Yeah, especially with multiples.

Here's a lore/mechanics question for you all: why is Gang Sign - a resource about, I think, using your virtual gang tags in the corp's Network space to intimidate their drones - so good, but Political Graffiti, which I imagine thematically is fairly similar, is a) a run effect, b) purgable by virus counters, and c) so very shit ?

I mean, it's clearly less permanent, so b) kind of makes sense (though I'd personally have gone with just a way of removing it, rather than have purge be the trigger), and you have to "spray" it on the corp's servers, so there's a) - except you don't have to do that for Gang Sign, apparently.
Basically, why are two very similar cards thematically so very different in how they work?

Gang Sign is probably similar to the intimidating presence of actual gangs, as in they are always around and the government/corps knows this but can't do anything. Hence getting a connection with a gang doesn't require a run, and it isn't as easy as just spending some time to remove them. Political Graffiti is probably made by the runner themselves, which is why it needs a run to install. It's also why a purge clears it, it's an actual thing that can be cleaned in the corp's servers, compared to to Gang Sign which I feel is just the intimidating "presence" a gang can have. The only way you can get rid of Gang Sign is by tagging and tracking down the runner's connection to the gang and getting rid of them, or send them a Wake Up Call.

As for the effects, Gang Sign could be the Runner leaking info on a lapse of security due to the corp focusing on their agenda to the gangs, letting them hit a valuable target or something. Political Graffiti is just making an agenda look bad to investors and the public, which is nothing a little time and money can't fix.

Has the new core done anything to get more people into the game or is the whole thing on the way out?

I'm a new player who picked A:NR up because of it. I haven't gone to play with the local community yet but I introduced it to some mtg friends of mine and have been playing casually with just the revised core.

Idk, it had some positive effect on the playerbase at least, enough to replenish some of the attrition that is a real issue these past years.

Honestly, it is too early to say, although more overt attention to A:NR would have been nice to have. And considering the past histories of other LCGs, the game would still go on for a few more years at least to the bitter end.

>I think it's Gang Sign in combination with HQI that makes it strong

As I said when comparing Gang Sign with Spoilers. You can see it right there.

The difference between a gang marking its territory in turf war with official power structures and some dude tagging "Fuck the Police" - or the truth about that latest political scandal. The later is just noise you can pay to have removed, the former is a both tool and symptom of a conflict of interests between competing organizations. It doesn't even have to remain there to still have an effect, and all in all you probably want the information about which zones are being contested to be available. Even if it represents a challenge to your authority.

Not much incidence as far as I can see here. Prevented some bleeding of the player-base for sure, and on that it can be commended, but I don't think most people thinking about getting into the game now or care that much at that point about what 2.0 means for the game.

Yeah, the amount of attention given to the promotion of 2.0 is not quite as high as 1.0 all those years back. Having L5R out at the same time *really* didn't help things either.

They really should have had a promo kit like that Terminal Directive had. Perhaps the less-then-stellar sales (dayum shame that) affected things down the pipeline alas.

>As I said when comparing Gang Sign with Spoilers. You can see it right there.
Is the implication that you can see it installed, so you can prevent it from doing damage? Because you can't, it doesn't matter that you can make it so there's no agendas in hand, you're still getting 3 - 12 accesses from a thing that you're supposed to be doing to win the game anyway. It's the principle of it that offends people, not the actual outcome. Spoilers is theoretically even worse because you can't control what's in RnD, it's only mitigated by not having synergy with many other cards, with Hades Shard being the most notable.

What I was getting at is that Spoilers *cannot* benefit from multiaccess - there's no multiplication effect like HQI that exist for it - and doesn't even grant access. Which is why hardly anyone plays it while GS is in limited.
A well set up GS+HQI rig will let you access the whole of HQ on a score. A fully, perfectly timed set up for Spoilers will get you 9 cards in Archives. Add to that HQI works for all your other HQ accesses. It's not an otherwise dead draw.

>Perhaps the less-then-stellar sales (dayum shame that)

Yeah, I'm very sad about that. TD wasn't perfect, but I do think it was opening an incredible space for the game.

Yeah, the ideas behind TD were excellent, in general narrative Netrunner is a cool idea - just a shame it didn't work out too well. I'm guessing some of it was the LCG design team (from what I remember there's a couple of guys for each game and then a larger LCG team who work on all the games/whatever is big at the time) being overstretched, some was interference from above, and some was trying to get on the Legacy bandwagon

The whole concept is not bad per se, but the execution leaves much to be desired. The campaign bits could have been spun off into a separate related product line (like the novellas, but more akin Arkham Horror scenario packs), while the evergreen bits could stay in a smaller box.

Having historical scenarios like Reina's vendetta vs GRNDL could easily just rely on the Core set (single or triple), and potentially sell just as well as the novellas. Stick in full bleeds/alt arts (or both) to make them even more desirable and there would be a decent number of sales just for that.

One can hope I guess.

>novellas, but more akin Arkham Horror scenario packs
A novella + duel deck product, even with no new cards, would be fantastic.

Of course if it DID have new cards, even if some were scenario-only (ideally only a couple, if any) I'm sure it would sell like hotcakes.
Not quite sure what the best way would be to get that much-desired "replay value" there, other being good for normal play - Legacy mechanics doesn't seem to be a good idea, possibly just a few cards that are used in order or something. Or maybe going for maximum replayability with scenarios, especially in smaller packs, just isn't realistic

As fancy as those ‘permanent changes’ as defined by typical Legacy games are, if players don’t go about ripping up perfectly good (campaign-only) cards/stickers, there really won’t be an issue regarding replaying that same scenario again.

Other then that, if the campaign is truncated into 3 scenarios, and can be played in a GNK session (which is usually 3 rounds) with different players, then that by itself makes it far more accessible to players who don’t have the time/inclination for longer sessions vs the same player as what is currently the case for the TD campaign as a whole.

Wonder how viable would it be to make a proper PvE campaign with Netrunner. Probably easy as the Runner to randomize stuff, but Corp side has to be a lot weirder. Maybe turn it into puzzles where the runner has a fixed deck of actions and you win if you can block them from accessing a set number of turns?