Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Almost everyone cares to complain about clan vengeance, eh?


#21

I think zer0 is a brilliant anarch card. I think Clan Vengeance is a bad idea that was only saved by the lack of repeatable self-damage in the game. Admittedly I don’t like cards that turn the game on its head: I think they tend to be either pointless or oppressive without an in-between. (Data Leak Reversal, Counter-surveillance etc). The new Weyland ID is in this frame as well. If there is a Clan Vengeance equivalent for Bad Publicity the ID will be oppressive.

It is far worse when this in the runner side. Netrunner is a game of attack against defence. If the runner doesn’t run then the game becomes tedious. Not so bad on the corp side due to the structure of the game.


#22

This! I really dislike cards that mess with these things. There shouldn’t be any ‘tag me’ deck archetypes. I mean, there’s a place for ‘high risk, high gain’ strategies, but you must be very sure that they actually are ‘high risk’. Take away the risk and you’re left with a broken game.


#23

Good points being brought up here. I’ll clarify a little on my original point about the trouble with having a cardpool containing both “self-damaging” cards (e.g. Zer0, God of War, Rogue Trading) and those that reverse negative effects (e.g. Clan Vengeance, Data Leak Reversal, Counter Surveillance), and summarize a couple of key points that were brought up.

  1. Mixing “negative effect as balancing mechanic” and “reverse a negative effect” in the pool isn’t necessarily impossible, it just seems to yield solitaire decks more often than other forms of synergy (e.g. stacking run-based effects), and is super hard to balance.
  2. @Crunchums pointed out that stuff gets really dicey when there are recurring sources of whatever the negative effect is (e.g. Zer0, God of War)
  3. As @CrushU pointed out, one red flag to watch for is when the effect goes from “beneficial to the runner” (e.g. Obelus, I’ve Had Worse) to “harmful to the corp” (e.g. DLR, CV).
  4. @deleriad further elaborated on this by mentioning that due to the attack v. defense nature of the game, cards that allow the runner to “attack” the corp through a method that doesn’t expose them directly to risk or requires the corp to have a different “defense” plan from that which works against other runners can be a problem.

Anyway, food for thought. I have had plenty of fun games with and against pre-errata WNP + DLR decks, but I think that the for the long-term post-EOL health of netrunner it’s good to look at what sorts of interactions tend to leave people salty and take them into account with any fan-run MWL, formats, or content.


#24

My only real issue with Clan Vengeance is that it can be triggered in any paid ability window which creates a lot of hassle during games (i.e. Corp player having to wait longer between draws to give the runner a chance to use CV or not).

If it had been worded as Click + Trash to use, or even if it just had a stipulation like Officer Frank where you have to have taken damage on the turn you use it, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad.


#25

Yah it’s one of those cards where you feel like Damon was playing Netrunner more as an immersive RPG with his wife than with strangers on Jnet who don’t speak the same language as you.


#26

I thought DLR was actually a pretty neat card, but it had the same sort of problems as Parasite: it was fine in the context of the card pool at the time but no good once other cards came out that dealt with its weaknesses.

Before pavilion and friends let people break DLR, I had a fun Andromeda mill deck that controlled the corp with siphon and vamp, and needed really careful play to keep the corp restrained. It was still Good Netrunner.


#27

I feel that CV would be much more fair, even in this meta, if it cost a click to use. My least favorite thing about it is

“Mandatory draw.”
“Wait, I have an action.”
“What…”
“Vengeance your hand.”
“…the hell.” /dead


#28

As someone who has played with Vendillion Clique in MtG Modern…
That feels normal to me.

Hand disruption has been rare in Netrunner, and (good) paid-ability hand disruption nearly non-existent. CV’s been around for six months, remember. Self-damage decks existed to take advantage of it upon its release, but the fundamental issue those decks have is that your cards are a very finite resource and Anarch didn’t have a good engine to draw more cards quickly. Zero fixes that problem while being a part of a self-damage deck, so slots are saved for other uses, and that’s why CV’s getting more play now.

I’m fairly certain that if CV cost a click to use it wouldn’t see as much play. Remember, one of the points of it is that it keeps the Corp from hitting with double-punitive or hurting you too badly since you’re already hurting yourself. Paid-Ability was meant as a way to sort-of work like Plascrete Carapace, while having uses outside of a kill-deck matchup.


#29

I can agree with a bit of what you said here. However, a major difference in Netrunner is that the Corp can just lose the game if they have agendas in hand when CV is popped. It does much more than just disrupt a possible incoming HHN or Punitive. I’d the runner has a good amount of money and the Corp can’t find a scoring window, usually the runner has to at least get into HQ and poke around. Now they just pitch CV on a run to archives, where they simply get to see everything, rather than have the chance element that HQ has. There’s no real way a Corp can adequately defend all 3 centrals and have a functional scoring remote, so this becomes a problem.

Zer0, I’d argue, is the real issue. I’m actually fine with the net damage part, and the once a turn out. My issue is that it draws you those cards that accelerate your game plan so you can draw into that remote lock faster so that the CV is now more likely to hit the agendas.

I’m sure I must have not to more to say in the subject, but I got like no sleep last night after Nats, so I keep falling sorry while typing =P


#30

Paid ability speed discard would be much more palatable if corps still had paid ability speed recursion but they don’t really.


#31

Like some kinda, I dunno just shooting from the hip here, let’s say a 0 Rez, maybe 3 trash asset that you can trash to shuffle, oh, maybe 3 cards from archives into R&D. Maybe it could have some secondary use as well, but that’s crazy, right?

Should probably be neutral.


#32

I think the card could probably be pretty well balanced by stipulating the effect can only be used in the next paid ability window after the runner has taken damage. While clunky, it allows for the use case of preventing double punitive, but also allows the runner to actively use it on their turn so long as they can manufacture damage. This would allow corps to play around it on their own turn.

It doesn’t drop the power level significantly, but does open up counter-play which is currently non-existent.


#33

While true, every Corp right now wants to score any agendas they draw. They can still suffer from flood, but it’s more common right now for CV to disrupt Operation combos, than to get Agendas. In this respect, CV is an anti-glacier card.


#34

Just waiting/expecting it to be ban.

It’s not fun, there is no interesting counter and it clearly wasn’t meant to exist next to Zer0. It’s just bad for the game right now.


#35

Although Clan Vengeance only really exploded with zer0 I think zer0 is a superb Anarch staple that should stay: it’s up there with cards like Liberated Accounts, I’ve Had Worse and so on that are the foundation for Anarchs. If however Zer0 started turning up in other factions as a staple, that would be a problem. Zer0 is also now a risk factor with any other card that takes advantage of the runner receiving damage.

Clan though will always explode the second that repeatable self-damage for a net positive effect occurs. It’s essentially two anarch effects jammed together which should not be jammed together.

  • Proactive HQ destruction (e.g. wanton destruction)
  • Indirect protection from corp damage: the corp has to one-shot flatline the runner or suffer a spite effect. (a sort of reverse IHW).
    Add to that the ability to lock HQ and massively complicate the interaction between runner and corp due to the sheer number of windows in which it can fire.

#36

PE, Breached Dome.


#37

This isn’t a counter at all. The runner may stop using Zero as frequently (or possibly ever), but would likely continue to use CV which still hurts the deck and makes an already mid-tier deck even worse. Further, these decks often run 1x Trope which further hurts the grinder style deck. Lastly, even if the runner just used all the Zero’s/CV’s as hit points they’re still likely to win.

Assuming you meant PU instead of PE, then you have a slightly better match up. Still CV is bad for you, and there was a reason people playing PU at worlds last year took Val. The deck is naturally resilient. Neither PU or PE though has a great shot. I’d wager most of the success of the PU at US Nats was against Crims. In good hands it still has a decent chance against Vals, but it’s hardly interesting counter play or even a true counter.


#38

An ID is hardly a reasonable counter, just a less lopsided possible match-up.

Although there are sort of things you can do to try to respond to it, it’s the worst kind of solitare and removes a lot of the interaction that makes the game sporting.

I’m honestly sort of surprised to hear that anyone would be in the pro-cv camp. Personally, to me this one seemed a pretty obvious case. I have people apologize after games on jnet when they use it and people who have quit matches as soon as they see cv played.

Incidentally, I’m more and more coming over to team #BanStinton as well. I used to think of him as powerful but fair but in the current meta, he tends to lead to some unsatisfying games. Also having to hoard 6-10 credits you should never really spend as runner leads to just more conservative/less exciting action.


#39

Kind of weird to see arguments about a card restricting future design space when there won’t be any new cards :frowning:

I liked the old pre zero clean vengeance decks, combo decks and even “solitaire” playstyles add a lot to the game when they don’t dominate the metagame. Just because the interaction isn’t as explicit as running against a piece of unrezzed ICE doesn’t mean interactivity doesn’t manifest in different and interesting ways.

I don’t see what’s wrong with restricting CV and zero in this case. Both cards have their place in fun and interesting decks, just arguably not together. If we’re eventually making new cards and want to ban CV or something later to make space for repeated self damage (not something I’m really keen to explore anyway but whatever) we can deal with that in an unofficial mwl then.


#40

Last time I checked, I approached 70% wr on jnet’s casual room with a slight variation/optimisation of an English PE that ranked high in their tournaments :slight_smile:
My current one would be the #1 I’d bring in a tournament today.

You’re talking about comboes. This is true, this one is strong. But what do you if you find only one piece of your 2 or 3 hit combo ?

What ice do you want to trash with PU against CV, hmm ?