[quote=“pj1, post:154, topic:7331”]
if the only winning condition is grinding through runners deck (twice when everyone plays Levy), then the games will take long.
[/quote]No good Museum deck has this win condition. I’ve won a Regionals with IG and every runner I killed was flatlined with plenty of deck remaining, they just had no way to draw enough cards. I never went to time (both games I lost also finished quickly).
I completely cannot understand why people are fine with corps taking shortcuts like “mandatory draw, take 3 creds, your turn” (where the runner actually has windows to act in between and may want to do so) but claim it is illegal to do “use two Museums, use two Tech Startups, shuffle when done with all of this” (where the runner has no way to do anything in between, let alone do anything where order of corp’s deck at this particular point matters).
but claim it is illegal to do “use two Museums, use two Tech Startups, shuffle when done with all of this” (where the runner has no way to do anything in between, let alone do anything where order or corp’s deck at this particular point matters).
I agree with you and have no problems with people doing this. However it nicely demonstrates how stupid the design of these cards is, because it is not practically possible to play it without violating the shuffling rules. And you cannot blame the opponent if he chooses to actually shuffle the deck after each trigger. Because he would be the one to actually follow the rules.
While this may be true, I think there is some danger in jokily suggesting this approach in the case of something that is primarily enforced by trusting your fellow Netrunners not to be wazzocks (which 99/100 aren’t, one of the main selling points of Netrunner!).
If people begin to start wondering at tournaments if it was just banter, if people really did intend to cheat or more subtly if people are just going to “let things slide” a bit on the self-policing side and convince themselves that it isn’t really cheating, then that can bring unnecessary negativity into the atmosphere regardless.
The same is true of most cards with important paid abilities (Utopia/Hades Shard for instance), and Spark. The game slows down to a drag if you a rigid in passing priority back and forth.
Well, this is not about passing priority. It is about mandatory shuffling after search, which is included in the tournament rules. So I think there is a clear distinction here.
I agree that for practical purposes we should all ignore this tournament rule. But it does bother me when card is designed which makes following this rule impossible. And it is also bothering me if IG players take ignoring this rule for granted. They should at least seek consent from the runner to perform their actions in this way.
Edit: As was discussed in another thread, shuffling after each MCH trigger can matter quite a lot, because the IG player might want to check the top 3 cards to see if he will use Heritage Committee or not. So based on this there definitely should be a proper shuffle at least after MCH triggers…
the thread is called Anti-IG strategy, although the goal of swiss is to maximize prestige. so really its maximize prestige strategy vs IG.
if its the first round vs IG in swiss play kamikaze to finish the game as quickly as possible one way or the other. that way you can at least finish your second game.
if its the second game that is vs IG and runner is not whiz, force them to respect every single game trigger - because a timed win may well be the best out.
seems good and totally within the rules, although perhaps not within the spirit.
[quote=“rojazu”]if its the second game that is vs IG and runner is not whiz, force them to respect every single game trigger - because a timed win may well be the best out.
seems good and totally within the rules, although perhaps not within the spirit.
[/quote]
Careful. You need to play at a reasonable pace. If you are a stickler for passing priority, that’s one thing, and I would expect you to equally do so with a minute left and a Fast Track in hand and and astro token waiting for your next turn to win.
If you don’t always insist on such precision, you have shown that you obviously see a “looser”, quicker play as entirely reasonable. In that case, against a non-scoring IG deck you would be insisting on a method of play that is slower than you yourself have indicated to be reasonable, purely to stall for time. That’s cheating.
Having just read the tournament rules, I think the only time you need to announce your IDs is too the chooser in the first round of double elimination.
As a Crim: you will be rich - IG will always give you plenty of places to use Sec Test/Desperado/Masanori. They will start slower (because they have to respect Siphon during first 2-3 turns). Desperado allows you to check all remotes, Inside Job helps flip Archives if they grow too big. I would concentrate on trashing Museums (before they can use them even once) and Hostile Infrastructure.
As a Shaper: use Net Shield, this buys you lots of time. Use your heavy R&D multiaccess during this time, poking other centrals enough to make them resign from storing agendas in HQ or Archives.
As a non-Whizzard Anarch: this is actually the hardest. If you’re Noise you can try heavy Imp recursion.
So this is a very well summarized and articulated strategy, thank you.
Do you also have some win / loss percentage numbers when using the approaches above?
My results with Shapers have been so far mixed, it can be a close win, but it can also be a quick flop if they get a great draw.
I would add Archives Interface with Noise. Imp makes you sigh; Archives Interface makes you cry. But then I’ve always rated it, and don’t see it as merely a “silver bullet” to recursive decks.
And Keyhole obviously remains particularly oppressive versus Jinteki in any Anarch hands. It’s the Anarch Film Critic: didn’t like your screenplay, so I burned down the studio.
I would have thought Lamprey helps Noise out a lot as it provides good hq pressure or forces a serious tempo loss. It was really annoying vs my pre-ethics IG.
I have seen ‘Lamprey Lock’ mentioned a few times but never seen it in action. What exactly is this? Getting 2-3 out all at once and being able to micro-siphon/vamp once or more per turn?
No, it’s generally 1 Lamprey. You catch the corp either with no ICE on HQ or a pretty weak ICE on HQ and catch them low on credits with no asset econ running, and you install Lamprey run hq run hq run hq. They’re forced to purge because if they click for 3 credits, you get to unclick the 3 credits while accessing cards from HQ at the same time. That’s nice on it’s own, but it’s at it’s best if you can De Ja Vu the lamprey and install it again once they click for 3 credits and start it over again.
Its called a lock because you’re keeping them so poor they can’t Celeb Gift or Hedge fund to bounce up, and keeping them so poor they can’t ICE HQ.
The strategy outlined of forcing 7 shuffles for every musuem is just enforcing the rules.
The camping unrezzed remotes other than MOH strategy is just implementating a strategy that will result in a timeout.
Asking for credits and cards is something I do every turn anyway.
A slight pause during accesses is normal given the fact that 90+% of the time you will be looking at a trashable asset. and only when you are looking at an operation is this at all weird.
Early LARLA is just a plan to get around a particular card
Planning ahead (11/12) don’t even require extra time, they just have important implications
13/14 are a little toungue in cheek way of reminding yourself that if you are in the finals vs IG you need to make sure you have no life because if you have a life netrunner needs to take priority over having a life. Also netrunner tournaments where the finals start at 2 AM and end at 5 AM suck.
none of the actual lines suggested were true “intentional stalling” they just combine to make one that leads to a timeout.
That’s what I’m concerned about. You’re aiming to win the game using an outside factor (the clock) rather than using one of the game’s win conditions: decking the corp or stealing 7 points.