Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Anybody interested in having a look at my decks for an upcoming tournament?


#1

Title basically says it all. I have a tournament on Saturday (my first so far, yay) and if anybody would like to chime in and help a bit that would be great.

Some notes before the decklists:
I have the whole Genesis Cycle, but only one CoreSet so that limits things a little (even more so since I am used to playing on OCTGN…)

If you encounter something that is slightly weird, that probably is intentional, because it is no regional yet and I want to experiment under “real” situations.

On to the decks:

That Chaos Theory is somewhat inspired by this list:
http://forum.stimhack.com/t/schaumburg-illinois-regionals-1st-place-decklists/?source_topic_id=166

The plan for the early game is to get a breaker down and snag some points with Tinkering + Indexing for example while pressuring the remotes with Inside Job.
In the late game you start pressuring HQ by dropping HQ Interface on Personal Workshop.
When the corp then guards HQ more (because they can’t safely score in their remote), you drop Test Run into Sneakdoor and clear the corps hand.
Sounds good against a couple of decks

This changes against dedicated Fast Advance decks, here you want to apply more pressure on R&D which your Femmes should focus on. Hopefully Maker’s Eye and Indexing get the job done with Indexing, but I have good faith in those cards

The Weyland deck is a rush deck mostly inspired by this list:

The goal (obviously) is to rush to 3-pointers for the win (Hostile Takeover takes care of that). So you have plenty of early game Ice plus Oversight AI into Archer/Hadrian’s

Here I run a mixture of cards that I want to test. For example the 2x Executive Retreat may or may not work as advertised. That’s also the reason for 2x Draco, 2x Shadow, 2x Caduceus instead of two 3x.

Any kind people willing to feedback?

Identity:
Chaos Theory: Wunderkind (Cyber Exodus)

Total Cards: (40)
Event (22)
Inside Job (Core #21) x2 ■■■
Diesel (Core #34) x3
Indexing (Future Proof #106) x3
Infiltration (Core #49) x1
Quality Time (Humanity’s Shadow #87) x2
Sure Gamble (Core #50) x3
Test Run (Cyber Exodus #47) x3
The Maker’s Eye (Core #36) x2
Tinkering (Core #37) x3

Hardware (4)
HQ Interface (Humanity’s Shadow #85) x2 ■■
The Personal Touch (Core #40) x2

Program (8)
Femme Fatale (Core #26) x2 ■
Sneakdoor Beta (Core #28) x1 ■■■
Crypsis (Core #51) x1
Gordian Blade (Core #43) x2
Snowball (Trace Amount #27) x2

Resource (6)
Kati Jones (Humanity’s Shadow #91) x3
Personal Workshop (Cyber Exodus #49) x3

Identity:
Weyland Consortium: Building a Better World (Core)

Total Cards: (49)
Agenda (9)
Executive Retreat (Trace Amount #39) x2
Government Contracts (A Study in Static #77) x2
Hostile Takeover (Core #94) x3
Priority Requisition (Core #106) x2

Asset (0)
ICE (21)
Archer (Core #101) x2
Caduceus (What Lies Ahead #19) x2
Chimera (Cyber Exodus #60) x2
Draco (What Lies Ahead #20) x2
Enigma (Core #111) x3
Hadrian’s Wall (Core #102) x2
Ice Wall (Core #103) x3
Shadow (Core #104) x2
Wall of Static (Core #113) x3

Operation (15)
Green Level Clearance (A Study in Static #70) x3 ■
Archived Memories (Core #58) x2 ■■
Closed Accounts (Core #84) x1 ■
Beanstalk Royalties (Core #98) x3
Hedge Fund (Core #110) x3
Oversight AI (A Study in Static #79) x3

Upgrade (4)
Ash 2X3ZB9CY (What Lies Ahead #13) x3 ■■
Corporate Troubleshooter (Core #65) x1 ■


#2

Hey sir, I was to at the regional where ct took first, and your list is way better than his. To be completely honest, I discovered after the event that he’d been using a deck with 16 influence (he counted his sneakdoor as 2 influence and played 2 inside jobs and 2 hqis) and I submitted the list that he gave me when confronted about it.

So I was struggling to deck check everything by myself, and this is one that slipped past me.

Anyway, my shame knows no bounds, but what I was getting at is, your decks influence is almost what he played and did well with.


#3

lol, 16 influence, nice oversight :wink:

Can you attest to the use of HQ Interface? They seem to be the most odd choice here, especially since they don’t really help in a Fast Advance meta. I wonder whether I should play Corroder instead


#4

The link to the first deck is not working properly for me. Did I mess up the forum formatting?


#5

I felt like Snowball set me back really far, and prevented me from being able to run aggressively, so I switched out of Snowball into Corroder in my CT deck. It kind of sucked, bc I liked having another Stimhack and Inside Job, but I think it was the correct move for me. I kind of think RDI will do you more good than HQI, tbh.


#6

I agree that snowball sucks, and @Sirprim I can’t attest to HQI, I think I’d rather have RDI if I was only going to play 1 of the interfaces.

In a fast advance meta hq access are still great though, you see if they have a biotic labor then you automatically know to hit R&D, and when their hand is stocking agendas because they are waiting for a FA trick, then HQI is clearly great.

Again, it’s not better than RDI, and I think you should play that also/instead.


#7

I wonder what people think about Magnum Opus in such a deck? I think CT is the only ID that can use Magnum Opus to any meaningful degree because of her memory. But I would never Test Run for it (unless desperate). I feel the “best” place for Magnum Opus is actually on the Personal Workshop, so you don’t lose too much tempo. But Opus + RDI should give me a reasonable late game


#8

I also think the right move is to make HQ interface into R&D Interface while using the influence savings to get Corroder.

@Sirprim The link seems to work fine for me.


#9

Ok, deck update time:

I made the recommended changes and removed some small redundancies (mostly the third Test Run and Kati). Additionally to Corroder and RDI I added 2 Magnum Opus (as I said I think CT is the only ID to pull it off) and 2 New Angeles City Hall.

Especially the NACH should complement the deck nicely as I try to get some agendas early via all those tricks (Makers Eye, Tinkering, Inside Job, Test Run + Femme etc.), then drop the NACH going into late game protecting my resources and shutting down Tag’N’Bag at the same time. The downside should be minimal then…

Identity:
Chaos Theory: Wunderkind (Cyber Exodus)

Total Cards: (40)
Event (19)
Inside Job (Core #21) x2 ■■■
Diesel (Core #34) x3
Indexing (Future Proof #106) x2
Quality Time (Humanity’s Shadow #87) x2
Sure Gamble (Core #50) x3
Test Run (Cyber Exodus #47) x2
The Maker’s Eye (Core #36) x2
Tinkering (Core #37) x3

Hardware (4)
The Personal Touch (Core #40) x2
R&D Interface (Future Proof #107) x2

Program (10)
Femme Fatale (Core #26) x2 ■
Sneakdoor Beta (Core #28) x1 ■■■
Crypsis (Core #51) x1
Gordian Blade (Core #43) x2
Corroder (Core #7) x2 ■■
Magnum Opus (Core #44) x2

Resource (7)
Kati Jones (Humanity’s Shadow #91) x2
Personal Workshop (Cyber Exodus #49) x3
New Angeles City Hall (Future Proof #109) x2

For all who only wonder about the differences:

  • -2 HQ Interface
  • +2 R&D Interface
  • -2 Snowball
  • +2 Corroder
  • -1 Indexing
  • -1 Infiltration
  • -1 Kati Jones
  • -1 Test Run
  • +2 Magnum Opus
  • +2 New Angeles City Hall

#10

I like R&D interface and corroder better here, and yeah, if you’re going to play MO, Workshop Chaos is the way to go.

With MO in mind for late game sustenance, why bother with NACH at all? I think I’d prefer Plascrete, assuming that players in your area are as ZOMG A RUNNER NUKE IT FROM ORBIT as players in my area are :). You don’t have very many late-game resources to protect at all, and the last thing you want is to grab a midgame breaking news, lose NACH, and then hear the dread dialing noises of the SEA Source.


#11

Hmmm, here is the thing about Plascrete: I think it is one of the most overrated cards at the moment. In fact I have never played any Plascrete in my decks so far and I get flatlined pretty rarely. And I usually play Weyland as the corp of choice (and so far it was Tag’N’Bag - didn’t felt right now with one Core Set) and I am much more scared of NACH than Plascrete.
Maybe it is just me, but NACH has a lower initial cost and has a much broader use.

edit: And Indexing makes using NACH much safer


#12

its not unheard of for tagnbag to play MSR. You aren’t considering nbn scorch decks that will be there en masse as well. Playing NACH to stop a scorched earth is the magic the gathering equivalent of playing your counterspell on their demonic tutor. You stopped it for a turn, but the threat remains, and you had a card slot you could have used to eliminate the threat instead of stalling it.


#13

So I took this basic Weyland deck to league play for a season 2 kit tonight :). Did quite well overall, though I have to say I wasn’t a huge fan of this deck, at least vs. my meta of hyper-aggressive Chaos Theories and Criminals. It was great to see everyone playing cautiously around tags even though there’s no tag punishment. The tradeoff is that you yourself have to remain patient and flush with cash for Ash.

It went 50/50, and boy were those wins tense. I lost one game due to sheer luck: Andromeda topdecked a Gov’t Contracts off R&D turn 1, then bankrupted themselves on a hail mary into HQ for a PriRec. Down 0-6 by turn two :(. I also didn’t like that there were so many turns that I had nothing to do other than econ, but I favor highly aggressive strategies.

I can see this deck absolutely crushing conventional shaper and most anarch play, but with a limited sample size I think it is higher variance than any of my NBN builds, and for my money I like my Weyland FA fork deck better, if I’m going to play Weyland. I’d give it a B. YMMV.


#14

In my opinion I can’t tech against everything. And I am simply not scared of NBN Scorch decks. Why? Because they spend their money on Scorched Earth, which means I will likely be richer than them, that is all protection I need against MSR. Then there is Indexing allowing me to avoid some pitfall. And NACH can protect Kati Jones et al against Breaking News for example.

Maybe this has to do with playing Scorched Earth decks on the corp side, but I feel like I can navigate them without Plascrete well enough


#15

Thanks you for testing the deck. As far as meta goes, I think we’ll see a slight shift away from Criminals as the new tournament structure rewards 7-6 wins the same as 7-0 (and it might be possible that we just play 4 rounds of swiss with no cut).

P.S.: When the runner hits 2 agendas on 2 accesses, that’s bad for any corp and nothing you can do about it


#16

np. I won a bunch of early league nights and made the BGG OCTGN tourney finals with a Weyland deck, so it’s about time I gave some new Weyland a try :).

I definitely favor a more aggressive/active corp style, and I #$%&$ hate variance, so I strive to minimize variability like 2 random accesses pulling 6 points :). If you can handle the variability and the patient play, it’s probably better than my assessment of “B”.

I don’t foresee much of a drop in aggro criminal/CT play, but that’s my group and untested assessment of C&C without playtest ;).


#17

Were you Orange Devil by any chance? Or am I missing something?

back on topic: Guess I’m a patient guy (I’m drawn to Shaper, can you tell :wink:)

Also I don’t really think that Criminals will drop big, just that with a fresh set of tournament rules allowing slower decks to shine and soon 55 shiny new cards, people will start experimenting at first. Which likely means less Criminals for a while. But anyway this is just a guess.


#18

Alas, no, I’m not that good :).

I meant I made the cut to the finals bracket, not the final match–I should proofread before posting at 2:30am.


#19

so would you rather have feedback filter then? given that your combo defense is a resource, I don’t see it keeping you alive for more than 1 turn. Versus jinteki it’s great, but I’d be concerned about more scorches since theres that hb id with 7 extra influence people seem to like.

edit: I know you wont have c&c for this event, but if you did.


#20

No worries, it is probably a misunderstanding on my part. You said finalS which includes all final rounds I presume (I’m a non-native speaker)