Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Ban vs restricted philosophy


You would like a runner econ card that never runs out and gives the runner tons of money?


Or Daily Casts. The attack on resilient Runner econ is interesting to me. I didn’t see it coming, and Boggs’s team has obviously put a lot of thought into it. I never felt that Kati Jones ruined games, and I never thought Prepaid Kate was a problem.

Dirty corps become much more effective without any kind of robust runner econ like the simple, elegant efficiency of Prepaid Kate. Hard Hitting News especially, a card I don’t enjoy playing around. “Run early, run often” now becomes “Don’t run until you have your (now clunky) econ set up and and credit parity with the corp.” Doesn’t have the same ring to it.


I like Guster a lot too.


Haha, maybe my runner econ outlook is just salty because I hate getting Punitive Pizza-Deliveried and I ALSO hate playing Film Critic.

That said, I feel like Corps have more “outs” in general than Runners, so when Runners were more economically dominant due to Temujin Contract, I never as a Corp really felt completely locked out of the game. Nowadays, I find myself in a lot of tight spots as the Runner where I can’t cope with the amount of clicks, credits, and punishment avoidance required to steal an agenda.


Not tons, but enough to be worth playing. Kati Jones is the card I miss the most out of what has been rotated.


I think game designers will first favour printing answers as cards, then restriction, then ban. For every card that someone might find un-fun/oppressive, there is a group of people that absolutely love it and may just quit the game because it’s been removed. Just look at how upset a lot of the top players were at the rotation of Parasite and Account Siphon. (Personally I loved Siphon, but agree it was a little too strong to be included in a Core product.)

This is not to say that ANR had been handled well in the past. Just looking at the ‘answers’ printed (Film Critic, Employee Strike, Rumor Mill) we can all agree are horrendously designed. The communication from OP regarding when MWL updates may happen also is an obvious sore point for players.

I’m very optimistic with Boggs at the helm though. He genuinely understands what the vast majority of the players like about the game and seems to make good decisions regarding how to move the game in that direction. I’m very excited about the upcoming cycle and am looking forward to see what he has cooked up for us.


<For every card that someone might find un-fun/oppressive, there is a group of people that absolutely love it and may just quit the game because it’s been removed.>

Show me that community for Museum of History. :wink:

Sidenote though, I think the kind of players who talk about quitting the game over every minor switch to the MWL are the ones who are most addicted and could never quit if they wanted to.


I’m going to be that guy and say that I’ve always enjoyed playing with/against prison decks. Even when IG was dominating the meta and essentially had favorable matchups against every runner deck, I always thought about it like playing a really difficult boss battle in a videogame.

One of my favorite interactions in the history of Netrunner was using Mumbad City Hall to Consulting Visit an Operation, and then shuffling back the Consulting Visit with Museum the following turn. I actually really enjoy the way that combining tutors and recursion allows you as the corporation to play a highly consistent deck. Obviously, this combination of cards was above the power curve, and reasonably, was hit with the MWL, but I honestly miss the sheer volume of decisions that this sort of combo left to the player.


Just stop with your reasons, even if they make a little sense…


I have been thinking about the possibility of replacing the ban/restricted list for Standard with just a ban list - I made a video to share my thoughts