I’m solidified as a fan now.
On an individual game level, sure. But you don’t end consistently in top4/8 in every tournament / league you play if you aren’t good.
Being good isn’t linked on individual win but on how consistent you are during a reasonably long period of time.
I will point to the old adage:
If you want to avoid luck, play chess.
I completely disagree that random chance in ANR means it is devoid of skill. Deck building and calculating probability to mitigate that randomness is part of the skill, and so is reacting to it. However, just like any other game with random elements, you’re still going to have freak situations where you lose or win out of nowhere just because. Either accept that or move on, but please don’t insinuate we’re all plebs for sticking with it.
That all said, Psi games are fucking bullshit. I’m with nuTella on that.
I’d rather lose on a psi game where I get to choose my bid than lose on an RND access that I statistically should win on.
I think any game need some level of randomness because if every game was finite, it wouldn’t be challenging and fun to play. I’m totally ok on winning / losing some games on random accesses. What you need to understand is that even if it happens, it doesn’t happen that often. Statistically on a large set of games, the random bullshit access only happen in a fraction of games. It’s not because you got a serie of bad experience that every game will end that badly. And even with bad luck, there’s still stuff to do, like drawing cards / clicking for credits, something you just can’t do in any other card games.
I’m not so sure randomness is required for an interesting game, one of my favourite games is Go. It’s challenging (the best people beat the best AI), it’s fun to play, and there are lots of interesting decisions.
That being said, I think the amount of randomness in Netrunner is very acceptable and I’m extremely happy with the amount and way it has been handled. I don’t think it detracts from the game in any meaningful way, and aids it somewha.
perhaps it’s because i only play on octgn, where the shuffling seems to be a bit dubious, but i very frequently lose games on rng situations where odds are in my favor. being able to mitigate your own draw is one of the best features of anr for sure, but it sucks to constantly lose on end game deep medium digs where odds are 60% or higher for you to win
Becouse on octgn there is a “true” random shuffle, when in real life most of us isn’t able to do a real random shuffle, most of the cards stay togheter becouse of the weird shamanic shuffle most of us do, when you really need 7 riffle shuffle to get a “true” random shuffle.
This thread is horribly off topic =(
Yeah I’m just waiting for Dan to split it TBH
MaxX doesn’t care though cause ya know MaxX Reasons
Even in chess and Go there are unknown factors / luck (thought much less… direct? than netrunner). Basically any game with a human component involves luck.
That being said, I think good plays make good luck. Good players notice lucky opportunities when presented with them, and can maximally take advantage of them. Bad players have the same amount of lucky opportunities, they just let them pass by.
It may not happen that often but I will remember every game it does… We will always remember the games we got “screwed” over the games we “lucksacked” into winning. I think this psychology reveals to a small degree of why some get burnt out on the game.
You have to focus on remembering the good with the bad or you shouldn’t play card games… there will always be randomness
It turns out you need something closer to 10 or 12 shuffles if you do the math and pick a reasonable definition for what it means to approximate a truly random shuffle.
I started playtesting levyless MaXx, after studying how many cards levy got me and determining that perhaps 0 levy would work. Now then Cutting levy has the following consquences.
- Deck size becomes a resource worth looking into more cards is better but not going overboard
- we still need to maintain quantities of the various cards intact.
- Certain cards that are often dead/very weak (Same old thing/Deja Vu) get cut from the deck.
- We have 3 extra influence.
The reason I’m trying 0 levy builds, was after studying the typical levy, I noticed that I would shuffle in anywhere from 20-30 cards each levy, but that I would only use 10-25 of those cards, Now then I would not go to 70 cards in the deck, but I wondered “How BAD is adding cards anyway?” It clearly is a significant cost, you are adding the worst card in your deck and diluting your deck but by how much and how painful? What I noticed was that as long as we only put in cards I will call cards that are good and maintain certain ratios, there is little issue with adding cards. The ratios to maintain are as follows
1/15 cards in the deck should tutor for ICEbreakers (and probably more)
~40% of the deck should be econ, good econ not armitage codebusting crap, This ended up being the Wall that prevented further expansion, thought the next limit also would have been hit soon.
1/20 of each ICEbreaker type and multiaccess card is needed, we would have run into this limit if there were 1 more econ card printed
Every card played must be good on its own.
The answer for now in terms of expansion limit is 60, though 65 might be next assuming we get 1 more good econ card for anarch (+1 retrival run +2 econ +2 Knifed) and anything beyond 65 should just play levy.
I playtested this deck quite a bit its preformance has been admirable (15-2) The secret is that with 60 cards, and an aggressive Maxx build, every game comes down to speed. In a typical levy build, you will have a power arch that is really strong right up until you levy, then levying costs you a lot of resources, then you recover your power arch. This deck’s power arch is a strong steady power until a sudden massive drop right around turn 18 where the deck ran out and now your remaining hand did as well.
I’m kinda burned out on netrunner, after playing a bunch with @mendax and having 0 interesting games.
This deck is strong, but it should be played as fast as humanly possible, just blitz blitz blitz and win ASAP, like mono red burn.
###[Red Deck Wins] (60 cards)
- [MaxX: Maximum Punk Rock]
- 3 [Day Job]
- 3 [Dirty Laundry]
- 3 [Inject]
- 2 [Lucky Find] ••••
- 3 [Queen’s Gambit]
- 2 [Retrieval Run]
- 2 [Spooned]
- 3 [Stimhack]
- 3 [Sure Gamble]
- 3 [Wanton Destruction]
- 3 [Clone Chip] ••••• •
- 3 [Grimoire]
- 3 [Daily Casts]
- 3 [Liberated Account]
- 1 [Utopia Shard] •
- 3 [Corroder]
- 3 [Mimic]
- 1 [Yog.0]
- 2 [ZU.13 Key Master] ••••
- 2 [D4v1d]
- 3 [Datasucker]
- 3 [Medium]
- 3 [Parasite]
Built with [http://netrunner.meteor.com/]
Noooooo, why would you do this to us?
You should maybe make a new thread called “Too many cards Maxx”
But seriously, that deck looks somewhat reasonable. I don’t know if it has the RP matchup regass does, though. Having to levy isn’t a very big deal there; you’re totally fine playing the long game and $5 to refresh your hand isn’t the worst thing in the world, not considering it will actually draw you about 12 cards. I almost always go to 0 card post-levy against RP, so it’s actually netting you a good deal extra over 60. Shooting for early aggression against RP can easily come up short.