Have there been any discussions about mulliganing a partial hand vs the current mulligan system?
I feel like being able to keep specific cards in your hand while mulliganing away the bad ones would be a good way to decrease variance and lower the odds of getting stuck with a truly abysmal opening hand.
Thoughts?
One issue with it off the top of my head may be andromeda getting owned by sweeps week. It’s not that terrible really though.
My concern is that this would tip the scales in favor of combo-oriented decks.
I think it would be much better than the current system.
Partial hand mulligans in Hearthstone are just amazing at giving everyone a more fair start to the game.
Yeah but…I dont give a damn. 
The benefits massively outweigh that cost.
Andromeda may get owned by Sweeps, but her mulligan would be amaaaazing.
I still vote that runners keep the same mulligan rules, but corp is allowed to look at their first mandatory draw before deciding to mulligan that hand or not. They would then skip their first mandatory draw step.
thats interesting idea.
anyway, none of the ideas here gonna happen. its fiction like homemade cards.
You’ve got a point. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would ever apply house rules to a card game.
Partial Mulligans can drastically reduce game variance. I’m in favor, but I don’t think they’ll change it.
I feel like the only way for something like this to gain any traction would be to run an event with the modified rule and do a write up about it afterwards so people can read about it.
But I think it might be worth investigating deeper, it would be really great for a game like netrunner.
Of course there would be some consequences, both sides would be prepared for the early game more consistently so the meta may shift. FA could assemble their combos easier for example, so the runner would have to make adjustments to take that into account. I don’t think it’s a bad thing though if it means you’d only deal with crap hands very rarely.
Partial mulligan (for Corp only) was a cool idea for fixing Runner-Corp imbalance, but it turns out that FFG’s designers were doing that already. I don’t think it’s necessary at this stage.
No. Just no.
going to have to say no, this feels like a solution in search of a problem.
this would do away with much of the opening and jump matches straight into a midgame.
part of the game and its challenge (and reward!) is playing out of bad situations such as a bad draw.
No. Just no. +1 There is nothing wrong with this game yet, nothing.
You clearly havent lost to the CI Accelerated Diagnostics 7 points in 1 turn deck yet have you?
That, plus the other BS combos, just mean that we need a restricted list of:
And hey presto problem solved :). But I’ve been saying this since Accelerated Diagnostics came out, so…
If that were the case, Accelerated Diagnostics wouldn’t be worth beans without Precognition. I’d rather that Power Shutdown couldn’t be used to trash all of R&D, but oh well, neither scenario will happen.
I’d certainly be in favor of errata explaining that “X cannot be greater than the cost of the item with the highest install cost currently installed in the runner’s rig” on Power Shutdown sure :).
You clearly havent lost to the CI Accelerated Diagnostics 7 points in 1 turn deck yet have you?
I’ve played against this a fair amount and have yet to lose against it. My impression is that it isn’t good enough to actually be a balance problem, though it’s certainly silly and uninteractive.
The old one or the new one? The old one was pretty unreliable. The new one sounds a lot more so (haven’t played with or against it yet, though) :).
Nope, I definitely haven’t lost to a double Accelerated Diagnostics, and probably won’t seeing as how it’s an extreme nut draw, and top deck at the same time. But I have scorched a runner on turn 2 for the win…but I am kinda amiss at what your are saying? Are you saying because someone can throw a full court shot in basketball and win at the buzzer makes basketball a bad sport? Except that this just happens to be the reverse because it happens right at the beginning. Cause if you lost to AD like say 1 out 5 games every time you played then yeah I would agree 100% that would be lame and broken. But making a deck that is a 3 (or more in this case) card combo that “needs” to win on turn one, is hardly meta-wrecking. I would build magic decks (60 cards) That would “specifically” try and win in the first 5 turns. Most of the time you know what would happen? 2-2 on an FNM. These things are just not that big of a deal to most. But there have been times back in MTG, like “Memory Jar”, which was probably the fastest card to get banned, where you could pull off a turn 1,2 or 3 turn kill like 75% of time. Is this what AD is doing? NOPE… I just see this game needing way more players, way more “fnm” style events, a few more years, and some top 8’s where 6 out of 8 decks have about 43 out of 45 (or 46 out of 49) cards EXACTLY the SAME. And what’s funny is even tho we only have a 408 card pool (excluding H&P) the decks still vary like crazy. Not to mention someone might play a certain corp but not play the same runner at other events. Yeah this game needs WAY more PLAY at least for a year if not two… my 2¢, oh and learn to cut! 