that makes sense - cheers
in fact Sinclair + Patron becomes the shaper wyldcakes.
1 Like
Yeah, a wyldcakes that relies on you having an easy server to run. As Lttl said above (right above a post you made, no less), it’s a bad version of wyldcakes.
Just add Doppleganger!
1 Like
I think that is a little harsh. Mostly because I feel patron fills a different niche than a pure card draw engine like wyldcakes. First of all being 1 card and 3 cost it compares favorably to the traditional earthrise hotel in shaper decks. It forces icing on archives which is rare against shaper, is a form of click compression that is very likely to pay dividends, and is synergistic with a number of normal shaper strategies.
Now if it is part of an engine to power a shaper faust rig that is comparable to the anarch builds is an open question.
1 Like
It can be good in a deck that runs datasucker because even if CVS is in archives you can still farm some tokens.
Niche, but with Brahman I imagine people would want to use sucker rather than boosting.
I plan to make a bad pub Nasir deck with patron that can use the bad pub to pay down stuff on the workshop while I make my patron runs.
I was not aware this was a thing. I usually use x3 Diesel and x1-2 Quality Time.
1 Like
Well maybe traditional is a strong word, and might be dated by the change in the meta.
However I still see it a lot in Hayley builds, at least until recent consensus that QT was better. It was also in kate decks quite a bit not that long ago. It has fallen out of favor lately but even looking back it was used in 15% of shaper decks according to knowthemeta. So people still feel that there is a need for non-event draw, even if procons seems to be the favorite at this time.
By itself it was 1 card, I wasn’t saying it was bad on its own. I was considering it in a Sunny deck comboing it with Jak Sinclair, which is now 2 cards just like Adjusted Chronotype + Wyldside (Jak plays the role of the Chronotype, allowing you to draw those two cards without spending a click to run). Jak is 2-3 credits cheaper than the chronotype and can also allow you to grab datasucker tokens / masanori draw while you patron, but it means that you have to pay influence either for Jak if you’re Shaper or for Patron if you’re Sunny (plus the requirement to get into a server, which means you’ll need security nexus if every server is iced).
I did a search and couldn’t find patron. So I thought it was some jargon like Pancakes.
Is edge of world + merger gonna be a thing?
Explain plz.
I can’t see any reason it would combo with any card, ignoring Punitive.
If almost all of your agendas can be scored without advancing them on a previous turn, the runner will never know if it’s a good idea to run at unadvanced cards behind ice or not
1 Like
The thing is, every faction can play the never advance game if they want, they all have a 3/2, and there are enough neutral 3/1’s so all factions can do it if they want. The reason Edge of World is not good is not because of the lack of never advance targets, but the lack of Edge of World being a good card.
4 Likes
This is the best answer to explain why certain cards are bad.
1 Like
If you are using 3/1s, the runner can often just let them go.
Similarly if you’re using a mix of 3/2s and other agendas, the runner can take a chance on some of them not being 3/2s and wait for you to advance before running (or see the 3/2s scored/stolen earlier).
The more 3/2s you have, the better the strategy becomes.
1 Like
Except Merger. =P It’s going to take one hell of a deck to make that a good idea.
3 Likes
True, you lose the benefit of 10x2point being that the runner needs to steal 4 to win. Though you could do the same deal for yourself by playing “clones are not people” (how’s that for a mind game when you install edge of world in a server?) You can have a fast advance backup plan with trick of light, and run this out of Palana foods so you can afford to pay for everything.
1 Like
Merger is the anti GFI. You pay 1 influence and create the chance for the runner to need one agenda less than you instead of one agenda more. Considering how huge a boon GFI is (enough to become a stable in many decks despite costing influence), it should be clear how harsh a penalty the negative effect of Merger is.
The only deck that would consider Merger at all would be a 100% never advance (or fast advance) deck. For example HB with 3xABT, 3xPV, 3xMerger, 2x3/1. In that deck you are guaranteed to need 4 agendas scored. While the runner, assuming each agenda is equal likely to be stolen, has a 0.36565… chance of only needing 3. (And a 0.04545… chance to need 5.) That’s really really bad.
1 Like
[quote=“Alakallanar, post:2213, topic:4340”]
The only deck that would consider Merger at all would be a 100% never advance (or fast advance) deck.
[/quote]That’s stating the obvious.
People have been playing atlas, Vitruvius, braintrust, beale, and ABT for years with no intention of getting anything out of them. Having an advancement requirement of 3 is a massive benefit to counteract the massive drawback.