Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Museum of Contempt

Museum of history is great not only in ig, i m playing in rp With Mumba and Hostile and is also great. And more Fast than ig decks. 54 decks for Corp has weakness but also you have more space for tools can give you games (a Current for example), better agenda density and protection from noise. I had experience in jinteki decks that wins a lot more With 54 than 49

Museum is really busted against decks that don’t have asset hate (Imp, Whizzard, Sec Testing). If they have those things it’s pretty blank (especially vs Whizzard).

Horizontal decks take a lot of experience to learn how to beat. 90%+ of the online player-base misplays against them horribly.

Museum is a totally fine and cool card. It’s definitely not too strong.

All of the Museum decks people play actually lean on some OTHER card that they are hoping the runner cannot interact with (Astroscript, Mushin No Shin, Tour Guide etc.). If the runner can deal with those cards (Medium+turntable, Vamp, Switchblade/Parasite Spam respectively). Then all of your museum nonsense gets you nowhere, since your endgame is trumped by the runner’s anyway.


Next Month is Cyberfeeder!

1 Like

Asset spam in general is strong right now because criminals with desperado and sec testing are rare. MWL Keeping desperado out of whizzard and Val’s dirty anarch hands is also huge. Museum alone doesn’t bother me but museum on top of Jackson’s recursion and DBS is disgusting.


in response to the having mumba and museum in same deck being bad, the mumbas help to be able to Rez all the stuff that you’re continuously recurring. relying on all real credits would mean you’re spending so much Rezzing assets over and over that you can’t Rez ice too.

1 Like

in my limited experience against this card it hasn’t really been an issue, as long as you have a reliable way of dealing with “problem” assets without breaking the bank. I know I trashed museums and dbses against an NEH deck that was going horizontal, and desperado + sec test made that pretty easy. After that it was pretty easy to find agendas in hand and R&D when they weren’t trying to sneak one out on me

I play a lot of gagarin and it steamrolls noobs but good players have cottoned onto it. Trash the museums, dbs and jacksons on sight, an early mumba is okay to trash too but sooner or later you must cede the economic advantage or you will fall behind too much in your own board state, save parasites for tour guides, poke hq especially in the early game they tend to be a bit poor and havent had chance to clean hq yet, win off rnd. If you are whizzard or val with scrubber, or a sec testing desperado criminal you can also lock them down economically too. It is a war of attrition usually for both sides.


In before Kate Cyberfeeder MWLing

So basically, the card is strong in decks designed around it, but can’t just be put in any deck. Yeah, that’s what I figured. I’d like to see someone being an IG deck to a tournament and place highly with it. People can concede games, and it might be more reasonable to take these kinds of decks to tournaments cause people would want to play both sides, and might be more open to conceding a clearly losing game. Or maybe there’s a strategy around playing Corp as much as possible. I don’t know, I go into tournaments with a “you can win if you’re more perfect than everyone else so do it” attitude.

Care to elaborate? I’m sure I’m a lot of these mistakes. I don’t play the archetype very often but when I do it feel like a right pain in my ass. “Trash MOH and nothing else” is basically the plan.

I personally feel like people just choose bad times to trash it. I’m not even sure myself how to play against it really. @TheBigBoy please enlighten us

Yesterday I had a bad time playing a lot of museum decks. I had trashed a bunch early, but eventually stopped and only trashed SSCG. After 35 minutes, I told my opponent:
R: you have 3 minutes to finish this game, after 3 minutes I’m leaving to do something else
C: lol… is this how you win in tournaments?
R: no, in a tournament we’d have time called by now and I’d get a timed win, since I’m leading 6-5

Next turn he installed, I stole, and left… to play another 30 minute museum game against this stupid museum. I really with people in competitive would play decks/playstyle like they are actually in a tournament instead of dragging games out forever to set up 11 of their 15 ICE onto a single server to make it ‘safe’ to score out of.

I get why people put it in, but it’s asking to lose against medium digs from wizz or dying to apocalypse. 14 ice isn’t enough in 54 cards to protect your shit

I’m one of the guys who is so fascinated by Museum - extra time! Recurring cards! Attrition for the Runner! It’s a wonderland for Corps, purgatory for Runners.

I’ve stopped slotting them in. I feel like the zeal for this card will die down quickly enough as people realize it’s actually not beneficial to the corp save a few fringe applications. There are tons of things I could be doing instead, like winning games in a timely fashion.

If the Corp has four ICE in total to protect their centrals, what stops you going and getting the agendas where they are rather than waiting for them to put them in a remote? It doesn’t sound at all like the problem is a non-interactive Corp game plan.

If the Corp is planning for a recursive gameplan, then to an extent they ought to be playing “hide the agendas” and employing tactics to reduce the chance of steals. If the Runner is hunting in the right places, all this means is they take a few more accesses to win, hopefully for the Corp those few extra accesses make all the difference in winning themselves!

So if you as the Runner weren’t getting agendas (albeit a little more slowly than if the Corp wasn’t trying to skew your chances so much), then it seems that either you are looking in the wrong places (can’t blame the Corp there!) or something else is at play beyond Museum of History.

Where do you go looking for agendas? Playing as the Corp with access to somewhat reliable recursion, I would say that one big bonus is that you can change the usual rules in where the agendas cluster in central servers. Like with a “shell game” Jinteki in reading your opponent and playing to your opponent’s weakness in overconfidence/reticence, you can react to the Runner’s attacks in where you stash agendas. If you aren’t finding any agendas as the Runner despite repeated accesses, maybe try hitting the centrals more equally and keeping the Corp honest (even if your initial game plan was R&D focus, or HQ lock, or whatever)?

I was playing Geist, breakers are great to get in, but after half of the points in the game are scored, the agenda density in centrals is too low to keep going after them. Playing against NEXT ICE post-Levy, running the centrals would beef his ICE out of range for me to challenge the scoring remote when he installed there, if I didn’t hit the agenda.

Normally I’d say hitting the centrals repeatedly would work, but my deck was built to win on a limited pool of resources with limited recursion. Sure, I could roll the dice, but if I miss then it would create a scoring window. If this had been a tournament, I could wait for the timed win or wait for him to install and win by stealing out of his remote. If I run, miss the agenda and open a scoring window, then the corp wins, so why waste my resources on a lower expected value option?

14 ice is plenty in a 54 gaga deck because you have 3 DBS to select what you need when you need it, 3 museums to recur back destroyed or milled ice, and the tour guides are nearly impossible to break repeatedly unless you have a silver bullet (parasite, shrike, switchblade). in addition the DBS/museums are massively thinning the density at the top/in the deck respectively, which is really the core benefit of the combo. the deck is much weaker than most in the early game, but once stabilized it locks the game out like not many others. of course, these items are what you need to go for if you want to beat this deck (see comment above).

That makes a lot of sense.

It sounds as if the problem, if you want to define it as such, is with your Geist deck. There’s nothing wrong with playing an explosive, but limited, Runner deck. But if you don’t win in your finite number of accesses, you lose. That’s a condition set up by your own deck choice, nothing to do with the Corp at all!


I would like to point out that the corp had nothing to keep me out of their scoring server. He had no way to win, just a long experiment in wasting time.

What was the flaw with my deck that the corp deck didn’t share? It was a situation where he could not score or win. I was ahead on points, and ok with a ‘timed win’ given the circumstances.

According to your description, you were in a situation in which neither of you could win! The stalemate arose because either of you acting (the Corp in installing an agenda; the Runner in running centrals to look for agendas) would be detrimental to themselves. It was in neither player’s best interest to act.

This situation arose due to both of your deckbuilding choices: the Runner in not choosing to play enough permanent resources to sustain access (in which case they would have been able to make those central runs and win) and the Corp in not including a way to close out the game (proactive damage would do it, or trap shell game, or fast advance).

I don’t think you can blame one deck for the the stalemate without equally blaming the other!

(Presumably the Corp had only 4+ agendas? Any kind of 3 advancement agendas and they would have had a natural win condition in the deck. Simply keep installing assets/upgrades in the scoring remote, overwriting the previous one. The Runner either runs, exhausting their limited resources, or lets it go. The Corp can keep re-installing assets all day, and the one time it’s the agenda they win. Not “nailed on”, but highly in the Corp’s favour.)

1 Like