With Museum now unique and MCH + Heritage Committee shuffling before the draw and place, you cannot control R&D with the kind of consistency that kept BioLock from losing on R&D. With 3 influence going to Mumba Temple you can’t just cram 3 Hive or 2 Hive + Elizabeth Mills + Executive Search Firm. These don’t kill BioLock altogether, but it makes it less consistent and less oppressive.
Meanwhile NEH has had lots of MWL piled on to try to keep it from being the dominant deck in almost every meta (not just Astroscript and SanSan, but Eli, Architect, and NAPD too). And it’s still the dominant deck in most metas. That’s clearly a problem.
Basically, there’s nothing wrong with IG, it’s a deck that makes you actively fight against it by giving you constant threats that don’t necessarily cost the Corp money up front. It’s a stark contrast to certain runners, like Leela, and Noise and decks like Iain and what Iain wants to do better in other factions. The fact that the perfect storm of cards made IG, an ID that’s been around for 2 cycles now oppressive, and not just viable, is unfortunate. But with all those adjustments to the game, it makes it so IG is perfectly manageable. I doubt we’ll see too much of it, and I bet we’ll see more net damage (and damage in general) in the future, so teching against this deck will be perfectly natural, instead of grating on your sensibilities as a gamer.
The game just needs to be a little more evenly paced in order to fully realize the contrasting dualities of the games fundamental asymmetric dynamic.
In other words, pretend rush and glacier are the extremes of deck building/style of netrunner, and IG being the ultimate glacier, and NBN being the ultimate rush deck. My opinion, but I feel they both got neatly trimmed
No, you’re missing several points. First your assertion that IG is still the biggest problem (if indeed it ever was). Part of the challenge of Runners is having a way to deal with both types of deck and a slow down on FA means they can put more into teching for IG type decks.
He didn’t do “diddly squat”, there were several impactful changes as listed above. Claiming he didn’t do anything because he’s in love with Jinteki is not only demonstrably false (he did do several things) you have no idea on the thought process behind it. Also note that NBN has been strong for years, we could argue because Lukas loved NBN so much I guess. Having another faction favoured it not a bad thing for a change.
We don’t know how the changes will pan out yet, there are more tournaments coming up and top players will try to take the most effective decks. That will no doubt inform some of the state of post-MWL meta - your assertion based on gut feel is nothing more than your uninformed opinion. Which you’re entitled to, don’t get me wrong, but stating so strongly what the strongest deck is and was has the potential to come back and bite you.
IG wasn’t that big a problem in the UK - it got several people into top cuts, but didn’t have the capacity to win largely due to the “score one agenda as runner and fanny around” strat that proved effective time and again. Also at Expo, the largest Regional, Whizzard (regarded the top Runner at the time) consistently crushed IG.
Trying to claim IG is the biggest problem in the game without any time to see what changes the new data pack(s) and rules make is a bit silly. IMHO / YMMV / etc
I think the fact that Technical Writer didn’t make this MWL, shows that they have no clue what they are doing. I’d say the incoming shaper dominance will show that that card needed to be on the list.
Yeah, I’m recommending bye gives 5pts and +3 Sos, instead of 6pts and +0 SoS.
The consequencies of this are all explained and I think this would work very well for everyone (but “bye win id id” players : byers, unlucky guys vs byers, non byers playing this tournament and FFG).
He’s talking about the change in chained effects which, I’m guessing, you don’t know about. There’s now an exception where search and shuffle is atomic, which makes the MCH+Heritage interaction much less strong. Basically when you search for Heritage, you shuffle before resolving the operation. Big change, makes the decks abusing that much weaker.
How does that make it significantly less powerful? Sorry if I’m not following, but that seems almost stronger, because you can control what is on top of Rnd.
You can’t abuse it by looking at the top cards during the search process, before you decide whether to use Heritage Committee, or Consulting Visit -> Power Shutdown, or whatever other potential target that has some effect that depends on the deck positions.
The new rules on searches makes the shuffle after searching a part of resolving the search, as opposed to the way it’s been where the shuffle is resolved separately of searching for a card. Before you would search with MCH, look at the top 3 cards of R&D and decide whether you wanted to draw them with Heritage. If you did, you would search for Heritage and resolve it, drawing the three cards and placing one from HQ at the top of R&D. After resolving Heritage you would finish resolving MCH, which makes you shuffle, shuffling in the card that should have been left on top.
Now you search for the card you want and shuffle before resolving anything else, meaning you can no longer scout for the cards you want to draw with Heritage before committing to it and you have to leave a card on top instead of getting in shuffled into R&D. Leaving a card on top is very important because that means you can’t just shuffle your agendas into R&D where they’re less likely to be on top than they are likely to be accessed in HQ.
The old way gave you enormous control over R&D, which was a major factor in making BioLock the oppressive deck we love to hate. If it had to play fair with drawing from Heritage and didn’t have that extra tool for hiding agendas away in R&D it’s much more likely to lose on simple R&D access. Tack on the reduced power of MoH to keep Heritage in R&D while also keeping it well composed and you’ve made for a subtle but impactful change to the deck.
You just add another rule that says “you can play two Astros in a tournament if your deck is only made of core set cards”
There was a similar fix in Magic where a pre constructed deck had a banned card in it. You were allowed to play that deck as long as you made no changes to it.
I personally don’t think bye sweep id id id is any different from sweep sweep id id id when it comes to being a problem. I think if you have an issue with byes, removing byes from the system is a much better solution than this.
I agree that IDs are a problem and that byes are too frequently rewarded or maybe should not exist at all though. When 20-25% of your event used a bye… there is a problem. This happened at a regional in the PNW if iirc. I really think the fact that they pass down to 2,3, even 4th place and that store champs are so frequent leads to this issue of too many byes.
There are much better solutions than the one you are proposing though, I don’t think that solution works for everyone like your suggesting. what your suggesting basically makes it so byes go unused, randomly getting the bye is the worst thing that could ever happen and actually does nothing to solve IDs since you can easily ID under the current system without needing a bye first round. I IDd twice in vancouver for instance… didn’t use a bye. I only IDd once in Portland but that was because I was paired down round 4, would have been able to do it there as well(without a bye again)
ID are unsolvable : if you touch this, players would still agree and corp players would be playing saying “OH I WONDER IF THERE IS AN AGENDA IN THAT REMOTE ??? OH YOU FOUND IT, YOU ARE REALLY A CLEVER BOY !!”
You can’t nerf it, you can’t limit ID to 1 per competition, you really can’t do anything about it
But, in the “bye win id id” sequence, you still need to nerf something or it’ll be a standard. I’m eager to see what happens at worlds by the way.
In that sequence, I don’t like those guys playing ranked middle of top. They are playing between themselves, avoiding top player #1 (15s vs 24s and 18s between themselves).
Those guys should have at least a problem in tops, no ?
I’ve got a problems with byes, yes. I know at least 2 players that are friends to game shops and buy tournament kits for themselves I don’t really know how many byes are sold on the blackmarket but this happens.
So, since you can buy one @a small shop in the middle of nowhere to automaticly access tops of a big tournament if you win one game, I think byes should be changed.
