Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

New deck testing: NBN: TWiY

Hi guys,
I am a return player and I had a lot of success with my NBN-FA deck, but now im trying a new build with the new NBN TWiY identity. Here’s my decklist below

NBN: The World Is Yours

Agenda (12)

3 AstroScript Pilot Program
3 Breaking News
3 False Lead
3 Project Beale

Asset (3)

3 Marked Accounts

Operation (10)

2 Anonymous Tip
2 Closed Accounts
3 Hedge Fund
3 Oversight AI

Barrier (3)

3 Ice Wall

Code Gate (9)

3 Chum
3 Pop-up Window
3 Tollbooth

Sentry (3)

3 Flare

I just wanna is this deck tournament worthy and I am still figuring out the right way to play this deck. Any advice and suggestions. Much appreciated. Thanks

Interesting deck. Looks like you are trying to milk Oversight AI for all it is worth.

I think I would definitely cut the Closed Accounts from this deck. I don’t see anyway to tag your opponent at all,so this is an easy cut. I would then probably add in two Wall of Statics (or other cheap ETR ice) to give you some more starting ice for your central servers. The big problem that I see with this deck is that Emergency Shutdown seems to be incredibly powerful against it.

I also think that Marked Accounts might not be the correct choice for your economy card. Defending a Melange Mining Corp behind an over-sighted Flare for a turn or two will probably give you vastly more credits. I think this deck wants to try and end the game fast, and i am not sure Marked Accounts is the best way to keep you solvent for a short game.

1 Like

Thanks for the advice and suggestions. If it’s not too much to ask, perhaps some day I could see you test this deck in your stream, if you don’t mind.

Sure, will do.

Hey AcidBurn,

A few other points of feedback for you too:

This feels like a rush deck in spirit because of the Oversight AI, since it’s best early when the Runner can’t break through something as big and mean as Tollbooth or Flare. That said, I think the prior feedback of trading in the two Closed Accounts for two more ICE like Wall of Static is very good. For the same reason, the advice of trading in Marked Accounts for Melange Mining Corp is also good - if you get one of these out early just for 2-3 turns behind an Oversight Tollbooth/Flare, it will go a long way to helping you rez more of your mean ICE.

If I assume you make the Marked Accounts->Melange change, then my additional advice to you would be to point out that you don’t have a good way to make the Runner waste money by traveling down your remote into something unrewarding. That means every time they do manage to break through, they know they’re going to get something good - either an agenda or Melange. That’s not automatically bad; it just means that you have to pay attention to the tempo of when you put things into the remote.

Making the decision to do this does gain you something - you don’t have to worry about which of your cards masquerade for which other ones when they are face-down in a remote. Normally, having a 5/3 agenda in a deck running Astroscript has some ramifications in this masquerading regard that you should consider as a deckbuilder. Since there’s no way to trick the Runner into wasting money in your deck anyway (since I’m assuming that blowing up a Melange isn’t a waste), then you don’t need to worry about the fact that having 2 advancement counters on an agenda tells the Runner to come get the card. For that reason, I think your deck doesn’t have a good reason to need to run 12 agenda cards in a 40 card deck. Furthermore, I think Priority Requisition is actually a great agenda in a 40 card deck that’s running 3 Flares and 3 Tollbooths.

If you cut all 3 False Leads, 1 Breaking News, and 1 Project Beale, then put in 2 Priority Requisition, you gain several things here:

  1. 3 card slots back for other cards
  2. Easier combinations of points for you to score early to set up the win
  3. Fewer clicks/credits/cards spent on obtaining your agenda points
  4. opportunity for 8-9 bonus credits for rezzing ICE

For the same reasons, I’m personally of the opinion that you are going to want to try to score your early Project Beale agendas for 3 points as well. If you do the agenda mix that I suggest, you’ll essentially have 3 3/2 agendas, 2 2/1 agendas, 2 5/3 agendas, and two that either serve as whichever you need worse at the time, 3/2 or 5/3 agendas. That’s a SUPER powerful mix for always coming up with exactly 7 points to win and not having to ever overscore because of your agenda mix.

If you make the agenda mix change I propose, you can actually now put the 3 Marked Accounts back into your deck that I agreed you should remove earlier. I think that’s a reasonable way to use those 3 slots - just put any of them you find out undefended and make the Runner trash them. This is a win-win scenario for a rush deck; either you get money or they lose money, and both of those are about equally powerful for you early on. The only thing you have to worry about is Bank Job. Normally, I don’t give two @$^!s about someone Bank Jobbing my Marked Accounts; if you don’t trash it, I still get to make money, and if you do trash it, you only came out a 1-2 credits ahead depending on how you count the install/run/draw for Bank Job itself. You do, however, have an extra element of danger in this. Without Oversight AI, I think “meh, now they can break my monster ICE once”. With Oversight AI, this turns into “Uh oh… now they can trash my monster ICE”. This is easy enough to work around - if you have an Oversight ICE that is currently keeping the Runner away from your agendas/Melange, just don’t put the Marked Accounts in play yet against a Criminal deck.

The other thing you can consider doing is putting in 3 Enigmas (or sub one for the third Wall of Static). As already noted, this deck is ENORMOUSLY susceptible to Emergency Shutdown, and having these is a cheap way to help delay the inevitable shutdown shenanigans from Criminals for a couple turns.

Hope that helps!


Great analysis as usual lil. Agree completely.

I will try and test your original deck on stream tonight. After that we will test a version with the changes that @Lluluien suggested in his great post.

1 Like

Appreciate the awesome analysis by Llu, it really helps. Will make the changes accordingly. Btw, how about adding SanSan in this deck? will it help?

Also, will be waiting for Sly to test out this deck and see how it goes and being played.

Cheers :smile:

Glad I could help! I’m looking forward to checking out Sly’s stream w/ the before and after too; I think that will be cool :smile:

With regards to whether or not you should include SanSan:

On the one hand, SanSan is an abnormally badass card, particularly when Runners are so scared of scored Astroscripts already. Most Runners will actively hunt them down, sometimes even before they get rezzed, and that by itself makes it a great card just for wasting Runner money. I’ve said lots of times that one of my favorite Stimhack plays is to blow up a SanSan for the cost of a brain damage instead of giving away all my money for it.

On the other hand, you have several things going against it in this deck:

  • You already have a pretty strong mechanism for getting agendas scored in using an Oversight Tollbooth or Flare to block access to an early powerful remote server, so it’s questionable whether or not you need SanSan in the first place. Ideally, your Astroscript does for you what SanSan would do for a lot of other decks, and that is finish the game off. If you score Astroscript and one 5/3 agenda, all you need to do to finish the game is mandatory draw Beale or Astroscript with two credits in your pocket and the game is over. That’s one reason why I would encourage scoring the first Beale you play as a 5/3.

  • SanSan’s interaction with a 5/3 agenda is pretty weak. You’ll still have to leave the agenda in a server to score it for a turn even if you don’t advance it, and you’ll still have to have an Astroscript token to do it as well. Even worse, it can’t help you at all with overscoring Project Beale, since to score it as a 5/3 agenda, it states explicitly on the card you have to have two advancements beyond the original three, not two advancements beyond the current cost of scoring it for 2 points. If you had some interaction with card masquerading, then SanSan could potentially buy you hidden information advantage with being able as an edge case to score a never-advanced 5/3, but we already concluded that the way you designed the original version of the deck actually made it a feature to ignore this consideration, so that’s not helpful for this design either.

  • SanSan is pretty bloody expensive to rez, as well. Since you’re playing so much expensive ICE and there is relatively little benefit to SanSan for this design, you’d probably be much better off spending those credits to push your monster ICE advantage for as long as you can.

As much as I like the card in general, I think your deck with the changes I proposed earlier doesn't really fit together well with SanSan.

Thanks for the great insight Llu. Again appreciate it I love SanSan a lot in my other NBN deck and I have to agree with you on the 5/3 agenda which I always have problem scoring them.

Deck testing went great today. If anyone else wants to see the decks in action go here:

The changes worked very well. Good call @Lluluien

Thanks again guys for testing my deck. After watching the stream earlier, clearly Llu changes goes really well with the deck.

I’m not seeing the justification for using TWiY and the smaller deck size or larger hand size. What is the advantage of fewer cards here? What are you trying to get to faster? The oversights?

Proportionally to your small deck size this is a f*TON of ice. You have a close to 40% chance of drawing ice on EVERY draw. Then, considering the also proportionally ginormous number of agendas you have, you’ve got a combined 67.5% chance of drawing an agenda or a piece of ice. I don’t see how this gives you enough options against anyone tutoring for rigs. Then, considering 6 of your ice are crazy cheap to break, I just don’t get it.

I find your lack of faith disturbing sciencebuster guy. Have you exactly tried the deck irl or in OCTGN yet?

Buster, it’s the agenda minimum of 18; as Anthony and Anthony proved Liulu’s theory - you can run a perfect agenda package with 18 points. With 20-21 points you end up stuck with at least 1 agenda you don’t realistically want.

You are spending 7-11 credits on agendas to win the game, everything else is for rezzing ice. This is compared to HB fast advance which requires 12 credits + however many biotics you need + any sansan rezzes to win the game.

@AcidBurn I’m all over TWiY and 40 card draw probs.

@Chill84 I’m not criticizing your agenda package based on the number of points needed to score and win and overscoring as llu puts it. I’m talking about what your next card drawn, or accessed by the runner, is going to be (probabilistically) with that many agendas in a 40 card deck. Forget credits. What do you want to be drawing? What are your opening hands like? What happens when your extremely weak ice gets eaten alive for no credits because they tutored a barrier breaker on turn 1 or 2 and they walk all over your centrals? You gotta protect those 'spensive agendas behind something, maybe a big ice, but you’re not taxing them enough on your cheap crap ice, so they have the creds to put behind their crypsis or whatever when they grab it as soon as you oversight anything.


The agendas aren’t expensive; that’s the point. You’re getting the opportunity to use 4 cards worth of 5/3 agendas while only having 2 of them actually in the deck. If you score just one of these and an Astroscript while the Runner is still trying to figure out how to get the credits to play the breaker and the actually break one of the large Oversight ICE, then the only thing you need to close out the game is 2 credits and a 3/2 agenda.

I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that the ICE is extremely weak in a 40 card deck that’s running 3 Flares and 3 Tollbooths?. That’s a borderline lunatic amount of enormous ICE for a deck this small if it wasn’t for the fact that there are 3 Oversight AIs in the deck.

With regards to walking over the centrals, HQ shouldn’t ever be too much of a target since your remote is going to be very powerful relative to most Corp decks in the early game. This does make you vulnerable to Emergency Shutdown, but that’s already been acknowledged as the biggest weakness of the deck several times. With regards to R&D, one of the reasons for changing the agenda mix in the deck is to make it less vulnerable to having all the agendas filtered out of R&D. Anonymous Tip is in the deck and can be saved to draw past the remnants of a Maker’s Eye/Indexing run, and where I have personally found that most Runners aren’t real excited about feeding me through Pop-ups on R&D/HQ anymore when I’m playing Never Advance, this deck practically dares them to do so since R&D will be such an easy target in comparison to a Oversight Tollbooth/Flare + Chum.

Given that the ideal strategy for the deck is to erect an strong remote on turn 1-2 and use it to score early agendas and use Melange, what exactly is it that you think we should be drawing besides the cards that are in the deck? Your specific objection seemed to be that they could tutor Crypsis and kill an Oversight ICE, but since that ICE is going to be either Tollbooth or Flare, that’s not a trivial thing, and the intent is to do at least one (and probably two) of the following things before that happens:

  1. Score Astroscript
  2. Score a 5/3
  3. Make 14-21 credits with Melange

Bonus points for the Corp if they do #1 or #2 first and make the Crypsis run for blowing up the Melange instead of scoring an agenda. Even if they score an agenda though, there’s something pretty significant to keep in mind here - the Runner needs 7 points too, and when they’re done cracking Tollbooth or Flare with Crypsis, they’re going to be very broke, which is a great opportunity for scoring again.

Could there be changes remaining to make the deck stronger? Sure; there almost always are, or we all wouldn’t have so much fun playing and rambling on about this game so much :smile: I’d try wiggling a couple of Red Herrings into this deck somewhere myself, but then we’re moving away from the essence of the deck concept again by tempting ourselves to do trickery with faking out the Runner w/ cards he doesn’t want. That’s not how I saw this deck. I saw it as saying “Okay Runner. This game is a race, and I’m faster than you.” I tried to suggest changes that were in keeping with that theme.


I’d try wiggling a couple of Red Herrings into this deck somewhere myself, but then we’re moving away from the essence of the deck concept again by tempting ourselves to do trickery with faking out the Runner w/ cards he doesn’t want. That’s not how I saw this deck. I saw it as saying “Okay Runner. This game is a race, and I’m faster than you.” I tried to suggest changes that were in keeping with that theme.

The thing about trickery and faking out the runner, is that its effect is actually to slow the runner down. Each time you get them to run some bullshit thing, they lose money and time going through your ice, and you get put ahead economically.

So tricking them is in fact, a critical part of racing them.

In fact, the corp CANNOT win races against a good runner right now, without tricking them. The runner economy is just too good, the corp economy is just too weak, for the corp to do well without some trickiness occurring.

I think the card the deck needs most is SanSan. You have NINE three-difficulty agendas here, that are massively helped by a SanSan. SanSan protected by Oversighted ICE, powering through agendas until they can get it and kill it, is even better than the agendas themselves there.

In the current state of netrunner, you cant really win as corp against anyone good unless you force them to waste large quantities of money on things like running through your remote server and paying to kill SanSan.

I don’t disagree with you, but I didn’t see this as an exercise in homogenizing the deck with all the rest of them. I already wrote the NBN instruction manual for the kind of trickery you’re talking about; I’m sure you’ve read the thread already :wink:

Sure, you could leave the agenda mix the same (not sure how far back in the thread you read, but after my suggested changes there’s only 5 3/2 agendas in it afterwards), include SanSan, include some Red Herrings, then switch to Making News, add Caduceus… and then end up with a deck that’s nothing like what the original one was.

1 Like

Again, I’m not talking at all about cost of agendas except in the sense that agendas are always expensive down place and advance in 3 peasly clicks per turn. Well, actually, compared to any fast advance decks, this is relatively expensive so I guess I’ll stick with it.

But I digress! I’m talking about the number of agendas. Erect strong remote turn 1-2. Score agendas. 1 5/3? 2 3/2? That’s a shit ton of clicks and credits for turn 1-2. Rez that expensive ice? Even if you mulligan just for oversight you’re only getting it 56% of the time. All that while, oh, and ostensibly, you’ve put something on HQ and R+D, any runner access on either has a 30% chance per card of hitting an agenda. Not good.

Could you elaborate? What about a powerful remote makes HQ not a target? Is the runner thinking he has to deal with the remote or find out what the ice is because any agendas that go to hand are going to be put safely in there? You’ve got a 30% chance that any draw is an agenda. That’s not good. Especially since raising credits if not using oversight and the advances and the melange is going to sink entire turns worth of clicks. Certainly, early turns. What will be left on HQ? pop-up ice wall? That’s two of installs.

When you accept that the risk of having so many agendas is that they all get filtered out of R+D I would offer that the risk is that they all get filtered out of R+D and HQ, which is basically a critical flaw. Saving anonymous tip? Who has time?! That’s hardly a solution. You’ve got to draw it, have room to save it. There are only 2.

A runner will laugh at feeding your popups not if but WHEN they get a taste of a 30% agenda hit chance. Never advance schmever advance. Those are long games.

My specific objections were stated in clear questions, not a general scenario where crypsis gets tutored, offered as an example.

Since you “moved your bones around” by raising the spectre of never advance, I’d point to my recently highly unsuccessful deck post on BGG, TWiY - Crash or Burn. THAT is a race deck.