yeah, i think IHW is the way to go. makes facechecking Cortex Locks early not so terrible, plus it comes in handy for scorch match-ups where the corp is able to get a decent amount of money early.
No, thatâs exactly how you figure out if what youâre doing is right or wrong. Seeing/knowing what happens when you do it.
Ignoring the bad for the potential good is wearing rose-tinted glasses. Headlock can either deal with discarding a crescentus or it canât. EOL
http://www.onlinegamblingsites.com/poker/results-oriented-thinking/
You decide whether a play is good based on how likely and desirable each outcome is. Basing whether that play was correct based on what actually happened makes you worse at the game. If you know that there is 1 agenda in a 4 card RnD and you play The Makerâs Eye and miss it, youâd be foolish to conclude that playing TME was a bad play. This is what MasterAir is talking about.
9 Likes
No, thatâs completely wrong. A decision is correct based on the information you have when you make it. Hindsight doesnât change whether the decision was correct when you made it or not.
If you are told to guess whether a card played face down at random from any given deck is a number or a face card and you guess number, flipping the card to a face card doesnât mean you made a bad decision.
5 Likes
Thing is, in Netrunner, a game where you can actively choose to draw a card instead of being forced to draw a card at the start of the turn then need to use another card to draw like MTG, the result still stand. Whether using or not inject at the turn X with Y cards left is a good decision or not doesnât mean the result wonât have any effect on the rest of the game. If for some reason your inject trash 2 crescentus, 1 parasite and your keyhole, the likehood of this play outright losing you the game is pretty high. Sure, you wonât know until you play the card but playing Inject in this particular deck means that this kind of situation can happen and thatâs something you should try to avoid. And the best way to avoid it is by not playing a card who can potentially screw you up and play another card (IHW) who, even if itâs less efficient on the draw / amount of informations it gives you, wonât sometime screw you over.
2 Likes
I think weâre basically all agreeing with each other about decisions but using different semantics. The potential Inject has to dump all the programs in your bin is something that factors into your decision to play the card during a game. You assess whether its correct to do so at the time. You assess what kind of impact it going badly or it going well will have on the rest of the game.
What you donât do is play it, watch 3 copies of Crescentus go into the Heap and then say âwell playing that was obviously a mistakeâ.
4 Likes
I totally agree and Iâm not saying you base your decision on anecdotal evidence. Iâm saying; you know thereâs an inherent variance/risk thatâs built into a card like inject that will cause some damage to your plan if you play it in some percentage of games over the course of a tournament. You evaluate whether that cardâs risk is worth it in comparison to other cards (like Iâve Had Worse) that could be in that slot and decide whether to play not because of results, but because of context and the likelihood of potential results; based on opportunity cost.
Inject is an ok card at the beginning of the game and gets conditionally worse in about 50% of games as the games go on if your strategy is at all reliant on having multiplicative programs (crescentus, keyhole, lamprey).
You donât play inject because it is probable that it will hurt your deck. That itâs a non-bo.
And if youâre all missing it; yes Iâm probably agreeing with you.
I said I wouldnât do it, but I canât help myself.
Assume Inject said âreveal the bottom 4 cards of your stack, trash any programs and add all other cards to your grip, gain 1c for each trashed program.â
If this makes you, for any reason, more likely to play Inject youâre thinking about the card wrong. Except for interactions with a handful of cards hardly anyone plays, this is functionally the same effect as Inject.
Iâm willing to believe that IHW is better in this deck, but itâs very very close (largely because IHW and Inject are pretty similar cards)
8 Likes
I think this about sums up the top vs bottom of the deck argument thatâs been going round and round. Bravo.
With all this weird maths stuff aside I can definitely see why Inject isnât optimal in this deck. If our aim is to get as many instances to use a specific program as possible then Inject does have a downside.
2 Likes
Having one card with a huge potential of screw up (remember: about 35-40% of the deck is programs and you never want any of them in the bin in the first place) and another one who will just draw you cards isnât nearly as close.
[edit]
Remember: this discussion started with me saying that inject is a terrible idea in the context of this particular deck. Since then, we got a couple of players trying to defend inject when the card is definitely a no-no since your mean of pressure are mostly programs that you want to play from your hand THEN recurse with Clone/DĂ©jĂ vu and not event/ressources.
It wouldnât change my opinion at all; which is why weâre probably arguing past each other. As the deck shrinks if you havenât been seeing enough of your programs (which will be the case in a portion of games) then playing inject regardless of whether you take from the top or the bottom is a worse play as time goes on. You have information about âprogramâ density and the cards you want to draw are programs. Playing a card that works against that is why Iâm arguing you should not play inject. If you split a deck into equal piles of 4 and inject picks one at random and performs its trash-hand-credit ability ITS STILL A BAD IDEA and the odds that anyone of those piles contains a program is the same regardless of the order of those piles.
Someone once explained to me on these forums (when I had reservations about Inject in Noise) that the goal of Netrunner isnât to draw and play out your entire deck in its most efficient fashion.
4 Likes
This is also wrong.
This can be true only if
a - you shuffle at each draw
and b - you start the game with 0 cards in hand.
No, @syntax, you are wrong.
As long as you shuffle enough once there is no difference between any two sets of equally sized cards regardless of their position probabilistically.
Drawing a card only tells you probabilities.
1 Like
I canât see how the quoted statement can possibly be wrong.
1 Like
Well said.
Time is money and if (theoretically) the credits and deeper dig from Inject can find an answer and deny an Adonis on average 1 turn earlier than IHW - Iâll happily bin any of my programs for that.
In principle Inject is sacrificing reach for tempo and thatâs not clearly wrong to me.
Crescentus is valuable pretty much all the time but often HQ is secure enough that 3 Lamprey is too many, often later copies of breakers are dead, and often Iâd rather have my first Parasite in the heap so I can insta-Clone Chip than have it hand. I use the Keyhole in maybe 30% of games so the majority of the time itâs fine to bin it.
3 Likes
Because the card can be at any slot 1-45 at the first place.
% of 3 of them being at slot 42-45 are the same % of having them in slot 1-3 that you draw in the starting hand and a lot smaller than % of them being between slots 1-5 (and a lot smaller than only one of them being between slot 1-14, etc).
Drawing 1 should cover your needs for a moment, weâre not talking about Origami there.
We had all the same discussion in the Noise thread, too. Where, arguably, drawing and installing programs is even more a critical way of applying pressureâŠ
Difference being there are so many of them in that deck and theyâre all of relatively equal importance, right?
If you guys are saying that economy & non programs actually are more valuable than crescentus/lamprey to your game plan, then inject probably does make more sense.
Weâre going off topic, but Iâve played a hell of a lot of Noise and with all the recursion and redundancy he plays, Inject is extremely good in a Noise deck. Its one of the best cards in a standard Noise build.