So I guess what it comes down to is which directive do your drop against CTM/Hard hitting news decks?
Hmm… [EDIT] Neutralize All Threats (not Safety First)? You can click through single-ice servers (all of them for most of the game, right?) with ABR, and they now know you’ll always be checking things without being forced to trash them, so it’s harder to just leave Breaking News sitting there to NA it. Bonus, once they put an ice on that server to protect the agenda, you can target it with Temujin so, like, you have to run it anyway, right?
Dropping Adam is my recommendation. The matchup is nigh unsalvageable in my mind.
In full seriousness (though the above was not said entirely in jest), if it’s a tournament and you really don’t want to concede off the bat, I think dropping NAT is probably the best choice. ABR theoretically leaves you vulnerable to HHN every turn, but that’s what econ cards are for - it’s also really important in that it stops the Corp from just rushing out behind gear-checks super early against you. Being forced to trash installed cards you access is just so utterly horrendous against CTM.
I agree, cutting Neutralize seems like the best option. You’ll have plenty of Incentive to hammer HQ anyway with Find the Truth, and hopefully you’re running The Turning Wheel. But being rid of NaT, you can actually check remotes for Breaking News and such without risking the trash.
This might be premature, but does anyone know what the ruling would be around your pre-installed Directives if you play an Adam deck with all four Directives included in the list? Can you choose the three to install based on your matchup, like Jinteki Biotech?
It seems clear that, since the directives are not part of your deck, you should be able to change them from game to game without changing your deck, but I think it’s still up in the air exactly when the choice is made. It should be after IDs are revealed, though, so you should be able to choose, as I read it. There’s still some ongoing discussion on when Adam’s directives enter play compared to things like revealing IDs and drawing starting hands, if you want to follow that in the Official Rules Questions thread.
Note, though, that in a tournament setting, your deck cannot change, and the starting directives are not part of your deck list. You can have all 4 directives in your “sideboard”, and you can have extra copies in your deck, but you cannot pull 3 directives out of your deck, leaving the one you’re not using in there.
Currently an open question. We’ve not had any ruling from @jakodrako or Damon on this yet. Look for it with the UFAQ update for Escalation, perhaps.
If we’re really lucky, the insert that comes with the datapack will clarify the rules for Adam, but I’m not holding my breath on that one.
@jakodrako said on Twitter that his interpretation was to decide after IDs are revealed, but that’s not confirmed by word of God.
The directive to remove is NAT, as the impact is fairly small, exploiting the narrow window early game where the corp doesn’t have perfect control over its agendas, largely after that, double access from HQ is not that great. The ‘drawback’ is at its worst, due to HHN.
SF is the best of the 3 in the most situations, a free draw engine, especially one that triggers when you need it, is amazing.
ABR is the most impactful of the directives, its ability to break ice early slows down the corp, and late game can be impactful to save you $$$ on lots of things.
The only way to go besides cutting NAT and putting it in your deck is to cut ABR and put it in your deck, and lean on overmind early.
This directive probably isn’t enough to bring Adam to playable, not any more than before sadly. However stealth does look much better now.
I don’t think it’s that black-and-white. NAT is probably the one with the heaviest drawback of the original three in our CtM-meta, but having an “HQ-lock” is nothing to sneeze at either. With NAT in play, the corp can almost never store agendas in HQ, focing them into very awkward scores or to use their filtering solely to not draw agendas.
Situations I’d consider keeping it are the ones where removing ABR would be preferable; perhaps you’re playing against an HHN-deck and would like to set up some econ before subjecting yourself to the tag-hell.
Like I said earlier, I don’t think the challenge is to figure out how to build to a single combination of directives - rather, the challenge is to maximize ALL combinations, so that you can stay flexible, regardless of which combo you choose.
Yea, let me get some thought and deck building in and I’m in.
@pang4 if you don’t have NAT to drain your money, then generate more money is a good answer. ABR is basically the reason you play Adam IMO. I don’t think NAT is that important, good players can manage agenda flow in most situations. Granted, the combo of ABR and NAT are Adams absolute strength, the early game pressure before you can manage agendas (and have where to put them because rush probably won’t work), is what makes this true. I don’t think HQ lock is that successful these days.
So pack x1 of the new directive and liberate the must trash one after your first few hits on hq.
I think the extra directives might actually encourage that play style, but maybe I am just hopeful for Adam’s draw.
Bringing back my ultra-aggro-Adam list, where Find the Truth can work to replace Neutralize all Threats. Instead of an extra HQ access, you get a pseudo-access on R&D. Also, AI hate is on the down-low right now, and Bioroids are on the rise.
Bioroids are not people!
Adam: Compulsive Hacker (Data and Destiny)
1x “Freedom Through Equality” (Democracy and Dogma)
3x Sure Gamble (Core Set)
1x Networking (Humanity’s Shadow) •
3x Dirty Laundry (Creation and Control)
2x Career Fair (Breaker Bay) ••
1x Independent Thinking (Data and Destiny)
3x e3 Feedback Implants (Trace Amount) ••••• •
3x Brain Chip (Data and Destiny)
1x The Turning Wheel (The Liberated Mind) •
3x Temüjin Contract (Blood Money) ••••• •
3x Armitage Codebusting (Core Set)
3x Public Sympathy (Cyber Exodus)
3x Kati Jones (Humanity’s Shadow)
3x Daily Casts (Creation and Control)
3x Data Folding (Order and Chaos)
2x Dr. Lovegood (Data and Destiny)
1x Neutralize All Threats (Data and Destiny)
3x Overmind (Honor and Profit)
3x Faust (The Underway) ••••• •
22 influence spent (maximum 25)
45 cards (min 45)
Cards up to Blood Money
Looks a lot like what I just threw together. Did you consider special order instead of Faust to save on influence? I included a singleton Makers Eye.
Haven’t considered Special Order. Has it been working out for you? Seems to punish his click compression even more, though I admit saving influence is appealing.
Played a few games with Adam and Find the Truth yesterday. I think it’s legitimately playable and a very good card. The drawback is rarely significant, I think, though perhaps smart players can utilize a rush or a Salem’s Hospitality strategy. Making a successful run is less difficult against decks that spam assets, particularly if you take out the directive that forces you to trash ones you access (which you’re doing against CtM anyway). Looking at the top card of the corp deck is strong, as we’ve seen from all the Spy Camera decks out there, especially if you can combine it with Freedom through Equality.
Alternately, I could see splashing this card in Criminal, perhaps instead of Medium or RDI, especially with someone like Leela. Peregrine might give the influence to do so.
I wish there was a way Adam could use a card to throw the top card into archives without having to run on back there.
But yeah, it seems pretty good to me.
You can play a jank combo with Gravedigger. Make a successful run on a remote -> Find the Truth triggers and you can look at the top card of R&D (before you access cards in the remote). If you see something you want to trash, then trash the card in the remote, earning a virus counter on Gravedigger. Next click, use the virus counter on Gravedigger to force the Corp to trash the top card from R&D.
Now I want to build a Find the Truth Noise deck.