I think Adam could work with Maw + Gang Sign + Aeneas Informant + Turtle synergy considering he basically starts with an HQ interface in Neutralize All Threats. The must trash clause is a problem though.
clone chips and grappling hook?
Currently still on a Mammon build (tho losing Moose and Temu has hurt it a fair bit). I think there’s a post-e3 Overmind build with TestRun/Scavnege/Uninstall (and maybe a 1-of DDM) but I haven’t put it into action yet.
I thought about Diamond when TD dropped; if going that way I’d look to a Cloud breaker suite backed up by Overmind, plus you’ve got UC as well as Folding and Casts to help offset the loss of Moose.
I think you still run AI + ABR as your primary breaker suite for Adam, plus support breakers in something like Nanotek (swordsman) / Paperclip / Inversificator. The question is: which AI? I think it’s between Mammon and Aumakua. I don’t like how fragile Turtle is to purging.
Actually, I might run Hunting Grounds instead of Paperclip for IP Block. And Film Critic might be a better restricted card than Inversificator. It’s pretty hard to get an obokata with a limited hand size.
This plan still leaves lots of influence. Should be room for Liberated and Turning Wheel. I’ll have to drop the DDM from my old Overmind list tho. :`(
I have been loving Adam with Inversificator. Man that card is a beast with multithreaders.
I posted my worlds Adam list if anyone is interested.
I love this stupid deck, but I am ready to move on.
Here is my current project:
Adam and David (45 cards)
Adam: Compulsive Hacker
3 Dirty Laundry
2 Mad Dash
3 Sure Gamble
3 Brain Chip
2 Always Be Running
3 Armitage Codebusting
2 Corporate Defector
3 Daily Casts
2 Dean Lister
2 Dr. Lovegood
1 Film Critic
1 Hunting Grounds
3 Technical Writer
1 Black Orchestra
3 Self-modifying Code
just before looked up your worlds list, ty for the inspiration!
You convinced me.
Corporate Defector is mandatory in Adam now.
I seem to be the odd one out when it comes to starting directives. What’s the appeal of Neutralize All Threats at the start of the game?
The extra HQ pressure is usually the reason it’s chosen. Being able to see extra cards when it’s in the early game and the Corp can’t get rid of agendas in hand is great, especially if paired with ABR to click past ETRs, or AI breakers.
I mean, ABR is the one people avoid. Otoh, NAT kind of prevents you from running too early because you don’t want to have to click up to sure gamble again because you hit that Jeeves in the CI’s hand.
I understand that directive so much more if the corp is pressured midgame, when you’d usually legwork as a shaper, but clearly I’m making a mistake in my thinking there, it’s not really a discussion at this point.
I’m not the most experienced Adam, so take this with a grain of salt, but sometimes it isn’t choosing NAT for its effect as much as it is choosing against having ABR at the start. There are a number of match ups where you would sooner not be forced to run against your choosing (i.e. pretty much anyone with HHN).
Also NAT combined with Find the Truth can get you to a game state where you have near perfect information of what’s in the corp’s hand. In the deck @conphas posted, Corporate Defector does a ton of work as well. Find the Truth shows what the corp will draw with their mandatory, and assuming they have no draw cards, clicking to draw will trigger Defector, which puts them in a position where they can’t really advance their board state without surrendering that juicy information. Having NAT just helps you capitalize on that knowledge, because once you know an agenda went into HQ, it should be fairly easy to pick it out.
NAT is an incredible starting directive because it means a successful HQ run gets you two HQ accesses and a pseudo-access of the top card of R&D. That is insane turn one central pressure. If you play Adam as an early to mid game-focused runner, and/or you want to prey on ice-light corp decks, NAT is the glue that holds that together.
I’ll back you up here - non-NAT builds are also viable. Since NAT heavily incentivizes the corp to ice HQ, being able to double-click through ice is often better early pressure than having a HQI that you can’t make use of. NAT’s drawback is maybe less severe than ABR’s, but it’s still quite bad.
I find not having NAT with ABR turns off a lot of your pressure. You don’t have to be as careful with your econ but you have to be luckier.
NAT + ABR gives corps real trouble turn 1. They might mulligan a hand with 2 ice and a hedge fund if the other 2 cards are agendas.
While I love the idea of flexible decks that can pick directives based on matchup, its generally better to know your default directives when deckbuilding and work around that. NAT is less of a problem when you build a deck where everything is 2 cost or less. ABR is fine if you are building a deck that plans to run every turn anyway. FTT is just bonkers no matter what, just dont try play En Passant like I did. Building around Safety First is harder without Public Sympathy, but can be a fantastic draw engine.
So Logic Bomb was just added and it kinda makes up for the loss of e3 Feedback that made ABR so great.
So I’m thinking are any of the new run events, namely Embezzle maybe?
I must admit I’ve recently been wondering whether ABR Adam can be viable, and Logic Bomb has convinced me to start theorycrafting
i’m actually thinking logic bomb will make ABR redundant tbh. it has some synergy with it i think, but i already wasn’t using ABR anyway. i think this just makes me less willing to use it