Abagnale has me excited, but you have to pay 3cr to use it on Tollbooth; Abagnale is paid-ability, have to suffer the On-Encounter effects. This is awesome.
I do think Abagnale is competitive with criminal decoders, but Iām not convinced about being the universal right choice. Iād agree it might have an edge Peregrine, but Peregrine was already the worst of the options, IMO.
Install cost is an important concept that gets overshadowed by analysis of break costs. And what gets more overshadowed still is the notion of burst effects on economy, and how that factors into gameplay; losing 1 credit every turn for 10 turns is not equivalent to losing 10 credits in one turn.
People have a tenancy to lean towards Gordian Blade in criminal, but Iāve been using a Faust Andy deck that initially had Zu, and man, getting your decoder out with only 1 credit impact on your pool feels very good. It is so unintrusive on your tempo. I eventually swapped to Peacock to make the influence work, and break costs aside, you can feel the difference that 2 credits makes. It goes from being an almost no brainer to a cost-benefit analysis (after all, my deck has Faust; do I need to hit my economy with this?). I similarly chose Corroder over Paperclip for the same reason.
Where Iām going with this is that Abagnale costs more still than Peacock. You might āitās just 1 credit moreā, but itās more than that; itās taking a 3 credit hit to your pool to a 4 credit hit, and that matters. Hard to give a strict analysis as to how much, but it does.
And, even without install costs, while Abagnale is generally more efficient at breaking routines, a ācriminallyā under played card is E3. I use it for Faust, but it also makes Peacock only take 2c on the first sub. Along with its better boost, I think itās a competitive choice.
So thatās pretty much my stance. I do think itās a competitive option; another tool in their kit. But their objectively best option? I donāt think Iād agree with that.
1 Like
To be frank, the comparison point for abagnale for me is
- gordion blade: as this is what it is replacing in good stuff decks. It has exactly the same numbers overall the slight difference is the awkward strength boost (which is mitigated by sucker). The big difference is strength retention which im not sure is worth 3 inf to a criminal deck. In return you get to bypass a code gate once which might be worth using in the early or very laye game.
- passport: passport is an awesome breaker, abagnale is indentical but you are paying 3 credits more to be able to break remotes.
I can see my goodstuff andy deck slotting 2 abagnale in place of both these cards.
4 Likes
In a deck running SO, I think Iād do 1 Passport 1 Abagnale before 2 Abagnale. Having the option of the reduced tempo hit is nice.
Iāll agree that Iād almost definitely run Abagnale before Gordian though.
1 Like
Dude, I think install cost is incredibly important (Zu comprises 100% of my influence spent on non-Yog decoders in crim decks since its release). But comparing Abagnale to Peacock is a really bad example of this ā as soon as you use Peacock to break a single subroutine, youāve broken even on that 1 credit difference. The only reason to run Peacock once Abagnale is out is if you a) are not running suckers, and b) are playing in a meta dominated by code gates with exactly Str 5 and/or Str 7+. Even then, my dignity would probably prevent me from running Peacock. 
ETA:
I donāt think this is a bad idea in a vacuum, but weāre seeing an increasing number of RFG effects and targeted destruction effects (e.g. Hunter-Seeker). My guess is that by the time this expansion hits stores, icebreaker redundancy is going to be more important than ever.
1 Like
I donāt follow. So you think Peacocks cheaper install cost is worth it over Abagnale, but at the same time talk about E3 to get rid of the 2-to-break, which is another 2 credits install cots on top of Peacock, as well as a card you have to find and install. I find the need to draw and install a card I canāt tutor for a way bigger problem than the need for 1 more credit at install time. I get that you use E3 already for Faust, but I still think thatās not worth it.
I also think the 2-to-break eats up any credit saving you might have from the 3-for-2 pump cost. For ICE with strength < 4 itās the same pump cost for both breakers anyway (2 to pump), theyāre also even for ICE with strength 6. For 5 and and 7 you need to pump once more with Abagnale.
But then Abagnale saves you one credit on the first subroutine (and each subsequent subroutine, if there is more than one and you have no E3). Which is also true for every ICE where the pump costs are the same. So with Peacock youāre basically cheaper off against FC3 and Little Engine, and - even with E3 out - worse against Magnet, Enigma, Tollbooth, FC2, Mausolus, DNA Tracker, Archangel, Lotus Field, Quandary, Ravana and Turing. I know there are more Code Gates out there, but I think that are the ones that are played atm. Considering that you only save 1 credit at install time with Peacock over Abagnale and you spend that one credit more against almost any Code Gate in the game on first encounter, Iāll happily slot Abagnale over Peacock any time. Passport might be still worth it for the low install cost, and if I have some spare influence Iāll think about alternatives, but otherwise itāll be Abagnale for me in the near future.
3 Likes
IMO if you are looking for a three to install decoder in Criminal that works on remotes, you should be playing Rex.
4 Likes
Again, the analysis being provided here is naive; itās assuming that the 2c break cost immediately and definitely counters the 1c cheaper install cost.
Being 1 credit cheaper on the install allows:
- Putting it down with less risk of being in HHN range.
- Play the SG/DC/Whatever that you drew from John M. When they didnāt rez the ICE (or the ICE want code gate).
- Trash the asset in the server under the same circumstances.
- Win traces.
The list goes onā¦
With respect to E3, it doesnāt only work with Peacock. It isnāt there for that, so saying itās 2 credits dedicated to that is not correct.
Going back to Bios -
I have mixed feelings about the ārandomness.ā First, Iāll say that itās really peculiar that itās 4/6 ā like, give me some real choices or just make it something that happens. This is a very weird design decision.
Regardless, though, you can figure that sheās going to have 4 good cards under there, because why would you slot bad cards? So, thatās cool; you can fetch a specific good card with a single click, and it works like a mini-tutor. (Note: I am presuming you select the card from the four, because there is nothing on the ID that suggests the NVRAM is in a random order or that you select a random one.)
However, since you canāt plan at the deckbuilding stage which cards will be there, this is pretty awkward to plan around. I canāt, for example, run a bunch of 1x programs and then still cut down on SMCs, because I donāt know that those programs will end up in the NVRAM. Similarly, if I slot some high-impact, highly-situational run events theyāre going to end up clogging my regular draws much more often than they end up āsideboardedā in the NVRAM in games where I donāt need them.
More than the randomness, though, my real issue with her ability (again, barring effects that interact with this in some way) is just that it is actually resistant to economic efficiency. Clicking to draw a single card is literally the slowest way to draw; you canāt speed this up with Diesel or Patron or Quality Time, etc. etc. etc. Consider ā for a single click and 2MU, SMC lets you hold onto your credits until theyāre needed and threaten any potential breaker in your deck during a run. By contrast, if you stick a key breaker in your NVRAM so that you have āeasyā access to it, youāve got to spend one click fetching it and another installing it, paying all costs, before the ice youāre worried about gets rezzed (unless youāre willing to eat the results of a facecheck, of course). Similarly, since we all run 3x Sure Gamble, itās a safe bet (pun intended) that youāre going to end with one in your NVRAM on a regular basis. Diesel ā Sure Gamble feels like hot dirty sex after a night at the club; Click ā ātutorā Sure Gamble, Click ā play Sure Gamble is closer to the thrill of driving a Honda Accord slightly above the speed limit. Itās not terrible at 2cr/click, but considering that to enable this ability you gave up 1cr/turn install discount or 1 recurring stealth cred or bonus clicks from installing or āeverythingās a code gateā orā¦
5 Likes
I think it is called NVRAM to sprinkle in some flavor and give it an area name to protect it from weird rulings (wow FFG good job!).
From a designer perspective printing a card that exclusively deals with NVRAM is a 0% chance.
We may get some cards that have text: Do X. If you have cards in your NVRAM, do Y
Also I expected more from Brute-Force-Hacking. It has this weird hyphenating crap and I tried to break it down into a reference, or an abbreviationā¦ and nothing. The flavor text redeems the card and presents like three better names.
2 Likes
NVRAM will be referenced in the legacy game Iām guessing, and probably never in the competitive. If it does get referenced in the competitive, it will be to provide a notion of NVRAM to other IDs before buffing NVRAM itself. Making cards that have forced synergy with a single ID is atrocious design.
But, then again, I canāt say I have the wealth of game design experience that our new captain Michael Boggs does. Weāll see how he handles it going forward.
With respect to SMC for mid-run install vs. installing ahead of time from NVRAM-- you can still use personal workshop or clone chip (or DaVinci, I guess) to avoid paying for it until you need it.
I could see her working well with a stimshop build: good odds of starting with a workshop and some expensive stuff, key cards can sit in NVRAM without getting brained, etc.
What do people think is the relevant rule for NVRAM + mulligan? I donāt see anything about it in this English translation of the german rulebook: Netrunner Terminal Directive Rulebook - Pastebin.com . So, take it with a grain of salt, but that seems to fall back to the core rules. From āSetupā (relevant text bolded):
- Choose Sides: The players decide who will play as the
Runner and who will play as the Corporation. Then, each
player places his identity card faceup in his play area and
takes a corresponding deck.
Note: New players should use the Shaper and Jinteki starter
decks for their first game.
- Create Token Bank: Gather the credits, advancement, brain
damage, tag, bad publicity, and generic tokens into piles.
Keep these piles within reach of both players. - Collect Starting Credits: Each player takes five credits from
the bank. - Shuffle Decks: Each player shuffles his deck. After shuffling,
each player offers his deck to his opponent for further
shuffling. - Draw Starting Hands: Each player draws five cards from
the top of his deck to form his starting hand. After drawing
starting hands, the Corporation may choose to take a
mulligan by shuffling his hand back into his deck and
then drawing a new starting hand. After the Corporation
decides whether to mulligan, the Runner decides whether to
mulligan as well. If a player takes a mulligan, he must keep
his second hand as his starting hand. When the players are
satisfied with their starting hands, each player places his deck
facedown in his play area.
A āmulliganā is described as shuffling your hand into the deck (not āall of the cards that are in your deck listā or whatever).
While there is a step 5 called ādraw starting handsā that seems to align with Biosās ability (ābefore drawing your starting handā), the second draw of a mulligan is also referred to as ādrawing a new starting hand.ā
So, Iām not sure. I really want it to trigger on both the initial hand and the mulligan, but I could see it going either way.
I interpret it as happening after āStep 4: Shuffle Decksā but before āStep 5: Draw Starting Handsā (IE: only before first hand). But, after the Find The Truth ruling, Iām not really 100% on any pre-game stuff.
Donāt judge my relationships just because you donāt understand them.
7 Likes
NVRAM will also significantly improve your set-up, like an Andy-lite. If you get to see roughly 10 cards on your first turn there is a good chance of being able to Sure Gamble into Beth. This might bring some strong turn 1 cards like Professional Contacts back into the meta. You could also use NVRAM to cut dead draws, run 3 Beth without the drawback of two in your opening for example.
So long as Iām not the TO who needs to inspect it, more power to you the way I see it.
āWell, this is definitely strundleās bye. In addition to signing it, he left his DNA all over it.ā
FWIW, I feel confident that youāll do the whole NVRAM process (look at 6, add 4) before the first hand and that they will stay there whether or not you mulligan. If it were the other way, with the way the card is written there is no reason to remove the first 4 ā so youād end up with 8 cards in NVRAM, which would be super weird/backwards/broken.
Two thoughts:
-
This makes sense from a general design perspective, but if Bios gets her own console, do we really expect it to have no direct interaction with her defining characteristic (itās not impossible ā see Noise/Turntable or Whizz/Grimoire ā but it would be odd)?
-
I could see Street Peddler-style effects that add cards to NVRAM or the like even if you didnāt have NVRAM before. Given the reluctance to add keywords, though, if they go this route weāre going to end up with dumb walls of text describing the same effect over and over again (see: psi games).
2 Likes
The big thing is that, even if a dedicated console has synergy with the intended ID, itās never been pigeonholed into the ID. Noise gets benefit from Grimoire, but it doesnāt interact with him any differently than other IDs. Same deal with a lot of others (Gabe/Desperado, Jes/Maya, Val/Vigil, etc.).
If they make Bios console interact with NVRAM, it would be the first designed card that interacts with one ID differently than others, which I feel is bad design. They would need to not only make NVRAM available, but make it reasonably commonplace.
A better designed card would be, for example, something that interacts with facedown cards. Like ā5 cost, 1 MU, trash an installed card: play a facedown card, paying all costsā. The above might not be balanced (or the right approach; I still donāt think face down cards is general enough), but, in general, something that synergizes with Bios ability, but isnāt inherently tied to her specifically.
1 Like
Yeah, fair enough. Iām probably just not thinking outside of the box enough. They could also include NVRAM with other options ā āWhenever you make a successful run on R&D, install one card from your grip or NVRAM.ā
Honestly, 80% of my blockage on this front is just that I think the ID is so āmehā right now (having never played with or against it, of course) that Iām having difficulty imagining a console ability that would work better out of Bios than Kate or CT.
2 Likes