Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Tournament Report, 1st Place Cambridge Regionals


#1

Originally published at: http://stimhack.com/tournament-report-1st-place-cambridge-regionals/

Discuss the latest tournament report by @jdeng here.


#2

No offense to the guy; it was an enjoyable writeup, (though slops to you for beeing Zach/Groober) - but can we ban butcher shop yet?


#3

Sarcasm? There are several tech cards that make this match up much easier with a less narrow one in Film Critic on the way.

Do you just want to remove all viable kill decks? I think it keeps the game interesting and healthy to have a more diverse field than FA and Glacier.


#4

NYC too strong.


#5

Please no. It’s the best. Playing a deck with multiple win conditions is very fun. Also, the reson why it has picked up is because Anarchs rely solely on I’ve had worse to protect them. (and don’t slot Clot, of course)


#6

I feel like most of my games against Butcher Shop are on a knife’s edge but I generally feel like I have an edge in the matchup whenever I play a deck that’s good and I know how to pilot. The deck is good, but I see no reason whatsoever to ban it, nor would I see how you would achieve such a task.

More on topic, nice writeup! Great to see new-ish players getting into the action and still performing at a high level!


#7

It was awesome to meet and play against you @jdeng!

I too have been playing Netrunner for a little less than a year and similarly felt good just making the cut.

I just want to clarify and say that I was only 3-0 against Kate on the day, and only mentioned it as a justification for why I wasn’t going to play Noise against your Butchershop :smile:


#8

I am reading about people getting destroyed by butcher shop left and right…which I find surprising. People in our meta already know how to beat it and it’s back on the decline, which is alright. Anyway good write up, but yeah, weird reading about all these people carelessly losing to butcher shop. No need for plascrete to beat it @_@


#9

Clearly superior meta then :stuck_out_tongue:


#10

when it comes to butcher shop, I guess so? Though that’s only one deck


#11

Can you elaborate more on your meta choices against butcher shop?

Cheers.


#12

Update: I seem to have mistaken what game I was playing. Could someone redirect me to the correct forum for Androil: Netrunner?

http://imgur.com/FsAqDcA


#13

Is this correct procedure? I thought sides were determined randomly, not choice of sides - there’s a subtle but important difference.

Congrats on the win though, but shame on you for knocking out the British talent :wink:


#14

yah we were told we were doing it wrong when doing a die roll with the intent to let the higher rolling player choose, and instead said that if it were odd I’d corp, if it were even I’d run. Which makes a little sense


#15

Yeah that’s what I thought it should be.
It’s weird because it’s kinda the opposite in swiss, random selection = choice. Aalthough oddly, a lot of players try to determine randomly in swiss which I won’t stand for - having the choice of sides is an important consideration in a time-limited round.


#16

Don’t bring slow decks, then that won’t be a problem :wink:

On a more seriosu note, none of your decks should take more than 35 minutes to win; you need to be able to win in that time in a cut game.


#17

Not true on two counts:

  1. Championship Play is defined as 40 minutes at the top of the first column on p.5 of the Tournament Rules, although granted the text at the top of column two has not been updated to match and still says 35. Since the 40 minutes is in blue it represents a deliberate amendment from the previous version, so I think we can safely assume that 35 minutes is an oversight that FFG missed in editing.

  2. You don’t have to win in the time limit, you just have to be ahead after time is called and both players have finished a turn.

Irrespective of those facts, having a choice is important in swiss. For example, if I only need a single win to make the cut and I have a favoured match-up I’m more likely to select it first to give me the luxury of time to leverage my advantage. If I’m paired against a random player who I’m not familiar with then I am way more likely to run second (especially if they’re repping one or more “slow” IDs) - the reason for this is that I feel I can adjust the pace of the game a lot more as the Runner, so if I’m playing someone who I don’t necessarily trust to play quickly and confidently (i.e. I suspect we might go close to time) I’d prefer to be in a position where I can have more of a say in moving the game along faster when it matters. I think this makes more sense than rushing unnecessarily in the first game and risking an error in order to buy time for a slower second game. The state of the meta makes a difference as well; for instance if the Corp was heavily favoured in general then I would want to play that first to register a safe 2 points before punting my Runner as the underdog. Lots of factors go into the decision. Sometimes it can be something as simple as the fact that I just played Runner, so my head is in the Runner groove and my deck is already out of the box / shuffled. If the rules say I have a choice then I’m going to exercise that right.

At the end of the day I don’t much care what the rule is, I just care that it is consistently enforced. The original poster wrote in the report that he made a decision to choose a side in the second round of double-elimination in order to maximise his chances of getting his favoured side at the business end of the tournament. Absolutely smart play on his behalf, but ultimately not a decision that he should have been allowed to make because the selection should have been random. He potentially gained a material advantage over other people in the field who determined sides randomly and ended up getting their least-preferred side later on.


#18

Why should it?

“A match consists of two games. Players alternate playing Corporation and Runner during a match. For the first game of a match, the players must decide who will play Corporation and who will play Runner by using a random method (such as a die roll or coin flip). The winner of this random method chooses which side to play.

“If both players have played the same side the least, the player who has the greater differential between his or her two sides plays that side. If both players have the same differential, then they must decide who will play Corporation and who will play Runner by using a random method (such as a die roll or coin flip). The winner of this random method chooses which side to play.

Tournament rules are clear and consistent with respect to this - both in Swiss and in double elimination the player who wins die roll gets to choose. Which is good IMO, because if a player loses the roll, they are not automatically playing the worse matchup available, they still need to have their opponent choose wisely, which makes the chance to land in the worse matchup purely due to random somewhat lower.


#19

My bad, I am one of the people who was very much under the impression that this was not the case, but I did just jump on the tournament faq which you copied this out of and you are indeed correct. You live and learn


#20

In that case, comment retracted and props to @jdeng for making a solid decision.