Home | About | Tournament Winning Decklists | Forums

Where is the MWL? - As of August 20th, 2018 - MWL 2.2 is here (effective 2018.09.06)


#764

if you want to go back and forth with @CrushU, you could just take it to PM’s. Right now you are cluttering up this post with a 1-on-1 argument that nobody else is involved with.


#765

Sure. I’m just jealous/angry that CrushU got 12 likes on a post that targeted me as a strawman for a position that was opposite of what I actually argued for. Peace. :thinking::persevere:


#766

If it helps, the reason I took that single sentence out is because that single sentence was all I was against. Honestly it didn’t need your name above it, and I wasn’t intending to call you out specifically, as I tried to use language that applied to the general case, not to your specific position. I try to argue against arguments, not the person, because that way lies heated flamewars. You just happened to have two in a row. :slight_smile:

(Also I think the post got likes because of the second and third paragraphs more than the first one.)

Okay, back on topic now.


And this is why I have a hard time supporting FFG when they want to pick up L5R and start another LCG… You already have a really good one, please support it! >.<


#767

Did I miss an announcement for another LCG after L5R? I know Destiny has some other name–like Dice Systems or something like that.


#768

No no, the ‘another LCG’ I was referring to was L5R… Technically L5R is just the IP, they didn’t have to make an LCG for it. (Example: Battle for Rokugan.)


#769

Tapwrm turns a former Corp advantage (credit lead) into a liability. It breaks a fundamental pillar of the game. Often it is better to remain poor than have credits as Corp; this has been true since the TapCon engine took over months ago. Peace makes this even more frustrating because the Corp is no longer in control of their own credit pool. This doesn’t make for interesting or exciting games of Netrunner. Yes, there is limited counterplay available to the Corp, but purging three turns in a row is not interesting or fun, yet is generally the correct line of play as Corp against these engines to maximize the Corp chance of winning. I personally think the game would be better with SacCon restricted; it is the true offender in the TapCon engine. A card that forces a purge is fine; an engine that forces two to four is not.


#770

Random thought, but would giving Tapwrm the WNP treatment and sticking a unique dot on it help make it a little more fair?


#771

No. It’s rare that two are played at the same time anyway, because then corp purges gain much more utility.


#772

Just a bit of a reality check, in the last 10 SC off of ABR (dates January 27th to February 11th) that had at least 10 players (and link to the winning deck), I found:

  • 4 Decks with Tapwrm: 2 Hayley* (1 with Levy, 1 with Film Critic) both with 3 SacCons, 1 Sunny* with 3 SacCons and 2 Clone Chips, 1 Leela with 3 SacCons and 3 Gang Signs
  • 4 Decks with Magnum Opus: MaxX, Omar, Adam, Bios*
  • Geist with Traders and 2 Levy’s
  • Smoke with event/resource econ and 3 Strikes

* Also had Clot.

Small sampling size, but I wanted to have some idea how common Tapwrm is. Not sure if it’s a problem; maybe if either Tapwrm or SacCon is restricted it will go down to Strike-Levy usage. But, I think if there’s a few more fair Runner econ cards coming this cycle it may have the same effect. Overall, it still seems like a pretty healthy Runner meta.


#773

It would be interesting to know the ratio corp-runner there.

I’m not sure Tapwrm is really a wining asset.


#774

Imagine in 2014 if someone said cards like Magnum Opus and SacCon would be one day be considered too powerful.

From that perspective, I’m ambivalent about SacCon becoming restricted. It might still see play in Shaper decks, but I’d rather have Clone Chip. And plus, I like SacCon being commonly played because it adds a buffer against the possibility of Skorpios becoming competitive. Lockouts suck as bad as prisons.


#775

Well, you also thought Temujin Contracts was a mediocre card, so I’m not sure I trust your economic radar =P


#776

When I came in with the Clot stuff I think maybe I was just salty over a night of getting screwed over by in in my pure FA Titan with only a single CVS for counter. :cry::laughing:

In hind sight I could have teched better, built my deck better.


#777

Learn to read, honestly. Honestly. I never said that.

If I say Temujin should be Restricted instead of being banned, sure this totally means the card is mediocre.

If my economic radar is untrustworthy, your word radar is seriously fucked up.

Now, let’s learn runner - corp was 60-40 or 40-60 wining ratio before “card is a card” means Tapcon is to be banned or something.

To me, Tapwrm is, this one, mediocre in itself, if you like drawing running installing to make a corp lose 3 clics. Saccon barely saves it because it’s clic positive by one, for 4-6 cards in your deck and never less than 3 inf.
3x Sacon makes you lose a grand total of 3 clicks.

But sure, OP, great wining asset, ban that.

I’m just waiting for the next economical genius that would say you can invest draw install 1c restricted to win another clic !


#778

I don’t think I necessarily disagree with your evaluation of Tapwrm here. You are definitely correct, it’s mediocre-to-playable, on its own, when all it reasonably does is force the Corp to purge next turn. If SacCon didn’t exist I still think it might see play but it definitely wouldn’t be a staple. That said, I think SacCon doesn’t just barely save it, I think it makes it downright great. Forcing the Corp to skip 2 full turns can give you as the runner much needed breathing room, plus whatever credit gain from the interim turn. Multiple SacCon make it kinda nuts, since having 2,3+ drip per turn is downright amazeballs (Bloo Moose, as an example, and that doesn’t even force the Corp to skip turns). It also makes a difficult decision for the Corp at times, when it’s worth purging and when not, etc…

I think, given the power of making the Corp skip turns (especially in multiple), I think it’s a “winner”, but I’d also agree that it’s not OP and I think the bally-hoo against it may be somewhat overstated and colored by the state of runner econ and corp balance at the moment.


#779

Minimum 4 cards, price of a run + 9 clics and 2 inf for 12 clics purging + maybe winning 3c unless you’re loosing your time watching the corp scoring is really good enough to restrict it ?

No. Or restrict Sure Gamble.


#780

“Maybe winning 3 c”

you said it. How you come to this outcome? Tpwurm can give more, even more with Peace in our time. So, If you get 2 credits per turn then you are at winning 6 creds, not three.

Also, if the corp’s hand is full when you install the tpwurm, then the corp has something to do with the extra 4 cards drawn, it is going to discard some cards, added bonus.

ALSO, in Hayley, intalling 3 sac cons in Hayley costs 1,5 clicks, not 3. Diesel and SMC can even compress the clicks more.

Take these into account and redo your math. Presenting the worst case scenario as evidence that your math is right is equal to presenting the best case scenario as evidence, A.K.A. wrong. the truth is somewhere between and always other variables (like runner ID and current meta) have to be taken into consideration.

Cheers,


#781

Diesel card + Tap + 2 Ressource + ID = 5 card combo sure, this is better than 2.

You forgot telling it yields 45c a turn, happens T1 everytimes, and then the corpo can never IAA Obokata in the remote, and can never rez everything in the remote once you come with your 45 fresh credits cause they prefer keeping 175c, x 4 turns and your hand made of 56 cards because obviously you can run with your 1 inf peace and all your deck focused around “don’t FA / NA Chronos, please”.

If you can’t discard 4 cards as the corp and adapt, you’d better stop Netrunner. I don’t lose more than 1/3 to this, so this shouldn’t worry better players than me, end of story.

Sunny’s console is actually the card I lose more game than anything made of worm.

Cheers too.


#783

I understand that the MWL is a topic which is a little controversial, but please try to keep the thread civil and on topic.


#784

I’m not sure I agree with your evaluation from above.

For one, I’m not really sure where you’re getting that you’re only maybe earning 3 credits off of the Tapwrms. If that is the case then whomever is using the Tapwrm is not using it to it’s full potential. You should only be installing it when you get at least 2 credits, and with multiple SacCon on the board that can easily turn into a 4-8 credit gain even assuming the Corp purges 4 times in a row and only has 10 credits in the bank. That’s not even counting the times that a Corp has to let it sit on the table in favor of scoring that turn. Or, maybe because they can’t afford to purge 4 times in a row because then you, the Runner, have 4 turns of setup on them and got your breakers/other econ out and now have R&D/Remote Lock ready.

I’m also not sure how that’s considered “losing your time watching the Corp scoring”. It is not as if you forego playing the game in order to purely set up a Tapwrm engine ASAP. You do it when it makes sense for the tempo of the game. No need to let the Corp run rampant. You have to install it when the Corp has a ton of money and you have SacCon. Or they’re about to score an agenda you know you can’t contest so the Corp has to chose between scoring the agenda or letting you have a free turn of Tapwrm credits.

I believe that you are massively undervaluing taking clicks away from the Corp. Theoretically, and realistically, for an investment of 2 cards and 3 clicks (a SacCon and Tapwrm install) you can cause the Corp to lose 6 clicks while you gain a few credits. Not only that, but the Corp loses 2 entire turns at a time, which is much more valuable than taking 1 click over 6 turns. Trading 3 clicks to make the Corp lose 6 is a pretty dang good trade. The money on top makes it worth the deck slots.

After writing all of this I realize that I have made some assumptions about the kinds of decks you see that may not hold true between us. Most of my evaluation comes from expecting the Corp to have a bank of 10, 15+ credits so that you can get credit value out of Tapwrm in the event the Corp decides not to purge, or you have delayed it’s removal with SacCon. I also remember from the earlier discussion TTW you mentioning regularly not being able to afford to rez ice in response. Are Corps you are playing with/against regularly poor (less than ~6-8 credits in the bank regularly)? If so, then Tapwrm might legitimately be a poor choice in the meta you are playing in, and so we might both be right about it in our individual situation.