10 Agenda7 Netrunner Podcast – Strategies & Rants

Episode 10 of Agenda7 is online!

Glen and Dave discuss the Humanity’s Shadow previews, opening hand strategies, the Jinteki Shell game and more. By the time you hear this episode, you’ll probably already have your copy – but we can’t wait any longer to record!

jfbiiffjPodcast 10 includes:
1 – Humanity’s Shadow previews
2 – Glen’s Weyland rant
3 – Opening hand strategies
4 – Dave’s Syracuse, NY Netrunner regional
5 – Glen’s False Lead rant
6 – Understanding the Jinteki Shell game
7 – Acknowledgements & contact

Episode 10 was recorded on Apr.28th, 2013 and is now mirrored on CARDGAMEDB.COM. Thanks too to “Joe” for leaving a YouTube link to equalizing and compressing in Audacity. I watched it, used the settings, and this is possibly the best audio quality yet. Let me know if you have any problems with it. 

Agenda7’s Netrunner Podcast is available on iTunes – if you have the time, please leave an iTunes review if that’s how you subscribe. You can leave a comment here, or on our facebook page. Many thanks to Matt Nott for reviewing the show. We hope you get something useful out of it.

Direct download link: 10 Agenda7 Netrunner Podcast

28 thoughts on “10 Agenda7 Netrunner Podcast – Strategies & Rants

  1. Oh, those HS spoilers. Old spoilers. When did you record this episode? Full spoilers appeared on BGG last week or so.

    You played the old Netrunner and you’re surprised about wording? Complex wording of Android: Netrunner is perfect and necessary, because this game is hardcore and has mechanics that require extreme precision.

    You’ve got both “place” and “add” counters to represent different actions. I’ll repeat, placing tokens from Matrix Analyser is not an act of advancing, despite the fact that it results in a card being advanced.
    It’s similar to, let’s say, playing Archived Memories vs drawing a card. Both result in a card being added to your HQ, but they are different actions.

    Please stop making those comparisons to real life, they do not work and do not make sense. I have a really hard time seeing your concerns as legitimate, I just do not have any problems with wording.

    Then again, I’ve been playing MtG for 8 years and it taught me to be careful about wording and all those subtleties are obvious to me. WIth time, those things will became obvious to you too. If not, then maybe you just weren’t born to play this game. 😛

    • Thanks for writing Absurd – good comments. First off – we love the game – Glen and I are really big fans. This is not an argument we can win. In fact it’s not an argument at all – rules are rules – and it took parsing the Matrix Analyzer/Weyland combo to start making us be more careful about rulings. Up until this point there were never any problems, and we’re more disappointed about the rulings than anything.

      I think Glen’s analogy is a good one, albeit not in a fantasy card realm, but a good one nonetheless. Glen hasn’t gone overboard on real-life analogies – in all the previous episodes there has never been a planned rant. I think he’s entitled. As a Magic player, I can only imagine the number of gripe sessions over cards you must have had.

      You Magic guys do have a leg up on the rest of us though. Sooooo many cards, keywords and banned/restricted lists – you’re used to all this. – Dave

  2. I agree with Absurd, I dont see the confusion really, two totally different actions are very clearly printed on the cards if you’ve read the rulebook in depth, most rule questions on BGG are just ppl who havent read the rulebook or desperately trying to bend the rule one way or another when its clearly arent meant to be and are accually really easy to understand. I havent had problem with any of the rulings but im an old mtg/tcg player so i guess the rule-skillz comes with experience 😛

  3. I understand your frustration over the rulings, but there are two things to keep in mind: these are just clarifications from Lukas, not official rulings, so it’s possible for them to be different rulings in the next FAQ. For example, Lukas was asked at one point if Cyberfeeders could be used for Femme Fatale’s bypass ability, and he said no. The first FAQ came out, and it contradicted Lukas’ opinion, stating that the recurring credit could be used for Femme Fatale’s bypass ability. The FAQ ruling made more sense, and now everything is fine.

    Secondly, both of the rules clarifications that you point out limit the reach of a card ability, and even if you think that it’s not necessary for balance now, it might be in the future. They have playtested many more packs ahead, and have a better understanding of what kinds of limitations are necessary for cards right now. Looking at False Leads, though, I would argue it really is necessary for it to be two and only two clicks, even if the wording is confusing. The main reason for this is because of the flat-line win condition. Take Scorched Earth, for example. If I make a deck with False Leads, Data Raven, and Scorched Earth, I can almost guarantee a win unless you only ever run against a server with Data Raven on your first click. There are countermeasures, but it means that a deck without them now has no real way of getting around this win condition because of an agenda that can often be scored out of hand. The same is true with something like Snare!, which does damage and gives a tag, which you can then use False Leads to follow up with Neural EMPs and/or Scorched Earth. With the ruling the way it is, it gives Runners a little more leeway while making it so that their second click isn’t safe either. To extend the utility a little more, though, we have cards like Bernice Mai coming out. Now, if they run on a server with Data Raven on their first or third click, you can give them an extra tag to that they didn’t account for and use False Leads to do away with them. The need for all of these pieces to come together makes it a little more fair than the Corporation being allowed to forfeit False Leads on the second or third click, making three out of four clicks on the Runner’s turn unsafe for running against anything that could tag them.

    • Wow Skiesbleed – this is brilliant. Thank-you for your post. These couple of paragraphs should be mandatory reading for all card gamers.

      I agree about the rulings because I’m an old hand at miniature gaming as well. Nothing’s official until the next FAQ – and this is what I don’t like about hunting down rulings on BGG. Hell, people could post false rulings saying that it was a Lukas response. I don’t expect FFG to post an FAQ after every datapack, but I do expect one after a cycle, so, it’s coming.

      What you say is too true. Cards come out and are paired/contradicted by something else in the next datapack, and balance is maintained. Thanks again for the excellent insight. – Dave

  4. Couldn’t agree more about place and add (what a pain). My rant for the game is the pronunciation of the card Janus. “Janice” is a girl’s name. Janus (YAW-NOOSE) is the god of Doorways.2 faced, and Sean Bean’s alias in Goldeneye.

    • Those freakin’ Roman gods! Thank-you for somehow combining Sean Bean and Netrunner – that made me laugh out loud.

      Sorry Randolph – not gonna say Yawnoose. 🙂

  5. I think Glen’s rant about Tollbooth was a bit off base. If you think about it, you have to pay a toll to pass through a tollbooth. If you cannot pay the toll, you shall not pass (Gandalf style). You aren’t going to pay $2 to not go through a $3 tollbooth.

    I thought the rant was funny though.

  6. Play the Game, Read the Book? That was my friendly local game store when I attended Syracuse University, though in those days it was called Altered States.

    In fact, finding out about that store is what got me firmly stuck into tabletop games, after a dalliance with Magic in the 90s. I loved the walk across town to their warehouse-like store to browse all the games. Glad to see the tradition’s going strong, if under a new name.

  7. Nice episode guys.
    Especially the first rant was pretty funny, although I don’t agree with it 😛
    And BWBI doesn’t necessarily suck – you just have to abuse it. When I have an Ice Wall or a Shadow out in the first couple of turns, I easily get more money out of it than I would with the core identity.

  8. Hey Guys,
    I’m a runner from Syracuse and swung by Play The Game Read The Story to pick up Humanities Shadow and playtest for tomorrows regional in Rochester. I mentioned to them that you had great things to say about the organization of there A:NR regional and they wanted to send out a big “Thank You!”. I also asked them about tracking agendas and they said that it was 100% for “tie-breakers” and optimal pairing.
    I’ve got my fingers crossed for tomorrows regional and plan on playing Gabe Resource Denial and HB Glacial (Josh’s list from Decks of the Winners). I’ll let you know how it goes, will you folks be present?

  9. Hi Total – thanks for doing that. It was a great tourney in Syracuse and the store deserves the credit.

    I did not make it to Rochester. I was just too busy at work and actually worked the weekend. How did you do? How many were there? I’m keen to know how Josh’s deck worked for you after so many more cards have come out.

  10. I don’t think whirlpool would force a runner to access an ambush asset. It just makes them complete the run, which accessing is optional after the run is over, right?

    So you could combine it with houski grid to make them take damage (for completing the run) but whirlpool wouldn’t foce them to access the snare in there with it.

    • A run is only considered successful if you access cards.
      The time after you break the last piece of ICE and you actually accessing cards in the server, is the last time you can jack out.

      • You actually approach the server in the same way you approach a piece of ICE. Because you can’t jack out with Whirlpool, you will access all cards in the server. This is not an option unless you’re using Bank Job or another card that says “instead of accessing cards…”

        Accessing is not optional. Choosing to trash cards is optional. Stealing agendas is also NOT optional.
        – Dave

      • Stealing Fetal AI is optional though. You can just opt to not pay the two credits.

      • Is there an FAQ I don’t know about re: Fetal AI, because stealing an agenda is not optional. (pg. 18) If you have 2 creds, you must pay it to steal Fetal AI. The only way you can’t steal it, is if you don’t have the creds – which would suck.

        But the rules say – you can never decline to steal an agenda.

      • You can decline to pay the optional cost. Just like you are not forced to steal an agenda which is protected by Red Herrings. You can just decline to pay the 5 bucks, even if you have them. It’s actually in the FAQ 2.0 on page 5 as well.

        Question: ‘Can the runner decline to pay 5 credits to steal an agenda that is accessed in a server with Red Herrings? The rules say that the Runner cannot decline to steal an agenda.’

        Answer: ‘Red Herrings requires the payment of an additional cost, and the Runner can choose not to pay this cost. While the Runner cannot decline to steal an agenda, he can decline to pay the additional cost, and therefore the agenda is not stolen. This also applies to Fetal AI.’

        Note that you can’t decline to pay the cost for Tollbooth, because it isn’t an additional cost, just like you can’t refuse the tag from Data Raven without ending the run.

  11. You are right of course Paradox. Gotta read and reread the FAQ just as much as the rulebook! You had me going though – it’s FAQ 1.1 – for a minute I was thinking, how did I miss 2.0’s release?

    Thanks man.

  12. I do find it a bit odd myself. FFG is usually pretty good about the wording on their cards. So it makes sense for the slight term to cause a big difference. Having said this though, usually they do try to keep to terms in the book. Having both ‘add’ and ‘place’ used on different cards is a bit quirky when the term used most frequently on other cards and rules is ‘place’. I’m going to go through everything tonight I think and see if they do use add elsewhere.

  13. So, I have a favor to ask. It’s totally fine if you guys want to bleep out some of your language, that’s your prerogative, but can you please, please, please use a different sound? I listen to this podcast on my headphones, and that thing smarts. I’ll just be walkin’ along, mindin’ my own business, then BLEEP! It’s so high pitched :[

    • Ha! – never heard that one. OK Anon – compromise – I’ll use the same sound, but wickedly reduce the level on it. Thanks for listening.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s