Jump to content



Photo

Cyber Exodus Preview


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 Messenger

Messenger

    Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 10:36 PM

NO. I neither misunderstand nor am twisting what you're saying. Neither does my use of partial quotes do that, especialy where it allows me to zero in on what's wrong with your arguments.

 

First of all, you gave that statement, that example. You said:

If you see an ICE that you can't break or that will kill you, you gotta jack out… but by doing so before it is rezzed by the Corp, you prevent them from spending credits.

There's already a recognition on your part that not jacking out will hurt the Runner or even cause him to lose- and yet you're still whining about how Snitch preventing defeat didn't get the Corp to spend cash. Killing the Runner will automatically win the game for the Corp.

There is no getting around what you posted. There is no getting around that conditions for winning and losing. There is no change of meaning involved. You're explicitly saying that Snitch falls short in your standards because it doesn't get the Corp to spend on rezzing ICE even when Snitch just saved the Runner from losing.

 

Second, in regards to:

I never run just for the sake of it, never test my luck on a protected server.

And:

 

For the sake of it, which in this case would be (and correct me if I'm wrong, since I ain't am not a native speaker after all) "running for the sake of running" as in "running just to run", for no particular reason.
I meant to say, and I thought it was clear (so please forgive me if it wasn't), that I usually run with a purpose.
Thus, I judge by the amount of credits left for the Corp, the number of ICE on a server, the ICE he already rezzed, the influence I know he spent on other cards… stuff like that. And if it seems to me I can make it, I run, Archer or not.
 
To begin with, only those intentionally trying to lose or who are not taking the game seriously run for the sheer heck of it. Serious players run for the purpose of doing something meaningful and useful in the game, whether grabbing agenda or sabotaging Corp resources, even if they do it without the level or preparation you practice.
 
However, what you describe here is a situation wherein the you are still going in blind, nevermind how prepared you are for it. That can be catastrophic from the position of the Runner where the guess was wrong and you are in truth unable to deal with the ICE that you encounter.
 
 
 
Third:
 
In a game of the last tournament, my opponent had 4 agenda points and I had less (don't remember, 2 or 3, I stole an Agenda from R&D).
He had a server with 2 layers of ICE and an Agenda installed (I knew, because he installed it over an Asset).
I knew it could be the end of the game, and I had to run there… but I also knew he could have some very bad ICE. What could be the worst ICE for me? Archer.
So I gathered credits to reach 8 and run. He decided to rezz the first ICE and it was, infact, Archer. But he had to forfeit an Agenda (and he only had 2 AstroScript) for it. I paid 8 credits to break the 2 Trash subroutines, and ended the run.
That move made me win the game, because he did score that Agenda, but it only brought him back to 4 and the last agenda he did, for 1 point, wasn't enough to make him win.
 
Snitch would have helped me in that situation? I honestly don't think so.
 
This is a straw man argument.
 
Snitch's worth is in how it can save you from a hazardous encounter with ICE. What you've posited here is how you made a mistake assessing the threat of Archer while stumbling on how to turn its rezzing to your advantage to win your game. You closed it by questioning how Snitch could have made things better in order to question's Snitch's worth when you didn't need to be saved from Archer to begin with.
 
The very fact that you turned the rezzing of Archer into a game-winning move shows it's not actually the worst ICE for you in that situation. Perhaps it was even the best ICE you could have faced then and there.
 
Furthermore, if you read my second reply to you in this thread, you'll find that I covered how Snitch can enable such tactics.
 
 
 
That's why I said "I'm not really excited about Snitch".
 
And for all the wrong reasons.
 
 
 
Does it looks like I said I am never wrong, to you?

So, you have indeed made mistakes in your guesswork that led you to encounter ICE stronger, tougher and more dangerous than you can handle? You've already shown a wrong assessment of Archer earlier.



#22 Messenger

Messenger

    Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:10 AM

Saturnine said:

photogasm said:

Imagine 8 advancement tokens on a woodcutter.  Either gonna do a lotta damage or cost a massive amount to break through.

 

 

 

Sure, but at that point it's likely you've invested 12 credits and 8 clicks plus installation. That's an awful lot of time and credits, and its value dips significantly against a runner with Parasite. Also, in the early stages of pumping it up it's more of a minor inconvenience to the runner, especially given that it has no surprise value. Sure, it's nice if you can use it with Corporate Troubleshooter, but only if you can outspend the runner.

I can see the card may have some potential, but I'm probably going to remain skeptical until I've played with it and wins me over.

I don't think it's fair to cite Parasite or any other specific card- at least not without bringing up how a highly advanced Woodcutter is practically proof against Femme Fatale. complice Each ICE will have its strengths and weaknesses especially when it comes to particular cards.

I don't use advanceable ICE myself, so I gotta ask: how often do people use such ICE? How often do they advance it? By how much per ICE? At what point do you realize it's too much? Too little? Just right?



#23 Paddosan

Paddosan

    Member

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 07:56 PM

 

I'll be using Bold for quotes, since the forum has already gone nuts, better avoid any more trouble.

So how did you know he just didn´t install another asset (trap) over the old one to mess with you, oh wise one? 

This is something I myself have done a few times. Just every now and then it can win a game to get the runner convinced that he knows something

That is indeed a good play, however having played with that guy for the previous turns I had enough reasons to believe that there was an Agenda there, not a trap of some kind.
It had no advancement on it so far, so it could maybe have been Snare!, but I had enough cards to survive anyway.

Plus, I hadn't much of a choice, with him being already at 4 points, I couldn't let him take any more.


So, you have indeed made mistakes in your guesswork that led you to encounter ICE stronger, tougher and more dangerous than you can handle? You've already shown a wrong assessment of Archer earlier.

I see we value right and wrong assessments in a different way.
Furthermore, you failed to understand what I wrote. Or the order in which that happened, anyway.

1) I had to run there, as I said, since it could be the winning agenda for my opponent.
2) Thinking at which ICE would have affected me the most, I considered Archer the worst.
3) I gathered enough credits as to be able to break at least the 2 Trash subroutines on Archer.
4) I run on that server.
5) Archer is infact rezzed, and since I judged correctly, I had enough money to break two subroutines.

Not the opposite. No stumbling. No mistake.

The one assessment you consider wrong made me ultimately win the game.
In your book, probably, that's not good enough.

 



#24 Messenger

Messenger

    Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 09:27 PM

 

I see we value right and wrong assessments in a different way.
Furthermore, you failed to understand what I wrote. Or the order in which that happened, anyway.
 
1) I had to run there, as I said, since it could be the winning agenda for my opponent.
2) Thinking at which ICE would have affected me the most, I considered Archer the worst.
3) I gathered enough credits as to be able to break at least the 2 Trash subroutines on Archer.
4) I run on that server.
5) Archer is infact rezzed, and since I judged correctly, I had enough money to break two subroutines.
 
Not the opposite. No stumbling. No mistake.
 
The one assessment you consider wrong made me ultimately win the game.
In your book, probably, that's not good enough.
 
No. I got what you wrote correctly and in the proper order.
 
It's you who just doesn't get it.
 
How can Archer have been the worst ICE for you to face then when encountering it won you the game?
 
Do I have to point out how you said (twice now) that Archer would have been the worst for you in that situation?
 
The worst ICE would have been one that stopped you without causing your opponent to give up an agenda. It would have been the one that would cause you to lose the game. That's the kind of ICE that would have affected you the most, leading you to defeat.
 
It was you who considered Archer to have been the worst in that scenario. It wasn't because running into it and getting the Corp to rezz destroyed the Corp's lead and eventually awarded you, the Runner, the win.
 
You made the assessment that Archer was the worst when it turned out to be the best ICE you could meet. You had what is called by some as a "happy accident". It was a pleasant surprise despite the any errors causing or preceding it.
 
One thing I do agree with: your assessments on cards and tactical analysis certainly aren't good enough. You talk about how Snitch isn't a good card by citing reasons that completely miss the point. You bring up this scenario to explain how Snitch is worthless when it has absolutely no relation to Snitch. Even other people in this thread are wondering why you're saying these things when they don't make sense!
 
You just don't get it.
 
 


#25 AndrewRogue

AndrewRogue

    Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:46 AM

Snitch allows you to take chances or be more aggressive safely.

You're playing against HB. You have Corroder and Zule out. Your opponent is about to score what you're sure is a Priority Requisition. They have two ICE in front of that server. One is a revealed Ice Wall, one is hidden.

If you run it and it turns out to be Rototurret, you lose a breaker and they score a Priority Requisition, putting you in a terrible spot. If you don't run it and it is Rototurret, you avoid losing a breaker, but they are now 3 points cloers to winning. You don't run and it isn't Rototurret (say it is another Ice Wall) then you just gave them an Agenda for nothing.

Snitch allows you to avoid the worst case circumstances.

Basically, Snitch allows you to limit how much time trying to always be safe, and instead allows you to make more aggressive/riskier plays without paying the price if you're wrong.



#26 Paddosan

Paddosan

    Member

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 26 January 2013 - 06:14 AM

 

How can Archer have been the worst ICE for you to face then when encountering it won you the game?

Well but that's precisely the point I said you misunderstood.
When I run, it wasn't anymore, because by gathering enough credits it couldn't harm me anymore.

Do I have to point out how you said (twice now) that Archer would have been the worst for you in that situation?

I said it indeed, because I didn't have enough credits to break it, nor I could bypass it.
That's why I said that I made the right call, because I gathered those few more credits that made all the difference.

I agree entirely with what you said earlier, about a wrong guess could prove catastrofic. But mine wasn't.

How can, taking into account an ICE that could prove disastrous and thus deciding to get enough creds to survive and actually turn it to my advantage, be considered a bad assessment of the situation?

The examples I made about Snitch may have been bad, but I didn't mean to say (or make them to prove that) Snitch is worthless.
As it has been said by many including you the card has its good points. I am not so excited about it, because I don't see it as really necessary.

Snitch allows you to avoid the worst case circumstances.

Precisely. However, careful preparation of his actions and play experience basically does the same for a player.
Snitch is just one more weapon in that direction.

It's quite good against Replicating Perfection, though… since it allows jack out on the very first ICE.

The card I like the most in the preview, anyway, is Test Run… search and install, plus the possible recycle.
Will probably allow for very fast decks, maybe better if with Chaos Theory.

 



#27 Messenger

Messenger

    Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 02:56 AM

 

Well but that's precisely the point I said you misunderstood.
When I run, it wasn't anymore, because by gathering enough credits it couldn't harm me anymore.
 
No. You never said that. You simply considered Archer to be the worst one you could possibly encounter. You raised your credits as part of the preparations you like to brag about, but by no means did you know it was Archer. And you certainly did not think that Archer would give you the win.
 
Furthermore, regardless of the excuses you're trying to pull off now and the misunderstanding you claim is happening, the fact remains that it's still not a scenario that puts Snitch in a bad light. Neither was it the absolute worst ICE for you to run into in the game.
 
I said it indeed, because I didn't have enough credits to break it, nor I could bypass it.
That's why I said that I made the right call, because I gathered those few more credits that made all the difference.
 
I agree entirely with what you said earlier, about a wrong guess could prove catastrofic. But mine wasn't.
 
How can, taking into account an ICE that could prove disastrous and thus deciding to get enough creds to survive and actually turn it to my advantage, be considered a bad assessment of the situation?
 
Again. You still just don't get it.
 
Archer was not the worst ICE for you to encounter for the purpose of winning that game because encountering Archer caused you to win that game.
 
Your opponent had the lead in agenda points. The only way you saw to swing victory away from him was to steal some of your own. This would close the gap in points between you two.
 
Your plan was straightforward and according to how most games normally go: make a run, break through the ICE, claim your prize.
 
That didn't happen. Archer rezzed and ended your run. However, in doing so, your opponent had to forfeit ICE and lose his lead. You then went on to win by points.
 
You failed in your run, but you succeeded in your goal: getting the lead in agenda points. This gave you victory.
 
The true worst case scenario for you then was meeting ICE that you could not break that ended runs that did not cause the Corp to lose agenda points. You would have failed in your run while the Corp kept its lead and then won.
 
It's a bad assessment of the situation inasfar as you lucked out. You're clear in your narration that you weren't planning for this to happen, to win that way (despite now pretending that's what you meant). If you did, you'd have considered Archer a fortuitous ICE to meet rather than the "worst". It would have meant you realizing that encountering Archer would turn your run into a win-win situation. You're only seeing it now because it's been pointed out to you.
 
The examples I made about Snitch may have been bad, but I didn't mean to say (or make them to prove that) Snitch is worthless.
As it has been said by many including you the card has its good points. I am not so excited about it, because I don't see it as really necessary.
 
Yeah. They were bad. Really bad. Not even just missing the point of Snitch or showing a situation where Snitch doesn't even come to play, but you also failed to truly understand how one of your own games worked out.
 
As for not meaning to say Snitch is worthless, neither did you makes that point clear from the beginning nor did you say anything to indicate such. You started by saying you didn't play blindly anyway (which you actually do) and then went on to say that it's a Runner card that benefits the Corp more than the Runner, as if losing the game was worse than getting the Corp to spend more.
 
All your replies have been to defend that viewpoint until it had to be pointed out to you how silly it was. You even went on to say that FFG themselves were wrong in their article about it, saying that:

"Snitch does not help you run smarter, on the contrary, it helps you run wilder."

This is despite the ability of Snitch to let you see through the most basic bluff in the game!

And let's get this straight: lots of cards in this game are not a necessity to begin with. That's besides the point.

It's not necessity but effectiveness and practicality that's in question here. The ability to see ahead and avoid among the worst the Corp can throw at you is highly valuable and attractive.



#28 Paddosan

Paddosan

    Member

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 04:25 AM

Just for the record, saying to someone "you certainly did not think" is just ludicrous.

For someone acting as the ultimate connoisseur, should be obvious that 8 credits are what's needed to break the trash subroutines of Archer with the most used Killer program (aka Ninja). The math is easily done: 6 creds to raise the strenght twice, 2 creds to break two subroutines.

"So I gathered credits to reach 8 and run."

And that's what I wrote, just scroll up.
What do you think I gathered exactly 8 credits for?
A hint was on the line before: "What could be the worst ICE for me? Archer."

Then again, since you claim you know what I was thinking, I guess further discussion is kinda pointless.
It also seems you're getting way too angry about this, and the discussion has been derailed enough anyway.

 



#29 Messenger

Messenger

    Member

  • Members
  • 224 posts

Posted 30 January 2013 - 06:57 PM

"What could be the worst ICE for me? Archer."

It's not ludicrous because that is exactly what happened as evidenced by what you said and how things turned out. Archer popping up was the next best thing to scoring that Agenda and you still don't get it.

And you're right; I am getting too angry about this. After all, I'm not the one missing out on what was a good turn of tactical fortune.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS