OK. So. We didn't have much fun playing against IG did we Phil?
Kudos to Brendan for playing it well of course, and we are glad to have had the experience.
But eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh I am just stuck.
I didn't really have a plan in my Hayley game except get set up to enable me to hit Archives with Archives Interface. Unfortunately i never drew it, and with no agendas being scored/stolen I was unable to tutor for a single thing. If I HAD drawn it then the game would have turned into a slog fest which I MIGHT have been able to win, but I still think it would have been an uphill struggle for my economic options to try and keep up. Especially as IG is able to put considerable resources into protecting centrals. This made my plan to hopefully pinch one or two from Indexing even more problematic - having to trash Jacksons notwithstanding.
In short i don't know how I can adapt my Hayley deck to cope. Phil seemed pretty depressed about Noise & the Andy matchup looked terrible (and presumably this would be one of the strongest for Criminal).
I'm left thinking in 3 directions:
1 - We find a way to NOT play IG's game
That's what I was hoping I could do with Hayley - let them build their boardstate but then surgically take it down later once I had set up. Alternatively if R&D was underdefended then pinching off R&D could become a possibility again. As discussed, this failed.
I still feel that the best way to beat a lot of corps is to find a way to not play the game they want to play - or to make them play in the way you want to. If NEH tries to go fast you stop them Fast Advancing out, if HB wants to play never advance in a horrible remote then playing the Source... OK nabbing the agendas off R&D is often the response but seriously THE SOURCE (sorry, janky asides). Hitting R&D or credit denial ruined many a shell game deck's day. So... what's the "OK we'll do our thing" against IG? I've not worked it out
2- We trash and trash and trash
You load up on Imps, Scrubbers, Paricia's and just get trashing. Hit at least 1 thing a turn and just try and fight your way back to them not having the huge amount of utility of all those servers
3 - Hit 'em hard & early
Go so fast in the early game that the mid/late game boardstate never develops.
4 - Apocalypse?
Variation of above, with a plan to deal with Hostile Infrastructure.
5 - Hope the rules change
All of the above looks like it might be necessary to be Whizzard to do, which is annoying because Whizzard was already a great idea as a runner. And, to me, it seems that it just comes down to that sheer raw power of that machine of Draw, Ice destruction, Medium, and all that jazz. I actually have no major problem with that deck as such, I just don't want to have to play it to compete at a tournament. Sure, I CAN take another deck but I feel like I will just have to accept that I lose to IG. That bothers me. I don't mind having more difficult match ups, in fact in playing a toolbox deck I kind of end up with all match ups having dead draws to play around, but I am struggling to think I can play a deck even remotely like mine and competing with IG. That feels a little galling. I guess, however, this is how Andysucker (and other Criminals) players felt against RP so maybe this is just something I have to accept?
In other news I had an OK day with my latest HB rush experiment. I can't speak for Phil & Brendan absolutely but they certainly seemed to have a lot more fun against it - win OR lose. That said, I think it mainly won because Aggressive Secretary is harsh vs. Criminals, I think I might keep exploring with the new 5/3 Voting Tampering HB agenda. I don't think it is in the same league as Global Food, but I DO like it.
"Guy, you are often right for all the wrong reasons. And if you are wrong, it is always for right reasons." - Brendan .
The Praetor of Jank