Hot Pockets Delivery Service: 1st Place Store Champ Deck

Just played series with this deck, went 3-0. Thought you might enjoy the breakdown:

Game 1 - 24 turns, 7-3 / Game 3 - 16 turns, flatline / Game 5 - 12 turns, 7-6

It's funny - it looks to me like Wolf and I each built Runner decks designed to contend with the Corp decks we were using. In other words, my Runner deck countered Sniper's Corp deck and his Runner deck countered his Corp deck.

Here is how we spent our actions. Note - I've lumped run preps in with the runs (rather than the preps). Since I'll be looking at both success rate and agenda frequency, I want to keep #-of-successful-runs separate from #-of-cards-accessed. Also, since some of the actions are unclear I've decided to lump all preps and installs together (since OCTGN doesn't actually track where cards are installed, I often can't see what's being accessed/bypassed in the gamelog).

At the bottom of this email I'll be providing the decks used and the (cleaned up) gamelogs.

Nathan (through 52 turns)

68 installs

52 mandatory draws

43 take credits

28 add advance counters

10 add credits to Marked Accounts

6 operations

2 draw cards

2 draw cards via Jackson Howard

1 pay to trash resource (tag effect)

Observations: this is an install-heavy, shell-game style corp deck - averaging 1.31 installations per turn (nearly half of my actions!) and drawing just 2 cards through 52 turns. Also noteworthy is the relatively small number of advancement counters needed. In Game 5 I was able to advance 7 agenda points with just 9 advancement counters (using a combination of Astroscript Pilot Program and SanSan City Grid).

Wolf (through 52 turns)

62 runs

51 take credits

28 draw cards

19 install cards

16 preps

12 draw cards via Mr. Li

7 pay to remove tags

4 lost to bypassing HB ice

2 triggers of Kati Jones

Observations: I think this is a fairly typical Criminal breakdown (he's using Silhouette and Desperado) - lots of runs and a mix of everything else. Relatively light on preps for a criminal and very light on installed cards, although Wolf was perma-tagged in two of the three games and so couldn't use many resources. The 0-3 record of this deck is misleading - it was actually ahead the majority of the time it was played. In fact if we only look at games 1 and 5, Wolf held the lead in 21 turns to my 5.

Wolf's runs were well distributed and had a very high success rate. Fortunately (for me) he hit a disproportionately small number of agendas running on central servers. With my 11 agendas out of 49 cards (22.4%), Wolf went 1 for 19 on R&D accesses (5.3%). Unlucky.

56 successful runs in 62 attempts (90.3%) 5 agendas in 24 successful runs on remote servers (accounting for all but 2 of the agendas he scored) 1 agenda in 19 R&D accesses (5.3%) 1 agenda in 16 HQ access (6.3%)

It's always interesting to compare sustain economy, particularly in this case since it was central to the theme of my deck (low-click economy cards which are expensive for the runner to trash). For the purposes of this section I'm ignoring preps and operations.

On the surface, PAD Campaign and Marked Accounts seem very similar (both assets, PAD Campaign is 2 to install, 4 to trash and gives you 1 credit per turn, Marked Accounts is 0 to install, 5 to trash and can be pumped for 3 bits (one action) which trickle back one per turn). So ultimately they're both trickle economy cards, one more click efficient, the other cheaper and slightly more expensive to trash.

In practice they both got installed heavily and performed very differently. PAD Campaign is much more efficient and valuable.

Over the course of three games, PAD Campaign garnered me a net total of 21 credit at the cost of 6 actions (so 3.5 credits per action, nearly as efficient as Hedge Funds) and cost the Wolf an additional 12 bits to trash.

Over those same three games, Marked Accounts also garnered a net of 21 credits, but those credits cost me 15 actions (so 1.4 per action) in addition to 5 bits spent by Wolf to trash.

On the other hand, I finished every game with a rezzed Marked Accounts on the table. But these were reasonably long games. They're definitely less attractive targets than the PADs, but that makes sense since they're far less efficient.

Wolf used three different economy resources, but his numbers are janky because I was so tag focused. He installed a Bank Job and a Kati Jones in the first game, neither of which a got to use (for a net total of 4 actions he received -3 bits, for a total of -0.75 credits per turn, and costing me 2 credits to trash).

He had a lot more success with Daily Casts, one of my least favorite runner neutrals but a nice compromise against a tag deck. He installed a total of 4 Daily Casts, gaining 20 credits in just 4 actions (for a whopping 5.0 credits per action) and always installing them at points in the game where I couldn't easily trash them.

Thanks for sharing your experience and such an in depth breakdown of accesses and the like. Even though your friend was abit unlucky with his RnD pulls, between DBS and Jackson filtering agendas it's not to uncommon to not see an agenda with only a single access.

Also you commented on how he was often ahead, that's another strong point of this deck. Even if you bleed 2-4 point, even 6 in some cases, you still still stabalize and come back, considering the runner often invests alot to steal those points and will often run out of steam and need to refuel to strike again. Hope you continue testing and enjoying this deck, it's one of my favorite!