So, at the time that this card is coming out, we don't know a whole lot about what Borealis will look like as a whole. We don't know what other Killers will be in there, we only know one sentry (Anemone) and we don't know if there's anything waiting in the wings to play with the "weapon" subtyping on this, which is purely flavor at the moment of this writing.

What we do know is that, at this moment, there is one Gold Standard killer, also in Crim (the home of great Killers), by which all others must be judged. Bukhgalter - it's efficient, reasonably costed to get down, and much like Discover™, it's the Card that Pays You Back! So how, indeed, do these two cards compare?

Based on the pure numbers of how much it costs to break a given sentry with both cards operating on their own best lone potential... Revolver holds up really well, actually. Against all but 2 Sentries in the current Startup format, Revolver is equal or cheaper on credits when compared to Bukhgalter. In some cases, it's much cheaper - if you find yourself facing down a Tyr or an Archer, you'd probably rather pay 4 than 7 to get through them unharmed. And for the 2 exceptions - Swordsman and Anemone - well, first off, I'm not sure anyone has run Swordsman for years, but more importantly, each of them cost 2 to Bukhgalter's 0. Not nothing, but not the biggest downside either.

The real conversation between these two is a little more about incomparable traits. Bukhgalter's downsides are that it costs one more to install than Revolver, it costs more influence to import it, you're getting a rebate rather than a discount with it, meaning you still need to have cash on hand, and the rebate only works once per turn. Revolver's downsides are that it breaks 7 subs, total, and with that seventh sub (already known as "throwing the gun at them") it trashes.

The truth is that in an ideal game, you'd probably want to have both of these out, but that scenario is unlikely until Glacier makes a big comeback. decks that are likely to hit one sentry per turn are still going to be better off with Bukhgalter. Decks that like to make a LOT of runs in one turn will prefer Revolver. As a result, this card might end up seeing more play in Shaper than in Crim, especially with Deep Dive encouraging the Big Turn playstyle and having Simulchips and Harmony AR Therapy in-house.

Since somehow nobody’s written a review of this, and I’m playing around with constructing Startup decks, I thought I’d do a side-by-side comparison of how it stacks up against Corroder in the format, since deck construction will likely have you choosing between the two, even outside of Anarch.



TL;DR: They’re very comparable, and which one is ultimately more efficient for you will depend largely on what’s showing up in your Meta. Corroder is always going to be equal or better for Single-Sub Barriers, and Big Hairy Monster barriers will make you want to lean towards Corroder as well, so Cleaver certainly isn’t going to supplant it, but Cleaver might be the most cost-efficient choice depending on other factors. Cleaver’s edge is increased by supporting it with Ice-weakening tools, so it might ultimately be a little better in-faction, but Corroder is almost certainly better out of faction.

So: On paper, they’re obviously similar. Both Anarch Fracters, both 2 Inf. Cleaver is 1 more to install, but has one more strength and can break 2 subs for 1 where Corroder has to pay 1 per sub. But Cleaver costs twice as much to boost strength, and here’s where the math gets particular.

Some Barriers in Startup are easy to calculate, and for these, Cleaver is equal or better than Corroder: Eli 1.0 is 3 for a Cleaver, 4 for a Corroder. Same for Gold Farmer. Ping and Wraparound are both 1 for either. Both handle Palisade for 1 or 3, depending on where it’s installed. Simple enough.

Advanceable Ice gets trickier. Akhet, for instance, is 1 for a Cleaver when naked, and 2 for a Corroder. If the Corp gets those three tokens on it, though, it becomes 5 for Cleaver vs. 4 for Corroder. At three tokens or fewer on Ice Wall, Cleaver is equal or better, but once it gets advanced beyond that, Corroder takes off running in advantage. Pharos is much more distinctive - Both can crack it for 6 if it has no advancement tokens on it (5 if they’re ok with taking the tag) but once it’s advanced, that’s a pricy 11 for Corroder, but a whopping 16 for Cleaver! Now, it’s worth mentioning that in any realistic scenario where you’re dealing with an advanced Pharos, you’re going to have other ways of dealing with it, but in case you get truly ganked by it, Corroder is definitely the better card to have.

For the last three odd Barriers in Startup: Corroder is equal of better for all instances of Sandstone and Brân 1.0, while Cleaver is equal or better (usually better) in all instances of Hagen except for where your fracter is your only installed program, meaning no other Icebreakers and no worry about letting the program-trashing sub fire.

All of this is, of course, academic, especially considering that these are both Anarch cards. Like I said above, any runner will be looking hard at these cards whether their ID is orange or not, but in Anarch, you’re going to have access to a lot of tools for weakening Ice, and in Startup, it’d be hard to NOT be using those tools. As a general rule, if an Ice has multiple subs, then the closer its strength comes to 3, the more likely Cleaver is to come out ahead. But even in the best situations, it probably won’t come out ahead by much.