Jump to content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Search Articles

* * * * -

Tech Talk - Vamp

Android: Netrunner Tech Talk Scud

It's Tech Talk Time, time to take a look at one special Android: Netrunner card and see if we can't help you see why and how you might use it. This week, we turn our attention to that vexing vixen, Vamp. Look ma, alliteration!

DOCUMENTATION: Runners need credits. Android: Netrunner players take that as an inviolable truth, like the sun rising in the east, or water being wet, or someone always being wrong on the Internet. Clicks let the Runner actually *do* things but most of those things require credits for the doing. You need credits to install all those wonderful toys you put in your deck. Most of the neat-o events you're packing are going to cost a few credits. And, of course, you're going to need credits to power your icebreakers so you can get through all that stupid ICE the Corp puts in-between you and their servers. Credits are muy importante, as Tech Talk would have said in 12th Grade Honors Spanish.

It's easy to see why, when Trace Amount released a month back, everyone was pretty hardcore thumbs down on Vamp (Trace Amount). I mean, an event that let's you spend X credits to make the Corp lose X credits? C'mon! Account Siphon (Core) let's you drain up to 5 of the Corp's credits and nets you double in return! At the very least, you can use the money you gained to ditch the tags you get. If you run a Vamp, you end up broke AND tagged! Vamp? *SPITONTHEGROUND* Let us speak of it no more!

But what if Tech Talk told you that the Runner needing credits isn't as inviolable a truth as it seems? Because, you see, the Corp needs credits, too. In fact, the Corp? She needs credits more than you do because she can't do anything without them. The Runner, theoretically, can win the game without spending a single credit - making a run in and of itself costs nothing. The Corp, on the other hand, *must* spend credits to advance Agendas to win. Scorched Earth (Core) costs credits, as does every single means of tagging the Runner. Project Junebug and Snare! cost credits. Data Mine (Core) is free, so if the Corp can get you to run into 6 of them in a row, you're toast. If the Corp has no credits (or just very, very few), she can't win. Period.

Not only can't the Corp win without credits, but everything that causes the Runner to *need* credits is put into play by The Corp using, you guessed it, credits. A runner doesn't need icebreakers if there are no rezzed pieces of ICE on the table and the Corp can't rez any pieces of ICE if she's poor.

So *how* do you keep the Corp poor? If only there was a card that let you drain the Corp's coffers as much as you needed to...

The Runner's economy is stronger than the Corp's, at least at this point in the game's life. Sure Gamble, Easy Mark, Liberated Accounts, Armitage Codebusting, Magnum Opus – it's pretty easy for the Runner to put together a nice little nest egg. As we said, how much you *need* all those credits is entirely up to Corp – as we pointed out, you don't need to install and use expensive icebreakers if the Corp can't rez any ICE. With Vamp, you can put your credits to direct use, cutting down how many credits you'll need later

(The Corp's most powerful economy card, Melange Mining Corp (Core), requires full investment of clicks, so she's not doing a whole lot else, like installing ICE or Assets or Upgrades, if she's using it.)

"Yeah, but," says Connie Contradictory, "if you spend all your credits draining the Corp, how are you going to deal with the tag?" To which Tech Talk replies, "What, dear Connie, is the Corp going to do to you with NO MONEY?" All of the really dangerous things that being tagged can lead to cost credits. With three clicks and no cash, the worst they can do is play Freelancer to trash two Resources, which can, it's true, suck. (Depending on the Corp, it might actually be worse if she plays Big Brother (Trace Amount) on you, but still...)

INSTALLATION: Using Vamp takes patience and restraint. If the point of playing Vamp is to keep the Corp poor which will then keep them from rezzing ICE or Assets or Upgrades that will make you need money, you need to give the Corp the fewest possible chances to rez those things. Sit back, build your economy, get your rig together (as cheaply as possible), and wait to draw Vamp. Who cares if the Corp gets to layer ICE three deep on R&D and/or a juicy-looking Remote Server? As long as you can get into HQ, you can keep all her other defenses face-down and run willy-nilly.

You'll want to keep your rig as economical as possible. We are referring, of course, to the install costs of all your necessary pieces. Hopefully, there won't be much ICE for you to break, so the efficiency of the the program(s) isn't as big a deal. Crypsis (Core) is a winner combined with Vamp because, for the low cost of 5 credits, you get all the icebreakers you'll need. You don't need to run multiple times a turn and, if things are going well, you'll know exactly how many pieces of ICE (on anything other than HQ, zero) you're going to encounter, so you can load Crypsis up with just the right number of Virus tokens. Hardware that gives you recurring credits for icebreaking, specifically Cyberfeeder and Spinal Modem (What Lies Ahead), are great to combine with Crypsis in this sort of build. The drawback on Spinal Modem won't be as big a deal if the Corp doesn't have money to throw into Traces and, since you'll be playing a slow game where you get all your pieces in pace before you start running, the occasional Brain damage isn't going to wreck your game. As for Cyberfeeder (Core), it has the bonus of helping you pay for Crypsis if you install it first.

If Vamp is doing its job and the Corp is po' (to the point that she can't even afford the O and R in "poor"), she's probably not going to be building out Remotes and installing Agendas, so you need a way to get at them and, you know, win. That means digging into R&D. Medium (Core) is a great choice, since the Cyberfeeders you want to run anyway will help pay for them. Maker's Eye works well, too, although it isn't as economical.

Deja Vu (Core) is also an all-star in a deck that kinda' sorta' hinges on one card, letting you pull it out of the Heap and run it again, which is probably going to be necessary – you don't want the Corp to get her footing in the mid- or even late-game and suddenly be able to start rezzing all that dormant ICE...

Do you know what sucks worse than getting hit by Vamp? Getting hit by Account Siphon and *then* getting hit by Vamp. There is nothing like using the Corp's own credits to drain them dry. Think about spending the hefty Influence cost to bring a couple in. You're already packing Deja Vu, so you'll get enough use out of 'em.

Either of the current Anarch identities works well with a Vamp-focused resource denial deck. Noise will want to pack more Viruses in order to punish the Corp for not being able to protect the Archive. Whizzard and his three recurring credits will let you get rid of cards that might help the Corp get back on her feet (PAD Campaign, Adonis Campaign, Melange Mining Corp) without digging into the pile of credits you want to keep around to fuel Vamp.

IMPLEMENTATION: While Vamp fits very, very well in Anarch, at two pips of Influence, it can make a splash in the other factions as well. Criminals have Account Siphon, which we know combos well with Vamp, and Gabriel naturally wants to hit HQ anyway, so building a resource-denial deck on a Criminal base will be different (things like Compromised Employee and Inside Job may be less useful if everything is going well), it is very possible. Kate-based Shapers, on the other hand, might want to simply splash a single Vamp for mid- to late-game shenanigans, a very real threat since Kate decks tend to spend the early game building, making fewer early runs and leaving a lot of unrezzed ICE into the mid-game.

COUNTERMEASURES: If you suspect that your opponent is running a Vamp-fueled resource-denial type deck, pay attention to your Central Servers. ICE them up fast and deep. Rez your ICE whenever possible, even if it'll make you poor – it's better to be creditless and defended than broke and vulnerable. Remember that you can rez Assets and Upgrades in *any* server during a run. If the Runner's coming at you with Vamp, spend as much of your money as you can before she gets to you.
  • operdonos and HaphazardNinja like this


52 Comments

"The Runner's economy is stronger than the Corp's, at least at this point in the game's life."

This entirely ignores the flow of the game. Yes, in a vacuum, the runner can outcredit the corp. However, the corp's credits mostly go towards "investments" that stick around and provide continual benefit throughout the game. The runner's credits are thrown away when they use icebreakers.


So early game, the runner would like to trade 1:1 to stop the corp investing. Later in the game, it's the other way around. The corp would prefer to be poor with the runner, because zero creds on both sides means toolbooth wins.

But here's the kicker: Anarchs kind of don't care if corp investment gets out of control. Yog breaks code gates for free. Morning star and mimic break for next to free. Throw in some datasuckers, run 3x on archives, and you can break into virtually any server for your 4th. The corp winds up having to throw down ice worth 5+ creds just to get you to spend a counter and a cred to break it.

In short, anarchs already have an easy way to not care about corp investment accumulation. It's only in the early-mid game when the runner has to pay for their behemoth icebreakers that anarchs are at a large disadvantage. So anarchs want to invest early anyway. I don't understand why they'd want to trade 1:1 creds just to make a few cheesy runs through unrezzed ice.


"You'll want to keep your rig as economical as possible."

Recurring creds don't help you charge up for your omega run on HQ. It takes 3-4 runs for cyberfeeder to pay for itself. And, from hypothesis, you aren't really running on other servers because you don't want the corp to rez the ice.


"If Vamp is doing its job and the Corp is po' (to the point that she can't even afford the O and R in "poor"), she's probably not going to be building out Remotes and installing Agendas"

Which means they'll be accumulating in the corp's hand*** R&D's agenda rate is basically constant.


"Noise will want to pack more Viruses in order to punish the Corp for not being able to protect the Archive."

Which is at odds with the investment philosophy behind vamp.


"Whizzard and his three recurring credits will let you get rid of cards that might help the Corp get back on her feet (PAD Campaign, Adonis Campaign, Melange Mining Corp) without digging into the pile of credits you want to keep around to fuel Vamp."

This. Especially since the new meta is going to be towards less secure corp servers, but more durable assets.


"If the Runner's coming at you with Vamp, spend as much of your money as you can before she gets to you."

Stick a trace in front of HQ. If they go to steal your creds, just pump up the trace to maximum.
[Edit: Wrong. This might be okay if you want to combat an account siphon, but if they're vamping you at least want them to spend money to lose all your creds. H/t Azeltir and wolfone88 in the comments]

"Criminals have Account Siphon, which we know combos well with Vamp"

Criminals benefit the most from vamp because they want the game to be light on investment. Their icebreakers lose hard to superservers.
    • Gildor and Keiichi1337 like this

Now with that being said I think a quick comment on the nature of Tech Talk might be in order. I haven't actually discussed this with Scud, so I hope I'm not mischaracterizing his series and if I am I hope he sets me straight. For those familiar with the Timmy/Johnny/Spike (or Ned/Shagga/Jaime for GoT) player categories I think there is some expectation that Tech Talk is going to be looking at cards from a Spike point of view. However, Scud is many times trying to highlight cards which are underused and show how they can be useful, but that doesn't mean that it will ever be a card that a Spike player would consider worth it. I think because of this his articles are going to lean in the direction that the underused card leans in, which is usually more towards Johnny/Timmy.

    • Toqtamish and EmeraldGuardian like this
I'm not saying vamp is bad, just that your lack of analysis stops us from using the card to its full effect.
"Stick a trace in front of HQ. If they go to steal your creds, just pump up the trace to maximum."
Wait a minute, if you as the Corp did that to me, I think I'd think "mission accomplished", and just go for regular access when the Vamp run is successful. Then I get to keep my credits, and not get Vamp's tag.
    • Kennon likes this
Yeah Sieben, rezzing assets you need next turn is a thing, but you really want the runner to spend as much money as you can make him spend once he's vamping you!
Edit: I've deleted this. These posts are just making discussion worse.
    • Toqtamish likes this
Photo
BtrLuckyThanGood
Feb 12 2013 05:58 PM

"Stick a trace in front of HQ. If they go to steal your creds, just pump up the trace to maximum."
Wait a minute, if you as the Corp did that to me, I think I'd think "mission accomplished", and just go for regular access when the Vamp run is successful. Then I get to keep my credits, and not get Vamp's tag.


Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking!! What Sieben said there made no sense lol. At that point you are basically ruining yourself.

"Stick a trace in front of HQ. If they go to steal your creds, just pump up the trace to maximum."
Wait a minute, if you as the Corp did that to me, I think I'd think "mission accomplished", and just go for regular access when the Vamp run is successful. Then I get to keep my credits, and not get Vamp's tag.

You guys are right. I got confused because I was talking about account siphon as well. But with Vamp, yeah, you may as well have them spend the creds. My bad.

Instead of "This entirely ignores the flow of the game", try something more positive, like "This idea is good, but could be refined more if you take game-flow into account". I think you will get much less hostility (whether you care about that or not) and more good discussion about your ideas (which I think you do want).

I'd rather let people know that it's not okay to to defend sloppy opinions than to open a "discussion" over them. I mean, my criticism is pretty obvious. There's nothing to discuss. If it were grey area, then I wouldn't be as hostile, and then we could have a discussion. Maybe. Because I've seen almost no discussions (with or without my presence) on these threads.
Edit: Deleted this one too. See above.
    • Toqtamish, Kennon, Jhaelen and 4 others like this

Being severe will not get your point across more clearly. It doesn't work on the internet, and it generally doesn't work face-to-face unless you know the person you're talking to very well. People will bristle at your harsh words and seek to defend themselves instead of evaluating your logic.

From hypothesis, these people are obviously wrong. There's nothing to evaluate. It's not my problem if I can't change their mind because they get cognitive dissonance.

So far, it seems that your attempts to point out that there's nothing to discuss have only spawned more useless discussion.

Not my fault. I didn't ask a bunch of white-knights to tell me to play nice.

What is it that you actually want to accomplish? If you want good discussions about grey areas, start more good discussions.

We'll have to wait for some grey area first. At the moment, most of the issues ITT are pretty black and white.

If you want to "trim the fat" with respect to the quality of discussions here, I would suggest you be more up-front and polite about it. Politeness goes a long way.

Politeness endorses the people who put out sloppy opinions. I don't do that.
    • PJOmega likes this
While I'm sure Sieben is happy to defend his right to be abrasive if and when he chooses, I'm interested in taking it back another step and say this: it's not hostile to say that one statement completely fails to account for a fact or other idea. Scud is free to step in and say that it doesn't need to, and then make a case why it's not relevant, or he can quote Darksbane saying that Tech Talk isn't geared towards cutthroat competitive play, or he can say that he did consider it, and then explain why his consideration led him to say what he said. "You're stupid" is hostile. "Starving children in Africa wouldn't make such a tactically unsound statement" is hostile (and tasteless, besides). "This entirely ignores the flow of the game" is an observation.

If someone writes 2+2=5, I'm not going to say "that's a good idea, but...". It's both patronizing and damaging to real analysis. And asserting 2+2 does not equal 4, and starting good discussions are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps you noticed his article directly below this one?

You know what is hostile? Turning a discussion into a baseless attack on someone's style of expression. I don't disagree Sieben is hostile, and needlessly alienates people, so it's good that he doesn't need me here black knighting. It's just that those things aren't in what you're quoting.
    • Keiichi1337 and Sieben like this
The following two sentences have been added to the article in order to clarify some points:

Not only can't the Corp win without credits, but everything that causes the Runner to *need* credits is put into play by The Corp using, you guessed it, credits. A runner doesn't need icebreakers if there are no rezzed pieces of ICE on the table and the Corp can't rez any pieces of ICE if she's poor.
Photo
ironchefzod
Feb 12 2013 08:49 PM
Interesting article on Vamp.

I disagree that Runner economy is stronger than Corp though. Melange makes Corp economy stronger. It covers any Corp weakness in the early game allowing the Corp to move on to mid/end game before the runner is really ready to contest agendas. Melange also trumps Vamp. Vamp is a dead card against a Corp with Melange out.

I also don't think Vamp is a good fit for Criminal. Everyone knows Criminal is gunning for HQ. You arleady have Gabriel's inherent ability and Account Siphon so the Corp is already putting ICE on HQ to stop you from accessing. By splashing Vamp the corp's HQ ICE are now pulling triple duty. I'd rather splash something that makes me a threat in another attack vector (Maker's Eye at R&D) or a card I can use to brute force through a server (Stim Hack).
ironchefzod: Yeah, MMC is a bummer vs. a Vamp deck. It doesn't completely shut you down though – MMC is fragile and the Corp needs to protect it, so if you can Vamp them, they may not be able to rez the ICE they put in front of it. If that happens, then you just need one credit to get rid of it. It's not as hard to pull off as you might think. Vamp's biggest strength is that ICE can't be rezzed until it is encountered, so the only ICE you *really* have to worry about is on HQ and, if they are putting all their attention toward HQ, you should be able to find holes elsewhere.
Ironchefzod: Also, I can see where you're coming from about the Corp economy getting a big boost from MMC, but I stand by the opinion that the Runner's economy is stronger right now. There are a couple reasons this is true:

1) The Runner simply has more choices as to economy cards right now (Armitage Codebusting, Sure Gamble, Easy Mark, Bank Job, Data Dealer, Magnum Opus, Aesop's Pawnshop, Liberated Accounts, and to a limited extent Stimhack).

2) As pointed out in the article, the Runner has ZERO inherent need for credits. The Runner's need for credits is dictated by the Corp spending credits to put up obstacles/targets. The Corp has a much greater need for credits, especially in the early game. She needs to install and rez ICE, rez Assets and Upgrades, and advance Agendas. She also only has three clicks with which to generate credits, either directly or by playing cards.

MMC has a high click-to-credit return rate but it also has a high opportunity cost, since it's all or nothing, spend the whole turn to get credits. In most cases, it's worth the cost, but there are sometimes when it's just not the best move.

2) As pointed out in the article, the Runner has ZERO inherent need for credits.

And as soon as the corp rezzes a few pieces of ice (i.e. very quickly), this situation is entirely reversed. Unless we

Don't run
Don't run
Don't run
Don't run

Okay I have crypsis and 40 creds. VAMP!!!

The "inherent need" for creds is on the runner's, not the corp's side.
I mean, I can get behind it when you say that the situation reverses quickly (and sometimes quite dramatically) but I'm not sure how you can tacitly acknowledge that the need for credits on the corp side is true, then say that it's not.

I mean, I can get behind it when you say that the situation reverses quickly (and sometimes quite dramatically) but I'm not sure how you can tacitly acknowledge that the need for credits on the corp side is true, then say that it's not.

I'm not saying it's not. I just chose a... stylized way to express myself. It's a large run-on sentence that spans several lines:

Unless X, the runner has an inherent need for creds. Since not-X, the corp doesn't have an inherent need for creds anymore.

X is the situation where the runner *has* run, and presumably the corp has rezzed some ice.
So, in other words, what Sieben is trying to say is that I am right – the Runner *NEVER* has an *inherent* need for credits, only an *acquired* need, once the Corp spends credits to create said need, which is evidence of the Corp's *inherent* need of credits.

Thanks, Sieben.
    • Kennon, Paddosan, Keiichi1337 and 5 others like this

So, in other words, what Sieben is trying to say is that I am right – the Runner *NEVER* has an *inherent* need for credits, only an *acquired* need, once the Corp spends credits to create said need, which is evidence of the Corp's *inherent* need of credits.

Thanks, Sieben.


*slow clap*
(I'm on an iPad, so cutting and pasting is a pain. These are all in reference to Sieben's original comment.)

As to the "flow of the game" – yes, the usual flow of the game is one in which the Runner, lacking any inherent need for credits, starts strong. The Corp then puts obstacles in the Runner's way, slowing her down and gaining the upper hand. The endgame is a rush between the two sides. This is all true.

An early Vamp (or, preferably, two or three) aims to upset that standard flow by depriving the Corp of the credits it needs to set up it's obstacles (and actually win the game, since the Corp needs credits to advance Agendas, or, in all but, I think, one case, to flatline the Runner). Executed at the right time, Vamp can ensure that the Corp can't actually make any of the "investments" that will burden the Runner with an acquired need for credits.

However, the rub is that Vamp itself causes the Runner to need credits. The difference is that the need Vamp creates is entirely in the Runner's hands. Their are no messy exchange rates (credits-to-icebreaker-strength or subroutine-breaking), simply a 1:1 correlation.

ICE, which causes the Runner's greatest need for credits (installing and powering icebreakers) can only be rezzed when it is encountered. That rule is a HUGE bonus for Vamp, since it means that if, when the Corp has credits, you only run on HQ, they can only rez ICE on that server. They can spend their credits to rez Assets and Upgrades in any server when you run at them, but the effect, a broke-@$$ Corp, is the same (oh, and the Runner gets to access a card and doesn't get a tag, so bonus!). As long as the Corp has no money when you're done, Vamp has done it's job.

In reality, it is very hard to keep the Corp completely unable to mount any defense on servers other than HQ. However, it is surprisingly easy (and this is said FROM EXPERIENCE with a 9-1 credit denial deck) to slow the Corp's "investments" to the point that the Runner's credit expenditures outside of Vamp are fairly small (and definitely aided by recurring credits from things like Cyberfeeder and Spinal Modem).

----

As to Anarchs having better options – Since the project of Tech Talk is to present reasons and ideas on how to use specific cards, this is a moot point. It has no bearing on using Vamp if you want to use Vamp.

----

As to recurring credits – I thought that "how long a card takes to pay for itself" (i.e. turn a profit) was a terrible metric on which to evaluate a card. In all seriousness, Cyberfeeder's recurring credits don't only help you to make runs, they can be used to install Crypsis and/or Medium, both of which are good cards for this kind of build.

----

As to Agendas accumulating in the Corp's HQ – Again, yep. However, there will still be Agendas in R&D (or the Corp, due to the forced draw, will eventually have to toss some in the Archives). If you build your Medium(s) up to a large number of counters, the Corp either spends a turn shutting it down OR lets you know that all the Agendas are in their hand by NOT shutting it down.

I purposely didn't mention the upcoming Nerve Agent because it isn't actually released yet. Also, since HQ is going to be the one Server sure to have rezzed ICE, you don't want to make more runs on it than you have to. I'll be testing it when it is out.

----

As to Noise – Yeah, I only included him to be thourough. Also, so many people are resistant to using Whizzard and will want to build off Noise instead.

----

As to Criminals benefiting "the most" from Vamp – I'm not sure about that. They certainly benefit a lot. Probably as much as a Whizzard build and way more than a Noise or Kate build.

So, in other words, what Sieben is trying to say is that I am right – the Runner *NEVER* has an *inherent* need for credits, only an *acquired* need, once the Corp spends credits to create said need, which is evidence of the Corp's *inherent* need of credits

Thanks, Sieben.

Which completely misses the point. You're right up until the corp rezzes a small amount of ice. Putting this back in context of vamp, and when credits matter, it's a big deal to point out.

It's dishonest of you to claim that I said you were "right". But I guess it makes a good soundbite.

Executed at the right time, Vamp can ensure that the Corp can't actually make any of the "investments" that will burden the Runner with an acquired need for credits."

And, as you keep neglecting, the "right time" is at the beginning of the game before any remote ice has been rezzed. Unless you can somehow keep the corp in this perpetual state of not being able to rez enigmas, the tables get turned, and all of the sudden the corp has recurring creds and the runner needs to catch up on investment.


The corp can also force you to run on remote servers by trying to score early. You know, before you have any real icebreakers.

I guess I'm just totally confused at what you expect the corp to be doing while you both stockpile creds. It's like you think he'll sit there and be happy you're not running.

"However, it is surprisingly easy (and this is said FROM EXPERIENCE with a 9-1 credit denial deck)

Dude, seriously. You ned to stop throwing around these personal anecdotes. I had a corp deck that went 7-1, and only lost because of some freak chance runs on R&D scoring 2 PRs back to back. It's not a sick corp deck. I rebuilt it quickly because I know it's not a sick corp deck. I don't think it demonstrates anything useful, so I'm not going to throw its win-record in anyone's face like it validates any of my arguments.


to slow the Corp's "investments" to the point that the Runner's credit expenditures outside of Vamp are fairly small (and definitely aided by recurring credits from things like Cyberfeeder and Spinal Modem)."

Again, a small amount of corp investment must be met with a significantly larger runner investment. Rezzing a single piece of ice is almost always cheaper than installing an icebreaker AND breaking it. Unless you can vamp EVERY TURN, the corp will get small investments off, and will be happy to trade 1:1 with you.


(and definitely aided by recurring credits from things like Cyberfeeder and Spinal Modem).

Math is hard.


As to Anarchs having better options – Since the project of Tech Talk is to present reasons and ideas on how to use specific cards, this is a moot point. It has no bearing on using Vamp if you want to use Vamp.

If you want to use vamp, you have to pick an identity. Which identities/factions go well with vamp is completely topical.


As to recurring credits – I thought that "how long a card takes to pay for itself" (i.e. turn a profit) was a terrible metric on which to evaluate a card.

Errr... it's a full opportunity cost calculation. When people say "Armitage CB pays for itself in the 1st click", they don't consider the fact that they could have just clicked for a single cred 3x in that span. So when you install cyberfeeder, it's a click to draw, click to play, and then 2 bucks. You conceivably could have been at +4 bucks for the same amount of clicks, so you need to use the recurring-cred 4 times in order for it to pay off.


And the reason that "time to payoff" is relevant here is because you're really focusing on just making a few early HQ runs with vamp. If the cyberfeeder doesn't pay off in a reasonable amount of time... well... there are other things you could have done with your cards and money.

In all seriousness, Cyberfeeder's recurring credits don't only help you to make runs, they can be used to install Crypsis and/or Medium, both of which are good cards for this kind of build.

I haven't seen the full setup. So... no comment. Cyberfeeders are really good, I'm just saying that they don't help you charge up for your first few runs on HQ.


(or the Corp, due to the forced draw, will eventually have to toss some in the Archives).


You're... extremely optimistic.


If you build your Medium(s) up to a large number of counters, the Corp either spends a turn shutting it down OR lets you know that all the Agendas are in their hand by NOT shutting it down.


You must play against some dumb corp players.


"As to Noise – Yeah, I only included him to be thourough. Also, so many people are resistant to using Whizzard and will want to build off Noise instead."

I'll quote you: "Since the project of Tech Talk is to present reasons and ideas on how to use specific cards, this is a moot point".

"As to Criminals benefiting "the most" from Vamp""

Criminals have the most to fear from large-scale corp investment, and get the most bonuses from running on HQ. Everyone else has good tools to deal with megaservers.
    • Hattes likes this
I can't believe I let myself get sucked in to responding to you. Sorry, sorry, it won't happen again.
    • Toqtamish, Jhaelen and DubiousYak like this

I can't believe I let myself get sucked in to responding to you. Sorry, sorry, it won't happen again.


I agree with you there.
I believe constructive criticism is always good.
Just pointing out faults in other people's argument shows how small you are.

By the way, vamp isn't really 1:1 since you get a tag. But account siphon gives you 2 tags. This usually means the runner has to spend 2 clicks(unless he has decoy) to remove them. Vamp on the other hand only gives one. This means that you can run twice after you drain the corporation(third time with decoy)

This is the advantage Vamp has over account siphon. If you have enough credits in the late game, you can make sure the corporation cannot rezz ice outside of hq and make a run twice(or more). The biggest problem, of course, is that the card is very situational. It only works if the corporation has unrezzed ice on remote servers and the runner has the economic advantage.

Of course, I assumed that the runner want to remove the tags. Sometimes, the runner can ignore the tags and try to end the game.

I can't believe I let myself get sucked in to responding to you. Sorry, sorry, it won't happen again.

Maybe one day I'll have a deck that goes 9-1 (instead of just 7-1) and can be so awesome that I can ignore major game mechanics in my articles and get defensive about it when someone tries to put my little solitaire plan in a more realistic context.

Nevermind that runner investment eventually taps out once you have a full rig, and especially anarchs don't have much to do with their creds late game. This would be a really good time to vamp, but what do I know. 9 > 7.