I want to really drive home the point that even if what you desperately need is to draw a bunch of cards, you should not necessarily do it.  If you can puzzle or confuse the runner a little bit, you have a chance to come through ok.

Let's say that the Corp's opening hand is 1 Ice and 4 Agendas.

I'm a Runner.  I see the Corp draw three cards, play one Ice on HQ, and discard 2 to Archives. I think it's the discards that give things away, I KNOW at this point that they are nervous, that they are in big trouble.  My reaction is to go all-out to take advantage.  On my first turn, I will run HQ at least once, I will certainly run R&D, and I might run Archives too.  Next turn I'll continue the aggression.  This is a bad start for the Corp, could be a 2-3 turn win for the Runner.

How about the Corp draws two cards, plays one Ice on a remote server, and installs one card inside that server.  I'll definitely run HQ.  If I pull an agenda, I smell blood, and I go back to HQ.  Game might end on the first turn, this is definitely bad for the Corp.

Let's say I see the Corp draw two cards, install one Ice on HQ, and install one card into a remote server, unprotected.  I guess that the remote server is probably a Pad Campaign or an upgrade.  I should definitely run R&D.  I should run HQ, but some Runners won't.  Maybe I run HQ and score an agenda.  But unless the Corp had really bad luck, and the Ice was a Wall of Thorns or Archer or something else they can't rez, the Ice probably hurt me or stopped me, and I'm not going to run HQ again.  At this point, I've already spent a couple of actions, maybe I took some damage from running HQ.  Maybe I'll run the unprotected remote server, but maybe I'll just leave it alone (I'm guessing it's Adonis or Pad Campaign, and the Corp just spent all their credits rezzing the Ice, so they aren't going to profit yet, maybe it can wait for later).

In the last case, nothing's guaranteed, but at least there are scenarios where the Runner doesn't realize just how desperate your situation is, where they come away from the first turn happy to score an agenda and start focusing on building up.  Sure, there are also scenarios where they figure it out (such as, they run the unprotected data fort), but at least you have some possibilities of surviving the early game; in the other starts that I described, you have no chance against a good runner.

reebo said:

/ What this guy said.  I know everyone wants to put in their idea to show how smart they are, but this is the BEST idea if you are playing against good players.  As stated earlier, drawing is desperate and will be recognized - a runner is going to jump at any easy openings.  It is great lesson in subterfuge - the part that makes Corporations fun :D  Also, this is the only strategy that takes into account the Corp player only having 3 clicks a turn to spend.  Drawing multiple cards and installing and doing all that great stuff to work around not having a useful hand doesn't work until beyond your first turn!  And that's why you are dead.

FesterDuley said:

Sorry if I came of as sounding like I was wanting to show how smart I was.  My post was intended to suggest ways to evaluate your options, not so much to say what the best option is (the latter's hard to do since it depends so much on what cards you actually have, which runner, etc).

I felt I had to post, because I saw people still saying "draw more cards" even after Reebo's post.  I was worried that some folks weren't grasping that you have to think of how the Runner sees things to figure out what to do.

As the Corp player, I think mulligans should be looked at differently from the way they are in other CCGs because of how absurdly punishing all-agenda hands can be (you aren't just "flooded", you're in real danger of quick defeat); normally, you will shuffle back a sub-optimal hand, but as prune's (in my opinion, correct) advice shows, though misdirection and confusing play, a Corp can play through very sub-optimal hands if the runner takes the bait. So far, I have been ignoring the mulligan opportunity unless I get hit with the dreaded 4-5 agenda hand; the chances of hitting this at all with decent randomization is already tiny*, so my caution may be paranoid, but the likelihood of getting hit twice off of two draws is miniscule. Proper shuffling removes a lot of problems. Any time I've noticed a player who has issues with getting regular low probability draws, it's either due to cheating or improper randomization technique; proper randomization technique matters, I've seem it in my own development as a gamer.

While many players frown upon pile-shuffling in general, it is a good way to break up clumps of cards; as long as you do not repeat numbers of piles, use primes, and avoid numbers which are factors of your population, you are accomplishing something. Unlike other CCGs, A:NR does not currently require riffling, but you should do this (four-five times even if you piled), and should riffle your opponent's deck as well in competitive play. Any form of pile-shuffling can be used to cheat if pre-seeded. The absence of stricter shuffling rules is kind of strange to me; the AGoT floor rules require that a "combination of shuffling techniques" be used (though do not require riffling), so at least some form of tighter randomization requirements should come to A:NR.

Anyhow, this is my favorite short piece on proper deck randomization I've ever read. Fellow math nerds may wish to read some of Diaconis's work on the matter.

tl;dr: Prevention is the best cure.

All excellent points.

On mulligans as the Corp, my thought is that I'll only take a mulligan if my hand is truly horrible, something like the hand full of agendas scenario that started the thread.  If you mulligan on a hand that could be better (for example, your initial ice is Chum and something you can't afford, but also has no agendas), you run the risk of drawing into hand that's even worse if you take the mulligan.  You can recover from the mediocre hand, after all.

So far I've been much more likely to mulligan as a Runner, mostly if there's no cards in my opening draw that will be a big help early game (ways to make money, Medium, ways to draw cards).

On the randomization, it helps that the official tournament rules give the opponent the option of shuffling anytime the other player randomizes their deck.

The worst casual game that I've had so far was against a player who couldn't really shuffle cards in sleeves, and all the agendas were clumped at the bottom of the deck.  It wasn't deliberate cheating, just sub-par randomization, and I really should have asked to shuffle her deck for her a few times before the game started.

prune said:

I have trouble getting that: shuffling sleeved cards is actually easier.

I also don't see a problem with the floor rules not explaining how to properly randomize a deck, because it is not in the scope of the rules. I have nothing against them containing suggestions on that point, however.

Making piles doesn't do anything for randomization, but it breaks clumps (and if you're mathematically minded, it can help you check your deck size). Some riffling after that and you should be good to go.

Khudzlin said:

Um, how so?

Ariston said:

While it is in the scope of the rules to say decks have to be randomized, exact methods are not in that scope, no more than token usage (they're provided for convenience). Or do you need them to hold your hand? That reminds me of a thread about a card in AGoT that calls for determining a random card from a discard pile (in which order must be maintained); many people were upset (and still are, most probably) that no method is provided. No method was provided for selecting random cards from a hand either, and people found a method themselves (admittedly, this is easier, since order doesn't matter) : having the opponent select the cards without seeing them (by the way, isn't this what people do in A:NR?). And despite the fact that virtually everyone uses this method, it isn't anywhere in the rules or the FAQ.

Fair enough, though your comparison does not have nearly the same level of competitive impact.

Which one? The one about the recent card (random card from the discard) or the one about random discards from a hand? The latter effect is an integral part of the game, since it's the claim effect for one of the challenge types. The card is very recent (latest pack), so I'm not sure the issue's come up in tournaments yet.

Drop one of the Agenda (low cost)

Put two advancement counters on it.

Smile evilly.

byronczimmer said:

This is the most important step. :)

 In my playgroup we allow free mulligan while the corp can reveal an opening hand (5 cards) of 4 or 5 agendas.  After the first turn draw it is too late.  With this house rule the worst case is 3 agendas plus one more on the draw.  This situation is bad but not unreasonable to win.

Khudzlin said:

Coming from an MTG judge with experience debating this question I'll point out something.

There are two scenarios to pile shuffling, either A) The player randomizes the deck totally, thus rendering the pile shuffle a useless step. or B) The player fails to randomize the deck totally, and the 'clumps' of card order are apparent. This is cheating. There is no real middle ground here. Choosing to arrange the deck in an order that benefits someone, then undo that work…well, thats a poor choice.

'Clumps' can, and will, occur through valid shuffling techniques, as will a perfect 'pile shuffle' apperance some times. When an opponent watches you pile shuffle, calls for a judge (or TO) and says 'my opponent did x cards in a pile, can you please check his/her deck to see that (s)he's not cheated and failed to randomize it'…he's fully in his/her right because he/she SAW you arrange it. Now even random chance can catch up. Now, the two options will come up, there will be no order apparent and everything will be 'ok'. Or…a pattern might appear, and that's bad news.

So why risk it? Why EVER put your deck into a known pattern in front of your opponent, regardless of how well you think you're going to shuffle. Just shuffle like mad, 8, 10, 15 times if you think clumping is going to be an issue. Post game when they may be organized a little by your play, make sure to shuffle those first, then shuffle them all back into the deck itself. No pattern, no problem. 

Just my 2 (experianced, having to boot foolish pile shuffling players getting caught) cents.

I'd spend two minutes to give the player some shuffling tips. Some sleeves are more slippery than others, but there's simply interweave shuffles that are easily performed with sleeved shuffles, especially since Netrunner decks are relatively small.

A proper shuffle should alternate between fine-grade shuffles (such as a riffle shuffle or interweave) and shuffles that move larger packs of cards (like an overhand or strip shuffle of about 3 moves). A casino shuffle would usually go something like riffle, riffle, triple cut, riffle, riffle, triple cut, riffle, riffle, cut.

Besides, every time your opponent shuffles his deck, he or she must give you the option for a final shuffle or cut (as is customary in all card games and as is codefied in the tournament rules), so you can't really blame your opponent's shuffle for anything.