Worlds 2024 Deep Dive
A look at the best identities from the World Championship
Top Cut decklists are available on the NSG website
With the conclusion of the most important event of the year, players will be wondering “what does this mean for the meta?” and “what decklists should I expect to see at the next tournament?”
As promised, here is a deeper dive into the high performing decklists from Worlds 2024 …
… but first, an Important Disclaimer
Winning at netrunner has always been a balance of “playing the best deck” and “being the best player”—that hasn’t changed, but the balance does seem to have shifted. For a combination of reasons—mainly because of design decisions made by NSG—it is much more important now to “be the best player” than to just “play the best deck”.
Ask any of the top players what you should bring to a tournament this season, and they will most likely encourage you to bring whatever you are good at. That doesn’t mean that you can play any pile of cards that you like and still expect to do well. What it means is that, if your goal is to make the top cut, you should prioritise finding a (decent) deck that you enjoy and you should practice the heck out of it—especially your tougher matchups*.
Still having trouble? You can always ask the decklist creator directly for any tips or tricks that they have for playing the deck. We are a pretty cosy community, and you would be surprised how keen most netrunner players are to talk about their decklist creations!
The intention of this article is not here to tell you what you can and cannot play, but to help you find a deck that you can feel confident about taking to a tournament—and to give you an idea of what you are likely to be up against.
*not sure what your tougher matchups are? There’s a spreadsheet for that
Worlds Performance
nb. the overall Corp win rate at worlds was 52%. This means that a corp win rate of 50% is an under-performance, whereas a runner win rate of 50% is actually an over-performance
nb. anything more than a 1x conversion is good, anything less is bad. See here for a more detailed explanation.
Top Cut - Runner
Hoshiko
Hoshiko (29) had a 0.96x day 2 conversion, 0.88x into the top cut, and a 45% win rate.
Any analysis of Hoshiko is made slightly more complicated by there being two very different archetypes: Turbine Hoshiko and Crew Hoshiko. My suspicion is that the Crew variant is the stronger of the two—both of the Hoshiko in the Top Cut were Arruaceiras Crew builds—and that Turbine Hoshiko is dragging the Crew Hoshiko numbers down, but probably not by much.
Hoshiko’s best results were against A Teia (67%, 9). The worst results were against BtL (22%, 9), but Outfit, Sportsmetal and AgInfusion all provided their own problems.
Notably, Hoshiko did perform well against Asa (56%, 18).
Esâ
Esâ (19) had a 1.26x day 2 conversion, 0.67x into the top cut, and a 39% win rate.
If we look at the standings, we can see that, while the deck performed well for some players, it did not perform well at all for others. What does this tell us about Esâ? I think it tells us that it’s a highly technical deck that requires a lot of attention and creative thinking—it’s never going to be as simple as “take core damage, do sabotage, run archives, win”.
Getting Esâ down to 45 cards is a tough, but worthwhile, challenge, and jan tuno managed it by dropping to 2 x copies of marrow—which is a clear indication of how much work went into perfectly tuning this decklist.
Esâ’s best matchup was PE (57%, 7) and worst matchup was R+ (11%, 9).
Somewhat surprisingly, xi managed a positive win rate against AgInfusion (53%, 15)
Freedom
Freedom (13) had a 1.53x day-2 conversion, 0.98x into the top cut, and a 45% win rate.
These are very reasonable numbers. They aren’t setting the world on fire, but, if you saw a Freedom deck from worlds that you liked the look of—such as Santa’s Audrey + Crew list—and you wanted to take it to a tournament, then I wouldn’t try to talk you out of it. Just make sure to practice your weaker matchups (PD, R+, Ob).
Freedom’s best results were against AgInfusion (75%, 8). The worst were against R+ (30%, 10).
Sable
Sable (20) had a 0.8x day-2 conversion, 0.63x into the top cut, and a 51% win rate.
I’m going to be brutally honest, and I’m going to break my rule about telling you what to play. Now that Shaper is finding wins against NBN and PD, there is no obvious reason to play Sable—or any reg crim list. With the exception of SportsMetal, there is no matchup where you would rather not play Lat. Reg Criminal and reg Shaper are not completely identical playstyles, but they have become similar enough that I would encourage any Criminal fans to try playing Swift Lat and see how they feel.
Sable’s best results were against PD (64%, 11). The worst results were against AgInfusion (45%, 11).
Arissana
Arissana (6) had a 1.99x day-2 conversion, 4.23x into the top cut, and a 59% win rate.
These are some strong numbers. There were only a handful of players (6) playing Arissana at the tournament, and each of them seemed to be playing a different homebrew list. It seems somewhat fitting for Arissana to be the best ID for personal expression. 3 of the 6 Arissana made day-2—at which point Arissana win rates sky-rocketed. This suggests that, compared to Lat, Arissana is a difficult ID to play, but one that rewards you for being able to play it—a high skill ceiling, but also a high skill floor.
We don’t really have enough data points to dig into Arissana’s matchups, and given the variety of builds it would be completely misleading to do so. I recommend keeping an eye out for aruzan’s NRDB decklist write up for tips on the matchup spread, because Spree + Botulus seems like it could be a good time.
Interestingly, SebK bought a Diversion of Funds Arissana list, which is a super powerful build that was discovered at the very tail end of 23.08 (during Fite Club), but which hasn’t seen any play since Rw/oR was released.
Lat
Lat (36) had a 1.66x day-2 conversion, 2.82x into the top cut, and a 62% win rate.
We knew going into Worlds that Lat was almost certainly the best runner deck—but I’m not sure that we realised quite how good it was. Until the very end of the tournament—when Arissana rocketed into the cut—Lat was the only runner worth talking about.
Swift Lat and Aniccam Lat are the two most popular Lat lists. Both are excellent, and variations on both made the top cut, but most testing teams that I’ve spoken to seem to think that Swift Lat has the edge. Play a click one Trick Shot into PD—gaining the Swift click—and you will quickly understand why.
The third, more niche, Lat list is a Aesop’s + LilyPAD build that Tak took all the way to 10th place.
Lat’s best results were against… basically everything. The only Corp IDs of concern were Asa (42%, 26) and Sports (38%, 8).
Top Cut - Corp
R+
R+ (22) had a 1.81x day-2 conversion, 1.73x into the top cut, and a 53% win rate.
These are completely respectable numbers, and I’m honestly quite surprised. I was sure that an asset based NEH list would outperform it’s leaner cousin at worlds. Rather than spamming assets, all three R+ lists in the top cut were variations on this End of the Line R+ list from EA Regionals. ctz played a single copy of active policing—which is extra spicy.
R+ best results were against Esâ (89%, 9). The worst results were against Lat (33%, 30), so definitely worth practising that matchup if you are thinking of bringing R+ to a tournament.
PD
PD (28) had a 0.85x day-2 conversion, 0.45 into the top cut, and a 51% win rate.
Unless you expect to face a field of Anarch—or unless your name is RotomAppliance—playing PD is going to be a bit of an uphill struggle. It just isn’t finding wins against Shaper any more, and it’s always struggled to find wins against Criminal.
RotomAppliance’s PD list was a traditional Skunk+Void build, with ADT and a spicy Eli 1.0. I imagine that other players might have been playing Shoot the Moon.
PD’s best results were against Esâ (69%, 13). The worst results were against Lat (35%, 20).
Asa
Asa (22) had a 1.63x day-2 conversion, 2.88x into the top cut, and a 60% win rate.
Asa was hands down the best Corp ID of the tournament. It’s an ID that saw a huge amount of play in 24.03, but that became less popular in the beginning of 24.05—right before Lat started winning tournaments. The net result is that, going into worlds, we didn’t really have the data to know if Asa was good or not. Now we do, and the answer is that it’s the only Corp that is any good into Lat.
There were 5 Asa in the top cut, and they came in two flavours: Original Classic TAI Breakers Offworld Office with Holo Man, and Delicious New West Coast Unnamed Testing Group Cohort with MCAAP. They have very different scoring strategies, and agenda suites, but both seem good in their own way.
Asa’s best results were against Kit (62%, 13). The worst results were against Freedom (37%, 8).
AgInfusion
AgInfusion (22) had a 1.09x day-2 conversion, 2.31x into the top cut, and a 50% win rate.
Before the event, AgInfusion was widely tipped to be “the best Corp ID”. While the conversion numbers are decent, the 50% win rate is a pretty big disappointment. So what went wrong?
The players that I spoke to before worlds all knew that AgInfusion was unfavoured into Kit, and unfavoured into Lat. There are a couple of different ways of addressing this problem. TAI Breakers tried to increase their win percentage by using treeline as a way to tax propeller counters—a novel solution. Unfortunately, it seems that Lat players were also aware of this weakness, and compensated for it by either playing Turbine or Pressure Spike.
Most of the players in the Top Cut were on a traditional Project Nisei + Void/BioVault build. But The King must have woken up feeling particularly monstrous, because he decided that what runners really needed in their life was to have to deal with Cloud Eater + Sisyphus Protocol, while trying to find 3 of only 7 agendas.
AgInfusion’s best results were against Hoshiko (62%, 16). The worst results were against Lat (33%, 36).
PE
PE (21) had a 0.95x day-2 conversion, 1.21x into the top cut, and a 55% win rate.
Okay conversion numbers and a very decent win rate tell us that that PE is bringing some credible threats to the table, and should be taken seriously. The two PE in the top cut were both on the QtM Prana Condenser + Moon Pool list. This build has no linear strategy. Instead, it presents a complicated puzzle for the Runner to unpick, with an imminent threat of flatline if they misstep. It’s classic netrunner in that sense, but I think probably best enjoyed in open decklists. I strongly recommend that you learn the basics of the deck, or at least the decklist, so that you are prepared when you face off against it in Swiss.
PE’s best results were against Freedom (62%, 8). The worst results were against Lat (46%, 24).
BtL
BtL (9) had a 0.88x day-2 conversion, 1.41x into the top cut, and a 58% win rate.
It is tough to know what these numbers are saying. The high win rate, but low conversion rate into day-2, suggests that it might be doing better at lower tables than higher tables. Of course, these numbers are just as easily explained by one of the two people who did make it into day-2 with BtL being quite possibly the greatest netrunner player of all time.
If you remember Sokka’s world championship winning BtL list from 2023, the new The Future Perfect list will seem familiar. It’s more concise (44 cards rather than 49) and includes some Rw/oR improvements (Logjam, Basalt Spire), but it looks to have the same glacial game plan.
BtL’s best results were against Hoshiko (78%, 9). The worst results were against …*drumroll* … Lat (41%, 17).
Other High Performers
Even with 200+ players playing 14 rounds, variance still plays a hand in who does and doesn’t make it into the top cut. Bad beats happen to even the bestest of players, and not every high performing* ID made it into the Top Cut.
*my definition of high performance is a >50% win rate, and >1x day-2 conversion
Azmari
Azmari (11) had a 60% win rate, and a 1.09x day-2 conversion.
After a very rough start, Azmari did manage to stabilise in the latter half of day-1, and a reasonable number of Azmari players were able to fight their way into day-2—but it was a struggle, and none of them were able to make it through to the Top Cut. A 60% win rate is great, but it’s less than we’ve seen at other tournaments, and a 1.09x a day-2 conversion is middling. Advocates will be feeling disappointed. Sceptics will be feeling vindicated.
Azmari’s best results were against Hoshiko (83%, 6). The worst results were against Lat (22%, 9).
Sports
Sports (7) had a 54% win rate, and a 1.14x day-2 conversion.
Notably, Sports was the only ID other than Asa to achieve a positive win rate against Lat. This suggests that the thing to do to increase your win rate against Lat might be to include a fast advance component into your Corp strategy.
Seasoned Lat players may want to consider whether it’s worth dropping a few percentage points in other matchups to include a copy of Clot, but I would discourage newer Lat players from worrying about it too much. Trick Shot and Deep Dive will get you there most of the time.
Sports best results were against Hoshiko (62%, 8) and Lat (62%, 8). The worst results were against Sable (0%, 3).
Outfit
Outfit (7) had a 59% win rate, and a 1.14x day-2 conversion.
Outfit proved to be less good in the Lat matchup than Sports, but more than made up for it against everything else. If the Sports results are telling us that fast advance is good against Lat, then Outfit might be telling us that fast advance is also good into everything else.
That being said, I am not convinced that Outfit is where it is at. I think what these numbers are really telling us is that it really helps your tournament chances not to get paired against Lat. If I’ve done my maths correctly, the 7 Outfit players should have faced against 7.7 Lat in total across the tournament—roughly 1 each. Instead, they only faced against 5—and they lost every game.
The Outfit’s best results were against Hoshiko (70%, 10). The worst results were against Lat (0%, 5).
Other Popular IDs
Kit
Kit (29) had a 48% win rate, and a 0.57x day-2 conversion.
When the spark of inspiration hits, it hits hard, and it can leave the Corp player feeling like they’ve just been beaten up. But when it doesn’t hit, well, sometimes the Corp just gets a free run of things. It might also be that some of the R+ on the lower tables were playing Self Growth Program, which is not a card that Lobisomem or Orca ever want to see.
Kit’s best results were against PD (61%,23). The worst results were against R+ (38%, 13)
Ob
Ob (12) had a win rate of 60%, and a 0.66x day-2 conversion.
It looked like Ob was in for a great tournament in the first half of day-1, but things ultimately petered out in the latter stages. Wins and losses were spread across both the upper and lower tables, and there’s nothing obvious in the matchup spread to explain what happened. But, if you look at the standings, you’ll see that most Ob players had much better results with their Corps than they did with their runner.
Also worth mentioning that ManintheMoon took Ob to 18th place, only missing out on the Top Cut by SoS.
Ob’s best results were against Sable (80%, 5). The worst results were against Esâ (50%, 6), Lat (50%, 6) and Ken (50%, 6).
Conclusion
If you are looking for the best IDs from Worlds, then I think the answer is fairly clearly Lat and Asa. However, the meta continues to be super diverse, and even within “the best IDs” there are still 2 or 3 different decklists to choose from, and they are all good in different ways.
So hopefully now you have an idea of what you want to practice for UK nats!
It’s going to be the second biggest event of the year—they’re calling it worlds 2—but tickets are limited, so make sure to get yours while you can.
I’ll see you there!
The Surveyor 24.09 meta analysis spreadsheet is available here
So true about reaching out to deck creators! Wenjong helped me the week before Worlds when I asked if I could bring his Swift Lat to Worlds, which was unpublished at the time but had a top cut open decklist at pre-Worlds Showdown.
A lot of great matchup advice and tips on specific card choices and discussion on the icebreaker suite vs the meta. Ended up going 5-2 thanks in large part to Wenjong’s advice
——
I also brought Azmari (4-3) and I won all the games where the opponent hasn’t seen the deck, and only won one match against an opponent who knew the deck. I would say it’s hard to get reps with the deck without a testing group; testing on regular jnet did not prepare me for my tougher matchups nor did the opponents consistently know the deck.
I don't quite understand the favoring of the conversion metric over winrate. Surely the winrate tells us more about the individual deck, while conversion also embeds the results of the players' other deck?
I get that it gives a more nuanced picture than just winrate on its own, which is not a perfect metric either, but if a deck has a very h igh winrate and low conversion rate, that still means that it won a lot of games! And the reason for the low conversion rate could easily be poor deck choices for the other side. So what is the reason for dismissing Azmari, for example, when it has a fantastic win rate but just happened to be paired with middling runners in this particular tournament?