Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/02/16 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    Thanks for correcting the record. I saw people discussing it on twitter and thought it was interesting, that's all. I apologize.
  2. 3 points
    10/10 Also if someone could explain how it's going in the election so far, that'd be great. Would also like to point out that based on the last few pages, Wumbo is the right kind of Trump supporter. Admitting to when he's wrong and apologizing when evidence otherwise is presented - time for some of the others in this thread to take note? I'm from the uk and know nothing about USA politics other than watching House of Cards...
  3. 3 points
    Okay, what is it? Edit: Sorry, I guess this cements the idea that I come off as a mad man. :/
  4. 3 points
  5. 2 points
    Because of gym stagnation and multi accounts. 1. Have a main account that is blue or another popular color in your local area. 2. Have 10 pokemon that are CP2000+ 3. Make a 2nd yellow account using a different email address and train to approx. level 18 (technically not allowed but they have no way to prevent it) 4. Play primarily on your blue account. Whenever you come across a friendly level 10 gym, log out and switch to yellow. 5. Fight the 1st pokemon in the blue gym until it is kicked out. 6. Log back into your blue account. Train the gym back to level 10. Insert your pokemon. 7. Due to fewer active players and level 10 gyms being intimidating, your pokemon should last for many days or weeks. The higher up you placed it, the longer it will last. I've seen people on silph road complaining about multi-accounts, but honestly I think this is bullshit. All multi accounts do is take advantage of the gym stagnation. They do not cause the gym stagnation directly. Besides, gym stagnation is good for the players because fighting gyms to get coins is a waste of time and is extremely inefficient. More people are getting free coins now than ever before because of stagnation. If you disagree with this, or find it unfair, you can go ahead and fight a level 10 gym by yourself only to see your pokemon defeated the next day. That's what's unfair about the gym system: you were never adequately rewarded for your efforts in the first place.
  6. 2 points
    yeah and if you have a big dick all you need to do is just spit a little
  7. 2 points
    ^hahahahaha what the fuck just happened
  8. 2 points
    I do believe there is some merit as long as it does not affect the real world in any significant way. What I mainly mean is basing entire arguments and platforms off of these claims like Trump, I guess. On the other hand the physical world is actually not directly involved with the mind in any way, shape or form so this entire statement is subjective. On the third hand you could say the brain and mind are physical in nature but then you would have the explain everything related to that which in turn would take forever and I am most definitely not well informed enough to backup any claims I make in that regard. I have not read the statement and have been getting all my information from a certain secondhand source but I do understand the failings of that form of information grabbing. Mostly all of their content is well informed conjecture so I will be more careful from now on. I will try to branch out more in other areas of information gathering too. Lastly, I believe I am missing something (as I always am) but I cannot comprehend the meaning on this statement for any reason: " Questioning his decision is one thing, but questioning his ethics without any evidence to back it up is pretty fucking low. " Could you expand upon this please?
  9. 2 points
    http://www.snopes.com/michelle-obama-scrubs-twitter/ you must read your news in the best places Literally one of Obama's last 5 tweets has Hillary's name in it.
  10. 2 points
    allen is in for an informative and frightening afternoon
  11. 2 points
    IS THIS SERIOUSLY WHAT QUALIFIES AS WORTHY OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION NOW
  12. 2 points
    I haven't checked over the thread to see if this has already been said but one thing I considered was to never play foreign cards. The idea being that even with translations, you ideally don't want to give your opponent the opportunity to ask for one since it gives them another option for stalling. If your cards are in the corresponding language for your area it makes it that little bit harder for them to take you to the time-out procedure where anything can happen.
  13. 2 points
    Fascist homosexuals? Oh, mein fuhrer is rolling in his grave at the thought of this shit being true. No, but seriously, you're being a fucking asshole and projecting shit onto Winter that he has no involvement in nor has he once said anything homophobic and afaik he likes to suck dick. Milo, Blaire White, or who fucking ever you hate on the side of the alt-right aren't a deteriment to the LGBTQ movement. Insecure people like you who hate entire groups of people based on preconceived notions are. I can be black and not like black culture, gay and not like the trans community, blah blah. It's a pretty fascist train of thought to assume everyone of one group thinks the same way. You fucking cuck.
  14. 2 points
    When I look at that warrior deck I really just see a Zoo deck with a slightly different threat base. It's definitely a lineup worth considering, Blade Knight enabling BLS is big draw to a list like that. Giving the deck a lategame trump for the control matchup isn't necessarily on plan, but probably powerful enough to negate the early game tradeoff of potentially opening with a dead BLS. The main problem I've had with Blade Knight lists is they're really weak to Exarion early on, and you said it yourself, the deck's end plan is to simplify the game. Once the game is simplified, you're already ahead (which is also why Dustshoot is so powerful in this deck.) This deck also inherently wants to have multiple monsters in play to speed up the clock, maybe it's just the way I play the deck, but unless my opponent has seen a bunch of cards, or I'm far enough ahead already I just won't respect Mirror Force or Torrential (which is a big reason why I like multiple Dust Tornado in the deck, and another reason Dustshoot is powerful.) and Blade Knight doesn't work very well on that plan. He ended up being a 1600 vanilla monster more often than I wanted from a card. If I wanted to jam BLS, I'd probably just go 1 Blade Knight for a RotA target, DDWL, then maybe a Shining Angel to round it off, but you might even be fine with just 2 RotAs and 1 real Light. It's not like there's a bunch of stuff in the format that is going to banish your Blade Knight. I don't really see the point of maindeck Sasuke, it's main purpose is to hit Spies post-board and it isn't even that good at that. You already have Blade Knight as a light RotA target, overall it just seems worse than Bazoo which also answers Jinzo, profitably attacks over Exarions, Airknights, etc. They both die to the same things, but Bazoo answers more problematic threats. Bazoo definitely gets a little awkward with BLS in the deck, but I don't see that being too difficult to deal with. If I was on BLS, I'd also probably play Skilled Dark Magician over Gorilla. It notably can't answer defense Exarions, and can only crash Airknights, but being a dark isn't irrelevant, and not getting eaten by Tsuk is a huge upside. Also, I agree completely that DDA is an incredibly underwhelming card, but you're looking at it from the wrong angle. It's purpose isn't to be powerful, it fills a role. You don't play DDA because you can summon it and crash it. You play DDA because it's the best RotA target to summon onto an empty board and get damage in. It's resilient because they can't Tsuk over it, it always trades tempo neutral in battle, and provides a clock. It might sound strange, but I think Compulsory is a build-around card for this deck. I tried to make it work, but it's just so weak to Tsuk. If you're going to run Compulsory you really need to make Tsuk bad against your deck, especially if you're cutting Sakuretsu. Blanking opposing Tsuks is definitely a direction you can go in, and it isn't something I've had the chance to test. My initial thoughts is that the more you build around not losing to Tsuk the worse you get vs. Exarions, but I might be overlooking some tech that makes it just work. You certainly gain a lot of equity against TERs by playing Compulse, and it's really nice how they can double as extra threats if you're light on monsters, but everything is a trade-off, and in a standard build Sakuretsu is "good enough" against TERs, while also answering Tsuk tempo positively. Also, when playing, take note of how often Solemn Judgment is just a Sakuretsu that costs half your life points.
  15. 2 points
  16. 1 point
    Sorry in advance i kind of ramble on... I think everyone agrees that the ABC engine is one of the most powerful at the moment in yugioh. I've been trying to find a version that is better going second than the 'standard' build with 7-8 traps and just hope to draw their maxx "c" or gameciel to have a chance in the mirror. That has brought me to this build: Monsters: 22 1 a 1 b 1 c 3 cyber dragon 3 cyber dragon core 2 cyber dragon drei 3 galaxy soldier 1 photon thrasher 2 elemental hero prisma 1 elemental hero blazeman 1 jizukiri, the star destroying kaiju 1 gameciel, the sea turtle kaiju 2 maxx "c" Spells: 18 3 A hero Lives 2 cyber repair plant 2 instant fusion 3 overload fusion 1 polymerization 1 reinforcement of the army 3 twin twister 3 union hanger Extra deck: 2 ABC - Dragon Buster 2 Chimeratech fortress dragon 2 Chimeratech rampage dragon 1 norden 1 panzer dragon 1 nova 1 infinity 1 tsukuyomi 1 diamond dire 1 castel 1 utopia 1 lightning Side deck: 3 cherries 3 transmodify 3 terraforming 3 full house ? ??? ABC engine: I think that one of each piece is correct because hanger is the card you want to draw mainly not the tanks. The tanks can brick your hands because they are basically just vanilla normal summons unless you can find all three. In this version although hanger is obviously powerful i don't think you would want to play terraforming unless you played a second field spell engine such as the empowerment engine. Cyber dragon engine: This ratio I'm a little less sure on because it goes back to a normal summon problem. Is adding drei/core over more tanks really better? With 5 ways to get polymerization the more cyber dragons you play the better because then you can summon rampage and most of the time that will lead to abc dragon. This engine also adds the ability to search a kaiju which is obviosly powerful against abc/ blue eyes and will force them to tag out their boss monster. Also cyber dragons being cyber dragons which can make chimeratech makes this deck better against abc second because it can force the dragon to banish them/ tag. If they tag they can make another abc next turn but you have a 4000 atk monster which can possibly just kill them so sometimes they'll be force to not tag. Hero engine: This engine combines the cyber dragon and abc engine together with prisma/ hero lives. It acts like a thrasher if you have hanger with the ability to also make your repair plant live if you have one. Also it gets blazeman -> poly which can make rampage. Prisma sets up overload fusion by itself by fusing with the onfield prisma and in grave cyber dragon. This is a 2 card rampage which sets up 2/3 of abc. Galaxy soldier: Discard outlet for all of your cyber dragon and abcs to be fused with in grave. The card increases your ceiling going second but also i don't know if it is worth it because if they just strike when you infinity you just neg 3 (2 if you have cyber dragon in grave). if you have overload fusion or a way to set up abc its not as bad but otherwise its not doing much. Transmodify could be good but idk if it would be worth playing when the deck plays less hangers and abc monsters so its more likely to be a brick. I thought about siding it in going guaranteed first with terraforming for more unfair turn one plays. Extra deck: space is really tight in the extra because of all of the fusions. I thought about cutting the panzer dragon because most of the time you just make infinity with soldier and not cyber dragon. It needs probably dweller and possibly pleiades. Possibly just 1 rampage because the second one isn't as good because there is not alot to send at that point but then your extra overloads are dead. Side deck: I have the transmodify/ terraforming combo in there right now but just siding anti-spell fragrance for going first might just be better. Cherries for going second against abc. Full house for majespecter but idk if cosmic cyclone would be better because its live going second. idk what to side for blue-eyes going second so i would really like some input on that. Possible brilliant fusion engine: I think bf could be good in this version because like the hero engine it kind of meshes the abc and cyber dragon together. also it solves some of the normal summon issue and creates plays like bf + core -> infinty. it can also just act like foolish in some instances. The main problem with adding it I think however is the extra deck space because you would need to fit in seraphanite and probably a durendal. For the main deck cuts it would probably be either the instant fusions + one other card to make room for the extra deck requirements. Or it would be the maxx c's and the gameciel but then our deck is a little worse going second (especially against non abc) and then you would have to take out like one of each chimeratech or possibly utopias for the engine. If you have any questions on the deck please write a comment. I probably don't have all the theory on ratios and such in writing because i can't remember it all lol but if you ask about it it'll probably come back to me.
  17. 1 point
    this was how you played around starlight road when it only came in SCR
  18. 1 point
    It's funny you mention Nekroz because while it's true that it's one of the decks where you will play multiple turns, it's also something that proves my point because if you couldn't open Valk+a way to clear your field, or some other kind of insane opening, you would just get trished/OTK'd or outresourced one way or another. Bricking ment losing. This is an example of late game mattering, but it being a product of the early game. At some point there was also Masquerade which made things even more complicated, and there's the Djinn aspect which could mean an auto-win/auto-lose based on beginning hands alone. Note that my point is not to say 'nowadays games don't have late games' necessarily, but rather: 'late games can exist but are a product of a solid early game, rather than topdecking or holding powerful cards in hand'. A card such as Maxx C or Shared Ride, for example, might seem like it will give your deck a bad late game at first glance, but it actually does the opposite because when resolving you would have drawn so many cards that that's more relevant than the times where you're topdecking a dead copy every now and then. The entire point of all this is to be able to judge cards better, and to 'exclude' these cards that don't help your opening - of course, exceptions will always exist as well, but I think a lot of people are still maining a bunch of these cards that simply require too much setup, or worry too much about cards being dead late game therefore not playing the optimal ratio's. Examples that come to mind are: only playing 2 Desires/Instant Fusion, in general playing more searchable 'targets' than necessary, playing cards such as call of the haunted without it being to use immediately after setting (such as grabbing an Kristya you dumped T1 in that Herald deck I saw on here, or dodging a Kaiju on ABC etc.), basically playing too few of the same cards (such as playing 2-offs instead of 3-offs, but also playing 4-5 of a 'type of card' that's essential to draw, rather than to play 10 copies and/or a big draw engine etc. Especially if we're talking about combo pieces, you can't expect to reliable draw a combo that requires 2 cards which you each play 5/6-off that aren't searchable.) edit: For people who are interested/haven't read it yet(although it's a sticky on here), I think this thread explains it better: One deck is focussed on an early game win (Domain Monarch, for example), and the other deck is about surviving the early game because it will outgrind in the late game (XYZ monarch). But even then: the goal is still to survive the early game, not to improve the late game, because the engine being powerful enough already 'takes care' of the late game.
  19. 1 point
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    "muscular black"
  22. 1 point
    you are all like little children watch this
  23. 1 point
    Combination is definitely the better trap card now that we have a quickplay fusion spell, but Counter is still very strong. Previously this deck was hugely reliant on control and beatdown; those avenues to win are still open and in some ways supplemented by the newer cards, but I foresee the strongest build of this deck being able to use these new cards to consistently combo out into game damage, with the flexibility to create recursive boards. Mithrilum and Combination have very powerful recycling effects, that combined with Fullmetalfoes Fusion lack of a OTP-clause, seems really degenerate. In my mind, though terribly reductive and simple, this deck is now the Shaddoll deck to ABC's Satellars.
  24. 1 point
    New information was found, and thus revealed. Obama says he did nothing wrong.
  25. 1 point
    No. Should a theoretically neutral party manage releases in an attempt to further their own political agenda?
  26. 1 point
  27. 1 point
    Sounds like you were wild and willing
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point
    you're right, i forgot that your omnipresent abrasiveness allows you insight into human souls that the rest of us lack and so you are able dictate the cares and thoughts of other people like idgaf about milo lol we are talking about winter. if you want to say "you are an idiot to support trump in this regard because x" then fine because you are probably right, but that's not what happened winter hopes that trump will adopt his previous, more more open view toward lbgt if elected (because that would be the first time someone changed their platform after being elected and no longer needing a voting demographic, right?) then said he's bi. you said he doesn't care about gay people. i said he just said he was bi. that's the end.
  30. 1 point
    how tf do you go through an oz a day jesus Let me know if you're ever in Canada
  31. 1 point
    One of those 'other' decks was me with dark synchro. Serious dark horse in the format, no bad matchups.
  32. 1 point
    I went with bbgungun...probably should have stuck with Amnesiac.
  33. 1 point
    Who all did people pick for the free pack thing for worlds. I went with Amnesiac because I forgot Thjis was in it but I'm pretty happy with that now.
  34. 1 point
  35. 1 point
  36. 1 point
    I played a lot of Arena earlier this year. I felt it was something I'd neglected a lot and it seemed like a neat challenge because, while it lacks in ranking or tournaments, it does have charming rewards like heaps of gold and packs and such. I got some sick runs and it felt really fun. However, I find the problems I have with Arena are basically the opposite of the ones you cite about constructed. Arena is more "wet and wild", but it's not as though you suddenly aren't trying to play around things like you do in constructed, you just have to play around broad strokes instead of specific things. Moreover, you're exposed to more variance in deck construction, which does solve the relative staleness of decks, but replace it with a lot of potential for bad beats. The big "arena fix" that tried to correct how Mage got a good class common basically every set while Hunter gets, like, Dart Trap, for instance, also seems like an admission of poor planning for Arena. For every time a Druid nutted on me with t1 Innervate in constructed, I'm sure there's one dude getting knocked out of a game by the dude who drafted 5 Firelands Portals. Lastly, while Arena isn't as clear-cut as Constructed, I don't think it's actually more creative, in fact, I'd say it's basically the opposite; everything is a midrange-tempo deck. How are you going to ever play combo in Arena without getting really lucky, for instance? How creative is a deck going to be when you want 6ish 1/2 drops and 3-4 drops on 3, 4, and 5 in basically 99% of cases? The best parallel I can draw is when Cube Drafting was all the rage in YGO, and ACP made the observation that adding more cards to your cube decrease deck variation, not increasing it, because its statistically less likely that you'll get any given theme and the EV of the "generic good stuff" decks is relatively higher. Same deal here, the card pool is only getting deeper, how could you justify pick 1 Anyfin or some other build-around knowing that it's astronomically low odds that the rest of the deck comes together? Basically, Arena's fun, and I think shifting between that and constructed is likely a good way to fight getting burned out, but it's real tough to hold up either format as a well-designed or super-deep format. Cube draft a game with people some time, also, that's another lesson here.
  37. 1 point
    >No explanation of how complexity of a game can even be measured >Throws out random win rate statistics with no basis to support them Ok, I guess.
  38. 1 point
    how come nobody on dgz plays arena? i love it personally and find constructed really rather boring and more about memorizing situations and decklists than creative gameplay. i do hate that theres no ranking system or tournaments/prizes though, so thatd be a valid point. just interested in other opinions
  39. 1 point
    1 like = 1 prayer for handsomeguy. Got nut drawn every game by Cydonia
  40. 1 point
  41. 1 point
    "still debating the usefulness of allure" in 2016
  42. 1 point
    Update: - 2 instant fusion - 1 gameciel - 1 cyber dragon drei - 1 norden - 1 panzer + 3 brilliant fusion + 1 garnet + 1 seraphanite + 1 artifact durendal Played this at my regional today and went 6-2 getting 14th (albeit small regional). I blinded second all day. Matchups were 4 aBC, 1 madolche artifact, 1 mermail, dinomist, and 1 demise qli. Losses were to madolche and mermail because they also wanted to go second and i didn't end up siding anything such as transmogrify or fragrances for going first. Also I did make one misplay today against the mermail player so that's also why I lost. Also I learned that you cannot use rampage dragon effect on the first turn because you don't have a battle phase do that also decreases your chances opening ABC going first.The aBC matchup blinding second was pretty much free and I only lost one game all day against ABC. It's not like they were bad players it's just that deck tries make the same play going first pretty much every time and this deck exploits that fact pretty well. My side was: 3 cherries 3 gameciel 3 mst 2 dark hole 1 raigeki 2 full house 1 dante Still didn't get to play the blue eyes matchup so I don't know how that's going to go because the engine doesn't have a good way to deal with their boards outside of kaijus.
  43. 1 point
    You're close. Actually, I control all politicians in this country, and I intentionally created a ridiculous election with radical candidates in order to boost duelistgroundz.com activity. Look at how many people started posting almost specifically to talk about Trump? It all adds up, doesn't it?
  44. 1 point
    This is a dumb Beast-Dragon deck I tooled around with over the weekend because I had a bunch of Druid quests. Just a standard curve deck. Objectively, it is not good. But, generally I found it to be much better than standard beast druid. Also, people get really confused when you start dropping Corruptors after first doing beast stuff. That part's fun. 2 Innervate 2 Living Roots 2 Enchanted Raven 1 Sir Finley Mrrgglton 2 Mark of Y'Shaarj 2 Faerie Dragon 2 Druid of the Saber 2 Blackwing Technician 2 Savage Combatant 2 Twilight Guardian 2 Swipe 2 Azure Drake 2 Druid of the Claw 2 Blackwing Corruptor 1 Drakonid Crusher 1 The Curator 1 Deathwing I wanted Combatant to be Armored Warhorse so much, but Jousts are basically impossible to win when you're so heavy on early drops. Also never lucky.
  45. 1 point
    Only exception where you draw is when you know your opponent's deck is greedier than yours so you want to turbo into monkey to stand a chance.
  46. 1 point
    I think Trogg already by itself is better than all the other 1 drops because its 1/3 ( already better than average 2/1 or 1/2 ). Overload buffs are just a bonus to it. I tried only claws as 1 drop when I was testing WitchDoctor Primal fusion deck, and I think mirror matches are decided by turn 3, because player who sets board first will bait out first lightning storm. Thats why I think 1 drops like Squire and Trogg are super important. For Warrior, I think keeping war axe is priority, but you can keep things like slam and ghouls vs decks like zoo as well. Keep brawl vs midrange shaman ( imo more important than axe in this matchup). If you have war axe vs shaman, you can keep ghoul because you can clear off totem golem. Keep Justicar TrueHart vs mid shamans, druids, warrior. Against shamans, dont use war axe on totems. They are actually not threatening at all. just clear every other minion. Try to calcucate how much damage they have with bloodlust and only brawl away totems if they are buffed with thunder bluff valiant. In the Warrior mirror match, just keep Justicar and elise in your mulligan. Warrior mirror match is pretty easy when you are used to it, the most important thing is to never play a card until you reach 10 cards in hand. if you are playing minions, they can get rid of their useless slams/war axe from hand. You want to put them into awkward spots where they must use spells like bash and revenge from hand just so they wouldnt overdraw and then you get rid of your situtational stuff. Never play sylv in mirror because they can just give you acolyte, try to save sylv until they are forced to play their big minion ( most important one is cairne)
  47. 1 point
    So, I've been trying to play a bit more HS lately, since I kinda dropped off a bit when I started work. I've been mostly playing Midrange Shaman, because it seems pretty nutty, and I can play like an idiot and still win. That aside, there's definitely some stuff I want to brush up on, so I'm hoping you can all help out with some tips and such. RE: Midrange Shaman > Am I being dumb, or is Tunnel Trogg not that amazing in this deck? While I can sometimes get the Trogg > Golem opener and shut out aggro/board control decks, I feel like it's often just pushing 1 damage while I totem, or hanging awkwardly while I try to make a Feral Spirit connection. I'm inclined to think that it's better than comparable 1-drops like Squire, but has anyone tried running Claws only as the 1-drop, and then fit in more midrange threats like Ragnaros or the like? RE: Control Warrior (I'm trash at this deck, send help pls) > I have basically no experience with this deck, and have consequently been playing it pretty terribly, imo. As a general case, I feel like a lot of the issue is that I fall too far behind, and can't get enough value out of my cards. Should I be hard mulliganing for War Axe all the time so that I maximize the chance of keeping the early turns to myself, because I feel like I get overwhelmed otherwise? > I see some varying ways people try to give an end game to the deck: Elise+Yogg, Elise+N'Zoth, C'Thun, Fatigue, Elise+Bombs. Would I be right in thinking that, unless my endgame package has a mechanical advantage against a deck I expect to be highly represented (ex: Spells+Yogg against heavy aggro, Fatigue against heavy control), should I try to play something like N'Zoth because its the most middle-of-the-road in terms of value versus matchup skewing (Taurens give you clearance agaisnt Aggro, but you can convert them to legends and N'Zoth back Sylvanas/Cairne against control, for instance)? > In the mirror, are there common signals to know when it's time to clam up and try to draw as little as possible? I know there are certain priorities like Justicar/Elise, and that you want to have answers available to dispatch threats but I feel like it's hard to know when I need to dig for plays/answers, especially when the opponent can just armor up if try to dig for removal. > Against Shaman, I know a big part of the matchup is trying to get to a point where you can stick something on the board that can bash down the totems (hence the combo of War Axe + Ghoul being so good, you can answer Golem and have a totem-breaker). Ifyou open on Axe and they just start toteming, what are some inflections to look for to know if it'd be worth using Axe charges on early totems? > Against midrange decks (Dragon Priest/Warrior, for example), would I be right in thinking that the matchups are kinda even, because all my removal is basically even on average against their threats? Would the individual matchups mostly come down to whose draws line up better and who teched to be greedier? RE: Secret Hunter > I've managed to run into a Hunter build that seems to only be 2 Secretkeeper, 2 Huntress, Rag and 25 traps, bows, spells etc. I've managed to lose to it because my opponents all just flopped Rag as their last card and it hits my face for lethal all three times (better than Call of the Wild! +3dmg to face, 1 mana less!). Much like my Questing Adventurer encounters, I'm left wondering if it's a real deck or if I'm just having some bad encounters with Ragnaros.
  48. 1 point
  49. 1 point
  50. 1 point
    So you're saying we need to play Downerd?
×