Shadow Lord

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

254 Good


About Shadow Lord

  • Rank
    Knight of the Abyss

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  1. Curious on the order these should go in. I know in the case of 2 mandatory effects, or 2 optional effects, the first one triggered has to go first. However does the fact that Caius is mandatory and Edea optional override this interaction and revert it to standard SEGOC (mandatory first, then optional) or does it still go in order of activation?
  2. Nekroz will almost certainly get hit by the banhammer on the next list, so it's likely they're avoiding overpowering Burning Abyss for a post-nekroz format.
  3. No Angineer/Gigabrilliant seems like an odd choice, also doesn't have 7 discards get cloggy at all? It would seem like you'd rarely have enough optimal discard fodder to utilize them effectively.
  4. Meant to pos my bad.
  5. Is it just me or did Chris play very poorly? The dante with cir attached and no non-Cir BA in gy t1 seemed really bad, also immediately karma cutting the Carrier made no sense, unless he'd intended to karma cut before saq was played.
  6. They do; however my understanding of current TCG rulings is that OCG/Japanese Text is treated as if it doesn't exist, instead purely rely on what the actual TCG text is. That does indicate, I think, that Black Horn will most likely be made to work like Rai-Oh in a later wording.
  7. Rai Oh says exactly one monster. "When a(1) monster is summoned" is not an exclusive statement. If I summon 2 monsters I'm still summoning "a(1) monster" because a(1) monster has been summoned, 2 monsters have also been summoned, and exactly one monster has not been summoned. Compare this to cards such as Grandmaster of the Six Samurai or Bora the spear, both of these cards state while you control a "x" monster you can do y, in this case "a monster" clearly does not mean only 1, black horn's current wording follows this logic.
  8. Casey was using Shadollfacts, not BA. Apparently was ACTUALLY using Qliphorts. Funny they got his deck wrong twice.
  9. Actual t16 seems to be 5 BA, 4 Shaddoll, 7 Qliphort. T8 was 4 Qliph 2 Dolls 2 BA. T4 is 2 Qliph 1 BA 1 Dolls. Seems this format's pretty even between all 3 so far, interesting to see what wins. 
  10. You don't really risk anything if you can immediately flip the face down. You have priority to activate your card, and since Denko is continuous as soon as your (1) backrow is flipped your opponent can no longer respond, so there's no window of opportunity for your opponent to play Bottomless/Phoenix Wing Wind Blast.   I don't see this card as being all that amazing though. It's a combo piece that uses up your normal summon and only functions to insure a combo goes through, but it doesn't really do anything on its own. Further, unless you're winning that turn, you're preventing yourself from having any responses to your opponent's plays (outside of veiler/maxx/other monster based disrupted, which in most cases being discussed aren't really an option), so it can be a double-edged sword.
  11.   This largely ignores the mirror match, however; banishing Dantes, Virgils, and the searchable BA lineup (since they can discard trap to regain the draw phase) banishing cards is simply better. And, against Shaddolls, it is still rather good. Banishing fusions with a discard is AS optimal as stacking them, but it is pretty close. I actually did mention this: "Removing cards versus stacking them is at best marginally favorable to removing in the case of extra deck mons". That includes Dante/Virgil/Fusions. The difference between banishing them and returning to the extra is basically negligible and only rarely is banishing actually a superior option. The general BA lineup are cards that are occasionally better to banish and occasionally better to stack, really which it is depends heavily on the game state. In general my argument would be that banishing versus stacking monsters is basically a wash, with banishing at best being marginally better overall, but the added utility of being able to stack face-down monsters of back to square one is better than the tiny bit of advantage removing might have over stacking
  12. I feel like if you're considering main phase removal Back to Square one is better overall than Dark Core. Removing cards versus stacking them is at best marginally favorable to removing in the case of extra deck mons, and only somewhat favorable when talking about cards like Dark Armed/BLS/Deneb/Math. But since shaddols are a thing, being able to spin face down monsters is a huge plus. I know back when I used to side it I would often win games versus dolls by completely controlling the draw phase via Back to Square One, Raiza, and Phoenix Wing Wind Blast.
  13. Clearly its not always optimal (that should be obvious, few cards are). Usually situations where Zenmaines is relevant are situations that are simplified, and you either out the monster in question, or lose. While, no, Zenmaines in attack mode isn't the best scenario versus dolls, its a hell of a lot better than leaving BLS/DAD up, and at times a better option than crashing Acid Golem. Shaddoll players have only so many copies of Shaddoll fusion, and at the point in the game where this usually comes up the Shaddoll player has usually already committed Fusion. Finally really, that's just an application of zenmaines, it may not even be the most important one, especially given the prevalence of shadow-imprisoning mirror as a side versus Burning Abyss.
  14. Its not used as a defensive option. You don't always lose the turn BLS/DAD hits the board, zenmaines can let you out BLS/DAD without going into Acid Golem, which, for obvious reasons, you really want to avoid if possible.
  15. I feel like at least 2 Virgil and Zenmaines are needed. I can't see not running Zenmaines when BLS and Dark Armed (sometimes) are being ran by Shaddoll, it gives a way to pop Tool off of Tour Guide, out Shadow-Mirror, and other useful things like that. 2 Virgil lets you maintain Virgil access even if Virgil is hit by Karma Cut or otherwise removed from play, which I think is important. I'm also not sure I think 1 of the tuner is going to be the best method, so if you're running more than 1 tuner, correspondingly you're going to want at least the 2nd Virgil. Less than 2 Downerd I don't really believe is going to be optimal.   So for me that's 13 slots, as I don't think fortune tune is required, although that probably because because I don't play in tournaments much anymore so eomp isn't something I worry about. That leaves only 2 slots for the, at least, 3 (really probably 4) cards needed to run astral force. Can I make Astral force work by cutting stuff that isn't strictly required? Probably, but I feel like at that point I'm losing out on too much optimization of the extra to gain access to a card that brings with it a whole host of its own issues, while now simultaneously making my extra deck less flexible for the standard plays.