Jump to content

harig07

Duelist
  • Content count

    3229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by harig07

  1. Nekroz - Discussion

    Um hate to be this guy today but the most common out to Djinn is Book of Eclipse, so if you go first make Djinn set MC and flip it calling Eclipse they'll just chain it and you'll commit seppuku
  2. Nekroz - Discussion

    The time where they're most likely to have an out to Djinn is mid-game though.
  3. Nekroz - Discussion

    I don't think anyone runs Maxx on the basis that it's super good. Quite the opposite, it's run because it's arguably more stable than Veiler in the mirror.   Tingy brought it up a while back, but you need to be in a reasonable position to get value off Veiler. Veiler means they can't clear their field, but if you can't clear their field afterwards - or if you have to play awkwardly to do so - the Veiler ceases to put them under pressure and instead puts you back under pressure. It's a minor problem but a relevant one going into a big tournament.   Por ejemplo, negating Valk leaves them open to a Trish counter push, but that requires you to have the means to make Trishula. Then you're left with a field of Trishula, so ideally you'd want your own Valk on board to prevent yourself from being open to theirs. That requires you to have 3-4 cards to perform, which isn't a problem necessarily given the consistency of this deck, but on a fundamental level the deck is a combo deck and Veiler is always a card external to the process of comboing. (Obviously there are other ways to counterpush)   Maxx in the mirror will always at least replace itself which is beneficial to a combo deck.   Veiler essentially places them under greater pressure in specific albeit common scenarios, and requires you to have the ability to capitalise on that pressure in order for it to not dissipate. Maxx places them under a lesser pressure (unless they play badly which in fairness most Nekroz players will atm) but that pressure is contingent to their deck Special Summoning which is a lot more applicable than the scenarios in which Veiler is useful.   Not bashing on Veiler I like it a lot but neither Maxx nor Veiler are necessarily better than the other. It's a trade-off between something that is safer but less powerful vs less stable but more powerful, and depends on a few factors as to which you elect to main.   Also real question if Djinn is bad in the mirror to the degree that you'd side it out why play it in the first place?
  4. Edison would be fucking nuts please make it happen
  5. Should Weed be legalized???

    God dammit why didn't you think of legalising weed when you were President you oaf
  6. Nekroz - Discussion

      I'm a lot more interested in how this came to be than the actual answer
  7. Nekroz - Discussion

    That also depends entirely on if you count Sorcerer/DP as that 7th Normal Summon though.
  8. Nekroz - Discussion

    Psi is pretty good at all stages of the game in the mirror and is not awful in other match-ups particularly if they have Emptiness up where it is gucci.   For the mirror you can use it in the early game after you've used, say, Kaleido or Brio to call their Kaleido/Brio and thereby force them into really awkward plays. If you're in Gungnir range you can call Gungnir so they can't Gungnir kill you. Obviously, if you can kill them you can call Valk and go all in.   Like the whole function behind Nekroz as a deck, and particularly the Nekroz mirror, is planning around what they can do to control the tempo of the game. Nekroz is fundamentally a tempo deck. Psi can be used in a manner that incrementally restricts their ability to play, in Psi's particular case across all match-ups rather than things like Denko/Kycoo which are more limited in match-up specificity but more powerful. So Psi weirdly contributes towards Nekroz's blueprint.   I wouldn't run 3 Psi because you'll get lots of Normal Summon clogging going on, but it's uses as a tech are pretty widespread.     Kycoo doesn't deal with Emptiness, which is the main reason for considering Blocker over Kycoo aside from the fact that Kycoo is poor against everything other than the mirror but super good in the mirror while Psi is okay against everything and pretty good in the mirror.   I assume the discussion is pertaining to Psi as a main deck option rather than a side rival for Kycoo.
  9. Pure Mask Hero

      I would agree philosophically. I run Soul Charge in my build because it is still a strong comeback play, and the Battle Phase is sometimes worth sacrificing if it means you can grab a free Dark Law/Rank 4 out of nowhere. It isn't universally favourable but it isn't universally unfavourable either. HEROs are backed by a spine of power Spells, such as Miracle Fusion and to some extent Mask Charge, that can be seen as recovery. HEROs need some form of recovery because they're forced to commit in the early game but are brittle if that commitment is broken apart. Those recovery Spells provide the deck with a mid-game that its monsters are unable to provide, because individual Spells become monsters that are suitable for that stage of the game.   It is for this reason I think lists should be running at least 2 but probably 3 Miracle Fusion. Even if it is just for AbsoZero, being able to drop a 25+ Raigeki evenly with relatively little set up is important for a deck that lacks many one-card plays or many recovery plays. I think it is more reliable than Mask Charge because Charge necessitates you having performed an MC play, which in my build is less common than having 2 monsters in grave, but I like Mask Charge as an option regardless. Hell I'd even be tempted to try something like Jar of Avarice, but that's way out there.   Soul Charge is just on top of that. It isn't like 'if you are behind you'll need your Battle Phase' because if you're behind it means you'll likely have no monsters and little means of producing monsters because the monsters in the deck are weak especially if you run things like Monk/Goblin that are more weak monsters. Soul Charge is a one card means of getting useful monsters onto the field, and that in itself is often game-changing.     You don't really. I don't think running bad cards to make a good card better is worthwhile.   I've seen the aggressive Dark HERO decks, I mean people build them in the model of Tele-DaD, I don't think that's correct because such an approach is nowhere near as good as it was back when it was actually good. Elements can be used maybe, I dunno, but I don't think running, like, AK + Grepher + PSZ + DaD is the right approach. It just regresses into a degenerate Synchro strategy without any real benefit from doing so.
  10. Pure Mask Hero

      Yeah this is a fundamental issue. I think the deck has to be played as an early game deck because, as previously said, its engine is too weak compared to other decks to drag the game out, but you do have the ability to just bomb things through mass removal or by putting 4k+ damage out of nowhere. Whether or not the opponent has adequate defence to lock you out and exploit the weakness of the HERO engine is entirely dependant on the type of defence that they have - loads of simplification suits HEROs very well because you can afford to have, like, MST Night Beam x2 in hand so long as you have all the other stuff to go alongside it. In many respects you need to simplify the gamestate because things like Dark Law and Absolute Zero are much better in simplified gamestates than they are in expanded ones. So just logically the premise of simplification + go balls deep HERO style somewhat works.   Nekroz disrupt this heavily though, because they play no backrow. Their defence is through Valk which there isn't a reasonable out for. This is the main spanner in the works, really. But maybe it isn't that bad because if you do play against Nekroz you can revert to protect-the-boss strats and hope it works out rather than going full aggro.   The problem now is flexibility to accommodate the necessity for aggro against Qli and BA vs the necessity for something beyond aggro for the Nekroz match-up. I guess this is what I'm trying to work on.   Tbh I'm perfectly okay with resolving Dark Law less if it means I have like 1/5 of my deck to run other stuff that isn't mostly garbage. Monk and Goblin make Mist slightly better but are more or less useless outside of that. Is there any intermediate that would be more useful? I think there might be but don't know.   I'm fucking around with this as food for thought too:   3 Shadow Mist 3 Malicious 3 Vanity's Fiend X amount of other Monarchs/support   X amount of Monarch support 3 AHL 2 Mask Change X amount of standard stuff X discard outlets (DDraw + maybe PwwB or whatever)   I think that could work as a control structure, compared with protect the Dark Law. I guess the idea with that is to pitch Mist to get Mali as quickly as possible, preferably through AHL -> Mist set MC MC into Law search Mali. If they kill the DL you can follow up with a Monarch which could be floodgate or simplification depending on what deck building choices you make.   I mean other than that I tried an Artifact build with the idea being to simplify the gamestate through access to additional MSTs and apply pressure with Sanctum Beagal Moral plays but with Moral at 1 it doesn't work that well cause you have to Ignition your own stuff too much and Beagal isn't that great without Moral.   Meh I would preferably have formulated theories rather than inklings and ideas but I just haven't had time yet. Been doing other things. I'll find time to see if things can be made concrete that isn't just what we already know kind of thing.   Oh and another fundamental issue with the deck is that it just isn't as good as Qli or Nekroz lol it's the budget choice and will therefore not be as good as everything else. I think there's potential though, and aspects to the deck that I feel are worth exploring.
  11. Pure Mask Hero

    I don't know if 3 Mist 3 Bubble and nothing else is favourable, I was just surprised that it functions cohesively. Monk + Goblin/TPGF + 4-6 RotA as a spine means you'll be able to Special Summon Mist T1 more consistently, which is desirable. I just haven't liked them because if you use Monk or Goblin to Special Mist you're unlikely to overlay immediately afterwards (you may have a Bubbleman follow-up but there isn't really a strong go to Rank 4 for early game outside of Dweller against BA), which means that the Monk/Goblin sits around until you can overlay with it. So it's either Monk, ditch Spell get Mist, Mist search, leaving you with a +1 that is undercut by having a dead monster on field, or Goblin SS from hand search same outcome. More monsters also conflicts with Bubbleman, and Bubbleman is like the only good searchable Hero outside of Malicious. Again, Bubbleman allows you to quicken the pace of the game by turning wandering bodies into Rank 4's, following the pressure motif. Fuelling Miracle Fusion/Mask Charge accelerates your gamestate, etc. So having reduced Bubbleman access kind of sucks.   Like neither Monk nor Goblin/TPGF are good cards on their own, they're just there to get the best out of Shadow Mist. RotA is good to some extent because it means more Shadow Mist and makes Bubbleman plays more manoeuvrable but you certainly hit a point of diminishing returns before you end up with 3 RotA 3 Emergency Call because over-consistency is a bad thing (early Nekroz builds played 3 RotA 3 Clausolas thinking it would make the deck more consistent, when it actually made it less so). So most of the monsters in the conventional HERO spine are just undesirable outside of specific parts of the game/scenarios.   Minimalistic monster line-up in favour of more Spells means that you have more Extra space for the R4s that are good rather than having to run a bunch of one-ofs split between Xyz and Fusions. The Spells in the deck are more powerful than the monsters (as the Spells = the good monsters), so less monsters for more Spells would make sense. It frees main deck space so you can run most of what you would want to run + more. It's just another deckbuilding compromise so there are pros and cons but it's one that I haven't seen yet.   I mean there are plenty of HERO structures that can be used, and they're all different. But everything seems to be centred around the standard one from most of what I've observed, which is like:   3 Shadow Mist 3-5 Goblindbergh/Goldfish 2-3 Bubbleman 2 Summoner Monk 11-13   4-6 RotA 3 MST 3 Mask Change 1 Book 1 Raigeki 1 Snatch 13-15   Then whatever other Traps/Spells/techs that people want to run. I don't think it's optimal for the aforementioned reasons, but I don't really have the answer to what is better.   So far I've preferred something closer to:   3 Shadow Mist 3 Bubbleman 6   3 Upstart 3 MST 3 AHL 2-3 RotA 3 Miracle 3 Mask Change 1 Book 1 Raigeki 1 Soul 1 Snatch 21-22   Which is similar in terms of numbers but instead of having to cut on Spells to accommodate mediocre Monsters you run bare minimum of the latter and max on all of the former.   I dunno just something I've been thinking about lately.
  12. Pure Mask Hero

    Mask Charge and Miracle Fusion aren't mutually exclusive.   Anyways, while the discussion pertains to meta-building I guess it's interesting to think about what kind of deck Heroes is. I wouldn't say it's protectboss.deck (or Evilswarm 2.0) because a) Dark Law isn't powerful enough, b) didn't have the protection that Ophion/Shi En had and c) isn't consistent enough to open with as Ophion was. I don't think playing protect the Dark Law is sustainable at all because it is super brittle (especially considering that Djinn outs is a mandatory part of deckbuilding and they happen to out Dark Law).   Heroes' engine is much worse compared with Qli, BA and Nekroz in regards to raw card advantage. Qli have consistent +1 minimum per turn, BA all float and Nekroz are Nekroz. Heroes have Shadow Mist. Trying to play Heroes like a control/grind deck is therefore unlikely to be sustainable because Nekroz, Qli and BA will out-plus you so slower games favour them. Even if you have Dark Law, which reduces the extent that their engine functions dramatically, playing a slower game gives them more time to top an out, and if you don't have Dark Law the lack of sustainability to the Hero engine is going to get exposed heavily.   I haven't found the perfect Hero structure yet, but probably the biggest strength I can observe is that it can apply lots of pressure very quickly. This pressure is applicable in a more flexible manner than that of other decks in that you can apply proactive pressure whether it be offensive or defensive. An example of this was Sanctum into Moralltach, which was a raw +1 and was, generally, defensive in nature, but generated/maintained pressure. Going AHL -> Shadow Mist search MC set MC, and having the ability to swap MC and Shadow Mist for Dark Law + Bubbleman and banish a card from their hand if they're forced to use a search effect is a similar kind of 'pressure'. But Heroes can make one card beatsticks quite consistently through Mask Change, which is obviously amazing, and Miracle Fusion. Acid and Absolute Zero similarly follow this idea of pressure as they're mass removal, and thanks to Mask Change the timing of when you choose to play removal/floodgate means you can maximise the amount of pressure and the kind of pressure you place your opponent under.   Like if I went AHL into Shadow Mist and swung for 1k then Mask Changed into Dark Mist and hit for another 24 that would be one kind of pressure compared with AHL -> Shadow Mist, set MC and pass.   I feel the deck should be played aggressively, because late game isn't sustainable. AHL is so good, but I really don't like Monk or Goblin because they just sit around most of the time and are deadweight until you can overlay with them. Imo you can easily play the deck with just 3 Shadow Mist 3 Bubbleman, in fact if Veiler becomes a thing this structure will probably become favourable over Goblin/Monk/TPGF which make the deck's early game plays super weak to Veiler. Fundamentally I think lots of simplification + minimal monster count + lots of power Spells would be best, however Nekroz don't play S/T so simplification loses a lot of value. I think a minimal Trap count is certainly favourable as, again, you want to be killing them quickly rather than drawing the game out. Killing them quickly doesn't mean Upstart is bad though.
  13. Pure Mask Hero

    This is turning into a HERO discussion thread (which is kinda cool but kinda dirty)
  14. Nekroz - Discussion

      Congrats to Omar for topping. Hope the matches helped haha.
  15. Nekroz - Discussion

    I get what you're saying but there's still a limit to what most people would tolerate when making those kinds of deckbuilding decisions, along with the fact that the more swiss rounds pile up the chances of getting any real gain from that win in time become slimmer and slimmer. Also unrelated but I'm not sure how legal it is, I know you're fine if it's just a few stall/lp cards (like this example, wok in qli or messenger of peace in those old-ass jank wind-up builds) but I'm fairly sure konami does not exactly appreciate you showing up to a YCS with 40 waboku.dek     The logistics of whether or not people are going to be inclined to dedicate space to time-specific cards is a separate issue, which is exactly what we're currently discussing in the thread. The moral implications are something different entirely and was what I was responding to, because your first post was itself a moral criticism.   Konami honestly don't give a shit what you do you've paid for the cards and paid the entry fee for their event.
  16. Nekroz - Discussion

      Cheers man :) Surprised you knew haha   Me and Tingy discussed time in the early stages, which was when I revisited Emptiness as I don't like siding it in general for the mirror but in time you get a lot more value out of burning them a turn (like you can yolo balls deep a field + Emptiness and cause it's time that will be good play). Our main picks were Air Hummingbird and Mystic Wok - Wok is actually not awful in that it lets you dodge Veiler and Valk so you can yolo a big field without Gungnir, swing then Wok when they Valk for ultimate time on the round funsies. I think Air Hummingbird was good too as it's easy 2k+ life and you can sack it for Valk, being Lv3 kind of sucks though.   I think Rainbow Life and Aegis of Gaia would be subpar. Maybe there's something else that could work but I've never found it necessary to side specific time cards so that's a gap in my knowledge. From what I have done I would advocate Wok for now.   fuck eomp wins that shit's gay and doing it on purpose is a great example of terrible sportmanship, playing any card for the express purpose of dicking over your opponent in time in the already agonizingly long nekroz mirror is being a huge ass     That mindset is a great example of being a terrible player. If something is legally available to you it can be used and it is fair. You finding something distasteful doesn't make it so. Suck it up and play what's best, not what feels most chivalrous.
  17. Nekroz - Discussion

      I'm going to revisit the Qli match-up in regards to hitting Scouts versus floodgates, before I tested it with Tingy and we found hitting Scout to be beneficial but that was a while ago.   I think Spiritualism is one of those things that isn't bad but there are just better things. Bouncing a Saq or bouncing anything to appropriate Trish is okay but will often be inferior to just sniping the card. Fundamentally your S/T removal is to clear floodgates and Scout, so dedicating space to S/T removal that is objectively worse at just clearing things than alternative options in exchange for potentially beneficial interactions + the ability to bounce Saq (which isn't that problematic) is probably not worth it.   Generally siding for Qli imo you have 3 MST 3 Fairy Wind as standard inclusions (Wind is too strong and MST is too well-rounded) and from there you either go with more S/T removal, generally Twister, or some kind of monster removal. I prefer diversifying side options to some extent because when I played 5-6 MST + 2-3 Fairy Wind I found the hands would become too congested and it's drawing X number of outs for X situation kind of thing. Fairy Wind is powerful enough to reduce the extent that you have to side sheer quantity of one-for-one S/T removal (ironically if you have an overabundance of S/T removal Fairy Wind loses value because it turns into a 141 more often rather than a 2+41 as it is in most situations), so monster removal helps in that it makes the quality of your hand more well-rounded (like if I draw 1-2 backrow removal + 1 monster removal that's generally better than 2-3 backrow removal no monster removal).   Essentially my pecking order is 6 S/T removal + some monster removal (this changes if you main or side Hands) rather than 8-9 S/T removal. My preferred monster removal at present is Hidden Armory or Mirror Force (I currently prefer HA), which supercede Dark Hole particularly and arguably System Down I guess but that's way in the out-there part of things. Then even if I were to go back to S/T removal Twister would be more applicable most of the time than Spiritualism, and even then Dust Tornado or Typhoon would probably get consideration too.
  18. Nekroz - Discussion

      Response is below     I didn't intend for it to come across that way, I just didn't want to criticise without attempting to contribute in some way, that was all that I meant by posting my list. I don't assume my build is superior because I've been playing for longer, but for someone who is inexperienced with the deck (which seem to be a lot of people now cropping up in the thread) I think it is an acceptable reference point. We discussed things like 3 RotA 3 Clausolas (which yes, I would say is suboptimal) dozens of pages back and such things are recurring now. I feel my list is good because it is good, not because I have any sort of authority due to X.   I think you assumed my mindset was different to how it actually was, and that's more what you were criticising. Fair enough, even though that wasn't the case I'll accept how it may have come across. But I'm not arrogantly posting my build assuming it's the best build and neglecting "different ideas" or "different ways of thinking". I've experimented with a lot of things but not everything, and even if I had tested everything I don't assume that ideas aren't worth revisiting. There's no high horse game to be had here.   With regards to Emptiness, you can main MST purely because Emptiness exists, sure. I wouldn't say that's invalid, and if one feels that Emptiness will be a consistent thing against everything that you'll play then MST is the most obvious solution to that problem. That would seem to be the case now, and it wouldn't be a bad idea in a still relatively undefined format to play a relatively diverse card in MST (Tingy has stated before that he feels MST is a good main deck choice at the moment for that reason going into a big event).   I don't main MST because I don't want to lose leverage in the mirror to that significant a degree. I am aware that you can set MSTs as bluffs and chain it to things etc but it is a pure -1 in the mirror, and in tight mirrors (as Nekroz's are) each individual card ends up contributing. Maybe it won't be a -1 now because people may play backrow, which would validate MST (again undefined format argument) but I'd assume that most Nekroz builds won't be playing any backrow. If they main MST and you a) don't and b) don't play in a manner that would make their MSTs live (setting Eclipse/Ritual Spells) you are already in a better position to win the mirror. This would be significant in "12 rounds of swiss" if you were to play even just 2-3 mirror matches, which I wouldn't deem as unlikely at all even at this early stage.   As has been discussed previously, Qliphort are likely to main 3 Emptiness and 2-3 Skill Drain as a minimum number of hate cards. That, with Scout, leaves at least 8-9 things that you are certainly going to want to MST. This is why Nekroz dedicates the majority of their side to Qli - there is too much that needs to be killed (and is why Fairy Wind is so good). The times where you're going to have enough MSTs to kill enough things to swing the Qliphort match-up in your favour Game 1 considering the abundance of backrow they have that deals with Nekroz + Scout as a resource engine is going to be few. MST doesn't even the match-up, it just slightly improves it should you see it/the right amount of them.   It seems reductive to accept you're unlikely to win G1 against Qli when you hypothetically have the option to improve it but the improvement is marginal in most cases. However, having MST as a -1 actually matters in the mirror considering how long the games go on for (games against Qli are a lot quicker, meaning you have less time to draw appropriate outs in that match-up + you're more likely to draw into at least one MST in the mirror). So it's a trade-off that I've elected not to take. This is before factoring in that main decked MSTs mean that you'll have less tech space, so less Djinn outs/hand traps and so on which will further hamper your mirror.   Basically, I don't think it's narrow-minded or arrogant to have limited outs to Emptiness considering that the two most concerning match-ups (Nekroz and Qli) are match-ups where MST is either dead or unlikely to be sufficient pre-side. If I lose a G1 purely to an Emptiness because I didn't draw Raigeki/Steal/Blocker or couldn't DA + Mage over something to break the lock so be it, Nekroz has good match-ups across the board bar Qli and Heroes so I can accept having G2+3 to win post-side. I'd rather run cards that better G1 in the mirror where G1 is paramount to the entire match than run something that means I won't lose a couple of G1s to rogue that draw Emptiness early on enough for it to be meaningful and maintain a strong enough presence despite the outs that I still main + however many turns I could Valk stall to stay alive for. I don't feel it is optimal to reduce the mirror to cement rogue/BA and slightly better a Qli match-up that is still dire even after you main MST.   On another note that's why Psi-Blocker is so good. It disables Emptiness but is very good in the mirror and is flexible across all match-ups. Baiting Veiler and retaining offensive momentum as a Level 4 Normal Summon are cherries on top.   P.S. Happy Valentine's everyone <3
  19. Nekroz - Discussion

    I would advocate the 3rd Shrit more than anything because it decreases brick hands and allows you to do Valk hit and runs more often, which is your bread and butter play in the mirror. Also helps to play around Maxx (you can go Kaleido to bait the Maxx then sack Shrit for Valk). There isn't a whole lot wrong with running both Gandalf and Dancer but if I had to choose one it would still be the former because you can sack it off Valk to search Valk/Unicore and that is super dope in the mirror. If you care about Veiler and feel like 3 Eclipse 1 Moon isn't enough then DP will help.   On another note, it seems like it's gotten to the point where a lot of people are popping up on the thread who haven't played the deck but want to get to know it because it's just come out and there's hype etc. I personally don't have a problem with this but test the deck and try to contribute something. The discussion has been pretty good so far and it would be a shame to see it regress because of...lack of diligence on an individual basis.   For those who are interested this is my current list. For the newer players reading this feel free to use it as a reference point, it saves the discussion derailing into lots of lists getting posted.     Most of it has already been explained at some point or another previously, but I'll happily take any questions regarding individual choices/plays etc.
  20. Nekroz - Discussion

    If Djinn is bad in the mirror is there any point even running it? Just a genuine question for those who are coming to the conclusion that it isn't good G2/3.   I mean not running Djinn is an absolutely fine thing to do and would make their Djinn outs dead weight G1 which gives you leverage etc
  21. ask chey anything

    Why can't I stop watching your signature?
  22. Jar of Avarice

    Pretty good for Chain Burn at least
  23. Nekroz - Discussion

    Again, it's a toolbox deck. Sword Saint is definitely an interesting option to consider. In general if there were a fourth or even a fifth Ritual Spell, almost regardless of its effect, you would consider running at least 1 of it because it means you can perform more Ritual Summons in a given turn (which is one of the reasons why Cycle's release was so dope way back when). Being able to go Brionac into effectively a Ritual Spell will come up regardless of the fact that it, well, isn't a Spell, and it completely shuts down shit like Spell Canceller that you may see flying around. As a one off I'd definitely consider it at the very least.   Plus its art is fucking dope like just look at those wings man   @Phillip: You can use its effect from hand, effectively making it usable as a Ritual Spell normally would.
  24. Nekroz - Discussion

    @Urthor regarding the DA thing: Arch/DP + DA is super bad, sure. But the important thing with that particular combo is that it's an engine out, meaning you don't have to wait to draw into Eclipse or every other thing which could just as easily be outed as the aforementioned play. If they put up a well protected Djinn lock you're not going to break it without Eclipse, but to say that you shouldn't run them because of that scenario doesn't account for the times (of which there are honestly quite a lot) where people put up breakable Djinn locks and it's a matter of going for that play or being locked out for another turn. Personally when I wasn't running Mage/DP or DA I found that there were times where I was staring down a Djinn lock and just wanted to have that option. It isn't always favourable to stall with Valk until you draw an Eclipse because you'd rather expose the Djinn play as soon as possible before they can replenish their hand. So yeah, it's not amazing but it's relevant.   I mean there's a whole toolbox element to this deck that I think is often escaped. Djinn is essentially just a toolbox piece. The deck is so versatile in terms of what it can do and how it can be played to cater to each environment (or I guess each player). DA is just another toolbox option, and whether or not it is optimal, or even useful, is entirely dependant on the scenario. But those scenarios exist and they must be acknowledged regardless.   I do agree that people shouldn't be thinking heavily about the interactions with DA when assessing Mage or DP though. The latter two have so much use that extend way beyond such a linear interaction. It's just an additional thing to consider.   ------   With regards to Dance Princess versus Archmage, Tingy and I have been discussing it recently. I think DP will become a lot more relevant in an environment where main decked Veilers are a thing (which people seem to be doing already). Beyond that baiting Emptinesses early if you have MST mained is gucci. I wouldn't consider the benefits versus BA too heavily because - while I wouldn't say that match-up is an auto-win - it is favourable enough to not have to main particular cards for them.   Personally I still prefer Mage for all the reasons I've posted since way back when, but I'll revisit DP because I haven't fucked around with her in a while.     My user is GardinerLad, if I'm around hit me up.
×