α

Hieratic/Dragon Ruler - Discussion

709 posts in this topic

You guys are talking about running multiple normal, Nebthet...  Do you realize how bad this deck can brick and how one response trap on Eset/ Tefnuit can easily shut you out? Nebthet and more normals are just cards that are going to do exactly this: make your bad hands worse, and your good hands better. I want to play cards instead that are going to contribute to actually getting places with the deck.

 

The reason this deck is going anywhere is because of the Rulers. The rulers give it the stability to keep throwing threats at your opponent every turn (not to mention gaining back the advantage that the Hieratic engine minuses itself to make plays). Yes, the Hieratic engine helps you get going, but you do not need to build the deck around gimmickly killing your opponent with 10k damage if they have no response and so on.

 

RedMD sucks for the same reasons. Drawing him doesn't get anything going.

 

I'm really not sold on this monster gate business, but I will try it.

 

The only reason I would consider running a second Labradorite would be if DD Crow becomes popular and even then I'd really hate to do it. You do not need more than Guard and Labradorite.

 

------

 

@Urthor

 

If you open 3 Hieratics? I personally would love to just open TWO, since that's all you need to get going. Drawing a Normal monster is awful, it is almost always a neg. It's like drawing tuners in Dragon Rulers back in the day, they're supposed to be the free advantage you get off your cards. Sure, once in a while you can use them, but if they were any other card it would be better since I'll be getting them off Shrine/ Hieratics anyway for free. I'd rather make sure my chance of drawing normals is as small as possible.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you open 3 Hieratics? I personally would love to just open TWO

That's why I advocate for Neb, just 1. Neb is a tribute for Su and I know the monster pop and the star eater isn't too relevant but it still exists. If you open up 3 hieratics, and neb is one of them it doesn't hurt especially if one of those 3 is su. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neb doesn't do anything. If I'm going first, I don't want it with eset because all I do is make 2 card Star Eater (gross) and it with Tefnuit does the same thing.

 

It literally never does anything other than make 2 card Star Eaters. Which is not the play you should be making.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you tribute it for su, star eater is only icing on the cake, if you beef up the hieratic count using neb, you have an extra card to tribute for su. I guess that's what I meant to say. I'd never make a Star eater like that and in fact I haven't made star eater for like the last 20 duels with this deck lol

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that's a 3 card combo required to make a card playable

 

I don't think that's really optimal.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are talking about running multiple normal, Nebthet...  Do you realize how bad this deck can brick and how one response trap on Eset/ Tefnuit can easily shut you out? Nebthet and more normals are just cards that are going to do exactly this: make your bad hands worse, and your good hands better. I want to play cards instead that are going to contribute to actually getting places with the deck.

 

The reason this deck is going anywhere is because of the Rulers. The rulers give it the stability to keep throwing threats at your opponent every turn (not to mention gaining back the advantage that the Hieratic engine minuses itself to make plays). Yes, the Hieratic engine helps you get going, but you do not need to build the deck around gimmickly killing your opponent with 10k damage if they have no response and so on.

 

RedMD sucks for the same reasons. Drawing him doesn't get anything going.

 

I'm really not sold on this monster gate business, but I will try it.

 

The only reason I would consider running a second Labradorite would be if DD Crow becomes popular and even then I'd really hate to do it. You do not need more than Guard and Labradorite.

 

------

 

@Urthor

 

If you open 3 Hieratics? I personally would love to just open TWO, since that's all you need to get going. Drawing a Normal monster is awful, it is almost always a neg. It's like drawing tuners in Dragon Rulers back in the day, they're supposed to be the free advantage you get off your cards. Sure, once in a while you can use them, but if they were any other card it would be better since I'll be getting them off Shrine/ Hieratics anyway for free. I'd rather make sure my chance of drawing normals is as small as possible.

 

IK, the nebthet was a random/bad idea I just brought up.  CoTH was a serious point tho.  

 

Err, like you're right about the two card combo, but that was just an example to go over why 2 is better.  Pretty sure all a 2nd normal is going to enable is to allow you to go atum, redmd, atum, or some random pure hieratic combo that requires a 3 card combo anyway, instead of just focusing on the dragon plays.   And drawing flamvell or Labo and normal summoning them is a combo piece in a pinch ofc, turns a 2 card atum tutor edragon play into a possible atum+synchro+edragon play.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Atum - Redmd - Hieratic is not really that strong now. That board is really easily broken especially if you don't run a lot of defensive traps

 

i'd rather just wait until my hand gets better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hrm i guess you right about the neb, it does require 3 cards otherwise it's a star eater. but one last thing - would you rather have tefnuit and su, or tefnuit, su and neb? I'd say the latter is better. But then of course there are the neb su situations in which neb is horrible. 

 

the second vanilla lets you pop more backrow with su while going double atum. so basically when you have 3 hieratics in hand without the second vanilla it's 1 less backrow pop, and one less atum. it's not part of some long atum atum REDMD hieratic play, let the pure hieratic deck do that.

 

I'll pay more mind to the 2 vs 3 vanilla thing as of now I really don't see myself going down to just guard and lab. also the situations where I want a nontuner level 6 does come up once in a while, and crow/chain disappearance certainly exist

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you pop a backrow with Su just get Guard and have Lab/ Su/ Guard. you don't need to throw all your Atum onto the board in one play.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dat urthor rage

this format is to tight every cart counts i dont want a dead monstar gate in my hand when they have traps for my summons its a cart that works if ur already establishing board prescence

theres a lot of better defensive options out there u can play more trap in place of stuff like that

i dont like the nebthet or double normal cus drawing normals is relly bad and u shouldnt need 2 atum to win a game it basicly forces u to play red eyes where u should be fetching the dragon rulers from ur deck instead. and nebthet gives u more hands with nebthet and su were u cant do shit
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I'd like to ask who built the standard version of Hieratics? Because it's shit. 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I'd like to ask who built the standard version of Hieratics? Because it's shit. 

 

err which?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nebthets, 3+ normals, no defense. Like sorry, that's actually just not how Yu-Gi-Oh works. Atum is ridiculous. It's Zenmaity for Dragon Rulers. There's no need to make the deck a gimmick when you could just not. It's like the Gilasaurus hand loop Wind Ups or just actually playing good cards in a Wind Up deck. 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote]Some players choose to run a variety of Normal Monsters in fear of Chain Disappearance, or the prohibiting of one in general by means such as Psi-Blocker or Prohibition, which are rare instances but may come up nonetheless. Therefore, we have Luster Dragon #2. In addition, you can use it along with Tempest to search for a Dragon.[/quote]

 

Like what kind of reasons are these? You're actually going to draw a normal twice as often for this? 

-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BreakthroughSkill-BP02-EN-C-1E.png

 

Pretty sure this goes in every single hieratic maindeck.  Just the best way to beat Roach/Dweller/Fossil Dyna, and does a lot of fiendish chain's job regardless because the deck can actually wear a few direct attacks.   

This card isn't good. The only games you lose are to getting OTKed or massive damage and this doesn't help there. I don't know how people think this deck loses to Fire. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard Hieratics is all or nothing deck. You keep passing turns until you are for sure you can KO them (praying they dont have veiler or swift). Deck purposely plays no defense It's not intended to try to grind.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he's not saying it loses to fire, he's saying it loses to roach/dweller/dyna

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I don't get whether you're talking about now or in the past Hoban. 

 

Standard was first played as an otk no defence deck in OCG Inzektor format where playing Yugioh vs Hornet popping backrow was a literal no-go zone, it made no sense to just try and flip trap cards in that format if you had a choice and the deck wasn't touched by good players since.

 

You played two normal monsters when multiple REDMD was a thing I'm pretty sure because there must be some good reason when you're doing multiple REDMD combos, otherwise Lauren and the other OCG players would have played one normal monster.  

 

 

And IK a lot of people played standard hieratics the past two weekends because it's way way easier to learn and pick up in a very short space of time and it still beats fire, so it was mediocre players compensating for their inability to play YGO with the harder/better version.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else here like Enemy Controller? Tribute guy, take control of opponent's monster, special tuner. Or something along those lines. Also, it's a card that can be used to stop ur opponent's plays or to protect ur shit.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Standard Hieratics is all or nothing deck. You keep passing turns until you are for sure you can KO them (praying they dont have veiler or swift). Deck purposely plays no defense It's not intended to try to grind.

 

I don't know if you actually think I'm not aware or you just didn't read my post. I said I think that's a shit strategy, not that I didn't understand it. 

 

And using the word "intended" is actually pretty stupid in its own right. Just because somehow a shit build of the deck managed to become standard doesn't mean that is what the deck is best at. It has a lot of good cards, you could just not play the bad ones and have a better deck. 

 

he's not saying it loses to fire, he's saying it loses to roach/dweller/dyna

 

It really just doesn't though. 

 

Yes, effect monsters exist. This isn't something that changes from format to format. This probably has something to do with the fact that pretty much every successful deck in the history of the game plays defensive cards. 

 

Also Roach and Dweller really just aren't even good. Most decks that make rank 4s can't kill you (except Gears). If a deck like Fire makes one of those, okay? And? I guess Roach hopes I don't have 1 of 7 Dragons or a defensive card. Dweller is only marginally better in that respect and strictly worse in that you don't have to have an out to it. It keeps you locked out for two turns because they're forced to do it every turn. Roach is there until you deal with it at least (and just has infinitely more answers). Decks making these aren't going to be putting 8000 on the board. You've got time.

 

Dyna has the problem of sucking to an established field. Better hope you draw it when you're already winning because drawing it when you're losing is only going to put you further behind. 

 

Then there's the fact that Dragons are Dragons. Literally the 4 best cards ever. The idea of not playing those and playing something like Luster Dragon #2 is so beyond ridiculous to me. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I've randomly thought about just running nebthet, and never summoning it and playing two normals.  You can tribute it/discard it for Su, and bang you have another hieratic combo piece, even though you didn't overlay with it.  Seems random/quirky and not sure it'll play out, but the idea is there. 

 

 

Using Call of the Haunted as an additional combo piece however, just seems like the nuts.  CoTH is flexible, applies pressure in any scenario you put a monster in grave, and it's virtually another hieratic if you're comboing off.  

 

tbh I've played this deck a very, very small amount, but so much of the time I did skill drain was just backfiring in the main because i'd draw it before I'd combo'd off, and if I actually flipped it on a spellbook magician or something I'd just lose the duel because no atums+hadn't hit the ashes+edrags combo yet.  I'm leery of that card, idk if it should even be in vs the books matchup.  

 

I wouldn't main skill drain unless I was playing planter tbh.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I don't get whether you're talking about now or in the past Hoban. 

 

Standard was first played as an otk no defence deck in OCG Inzektor format where playing Yugioh vs Hornet popping backrow was a literal no-go zone, it made no sense to just try and flip trap cards in that format if you had a choice and the deck wasn't touched by good players since.

 

You played two normal monsters when multiple REDMD was a thing I'm pretty sure because there must be some good reason when you're doing multiple REDMD combos, otherwise Lauren and the other OCG players would have played one normal monster.  

 

 

And IK a lot of people played standard hieratics the past two weekends because it's way way easier to learn and pick up in a very short space of time and it still beats fire, so it was mediocre players compensating for their inability to play YGO with the harder/better version.  

 

I should have known the default answer to "who made this shitty deck" should have been a Japanese locals. 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I've randomly thought about just running nebthet, and never summoning it and playing two normals.  You can tribute it/discard it for Su, and bang you have another hieratic combo piece, even though you didn't overlay with it.  Seems random/quirky and not sure it'll play out, but the idea is there. 

 

 

Using Call of the Haunted as an additional combo piece however, just seems like the nuts.  CoTH is flexible, applies pressure in any scenario you put a monster in grave, and it's virtually another hieratic if you're comboing off.  

 

tbh I've played this deck a very, very small amount, but so much of the time I did skill drain was just backfiring in the main because i'd draw it before I'd combo'd off, and if I actually flipped it on a spellbook magician or something I'd just lose the duel because no atums+hadn't hit the ashes+edrags combo yet.  I'm leery of that card, idk if it should even be in vs the books matchup.  

 

I wouldn't main skill drain unless I was playing planter tbh.

 

Because Skill Drain isn't good against every deck? What is this? We're making blanket statements that are actually just incorrect. 

 

And while we're on Planter, that sucks too. You can't get use out of it on your first turn. So if you're playing 2 you're just going to have a 5 card hand in 30% of your games. It's like holding Reckless. I'm not going to play a card that could put me ahead, but because I didn't play it in the case of holding Reckless or couldn't play it in the case of Planter it's a -1 for the turn, making it significantly less effective.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people say the deck as it was ran at ARG and Australia loses to fire because, well, it does:

 

"Round 7-Long Dao-Hieratic Rulers(Won Roll)

 

Another streamed feature. This time I was sure he was running Hieratics.

 

http://www.twitch.tv...ive/b/496310558

 

Duel starts at 5 minutes.

 

Game 1-I open quite strong as always with Cardcar Tenki Warning Fiendish MST. He Shrines and sets 1 and I end phase it. I tenki for Bear, attack get Tensu and Dweller him. Draw Phase Dweller because he has Rulers in grave. He sets 3. I am pretty sure they are fake but there is no need to go crazy into a Torrent. So I just summon and float a Coach and attack. Draw phase Dweller again. He summons a Debris to get his Normal and I fiendish it. He ends. I use the negated Bear to free up space, holding 2 MSTs to his 3 backs. I fire away and he scoops before I can see what they were.

 

Game 2-He opens Atum Spark 2 backs. I have a decent counter hand. I Dark Hole him but he Bottomlesses my Bear which really hurt because I had Coach in hand. I set Fiendish Torrent. Fiendish Atum but he MSTs and summons Su. I Torrent. He shrines for his Tempest summons both Dragons and makes Draco. I have to normal Dyna and set Bottomless but he powers through and wins.

 

Game 3-I look at my 6 of Cardcar, Dyna, Maxx, Compuls, Bottomless, Torrent and I get that feeling again just like Nats Round 10. Not as strong but I feel it. Summon Cardcar set the 3. He Shrines and sets 2 because that deck is really bad. I crack with Dyna and set Light Mirror MST. He draws and sets a 3rd. I end phase a Drain. Summon Coach and crack with both. He Recklesses and blanks and knowing he can't draw he scoops it up."

 

"Round 5 VS Hieratics

 

I gauge him asking if he won the mat, and he said yes, by playing chain burn Hieratics. I place him on "average, probably knows what he's doing and certain rulings" but he doesn't know what some of the Fire Fists do, and said that I was the first person he played today with a real deck.

 

Game 1: I open combo and start swinging, and then I know he has a fader/crow but he saves it, and I punish him by attacking with Rooster and axe him a question during damage step knowing he probably won't play around Tensen.

 

Game 2: I open up shit combo and have to torrent the Eset to save my 2 Black Horns from Wingbeat. I get wingbeat by a second Eset and my Roach dies because he tributes fader for nebthet and makes a Star Eater. I die to the Star Eater soon because my rekindlings won't save me with no leopard in grave, regardless of how broken rekindling was that game.

 

nudge nudge

 

Game 3: I don't open combo but I make a Roach and control his Faders with Bears leaving him with nothing. He soon has to make a play and summons 2 Tefnuit into a full power Roach and proceeds to lose."

 

These are only a few quotes from the Tourney Report section.  I say this every time people get on the hype train about some deck and say that it is unbeatable although results prove otherwise.  Seriously, how can we in the Hieratic thread say the deck beats Fire and the Fire thread says that they beat the Ruler Variant.  Like I'm pretty sure Fire Fist players are a lot more afraid of the Pure Variant than they are of the current builds of Hieratic Rulers.   I'm getting awfully frustrated at some people in this thread not realizing that the deck as it was ran this past weekend is simply NOT GOOD ENOUGH!  I probably don't have the answer or correct build, but I'm smart enough to realize that the status quo is a failure. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scariest part at Nashville for me was Skill Drain in the Hieratic deck. Wingbeat should've been scary but people weren't running it and I was relieved.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.