Jump to content
Gredinus

Burning Abyss - Discussion

Recommended Posts

catmaster0    48

Yea, you're just straight up wrong I'm afraid.
I mean, by all means enjoy playing fair yugioh, using your normal summon on something like Mathematician and doing literally noting else for the rest of the turn.
In that build, traps are so important to draw. And draw in multiples. If you do not draw a trap card basically every single turn you will likely just lose because you can only do one monster play in a turn, and you cannot defend yourself from what decks such as qlipoths and Shaddolls and big BA can do.

By playing multiple rubic, calcab and alich you increase the power of the deck exponentially, because you can actually do multiple things in a turn, fire lake is made live much much more easily.
You're actually just playing a more consistent deck if you play Big BA as well, because opening literally any combination of 2 BA monsters allows you to make a Dante.

Like Big BA is the outright best deck right now, by quite a distance.
The BA of old is such a fair deck it's not even in contention any more.
Monsters are better than traps.
Advancing yourself is better than hindering your opponent.

 

I'm afaraid your post is partially contradicting and through its own statements also incorrect. 

 

The first was that I'd be stuck without backrow. Well, for one thing, you are running new Bas in the place of some of that backrow, because you my math only took 3 of those slots, traps were the rest, so if I don't have backrow, I tend to be opening the same nutty hands you are. 

 

Second, traps are actually more important than monsters for the exact reason you just described, people now run he best traps they can to make up for this presumed difference, and the traps, although sometimes run in fewer numbers, are now only run for being game-breaking. 

 

By thw ay, note that the majority of my backrow is meant to prevent my opponent from blocking me. Sure, advancing your game is cute, but that only works when your opponent doesn't have a vanity,a skill drain, etc facedown. It just so happens that two of the big three (qliphorts and BAs)run a solid number of good targets, and the third (shaddolls) will probably run only a few really good targets. 

  • Downvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catmaster0    48

You say our plays are the strongest, but the way you are playing the deck is just to summon some rank 3s and that's it. Shaddoll and qli have stronger plays than the old version and that's the reason of the whole big ba thing.
Old ba has a terrible match vs shaddoll, adding 3 mst and 3 dust is not going to make that better.

Our shaddoll match-up was fine. We had no need to sue extradeck summoned monsters during their turn. Just poke with math/ cir, and if they went bigger than that you summoned dante and then rammed and revive it. They didn't have many outs to a 2500 wall so your traps could pick off their costructs etc. The goal was to drag the game out long vs shaddolls, because where their deck already used its resources, as the game progressed, we cold use or traps as actual attrition, where they could not.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catmaster0    48

You cannot play the "control" game vs Pendulum. They have inevitability over you. You will get to a point in the game where you cannot stop every wave of Pendulums coming down and you will just lose. The games you win is not because you drew well. Its because they didn't. You will never beat a Qlimate Change, either.

 

Playing the "control" game vs Shaddoll is a risk. You open yourself up to getting blown out by El Shaddoll Fusion and Winda so much more than any aggressive version. Not to mention, overall, their monsters are actually better than yours. Shaddoll do find it hard dealing with waves of monsters. Which the aggressive version of BA is capable of. You need to have more threats than answers and they cannot come back. It's pretty hard for Shaddoll to deal with Virgil + Cir. You want to maximize your opportunity cost of seeing both those cards as fast as possible. The "control" version of the deck does not do this effectively. You can either have a close 50/50 matchup using the "control" deck or have a higher win % by being the aggressive deck that has too many threats to deal with. Actually, I think it's probably a lost worse for "control/old" BA than 50/50.

 

Obviously the "control" version is better in the mirror, but that is only because of Karma Cut. And, you play Karma Cut. So is it actually better? Probably not. You have the same tools and more raw power to god draw the mirror. You still have "control" elements with Cut/PWWB/Lake/Dante/Virgil. Virgil actually just being the best game winning card. 

 

Control is not good in a tournament. You lose to inevitability vs Qliphort. You have a marginal Shaddoll matchup. You are a probably worse than average mirror match. 

 

 

 

And it isn't just spamming rank 3s. Dante is far better than most rank 4/5/6/7/8 XYZ monsters. It has good ATK/DEF points and a nutted effect. As a whole it is probably the most rewarding XYZ in the game for its investment.

 

Virgil is probably the best "answer" card to the entire format. 

 

 

The "control" version of the deck is too slow. Yes, it can win, but you give up so much raw power for not much in return.

 

I do not follow your qliphort point. Our late game is better than theirs. I have beaten them in every way I can think of, from negating every scout and floodgate with my standard 2-4 spell/trap removal in my opening hand, or by decking them uot because they dropped towers first turn. I did see someone post about leo and yazi, but leo is easy to kill in the M2, as they have to enter their battle phase against us or we will kill them. Yazi from shaddolls can be acid golemed, which you can do after you clear any backrow etc. 

 

Virgil I have found meh for the most part, made it a couple of times, and it is nice to have for now, but not great. Fire lake on the other hand, I have used in the majority of my games and it is an excellent card. 

  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catmaster0    48

This isn't MTG, so "control" is an awful word to use when describing Decks. In YGO, there is generally 2 types of Decks: combo, and non-combo. The latter usually uses more Trap Cards, focusing on fewer stand-alone monsters to just "get in there" all the time, whereas combo Decks usually play higher monster counts, utilizing multiple in a turn to make their plays. Let's talk about BA the same way we used to talk about X-Sabers: pre-NECH and post-NECH. The post-NECH builds are superior for all of the reasons listed above: it's a superior combo Deck to the pre-NECH versions, it relies far less on cards that have minimal interactions with the core cards of your Deck, etc.

 

 

 

Obviously the "control" version is better in the mirror, but that is only because of Karma Cut. And, you play Karma Cut. So is it actually better? Probably not. You have the same tools and more raw power to god draw the mirror. You still have "control" elements with Cut/PWWB/Lake/Dante/Virgil. Virgil actually just being the best game winning card. 

 

I want to nitpick here: is pre-NECH BA even a control Deck? What actually IS a control Deck? Does playing Karma Cut instantly make BA a control Deck? There are a lot of preconceptions as to "what is and what isn't" in this game. Karma Cut is an amazing card in the mirror, no doubt, but the presence of Karma Cut does not just change the Deck from combo to control. Not saying you don't know what control is, just that a lot of people automatically think that playing Traps = playing control, and that is not really correct.

 

On another note, I remember a couple years back, when the OCG v TCG was being discussed (around the time of Worlds, I think?), where someone mentioned that the OCG plays the game in a different manner than that of the TCG: in the OCG, they play to win. They build higher power ceilings, even if it costs some consistency. In the TCG, too often we look for "most consistent", and often also dismiss cards that have a higher power ceiling as "winmoar" if they don't serve the purpose of being an answer only. The latest card that this is a victim of is Fire Lake. It's insanely powerful, but so many have dismissed it as being a 1-of, or even unplayable, on the grounds that it has a slightly higher activation cost (specific cards being necessary to obtain optimal resource management) and that if you have that combination of cards, it just "pile on" without actually advancing you. Too often players look at the Deck as "this is the general gist of how you play the monsters, all other cards should be consistency cards, free/easy disruption, etc." Given that this Deck has a relatively low power ceiling (2500 is usually the best you cap out at in terms of battle power), other "power cards" are necessary to raise that ceiling. In pre-NECH builds, the abundance of Traps being played meant that playing Shaddoll Dragon raised the power ceiling, quickly creating a way to remove Traps in a manner that would force an awkward trade from the opponent in the event they wanted to get SOMETHING for their Trap. Then came the hybrid builds that pushed the power ceiling higher by adding Shaddoll Fusion. In this game, consistency doesn't always win. Usually, it's the most consistent Deck that also has the highest power level.

 

Let's also talk about Trap Cards. Playing 9 interactive Traps (Wind Blast, Karma Cut/RaiBreak, Fire Lake) in pre-NECH builds gives you a %30 chance of opening one or more of them in your opening hand (assuming you don't play Upstart). In a post-NECH build, playing 6 interactive Traps and 3 Upstart, that drops to %17. If you only need to open 1, the numbers are %43 pre-NECH and post-NECH. So post-NECH builds are usually just as consistent at opening some form of disruption as the pre-NECH builds. Here's where power ceiling makes a difference though: in a post-NECH build, you have Soul Charge, Beginning of the End is live quicker (and you see it more often courtesy Upstart), and more BA monsters to make more plays with. I'm not so good at math, but it seems like as the game goes on, the long haul favors post-NECH builds as well, as you're more likely to play more powerful cards, and also draw your Trap Cards. Allisdair Bowman has it right: pre-NECH builds are just "fair YGO" builds.

I woul say pre-NECh was control, granted, my build looked something like the core 12, 3 math, 3 supply squad, 1 veiler, 1 BLS, and the rest of my deck was made up of traps/negation and spell/trap removal. It didn't take me long to cut cards like RUM, monarchs, fiends, and chaos sorcerers, with BLS as a card I many times considered cutting. It worked well for me, and even better for Masik333. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catmaster0    48

Oh, Mother sun, I agree that new BA builds are better than old. I consider fire lake a staple due to tour guide. But why did you name the one advantage the old BAs have? They didn't have as many cards relying on their core, and thus fewer deaddraws, which would actually give them a potential advantage if the two were to duel off. It is the only reason I cut supply squads, which I considered the best card of the deck last format. 

 

One other note. Technically high trap decks have what could be argued the highest ceiling. They can access their entire hand to negate your plays. Back when I read Hoban's most recent article, and saw his comment on the best deck, I asked myself what he meant by "big." Size is relative. Combo decks are smaller than control decks when their combos are broken. Therefore combo decks couldn't necessarily be "big." Yet due to their general power, if they did work, they became larger than their opponent. 

 

The other note I also made as that his best build might not even exist, if the biggest deck was discovered, and yet couldn't run the best floodgates, you could not run it as that style. 

  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Never in my life have I heard "advancing your game" described as "cute" lol.
I'm not saying play 0 trap cards either.
But please understand that trap cards are only good when you are winning. Without a board to defend, a trap card is useless.
Like, I 100% agree with maining MST, Emptiness, Lake, and Wing Blast. But that's it.
Your deck is simply not powerful enough in the monster department to actually keep up, so it has to rely on trap cards. The other deck just doesn't because it's monster plays are also strong.
If you play this deck basically as it was pre-NECH, just know that you are willingly accepting to play a fair deck that is quite clearly worse than Shaddoll and Qlipoths.
Summoning mathematician and passing is just such an underwhelming play compared to what the big BA deck can do.
Enjoy struggling through tournaments I guess.
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fractal    2488

 

Yea, you're just straight up wrong I'm afraid.
I mean, by all means enjoy playing fair yugioh, using your normal summon on something like Mathematician and doing literally noting else for the rest of the turn.
In that build, traps are so important to draw. And draw in multiples. If you do not draw a trap card basically every single turn you will likely just lose because you can only do one monster play in a turn, and you cannot defend yourself from what decks such as qlipoths and Shaddolls and big BA can do.

By playing multiple rubic, calcab and alich you increase the power of the deck exponentially, because you can actually do multiple things in a turn, fire lake is made live much much more easily.
You're actually just playing a more consistent deck if you play Big BA as well, because opening literally any combination of 2 BA monsters allows you to make a Dante.

Like Big BA is the outright best deck right now, by quite a distance.
The BA of old is such a fair deck it's not even in contention any more.
Monsters are better than traps.
Advancing yourself is better than hindering your opponent.

 

I'm afaraid your post is partially contradicting and through its own statements also incorrect. 

 

The first was that I'd be stuck without backrow. Well, for one thing, you are running new Bas in the place of some of that backrow, because you my math only took 3 of those slots, traps were the rest, so if I don't have backrow, I tend to be opening the same nutty hands you are. 

 

Second, traps are actually more important than monsters for the exact reason you just described, people now run he best traps they can to make up for this presumed difference, and the traps, although sometimes run in fewer numbers, are now only run for being game-breaking. 

 

By thw ay, note that the majority of my backrow is meant to prevent my opponent from blocking me. Sure, advancing your game is cute, but that only works when your opponent doesn't have a vanity,a skill drain, etc facedown. It just so happens that two of the big three (qliphorts and BAs)run a solid number of good targets, and the third (shaddolls) will probably run only a few really good targets. 

 

 

 

This is amazingly wrong. This has been gone over before (by Hoban I believe). For example, in Fire Fist, you usually only have 1 play per turn: summon Bear or Wolfbark. In Dragon Ruler, you usually have more than 1 play per turn: you may summon more than 1 Dragon Ruler. Trap Cards must be drawn to be played. A 1-1 trade is fine in terms of outright math, but not all 1-1's are equal. Solemn Warning on a Bear is not the same as Solemn Warning on a Dragon Ruler. A single Trap may stop a Fire Fist player cold, but a Deck that can make more plays is not only NOT stopped cold, but still afforded the opportunity to take the lead. Right past your Trap Card. Pat's article about Traps (and defensive cards in general) echoes something I thought about playing Dark Hole in Mermail: I'd rather have my monsters answer my opponent's monsters.

 

As for advancing your game, that is not cute, that is WINNING THE GAME. You will never win playing 40 D-Prisons. You need to win the game. How do you win the game? By advancing your position in the game towards the outcome that is a win.You need to kill your opponent before your opponent kills you.

 

 

 

This isn't MTG, so "control" is an awful word to use when describing Decks. In YGO, there is generally 2 types of Decks: combo, and non-combo. The latter usually uses more Trap Cards, focusing on fewer stand-alone monsters to just "get in there" all the time, whereas combo Decks usually play higher monster counts, utilizing multiple in a turn to make their plays. Let's talk about BA the same way we used to talk about X-Sabers: pre-NECH and post-NECH. The post-NECH builds are superior for all of the reasons listed above: it's a superior combo Deck to the pre-NECH versions, it relies far less on cards that have minimal interactions with the core cards of your Deck, etc.

 

 

 

Obviously the "control" version is better in the mirror, but that is only because of Karma Cut. And, you play Karma Cut. So is it actually better? Probably not. You have the same tools and more raw power to god draw the mirror. You still have "control" elements with Cut/PWWB/Lake/Dante/Virgil. Virgil actually just being the best game winning card. 

 

I want to nitpick here: is pre-NECH BA even a control Deck? What actually IS a control Deck? Does playing Karma Cut instantly make BA a control Deck? There are a lot of preconceptions as to "what is and what isn't" in this game. Karma Cut is an amazing card in the mirror, no doubt, but the presence of Karma Cut does not just change the Deck from combo to control. Not saying you don't know what control is, just that a lot of people automatically think that playing Traps = playing control, and that is not really correct.

 

On another note, I remember a couple years back, when the OCG v TCG was being discussed (around the time of Worlds, I think?), where someone mentioned that the OCG plays the game in a different manner than that of the TCG: in the OCG, they play to win. They build higher power ceilings, even if it costs some consistency. In the TCG, too often we look for "most consistent", and often also dismiss cards that have a higher power ceiling as "winmoar" if they don't serve the purpose of being an answer only. The latest card that this is a victim of is Fire Lake. It's insanely powerful, but so many have dismissed it as being a 1-of, or even unplayable, on the grounds that it has a slightly higher activation cost (specific cards being necessary to obtain optimal resource management) and that if you have that combination of cards, it just "pile on" without actually advancing you. Too often players look at the Deck as "this is the general gist of how you play the monsters, all other cards should be consistency cards, free/easy disruption, etc." Given that this Deck has a relatively low power ceiling (2500 is usually the best you cap out at in terms of battle power), other "power cards" are necessary to raise that ceiling. In pre-NECH builds, the abundance of Traps being played meant that playing Shaddoll Dragon raised the power ceiling, quickly creating a way to remove Traps in a manner that would force an awkward trade from the opponent in the event they wanted to get SOMETHING for their Trap. Then came the hybrid builds that pushed the power ceiling higher by adding Shaddoll Fusion. In this game, consistency doesn't always win. Usually, it's the most consistent Deck that also has the highest power level.

 

Let's also talk about Trap Cards. Playing 9 interactive Traps (Wind Blast, Karma Cut/RaiBreak, Fire Lake) in pre-NECH builds gives you a %30 chance of opening one or more of them in your opening hand (assuming you don't play Upstart). In a post-NECH build, playing 6 interactive Traps and 3 Upstart, that drops to %17. If you only need to open 1, the numbers are %43 pre-NECH and post-NECH. So post-NECH builds are usually just as consistent at opening some form of disruption as the pre-NECH builds. Here's where power ceiling makes a difference though: in a post-NECH build, you have Soul Charge, Beginning of the End is live quicker (and you see it more often courtesy Upstart), and more BA monsters to make more plays with. I'm not so good at math, but it seems like as the game goes on, the long haul favors post-NECH builds as well, as you're more likely to play more powerful cards, and also draw your Trap Cards. Allisdair Bowman has it right: pre-NECH builds are just "fair YGO" builds.

I woul say pre-NECh was control, granted, my build looked something like the core 12, 3 math, 3 supply squad, 1 veiler, 1 BLS, and the rest of my deck was made up of traps/negation and spell/trap removal. It didn't take me long to cut cards like RUM, monarchs, fiends, and chaos sorcerers, with BLS as a card I many times considered cutting. It worked well for me, and even better for Masik333. 

 

 

Is that really a control Deck, or is it just a shitty combo Deck with a weak power ceiling that plays a lot of Trap Cards? A control Deck is one that consistently exerts control over the game: the perfect control Deck was Spellbooks. It could continuously cycle Fate, consistently, and continuously, interrupt the opponent with minimal effort. So much so that you could win off a card with less than 1k ATK.

 

 

Oh, Mother sun, I agree that new BA builds are better than old. I consider fire lake a staple due to tour guide. But why did you name the one advantage the old BAs have? They didn't have as many cards relying on their core, and thus fewer deaddraws, which would actually give them a potential advantage if the two were to duel off. It is the only reason I cut supply squads, which I considered the best card of the deck last format. 

 

One other note. Technically high trap decks have what could be argued the highest ceiling. They can access their entire hand to negate your plays. Back when I read Hoban's most recent article, and saw his comment on the best deck, I asked myself what he meant by "big." Size is relative. Combo decks are smaller than control decks when their combos are broken. Therefore combo decks couldn't necessarily be "big." Yet due to their general power, if they did work, they became larger than their opponent. 

 

The other note I also made as that his best build might not even exist, if the biggest deck was discovered, and yet couldn't run the best floodgates, you could not run it as that style. 

 

Trap Cards are 1-time-use cards. In order for Karma Cut, Wind Blast, or any other costed card to break even, the cost must pay for itself. You must also be able to pay the cost. You can't just summon TGU, Set 4 pass. You need to hold cards to pay your costs, which limits your ability to impact the game itself. Sometimes, you have to discard a Trap to pay your cost. You must also constantly hard draw your Traps to even be able to pay them. As Rapture said, your BA monsters pay for themselves. They always give you a return on investment. Which card is a better investment: Dante, or Raigeki Break? Again, you cannot always stop the opponent's plays. For as consistently as you draw Traps, you do not draw cards to make plays with, or pay the costs of using them. As Decks get more efficient at killing you quickly, you need to find alternative ways of killing the opponent quicker, or not dying so quickly. Big BA fields do both. They regain the investment you put in to make them, and also repay it when broken. Playing floodgates doesn't make a Deck the best Deck either. Remember when Mermail could still beat Fire Fist that played Macro, Fissure, and Banisher? All the floodgates in the world, but all Mermail had to do was make a small window of opportunity to make the floodgates not matter. That is still the same scenario: floodgates work until they don't. That is also why anti-meta does literally nothing all format, every format. What Pat means by "big" is what the scope of its plays, and also its power ceiling, is. You can't just ride Dante/Downerd to victory anymore.

  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catmaster0    48

Rather than quoting, I shall reply. 

 

Tour guide set 4 is enough to trigger a discard trap last I checked. Dante downerd backed my multiples backrow was generally game over, and using the boss cards only slowed your deck down and made it weaker to negation. 

 

However the key point to make is that the new BAs aren't advancing enough for their commitment. For two new BAs I might get a dante, but that isn't enough, it must be first turn fire lake or math will be far better because it guarantees me a tour guide, which is a fire lake. As a floater that doesn't interfere with my tour guide due to being xyzable with it, this makes math a more consistent option for less card commitment. 

 

Anti-meta only fails when the deck using the anti-meta is significantly weaker than an opposing deck, so a window of opportunity arrises. Right now, that anti-meta is qliphorts, who, although weaker than BAs, do have enough power to smash them if a vanity or skill drain resolves and you don't have an out. 

 

The thing is, although the new BAs have cute methods of possibly being a turn faster, that's all they do. They aren't improving my consistency by much, especially not for the space they take up in proportion to math. This means you will ahve fewer outs to winda, to scout, to vanity, cards that can cause severe issues if not outright steal the game.

 

I do not see how control would have trouble vs qliphorts or shaddolls. Qliphorts goes something like this.

 

Game 1: I open standard, try to lock them out of the game, drag it out if possible, win. I pray I don't draw bad cards like soul charge, BTS, or to a certain extent solemn warning. 

 

Game 2: I open about 2-4 outs to their scout and floodgates, crush their every move. gg. 

 

BA filled hands are some of the worst, I jsut have to pray they didn't open skill drain or vanity and that I can sack them in time. 

 

I just faced a shaddoll, and after that match, I am now convinced that not only is math a staple, but so are spell/trap removal, and that the new BAs are truly awful to have, will be running a minimum whenever possible after this match. 

 

Game 1: Fire lake was nice, and it would seal me the game, but math ended up saving it by dumping alich to out winda,, which is a decentish tech for shaddolls. Dust tornado was the best card in the deck, as I hit key backrow after backrow, as usual, without backrow, shaddolls struggle vs BAs, and I took it from there. 

 

Game 2: I am seriously ready to cut rubic at this point...and virgil with it of course. I literally drew my only copy along with alich... And I pray I never draw either of them again. Tour guide ended up giving me 2 1k beaters. He sets some stuff. I discover one of his sets was super poly, which sucks vs us, lol, if super poly came to 3, we would benefit the most. I again use my spell/trap removal, which is once more useful for his backrow. He has a cute field of two constructs and a metaion seals the deal. 

 

As of right now, the weakest cards in my deck are the BA core reliant cards, alich, rubic, but I keep them for searchable tech purposes. Fire lake is without a doubt the strongest card in my deck, but the best one has generally been typhoon, or my spell/trap removal in general, which is not reliant on my BAs and thus increases my stability vs feared floodgates and backrow, the only serious problem I am having with BAs, and one my techs are confidently solving. 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
catmaster0    48

Never in my life have I heard "advancing your game" described as "cute" lol.
I'm not saying play 0 trap cards either.
But please understand that trap cards are only good when you are winning. Without a board to defend, a trap card is useless.
Like, I 100% agree with maining MST, Emptiness, Lake, and Wing Blast. But that's it.
Your deck is simply not powerful enough in the monster department to actually keep up, so it has to rely on trap cards. The other deck just doesn't because it's monster plays are also strong.
If you play this deck basically as it was pre-NECH, just know that you are willingly accepting to play a fair deck that is quite clearly worse than Shaddoll and Qlipoths.
Summoning mathematician and passing is just such an underwhelming play compared to what the big BA deck can do.
Enjoy struggling through tournaments I guess.

I describe it as cute because the new BAs aren't advancing me any better than I can with math, and if anything are wrose because aggro is the wrong plan in nearly every game, since BAs are the masters of the late game. 

 

I don't maindeck vanity because if I truly establish a board I have no need for any additional backrow to protect it, plus it is sub-par vs qliphorts and iffy vs shaddolls. Phoenix I use at 2 for the same reason, to reduce the number of cards reliant no the BAs since I already run 5 BAs traps etc. Note most of my backrow is meant for outing my opponent's backrow so I don't get wrecked by a floodgate I can't play through, or pushes my plays through. I keep three regular negation, warning and BTs, as they are stable vs all three decks, if not the greatest vs qliphorts, which I already run very stable spell/trap removal for, and in the case of BTS can out certain floodgate monsters, plus being an extra weapon for dante mills. 

 

I don't have a problem using these powerful BA plays, if anything, I have more stable access than the new BA builds, if a potential one turn loss in speed (if that,) but they don't answer the real issues for the deck, and that is cards that makes the BA plays bad, or stun you so much you are too far behind in the game and lose. Trap decks never fall behind in a game, as msot of their cards are almsot always live, their opponents are just pulling far ahead, as BAs can match such efforts with broken swarms of their own, my goal is to prevent cars that would stop me from doing so. 

  • Downvote 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is now a pretty pointless debate, as you're pretty much ignoring what people are telling you and spouting off things that are just ridiculously and incredibly incorrect.
I'm not going to beat a dead horse.
You're just stating things that are simply not true.

Looking through your wall of text, I'm trying to see if I can salvage a single correct thing that you said, and I'm struggling.

Like, this is not subjective; it's fact.
Anything that could be said to argue against what you're saying has already been said. You're just not listening.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sess    280

After testing a bunch of mirror matches with a friend we feel that hand traps including veiler, maxx "C", and possibly flying "C" are incredibly powerful in the mirror match and help prevent the opponent from completely blowing you out on turn 1 which comes up a lot where the person going second just loses after the first player sets up. They can't be destroyed by fire lake either. With people cutting monarchs/tributes in the main deck, flying "C" can be a lot more annoying to deal with without them to tribute it away though on the other hand Alich is an out so it might just be better to play veiler/maxx "C".

 

I just think it might be a really good idea to consider siding hand traps of some sort. They feel like they give you an edge in the mirror match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Top_LADD    392
The hand traps are indeed quite good in the mirror. However, they're all fairly lackluster, or in the case of Flying "C" atrocious against the other two thirds of the meta. Attempting to main deck these only makes your Qliph and Shaddoll matchup worse, and it's not as if they were autowin to the point where having dead cards against them won't hurt your results. I do think that Maxx "C" is an excellent side card, as opening it going second is tremendously powerful in the mirror, as it either forces them to stop, or gives you enough resources to push straight through Fire Lake whilst setting up your own board.
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
d3monized    106

Does anyone know what Hoban sided in and out against Quils?

I believe he just sided 3 Fairy Wind and BTH, idk exactly what he took out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+rap tap    20145

not sure why you'd side out astral vs qliphort if half the point of playing it is to beat a possible killer

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oliver?    690

Idk his exact list but it probably should have been 2 cut, astral and x

he prob would have kept rank-up for killer and sided out trip vanity's

 

EDIT: beaten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ibGehring+    1410

I don't know what Hobans reasoning is; but the point of Astral is not to out Killer.

 

The point of Astral is that - it is easier to abuse than it once was. It is the perfect answer to El Shaddoll Fusion. Pleaides double bounce makes it an irrelevant threat. It is a powerhouse in the mirror match.

 

The fact is also gives you an option to out a Killer is a bonus, but not the reason it is played whatsoever.

 

There are no good rank 5s vs Qlip. Yes, making a 4k dude is fine, but really just win more outside of never going to happen Killer. 

 

In my opinion, if you do not see Killer g1 you SHOULD side out Astral. If you see if in g2, then fine, you might aswell put it in G3. Otherwise it really is just the worst card in your deck. You are better off having as much disruption as you can vs Qlip, and Astral provides none. \

 

If you know your opponent does not have Killer you 100% should side out Astral imo.

 

Astral should be in the deck regardless of Killer due to it being exceptional vs every other matchup, not because it is a marginal answer vs Killer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With Heraldry Crest in the extra deck its pretty save to say that astral is there for Killer too.

However dropping Killer g2/g3 is much harder vs 3 MST 3 Wind 3 Lake 3 PWWB BTH so maybe it was just for game 1.

Also in the top cut they knew if the opponent is playing killer so he knew if he needs an extra killer out or not.
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ibGehring+    1410

No, the astral is not there for killer. the hearldry is in the extra because you have astral so you have more options. you would not run astral and not put an answer to a scary threat in your extra... does not mean astral is there for killer at all.

 

astral is better vs the mirror and shaddoll than it is qlip... so obv you are going to play astral in your deck as being good vs 2 out of 3 decks in a 3 deck format makes it quite an obvious choice.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oliver?    690

 

The point of Astral is that - it is easier to abuse than it once was. It is the perfect answer to El Shaddoll Fusion. Pleaides double bounce makes it an irrelevant threat. It is a powerhouse in the mirror match.

 

my turn:

i make construct (shaddoll fusion from deck yolo), attack your pleiades

you bounce, i chain el shaddoll fusion

didn't really do much

 

or your turn:

you bounce my construct with pleiades, i chain el shaddoll fusion and make another one

i dump core, get back el shaddoll fusion

next turn i attack your pleiades

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Virtuoso    104

 

 

The point of Astral is that - it is easier to abuse than it once was. It is the perfect answer to El Shaddoll Fusion. Pleaides double bounce makes it an irrelevant threat. It is a powerhouse in the mirror match.

 

my turn:

i make construct (shaddoll fusion from deck yolo), attack your pleiades

you bounce, i chain el shaddoll fusion

didn't really do much

 

or your turn:

you bounce my construct with pleiades, i chain el shaddoll fusion and make another one

i dump core, get back el shaddoll fusion

next turn i attack your pleiades

 

8/10 they will return pleiades to extra during your fusion, unless there are other extra deck monsters on board

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+rap tap    20145

 

 

The point of Astral is that - it is easier to abuse than it once was. It is the perfect answer to El Shaddoll Fusion. Pleaides double bounce makes it an irrelevant threat. It is a powerhouse in the mirror match.

 

my turn:

i make construct (shaddoll fusion from deck yolo), attack your pleiades

you bounce, i chain el shaddoll fusion

didn't really do much

 

or your turn:

you bounce my construct with pleiades, i chain el shaddoll fusion and make another one

i dump core, get back el shaddoll fusion

next turn i attack your pleiades

 

honestly you're making this harder than it needs to be

 

they have pleiades, you have shad fusion

dump mathmatician or bulb + squamata for shekinaga

they try to bounce shek, you negate it and kill pleiades and you have a floating dolkka on their turn

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fractal    2488
That argument is so... situational. "If I can play Shaddoll Fusion and El Shaddoll Fusion and you have nothing to interact with" is a very weak way of looking at a card. Pleiades can answer any/all monsters that aren't Leo/Towers, so if your opponent has an out, oh well. If you can interact with their out, your opponent says "oh well". Existence of outs isn't a reason to not play a card that answers everything. Like, if you have Warning, Vanity, Wind Blast, etc Set, you're over their monster + their "out/dodge".
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oliver?    690

That argument is so... situational. "If I can play Shaddoll Fusion and El Shaddoll Fusion and you have nothing to interact with" is a very weak way of looking at a card. Pleiades can answer any/all monsters that aren't Leo/Towers, so if your opponent has an out, oh well. If you can interact with their out, your opponent says "oh well". Existence of outs isn't a reason to not play a card that answers everything. Like, if you have Warning, Vanity, Wind Blast, etc Set, you're over their monster + their "out/dodge".

it was a response to him saying pleiades outs el shaddoll fusion, not me saying rank-up/pleiades is bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×