Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Drewsifer    49

To avoid going in circles I'm happy you provided some numbers as I'm too bad at math to do them myself :s

Are you running these numbers on a 40 card deck or a 37 card deck? These create different precentages with going first and going second. There definitely is the problem of drawing too many outs similar to over siding G2 and G3.

Would you strictly run 3 veiler and then add d.d crow on top of it? I think running 2 of each could provide more utility to match-ups since you generally only need to resolve each effect once at the correct time to blow them out with a trish play. I think I would much rather see 1 crow and 1 veiler than 2 veiler and no crow, any thoughts? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
falolipe    72

There is no single card that solve the problem, the most alike you have is dd crow wich you have to draw before they lock but you can't play too many copies because its not that good overall.

 

So may be trying to have response before they lock you is not the best answer, because if you draw it first turn then yea its cool if they try to lock you, but if you draw it after you still need 2 more cards you don't run too many to out the lock. If you wanna consistently prevent the lock you have to play too many hand traps because if you play half hand traps and half djinn outs you might not draw the hand trap at the right timing and you will never break a protected lock with your few outs.

 

On the other hand, if you decide to respond AFTER the lock you need 2 cards but you have to consider they are also investing more cards in their lock (lance or scolding) so you aren't really losing advantage its just simplification, and you have 4 cards to play but your opponent still have less for sure. Also if you disrupt the lock with veiler/maxx c/lancea your opponent still have scolding to stop your play next turn and access to djinn later in the game (unlike dd crow). If you don't use hand traps and use 2 cards to out djinn you will also by pass the other card that could ruin your game if you only stop the lock (scolding) and you have other benefits as well, like being easier to break an unprotected lock and a better utility in your cards for other match ups where the hand traps are not so good.

 

So the way I see it is you can either play little to no outs and many hand traps to prevent being locked (messing with your other match ups), or play no hand traps and add cards to break the protected lock with 2 cards wich may not be as good as preventing the lock, but its safer because you can win if they lock you (with hand traps you are plain dead) and you have better cards to face other important match ups because as good as nekroz is you can't say you will win vs everything else just by playing nekroz.

 

If you choose to play 2-4 hand traps and 3-7 djinn outs you will still lose to protected lock when you don't draw your hand traps and your outs doesn't do anything, so idk whats the right answer but I doubt its a mix with hand traps and outs because you will need to draw hand traps first and in that case djinn outs are irrelevant, and if you draw outs first you only have 1 and can't break a protected lock.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phaze    92

I feel like D.D. Crow also has potential to stop an end phase COTH for the satellarknights by removing the deneb in the early game, but I'm not sure if veiler is better here by stopping it outright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GerardoSDR    173

To avoid going in circles I'm happy you provided some numbers as I'm too bad at math to do them myself :s

Are you running these numbers on a 40 card deck or a 37 card deck? These create different precentages with going first and going second. There definitely is the problem of drawing too many outs similar to over siding G2 and G3.

Would you strictly run 3 veiler and then add d.d crow on top of it? I think running 2 of each could provide more utility to match-ups since you generally only need to resolve each effect once at the correct time to blow them out with a trish play. I think I would much rather see 1 crow and 1 veiler than 2 veiler and no crow, any thoughts? 

I was considering a 40 card deck, in a 37 deck these would be the ratios
8 outs 38.7% to draw 2 or more
9 outs 45.7%
10 outs 52.5%

keep in mind that your engine is of 28-30 cards so I don't know what would you take out to fit 10 outs and 3 upstarts
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GerardoSDR    173

There is no single card that solve the problem, the most alike you have is dd crow wich you have to draw before they lock but you can't play too many copies because its not that good overall.
 
So may be trying to have response before they lock you is not the best answer, because if you draw it first turn then yea its cool if they try to lock you, but if you draw it after you still need 2 more cards you don't run too many to out the lock. If you wanna consistently prevent the lock you have to play too many hand traps because if you play half hand traps and half djinn outs you might not draw the hand trap at the right timing and you will never break a protected lock with your few outs.
 
On the other hand, if you decide to respond AFTER the lock you need 2 cards but you have to consider they are also investing more cards in their lock (lance or scolding) so you aren't really losing advantage its just simplification, and you have 4 cards to play but your opponent still have less for sure. Also if you disrupt the lock with veiler/maxx c/lancea your opponent still have scolding to stop your play next turn and access to djinn later in the game (unlike dd crow). If you don't use hand traps and use 2 cards to out djinn you will also by pass the other card that could ruin your game if you only stop the lock (scolding) and you have other benefits as well, like being easier to break an unprotected lock and a better utility in your cards for other match ups where the hand traps are not so good.
 
So the way I see it is you can either play little to no outs and many hand traps to prevent being locked (messing with your other match ups), or play no hand traps and add cards to break the protected lock with 2 cards wich may not be as good as preventing the lock, but its safer because you can win if they lock you (with hand traps you are plain dead) and you have better cards to face other important match ups because as good as nekroz is you can't say you will win vs everything else just by playing nekroz.
 
If you choose to play 2-4 hand traps and 3-7 djinn outs you will still lose to protected lock when you don't draw your hand traps and your outs doesn't do anything, so idk whats the right answer but I doubt its a mix with hand traps and outs because you will need to draw hand traps first and in that case djinn outs are irrelevant, and if you draw outs first you only have 1 and can't break a protected lock.

the problem I see with using the 2 card answer is that you are ruinning your overall deck consistency with cards that are useless outside of the lock, that's why I'm leaning towards the preventive side, in both cases if you don't draw the out in your starting hand you are pretty much done (granted you can live for a few turns using valk if you are using the 2 card answer, but most of the time that doesn't help that much, by the time you dig through your deck to get rid of the lock you are way far behind), what I'm basically saying is "choose the option that messes the less with your deck's consistency

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Samantha    154

Here is Joey Chou's Top 32 list from Nekroz list from Chicago :)

 

[spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7bQ7ToUp7Y

[/spoiler]

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»TS Fearless    7066

To bad that deck is awful.


The second best deck in the game is awful.. Just like Book of Eclipse was huh
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5836

 

Here is Joey Chou's Top 32 list from Nekroz list from Chicago :)
 
[spoiler]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7bQ7ToUp7Y
[/spoiler]


Just wondering, was pat's deck profile taken down by request?

 

 

There was misinformation in the list he gave so the media outlets that posted it took it down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Samantha    154

 

Here is Joey Chou's Top 32 list from Nekroz list from Chicago :)
 
[spoiler]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7bQ7ToUp7Y
[/spoiler]


Just wondering, was pat's deck profile taken down by request?

 

Basically what Matt said. I was informed by a multiple of sources that there was inaccurate information within the video, so I took it down. I did not feel like it was right to leave it up and spread false information. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpiceyYanni1    333
So pat showed a list that he didn't really play so he could mislead other people eh? I mean that's not very surprising at this point. If he didn't want to show his list then he shouldn't have done a video in the first place
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GerardoSDR    173

 

 

Here is Joey Chou's Top 32 list from Nekroz list from Chicago :)
 
[spoiler]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7bQ7ToUp7Y
[/spoiler]


Just wondering, was pat's deck profile taken down by request?

 

Basically what Matt said. I was informed by a multiple of sources that there was inaccurate information within the video, so I took it down. I did not feel like it was right to leave it up and spread false information. 

 

what false information? did he profiled a fake decklist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5836

He gave a list with 3 Lance 2 Scolding, 2 Eclipse in the side.

 

A lot of spectators say he actually used 2 Lance, 3 Scolding, didn't side Eclipse, and played Breakthrough Skill somewhere. 

 

I don't think he was siding Mirror of the Ice Barrier either. < I'm Wrong, he played Mirror

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GerardoSDR    173

He gave a list with 3 Lance 2 Scolding, 2 Eclipse in the side.

 

A lot of spectators say he actually used 2 Lance, 3 Scolding, didn't side Eclipse, and played Breakthrough Skill somewhere. 

 

I don't think he was siding Mirror of the Ice Barrier either.

mmm that doesnt seem like enough changes to deceive people, in fact what he did is pretty much stupid at this point, ruin his reputation even more for a change so little as 1 extra scolding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eNtitY~    53

He gave a list with 3 Lance 2 Scolding, 2 Eclipse in the side.

 

A lot of spectators say he actually used 2 Lance, 3 Scolding, didn't side Eclipse, and played Breakthrough Skill somewhere. 

 

I don't think he was siding Mirror of the Ice Barrier either.

He definitely played Mirror of the Ice Barrier. I saw him resolve it in a match, the story he told (in that original deck profile) about the blowout he had with that card was real I'm just disappointed he didn't go into more detail. His opponent did end with 0 cards in hand after his first turn while going second.

 

Pat set 2 traps and passed. 

His opponent opens Brionac, 2 Manju/Senju, Veiler, Cycle and Trish. He dumps Brio to search Shurit, activates cycle.

Pat chains Mind Crush calling Shurit. 

His opponent shows his hand telling him he can't resolve it. Pat pauses, and after two seconds he says "Yes you can"

His opponent has to dump the 2 Ju's and a Veiler and summons Trish and attempts to activate the effect.

Pat chains Mirror of the Ice Barrier, Banishing Trish and Cycle/Shurit in grave. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5836

 

He gave a list with 3 Lance 2 Scolding, 2 Eclipse in the side.

 

A lot of spectators say he actually used 2 Lance, 3 Scolding, didn't side Eclipse, and played Breakthrough Skill somewhere. 

 

I don't think he was siding Mirror of the Ice Barrier either.

mmm that doesnt seem like enough changes to deceive people, in fact what he did is pretty much stupid at this point, ruin his reputation even more for a change so little as 1 extra scolding?

 

 

Wouldn't less changes just give you a higher chance of being able to deceive people lol? You're right the Lance/Scolding thing is minor but not playing Eclipse and using Breakthrough is an entire choice, maybe there was some angle there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5836

 

He gave a list with 3 Lance 2 Scolding, 2 Eclipse in the side.

 

A lot of spectators say he actually used 2 Lance, 3 Scolding, didn't side Eclipse, and played Breakthrough Skill somewhere. 

 

I don't think he was siding Mirror of the Ice Barrier either.

He definitely played Mirror of the Ice Barrier. I saw him resolve it in a match, the story he told (in that original deck profile) about the blowout he had with that card was real I'm just disappointed he didn't go into more detail. His opponent did end with 0 cards in hand after his first turn while going second.

 

Pat set 2 traps and passed. 

His opponent opens Brionac, 2 Manju/Senju, Veiler, Cycle and Trish. He dumps Brio to search Shurit, activates cycle.

Pat chains Mind Crush calling Shurit. 

His opponent shows his hand telling him he can't resolve it. Pat pauses, and after two seconds he says "Yes you can"

His opponent has to dump the 2 Ju's and a Veiler and summons Trish and attempts to activate the effect.

Pat chains Mirror of the Ice Barrier, Banishing Trish and Cycle/Shurit in grave. 

 

 

My bad, I'll get rid of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ibGehring+    1410
Pat is not being a dick by giving out false information. People need to understand he plays this game to Win. It is just another way of leveling players. If people are so obsessed with hI'm and his decks and get so upset with misleading information then those players really need to rethink their position in the game.

Pat is good because he understands how to level players each event. Just copying him will put you in pretty shit positions against the innovation he finds next event. So what I'm trying to say is; it doesn't matter what he reveals now, being true Or false.
  • Upvote 6
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pat is not being a dick by giving out false information. People need to understand he plays this game to Win. It is just another way of leveling players. If people are so obsessed with hI'm and his decks and get so upset with misleading information then those players really need to rethink their position in the game.

Pat is good because he understands how to level players each event. Just copying him will put you in pretty shit positions against the innovation he finds next event. So what I'm trying to say is; it doesn't matter what he reveals now, being true Or false.

 

Assuming this is true (which I don't know) you do not make up lies on an interview. Thats disrespectful to the interviewer and ruins your reputation with the community. If you wanna be the guy who says "sorry my side deck/deck is private" as some people do then its fine but whats not fine is to show a false deck list. I guess he is trying to become a politician now? 

  • Upvote 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5836

Rather or not he's a dick is neither here nor there and isn't a topic for this discussion, I just wanted to make sure people weren't having discussion under false pretenses caused by misinformation and decided to nip it in the bud ASAP.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dirk    1955

Fe9kIzu.png

 

This is what I used at a regional last weekend to go undefeated, then this weekend at the ycs to make top 16. Hopefully the next booster set changes things up, because idk how much of an advantage there will be to gain if people start using scolding in every deck to protect various floods

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GerardoSDR    173

just to finish off this hoban subject, it's not about the players netdecking, it's not about he wanting to win by siding in the second djinn, the whole problem is that, he as a person is no longer trustworthy, he can keep his djinn in the side deck, he can keep his deck private, but the fact that he is actively trying to mislead the whole comunity it's the real problem, first with the djinn, he basically ruined the day for his opponent by lying to him, now he's ruining the reputation of samantha by making her post a fake decklist, is winning that so important that we must leave our most basic social rules? did he really thought that nobody would say a thing about all this? Specially since he's studying to be a politician, has he ever considered that maybe he's damaging his reputation and thus his profesional career? I mean if I cant even trust what he says to the media in a children card game why should I trust him as a political figure?

 

Anyways let's go back to the actual subject of this thread

  • Upvote 7
  • Downvote 1

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.

×