• Announcements

    • rei

      Battle of the Anime Characters   02/10/17

      THE BATTLE OF THE ANIME CHARACTERS HAS BEGUN   Find it here http://duelistgroundz.com/index.php?/forum/615-battle-of-the-anime-x/
ACP

A Treatise Regarding Exarion Universe

148 posts in this topic

 

 

Interesting discussion. Being an old school player myself and having played competitively in 2005, I would prefer playing without Exarion for authenticity reasons. However, I also think that authenticity should not be the main factor when playing a 10-year old format on a competitive level.

 

Exarion has, just like any other card, strenghts and weaknesses. Does it outclass other similar card choices like Blade Knight, Asura Priest, D.D. Assailant? Maybe it does, maybe not. It's not like those cards are now totally obsolete because of Exarion. They still have a niche and they provide enough reasons (being a Light, monster removal) to be played. The only cards that Exarion made obsolete were Enraged Battle Ox and Kycoo. But Exarion also opens up new doors for new cards to be discovered and for new plays to become more popular. For example, I play 2 Don Zaloog in my Warrior build precisely because of Exarion. I don't know how many times they lost a card because they attacked my set Don, then lost Exarion next turn via Smashing Ground. I think there are many ways of getting rid of it or even create advantage against it.

 

Stil, I would like to see a format without Exarion, simply because of nostalgic reasons.

Lol, good luck beating anyone with a brain with your shitty double Don Zaloog Smashing Ground deck. Piercing with Exarion into face-downs is just strictly suboptimal vs warriors since the set could be not only Don Zaloog but also DDWL/DDA. There are virtually no ways to create advantage against Exarion Universe and you clearly do not have much experience in the format. Goats today is a lot different than goats was in 2005, as l2thez pointed out.

 

 

First of all, you have no idea who I am and how much experience I have in Goat Format. You say I play trash like Don Zaloog and Smashing Ground, yet when I watched your match against Perovic and you played what, Iron Blacksmith Kotetsu? Please. And the thing about Don, maybe you don't know how to play him right. You set Don first turn after you open Pot, for example. It's the surprise factor that enables you to get a +1 against most people, as you would be forced to stop a potential MoF I could have and nobody would expect a Don sitting there. And btw, now that Blade Knight you say is unplayable suddenly becomes good. Exarion is surely very versatile, but he doesn't excel at anything besides punishing Scapegoat and being an excellent wall. Other cards like Spirit Reaper, Asura Priest or Apprentice Magician, for example, have the potential to generate real card advantage, something that Exarion cannot do. Yes, they do have a smaller window in which they can operate well, but that doesn't mean that those cards are unplayable at all.

 

You see, I also play Exarion myself because of the pressure and damage he can generate. It's a very good card with great strenghts, but also weaknesses that you can exploit. What is Exarion going to do in against a deck that runs no Scapegoat and for example, 3 Gravekeeper's Spy with 2 Zaborg? I'm probably the only one who plays this, but I had this following situation so many times. They attack my F/D Spy, they lose 600 and I get a +1. Next turn sac one Spy for Zaborg, destroying a F/D MoF/Deko/Merchant/whatever, then attacking Exarion for another +1. Also, Exarion is a sitting duck against a Pyramid Turtle ramming into it, or against agressive choices like Berserk Gorilla or even something crazy like Fusilier Dragon + Skill Drain.

 

Like any card game, one needs to constantly adapt to different metagame scenarios. This is why most of the time, if you look at the top decklists from big tournaments, you will see a lot of cards that people didn't consider any good before. Max Suffridge, the guy who won the Nationals, ran 2 Spy and 1 Guard, something nobody played before. The guy who won the German Nationals ran 2 Don Zaloog and 2 Zaborg. You see, a metagame can only evolve when people are actually willing to consider their options against the most common cards in the meta. How did double Airknight and double Exarion become so popular in the first place? Because Scapegoat was everywhere and people wanted to counter them. Now that double Exarion and double Airknight are everywhere, I think it's time to start playing around them instead of complaining about them.

 

Iron Blacksmith Kotetsu searches two of your most powerful cards in the deck and makes you less vulnerable to Crossout. Since Exarion goat games are faster paced than non-Exarion goats, you're also less likely to draw dead Kotetsu at some point in the game. Am I saying that Kotetsu is the nuts and that everyone should run it? No, but it's a lot more justifiable than Smashing Ground+Don Zaloog of all things. The goat list that I used vs Kris was a fun list of mine (I bunch of 1-ofs like dekoichi, reaper, exarion, asura, kotetsu, etc) and not intended to be representative of what I felt the best deck in the format was at the time, so it really bears no relevance to the topic at hand. Now had I said, "Hey, my strictly suboptimal deck crushes the obviously dominant deck in the meta" that would be a different story, and I would need to back that up at the risk of sounding like someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

 

If you open Pot set Don, and your opponent reads Faith, the most probable scenario is that your opponent tries to dispose of it in a way that doesn't flip it face-up, so Exarion would be the last of their options. If they were attacking, they would want something like Mystic LV2 or Blade Knight specifically, which both would just kill your Don, but if we're talking about Kris' list then neither of those enter the equation. We'd basically be talking about one of his 2 Crossouts or 5 or his LV1 monsters plus one of his 3 Metas. Additionally, if you set a least 1 s/t behind your Don (as I imagine you more than likely would), then summoning Breaker and attacking becomes preferable over Exarion as well. They could also open Pot of Greed or Graceful Charity into any of the above. Additionally, your opponent might open neither Crossout, nor LV1+meta, nor Breaker, but also might not open Exarion either.

 

Probability that you open Pot of Greed into a Don Zaloog = 4.95951417004049%

 

Probability of opening Crossout = 28.07692307692308%

Probability of opening LV1+Meta = 20.75427654375023%

Probability of opening Breaker = 15%

Probability of opening Exarion = 28.07692307692308%

 

The probability that you go first, open Pot of Greed into a Don Zaloog, your opponent doesn't open Crossout, doesn't open LV1+Meta, doesn't open Breaker, and opens Exarion approximately = .5*.0495951417004049*(1-.2807692307692308)*(1-0.1578947368421053)*0.3018018018018018*0.1804414947797301 = 0.0008179034209

 

Your hypothetical scenario will happen the way you want it to in less than one in a thousand games.

 

...And that's not even factoring the odds of you having a Smashing Ground afterwards.

 

You know how I know that you don't have any experience in goats? Because you are bringing up things that basically never happen.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I would normally be in the side of "Stop complaining and get better", but there is a such thing as a dominant deck. Not everything can be adapted to. This isn't a case of me losing a lot and bitching about it. My LGS has goat tournaments with Exarion every week. I've only lost a single match there. DGZ had Exarion goat league, and I had a 75% win percentage. I'm actually doing worse in Exarion-less goats than I was in Exarion goats on DGZ.

 

This is about trying to weigh the pros and cons of two particular formats. Even Kris, who basically never loses a match ever in Exarion goats admits that I have identified a legitimate problem with the format (we just disagree on the solution). The idea that "I should stop complaining about card X and focus on beating card X" is a good attitude to have in normal yugioh, where Konami controls what's legal, but is a shitty attitude to have when we're talking about a format that we can change at any time. Imagine how ridiculous you would sound if you we advocating adding something like Elemental Hero Stratos as a 3-of to goat format for example. Yeah, maybe we suck and should just try beating it... or we could just not play with cards that are overpowered relative to the rest of the card pool. I like that idea better.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what level 1 are you playing that you are offing for morph on your t1 going second outside of Sinister?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I often times feel like a lot of Yugioh players are lazy and don't want to sit down and have decide which card is best in a given field and would just rather play the cards that are "obviously good."

for many duelists the most riveting theoretical conclusion about the game they ever reach is "play good cards instead of bad cards." i wish i was even joking

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what level 1 are you playing that you are offing for morph on your t1 going second outside of Sinister?

2 Faith or 2 Merchant. If your opponent opens PoG and sets a monster that you're pretty sure is Faith then it's an entirely correct line of play.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also would like to note that urthor is completely correct when he's talking about certain decks being better for warring environment than tournament environments, you can steal individual matches from unprepared opponents in wars by keeping a burn list as an option whereas you wouldn't want to touch the deck if you were locking yourself into playing it for 9-11 rounds

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Your question doesn't make sense. It's trivially obvious that a format in which Exarion is restricted to one would be better than a format where it is unlimited, but the fact that that's the case doesn't mean that Exarion isn't the problem. The difference between Exarion and a card like Breaker or Tribe is that those cards are very powerful in specific situations and not so good in others, where Exarion is just good virtually all the time. A zero Exarion format is definitive better than a one Exarion format though."

 

The changes you listed that Exarion made to the format is a result of people having to handle multiple copies of him,not 1.

Exarion at 1 is far from perfect if we view him from the perpective of the whole format,aggro/gravekeepers/monarch don't care that much about him,the format gives alot of answeres to him in the form of smashing ground,dd.warrior lady/assailant/berserk gorila/extra saku

At 1 he'd keep certain cards in check from being used carelessly,making you reconsider the value of your card/keeping an out for him.

All of these points are very vague. For example, how does 1 Exarion Universe keep certain cards in check?

More importantly, why bother entering custom format terrority, when 0 Exarion is already fine? 

Aggro"Beastdown" plays multiple Berserk Gorilas/DD Assailants/sakuretsu,which can easly deal with Exarion

Gravekeepers-Spy,gourd can survive an attack,while spearsman and assilant with necro can destroy him

Monarch-soul exchange/brain control,summoning a monarch-attacking

When considering how good or bad a card is for the format,we must view it from the perspetive of the whole format,not just goat control

 

It makes overly defensive cards from being used too freguently,or rather both player have to keep him in mind while making their plays,sitting on Scapegoat can be a punishable action,attacking a f/d with airknight not being destroyed,consistantly setting little monsters,most of us started playing DD Warrior lady again to have an extra out,while some even started running DD Assailent,which are both flexible outside of Exarion aswell.

basicly he was in our expirience a variable to be respected,but didn't define the whole game.

I'll just note it's a 10 player meta,so our observations could be flawed,

 

I'd argue that the goat community played a custom list 3 years already with 3 Exarion,or that playing without all the sets available until the banlist is defacto a custom list,so that whole custom list territory is silly.

Your concern might be that "if we're already going into those relmns of changing the list,why not make other changes?"

Nobody can govern what "goat format" means,but as a community we can debate and try changes,and the most stable/fun will have the most members in it,it might not be called "goat format" but "new goat format".

 

If highly advise if you're activate on DN to try 1 Exarion meta with your friend to see for yourself whenever it's better or worse to 0-Exarion one.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also would like to note that urthor is completely correct when he's talking about certain decks being better for warring environment than tournament environments, you can steal individual matches from unprepared opponents in wars by keeping a burn list as an option whereas you wouldn't want to touch the deck if you were locking yourself into playing it for 9-11 rounds

No, that's completely wrong. Suppose you have the choice of two decks to play for a given tournament. One is standard goats, which has a 50% chance to beat any given opponent (the nuetral option). The other is burn, which has an 80% chance to beat an opponent who has not prepared their sidedeck for burn, and a 20% chance to beat an opponent who has prepared their sidedeck for burn (the risky option).

 

The probability of winning an individual match with burn is .8*x+.2(1-x) = .6x+.2, where x is the proportion of unprepared opponents. The probability of your standard goat deck winning an individual match is .5. During warring you're focused on winning individual matches, so which deck should you use? It obviously depends on the number of unprepared opponents.

 

vRLTFLs.png

The y axis represents the probability of winning a single match as a function of the number of unprepared opponents for burn, which is the x-axis. The red line is goats; the probability of winning a match is the same regardless of how prepared your opponent is for burn. The blue line represents burn. It happens to be the case that if at least 50% of the room is unprepared for burn, burn is the better choice. Not a surprising result.

 

The probability of winning at least 9 matches in a 10 round swiss tournament is: p^10+10*p^9*(1-p), where p is the probability of winning a single match. This means that if you run standard goats, the probability of going at least x-1 is 0.0107421875. If you run burn, the probability of going at least x-1 is (.6*x+.2)^10+10*(.6*x+.2)^9*(.8-.6*x).

 

kafOk4Y.png

In either case you will notice that burn is better than standard goats when more than 50% of the room is unprepared for burn. You could actually make an argument that burn is better in a tournament environment than an individual match environment based on the fact that you're a lot more better off when you run burn in an unprepared field than you are less better off running goats in a prepared field. Assuming that all combinations of preparedness are equally likely, running burn is technically better EV in a tournament, and equal EV in an individual match. Basically this is because integral(.8*x+.2*(1-x)-.5,x=0..1) = 0 but integral((.6*x+.2)^10+10*(.6*x+.2)^9*(.8-.6*x)-0.0107421875,x=0..1) = 0.05107916872. But at this point we're getting into calculus-based probability theory which is going over the head of most people who are reading this thread I imagine. If you're just interested in whether the risky deck is better or worse than the nuetral deck (in this case burn vs goats) and not at all interested in how much better one is than the other, the reality is that there is no practical difference between an individual match vs 10 rounds of swiss (or 20 rounds of swiss for that matter).

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"Your question doesn't make sense. It's trivially obvious that a format in which Exarion is restricted to one would be better than a format where it is unlimited, but the fact that that's the case doesn't mean that Exarion isn't the problem. The difference between Exarion and a card like Breaker or Tribe is that those cards are very powerful in specific situations and not so good in others, where Exarion is just good virtually all the time. A zero Exarion format is definitive better than a one Exarion format though."

 

The changes you listed that Exarion made to the format is a result of people having to handle multiple copies of him,not 1.

Exarion at 1 is far from perfect if we view him from the perpective of the whole format,aggro/gravekeepers/monarch don't care that much about him,the format gives alot of answeres to him in the form of smashing ground,dd.warrior lady/assailant/berserk gorila/extra saku

At 1 he'd keep certain cards in check from being used carelessly,making you reconsider the value of your card/keeping an out for him.

All of these points are very vague. For example, how does 1 Exarion Universe keep certain cards in check?

More importantly, why bother entering custom format terrority, when 0 Exarion is already fine? 

Aggro"Beastdown" plays multiple Berserk Gorilas/DD Assailants/sakuretsu,which can easly deal with Exarion

Gravekeepers-Spy,gourd can survive an attack,while spearsman and assilant with necro can destroy him

Monarch-soul exchange/brain control,summoning a monarch-attacking

When considering how good or bad a card is for the format,we must view it from the perspetive of the whole format,not just goat control

 

It makes overly defensive cards from being used too freguently,or rather both player have to keep him in mind while making their plays,sitting on Scapegoat can be a punishable action,attacking a f/d with airknight not being destroyed,consistantly setting little monsters,most of us started playing DD Warrior lady again to have an extra out,while some even started running DD Assailent,which are both flexible outside of Exarion aswell.

basicly he was in our expirience a variable to be respected,but didn't define the whole game.

I'll just note it's a 10 player meta,so our observations could be flawed,

 

I'd argue that the goat community played a custom list 3 years already with 3 Exarion,or that playing without all the sets available until the banlist is defacto a custom list,so that whole custom list territory is silly.

Your concern might be that "if we're already going into those relmns of changing the list,why not make other changes?"

Nobody can govern what "goat format" means,but as a community we can debate and try changes,and the most stable/fun will have the most members in it,it might not be called "goat format" but "new goat format".

 

If highly advise if you're activate on DN to try 1 Exarion meta with your friend to see for yourself whenever it's better or worse to 0-Exarion one.

 

Gravekeeper's Spy is not a counter to Exarion Universe. Gravekeeper's Spy could've been attacked by literally anything else in the format and had the same result. Your opponent still has the Exarion Universe in play, their board position hasn't changed, and you still have to get rid of your opponent's Exarion Universe before you can win the game. Sure, your opponent took 200 damage and you searched another Spy, which certainly isn't bad. But that's not what I would qualify as a counter. It would be like arguing that Level Limit - Area B is a counter to Exarion Universe. Sure, you stopped it from beating your face in, but you still have to win the game. Your deck has to be able to better take advantage of the standstill than your opponent's can. That's not a guarantee. Now against Tyler's Zoo deck with 3x Exarion Universe, Gravekeeper's Spy is absolutely a counter, because it walls everything in the deck, and almost any deck in the format is built to play a long game better than Zoo is. It's more accurate to say that cards like Gravekeeper's Spy are counters to aggression, not Exarion Universe. Kris's list shrugs off a Gravekeeper's Spy fine. It's going to be just as prepared to play the long game as you are. Playing Gravekeeper's Spy in your list doesn't suddenly mean that you're going to beat your average goat control list. It doesn't doesn't suddenly stop Exarion from completely shitting on any copies of Scapegoat in your deck.

 

If you really think that Gravekeeper's are going to beat Kris goat control list, feel free to try that and let me know how it goes. Gravekeeper's as a theme were very fragile and didn't see any real success in the format. Exarion Universe doesn't change that. Yes, literally every monster in GKs+Necrovalley can run over Exarion. Does that guarantee that you're going to beat any deck that happens to run Exarion Universe? Absolutely not. GKs aren't a real deck, and therefore are never going to be a significant part of the meta, and therefore are not going to provide anyone with any incentive to stop running Exarion Universe. If I happened to run into GKs, would I side out my copies of Exarion Universe? Of course. But that really doesn't change any of the points that I have made about how Exarion Universe warps the format.

 

I don't know why people are under the impression that a simple trade with Exarion is the same as countering it. D.D. Assailant is not a counter to Exarion Universe. Neither is Sakuretsu Armor. Or Smashing Ground. Cards like D.D. Assailant are contextually and opportunistically worse in an Exarion meta than a non-Exarion meta. Sakuretsu Armor definitely gets better in a format with Exarion, but it's no one is going to stop running Exarion because of Sakuretsu Armor. Because eventually you have to attack with something, so why not Exarion? Why would a format where the average number of Sakuretsu Armors is higher than the average number of Scapegoats make for a better format overall?

 

Technically you're right that Exarions without CRV is a custom format. But the whole reason that I went out of my way to convince everyone of the fact we were playing a custom format was to dispel the widely held belief that we were not playing a custom format. My point being, the whole reason that a lot of people quickly accepted Exarion goats to be the format that we should play was because it was assumed to be a non-custom format from the get-go. Had Exarion Universe been printed in 2006, this debate never would've happened. It is very, very challenging to get people to agree on a custom format (because people have very different, but often uninformed opinions), which is why I think it'll never happen. The same thing happens even when Konami makes a new format (ie changes the advanced format list). People bitch and moan about the format is going to be absolute trash and then calm down after they actually get the chance to play it. Or the just accept the fact that they have no other choice and play anyways. In general, people have the tendency to underrate formats that they haven't played. It's much easier to point to a bunch of already existent formats that people have played and say, "Hey, did you like that format? What about that one?" and get some actual relevant opinions. People don't want to sit down and test the hundreds of different possible formats. As much as I would be completely unopposed to playing a fun custom format, I try to be realistic about the chance of getting other people to cooperate.

And throughout your entire post you never made the distinction of why to allow 1 Exarion Universe as opposed to 3 or 0. As a card, Exarion Universe has constant returns to scale, which means that if it's too powerful, we should ban it, and if it's not too powerful we should allow 3. I personally think it's too powerful. It isn't a "power card" like Graceful Charity or Snatch Steal in the sense that you need to wait for the perfect moment to use. There's really no reason to believe that 1 Exarion somehow makes for a better format than 0. The same problems that I brought up in the OP would still be present, just on a lesser scale.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nifty i stand corrected
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to say that a few years ago when we were having the first discussions as to if Exarion should be legal in goats, I never thought we'd be debating years later whether the La Jinn that doesn't get Tsukuyomi'd, and can trample for 1400 would be too good in a format with Pot, Grace, Duo, BLS, Ring, etc. all legal.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to say that a few years ago when we were having the first discussions as to if Exarion should be legal in goats, I never thought we'd be debating years later whether the La Jinn that doesn't get Tsukuyomi'd, and can trample for 1400 would be too good in a format with Pot, Grace, Duo, BLS, Ring, etc. all legal.

There's a huge difference between "Is Exarion Universe an issue in the format and needing a psudeo-ban?" and "Is the format healthier with or without Exarion?"

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think bazaar is trying to say that we're all stupid for wanting to not allow Exarion. I think he's just legitimately surprised that the discussion is taking place on a site where not much quality yugioh discussion happens in general.

 

Exarion Universe is overpowered in a contextual sense rather than an abstract one. There's a difference. Exarion is absolutely not on par with BLS, Trinity, Ring, etc. That doesn't change the fact that it affects the quality of games both in terms of skill and fun.

 

For the record, if I were to make a "Goats Minus" format (ie, goats with additional bans/restrictions) these would be the cards that I would consider cutting from the format:

- BLS

- Pot of Greed

- Delinquent Duo

- Sinister Serpent

- Ring of Destruction

- Snatch Steal

- Morphing Jar

 

But of course I really don't think Goats Minus is something that enough people could agree to play to make it worth putting effort into.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nifty i stand corrected

And now we all know why I hate the phrase "can't survive 10 rounds of swiss." 

 

I should just rename this thread ITT: I debunk every shitty ygo opinion ever.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a big fan of Exarion in the format. I'd rather it be gone. It would make deck construction more interesting and be more period correct. 

I am a bit worried that we may be too far gone on trying to reel Exarion back in. I know the format has caught on in small packets irl and trying to explain to people that we are no longer allowing Exarion to be used may not go over so well. We don't really have one central goat control hub of information outside those who are on DGZ. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Interesting discussion. Being an old school player myself and having played competitively in 2005, I would prefer playing without Exarion for authenticity reasons. However, I also think that authenticity should not be the main factor when playing a 10-year old format on a competitive level.

 

Exarion has, just like any other card, strenghts and weaknesses. Does it outclass other similar card choices like Blade Knight, Asura Priest, D.D. Assailant? Maybe it does, maybe not. It's not like those cards are now totally obsolete because of Exarion. They still have a niche and they provide enough reasons (being a Light, monster removal) to be played. The only cards that Exarion made obsolete were Enraged Battle Ox and Kycoo. But Exarion also opens up new doors for new cards to be discovered and for new plays to become more popular. For example, I play 2 Don Zaloog in my Warrior build precisely because of Exarion. I don't know how many times they lost a card because they attacked my set Don, then lost Exarion next turn via Smashing Ground. I think there are many ways of getting rid of it or even create advantage against it.

 

Stil, I would like to see a format without Exarion, simply because of nostalgic reasons.

Lol, good luck beating anyone with a brain with your shitty double Don Zaloog Smashing Ground deck. Piercing with Exarion into face-downs is just strictly suboptimal vs warriors since the set could be not only Don Zaloog but also DDWL/DDA. There are virtually no ways to create advantage against Exarion Universe and you clearly do not have much experience in the format. Goats today is a lot different than goats was in 2005, as l2thez pointed out.

 

 

First of all, you have no idea who I am and how much experience I have in Goat Format. You say I play trash like Don Zaloog and Smashing Ground, yet when I watched your match against Perovic and you played what, Iron Blacksmith Kotetsu? Please. And the thing about Don, maybe you don't know how to play him right. You set Don first turn after you open Pot, for example. It's the surprise factor that enables you to get a +1 against most people, as you would be forced to stop a potential MoF I could have and nobody would expect a Don sitting there. And btw, now that Blade Knight you say is unplayable suddenly becomes good. Exarion is surely very versatile, but he doesn't excel at anything besides punishing Scapegoat and being an excellent wall. Other cards like Spirit Reaper, Asura Priest or Apprentice Magician, for example, have the potential to generate real card advantage, something that Exarion cannot do. Yes, they do have a smaller window in which they can operate well, but that doesn't mean that those cards are unplayable at all.

 

You see, I also play Exarion myself because of the pressure and damage he can generate. It's a very good card with great strenghts, but also weaknesses that you can exploit. What is Exarion going to do in against a deck that runs no Scapegoat and for example, 3 Gravekeeper's Spy with 2 Zaborg? I'm probably the only one who plays this, but I had this following situation so many times. They attack my F/D Spy, they lose 600 and I get a +1. Next turn sac one Spy for Zaborg, destroying a F/D MoF/Deko/Merchant/whatever, then attacking Exarion for another +1. Also, Exarion is a sitting duck against a Pyramid Turtle ramming into it, or against agressive choices like Berserk Gorilla or even something crazy like Fusilier Dragon + Skill Drain.

 

Like any card game, one needs to constantly adapt to different metagame scenarios. This is why most of the time, if you look at the top decklists from big tournaments, you will see a lot of cards that people didn't consider any good before. Max Suffridge, the guy who won the Nationals, ran 2 Spy and 1 Guard, something nobody played before. The guy who won the German Nationals ran 2 Don Zaloog and 2 Zaborg. You see, a metagame can only evolve when people are actually willing to consider their options against the most common cards in the meta. How did double Airknight and double Exarion become so popular in the first place? Because Scapegoat was everywhere and people wanted to counter them. Now that double Exarion and double Airknight are everywhere, I think it's time to start playing around them instead of complaining about them.

 

Iron Blacksmith Kotetsu searches two of your most powerful cards in the deck and makes you less vulnerable to Crossout. Since Exarion goat games are faster paced than non-Exarion goats, you're also less likely to draw dead Kotetsu at some point in the game. Am I saying that Kotetsu is the nuts and that everyone should run it? No, but it's a lot more justifiable than Smashing Ground+Don Zaloog of all things. The goat list that I used vs Kris was a fun list of mine (I bunch of 1-ofs like dekoichi, reaper, exarion, asura, kotetsu, etc) and not intended to be representative of what I felt the best deck in the format was at the time, so it really bears no relevance to the topic at hand. Now had I said, "Hey, my strictly suboptimal deck crushes the obviously dominant deck in the meta" that would be a different story, and I would need to back that up at the risk of sounding like someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

 

If you open Pot set Don, and your opponent reads Faith, the most probable scenario is that your opponent tries to dispose of it in a way that doesn't flip it face-up, so Exarion would be the last of their options. If they were attacking, they would want something like Mystic LV2 or Blade Knight specifically, which both would just kill your Don, but if we're talking about Kris' list then neither of those enter the equation. We'd basically be talking about one of his 2 Crossouts or 5 or his LV1 monsters plus one of his 3 Metas. Additionally, if you set a least 1 s/t behind your Don (as I imagine you more than likely would), then summoning Breaker and attacking becomes preferable over Exarion as well. They could also open Pot of Greed or Graceful Charity into any of the above. Additionally, your opponent might open neither Crossout, nor LV1+meta, nor Breaker, but also might not open Exarion either.

 

Probability that you open Pot of Greed into a Don Zaloog = 4.95951417004049%

 

Probability of opening Crossout = 28.07692307692308%

Probability of opening LV1+Meta = 20.75427654375023%

Probability of opening Breaker = 15%

Probability of opening Exarion = 28.07692307692308%

 

The probability that you go first, open Pot of Greed into a Don Zaloog, your opponent doesn't open Crossout, doesn't open LV1+Meta, doesn't open Breaker, and opens Exarion approximately = .5*.0495951417004049*(1-.2807692307692308)*(1-0.1578947368421053)*0.3018018018018018*0.1804414947797301 = 0.0008179034209

 

Your hypothetical scenario will happen the way you want it to in less than one in a thousand games.

 

...And that's not even factoring the odds of you having a Smashing Ground afterwards.

 

You know how I know that you don't have any experience in goats? Because you are bringing up things that basically never happen.

 

 

Iron Blacksmith Kotetsu is an interesting card that deserves more attention. Props for playing him in a serious match.

 

Now, Don. I never said that Don or Smashing Ground is the answer to Exarion like you are saying here. I'm saying that Don has a lot of surprise value to generate card advantage and to take advantage of some of todays standard plays, including Exarion. Using him as Exarion bait is just one example of using Don effectively and this will make you think twice before you use his effect in the next games. What will happen is that you are going to miss a lot of Exarions potential damage output against weak things like MoF because the possibiliy of a Don is always there. But Don has other good uses as well. He is great at attacking summoned Sangans turn 1 or punishing flipped MoFs. Plus he can be searched with RotA. The above example I gave with Pot + Don turn 1 was one of many examples of how to use him effectively, so all these probability numbers you posted there really don't reflect a real, practical game. And this is a very important thing: a practical game and theory discussions are two totally different stories! You said the probability of an Exarion attacking a face down Don is at 1 in 1000. I had a lot of situations where my opponents Exarion ran into my face down Don for the +1, so your statement that this happens in 1 in a 1000 games is just silly. Now, do I play Don in my main Goat Control? No, he is too risky to play and is stopped by Scapegoat easily. But I do play him in my Warrior Toolbox, as he is a great game 1 card because of the mind games he creates for the following games.

 

But that was just one example. Here is another one: you said that Big Shield is unplayable when Exarion is around. Now imagine I open RotA into Big Shield, then set one monster, then end. You have Nobleman in your hand. So what do you do, do you play it ?? Maybe I just set a MoF and I will play double Duo next turn. Or maybe it is a Jar. This is how you win games in this format. These cards allow you to play mind games with your opponent and this is far more important than a bit of damage because it gives you the psychological advantage for the next games.

 

Now coming back to Exarion. Can he do any of the things I mentioned above? Not really. Exarion threatens damage sure, but the only way Exarion can actually generate card advantage is through battle itself. Cards like Blade Knight, Asura Priest, Don Zaloog, Spirit Reaper etc. all have the potential to generate real card advantage. Sure some of them are not that great in the current meta but that is not the point. Also, you might say that Exarion forces some kind of play of the opponent to avoid further damage, and it is true that many times Exarion allows you to chip away damage in order to put your opponent in Ring range for a BLS for example. The flaw with this logic is that the real problem is not Exarion here, the real problem is Ring, as Exarion is easily stopped by any removal card there is. Also, there is another flaw with your logic: you are always assuming that you are playing against a standard Goat Control with 2-3 Scapegoat, 1-2 Merchant etc. In practice, and against good opponents, this will not be the case, and you can be sure they will not be playing a bog-standard Goat Control that everyone and their mother is prepared for. If anything, I would ban Ring but definately not Exarion. And FYI, I do play Exarion in my goat deck myself, simply because he is a great card to use against the myriad of weak flip monsters, Scapegoats and Airknights running around at the moment. But is he broken? Definately not. Does he limit other card choices? Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't. For me, it doesn't.

 

To sum it up, my proposed solution for this problem would be: Ban Ring and put Exarion at 1.

-5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I am bad at goats. But your scenarios are all very bad. Everyone autoactivates Exarion vs you. You search a Big Shield and try to proset MoF??? if I just attack you lose. (Again I am bad, maybe the 1000-2000LP matter in goats to some. And valid point would be having no attacker.) Clearly you can go back and say set saku/activate Duo first, etc but you said set MoF end.

You can try to mindgame all you want. And that is a completely valid aspect to the game. But going out of your way gives you away just as much as fdd set 4.

 

I like your discussion and sticking to your guns. But Allen's point is that Exarion is forcing people to run less goats, his logic isn't assuming vs "normal goats" at all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the most pertinent point is that Exarion automatically filling 2 monster slots and 1-2 Airknight makes Scapegoat a weak card, which leads to shortened games. Why more people haven't copied me and run 1x Scapegoat is beyond me--it was downright horrible to run 2-3x in my 10 war games against Perovic, and I did significantly better after siding it out. When the best use of Scapegoat is blocking spent Breakers, keeping the opponents BLS+Storm honest, and discarding for Tribe/GC, you've got to make changes.

Regardless of how you try to outplay Exarion, the Scapegoat interaction is an issue. Of course it can be done and you can gain advantage off of it if you are clever (Airknight, Jinzo, Zaborg, Mobius, TER) but this is NOT COMMON and the fact remains that the format is significantly sped up.

Now as I brought up before, we don't want to significantly slow down the format to the point where the only way to win is via Tsuku lock or a BLS game shot. But I was mostly playing Devils Advocate and feel that removing Exarion is the best solution because:
1. It is already a classic, historically accurate format
2. It is a minimal change that keeps goat format true to its nature
3. Most people who have tried it recently think it is more fun
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^I am bad at goats. But your scenarios are all very bad. Everyone autoactivates Exarion vs you. You search a Big Shield and try to proset MoF??? if I just attack you lose. (Again I am bad, maybe the 1000-2000LP matter in goats to some. And valid point would be having no attacker.) Clearly you can go back and say set saku/activate Duo first, etc but you said set MoF end.

You can try to mindgame all you want. And that is a completely valid aspect to the game. But going out of your way gives you away just as much as fdd set 4.

 

I like your discussion and sticking to your guns. But Allen's point is that Exarion is forcing people to run less goats, his logic isn't assuming vs "normal goats" at all.

 

The only information you got is that I have Big Shield. You don't know if I have a MoF/Jar whatever. Sure if I really set MoF and you attack it then I lose. But this type of play only works against good players and ceratinly I wouldn't try to bluff or mindgame a weak player. And my whole point of bringing this up was to show that many of these "unplayable" cards are still playable and there are many things these cards can do that Exarion can't.

 

The argument that Exarion shortens games is true but if you compare it to a card like Ring of Destruction then Exarion is child's play. Ring is much worse in shortening games than Exarion ever was. And without Ring, Exarion is suddenly much less threatening, as you wouldn't have to worry about plays like Storm into BLS into Ring. No more 6000+ damage in one turn, no more undeserved draws. I would much rather see Ring banned than Exarion. The luck factor would be reduced dramatically, and this is what we want. But maybe that's just me.

 

So the real question is: do we want to play a historically accurate format or do we want to play a custom format?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For people who prefer to win, suboptimal == unplayable.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I rarely feel sacked by ring. If they had BLS Heavy Ring, either they see it up for awhile or you still had a bunch of cards and they just took over.

I'd anything Tyomi makes me feel the most rage. Like I can deal with most players going PoG MoF. Or Duo MoF.
Once the Tyomi comes down though it is ridiculous.
Or Tyomi when they make a "bad" TER. I make a TER etc.
That is just me needing to learn though.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

using Goat Format as a starting point for a new, custom-made format. I really, really wish people would start taking the latter idea seriously.


I'm down, and honestly if people are going to debate if we should get rid of Dustshoot then there's no reason to not take it further with this.

 

 

The only thing that truly needs to happen, and the simplest solution to making Goat Control as close to perfect and authentic as you can get it without making it radically different and confusing everyone (hence lowering the playerbase) is to just ban Pot and Duo. Those are the only 2 cards which are unanimously agreed upon to be cancerous and have virtually zero positive influence on the gameplay. The game is instantly warped once a player has access to them; it goes from being about skillful interactions, reads and resource management to either just recycling and spamming them over and over while the opponent can often do nothing about it, or outright gaining a lucky winning position from the free advantage they give. GC is a beautiful game when neither player trivially profits from them. It's just a shame that when one of them does, it's often a disaster. They're the only 2 cards which are totally void of player interaction and give free advantage and gamestate control to whoever draws them first. Get rid of them and the format instantly becomes better and more attractive to play.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graceful is usually better than pot lol
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graceful is usually better than pot lol

It actually usually isn't. You basically need to discard Sinister in order to +1 with Graceful. It of course has other purposes like pitching a tribute mon to revive with Prem/Call or dumping chaos materials to make BLS live, but all of those things are probablistic and usually require you to wait until you have those pieces together in hand for you to guarantee the maximum effectiveness of the card, i.e. it's a card where the player has an input which strongly influences the mileage they get out of it. That's clearly in stark contrast to Greed, who's conditions and outcome are both completely fixed. Graceful also has a few other subtleties like giving indirect information about your hand and intentions when used at +0 as they can see the cards you've discarded and act accordingly, whereas Greed is just an utterly instant and unconditional +1 so most of the time it will simply be better than Graceful on those grounds because it never requires anything to combo with in order to be most effective.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But thats the point. Graceful is sometimes worse than pot when just windmilled in the instant you draw it, but because of the subtleties in playing it and the rewards for properly managing when you play it being much higher than that of point, graceful is usually better than pot. And a graceful where you have a legitimate discard target (serpent, airknight, jinzo, tsuk in a situation where your flips get noced, there are actually plenty of cards you lose nothing on by throwing away with graceful) it is usually better than pot simply by virtue of going one card deeper

 

Also worth noting that even on a +0, I'd rather take it and dig one card deeper than take the +1

0

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.