• 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

actually i can see why you'd misinterpret it that way, but no that's retarded and not what i meant to say.

 

to keep using kris as the example, my opinion would be "kris is better at playing against your burn deck with his goat control deck than the guy you beat round 2 in swiss", not "kris is better at playing against your burn deck with his goat control deck than playing goat control mirror matches"

 

i feel that its likely that the deeper you get into a swiss tournament, the more likely it is that your opponents have playtested vs several "rogue" matchups, and the more likely it is that they have cards in their sideboard that can counter your strategy efficiently. i think you said something like, you'd have an 80% win rate vs opponents who were not prepared, and a 20% win rate vs opponents who were prepared. my thought is that the deeper you get into the tournament, the more likely you are to face one of those 20% matchups.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see any reason to believe that. I guess it depends on how we define the word "prepared." I wasn't using it to mean "knows hows your deck works." I meant it more in the sense of "has stuff in their sideboard for it." And I think that's really more dependent on metagame composition and player preference than just "good people side more cards for combo decks." Take a look at the US nationals 2005 decklists for example and you'll see no sidedeck Neko Mane Kings: http://kperovic.com/metagame/yugioh2988.html?tabid=33&ArticleId=2839

 

While I was vending at YCS Miami, Gishki was at the maximum hype level, and lots of people were coming up to me to either tell me that they were running Gishki themselves or asking me about the deck. I know Billy Brake for example sided 1 Neko Mane King specifically for the deck. Other players just figured Gishki wasn't that great and decided to take their chances. But you'll notice that among the top decklists that we have from the event, he was actually the only one to make the top cut siding any copies of Neko/Droll & Lock: http://yugioh.tcgplayer.com/db/deck_search_result.asp?Location=2013%20YCS%20Miami

 

Good players often have the attitude that "once I'm 5-0 I'm very unlikely to play rogue combo decks anyways" and would rather just prepare for decks that they're more likely to face. I don't notice a lot of overpreparation for burn/combo/rogue by top players. If anything, I'd say they're more likely to underprepare. However, when I'm 1-0 at locals, I might have to worry about someone who's new to the game that randomly decided to side 3 dd crow 3 droll and lock bird because he thinks that "hand traps are cool" despite them actually being bad EV for the actual expected meta.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the other thing is that at smaller events word travels faster so that if someone knows allens there and playing gishkill, or that some other major player is playing gishkill, a) most relevant players are going to hear about it and b) the odds of playing that one player are higher, especially in the up ranks, so people are more likely to throw in some random side card against you.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah good point at a YCS people might just cheat and at add cards to their sidedeck right before they're about to play me. Seems pretty standard for most yugioh tournaments.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean at ycs they arent, thats the point. Unless they know ahead of time. Which at smaller events is much more likely that they are going to know ahead of time.

 

just going to ignore the cheating comment

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, forgot to mention this: Decks that are likely to brick are going to brick even more because at ycs they are going to stack your deck so that you brick more

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can we
A. Clarify the debate topic
B. Make a new thread
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would also personally prefer to play a deck that does not lose to terrible bricking in a swiss tournament (the consequences of a loss in warring are much lower, all that generally "matters" in warring is beating the team, not going X-1). Even if the probabilities of a loss are the same, I would rather lose with my control deck because I made a misplay than a combo deck because I bricked.

And that is why you're bad. When you start caring about how you win, rather than just whether or not you win (within the rules of the game of course), you've entered into scrub territory. Enjoy your stay.

 

 

Can you not read? I said if the probabilities were the same.

 

At the end of the day, combo in yugioh (especially the era I was active during) usually throws a wrench into things by removing interaction but is not tier 0. Whenever it is outright better than the aggro/control/whatever decks then of course I would use it, but I probably wouldn't be playing that format much anyway.

 

I just don't see any reason to believe that. I guess it depends on how we define the word "prepared." I wasn't using it to mean "knows hows your deck works." I meant it more in the sense of "has stuff in their sideboard for it." And I think that's really more dependent on metagame composition and player preference than just "good people side more cards for combo decks." Take a look at the US nationals 2005 decklists for example and you'll see no sidedeck Neko Mane Kings: http://kperovic.com/metagame/yugioh2988.html?tabid=33&ArticleId=2839

 

Your Empty Jar argument makes a huge assumption that it is better than 50:50 vs a standard goat player who knows how to play vs it.

 

I agree with Syko that better players will play better vs combo decks than lousy players will and that takes away from combo's edge.

 

Their sideboards are also generally better. I'm pretty sure Neko Mane is not the only card (or even the best imo) to side vs Empty Jar. Look more carefully at the link and you will find: Cursed Seal, Curse of Darkness, Raigeki Break, general Beaters, Compulsory Evac Dev, Mind Crush, Chain Disappearance, Spell Cancellor, you get the point. I think these sides are far from perfect, but they are likely better than the average r1/r2/r3 opponent's. People were aware of Empty Jar for a few SJCs and they were probably using cards that also geared toward other combo decks, burn, and end of match procedure. Neko Mane is a bit of a one trick pony.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't see any reason to believe that. I guess it depends on how we define the word "prepared." I wasn't using it to mean "knows hows your deck works." I meant it more in the sense of "has stuff in their sideboard for it." And I think that's really more dependent on metagame composition and player preference than just "good people side more cards for combo decks." Take a look at the US nationals 2005 decklists for example and you'll see no sidedeck Neko Mane Kings: http://kperovic.com/metagame/yugioh2988.html?tabid=33&ArticleId=2839

 

While I was vending at YCS Miami, Gishki was at the maximum hype level, and lots of people were coming up to me to either tell me that they were running Gishki themselves or asking me about the deck. I know Billy Brake for example sided 1 Neko Mane King specifically for the deck. Other players just figured Gishki wasn't that great and decided to take their chances. But you'll notice that among the top decklists that we have from the event, he was actually the only one to make the top cut siding any copies of Neko/Droll & Lock: http://yugioh.tcgplayer.com/db/deck_search_result.asp?Location=2013%20YCS%20Miami

 

Good players often have the attitude that "once I'm 5-0 I'm very unlikely to play rogue combo decks anyways" and would rather just prepare for decks that they're more likely to face. I don't notice a lot of overpreparation for burn/combo/rogue by top players. If anything, I'd say they're more likely to underprepare. However, when I'm 1-0 at locals, I might have to worry about someone who's new to the game that randomly decided to side 3 dd crow 3 droll and lock bird because he thinks that "hand traps are cool" despite them actually being bad EV for the actual expected meta.

i was specifically referring to your post about burn, i dont know what a gishki is

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i didnt wanna start a shitstorm i just thought allen's post ironically over-simplified things. like it basically says if you run burn you win 80% vs 'unprepared' opponents, and win 20% vs 'prepared' opponents, but if you just run goat control you win 50% of the time. i'm not very good at math, but that seems like a silly thing to assume. much sillier to assume than my idea that players who perform well in yugioh tournaments have sideboards that are built better and counter a wider array of things than players who don't perform as well in yugioh tournaments.

 

i do appreciate the effort put into that post though and do think it makes quite a few good points in between all the funny shapes and graphs that ultimately do nothing more than express an opinion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I would also personally prefer to play a deck that does not lose to terrible bricking in a swiss tournament (the consequences of a loss in warring are much lower, all that generally "matters" in warring is beating the team, not going X-1). Even if the probabilities of a loss are the same, I would rather lose with my control deck because I made a misplay than a combo deck because I bricked.

And that is why you're bad. When you start caring about how you win, rather than just whether or not you win (within the rules of the game of course), you've entered into scrub territory. Enjoy your stay.

 

 

Can you not read? I said if the probabilities were the same.

 

At the end of the day, combo in yugioh (especially the era I was active during) usually throws a wrench into things by removing interaction but is not tier 0. Whenever it is outright better than the aggro/control/whatever decks then of course I would use it, but I probably wouldn't be playing that format much anyway.

 

I just don't see any reason to believe that. I guess it depends on how we define the word "prepared." I wasn't using it to mean "knows hows your deck works." I meant it more in the sense of "has stuff in their sideboard for it." And I think that's really more dependent on metagame composition and player preference than just "good people side more cards for combo decks." Take a look at the US nationals 2005 decklists for example and you'll see no sidedeck Neko Mane Kings: http://kperovic.com/metagame/yugioh2988.html?tabid=33&ArticleId=2839

 

Your Empty Jar argument makes a huge assumption that it is better than 50:50 vs a standard goat player who knows how to play vs it.

 

I agree with Syko that better players will play better vs combo decks than lousy players will and that takes away from combo's edge.

 

Their sideboards are also generally better. I'm pretty sure Neko Mane is not the only card (or even the best imo) to side vs Empty Jar. Look more carefully at the link and you will find: Cursed Seal, Curse of Darkness, Raigeki Break, general Beaters, Compulsory Evac Dev, Mind Crush, Chain Disappearance, Spell Cancellor, you get the point. I think these sides are far from perfect, but they are likely better than the average r1/r2/r3 opponent's. People were aware of Empty Jar for a few SJCs and they were probably using cards that also geared toward other combo decks, burn, and end of match procedure. Neko Mane is a bit of a one trick pony.

 

All of the cards that you named are a lot worse than Neko Mane King. Also I would be happy to play you in 2/3s with empty jar and you pick any sidedeck from anyone who topped US nationals as your side just to prove how wrong you are. Empty Jar is roughly 80/20 vs any of those sidedecks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i didnt wanna start a shitstorm i just thought allen's post ironically over-simplified things. like it basically says if you run burn you win 80% vs 'unprepared' opponents, and win 20% vs 'prepared' opponents, but if you just run goat control you win 50% of the time. i'm not very good at math, but that seems like a silly thing to assume. much sillier to assume than my idea that players who perform well in yugioh tournaments have sideboards that are built better and counter a wider array of things than players who don't perform as well in yugioh tournaments.

 

i do appreciate the effort put into that post though and do think it makes quite a few good points in between all the funny shapes and graphs that ultimately do nothing more than express an opinion.

It's an example to demonstrate a point. Obviously no one knows what the actual numbers are. Like I said earlier, I shouldn't even need to use numbers, as this is literally just common sense.

 

The original argument was:

Deck A and deck B are equally good (meaning they have the same average matchup vs the field). Deck A is higher variance. Conclusion, deck A is better in individual matches, and deck B is better in tournaments.

 

Pick whatever numbers you want. The argument is wrong regardless. That's all I'm trying to say; the argument isn't about any specific deck. It's not an opinion, it's a fact. I've been the only one of either side of the argument has provided any king of logic based on reasonable assumptions.

 

I agree that good players have sideboards that are "better", but "better" sideboards are often worse vs burn/combo. If you look at top8 decklists, you will notice a lack of hate for rogue combo decks. This is because people don't sidedeck for things that no one plays, and combo has been historically underplayed in yugioh. As you move up higher through the brackets, it's actually less likely that people are hating on decks that they think there is no one chance that will play.

 

We're assuming that people can play 3 different decks here. Combo, non-combo that sides for non-combo, and non-combo that sides for combo. If combo is a small percentage of the field, then you'll have a lot of non-combo vs non-combo matchups, where the person who choose to side for non-combo will be more likely to have the better record. Which is great if you're a combo player with a good record, as your chances of winning the tournament increase exponentially with each match win.

 

It's like imagine if you entered a rock/paper/scissors tournament and the field was 49% rock 49% paper 2% scissors. The higher you get in the bracket with scissors, the more likely you are to play against paper. Once you're 5-0 with scissors, you're statistically almost guaranteed to win the tournament.

 

Yes, obviously in real life there are a bunch of different possible sideboard compositions, but you'll notice that throughout SJC top8 lists, the people who make top cut consistently avoid siding for fringe combo decks, because they view it as a wasted slot. And they're mostly right for doing so.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i also disagree with the point that combo decks do better in smaller tournaments, the only tournament that a combo deck would have an increased advantage in would be if for some crazy reason the TO decided that it was to be 1/1 instead of 2/3. if you think a combo deck is the best choice in 3 rounds of swiss, you should also think it would be the best choice in 9 rounds of swiss as it is effectively just 3 3-round swiss tournaments combined into one.

 

while the best players in the format didn't really side cards that are outright anti-burn, they sided a lot of multi-use cards that are effective against a wide array of non-goat decks, because countering each one individually takes up too much room. if you sided 6 cards that completely destroy burn for example, you'd probably not lose to burn very often. but if you side 6 cards that are pretty solid counters to burn cards but are also pretty solid counters to a few other rogue matchups, you'd end up being more consistent and covering more ground, it would just take a little more luck and a lot more smart play.

 

cards like raigeki break, mobius, chiron, do this without being total bricks if you draw them in the wrong scenerio or your opponent sides stuff out, and they also do well against other rogue matchups that aren't burn. these are the cards i'm referring to, the ones that cover multiple matchups but probably are not going to be sided in against the mirror very often if ever.

 

i do see the point that your math represents and understand that you picked arbitrary numbers to put forth your point. that is, your numbers for burn and numbers for goat control even out over 10 rounds on average assuming 50% of the field is 'prepared' for your burn deck, and that if less than 50% is 'prepared' for your burn deck, on average you will have an advantage over the field.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and i also agree with you that the bias against combo decks, at least in the old era of yugioh, was a little bit strange to me. you could argue that the top players tested burn, empty jar, or whatever and decided that they were not as good or consistent as goat control with smart card choices, but i just don't think that that was the case. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not actually sure why yugioh players are so damn allergic to combo. I mean, i get that it's not everyones favorite deck to play vs or even play itself, but the amount of bitching from yugioh players when combo is present is unreal, especially when most yugioh combos are so damn weak, most of them only do well when they have the benefit of the unknown, but once people know whats going on they quickly fall apart as meta decks, and most of the time the best form of hate is likely something that is playable anyways.

Imo, combo decks generally arent good for the game. It essentially becomes a memorization fishbowl game. They generally require very little PvP interaction which isnt good for the game in general at least imo. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is because in yugioh

Combo = FTK/unfair or low payoff (mostly)
but we have had some what I would at least what I classify as combo decks.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like when combo decks are good and everywhere, no one has a problem with them. Nekroz is mostly a combo deck. Dragon Rulers was mostly a combo deck. TeleDAD was mostly a combo deck. DDT was mostly a combo deck.

 

It's funny how in Return DAD format people were bitching about Magical Explosion, Tundo loop, and Ohm FTK, but somehow the ability for the most popular deck to draw 8 cards and drop multiple DADs on t1 was perfectly fine. It seems that yugioh players only get upset when the combo deck that their opponent is playing is faster than the one that they are playing.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like when combo decks are good and everywhere, no one has a problem with them. Nekroz is mostly a combo deck. Dragon Rulers was mostly a combo deck. TeleDAD was mostly a combo deck. DDT was mostly a combo deck.

 

It's funny how in Return DAD format people were bitching about Magical Explosion, Tundo loop, and Ohm FTK, but somehow the ability for the most popular deck to draw 8 cards and drop multiple DADs on t1 was perfectly fine. It seems that yugioh players only get upset when the combo deck that their opponent is playing is faster than the one that they are playing.

I'm fine with combo decks that allow for PvP and in mirrors, will punish the less skilled player for playing the deck incorrectly. However, all of the bolded iirc, where inherently designed to limit PvP which isn't good for the game at all imo.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I would also personally prefer to play a deck that does not lose to terrible bricking in a swiss tournament (the consequences of a loss in warring are much lower, all that generally "matters" in warring is beating the team, not going X-1). Even if the probabilities of a loss are the same, I would rather lose with my control deck because I made a misplay than a combo deck because I bricked.

And that is why you're bad. When you start caring about how you win, rather than just whether or not you win (within the rules of the game of course), you've entered into scrub territory. Enjoy your stay.

 

 

Can you not read? I said if the probabilities were the same.

 

At the end of the day, combo in yugioh (especially the era I was active during) usually throws a wrench into things by removing interaction but is not tier 0. Whenever it is outright better than the aggro/control/whatever decks then of course I would use it, but I probably wouldn't be playing that format much anyway.

 

I just don't see any reason to believe that. I guess it depends on how we define the word "prepared." I wasn't using it to mean "knows hows your deck works." I meant it more in the sense of "has stuff in their sideboard for it." And I think that's really more dependent on metagame composition and player preference than just "good people side more cards for combo decks." Take a look at the US nationals 2005 decklists for example and you'll see no sidedeck Neko Mane Kings: http://kperovic.com/metagame/yugioh2988.html?tabid=33&ArticleId=2839

 

Your Empty Jar argument makes a huge assumption that it is better than 50:50 vs a standard goat player who knows how to play vs it.

 

I agree with Syko that better players will play better vs combo decks than lousy players will and that takes away from combo's edge.

 

Their sideboards are also generally better. I'm pretty sure Neko Mane is not the only card (or even the best imo) to side vs Empty Jar. Look more carefully at the link and you will find: Cursed Seal, Curse of Darkness, Raigeki Break, general Beaters, Compulsory Evac Dev, Mind Crush, Chain Disappearance, Spell Cancellor, you get the point. I think these sides are far from perfect, but they are likely better than the average r1/r2/r3 opponent's. People were aware of Empty Jar for a few SJCs and they were probably using cards that also geared toward other combo decks, burn, and end of match procedure. Neko Mane is a bit of a one trick pony.

 

All of the cards that you named are a lot worse than Neko Mane King. Also I would be happy to play you in 2/3s with empty jar and you pick any sidedeck from anyone who topped US nationals as your side just to prove how wrong you are. Empty Jar is roughly 80/20 vs any of those sidedecks.

 

 

I would run this:

 

[spoiler]
Jonathan La Bounty

 

Monsters: 18

 

Black Luster Soldier – Envoy of the Beginning

Chaos Sorcerer

Jinzo

Airknight Parshath

Tribe-Infecting Virus

Sinister Serpent

D. D. Assailant

Exiled Force

Morphing Jar

Blade Knight

D. D. Warrior Lady

Magician of Faith

Breaker the Magical Warrior

Kycoo the Ghost Destroyer

Don Zaloog

Apprentice Magician

 

Spells: 17

 

Pot of Greed

Graceful Charity

Delinquent Duo

Enemy Controller

Reinforcement of the Army

Heavy Storm

Snatch Steal

Lightning Vortex

Premature Burial

Mystical Space Typhoon

Swords of Revealing Light

Nobleman of Crossout

Book of Moon

Scapegoat

 

Traps: 5

 

Ring of Destruction

Torrential Tribute

Magic Cylinder

Call of the Haunted

Mirror Force

 

Side Deck:

 

Dust Tornado

Bottomless Trap Hole

Sakuretsu Armor

Ceasefire

Giant Trunade

Reinforcement of the Army

Scapegoat

Don Zaloog

D. D. Assailant

Mobius the Frost Monarch

Reflect Bounder

Sangan

[/spoiler]

 

In all seriousness, we should play like 3 g1's and 6 g2/g3's as an experiment. I think it would be fun.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i really think max's deck was close to 100% perfect main and side for that event. not sure what matchups he played during swiss but i know he tested extremely intensively vs all decks and even purposely tested A LOT against random opponents with random decks prior to that event

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i really think max's deck was close to 100% perfect main and side for that event. not sure what matchups he played during swiss but i know he tested extremely intensively vs all decks and even purposely tested A LOT against random opponents with random decks prior to that event

 

Max's deck isn't a terrible choice against Empty Jar, especially since he sides Raigeki Break, but LaBounty's running 2x RotA, 2x Don Zaloog and 3x Dust Tornado in main and side combined is better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not entirely sure where the discussion went, but was referred here by a friend. The OP was a good read; glad someone pointed those things out. I'll probably be playing exarion-less preCRV goats from now on

(I might have missed the developments: was this the general consensus going forward? Or did people more so seem to want to play with exarion and post CRV? Further, are people wanting to play no bans goats? Empty jar, burn all legal?)
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exarion Universe probably would've been restricted to 1 had it been released earlier.  It was a near-staple, so it was somewhat of a dominating strategy.  It's only weakness was the same opportunity cost most monsters had. 

 

As for how it affected the format, it gave Goat-Chaos both a DARK and a threat to worry about.  Widening the monster pool with a strong but balanced option is good though.

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.