• 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/
Jazz

How to Side in Goat Format

125 posts in this topic

RE: Goat Format compared to the history of Yugioh. The existence of similar tier structures doesn't necessarily imply anything about the effectiveness of specialists versus generalists.

 

With a smaller card pool you could argue that fewer specialists exist, and when they do they likely aren't as specialized. This favors generalists relative to other formats in the game's history. For example, we don't have the option to side cards like Vanity's Fiend that shut down decks that rely on special summons, because such options don't exist.

 

With a smaller card pool you could also argue that the decks themselves are less specialized compared to each other. This could favor generalists, but it could also favor specialists, or it could mean that many cards are both specialists and generalists. For example Trap Dustshoot works quite well against many different Chaos builds because they are all similarly constructed to each other.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ACP said:

The reason that I'm not really siding against Chaos has nothing to do with how good it is. It's the fact that there's not really a lot of cards that you can side against it that help that much. I do like the Creature Swap plan, but only if they don't play Goats. I do like the Dekoichi plan, but only if they run 3 Dekoichis. It's too list dependent. The only card that's really good against all builds of Chaos is Kycoo, which frankly I'm not sure if it's good enough to be worth it.

 

With burn on the other hand, we can sometimes take a matchup that we might be only 30% to win (if we didn't side at all) and instead turn it into one that we're 70% to win. In other words, there's a lot more reward in siding for this kind of matchup.

 

Your assertion that we should only side for decks that are "good" is both not backed by any reasoning and even has some pretty problematic logical consequences

Premise 1: We should side against decks that occupy a significant portion of the metagame and can be effectively countered via a sidedeck (because it makes our sidedeck cards high EV)

Premise 2: Decks that be easily countered from the sidedeck are worse than decks that cannot be easily countered from the sidedeck (obvious).

Restatement of premise 2: Decks that can be easily countered from the sidedeck are bad relative to their uncounterable counterparts.

Premise 1 + premise 2 implication: We should sidedeck against "bad" decks that occupy a significant portion of the metagame

Premise 3 (your permise): Sidedecking against good decks is better than siding against bad decks. This reaches a conclusion the opposite of the implication.

 

This is why it was quite uncommon to sidedeck much against X-Sabers in 2010. While X-Sabers were the "best deck", they were the best deck in large part due to the fact there were no sidedeck cards that effectively countered them. You could maybe play sidedeck cards that increased your matchup by a few percentage points, but you were just better off using that space to hard-counter a deck like Infernities instead.

 

You're right and I should have clarified what I meant by "good decks". When I say we should side against good decks, I'm talking about decks that are good pre-side. Burn is a perfect example of a deck that is good enough pre-side to be sided against yet is bad enough post-side not to be played.

 

Let's say our Goat Control deck wins against Chaos 30% of the time and against Monarch 70% of the time. Let's also say Chaos is 10% of the field and Monarch is 3% of the field. If we only take into account the odds of facing each deck, it wouldn't mathematically make sense to pick a card that improves our Chaos matchup by 12% over a card that improves our Chaos and Monarch matchups by 10%. However, if we factor in the quality of the decks, it would make a lot of sense because our Monarch matchup is already so good that we don't even need to side at all while our Chaos matchup is so bad that any additional boost would be valuable.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jazz said:

 

RE: Goat Format compared to the history of Yugioh. The existence of similar tier structures doesn't necessarily imply anything about the effectiveness of specialists versus generalists.
 

With a smaller card pool you could argue that fewer specialists exist, and when they do they likely aren't as specialized. This favors generalists relative to other formats in the game's history. For example, we don't have the option to side cards like Vanity's Fiend that shut down decks that rely on special summons, because such options don't exist.

 
With a smaller card pool you could also argue that the decks themselves are less specialized compared to each other. This could favor generalists, but it could also favor specialists, or it could mean that many cards are both specialists and generalists. For example Trap Dustshoot works quite well against many different Chaos builds because they are all similarly constructed to each other.

Here are some specialist cards that I think are worth considering right now:

- Gravekeeper's Spy/Guard (only aggro)

- Messenger of Peace (only aggro)

- Wave-Motion Cannon (only burn)

- Royal Decree (only burn + Last Turn)

- Neko Mane King (only Empty Jar)

- Mind Crush (only Empty Jar and Ben Kei)

 

In general, if a card in your sidedeck never comes in against control (whether it be Goats or Chaos), it's a specialist card, seeing as how Controls occupies 80%+ of the field. The control decks can't really be countered much by the sidedeck to begin with. So to me, I hardly see options other than siding our specialist cards. Against the decks that we can potentially neuter with our sidedeck, why not use the ones that give us autowins?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Ynusgridorh said:

 

You're right and I should have clarified what I meant by "good decks". When I say we should side against good decks, I'm talking about decks that are good pre-side. Burn is a perfect example of a deck that is good enough pre-side to be sided against yet is bad enough post-side not to be played.

 

Let's say our Goat Control deck wins against Chaos 30% of the time and against Monarch 70% of the time. Let's also say Chaos is 10% of the field and Monarch is 3% of the field. If we only take into account the odds of facing each deck, it wouldn't mathematically make sense to pick a card that improves our Chaos matchup by 12% over a card that improves our Chaos and Monarch matchups by 10%. However, if we factor in the quality of the decks, it would make a lot of sense because our Monarch matchup is already so good that we don't even need to side at all while our Chaos matchup is so bad that any additional boost would be valuable.

No no no, this is wrong.

 

Suppose there are only two decks in the meta, deck A and deck B. If you are equally likely to play against either of them, being 80% against one and 20% against another is no better or worse than being 50% against both. We're still just as likely to win overall.

 

Turning a 30% matchup into a 40% matchup is no better or worse than turning a 80% matchup into a 90% matchup. There's no such thing as a "matchup being too good to side for." The only time that we shouldn't side against a deck is under the circumstances that:

- It is such a small portion of the meta, that any matchup gains constitute a very small gain on the metagame as a whole

- There are no cards that can substantially shift the matchup in our favor, and thus the space is better dedicated towards the matchups that can be shifted

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that right now, without knowing the meta or what anyone is playing - or having an event to prep for to try to guess a meta - it's all just theory. And that's great. Jazz I think has a good overall approach if you're going into an event blind. I think that it plays to his particular playstyle and works for him. However, after an event I think it would be clear that it would have to change depending on what he saw. If it worked, great, but there's always changes to be made after an event.

 

Goat Format warring would be a good start. Hell any online organized tourney really.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd be keen to join something on ygopro or whatever other online shit is avaiable for this or pretty much any other pre-NECH format

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YGO pro isn't programmed correctly for goat format afaik

 

It's also just shit in general.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, welcometointernet said:

i'd be keen to join something on ygopro or whatever other online shit is avaiable for this or pretty much any other pre-NECH format

 

LackeyCCG and Duel Portal are the only viable options until Dueling Book is finished.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Gojira said:

YGO pro isn't programmed correctly for goat format afaik

 

It's also just shit in general.

It'd be nice to have an automated option, though. Some people just want to play a game without having to deal with all the manual BS. Plus automated makes it easier for mobile support. Isn't Salvation working on a Goat Format section?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Gojira said:

YGO pro isn't programmed correctly for goat format afaik

 

It's also just shit in general.

i'm pretty sure you can set the banlist to unlimited, theres no way to give turn player priority though currently right?

 

I've been playing a bit with a mate and its fucking awful, way too rigid. My main issues is not being able to turn the 180 second turn limit off online and no "takebacks" which really hurt when trying to learn/test stuff, as well as the constant prompts been fucking annoying. I understand if online play was ranked, but it makes it a really poor tool for testing or casual/friendly games. I'm actually convinced anyone who preferred dev/ygopro to DN is mentally deficient 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably preaching to the choir here tbh

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, welcometointernet said:

i'm pretty sure you can set the banlist to unlimited, theres no way to give turn player priority though currently right?

 

I've been playing a bit with a mate and its fucking awful, way too rigid. My main issues is not being able to turn the 180 second turn limit off online and no "takebacks" which really hurt when trying to learn/test stuff, as well as the constant prompts been fucking annoying. I understand if online play was ranked, but it makes it a really poor tool for testing or casual/friendly games. I'm actually convinced anyone who preferred dev/ygopro to DN is mentally deficient 

 

Salvation uses turn player priority but it has a bunch of other problems, one of them being the fact that the program gives away valuable information to the opponent by asking for an answer when the player has a chainable spell/trap and not asking for one when he doesn't. Bluffing is nearly impossible.

 

LackeyCCG is the best simulator for Goat Format right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ynusgridorh said:

 

Salvation uses turn player priority but it has a bunch of other problems, one of them being the fact that the program gives away valuable information to the opponent by asking for an answer when the player has a chainable spell/trap and not asking for one when he doesn't. Bluffing is nearly impossible.

 

Is this fixable?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Anteaus44 said:

Is this fixable?

 

No, according to one of Salvation programmers but yes, according to another one.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ynusgridorh said:

 

No, according to one of Salvation programmers but yes, according to another one.

Lmao go figure. Guess we play the waiting game for Dueling Book. 

 

Got a buddy coming over to play some IRL goats later that'll be fun anyway. Best way to play goats is tabletop IMO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2016 at 5:46 PM, Jazz said:

 

Let's clarify: All spy does is stall, and it does not do so very effectively against Zoo. I'd rather not depend on a card that can be banished Turn 1 by Nobleman. I'd rather not keep tribute monsters in my deck just to have synergy with Spy. I'd rather not depend on a card that the Zoo deck is equipped to out, because it runs Abyss Soldier, Mystic LV2, Exiled, Mobius, and 2 copies of Reinforcement of the Army.

 

In short, a line-up of DDA/DDA/DDWL is both more versatile and more effective than a line-up of Spy/Spy/Guard against Zoo. It works more reliably. It let's me play both ways. It works well against other major threats in the format like Dimension Fusion decks.

 

I've been beating them consistently by tsuk locking them. Flip monsters will allow you to win against any 1 summon beater per turn deck as long as you have spells and traps that can take care of their 1 monster every turn.

 

Tsukuyomi is imperial to my winning strategy: I reuse my flip monsters to outadvantage the opponent and win. It is the queen to my deck's strategy, one that was re-utilized with extreme success in Newgioh, a format similar to goat format, but much more aggro, and has been allowing me to crush beastdown easily and consistently without deviating too much from my goat control strategy. Understand that you are playing goat control; they are not. You play Tsukuyomi, one of the most powerful cards in the format. It allows you to reuse your advantage generating cards (weak flip monsters). When facing zoo, you should be siding defensive spells and traps that take care of their 1 beater a turn that they slap down onto the board. These defensive S/T allows you to protect your monsters (and your LP) while locking them and putting up damage each turn. 

 

SIDE NOTE: Notice I never attack through an unknown set with Tsukuyomi. The only time I would attack with Tsukuyomi is when I've already read his set [Ex: One of my airknight hits went through on the set, or one of my exarion's attacks went through the set into a mof when it was public knowledge he had Tsuk in hand. The latter of which doesn't occur vs beastdown, another reason why I believe goat mirrors are the most skillful.]

 

Regarding which S/T to side to protect your Tsuk locks with: Beating zoo is easy if you can take care of their 1 normal summon per turn. My main deck has 2x sakuretsu. I side 2 more Bottomless. I would never side a third sakuretsu. A first bottomless is better than a third sakuretsu because bottomless can catch breakers, and in this case, Abyss Soldiers. Because Sakuretsu can't respond to the summon, it has diminishing utility the more you have in a deck, even if you're siding against aggro beastdown. Anything past 2 Sakuretsu, Bottomless is better. 

 

 

Aside, spy would also be great against zoo. You are not seeing the synergy of the spy search into guard with the rest of the goat control strategy. The GK Guard is what makes the GK spy engine great vs zoo. 

 

Sample turn 1 me going first: Set spy, set 1 (Bom). End. 

 

Turn 2 opp playing zoo: Summons gorilla (their biggest beater), attacks into spy, I search guard. They set 1 (sakuretsu armor, lots of brainless zoo players play 3 lol)

 

Turn 3: I summon Tsuk (2 of in my goat control deck), set guard, flip Guard, and bounce gorilla, attack for 1000, leave spy in defense position [this is my wall for protecting my LP. I leave the Spy in defence mode] Note: I would attack with Tsukuyomi for 2100 total damage, if I have read the opp's set S/T as a non-destruction S/T. Set a defensive trap to protect my attack position guard (Remember, he has no monsters on field, the gorilla was bounced to hand. I just have to answer 1 beater to keep this Tsuk Lock going. Very predictable and definitely in the goat control player's favour). End. 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mustang what you say is true about winning via Flips, but what you propose to do is to contort your deck into something awkward and one dimensional in an all out attempt to accomplish that. You've also failed to mention the single most important card against aggro, TER. Siding in Spies/Guard, siding in Bottomless, leaving in Book, does nothing to make your TERs more effective. Not to mention that Book is mediocre in the aggro matchup, and Bottomless is an awkward card in the format in general. I also believe, from years of experience with the card, playing the Max Suffridge netdeck for long stetches of time, trying to adjust it for the Exarion era (see: the dgz goat tournament where I lost to pollutedxdelta), that Spy is quite simply an awkward card to use in a Goat deck. In a deck that wants to activate Scapegoat, that wants to play Meta, that wants to bring out another Spellcaster in TER, Spy is not really all that good. It has as much negative synergy with the deck as it does positive synergy with Book and Tsuk.

 

You and I take a very different approach to the Zoo matchup. Essentially my philosophy is to partially, but not fully, match the aggro deck's aggression. I believe this is essential when we think about the first card that comes out of everyone's deck in the matchup, pretty much without debate, Airknight Parshath. The fact that Airknight patently sucks in this matchup means we should take it out, but Airknight is also one of the lynchpins of the Goat deck. Taking it out and failing to swap in a functional replacement makes your deck one dimensional.

 

Essentially, you're saying you can't match aggression with an aggro deck, so you have to make your deck extremely passive and protective. I'm saying that in fact you can match their aggression, especially if you are smart about it and you pick your moments. Smart aggro, if you will, like TER. This gives me flexibility with how I can play on a turn by turn basis. I believe this in game flexibility is paramount to winning consistently against this deck, or any deck in the format for that matter. Kris Perovic once summarized his overall approach to how he plays the format as "tight yet aggressive." That's essentially what I'm talking about doing with this side strategy.

 

Now I've also had a bit of a change of heart over the past couple weeks. While I do believe the combination of DDA/DDWL/Dust/Seven Tools works quite well, there is perhaps a better card that was suggested to me by Kris via personal communication--Berserk Gorilla. So I've made the following change to my side: -1 DDA, -1 Goat, +2 Gorilla. As of now I'm keeping 1 DDA and 1 DDWL for aggro matchups, Dimension Fusion Turbo, and aggro OTKs like Ben Kei. DDWL being a LIGHT is also critical as I've stated before. I don't ever see myself removing it from my side in an environment that often warrants removing Airknights. I haven't had the chance to test this new version of the side yet, but it should essentially accomplish the same goals I've been striving to achieve, just more efficiently. When you think about it, the deck most vulnerable to Berserk Gorilla is actually Zoo. They run 5 monsters that can be taken out for a loss, and everything else trades with it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jazz said:

@Mustang what you say is true about winning via Flips, but what you propose to do is to contort your deck into something awkward and one dimensional in an all out attempt to accomplish that. You've also failed to mention the single most important card against aggro, TER. Siding in Spies/Guard, siding in Bottomless, leaving in Book, does nothing to make your TERs more effective. Not to mention that Book is mediocre in the aggro matchup, and Bottomless is an awkward card in the format in general. I also believe, from years of experience with the card, playing the Max Suffridge netdeck for long stetches of time, trying to adjust it for the Exarion era (see: the dgz goat tournament where I lost to pollutedxdelta), that Spy is quite simply an awkward card to use in a Goat deck. In a deck that wants to activate Scapegoat, that wants to play Meta, that wants to bring out another Spellcaster in TER, Spy is not really all that good. It has as much negative synergy with the deck as it does positive synergy with Book and Tsuk.

 

You and I take a very different approach to the Zoo matchup. Essentially my philosophy is to partially, but not fully, match the aggro deck's aggression. I believe this is essential when we think about the first card that comes out of everyone's deck in the matchup, pretty much without debate, Airknight Parshath. The fact that Airknight patently sucks in this matchup means we should take it out, but Airknight is also one of the lynchpins of the Goat deck. Taking it out and failing to swap in a functional replacement makes your deck one dimensional.

 

Essentially, you're saying you can't match aggression with an aggro deck, so you have to make your deck extremely passive and protective. I'm saying that in fact you can match their aggression, especially if you are smart about it and you pick your moments. Smart aggro, if you will, like TER. This gives me flexibility with how I can play on a turn by turn basis. I believe this in game flexibility is paramount to winning consistently against this deck, or any deck in the format for that matter. Kris Perovic once summarized his overall approach to how he plays the format as "tight yet aggressive." That's essentially what I'm talking about doing with this side strategy.

 

Now I've also had a bit of a change of heart over the past couple weeks. While I do believe the combination of DDA/DDWL/Dust/Seven Tools works quite well, there is perhaps a better card that was suggested to me by Kris via personal communication--Berserk Gorilla. So I've made the following change to my side: -1 DDA, -1 Goat, +2 Gorilla. As of now I'm keeping 1 DDA and 1 DDWL for aggro matchups, Dimension Fusion Turbo, and aggro OTKs like Ben Kei. DDWL being a LIGHT is also critical as I've stated before. I don't ever see myself removing it from my side in an environment that often warrants removing Airknights. I haven't had the chance to test this new version of the side yet, but it should essentially accomplish the same goals I've been striving to achieve, just more efficiently. When you think about it, the deck most vulnerable to Berserk Gorilla is actually Zoo. They run 5 monsters that can be taken out for a loss, and everything else trades with it.

 

Not making my deck awkward at all, I am simply playing goat control vs beastdown. I protect my advantage generating monsters while I handle the 1 threat zoo throws at me each turn using my spells and traps (these I can dig from my deck and outadvantage my opponent with my: Merchant Tsuk locks, Deko Tsuk locks, and Mof tsuk locks while not disrupting the flow of my original goat control strategy). 

 

First off, regarding bottomless, I was talking about siding vs zoo. That's why I quoted you before I began speaking. 

 

Secondly, you are way underestimating Bottomless in this matchup. Look at the monsters ran in zoo. Bottomless answers everything, minus exiled force. Bottomless is a much better side card than DDA, Dekoichis, etc. I am telling you that to answer zoo's pressure, all you need to do is use s/t to neutralize their monster threats. If you're looking for a side deck card vs zoo Bottomless is your best bet.  Answer each monster threat as it comes along, when it comes along. If you don't, that's one more attacker each battle phase trying to kill you. Don't even let their first attack go through. Protect your Tsuk locks. 

 

Now, regarding playing Gorilla against zoo, while it may be better than DDA, Dekoichi, etc, it is still not optimal. I am telling you; the best way to handle zoo is to to use S/T to answer their monsters, and use your monsters the way you intended them to in a game of goat control: for me, it is to tsuk lock. Don't try to handle their monsters with your monsters, it is not advantageous for you to do so. Have more destruction spells/traps. Remember: their deck is linear. Your deck is complex if you can set it up right. You have a higher ceiling, you just need to maintain control of the board.

 

Spare me that nonsense of playing beaters to attack their beaters, etc. Go look at all the zoo lists that are being posted on Nostalgic Duelists by all the plebs. They run Sakuretsu in 2s and 3s. You, as a goat control player, simply have less beaters than zoo does. All your gorillas will fall into their Sakuretsus. Your gorillas will stay on the field for less than a turn.

 

If you're going to play a 2000 stat monster, it would be Spy. Aside from it being able to set up the Tsuk Guard lock that puts up 1000-3300 damage per turn that I explained earlier. Spy gives your side decked goat control deck a way higher ceiling than Gorilla ever could. Plus when Spy and Gorilla are both played skillfully, it is much easier for a zoo deck to kill Gorilla than it would be to kill Spy.

 

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, you didn't even read my post, because you didn't respond to it. You simply restated what you said the post before. You haven't even talked about TER. The whole strategy revolves around TER, I can't make that any clearer.

 

Second, you clearly haven't even tried the strategy I proposed. Nor have most of the people in this thread to be honest, not trying to single you out. I've played a lot of games against Zoo the past 3 months. The criticisms ring fantastically hollow when they come from those who lack both experience and the ability to see things from a different perspective. Again, this is not only you.

 

Third, what are you going to do, never attack? You never want to attack with your TERs, your Tsuks, or your BLS? Are you only going to attack in games that you draw Heavy Storm for game? Or when you set up the all powerful Gravekeeper's Guard lock? Standard Goat also plays 2 Saku, doesn't mean we never want to attack it. You can generate advantage and pressure in battle against Zoo in much the same ways that you can against Goat. Just because they have 'more beaters than us' doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't use battle to our advantage.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While my DGZ account name is Mustang, my DN name is devanw123. I've been playing on average 300 goat games a month from 2014 to 2016 consistently. On DN I would exclusively be playing goat format against all contenders. I've been playing on average 10 games a day for 2 years. How long did goat format last again? 

 

Haven't been involved much in the DGZ forums, but you can bet I've read through all 60 pages of the goat control thread on DGZ. I'm dropping some knowledge tonight because I appreciate you putting in the work to develop the meta by making a goat control side deck list post. 

 

I am telling you: aggroing beastdown isn't the best tactic. You use your gorillas to protect your lifepoints, but they will be easily destroyed (DDs crashing into them, opposing gorillas, sakuretsu armors, mirror force). Any Gorilla/any aggro monster you side into your goat control deck vs beasts gives you minimal ceiling. What you want to be doing is comboing off with the cards that your protected Tsuk Locks generate. Each of your turns should bring you card advantage through effect. If you want to protect your LP and use a 2000 stat monster, Spy is better. Understand that when I talk about Spy, I am talking about the entire Spy/Guard/Tsuk engine. It is the best defensively, and offensively it has a ceiling that enables you to bounce a monster and put up 1000-3300 damage each turn - way higher a ceiling than a Gorilla ever could. 

 

It helps if you think of the matchup as two kingdoms at war: The Goat Control deck is the defender and the Beastdown deck is the attacker.  You own a gold mine, and the opponent is trying to destroy it, and then destroy you. The more turns you protect your gold mine, and harvest its resources, the stronger your empire becomes. That gold is the cards in your deck. Your flip effect monsters that you protect and combo with Tsukuyomi to reuse their effects, are your miners. The opposing kingdom doesn't have miners; it invests all its soldiers into attackers. They send 1 attacker per turn. If you can repel that 1 attacker each turn, and keep enabling your miners, the opponent will run out of resources AND you will outpace them.

 

If you're playing a goat control deck, stick to your strategy. Against beastdown (they want to kill you fast), wall up, protect your life points, and drag it into mid-game. Your 6 card opening hand won't offer you your decks most optimal plays. For beasts, that 6 card hand is their most optimal play. 

 

Don't normal summon your monsters to trade for their normal summoned monsters. Set your S/T for 1 for 1ing their beaters, all while you plus with your Tsuk locks, and setting up your BLS/TER play is what goat control does best. 

 

Beasts can't generate advantage. They want to destroy your monsters through each attack (-1 you) in their battle phase. If you can stop that from happening, they're only getting 1 card each turn off their draw phase. Does your goat control deck only get 1 card off your draw phase each turn? No. So protect your LP and drag the duel out. 

 

Just to clear the air, I AM dishing damage with this strategy. It puzzles me why you think I'm not. I am playing 3 metamorphasis; I am playing goat control. Goat decks vs Beastdown should wall the beaters, generate advantage, and then overwhelm them in the mid/late game. 11 cards on me vs 5 on him. My deck naturally has a higher ceiling, and now I have a vast amount of options. Easy to understand. 

 

Any flip monster, Tsuk, and battle trap vs Beastdown allows me to keep the lock going and +1 each turn while dealing out 1-2 direct attacks. As long as you can answer their beater after their MP1 and before your BP, you have a clear field for your floater to sink his teeth into. How many of Dekoichi's direct attacks does it take to win the duel? 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, before DN went down, my side was:
1 D.D. Warrior Lady
2 Dekoichi the Battlechanted Locomotive
1 Exiled Force
1 Gravekeeper's Guard
2 Gravekeeper's Spy
1 Jinzo
2 Messenger of Peace
1 Swords of Revealing Light
2 Bottomless Trap Hole
2 Trap Dustshoot

I never gave much thought to optimizing my side though, mostly because 1. most folks play me with regular Goats and 2. I generally rotate things in and out as I prepare for specific match-ups and metagames. So take this with a grain of salt because I always change my list depending on what I expect to play against.

Anyway, let me clarify a few things:
1. I think your focus on standard Beastdown is misplaced. My present side handles them without any issues, so I'm personally much more concerned about lists siding into Chaos or Goat Control. That's a real thing and oversiding can easily be your downfall in these matchups.
2. I also think your focus on Thunder Dragon Chaos is misplaced. That matchup is mostly about how well they draw and nothing you side deck will really change that. You can only make your bad draws better. Nevertheless if I knew I was playing vs. Thunder Dragon Chaos, I might side deck some Dekoichis and Smashing Grounds.
3. Better, more consistent variants of Chaos (i.e. Recruiter, pre-Exarion) can also transition side, making them unpredictable and difficult to side against. I'd love to see the gameplan for those kind of decks.
4. Has anyone taken the Beastdown concept, taken out the shitty Beasts, swapped in SWM and added BLS? Seems strong.
5. When I mentioned Gorilla, I only meant to say that it does everything you want DDA to do but better, not that it was itself the best answer to Beastdown. It's only okay in my view, and probably worse than Smashing Ground.
6. Solemns were the worst part of my Recruiter deck. I saw you referenced Solemn in another post, so I just want to address that. On the other hand, Dustshoot is the MVP of that deck. My most up to date Recruiter list uses a third Dustshoot and 2 Upstarts over the 3 Solemns I used vs. Allen.
7. Even if you had crafted the perfect "standard side," I don't think I'd abandon my practice of changing things up depending on what I expect to play against, so I'm not sure what value this offers to anybody except to folks who make a habit of frequently playing new, albeit experienced Goat players they know nothing about.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why it hasn't been mention yet but Royal Decree is a very good side deck card against Beastdown. It's incredibly hard for them to out TER, Tsuk and BLS without using their traps whereas you can easily stop their onslaught with Scapegoat and Spy.

 

@Mustang Your post are unecessary long. Please shorten them up.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ynusgridorh said:

 

@Mustang Your post are unecessary long. Please shorten them up.

Negged for this part. There's nothing wrong with his posts just because he gives reasoning for his views: more people should do that actually 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mark said:

Negged for this part. There's nothing wrong with his posts just because he gives reasoning for his views: more people should do that actually 

That's not the probleme here. Like @Jazz pointed out, he's saying the same thing over and over again. There's no need to do that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@OD Superman I don't think your side is adequate against beatsdown decks that side cards like Mystic Swordsman. Personal opinion from playing that kind of side myself. Your strategy is just as much oversiding if not more considering the narrow use of cards like messenger, swords, bottomless, and to an extent the spy engine.

 

You're right about conversion sides being perilous. The best "strategy" I could think of is to play in a tournament that allows decks like Burn, which effectively disincentivizes playing decks that convert from one standard build to another.

 

Against Recruiter, a deck that I know converts to Goat, I'd probably side Dekoichis for Exarions and leave it at that.

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.