Magnet Zakame Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Card Advantage is not the key to good decks, nor winning. You are unintelligent and are equivalent to a sheep if you cannot see this. To anyone who wants to argue, Chain Burn wins quite often, yet you lose "card advantage" every time you play a card. Even Agents, whom gain a lot of "card advantage" lose to them, and easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Nu-13 Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 I always disliked "card advantage" whores. Who cares about -2ing yourself when it puts you on an edge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [IMG]http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080516020714/yugioh/images/b/b8/ArcanaForceXXI-TheWorldLODT-EN-UR-1E.png[/IMG] -2 to skip directly to your next turn wins gaems:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 If card advantage was the only good thing Synchros and Xyzs would be crap due to being a -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 It depends on what you're sacrificing card advantage for. Foolish Burial is a -1, but it's a fantastic card that gets your Graveyard set up for bigger plays. Chain Burn is an exception because while they lose card advantage, they also replenish their resources and thin the deck, which can lead to more burn plays and win the game. Card advantage isn't something to be OBSESSED over, but it shouldn't be disregarded. Running cards that set you back numerous cards for small, if any, gain are just not worth running. The more conditional cards are just as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.B X Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Wait, do you guys like Card Advantage or Hate it? Am confused here, is this a game? Yes it is. Do you want to win? Yes most people like winning. Well, then you like Card Advantage, when you have advantage over your opponent you are winning. But, its not the only way to win. You can still win even if you lose advantage. Its a game of luck, probability, skill and most importantly FUN! Whats the point of winning ANY game if your not having a good time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Lightray Daedalus- Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='M.B X' timestamp='1317522789' post='5554064'] Whats the point of winning ANY game if your not having a good time? [/quote] Unfortunately...competitive Game is not about fun is about winning... so Casual FTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 The faster you win the less important card advantage is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Mage Jacksonworth Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 So many nigs saying "it doesn't win the game but it helps" and yet, don't have an answer to the key to winning, and therefore have nothing to compare what is beneficial and what is not, so they know nothing and their opinions are s*** because they have no support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDDRodrigo Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1317523228' post='5554091'] The faster you win the less important card advantage is. [/quote] Summed up pretty well. You need to keep the balance. If there's a card that will decrease your card count, but will highly increase the chances of you winning, run it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Mage Jacksonworth Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1317523228' post='5554091'] The faster you win the less important card advantage is. [/quote] people can win in a few turns, but the question is why do they win. Obviously, losing life points, or completing one of the win conditions, but what is the underlying reason they were capable of completing one of those conditions while the opponent does not? Simply your statement is "card advantage is not an unconditional key to victory". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='Ser Mage Jacksonworth' timestamp='1317523616' post='5554118'] people can win in a few turns, but the question is why do they win. Obviously, losing life points, or completing one of the win conditions, but what is the underlying reason they were capable of completing one of those conditions while the opponent does not? Simply your statement is "card advantage is not an unconditional key to victory". [/quote] Obviously, the key to winning is making alts. It generates massive +'s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Mage Jacksonworth Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 winning what exactly? yugioh? alts do not effect the game conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SySV9xBU6M You really don't need Card Advantage to win so as long as you got the power of VGMs. Situational cards don't win games, but the cards and plays that are easier and more rewarding, however, do. It not just only matters how fast you win, but how certain your win is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Mage Jacksonworth Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='ZeroChill' timestamp='1317524383' post='5554169'] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SySV9xBU6M[/media] You really don't need Card Advantage to win so as long as you got the power of VGMs. Situational cards don't win games, but the cards and plays that are easier and more rewarding, however, do. It not just only matters how fast you win, but how certain your win is. [/quote] Why do cards that are "easier" win more often? Celtic Guardian, drop it, easy. does he win games when the opponent has Thunder King Rai-Oh to crush his b**** ass? define "rewarding", you seem to be vague here. certainty in winning, how can you be sure? I mean, you cannot deny the moment you look upon a field, and can decipher who will win just by what is placed on the board, what the conditions are, but how do you judge so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CNo.101 S.H. Death Knight Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='Ser Mage Jacksonworth' timestamp='1317524838' post='5554188'] define "rewarding", you seem to be vague here. certainty in winning, how can you be sure? I mean, you cannot deny the moment you look upon a field, and can decipher who will win just by what is placed on the board, what the conditions are, but how do you judge so? [/quote] he means how much pluses will the plays benefit or rather produce. but also depending on the plays give you certainty in winning are the plays that iare tight and less vulnerable to screw up or rather, endless. Ot: i don't disregard card advantages, depending on the minuses that will give you profit or edge of the game afterward. like Evilfusion stated cards that deem to be -1 or more can turn out good in bigger plays. why you think cards that some -1 cards are limited and such? like foolish burial for example why they limit it? because it bring out plays much faster duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='Ser Mage Jacksonworth' timestamp='1317524838' post='5554188'] Why do cards that are "easier" win more often? Celtic Guardian, drop it, easy. does he win games when the opponent has Thunder King Rai-Oh to crush his b**** ass? define "rewarding", you seem to be vague here. certainty in winning, how can you be sure? I mean, you cannot deny the moment you look upon a field, and can decipher who will win just by what is placed on the board, what the conditions are, but how do you judge so? [/quote] What factors are considered here are the ratios between how manageable a card is to bring out compared to how well it benefits the user. Using your example of Celtic Guardian vs. TK Rai-Oh, they both are of the same ease to bring out. That gives both at a balanced start. However, TK Rai-Oh is more beneficial because: 1) 1900 > 1400 generally 2) TK Rai-Oh can stop your opponent from adding any essential cards from their Deck to hand while Celtic only has support, but the support is not as easy to use as TK Rai-Oh's ability. 3) TK Rai-Oh can stop potential game-changing summonings all for the cost of itself while Celtic is just a Normal monster. While my description of "rewarding" is vague, you cannot disagree that, unless if your opponent has a counter, Judgment Dragon's field destruction will cripple your opponent and have the duel fall into your favor. Rewarding isn't solely judged by Card Advantage, but by how well you use your advantage. Like you said as the TC, Card Advantage is for the ignorant. What is the point of gaining Card Advantage if none of it will help you win the duel? That advantage is considered "unrewarding" because it doesn't help you win. However, if you use what little advantage you have and make game-changing plays, that advantage you have is considered "rewarding" Certainty in winning can be fickle, especially when your opponent topdecks a winning card. However, if one player's side of the field has a powerful monster(s) and heavy control of the playing field and their opponent is unable to counter the plays of the opposing player, then it is certain that victory is more than very plausible for the duelist with the most control of the field. Even then, luck can be a cruel mistress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Mage Jacksonworth Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 @Corbenik you say screw up, as though there is some "formula" to winning. By means, if you can say "screw up", then you should know this formula that you can compare an action to screwing-up. so, tell me the formula to efficiency in winning, if you would be so kind, I've been looking for this answer for such a long time. As for benefiting, benefitting his condition to win yes? Well, if you know the formula to efficiency, then you can also answer me what is beneficial to winning in this game, I do not have an answer to this myself. @ZeroChill: I then apply Axe of Despair to my Celtic Guardian, so that Thunder King Rai-Oh cannot defeat it. And then also, I can get passed it simply with Smashing Ground, but why do I need to get passed it? If I need to get passed it, my only conclusion is that its effect is either inhibiting my ability to win, or that its presence too. its presence stemming from my need to direct attack. But, attacking so that the opponent's life points become 0 is only 1 of the 3 game conditions for winning, card effect, life point, or decking out. So then, the formula to winning, could it be perhaps not 1 but multiple? And again, you will find that each can be inhibited by elements that take out the other conditions, such as effect veiler stopping Morphing Jar from decking you out, or stopping a monster from growing exponentionally to the point where you cannot remove it and attack directly through usual means. So, if they can be thwarted by a common resource, they must share something in common. what could that be? Also, comes the question of the Tic-Tac-Toe effect, and how it applies to this game. As for your Judgment Dragon example, define how it cripples the opponent, I'm not quite sure how it does so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Crouton Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Summoning Machina Fortress from the hand causes you to lose 2 cards (unless you're an idiot and dump Machine-Types OTHER than the Fortress your attempting to summon), and 1-2 cards to revive it. It's worth it for a 2500 ATKer that even if my opponent gets over, they lose a card as well. Gadgets try to make sure you have enough targets to revive it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.B X Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Is it just me, or is the TC trolling us. loI I mean he barely made an appearance xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CNo.101 S.H. Death Knight Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='M.B X' timestamp='1317527585' post='5554275'] Is it just me, or is the TC trolling us. loI I mean he barely made an appearance xD [/quote] I'm in-between of that thought atm. @Ser - I dunno if you're trolling or something but many decks have a "formula", you say, of their own plays to be structured differently in to order to brought out but tight and less vulnerable plays is to depend on the outcome of your opponent's state when stated that both players conditions are neutral atm. A deck with no directions of winning in some plays will falter eventually. But if this "formula" is not what you mean then define what you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Does anyone remember when we used to LIKE Mage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='Ser Mage Jacksonworth' timestamp='1317526518' post='5554239'] @ZeroChill: I then apply Axe of Despair to my Celtic Guardian, so that Thunder King Rai-Oh cannot defeat it. And then also, I can get passed it simply with Smashing Ground, but why do I need to get passed it? If I need to get passed it, my only conclusion is that its effect is either inhibiting my ability to win, or that its presence too. its presence stemming from my need to direct attack. But, attacking so that the opponent's life points become 0 is only 1 of the 3 game conditions for winning, card effect, life point, or decking out. So then, the formula to winning, could it be perhaps not 1 but multiple? And again, you will find that each can be inhibited by elements that take out the other conditions, such as effect veiler stopping Morphing Jar from decking you out, or stopping a monster from growing exponentionally to the point where you cannot remove it and attack directly through usual means. So, if they can be thwarted by a common resource, they must share something in common. what could that be? Also, comes the question of the Tic-Tac-Toe effect, and how it applies to this game. As for your Judgment Dragon example, define how it cripples the opponent, I'm not quite sure how it does so. [/quote] There is a reason why you need to get past it. Generally, the goal of your monsters are to provide primary shielding of your life points against your opponent's battling monsters while being the general forces that accomplish the general win condition (life point). Getting past Rai-Oh is no different exception. However, in Rai-Oh's case, he poses a good threat to the opposing player's (usual) win condition because of both his effects can stop the opposing player from not only adding cards they need to win to the hand, but can stop Summons that would bring your opponent closer to winning. If you can defeat Rai-Oh, then you just cleared away a roadblock in your path. Such as is with any monster, though there are conditions, natural by self effect/control of field and artificial by boosts and protection, that can prove to be more dangerous roadblocks. In the general case, Rai-Oh proves to be more of a dangerous roadblock than Celtic Guardian for the reasons already stated in my last post. There are multiple formulas to winning. If there is a situation that makes it much more difficult or impossible to use your general win condition, then you need to find another way to win. Veiler stopping Morphing Jar generally can prevent your opponent from decking you out, thus you may be able to stay in the game. However, if your opponent re-sets and flips Morphing Jar, but you have nothing to stop it with, then you will deck out and lose in that same situation. You see, a good deck should have an alternate win condition that compliments their general win condition. It is why Decks that predominately run DARK monsters like Dark Worlds or Blackwings and have Effect Veilers can use Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning and Chaos Sorcerer. In case if the Dark Worlds' or Blackwings' general win conditions fail, they will at least have those two monsters as an alternate win condition to fall back on. Actually, all decks have something in common: they all rely on bringing out their best cards to win the duel. This is usually done with summoning high-leveled monsters and decimating your opponent's cards so that their attacks will go through for the win. That means that all decks are, to an extent, thwarted by the same cards such as Dark Hole, Heavy Storm, Royal Oppression (banned), and other destructive or controlling cards. However, what makes a deck good is how well they recover from being thwarted. Judgment Dragon can generally cripple your opponent by destroying all of their on-field resources if your opponent could not counter it. It is because of this reason why Judgment Dragon, and Lightsworns in general, were a scourge of the meta in '08-'10 (they can destroy their opponent's resources while increasing their own resources and make big plays very rapidly). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CNo.101 S.H. Death Knight Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 [quote name='evilfusion' timestamp='1317528000' post='5554286'] Does anyone remember when we used to LIKE Mage? [/quote] that's why i feel that we're been trolling by his statements (which sadly i dunno if his english structure is bad or the concept is being vague there ) @ser - do explain your definition of "screw-up" if your common sense allow you to. if you can't it doesn't worth the while of your "overcomplication' of debating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeezus Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Yeah card advantage is probably the most important thing. The example this guy used was a burn deck, which is an anomaly. Use your brain guise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.