Welche the crab Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 http://articles.alterealitygames.com/?p=9118 Shut up and read the article. It's actually pretty interesting IMO. What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I have a personal policy upon this stuff. I make all competitive decks as competitive as they can, ignoring my internal screams to try to throw Debris or Gold Sarc in Inzektors and be original. But, when making non-competitive decks (and over 90% of my decks are these,) I always try to be as original as I can. For instance, I always try personal techs in my Gradius, Divine Wind Black Garden, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Why do they have to be absolutely seperate? .~. Honestly, I'm constantly trying to improve my Fableds to both be more original and competitive. I try different techs to see what works better. On the other hand, why would you go I RUN BAD VARIANT CUZ FUN. I mean, you could have a few lulzy techs, but... Nothing that'll truly hamper you. But you should still try to make it your own, per se. Granted, I'm by no means a great player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airride Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I play fairly original and non-dominant decks(Like evols) that are still powerful and can wreck many cards in the meta. RABBIT NEEDS TO DIE RIGHT NOW, BTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welche the crab Posted January 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Actually all the articles on this site are pretty good. I plan to become better at the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazooie Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Like with Black, I don't like the whole, "THE TWO MUST NEVER CROSS" mindset. I mean... One of my favorite things to do when I DO play is mess around with Agents. I love Agents and all their variants. I started with Pure Agents, which went horrible, then learned about T.G. Agents and I adored them... Until my bad luck started kicking in. After that, I tried a deck most wouldn't think about, Agent Monarchs. While it isn't "TIER BROKEN" it can win. When my luck worked out, I've beaten Inzektors with it, Sams, Blackwings, Rabbit before. It was a fun deck that started out as a fun idea that was actually sorta usable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 [quote name='Ignis Clover' timestamp='1326518232' post='5763597'] Like with Black, I don't like the whole, "THE TWO MUST NEVER CROSS" mindset.[/quote] It's not that they should never cross, it's just that competitive decks and non-competitive decks have completely different objectives - purely winning and purely enjoying. They generally don't cross, but when they do, I try to put it to full use. For instance, I'm trying T.G. Wind-Up Agent Inzektors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welche the crab Posted January 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I think the key he was trying to put forth is that you generally have to decide between topping a high level tournament and using the deck which will make you seem creative. Let's look at Shard for example. He runs Inzektor's this time, DWs last time and he plans on running WUs next time. He isn't trying to be a hipster like most YCMembers. He is trying to play the meta. He wants to win. Sure you will say "oh but hur dur i beat people with my creative deck" but you are likely not going to win something like YCS with it unless as the article says you thought out your match-ups quite well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Crouton Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 There's original, there's competitive, then there's fun. I like fun decks. I don't like auto-pilot like 6Sams, or decks that create broken combos, but automatically lose if you get a bad hand. Originality is irrelevant. As long as you're having fun with the deck you're running, and it can stand up against competitive decks, whether yours is competitive or not, and runs consistently, that's all that matters. I play Monster Mash because of my experiences with bad hands and dead draws, and Monster Mash can go off with pretty much any starting hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 [quote name='~King Crouton~' timestamp='1326524549' post='5763683'] There's original, there's competitive, then there's fun. I like fun decks. I don't like auto-pilot like 6Sams, or decks that create broken combos, but automatically lose if you get a bad hand. Originality is irrelevant. As long as you're having fun with the deck you're running, and it can stand up against competitive decks, whether yours is competitive or not, and runs consistently, that's all that matters. I play Monster Mash because of my experiences with bad hands and dead draws, and Monster Mash can go off with pretty much any starting hand. [/quote] Agreed, mostly. Lately, I've preferred using decent level casual Decks, like my Photon Sanctuary Deck. It can beat strong Decks, but it can just as easily lose to them. But in the end: It's not a top-tier Deck. It's a fun Deck that doesn't make me feel ill for winning against other players. Because how can you feel ill when you win using Galaxy-Eyes Photon Dragon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I always try and make something original, provided, I succeed at making it efficient enough to where it can win with amazement to my Opponent, and how they lost to something ridiculous but also hilariously consistent. .... The "secret" is you pretty much end up having to run Rabbit :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Fascist Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I find being conpetetive at any game fun. So it's only natural I want to win in the fastest way possible, which now turns out to be lolwinduploop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanAtlus Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 >Banlist pulverises all broken meta. >No new broken meta comes out. Problem? Broken meta is nearly never pulverised by banlists. New broken meta keeps coming out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I enjoy winning about as much as playing the game itself, tbh. I think I've got to the point that every deck I make has to be as competitive and consistent as possible, but that doesn't necessarily mean I won't try techs, I'd just usually not consider them straight away. The two can cross, but with the current metagame that's highly unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I think it's appropriate for the hipster to step in here. flargleflargle. Right, originality has only ever meant anything when it is a good deck. Simple as. Whether it be full-on using a weird deck to simply running a strange tech, originality will always be praised in the YGO community (providing it's fairly intelligent or something). Ultimately, being original is just fun, as explained in the OP article (which was a great read, by the way). Also, the concept of originality and competitiveness being a variable factor on a scale is true. Balancing the two is important. Not to mention that the balance is subtly different between competitive and casual play. I would still classify YCMLS as casual play, despite the prizes and tournament structure. It's not anything on YCS level anyway. That way, most people aren't as afraid to run strange original decks. In a YCS, much more so. Originality means something when that deck does something. I've recently seen people side stranger cards like Ally of Justice Quarantine as another alternative to the much more popular Leeching the Light. It certainly picked up my attention as a tech, as it is a good effect within a body. Lastly, originality should have a reason. It shouldn't be for the fact that you like the originality. Of course, it can be for that reason but that's a secondary choice to the efficiency of the originality. The random T.G. deck that popped up a while ago is a great example. It had some very good match-ups and was ultimately a rogue deck that was both consistent and unexpected. Why it started failing after a while is because it became a meta deck and people were aware of it. T.G.s slipped down on the originality scale, per say. Anti-Meta has always been the ultimate original hipster deck. It's been designed to have good match-ups against most meta decks yet it isn't one itself. It's hard to counter as it's been designed to be hard to counter against. And, it's extremely diverse. Techs can go rampant in anti-meta, not to mention the sheer number of playable variants; and it shifts focus each time a new meta deck comes out, so it's nearly always new. Oh, of course, originality is dependent on the current format, and how much competitiveness is an allure to you. If a meta is extremely overwhelmed by 1 or 2 decks, your best bet is to simply go for a deck that can either beat those decks or is one of those decks. Don't use that opportunity to test out a deck which probably has bad match-ups against those decks. Just wait for a chance, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeal Ascendant Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Since I'm very bad at the game and usually don't win against good players even with competitive decks, I find it more enjoyable to try and find new deck ideas or try creative things than to make a cookie-cutter meta deck. Still, it can get fun using a really broken deck (coughwindupscough). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkwolf777 Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Synchros and Xyz need to die. The game was much more enjoyable back then. As for the topic at hand, I haven't touched a meta deck at all (except Inzectors which I was thinking "a new insect archetype, i want in on that!"), but there's no way i can expect to win in any tournament, and not necessairly through lack of skill or deck buliding, but there are just generally better things that some ideas just can't keep up with the meta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeezus Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 [quote name='darkwolf777' timestamp='1326544986' post='5763767'] Synchros and Xyz need to die. The game was much more enjoyable back then. [/quote] except the best format we've ever had was based around Synchros Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkwolf777 Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 [quote name='Kyosuke Kiryu' timestamp='1326545080' post='5763770'] except the best format we've ever had was based around Synchros [/quote] The best format you ever had, maybe. Then again, I'm not a tourney person, I can't judge a format I hardly take part in, especially not competetively, but generally considering everyone else is usually pretty competetive about it, It may as well be that I was in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shonenhikada1 Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Inzektors need to get hit. Hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brinolovania Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I'd love to be able to make an original, not terrible deck. But whenever I try to, I end up frustrated when the deck sucks because I like winning too much. But I also don't like to use really mainstream top decks (and I can't afford them IRL anyway). That doesn't really matter as I don't go to tournaments higher than Regionals, but still. This topic has inspired me to go find a random deck O made on DN and coolify it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 There are plenty of choices for how you can make a deck. 1. You can make it outright competitive. 2. You can make it outright original. 3+. You can make it anywhere in between. That's what I've always seen anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welche the crab Posted January 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I think the key to this article is not classifying them as two opposing ends, but more so explaining how to be creative and competitive and he makes a really good argument. You need to read the meta. You can't be like me and just pick a random deck like Ojamas and be like hur dur I'm running these lol. You need to actually look at the meta and do what Jesse does, thinking about how a decks match ups will be against the top decks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 I just play what I like and never base it on its competitivness. The best part about this game (and most other games) is that the meta constantly evolves. This rewards those who be original (while still running a good deck). If you netdeck or continue to run the same thing then you'll be left behind. Gotta run, but I'll finish reading that article. =3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted January 14, 2012 Report Share Posted January 14, 2012 Like what Black said, I try to be as competive and original as possible. Exactly how many people would tech Deep-Sea Diva in Gishkis anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.