- Minimania - Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 Previously, the three main relevant decks were Shaddolls, Burning Abyss, and Satellars. Shaddolls are still relevant, but have almost fallen off themselves, Burning Abyss are definitely still relevant, but are overhyped, just like Sylvans were, but Satellars aren't seeing any play anymore. With the arrival of new Burning Abyss, Qliphort and Nekroz, I think it's safe to say that Satellars fell off.What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo. Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 Satellars are still very good, i think they're a bit of an hidden gem of the meta. They didn't get touched yet, and they are still very fast and powerful. But no one plays them anymore, because of Satanic machines and Old monsters fanatics (respectively qliphorths and necloths) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 I also suspect that Qlips running Skill Drain and such is problematic for Satellars. Burning Abyss isn't as badly demolished by Drain, but Satellars almost insta-die to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 You cannot compare burning abyss to Sylvans. One of them thrives in consistency, the other is inconsistent as fuck. BA aren't "overhyped", they are legitimately stupidly good. I never thought Satellars were that good, anyways. Yeah, trihiver or whatever it's called is amazing, but it's hardly enough to sell running the deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
- Minimania - Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 BA aren't "overhyped", they are legitimately stupidly good.Really? Here's BA in a nutshell: Turn 1 Dante, set some cards end turn. Opponent usually can't get over Dante. Turn 2, push for game with virgil, or second Dante.I understand Skill Drain and Vanity's screw over Satellars, but don't they also screw over Lightsworn? If so, then why are Lightsworn still so relevant, yet Satellars see such little play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 Really? Here's BA in a nutshell: Turn 1 Dante, set some cards end turn. Opponent usually can't get over Dante. Turn 2, push for game with virgil, or second Dante. I understand Skill Drain and Vanity's screw over Satellars, but don't they also screw over Lightsworn? If so, then why are Lightsworn still so relevant, yet Satellars see such little play? If they can consistently drop Dante and possibly Virgil T1, have a plethora of traps on backup, and consistently win, how is that overhyped? You're not even making a good point. "They have a standard set of early plays and can win in 2 turns, THEY SUCK!!!!!11!1!!1!" LS are still relevant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 If Lightsworn are relevant, it's because they're a budget Deck due to the Structure Deck. Literally, 3 of the Structure Deck can give you a very solid Lightsworn Deck that you'll barely even need to tweak. The damn thing comes with Judgment Dragon, Lyla, Lumina, the Tuners, etc. Burning Abyss, Qlip, and Satellars are NOT budget Decks by any stretch of the imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newhat Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 TCG doesn't have Rhongomiant. I don't know how much of a difference that makes, but Trap Stun into Soul Charge into Rhongomiant is hard to overcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 The only out I can think of for a full 86 is Lava Golem... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
- Minimania - Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 If they can consistently drop Dante and possibly Virgil T1, have a plethora of traps on backup, and consistently win, how is that overhyped?It's not that hard to beat it. It's just that it's hard for the rest of the meta (net Lightsworn, which is always relevant, just because of budget ^ ) to combat it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 LS aren't relevant and never will be. Budget is not a valid argument as the top tables will never care about budget. LS are rogue at absolute best. You clearly don't even understand WHY BA is good. It can run a plethora of chainable power traps without losing advantage to it, and has lots of easy to drop monsters. You can freely put Xyz and Virgil onto the board while also having PWWB, Karma Cut, Vanity's, Fire Lake, etc. to back them up. It IS very difficult for most decks to force their way through all that. They are not overhyped. They are the best deck, that is all. You can't compare them to Nekroz or anything like that yet as they don't co-exist truly. And Dolls even have a slightly favorable matchup against BA, so your point that only LS can combat it is incorrect. Dolls just aren't as power creeped as BA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 For the record, my statement that LS is relevant on the basis of budget is just me theorizing the reason why they possibly see play in tournaments despite their vulnerabilities: They're an easier Deck to construct and still see good results. I am not familiar with the current meta, so I made my statement purely with the assumption that "LS are relevant" is a true statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 LS will always be relevant, because they will always have the capability to sack their way to winning games they had no business with. Unfortunately, being so luck based is also a weakness, not to mention the tons of side cards that ruin their day. Satellaknights are ridiculous, assuming you let them get something off, they get free advantage from everything and can ensure a play turn after turn. The issue here is that many decks are now running traps that cut them off hard, and, as Mr. Robin points out, BAs can do so while avoiding the discard "costs" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted January 2, 2015 Report Share Posted January 2, 2015 Only thing I dislike about Satellars is that bounce effect of Trihever because it is borderline idiotic. Other than that, Satellars don't really have any substance. Yes, they have consistency going for them, but their consistency levels aren't good enough to match the levels of Shadolls and Burning Abyss (not forgetting to say that both Decks have their own issues, specifically dying to many common sides and Burning Abyss Decks are so fragile that even having a Token on their side of the field prevents them from making a majority of their plays not named Tour Guide). Really, everybody that played Satellars jumped ship to Qliphorts since they are unfair to face off against with a face-up Skill Drain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted January 3, 2015 Report Share Posted January 3, 2015 Satelars just don't do -enough-. Yeah, having a string of +1s among other things, especially Trihiver, is really nice. But they can't grind advantage as well as BA, can't push games easily like Shaddolls, or be anything close to Qlip. They're outpaced, outadvantaged, and outgrinded by the top 3 decks, and with the quality of their support worsening, yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.