Klav Rambles: "Autopilot"

[CLG Klavier]

So I saw a few comments, sometimes on here, sometimes on YGOrganization and places like that among lines of:

 

Wow, Nekroz and Dolls are so skilless, no wonder those players don't play [rogue deck X], seems too much for their little brains.

 

So we arrive at the everpresent word "autopilot". Top tier decks are usually called that. But what is autopilot supposed to mean? Because decks sure as hell don't play themselves. When they do, let me know so I can win an YCS without doing a thing. Yes, it's true that top decks usually have a few specific lines of play that players always do, so it looks autopilot to an outsider. I mean, how much thinking does Brionac -> Clausolas -> Mirror/Cycle require in Nekroz?

 

Most people don't realize that it's exactly that what makes a deck good: coherent, strong lines of play that are easy to execute often. However, a Nekroz player will usually know it's not so easy every game. There are other variables in other Nekroz monsters like Trishula, Gungnir etc. and usually you gotta decide on the spot which is the most correct play. Same for Ritual Beasts. Yeah, there is that one "autopilot" combo where you end up with 2 searches from Ulti-Cannahawk. It's not gonna work always, but it works more often than not and it's a sequence you can remember. Hence outsiders calling it "autopilot".

 

Same for rogue decks. Sure, maybe Fluffals aren't that easy to play on the first go, but after you get a hang of it after a few games, some lines like popping Toy Vendor with Tiger on turn 1 become obvious to you...and might look like "autopilot" to someone spectating the game since you're doing that automatically without giving it much of a second thought. You know the play, you know the deck, you know what you can do in a specific situation.

 

I guess it has to do with elitism. Even if someone "autopilots" a rogue deck, they won't ever say that because they think that their tier 3 deck is somehow superior to/harder to play than a tier 1 deck, but if they actually gave those a shot, they'd realize it's not really all that much different. Sure, some decks are easier to play than others, but only non-interactive decks like Exodia or Magical Explosion are truly "autopilot", because you don't take your opponent into account there.

 

So, discuss the concept of "autopilot". Do you think it exists? What decks are autopilot to you?

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

It really is just another way for ignorant casuals to pretend they have any semblance of skill at the game.

This may sound like I am upset with such players who complain about decks being "skilless" "sacky" or "autopilot". I sound like that because I am. I detest those arguments, because they are not founded in reality, and serve no purpose other than to make them feel justified in their losses. Yes, I am talking about you. You know who you are.

[CLG Klavier]

It really is just another way for ignorant casuals to pretend they have any semblance of skill at the game.

It's a matter of perception. Imagine Fluffals vs Nekroz matchup. Nekroz win easily because they're simply more powerful of a deck, so Fluffals need to invest more resources to win. It's not a SKILL difference between players, only power difference between cards.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Thing is, they use said argument in a way to imply that they are a better player than the one they lost to, simply on the basis that the opponent played a "skilless deck" and it legitimately disgusts me. It is just like with MTG. If you want to play casually, go right ahead, I don't fucking care. But the moment you try to say you are better BECAUSE you are casual? No. You are lying to yourself. That is just fucking wrong.

[The Warden]

I think it should only really apply to decks that always makes the same basic play that nets them an incredibly unfair advantage regardless of the situation they're in turn after turn after turn after turn. With Shadds you always have to think what card would be best for the situation, and what you should be using as your Fusion Materials at the times. Plus, Shadds can combo with a lot of stuff, they're hardly autopilot. Nekroz I can't say the same for, as it's incredibly popular to just Djinn-Lock with a Trishula because "what does effort mean"? Obviously Nekroz aren't auto-pilot, people just make it look like it is.

[Althemia]

I think it should only really apply to decks that always makes the same basic play that nets them an incredibly unfair advantage regardless of the situation they're in turn after turn after turn after turn. With Shadds you always have to think what card would be best for the situation, and what you should be using as your Fusion Materials at the times. Plus, Shadds can combo with a lot of stuff, they're hardly autopilot. Nekroz I can't say the same for, as it's incredibly popular to just Djinn-Lock with a Trishula because "what does effort mean"? Obviously Nekroz aren't auto-pilot, people just make it look like it is.

The decreasing popularity of playing the Djinn lock would really combat that point, I'd say. And honestly, you will only find bad players relying upon a very linear line of play in what many consider "autopilot" decks.

[The Warden]

There's Qli. It's pretty much the premier argument for auto-pilot, as they usually make the same move literally every turn that any idiot can understand and perform. Tool -> Search -> Pendulum -> TS for Alias/Disk -> Beat face -> rinse repeat next turn with more materials.

 

The only time they ever have to think is when they don't have Tool to rely on.

[ihop]

There's Qli. It's pretty much the premier argument for auto-pilot, as they usually make the same move literally every turn that any idiot can understand and perform. Tool -> Search -> Pendulum -> TS for Alias/Disk -> Beat face -> rinse repeat next turn with more materials.

 

The only time they ever have to think is when they don't have Tool to rely on.

 

You're oversimplifying this so much because you're basically assuming your opponent has no counterplay whatsoever. There's all sorts of difficult decisions in Qli such as when to pendulum summon for the most advantage/damage, whether to add Re-Qliate and when to flip Re-Qliate, the risk-reward element of drawing off Monolith etc. 

 

edit: Qli aren't even the premier argument for auto-pilot, that's Tellars because their offensive plays are the most standard. However, even watching someone play Tellars on saturday made me realise how many options there are, particularly when you want to make a 2-mat rank 4 because there's so much choice of what to make to stop yourself losing. He made completely different plays to what I thought were the best and while there was some merit in his plays I still think he made a few mistakes such as unecessarily summoning Giant Hand early game when he needed it late game and not summoning Rhapsody. Honestly, no deck that has any form of player interaction is even close to being autopilot.

[The Warden]

That is pretty much the case. I was oversimplifying it, but that's because I was describing Qli at its basest level, the one any idiot can play it at. Naturally a more skilful player can do more with the deck. Tellars are linear once they get going, as it's pretty much then all about cycling between Altair and Deneb. Granted, I believe Qli prefer Lose 1 Turn over Re-Qliate now, if what i hear is right.

 

Konami are steering away from auto-pilot decks now, which I can respect. I just wish they'd stop making some of the archetypes cuckoo bananas.

[ihop]

You heard wrong. Re-Qliate has no substitutes because it's searchable which no other defensive cards are, so if you open Scout you always have access to a Fiendish Chain.

[Zauls]

I'd like to see one of these meta-bashers try to pilot Shaddolls at any level above local play. I learned the hard way its a lot easier said than done. Also, I'm pretty sure a lot of rogue decks are just as "autopilot" than a lot of the meta decks. Take Madolche, for example, or 3.5-Axis. They both have standard plays that net them loads of advantage with no skill and little input and are far easier to play in general than Nekroz or Shaddoll or even Qli.

 

The reason these decks seem linear is because there are a number of common combinations of cards that good players learn how to get the most out of. When these plays become common knowledge, everyone does them because they are the optimal way to use these combinations of cards.

[Simping For Hina]

When eggs was actually good, I won at few GPT without ever even testing the deck. It was pretty autopilot for me. Cast eggs, get lotus bloom, grapeshot to death. Don't know why people had trouble with it.

[ihop]

sweet

[Expelsword]

People probably wouldn't feel so bad if they didn't see the same openings everytime.

But, what can you do in a game where some decks (let alone moves) are strictly superior?

 

As for autopilot decks, Infernoids have a scale from "Die because you have nothing" to "Win automatically because you hit Reasoning for more than 20".

 

Somewhere on the lower end, you'll need skill, and I've seen people fumble away games, but it's honestly more about luck at this point - maybe it will change in the future.

[J-Max]

Autopilot to me is when a Deck can keep going through a load of Combos in1 turn when your opponent cannot reply to it. This is why Turn 1 advantage is so required even with only having 5 Cards Turn 1. Went up against a Ritual Beast Deck the other day and may as well not be playing at all. So much Special Summoning..... I know that Madolche can be guilty of this too but at least Anjelly, Hootcake and Ticket are a hard OPT

[Spinny]

I'd like to see one of these meta-bashers try to pilot Shaddolls at any level above local play. I learned the hard way its a lot easier said than done. Also, I'm pretty sure a lot of rogue decks are just as "autopilot" than a lot of the meta decks. Take Madolche, for example, or 3.5-Axis. They both have standard plays that net them loads of advantage with no skill and little input and are far easier to play in general than Nekroz or Shaddoll or even Qli.

Ghostricks. Best rogue deck (/sarcasm), scale of 1-10 how autopilot are they and why?

[Blake]

Ghostrick are dead/10

 

limited tgu ruins them completely

 

As for Autopilot, they at least require timing, though I wouldn't call them extremely skillful or anything.

[ihop]

The only Ghostrick build that ever looked decent to me didn't even play TGU and isn't totally autopilot because you still need to manage your resources to stop your opponent winning (3 Jiangshi and then a bunch of level 1s)

[Blake]

The only Ghostrick build that ever looked decent to me didn't even play TGU and isn't totally autopilot because you still need to manage your resources to stop your opponent winning (3 Jiangshi and then a bunch of level 1s)

You play TGU because it makes Spoiled Angel. You only run Jiangshi and the level 1s, yeah, but you use TGU to accelerate your game.

 

Without it, the deck does nothing.

[ihop]

You play TGU because it makes Spoiled Angel. You only run Jiangshi and the level 1s, yeah, but you use TGU to accelerate your game.

 

Without it, the deck does nothing.

 

Oh, right, this was 2 years ago or so so that wasn't out yet, it was just after Downerd came out which was not quite as good but did the job.

[Just Crouton]

I think it was Masao who said something like this: Any deck becomes autopilot if you play it long enough.

 

It's not that some decks require skill and some don't. It's that some decks require more skill than others.

 

Some are simple and straightforward, others require a lot of thought.

 

"Autopilot" is just a thing people say when they lose like calling someone a "netdecker" or claiming the opponent sacked a win from them that "they deserved."

 

It's just bad sportsmanship.

[evilfusion]

For me, the term "autopilot" refers to a Deck that runs on a specific play that is both fairly simple to do, and rather consistent in doing so. But it is a term thrown around too loosely.

 

Six Sams back in the horrible horrible time was somewhat autopilot because it could go off in a number of ways, but almost always did the same thing. Kagemusa, Asceticism into Elder. Shi En. Kizan. Set backrow. If you had Gateway, do a dozen MORE things including but not limited to a second Shi En or Naturia Barkion or whatever.

 

Infernity is probably THE autopilot. It requires a lot from the player, but the fundamental spam plays are so often the same play. Necromancer into Archfiend into Launcher into ridiculous stuff ad nauseum. Ending with Break and Barrier and Synchros.

 

Dino Rabbit was kind of autopilot at times.

 

But nowadays, I don't think any Deck REALLY does the autopilot thing the way people think they do. 

[Maeriberii Haan]

Can we censor the term autopilot when it comes to YGO into linear?

Would've been more fitting and less misleading.

[Tinkerer]

(made an entire joke FTK archetype based around this premise thanks to this thread)

From how I use the term, autopilot is simply the ability to consistently run the same play against (pretty much) any matchup for great effectiveness. The kick is that autopilot plays are heavy combos that stretch to 3+ cards and/or are archetype specific, while engines are generally smaller and are more general. Am I understanding the term correctly?

[Slinky]

I think it was Masao who said something like this: Any deck becomes autopilot if you play it long enough.

 

It's not that some decks require skill and some don't. It's that some decks require more skill than others.

 

Some are simple and straightforward, others require a lot of thought.

 

"Autopilot" is just a thing people say when they lose like calling someone a "netdecker" or claiming the opponent sacked a win from them that "they deserved."

 

It's just bad sportsmanship.

 

If you're facing Lightsworn, then yeah, that statement is completely valid.