Cyber Angel – Vishnu (910)

[VCR_CAT]

I mean, you should be playing Herald. There's no excuse not to, especially since this is a worse hieratic deck than Gishki for the same purpose.

 

It's not a perfect answer, but you have like 4-5 ritual spell copies that banish from the grave to protect it, and it's easy to get them into or cheat them into the grave.

 

My excuse is regarding space in functionality. I like the Saffira build more, and I honestly do not want to run more ritual spells and monsters than I already do for the sake of consistency.

 

I mean, besides that Herald is utter scum and I won't stoop to that level either

[Premier Alexander Romanov]

I mean, you should be playing Herald. There's no excuse not to, especially since this is a worse hieratic deck than Gishki for the same purpose.

 

It's not a perfect answer, but you have like 4-5 ritual spell copies that banish from the grave to protect it, and it's easy to get them into or cheat them into the grave.

Still, Heralds are not Tier 0, guys.

Yes, they negate stuff, and yes, the Cyber Angels make them easy to get out, but that doesn't mean you all can go fondling their spherical bodies so sensually.

They have weaknesses, like summoning something big with an inherent effect, such as Blue-Eyes Alternative.

[Azuriena]

Otherwise I have a telegraphed means of negation that prays that my opponent isn't prepared for it otherwise I'm screwed?

 

Please stop throwing this out there like it's the god-card for the deck, because it more or less isn't. Maybe for dueling rando's on sims it is.

 

And you think that is worse than a Ritual Monster that deals with backrow in another way? Because that is what I am comparing it to.

 

They have weaknesses, like summoning something big with an inherent effect, such as Blue-Eyes Alternative.

 

I don't get it. Anything destruction doesn't seem threatening.

[VCR_CAT]

 

And you think that is worse than a Ritual Monster that deals with backrow in another way? Because that is what I am comparing it to.

 

If Cyber Angels got a monster like Galaxy Destroyer in the effect department; would you say that would be bad?

 

Cyber Angels is inherently a very aggressive deck, and the more you're able to emphasize those strengths the better. To me, Perfection holds the deck back in the offense department. Not only is it defensive in nature, but it holds you back from using resources in your hand to further your plays and put out more damage so you can instead protect your field. Focusing on Saffira more than Perfection compliments what Cyber Angels are really good at, and enhances those strengths: Being able to put out strong beaters and compensate costs for a recurring resource/consistency engine. It may not deal with backrow to any degree, but I've found ways to playing around more light backrow situations to compensate for that, and have seen some good success.

[Azuriena]

If Cyber Angels got a monster like Galaxy Destroyer in the effect department; would you say that would be bad?

 

No. But yeah, I did mean to say that it depends on the hypothetical Ritual Monster at hand.

 

Cyber Angels is inherently a very aggressive deck, and the more you're able to emphasize those strengths the better. To me, Perfection holds the deck back in the offense department. Not only is it defensive in nature, but it holds you back from using resources in your hand to further your plays and put out more damage so you can instead protect your field. Focusing on Saffira more than Perfection compliments what Cyber Angels are really good at, and enhances those strengths: Being able to put out strong beaters and compensate costs for a recurring resource/consistency engine. It may not deal with backrow to any degree, but I've found ways to playing around more light backrow situations to compensate for that, and have seen some good success.

 

Why not both. You're compromising consistency, but idk.

[VCR_CAT]

No. But yeah, I did mean to say that it depends on the hypothetical Ritual Monster at hand.

 

 

Why not both. You're compromising consistency, but idk.

 

key words: compromising consistency. I'd rather focus on one and make it as good as I can rather than just have the option.

[Azuriena]

key words: compromising consistency. I'd rather focus on one and make it as good as I can rather than just have the option.

 

Point taken, but Herald isn't just an option. It complements Saffira, so you aren't exactly taking focus away from her by running Herald.

[Blake]

My excuse is regarding space in functionality. I like the Saffira build more, and I honestly do not want to run more ritual spells and monsters than I already do for the sake of consistency.

 

I mean, besides that Herald is utter scum and I won't stoop to that level either

they don't conflict ._.

 

You run Saffira and Herald. Like, 3-2 or 2-2 for Herald and 2-2 or 2-1 for Saffira.

 

There is no inconsistency there. You have Pre-Prep and Prep and Ritual Sanctuary.

 

Still, Heralds are not Tier 0, guys.

Yes, they negate stuff, and yes, the Cyber Angels make them easy to get out, but that doesn't mean you all can go fondling their spherical bodies so sensually.

They have weaknesses, like summoning something big with an inherent effect, such as Blue-Eyes Alternative.

Wow, way to tell the person who admitted herald isn't be-all-end-all that it isn't be-all-end-all!!!

 

and way to mention an out i specifically mentioned counters too as well

 

Seriously, any reason you addressed that to me in particular? Cause your points are really poor.

[VCR_CAT]

they don't conflict ._.

 

You run Saffira and Herald. Like, 3-2 or 2-2 for Herald and 2-2 or 2-1 for Saffira.

 

There is no inconsistency there. You have Pre-Prep and Prep and Ritual Sanctuary.

I try to keep my Ritual Spell counts at 6 or less; 6 already has shown some issues in consistency regarding opening hands, but it's fairly close to a sweet-spot in ratios. 5-6 is right around the sweet spot for me, and being able to keep my Hymn counts higher lets me capitalize on the graveyard protection more without the higher necessity of having to recycle then search if I want to Saffira again (and I do summon Saffira more than once in a given duel).

 

Herald conflicts less in hard functionality and more in playstyle; that a player is more focused on keeping their hand-count high than they are making their field strong. If Cyber Angels are going, they can operate very well off of a minimal hand using Sanctuary, Cyber Petite, Dakini's recycle, and Saffira's recycle; but being more concerned about my hand count for number of cards to potentially negate essentially makes me hold back as a player while playing a very aggressive deck. I don't like that; that's not how I roll.

[Azuriena]

I try to keep my Ritual Spell counts at 6 or less; 6 already has shown some issues in consistency regarding opening hands, but it's fairly close to a sweet-spot in ratios. 5-6 is right around the sweet spot for me, and being able to keep my Hymn counts higher lets me capitalize on the graveyard protection more without the higher necessity of having to recycle then search if I want to Saffira again (and I do summon Saffira more than once in a given duel).

 

2 Machine Angel Ritual, 2 Hymn of Light, and 2 Dawn of the Herald?

[~Faytl~]

Thaaaat is NICE. The fact you can search it off of Manju and then use it and one of the level 6s as fodder to play this is also just cake, as well as the level 8 and Cyber Petit Angel. Destructive as hell, doesn't target, hits hard. I really need to start playing this deck. AND it protects itself and other Rituals!

[Blake]

I try to keep my Ritual Spell counts at 6 or less; 6 already has shown some issues in consistency regarding opening hands, but it's fairly close to a sweet-spot in ratios. 5-6 is right around the sweet spot for me, and being able to keep my Hymn counts higher lets me capitalize on the graveyard protection more without the higher necessity of having to recycle then search if I want to Saffira again (and I do summon Saffira more than once in a given duel).

 

Herald conflicts less in hard functionality and more in playstyle; that a player is more focused on keeping their hand-count high than they are making their field strong. If Cyber Angels are going, they can operate very well off of a minimal hand using Sanctuary, Cyber Petite, Dakini's recycle, and Saffira's recycle; but being more concerned about my hand count for number of cards to potentially negate essentially makes me hold back as a player while playing a very aggressive deck. I don't like that; that's not how I roll.

7 is fine. 3 - 2 - 2, 3 machine cause it's the most loopable.

 

You don't even focus on high hand count with Herald, and you're really closing off your mind with this. You keep just ENOUGH to make Herald live, often 1-2 cards, and set up Saffira next to it.

 

You use "if they're going well", but the deck is naturally not perfect in consistency, so you can't consistently "go well" for those OTKs. When they arise, yeah, you go for them, but Herald is a more solid option.

 

You're discounting a 4-5 card engine on the basis that it causes you to shift playstyles, but, like... Why? Why is an option that doesn't take away from your deck bad, like, at all?

[Progenitor]

I try to keep my Ritual Spell counts at 6 or less; 6 already has shown some issues in consistency regarding opening hands, but it's fairly close to a sweet-spot in ratios. 5-6 is right around the sweet spot for me, and being able to keep my Hymn counts higher lets me capitalize on the graveyard protection more without the higher necessity of having to recycle then search if I want to Saffira again (and I do summon Saffira more than once in a given duel).

 

Herald conflicts less in hard functionality and more in playstyle; that a player is more focused on keeping their hand-count high than they are making their field strong. If Cyber Angels are going, they can operate very well off of a minimal hand using Sanctuary, Cyber Petite, Dakini's recycle, and Saffira's recycle; but being more concerned about my hand count for number of cards to potentially negate essentially makes me hold back as a player while playing a very aggressive deck. I don't like that; that's not how I roll.

 

I think the misunderstanding here is the concept that Herald is primarily used as Herald.  In fact it's moreso for the fact that summoning Herald with Dawn automatically recycles Benten / Idaten and allows you to continue to summon stuff.  On the other hand, Saffira only procs at the end phase, but has much more versatility.

 

That's why you run both.  They both cover the same general points but at different points in the turn.  if you need multiple tribute fodder for that turn, then your Pre-prep is much better used towards grabbing Herald than grabbing Saffira.  On the other hand, if it's turn 1, or you are already in a solid position, Saffira is generally a much better choice.  2-2 for each keeps the engines solid, and results in 5 ritual spells (assuming you're running 3 machine angel ritual).  You can adapt the numbers from there for which engine you prefer, but you're kinda shooting yourself in the foot by not having equal access to both.

[VCR_CAT]

The problem with Herald and a smaller hand is that individual cards become more important in a smaller hand, and with a lot of decks being able to output a lot of effects in a single turn with minimal cost (BAPK, etc.), the risk becomes more apparent that a smart player is able to outmaneuver Herald and leave the deck high and dry. As capable as Cyber Angels are at playing with a minimal hand, they still need something to work with and have a hard time recovering from a field upheaval with few cards in hand.

 

I never said nor implied OTKs; I more mean being able to output strong rituals on a turn-to-turn basis as a means to out-beat the opponent. No, they aren't perfect in consistency; but focusing on an option that assists draw power and recycling does more for the functionality of the deck than a pseudo-floodgate.

 

As for turning down the option that's not necessarily hurting the deck? I chose, in building my version, to focus on making the aggro aspect of the deck a higher priority than its overall versatility. If I require a Herald, I still have decently easy access to Arclight as an option to keep on the field. Is it as strong? Not really, but I'm able to fit it in at lesser consequence than Perfection.

 

It's not about running all viable options; I picked an area to focus on, and 4-5 cards has too much of an impact on my deck's build and playing for me to want to run it.

[Blake]

The problem with Herald and a smaller hand is that individual cards become more important in a smaller hand, and with a lot of decks being able to output a lot of effects in a single turn with minimal cost (BAPK, etc.), the risk becomes more apparent that a smart player is able to outmaneuver Herald and leave the deck high and dry. As capable as Cyber Angels are at playing with a minimal hand, they still need something to work with and have a hard time recovering from a field upheaval with few cards in hand.

 

I never said nor implied OTKs; I more mean being able to output strong rituals on a turn-to-turn basis as a means to out-beat the opponent. No, they aren't perfect in consistency; but focusing on an option that assists draw power and recycling does more for the functionality of the deck than a pseudo-floodgate.

 

As for turning down the option that's not necessarily hurting the deck? I chose, in building my version, to focus on making the aggro aspect of the deck a higher priority than its overall versatility. If I require a Herald, I still have decently easy access to Arclight as an option to keep on the field. Is it as strong? Not really, but I'm able to fit it in at lesser consequence than Perfection.

 

It's not about running all viable options; I picked an area to focus on, and 4-5 cards has too much of an impact on my deck's build and playing for me to want to run it.

So you don't bank on herald 100%. That doesn't change anything here. You only negate when you must, leaving a smart player to not get blown out by multiple effects.

 

Uh, what? Aggressive implies OTKs. Otherwise, the aggressive nature is too passive to win. And what you're describing sounds bad, without backup plans like Herald.

 

Herald makes Preprep more live, thus enabling builds more, and gives you more options than preprep being a single path to saffira. Neverminding that Saffira + herald boards are strong, and fairly easy to make early. Of COURSE they can outplay it, but Herald isn't about protecting yourself eternally.

 

Herald of Perfection is a card that reduces the gamestate to "zero", not serves as pure protection. It makes both players grind out resources until it's too low for one or the other to come back with. Which is why, when playing with herald, it;'s about making sure YOU come out on top, not blindly throwing fairies down to stop them.

 

4-5 cards should never have that much of an impact in a deck that's about constant filtering.

[Tinkerer]

I just find it funny that the natural way of dealing with this is the Mirror Forces: Quaking, Storming and probably even Rippling (or w/e its English name is) would stop this card very effectively.

 

Solemn Strike wouldn't kill it and, more often than not (I'd think) they'd make a grave effect chain link 2 so it can't negate this card's on-summon effect in the first place.

 

Trap Holes can't deal with it too well either. Bottomless' destruction can get negated and Time-Space may end up hurting you more than the opponent because of this card's burn. Endless Trap Hole is the only safe one in this case.

 

...and there's also effect negation, but that's besides the point.

[Premier Alexander Romanov]

Seriously, any reason you addressed that to me in particular? Cause your points are really poor.

...

Still, Heralds are not Tier 0, guys.

Yes, they negate stuff, and yes, the Cyber Angels make them easy to get out, but that doesn't mean you all can go fondling their spherical bodies so sensually.

They have weaknesses, like summoning something big with an inherent effect, such as Blue-Eyes Alternative.

Black, there's this concept in the English language, most languages, actually, called a "grammatical category".

The Singular category means that someone is referring to one object, person, or thing.

The Plural category means that someone is referring to multiple objects, people, and things.

I was using, in the highlighted section, the Plural category.

Meaning I WASN'T JUST ADDRESSING YOU, YOU SELF-CENTERED, ARROGANT DIPSHIT.

[Azuriena]

...

Black, there's this concept in the English language, most languages, actually, called a "grammatical category".

The Singular category means that someone is referring to one object, person, or thing.

The Plural category means that someone is referring to multiple objects, people, and things.

I was using, in the highlighted section, the Plural category.

Meaning I WASN'T JUST ADDRESSING YOU, YOU SELF-CENTERED, ARROGANT DIPSHIT.

 

Although no one in this thread has claimed that Herald is Tier 0, uncounterable, or without weakness.

[Premier Alexander Romanov]

Although no one in this thread has claimed that Herald is Tier 0 or uncounterable.

Sure seemed like you all were wanking off to them pretty hard, though.

[Azuriena]

Sure seemed like you all were wanking off to them pretty hard, though.

 

Care to point out where?

[Blake]

...

Black, there's this concept in the English language, most languages, actually, called a "grammatical category".

The Singular category means that someone is referring to one object, person, or thing.

The Plural category means that someone is referring to multiple objects, people, and things.

I was using, in the highlighted section, the Plural category.

Meaning I WASN'T JUST ADDRESSING YOU, YOU SELF-CENTERED, ARROGANT DIPSHIT.

Dan, there's this concept, it's called not quoting people when you're talking in general. Saying guys doesn't change that you quoted me, AND proceeded to present points that I had already answered.

 

Furthermore, if you really can't present evidence of any sort for your points, kindly don't hurl insults, hm? So don't act high and mighty and insult me when you chose to quote me. Use evidence and back up points or keep your mouth shut.

 

Sure seemed like you all were wanking off to them pretty hard, though.

Wow, selling a point that needs to be sold? Clearly wanking!!

[Premier Alexander Romanov]

Why did they buff it so much? Herald of Perfection/Ultimateness are a thing as well.

There's no point if it's on a Ritual Monster. Otherwise, you have Herald of Perfection?

I mean, you should be playing Herald. There's no excuse not to, especially since this is a worse hieratic deck than Gishki for the same purpose.

 

It's not a perfect answer, but you have like 4-5 ritual spell copies that banish from the grave to protect it, and it's easy to get them into or cheat them into the grave.

Point taken, but Herald isn't just an option. It complements Saffira, so you aren't exactly taking focus away from her by running Herald.

7 is fine. 3 - 2 - 2, 3 machine cause it's the most loopable.

 

You don't even focus on high hand count with Herald, and you're really closing off your mind with this. You keep just ENOUGH to make Herald live, often 1-2 cards, and set up Saffira next to it.

 

You use "if they're going well", but the deck is naturally not perfect in consistency, so you can't consistently "go well" for those OTKs. When they arise, yeah, you go for them, but Herald is a more solid option.

 

You're discounting a 4-5 card engine on the basis that it causes you to shift playstyles, but, like... Why? Why is an option that doesn't take away from your deck bad, like, at all?

I think the misunderstanding here is the concept that Herald is primarily used as Herald. In fact it's moreso for the fact that summoning Herald with Dawn automatically recycles Benten / Idaten and allows you to continue to summon stuff. On the other hand, Saffira only procs at the end phase, but has much more versatility.

 

That's why you run both. They both cover the same general points but at different points in the turn. if you need multiple tribute fodder for that turn, then your Pre-prep is much better used towards grabbing Herald than grabbing Saffira. On the other hand, if it's turn 1, or you are already in a solid position, Saffira is generally a much better choice. 2-2 for each keeps the engines solid, and results in 5 ritual spells (assuming you're running 3 machine angel ritual). You can adapt the numbers from there for which engine you prefer, but you're kinda shooting yourself in the foot by not having equal access to both.

So you don't bank on herald 100%. That doesn't change anything here. You only negate when you must, leaving a smart player to not get blown out by multiple effects.

 

Uh, what? Aggressive implies OTKs. Otherwise, the aggressive nature is too passive to win. And what you're describing sounds bad, without backup plans like Herald.

 

Herald makes Preprep more live, thus enabling builds more, and gives you more options than preprep being a single path to saffira. Neverminding that Saffira + herald boards are strong, and fairly easy to make early. Of COURSE they can outplay it, but Herald isn't about protecting yourself eternally.

 

Herald of Perfection is a card that reduces the gamestate to "zero", not serves as pure protection. It makes both players grind out resources until it's too low for one or the other to come back with. Which is why, when playing with herald, it;'s about making sure YOU come out on top, not blindly throwing fairies down to stop them.

 

4-5 cards should never have that much of an impact in a deck that's about constant filtering.

ALL THE HERALD WANK.

 

Dan, there's this concept, it's called not quoting people when you're talking in general. Saying guys doesn't change that you quoted me, AND proceeded to present points that I had already answered.

 

Furthermore, if you really can't present evidence of any sort for your points, kindly don't hurl insults, hm? So don't act high and mighty and insult me when you chose to quote me. Use evidence and back up points or keep your mouth shut.

My point is that you need to get off of your high horse and stop being so elitist.

Also, First Amendment.

funk you.

[Progenitor]

Dan you are misinterpreting our attempts to demonstraight how vital Herald is as a combo piece and as a defensive option in Cyber Angels. We are not saying it's a wincon. We are not saying it's the end all be all.

 

That is not "wanking something off as tier 0"

That is "having a polite discussion about herald and its general application"

 

You failing to acknowledge it as such is only further proving your own ignorance.

This is the very basis of toxic discussion, so please end it here

[ihop]

Did someone really just quote the first amendment while discussing a Yugioh card?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Did someone really just quote the first amendment while discussing a Yugioh card?

Political Correctness x YGO = Equality for Casuals

 

@everyone

The deck won't really go anywhere, Ritual Sanctuary, while amazing, is much better off in Blue Eyes (an actual deck), this has cute application as a r6nk deck, but beyond that it's garbage 

 

Edit: Oh I didn't even think about BA being able to recycle Avarice and such, guess that could work as well

 

 

 

No, I used the First Amendment in response to someone telling me to shut up.

Fine.

Only because the fact that you couldn't spell "demonstrate" made me chuckle.

...and I actually respect you.

Unlike some people.

*coughcoughrhymeswithhackcoughcough*

 

Exactly what does this contribute to an already toxic discussion about an already shitty card?