[DISC] Black Garden

[Psycho Shocker Android]

In what way is Black Garden a horrible card? I'm dying to know.

 

In the way that there's not one deck that is any better by running it. It takes up needed space and misleads new/bad players into thinking it's good.

 

So you're saying that there aren't any decks that can benefit running a permanent Shrink that clogs your opponent's field?

 

Cyberdarks could benefit from this or Injection Fairy Lily. (basically any card that can increase it's atk power)

[Chevalier]

Cyberdarks could benefit from this or Injection Fairy Lily. (basically any card that can increase it's atk power)

 

Yeah! I saw this sick nasty Cyber Dark Deck pwning @ my regs. It destroyed all the top-tier decks! It teched BG and IFL' date=' isn't that pro? [/sarcasm']

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Your whole argument is depending on you having BG on your first turn. Which you won't 9/10 times.

 

Out of 50 opening hands with a deck that ran 3 Black Garden and 2 Terraforming, I drew either Black Garden, Terraforming, or some combination of the two 31 times. Therefor, it can be surmised that you can effectively draw Black Garden opening hand far more than 1 time out of 10, even without the Terraformings.

 

Also, as is the case with all decks that feature Field Spells, if you can't win without your Field Spell, you're better off not building the deck.

[CrabHelmet]

Lol at Chevalier. (Don't you get tired of being wrong?)

 

I honestly feel pity for the members of YCM who believe the illusion that they're good and know their Ygos.

 

Your whole argument is depending on you having BG on your first turn. Which you won't 9/10 times.

 

Naturally, we're acting under the entirely reasonable assumption that you run a 60-card deck with only 1 Black Garden, 0 Terraforming, and no draw power whatsoever - the only way for you to possibly fail 9/10 times.

 

While we're making perfectly reasonable assumptions, let's further assume that this deck also runs 3 Larvae Moth and 2 Bubble Crash. Those cards suck, so the deck sucks, and therefore Black Garden sucks. Logically proven!

[Chevalier]

Even if you have 1st turn Garden, it won't make it a difference. It'll be blown off the field during your opponents turn.

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Even if you have 1st turn Garden' date=' it won't make it a difference. It'll be blown off the field during your opponents turn.

[/quote']

 

You assume too much. The vast majority of decks that run Black Garden also run 3 Solemn, 3 Polli, and anywhere from 1-3 Divine Wrath. Not to mention that, unless you plan on using Twister, the average deck only has 2-3 non-monster outs to Black Garden, meaning that they still get Shrunk and you still get a token to use for Polli.

[Chevalier]

If it's such pro anti-meta why is it that the only person who runs it is Jerome McHale' date=' the same Jerome McHale who said that Neos Wiseman was good in this Meta and could top a Jump?

[/quote']

 

Now, let's not be shy.

Chaos and Crab, do either of you honestly think BG is good?

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

If it's such pro anti-meta why is it that the only person who runs it is Jerome McHale' date=' the same Jerome McHale who said that Neos Wiseman was good in this Meta and could top a Jump?

[/quote']

 

Now, let's not be shy.

Chaos and Crab, do either of you honestly think BG is good?

 

Good is relative. I believe it is playable, if that's what you mean.

[The Dark One]

If it's such pro anti-meta why is it that the only person who runs it is Jerome McHale' date=' the same Jerome McHale who said that Neos Wiseman was good in this Meta and could top a Jump?

[/quote']

 

Now, let's not be shy.

Chaos and Crab, do either of you honestly think BG is good?

 

It would seem to me that by repeatedly emphasizing the fact that Jerome McHale created the first known build of Blackest Garden you are making use of a logical fallacy called Argumentum ad Hominem, or Poisoning the Well. In the future, avoid this action, as it only makes you look like a bigger fool than you really are. (And trust me, that's hard to do.)

 

We all know Jerome McHale sucks at Yugioh. Get over it already and at least make an attempt at forming a coherent argument.

 

Oh, and little City without Oppression is much worse off than Plants are without Black Garden. Guess what else, Oppression can only be run at 3, whereas Black Garden is a field spell, and therefore qualifies for Terraforming. Your assertion that Little City > Blackest Garden fails.

[Chevalier]

In the future' date=' avoid this action, as it only makes you look like a bigger fool than you really are. (And trust me, that's hard to do.)[/quote']

 

 

 

Your assertion that Little City > Blackest Garden fails.

 

You took a card from Little City and said that Black Garden is more searchable than it.

That goes for every single trap in Little City, or in any Deck. inb4 you say Cat of Ill Omen.

 

Deny my assertions all you like, Little City is a good Deck and good anti-meta. Village Spellcasters is a good Deck and a meh anti-meta, Blackest Garden is a bad Deck and bad anti-meta.

 

Don't believe me? Play me. Lose. Learn.

[The Dark One]

In the future' date=' avoid this action, as it only makes you look like a bigger fool than you really are. (And trust me, that's hard to do.)[/quote']

 

 

 

Your assertion that Little City > Blackest Garden fails.

 

You took a card from Little City and said that Black Garden is more searchable than it.

That goes for every single trap in Little City' date=' or in any Deck. inb4 you say Cat of Ill Omen.

 

Deny my assertions all you like, Little City is a good Deck and good anti-meta. Village Spellcasters is a good Deck and a meh anti-meta, Blackest Garden is a bad Deck and bad anti-meta.

 

Don't believe me? Play me. Lose. Learn.

[/quote']

 

The problem with your little rebuttal to my Oppression argument is that every ROYAL OPPRESSION is the lynchpin of Little City, not some random D-Prison, etc.

 

And I will deny your assertions, because they are indeed false. (I'm not even saying that Little City is a bad deck, it's just not as good as Black Garden. Hell, I'd respect your opinion if you were claiming that Black Garden was NO BETTER than Little City, but you have to go and claim that Black Garden is BAD, which is blatantly false.

 

lol at you even bringing up Cat of Ill Omen.

 

cute sign.

 

I don't play YVD.

 

I see you didn't bother denying your use of logical fallacies. Using bad logic is a terrible habit to fall into.

 

So go ahead and somehow prove that Little City draws Oppression more reliably than Blackest Garden draws Black Garden. If you can do that, I'll believe you.

 

And while your at it, prove that any game that you don't open with Garden equates to an automatic loss. (Guess what, you can do just fine without it.)

 

I funking play plants. I also play Lightsworn. I win more often with Blackest Garden than I do with Lightsworn. (Go ahead and claim I'm just bad with Lightsworn, but I know plenty of other people who play Blackest Garden too. They have just as many successes.)

 

Oh, and if you claim that Lightsworn are a bad deck, than that will confirm my fears that you're a joke account.

[CrabHelmet]

...is it even possible to be bad at running Lightlords? They're pretty much the easiest deck to run since ever. >_>

[The Dark One]

...is it even possible to be bad at running Lightlords? They're pretty much the easiest deck to run since ever. >_>

 

lol, that is true.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

...is it even possible to be bad at running Lightlords? They're pretty much the easiest deck to run since ever. >_>

 

Well there's always the possibility that the deck was poorly designed.

 

There could probably be a burn deck based around this, where you swarm your opponent's field with tokens to benefit from cards like Just Desserts and Secret Barrel.

[Guest PikaPerson01]

This topic is great.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

This topic was great.

 

Fixed. I'm here now. loljk. Black Garden's fun to play around with, although I'm not one for Control Decks, Aggro and Combo decks are just so much more fun. =P

[Saiba Aisu]

And I will deny your assertions' date=' because they are indeed false. (I'm not even saying that Little City is a bad deck, it's just not as good as Black Garden. Hell, I'd respect your opinion if you were claiming that Black Garden was NO BETTER than Little City, but you have to go and claim that Black Garden is BAD, which is blatantly false.

 

lol at you even bringing up Cat of Ill Omen.

 

cute sign.

 

I don't play YVD.

 

I see you didn't bother denying your use of logical fallacies. Using bad logic is a terrible habit to fall into.

 

So go ahead and somehow prove that Little City draws Oppression more reliably than Blackest Garden draws Black Garden. If you can do that, I'll believe you.

 

And while your at it, prove that any game that you don't open with Garden equates to an automatic loss. (Guess what, you can do just fine without it.)

 

I f***ing play plants. I also play Lightsworn. I win more often with Blackest Garden than I do with Lightsworn. (Go ahead and claim I'm just bad with Lightsworn, but I know plenty of other people who play Blackest Garden too. They have just as many successes.)

 

Oh, and if you claim that Lightsworn are a bad deck, than that will confirm my fears that you're a joke account.[/quote']

 

This is getting ridiculous. Honestly, some of you fools ought to feel your lack of class a bit more keenly. I mean, bickering over a card whose playability has already been posted and proved? I am talking, of course, about Black Garden.

 

Despite being a former Black Garden enthusiast, my feelings on the matter are absolutely adamant - in a format where most top tier Decks rely on consistent, powerful combinations, Black Garden is at a standstill. There are just so many better choices. 'The Dark One' - That's your nick? Really? - if you think that Black Garden is a good as Little City, it's time you retire from Yugioh and start shopping for a vacation home in Majorca, because you're obviously clueless. Even at the best of times, Black Garden is a difficult card to use efficiently - the multiple, complicated possibilities it offers can unseat even the most experienced player, and easily lead to misplays when better moves are available. I'm not denying that the card has vast potential, but right now, our format is dominated by blunt, easy-to-use combinations. Sadly, Black Garden doesn't fill this quota.

 

Lol at you for dressing yourself up as good Ygoz. Don't bother, dear. You're not fooling anyone.

 

You really should play YVD - it's an excellent place to practice, and you can easily find innovation and competition at its finest. But, of course, who am I kidding? You're probably some anime lover that uses bad cards because you lack the depth of imagination required to form your own innovations. Go Go Heart of the Cards, no? Ha.

 

For someone who goes around making nasty accusations about logic, you don't seem so very sure yourself. Little City has been the top Anti-Meta choice this current format, being able to successfully tech out and shut down other top tier competitors. And yet, where's the Black Garden? Exactly. If a card is good, it's used in top tiers. Black Garden is not used in top tiers, except by fools like Jerome. Logical conclusion? Black Garden is not good. It's really sad that such an awful Duelist like Jerome can wield such influence over you - Metagame.com is bad, except for event coverage.

 

My good friend Chevalier didn't claim that Little City drew more consistently into Royal Oppression than Blackest Garden drew into Black Garden - there you go again, jumping to conclusions - he merely stated, and with good reason, that Little City can still perform to a moderate degree without drawing into Royal Oppression early, where Blackest Garden topples into situational garbage. Honestly, most of the Plant support was terrible. Barring Gokaplant and TeleDAD/Plants, I promise that you won't see any (competent) players tossing Plants around.

 

If you're winning while running Black Garden, I pity your opponents. I should think it's high time you up your game and play against real top tiers. And lose.

 

I wish I could pretend that you were a joke account - it's hard to imagine anyone being quite so stupid - but I'm afraid I can't. Even a joke account wouldn't combine bad Ygoz, an obnoxious attitude, and a tasteless avatar.

 

Better not quit your day job.

[The Dark One]

This is getting ridiculous. Honestly, some of you fools ought to feel your lack of class a bit more keenly. I mean, bickering over a card whose playability has already been posted and proved? I am talking, of course, about Black Garden.

Posted in proved? Where? By terrible duelists like Jerome McHale? I'm sorry, but him not getting into the Top 16 with Black Garden doesn't really prove much of anything. To tell you the truth, I'd be pretty scared at what this world is coming to if I saw him in the top 16. His first debu with Counter Fairies was shaking enough. (It's not a good feeling to know that a completely skilless player like him can manage to get that far. Oh well, that's just because of the shitty condition our format's in.)

 

- in a format where most top tier Decks rely on consistent, powerful combinations, Black Garden is at a standstill. There are just so many better choices.

So that's your argument? Black Garden isn't a combo deck? I'm sorry, but you seem to have forgotten the key part here. We're talking about an ANTI-META deck, not a Meta deck. There's a distinct difference. You see, Black Garden is too busy ripping apart everyone else's combos to bother with one of its own.

 

But to a certain extent, you've got me there. (If you were really so stupid as to think that anyone would believe this) Black Garden is not, nor shall ever be as good as TeleDAD.

 

'The Dark One' - That's your nick? Really? -

Poisoning the Well? Appeal to Ridicule? I'm sorry, lrn2logic.

 

if you think that Black Garden is a good as Little City, it's time you retire from Yugioh and start shopping for a vacation home in Majorca, because you're obviously clueless.

Funny phrase, but unsubstantiated claim. Please leave your own distorted opinions out of this for the time being, at least.

 

Even at the best of times, Black Garden is a difficult card to use efficiently - the multiple, complicated possibilities it offers can unseat even the most experienced player, and easily lead to misplays when better moves are available.

So it sounds to me that your saying that Black garden is bad because it takes skill to use.... Well, I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but around here, skill is considered more important than luck.

 

I'm not denying that the card has vast potential, but right now, our format is dominated by blunt, easy-to-use combinations. Sadly, Black Garden doesn't fill this quota.

Of course, but we shouldn't exactly be judging cards based on the funked up format we live in now should we? (Here's a clue: no we shouldn't.)

 

Well, at least you admit that the card has future potential. But now let's stop to consider the present potential. That is, Black Garden, in conjunction with the rest of the plant deck, single-handedly rips apart TeleDAD's strategy.

 

Lol at you for dressing yourself up as good Ygoz. Don't bother, dear. You're not fooling anyone.

It would seem that the main body of your post is filled with unorganized 'disses' rather than even a feeble attempt at a coherent argument.

 

You really should play YVD - it's an excellent place to practice, and you can easily find innovation and competition at its finest.

I would, if my computer wasn't funked up oddly so that it doesn't let me go online on YVD.

 

But, of course, who am I kidding? You're probably some anime lover that uses bad cards because you lack the depth of imagination required to form your own innovations. Go Go Heart of the Cards, no? Ha.

Who are you kidding? Yourself? I hope you're not actually so pathetic to believe that I'm the anime-noob here. (Random side-note: I've only ever seen one Yugioh episode.)

 

For someone who goes around making nasty accusations about logic, you don't seem so very sure yourself. Little City has been the top Anti-Meta choice this current format, being able to successfully tech out and shut down other top tier competitors. And yet, where's the Black Garden?

Get with the times. There were quite a few Blackest Garden players at San Fran. They didn't top 16, but OWAIT! NEITHER DID Little City! (Now a Cornarchs build did make it. I'd like to discuss the potential it has as well, but we'll save that for another time)

 

Exactly. If a card is good, it's used in top tiers. Black Garden is not used in top tiers, except by fools like Jerome. Logical conclusion? Black Garden is not good.

So....You're saying that Dimension Fusion and Return from the Different Dimension were bad cards before some brilliant person decided to use them in a DAD Return deck? You're saying that Royal Oppression was terrible before some "idiot" decided to try using it as a form of anti-meta? You're saying that Glads were bad before they made their first top 16. (Don't use Gyzarus as an excuse, this was pre-Gyz) I'm sorry, but you know there does have to be that first WELL-BUILT and SUCCESSFUL deck. (McHale's deck does NOT qualify as well-built)

 

It's really sad that such an awful Duelist like Jerome can wield such influence over you - Metagame.com is bad, except for event coverage.

Stop acting like this is news or something. We all know McHale and the rest of the metagame staff are fucktards.

 

My good friend Chevalier didn't claim that Little City drew more consistently into Royal Oppression than Blackest Garden drew into Black Garden - there you go again, jumping to conclusions - he merely stated, and with good reason, that Little City can still perform to a moderate degree without drawing into Royal Oppression early, where Blackest Garden topples into situational garbage.

Actually, he didn't state that either. He simply made an unsupported assertion that Little City > Black Garden. I simply had the intellect necessary to understand that Royal Oppression is the cornerstone of the Little City deck. Basically, Oppression is to Little City what Black Garden is to the Black Garden Plant deck.

 

Oh, and Plants do just fine without drawing into Black Garden early. I don't know about you, but I think that staring down a 2800 ATK beatstick, knowing that even if you manage to get rid of it, it will come back next turn courtesy of Miracle Fertilizer is a whole lot scarier than looking at a 1900 ATK vanilla.

 

Honestly, most of the Plant support was terrible. Barring Gokaplant and TeleDAD/Plants, I promise that you won't see any (competent) players tossing Plants around.

There you go making baseless assertions again.

 

If you're winning while running Black Garden, I pity your opponents. I should think it's high time you up your game and play against real top tiers. And lose.

Oh, I see. So your one of those bad duelists who lose constantly but pretend it's really fun and suggest it to everyone else? Well, that's enlightening, but no thanks. I don't think that I would get much "experience" from purposefully making myself lose.

 

I wish I could pretend that you were a joke account - it's hard to imagine anyone being quite so stupid - but I'm afraid I can't. Even a joke account wouldn't combine bad Ygoz, an obnoxious attitude, and a tasteless avatar.

OHHHHH!!!! What a diss man!!!!! Wow, you sooo got me there. I'm going to go cry myself to sleep now.

(I'll take it you're a Starcraft hater)

Better not quit your day job.

I won't, thank you. I do enjoy getting paid.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

I find it hilarious how you and Chevalier keep tossing around "Gokaplant" as a proven top-level plant build. Now there's a deck that's REALLY untested, even Black Garden has been more notable at jumps than that deck.

[Orochi]

it's amusing how chevalier uses long sentences and fancy words but in fact... he says nothing...

 

 

black garden uses a well known strategy that warrior decks applied very well: ATK variations, the difference is that is applied by a field spell instead a continous spell... field spells has a lot more advantage than continous spells...

 

now, the presumptions of mr. chevalier that BG sucks is just based on the draw ratio, funny when comes from a card that can be searchable, also with the chance of resurrect a monster, also with the chance of locking opponent's field and adding more plants to your side to use with pollinosis, tytannial, nettles and another effects, and ALSO with the high chance of making opponent monsters weaker, and that can save your monsters from cards like bottomless trap hole and crush card virus... creating new strategies like blackest garden, teleplant, plant DAD and garden control... pretty good for a "sucky" card...

 

and, based on the opinion of this humble player, chevalier is biased, don't know what is saying and all his arguments are equal to a chris tucker routine...

[Psycho Shocker Android]

...is it even possible to be bad at running Lightlords? They're pretty much the easiest deck to run since ever. >_>

 

Yes it is trust me on this one.

 

I've seen some of the worst YGO players out there. Some failing with tele-dad vs little kids, people who don't even know wich cards are in their deck, even people running FTK decks who can't even draw cards properly.

 

Some duelists even have game in their hand and are told by people around them that they have game. These people can't even figure it out and loses the turn after.

 

Where can we create a topic about Epic YGO failure we've seen? (is this TCG, general, strategy?)

[CrabHelmet]

I don't know how to tell you this, but Princess Larakaralanakalara Z. Chevalier IV's flock is a distant cousin of the communist political organizations that were responsible for the murders of at least 90 million people. Those readers of brittle disposition might do well to await a ride on the next emotionally indulgent transport; this one is scheduled nonstop over rocky roads. As soon as you're strapped in I'll announce something to the effect of how before Chevalier once again claims that everyone who doesn't share her beliefs is a lamebrained hermit deserving of death and damnation, she should do some real research rather than simply play a game of bias reinforcement with her patsies. For her caustic plans to succeed, Chevalier needs to dumb down our society. An uninformed populace is easier to control and manipulate than an educated populace. By the end of the decade, schoolchildren will stop being required to learn the meanings of words like "protobasidiomycetous" and "contradistinctive". They will be incapable of comprehending that we've all heard Chevalier yammer and whine about how she's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.

 

Isn't it odd that juvenile spoiled brats, whose uncompromising lifestyle will promote solipsism's traits as normative values to be embraced when you least expect it, are immune from censure? Why is that? I wish I had a lot more time to answer that question. Unfortunately, the following comment will have to suffice: I have a hard time trying to reason with people who remain calm when they see Chevalier traffic in our blood, birthright, and security. When all is said and done, her provocateurs remain largely silent when asked about the correlative connecting her to Pyrrhonism. The rare times they do deign to comment they invariably skew the issue to prevent people from realizing that Chevalier's maudlin preoccupation with collectivism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "anthropomorphization", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to put the prisoners in charge of running the prison. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that Chevalier's favorite buzzword these days is "crisis". She likes to tell us that we have a crisis on our hands. She then argues that the only reasonable approach to combat this crisis is for her to cause the destruction of human ambition and joy. In my opinion, the real crisis is the dearth of people who understand that Chevalier's ability to capitalize on the economic chaos, racial tensions, and social discontent of the current historical moment can be explained in large part by the following. This is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about Chevalier's illogical behavior but about the way that letting Chevalier marginalize and eventually even outlaw responsible critics of inimical satanic-types sends a clear message to the worst types of unreasonable Philistines there are that they can feed blind hatred—and Chevalier knows it.

 

There is really an uncongenial dimension to Chevalier's epigrams. Or, if "uncongenial" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "mephitic". In any case, we ought to identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that cause pain and injury to those who don't deserve it. That'll make Chevalier think once—I would have said "twice" but I don't see any indication that she has previously given any thought to the matter—before trying to spread hatred, animosity, and divisiveness. All kidding aside, her snotty, pestiferous politics leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children Chevalier's enemies? The answer is not obvious because I have some of Chevalier's writings in front of me right now. In one of them, Chevalier maintains that anyone who resists her deserves to be crushed. If you don't find that shocking then consider that Chevalier has never satisfactorily proved her assertion that she commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface. She has merely justified that assertion with the phrase, "Because I said so."

 

Be always mindful that we must defy Chevalier. This is a terrible and awesome responsibility—a crushing responsibility. However, if we stick together we can can show the world that it's possible that it's not fair for Chevalier to leave a generation of people planted in the mud of a pigheaded world to begin a new life in the shadows of Marxism. However, I cannot speculate about that possibility here because I need to devote more space to a description of how Chevalier once had the audacity to tell me that it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to go to great lengths to conceal her true aims and mislead the public. My riposte was that she has been trying to raise funds for scientific studies that "prove" that superstition is no less credible than proven scientific principles. This is what's called "advocacy research" or "junk science" because it's funded by noisome Neanderthals who have already decided that Chevalier is known for her sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends.

 

When a political condition of greed, massive corruption, and diversity of objective is coupled to a social condition of drugs, violence, and discontent, therein exists the perfect environment for Chevalier to threaten national security. Worst of all, our children's children would never forgive us for letting her deny minorities a cultural voice. A central point of her belief systems is the notion that she's merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live. Perhaps Chevalier should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think she'd find that she loves getting up in front of people and telling them that the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. She then boasts about how she'll destroy everything beautiful and good in the immediate years ahead. It's all part of the media spectacle that is Larakaralanakalara Z. Chevalier. Of course, she soaks it up and wallows in it like a pig in mud. Speaking of pigs and mud, Chevalier counts the worst kinds of shrewish knuckleheads there are as her friends. Unfortunately for her, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that Chevalier's ethics are built on lies and they depend on make-believe for their continuation.

 

Now, it is not my purpose to suggest that the ineluctable outcome of Chevalier's commentaries is a world in which brassbound, muzzy-headed scroungers set the wolf to mind the sheep but rather to provide a trenchant analysis of Chevalier's mind games. I have no problem with the manifestly obvious statement that Chevalier trumpets venal conformism laced with bumptious unilateralism. I have no problem with the idea that Chevalier's publicity stunts are a syncretism of unsophisticated Dadaism and sneaky recidivism. And I have no problem with the special privileges occasionally granted to rude cankered-types. What I do have a problem with are Chevalier's blinkered, disingenuous morals. Her attempts to tell us how to live, what to say, what to think, what to know, and—most importantly—what not to know are much worse than mere deconstructionism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation.

 

The public is like a giant that Chevalier has blindfolded, drugged, and gagged. This giant has plugs in his ears and Chevalier leads him around by the nose. Clearly, such a giant needs to defy the international enslavement of entire peoples. That's why I feel obligated to notify the giant (i.e., the public) that Chevalier ought to realize that the most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do. Unfortunately, she tends to utter so much verbiage about obstructionism that I can conclude only that I despise everything about Chevalier. I despise Chevalier's attempts to bribe the parasitic with the earnings of the productive. I despise how she insists that her zingers are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals. Most of all, I despise her complete obliviousness to the fact that if I hear her apple-polishers say, "The ideas of 'freedom' and 'defeatism' are Siamese twins" one more time, I'm going to throw up.

 

Never have I seen such a gross error in judgment as Chevalier's decision to deny citizens the ability to become informed about the destruction that she is capable of. I almost forgot: Chevalier just reported that Man's eternal search for Truth is a challenge to be avoided at all costs. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Chevalier's part? I don't. I, for one, think that it's a deliberate attempt to preach hatred. According to her, the media should "create" news rather than report it. She might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then Chevalier would realize that the claim that human beings should be appraised by the number of things and the amount of money they possess instead of by their internal value and achievements is illusory. It follows from this that Chevalier teaches workshops on isolationism. Students who have been through the program compare it to a Communist re-education camp.

 

Some people have compared fatuous, disreputable enemies of the people to reprehensible freaks of nature. I would like to take the comparison one step further: Chevalier's claim that the best way to serve one's country is to suppress people's instinct and intellect is factually unsupported and politically motivated. Chevalier keeps telling everyone within earshot that she is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. I'm guessing that Chevalier read that on some Web site of dubious validity. More reliable sources generally indicate that we should agree on definitions before saying anything further about her maledicent remarks. For starters, let's say that "ruffianism" is "that which makes Chevalier yearn to censor any incomplicitous sophistries."

 

Chevalier really shouldn't subjugate persons of culture, refinement, and learning to the worst sorts of putrid bohemians there are. That's just common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate her claims are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity. After having read this, you may think that Princess Larakaralanakalara Z. Chevalier IV is swinging pretty hard on some slender evidence. Nevertheless, you should always remember that she has no conscience and therefore no feelings of guilt for wanting to flout all of society's rules.

[Azuh]

lol Argument creator

[Valkyrie Lupia Blitzer]

Fenrir Lockdown.

 

Remove Brainwashing decks.

 

Not that anybody uses either.

[Chevalier]

Crab,

You added a "Princess *Random Sequences of K, L, R, and A*" in front of name and then wrote ten paragraphs to set up a scenario where you could troll me, but rather putting it at extremes as to not be a direct troll.

 

it's amusing how chevalier uses long sentences and fancy words but in fact... he says nothing...

Well this looks like a promising post.

black garden uses a well known strategy that warrior decks applied very well: ATK variations' date=' the difference is that is applied by a field spell instead a continous spell... field spells has a lot more advantage than continous spells... [/quote']

That paragraph on its own is enough to prove how bad you are but let's continue, and for all those Crab Helmets out there, I'll even explain why it's a fail-point.

 

To be brief, Black Garden is a card that is an infinite Shrink going both ways and fills the field with tokens. Black Garden is a Field Spell, and thus, making it searchable by 'Terraforming' and such. What being searchable can't do for Black Garden is make it faster while it's on the field, make it easier to control, and make it effective enough to work against any competitive Deck. I can guarantee any Deck consisting of or based on Black Garden would lose to Tele-DAD, horribly at that, easily eight to nine out of ten times. Furthermore, BG gives you room to have your monsters big if you play them before you play it. As it seems apparent from above comments, people seem to think that they're going to have 'BG, Lonefire, Solemn, Solemn, Pollinosis, Pollinosis' as they're opening hand. No. You wont. Plants have no draw power at all. inb4 someone says COSR. Black Garden will end up being a dead draw because by the time you play it and have everything set up, your opponent will have swarmed the field with boss monsters and will barely even notice the Field Spell. To conclude, Black Garden is not a good card this format because of its lack of speed to set up its play and how ineffective it is by turn 2. [T]his comment on how BG works with Warriors is extremely comical.

 

 

now' date=' the presumptions of mr. chevalier that BG sucks is just based on the draw ratio,

[/quote']

No.... No they're not.

funny when comes from a card that can be searchable' date=' also with the chance of resurrect a monster, also with the chance of locking opponent's field and adding more plants to your side to use with pollinosis, tytannial, nettles and another effects, and ALSO with the high chance of making opponent monsters weaker, and that can save your monsters from cards like bottomless trap hole and crush card virus... creating new strategies like blackest garden, teleplant, plant DAD and garden control... pretty good for a "sucky" card...[/quote']

 

Well, I went searching in the mine of bad comments, and what a gem I found indeed. I'll skip what I've already been over and go straight to your deck lists.

Blackest Garden = Bad Deck

TelePlant = Unless it's TeleDAD Plants, Bad.

Plant DAD = I'm assuming it has Tele, Good. Unfortunately, This deck doesn't run BG, which is why it does so well.

Garden Control = It's goo- no it's bad.

 

and' date=' based on the opinion of this painfully bad player, Orochi is unintelligent, no one bothers to see what I'm saying past the first sentence because they're so dumbfounded at my stupidity, and all my arguments are as lively and interesting as cattle grazing.

[/quote']

 

Fixed