dutpotd said:

Yeah I better start mainboarding cards I do not have.

How come every time someone comes in with an intelligent post, the next one is just whining?

Smazzurco said:

If this wasn't a rhetorical question, which I believe it is, I would also ask you to start a new thread for it ^^

- dut

If you can Value but not Trusted or Controller of Souls any anti-asset card. Memories that Stain its Armor makes sure they can't do it again if its a foundation. Killer Android protects path if you have another asset out or your opponent has an asset.

What was the gripe before forced rotation? It was people would hide behind a wall of gray and then one shot with one attack. It was a series of control/anti-control pieces. So now that a person with credibility as a player (Otaku) states he has done the thing that caused block rotation that seems to be okay. I would have left it alone as a joke if he didn't say he only lost twice with the deck and he wouldn't post the deck list. Does it look for whining? Yes it does because I'm the only one that sees this as a red flag. What was the purpose of early rotation if not to stop this situation.

The whining was not in reference to him....

darklogos said:

Here's the thing, we are dealing with extremes here. It wasn't a joke, there have been 4 attack Fury of the Ancient decks being built since day one in this block - if you consider that a waving flag then so be it.

If you think defensive play was what caused rotation you are seriously simplifying the situation. What caused the rotation was a stale meta, too many overpowered defensive cards, in essence giving the decks that do what you apparantly hate but want to do (a control deck does this) too easy of a time. This doesn't exist today.

Losing twice in a single meta can mean a variety of things, in fact it probably means it wouldn't win a major tourney yet, it just means it is viable under the right circumstances. We haven't got enough information to determine if what he is playing with is any better than 4ThrowKing, which is pretty viable in it's own right, - we don't have the number of games hes played, who they were against, etc. etc. Long story short, just because a control deck can win doesn't mean to raise the red flag, it means the game in the current block is finally getting a bit more diverse.

If anything, people should see this as a positive thing because there are increasing style options to win games with, it is only natural that this happens as more and more cards enter the standard block.

Some people like control, some people like agro. I could have equally said that because Hata/Heiachi only lost twice that agro is being played too much and I happen to like control. Meta is stale, a bunch of random attacks being thrown = win, therefore I don't like the game.

It's really quite silly this whole discussion, the game isn't killed when something is id'd as strong, there is always a better and there always will be, the fun is in finding it.

- dut

dutpotd said:

kiit said:

You think it is easy, build it and play it. When you get killed turn 2 by Hata/Heiachi/King tell me that the 'easy' time of 'defense then attack' exists. And, Good and Order do just as well.

Your point isn't even applicable granted I have never run less than 12 attacks in a Hilde deck and don't intend to.

Troll post is troll, if you can refrain from misquoting me in the future I'd greatly appreciate it.

Try thinking of an actual argument, indicate why something needs to be addressed (aside from the obvious bias bad players have against good players) and defend your point with actual results of your own. i.e. it could be that I am a good player and not that Hilde and the Fire symbol is broken, there is more evidence of that than what you constantly wish to imply.

- dut

dutpotd said:

Eh who said anything about your decks.

also the reason I wont play Hilde is still the same reason that I gave Seb back when he called to find out what my response to the early rotation was.

either way fire has an easier time then any other resource right now to hole up and wait to draw into it's key attacks, many of the larger damage reduction cards have both the damage reduction and damage pump, stand off, the ultimate team, it has the draw to pull in more foundations and cards in hand to defend with {fuel to stand off's commit 2 and the ultimate teams commit 1 costs, as well as the discard {pretty much the best option} a foundation for pump/reduction, making the " bad " block mod foundations worth keeping in hand. toss in speed control {paid to protect, and to a lesser extent sisters of battle}.

@dut

I want control decks to show up. I don't want control decks to be able to control so much that they can sit back and build for a haymaker. I have a lot of people I talk to about the game. Tech wise one of the big issue I emphasised is that there isn't a way , i thought, that could lock a player out. In the end most people didn't believe me because card games always go that way. Well it seems I was wrong.

Most of my testing with control pieces kept encountering setbacks. I could control or kill but not do both very effectively. Then comes along the claim that both can be done easily.

Thing with Valued but Not trusted is that I didn't think about its limitation. It doesn't really have any besides being destroyed. G-corp leader fixes that hole. You can recycle it over and over again. You can name any card including actions and character cards. All you need is a bit of mind-reading tech in your deck. That's not hard to do. Oh look I just blanked your character now you can't do jack.

The only way to stop valued but not trusted is to play dead for a thousand years but its reactionary so it could be shut down.

Sorry I'm just not adding much to this. Here's hoping something comes out stop valued but not trusted.

darklogos said:

dead for 1000 years, devil gene, Taki, no forgiveness, sirens call, pommel smash, rashotep {if they only have one} JJ, paul phoenix memories of a nightmare, more circumstancal could include regretful existence, also atoning for his wicked deeds {if you have life or path}

also valued but not trusted only hit 1 enhance phase, so if they have 1 out, try to bait them to use it then hit with a second attack.

Devil Gene does nothing unless its on your attack. Controller of souls shuts it down right after it goes off. So its not a valid solution.

No forgiveness does nothing again because you can use any method to blow it up and put it back in your hand with g-corp. In the end its futile. If they have multiple out you haven't solved anything.

Memories of a nightmare doesn't work because it blows itself up already.

Atoning for wicked deads doesn't stop anything it only allows you to build.

Taki has to take out both G-corp, valued but not trusted, and another card that can blow up foundations in their opponents staging area. That is a lot for her to blank.

Rashotep like you said only stops one.

Pommel smash falls under the same limitation as rashotep. Thing is there are cards that allow you to untap so that may not be a big thing.

Regretful existence does nothing to Valued but not Trusted at all.

This block will not turn into last block as long as we don't have the defensive level of foundations we had back then. it was practically game when my opponent would 2 bloods and 2 amys on thier first turn. We are not at that point anymore. Even if 1 attack decks exist they don't have the defense that they had in B3. If there is a 4 attack deck that starts shaking up the meta I am sure there will be plenty of counters to it. But as I and dut said it's nothing new to this game. When the early rotations first occured Zi Mei was doing it and I was contemplating making a Hilde that did it running 4 Odins Wrath as it had the highest base damage so just one Dual Wielding would equal 16 damage.

darklogos said:

This is a clear overreaction, valued but not trusted blanks out a card for a single enhance phase. Looping it, even with Omar, isn't going to win you games unless your opponent is throwing one attack at your a turn. In fact, valued but not trusted is the reason more attacks need to be run with characters like Hilde or Hata, namely, more than one is needed to actually use a character ability on an attack.

G-corp leader has a vitality cost... It also adds to hand, so that turn it is done. If you have 4 G-corp leaders out and 4 valued but not trusted, any deck with more than 8 attacks is likely going to eat you alive even if you stop their biggest damage enhances. You still have to block or reduce the damage on these attacks to try to survive...

Silliness I say. I've never seen such overreaction, and unwarranted by a player who likely hasn't even experienced a big tournament format. Absolute Balderdash, take it from me Valued but Not Trusted is a great card, it isn't game breaking though, nor is a deck that can win with 4 attacks more often than not.

- dut

A deck with only one set of one attack doesn't need to Valued more than once a turn, ever. Who cares if it blows up?

wow this has got to be the stupidest thread ive every seen and im sorry that im responsible.my one deck doewsnt kill the game and there is no way for you to hypothesis how to stop it because you dont know what it is.Im not a newb player and am probubly one of the tops so i look at what can stop my deck tand take care of it.one attack deck is a challenge and thats why i like it.this wont make me take the deck apart and since no one knows what it is it wont be a trend so chill out.darkwhatever.

kiit said:

It's obvious you are talking about me and my Hilde deck, one) you quoted me and then minced it up as if 'I should know', two) you've been whining about Hilde needing an errata ever since I started using her, three) it is fact that you run around these forums 'correcting' me, it only follows that you are talking about 'my' decks.

You gave Seb a reason back then did you? I'm not Seb so I have no clue what that means. I can only assume it was your typical 'cry' about how the new block doesn't have characters you like in it. I know you only play feminine characters, if you make that choice and they happen to be worse than the other choices out there you only have your own limiting factor to blame. Perfect Balance doesn't exist, make your choices and live with them, don't ***** and moan all the time, I for one am sick of it.

You've simply stated that one resource is better than another in a certain way, the certain way that it should be. Fire is a damage/speed increase/decrease symbol and always has been. How 'Fire is better than another symbol' has anything to do with this thread is beyond me.

The only thing apparant to me is this. You think Fire is the strongest symbol. I know for a fact I haven't seen you play Fire except when you played Astrid, and you still couldn't win. You don't play what you know is the best, ergo you only have yourself to blame? ...

Stating the obvious does not count as an argument, especially when it has nothing to do with what the thread is talking about. I acknowledge Fire is the best damage reduction symbol, but it is still offers 1/100th of the defense that existed pre-rotation especially respective of the strength of damage pump that exists. An 'easier' time is not comparable to the stale meta we had before.

If Fire has it all, play Fire, and when you still don't top 8 don't come crying to me.

- dut

otakuV said:

I didn't think the thread was stupid at all there has been a lot of intelligent convo going on.

dutpotd said:

too bad your playstyle is stuck in that meta mode

otakuV said:

Your apology is accepted, it isn't your fault we have paranoid responses to honest attempts at building reliable decks.

There is a million ways to stop it, and an equal number of ways to be stopped by it.

Obviously there is a challenge/enjoyment to be gained by building a single threat deck, with all the supporting pieces making the threat pay dividends.

Chill out is right. If I told you tomorrow I built a deck that mills, no attacks, would you wave a purple flag for me???

- dut

kiit said:

"You're a towel"

kiit said:

? My playstyle was never like what people categorized as 'block 3 meta', just ask anyone who played me.

How can I be stuck in something I never was??? I never built or ran a Bishamon deck, a Lock deck, a Chun-li deck, a Uppercut deck, a loop deck, a Fury deck, etc. I have and always will use mutliple attacks and kill methods, if that becomes a 'meta mode' than I would be a very happy man.

My playstyle is and always will be 'well-rounded', if that involves running some defensive pieces that you can't manage I suggest you stop playing right now.

- dut

otakuV said:

Lets see. You make strong claims in the other thread about control decks. You post that you've tested this deck and its only lost twice. You revert to a heavy emphasis on control and most likely are valued but not trusted looping. If you were a noob i would have written it off as thread trolling and ignored you. But your sig tells me otherwise that you are not trolling and telling the truth. So its an overeaction to stop something I think is toxic and bad for the game? Right.

If it won't be a trend publish the deck. You would have no fear of netdeckers because the deck is not that strong. But the truth is you haven't published the deck so it has a good amount of strength to it.

dutpotd said:

Can everyone calm down and stop airing your dirty laundry in a public place? If you're from the same playgroup, take it up in your cell phones. We're not interested in your bull. Zip it. BOTH OF YOU.

darklogos said:

It isn't toxic for the game to have multiple ways to play and still win. You are overreacting, what with little information and young card pool.

If someting always wins and takes little to no skill then there is a big problem. I gaurantee you that Nick is skilled and that skill is part of the reason why the deck is racking up more wins than losses (but it still does lose), not that he has broke the game and is secretly protecting the a-bomb of decks that once played will certainly win and dull the senses of all it beats into submission...

Nick isn't the type to post his deck, some people are the type and some aren't. The reason he isn't posting has nothing to do with trends, it has to do with personal choice and a dis-taste for copy cats. I, for one, respect this choice and think all you are doing with this thread is makeing a big deal out of nothing.

- dut