dutpotd said:

"MY DECK ONLY LOST TWICE!"

To who? Against what competition? Insufficient data is insufficient. It'd be like if I were to say "Guys I've got a killer deck that's only lost twice."

Who in their right mind would actually trust me without seeing a decklist?

guitalex2008 said:

As much as you are 100% right, and I appreciate your interjection.

I do, and likely will continue to, respond to slander and defamation of me, my posts, and of others when I find it appropriate. Perhaps I would be more concerned if I had dirty laundry to air, in this case I do not. I will continue to positively contribute to this thread the best I can and fend off attacks on my character from sore losers (pun? maybe).

- dut

Homme Chapeau said:

Thank you Hatman, my point exactly, paranoid overreaction is all this thread is.

- dut

Lovely, another thread derailed by bull between peopel

dutpotd said:

The only deck with 4 attacks that I think can do reasonably well is King because he will ALWAYS have said attack if he really needs it and has ways to keep PotE off the table. It'd be an Earth/Void hybrid to get the proper Earth pieces in and have enough space for War Between Sisters in case of PotE.

Homme Chapeau said:

For a low attack deck to work consistently there needs to be a few pieces to its receipe.

1) getting one of the few attacks into hand. Bittner did this with a lot of draw in his Zi Mei deck, careful mulliganing, and the sort. Nowadays the Zi Mei that runs 4 attacks is struggling with this, needing to add tech to the deck to draw into one of a few attacks slows it down and costs it games. As Hatman is stating Earth (King) is the best at doing this and is why he is top tier - getting attack is consistency.

2) being able to survive until support pieces are out. Kiit has inadvertantly, or maybe purposefuly, indicated that Fire is the best survival symbol (his opinion and maybe mine) right now. Can a void deck survive well? maybe. Death? maybe, depends what control pieces come out and when. Earth? yeah, it has the best shot of this.

3) being able to push the damage through on the attack. Valued but not Trusted has been mentioned and so have a large number of cards that stop One Hit Kills. Does a deck feasibly have all the answers for this?

This is the challenge Nick talks about, all of it needs to be addressed, and is why solo attack decks can be very fun.

- dut

dutpotd said:

That's why I said "both of you". I understand that if you feel attacked that you want to straighten things up. But this isn't the sort of thing you do online. If someone attacks you online instead of talking to you, they're petty. If you also respond online, not talking to them, are you also petty? It's a good question to ask yourself in these sort of things.

Just ask yourself, "What would Jesus do?" If your answer is "mow my lawn", then you're petty.

That last sentence had nothing to do with the subject, I just wanted to randomly insert humor to lighten up the mood.

dutpotd said:

dutpotd said:

@dut

Like I said before I wouldn't care if A. It was some nobody. And B. he posted a low loss rate. If it wasn't for those two things this thread wouldn't exist. This whole thing is built off Otaku's credibility and history as a player. If you confirmed the deck is possible then I would have a strong tendency to believe it. I didn't know about 4 throw kIng. No one posted it on the boards to my knowledge. Even after reading about it could be done with 4 throws or 14 throws in the deck. General premise is to abuse POTM and kings throw/fish ability. That's fine because one is playing aggro and not stalling out using control pieces.

It is the control element that some how feeds a strong unstoppable kill. It has to be unstoppable or you would need more attacks.

I have an awesome Taki deck that has only lost twice.

Here are some clues:

1) It doesn't use Ninja Cannon.

2) It is off of Air.

3) I've only played it twice.

Good luck.

Anyways, still on topic.

@ Darklogos

In my mind the most consistent deck at doing this would be Rashotep. Rashotep has the best defense on him if used properly being able to blank out the biggest threat.

Once he has Devil Gene and Valued but not Trusted out and maybe some Controller of Souls you play the attack, pump it to amounts that can't be blocked and go to town.

Similarily Bryan Fury can do this well too, but doesn't have the defenses in him that Rasho does, on the other hand he can make the solo attack kill faster.

So, how do you counter this mess? Kill quicker than he sets this up. Play with action cards that offer additional/unexpected defense. Destroy key foundations. There are still ways to counter the perfect kill turn from coming.

- dut

dutpotd said:

1) Even then - King requires Path of the Master, otherwise a 4 attack King will never get the backing needed in time to survive. Although that may be local metaspeak as games tend to not last beyond 4 turns here.

2) Ever since Paul Phoenix was released, Fire was a great symbol for tanking. The only reason I mention Earth/Void is in relation to King. We've established that King can probably profit the most from a 4 attack line-up. Great, but where do we go from here?

3) Again, King could theoretically do it, but he'll struggle heavily against Kilik.

King could play valued but not trusted against Kilik. You just pick the character card.

darklogos said:

Once, on one attack, destroying a foundation, only to lose the damage on said attack to Kiliks foundations, a block or something else... It isn't as simple as you want to make it out to be. And this is why it isn't black and white, 'my deck with 4 attacks always wins'...

- dut

guitalex2008 said:

Obviously, you are right again. Funny how I already know this but still responded. Am I admitting to being petty by knowlingly acting in a way that I consider to be petty? Perhaps.

Perhaps again, you don't know Kiit, and/or there are times when you have to compromise to get what you want. Maybe I have weighed things off in my mind and it is worth me compromising my own image, portraying myself as petty to people that don't know the full details, to respond in attempt to get what I want...

I've thought of all this, I've addressed him in person. I've asked and continue to ask myself 'these sorts of things'.

He needs to know that his behavior will not go tolerated and ignored . Always remember, scolding a child does not mean the parent is being petty, it means he or she is parenting and showing care for the child by taking steps to improve behavior (sometimes seemingly insensitive), setting boundaries, and teaching the child about the reprecussions of his or her actions. If the reprecussion involves online humiliation and/or ridicule maybe that is what it will come to. Its up to him really, I am just going to do what I think is right under the circumstances, every one being allowed to forumulate their own opinion of whether I am petty or not.

Not to disrespect your opinion, but it will be what it will be, and suffering the negative opinions of a few people who don't understand (nor should they be blamed, they don't know the full story) is worth not having to deal with insubordination ad nauseam, both when spending valuable time to contribute online and when playing a game I love and enjoy.

- dut

A deck with 4 attack cards has 55 cards to play around with. That is 13 playsets of 4. Thirteen playsets of anything need them to do. Not including sideboard. That is a lot of options to have in a deck. I used to play with 80 card decks a couple of months ago. I could fit in all my control elements that I wanted. THe problem I faced was that I couldn't attack frequently. I eventually died to Ivy attack spam. So I abandoned hard control for soft control in Rashotep. It worked a lot better because I could blank out just about anything that was a risk. The problems were always the next turn. What I'm trying to say is that I know the control was strong but it never had an inkling of leading into a valid win up until now.

He doesn't want to share his tech. Thats fine. It comes back to an argument I made a while ago that the cool kids club has their private tech and the rest of us have to plot in the open. In the end anything publically put out helps everyone including the elite few who don't contribute. It pushes back to the reality of why contribute? Why not just have a group of players and keep the tech between ourselves?

darklogos said:

And here is the crux of the issue, and probably what really gets to you - the unkown factor is not well loved by darklogos.

I've always been one to share 'after' (and in the case where I run the same deck twice I suppose it then becomes 'before') I play someone. The thing here is that there is value placed on the time and energy that goes into determining the ultimate deck, and most players rightfully want to translate that value into wins. It only makes sense.

If the game was only about determining the best player then fine, share everything. It is however about the best player/builder, and for many this is the appeal of CCGs as opposed to boardgames, the ability to put ones mark on something not just with what is done, but also with respect to what is made.

- dut

I say leave him be. If otakuV wins a major tournament with it, then props. If nothing happens, then whatever. He's a good player, but then again it's only his meta we're talking about. In mine, a Fire Zi Mei, no matter how many answers exist for a deck with 4 attacks, rocked for a while because quite frankly Stand Off is stupid. Does this mean a 4 attack deck would win in a major tournament? This isn't block 3, so the answer is an obvious, gigantic, enormous NO, no matter how much people will tout that their deck kills things.

I'm glad it kills things, but its inconsistencies must be staggering. And in a meta outside of your own, it will be worth zero. That's what SHOULD happen to decks that don't attack anyways, so it should not come as a surprise.

I'm saddened that no one noticed anything about my Taki deck I put here, which has also only lost twice lol.

dutpotd said:

In all honesty yes that is part of it. The elite share after they stack up wins if they share at all. The biggest winners in the game will read and talk among an elite group of peers and keep their findings and conculsions to themselves. That has rubbed me the wrong way since I entered this game. Every other game I've entered I've not seen that element as strong as it is here. In the end it yells "Hey keep thinking your good at the game even though your really a noob."

Vik was contributing and then he dropped off. Other then that I'm the only one putting out tech ideas. Yes we get character discussion but they never start with the author revealing tech its always about asking for help or asking people to put up commentary. There is no commit one podcast nor control check radio. No one with a history of success has stepped in and said "Hey here is stuff that makes you not a noob and so you can give the major players a run." I've seen that in other games. Not here. I'm doing my best not to character assualt on people that win. But they don't do crap to elevate other players or at least pass on skill. Scott Gainse and Mt. Do left the game and what vast amounts of technical knowledge has been lost and not past down for others of us to learn from. Its like the library of Alexandra in Egypt being burned and sacked in the ancient world. Everytime it happened the amount of known knowledge got cut in half. Its like loosing the secret of making concrete. I admit I don't know it all and overlook many different things. But my only two learning sources are the forums and practice games. Every time I tried to make a friend with the older players on the forums they wouldn't even respond nor would they respond to my tech questions. So when they don't contribute we are stuck with people with okay levels of knowledge and insight trying to help new players and existing players.

I had my fill of playing mother may I with what little I played last block.I don't want to deal with it again. I'd rather quit then deal with it again. It's not an issue of not willing to build a strong deck to fight it or practice or whatever solution people will give. It comes down to some tactics are just not healthy. Turtling wit no advancing, and stalling are two mechanics that every game I played does its best to stop and punish. Some how we are right back at turtling and stalling.

darklogos said:

Not true. Just because you hear of someone sucessful at a certain playstyle doesn't mean 'we' are all right back there. In any case, UFS is a rhythm game, it is about attacking at the right time and developing defensive resources at the right time.

I know most games end quickly, and I have yet to see a sucessful turtle or stall that isn't aided and abetted by bad luck on drawing attacks on my part or poor checks or whatever. We are not back at that point, there is absolutely no proof of it, and even when there is slight proof of its sucess in some metas it is not the way it is.

The problem is your viewpoint. You view deck secrecy as an 'elite'. Building decks is part of the game, just as I wouldn't reach over, look at your hand, and say - play that attack, it will kill me, you can't expect players of a CCG to share their upper hand gained by deckbuilding.

I, for one, have no problem sharing the deckbuilding philosphies I use, how I approach building a deck, and what key elements need to be in certain decks for certain reasons. All I ask is that players like you respect the part of the 'game' that is building a deck. If everyone shared with everyone, the deck building challenge would all but become negligble and we would lose half our reason to play... .

The challenge is building 'your own' deck, shirking that challenge defeats the purpose of playing a CCG.

Sigh. I know that you are intelligent Darklogos, so I hope you understand the points I am making above. And with all that said, I am willing to share any and all my knowledge, I truly believe the more players that are better at the game the better I too will become. (I need push and pull to succeed).

- dut

As has been stated their is too little information on this deck to surmise what it is and also if it is even something to worry about. If otakuV wins a major tournament with his deck, it's not the end of the world. He won't win another with it because everyone will start coming up with answers to it anyway. If he wants to keep his secrets it's his choice. Albeit, taunting us like this is pretty much an ******* thing to do. Still bitching and moaning wont get you anywhere.

The topic of this thread was to surmise what this deck could possibly be. I think you've got some great discussions going on "what could make a **** good control deck in the current meta." That seems like a far more interesting thread than a thread that seems to be complaining about a single deck, with probably more solutions than you can count (hence probably why he hasn't unveiled his deck in a tournament, he's probably still working out the kinks).

This thread is a abomination.

There is a FEW(I can think of 3 I know work, and 1 that might work) Competitive low attack decks(4-8 is the most realistic number) they can compete on a high level and yes, they are not necessarily the best thing for the game.

But the game is played differently by different people, and different decktypes are A-Okay with me, you do as you please with your way of playing.

There are many average attack number decks(12-17 or so) that work, more then the few attack catagory by a long shot. These are also competetive and what the game basically wants for a "healthy" meta. The fact that these decks do work and they are competitve means THAT THE META IS HEALTHY. When they stop working, completely overshadowed by the minimal attack decks, then you will see problems.

There is even a few HIGH attack count decks(18-24) that are competitve, I can only think of two off hand, but the fact that they even work is a testament toability to play the game any way you want.

A 1 attack deck is a neat trick, and can be good, but It has very VERY real weaknesses (Profiecent sniper/Wonderworld Warriors/POwer of the Edge, hell depending on the way it's done even acrobatic/The devil within can completely wreck it). I would take that same concept and expand it to one playset of a attack to eliminate some of it's main weaknesses but that is just me. Even then, just like every other deck, it can die turn two to a wall of attacks that a huge portion of the meta is capable of producing, Literally no deck in the game right now is immune to this, it just happens, and people die.

Also, I love it when people decide themselves whether or not they are top players, that always kills me.

dutpotd said:

dutpotd said:

Its not so much a deck secrecy issue as a social network of the elite players talking and sharing tech as an issue. The fact that I haven't seen any of the champions give any insights or general pointers to the game is another dishearting element of it. You hear a lot of "I talked to so and so champ on IM the other night and we talked about x." That's a bunch of bull. Its not a you and me thing. Its a community issue. Its top people helping their friends in turn spiting everyone else. Thing is IF THEY WROTE AND GAVE BACK I wouldn't care about half of the stuff they held back. Its the fact they give nothing is what ticks me off. Hata is an exception because he is designing the game.

I will not discount that a player still has to know how to play the deck. I've seen how proper coaching can allow people to play net decks. The problem I have is the consistency on the issue of net decking. When I bring it up as a bad thing I get people come in and correct me that it is good and needed thing. But when a top ranking player says net decking is bad and refuses to share a deck that could be strong in the meta it is okay to pull out the evil net deck card. This reinforces to me that there are 2 standards in the UFS community. One for winners and one for who are unproven. Popular opinion and policy always favors the winners.

You have written somethings up and I apreciate it a lot. I wish you would write more frequently. I wish for you to put more of you knowledge out in the open. Even if its after a test your decks have a lot of good insight that can be gained from reversed enegeneering. In all honesty you have worked hard and proven to me that you are person worthy to listen to and account for what you say. While I understand your viewpoint I can't agree with all your conclusions when it comes to this issue.

I'm going to try to create an one attack deck in the next week. At least being able to know the premis first hand will be benficial. If I decided to go to the tourney in Texas I would need ever edge I can get.

darklogos said:

Top players are barely paying attention to the game right now, it's the offseason and no one is really too into it, a lot of the top players don't even post because the forums are kind of icky, and travel in large circles. If you know what you are looking for on the forums, you can often find good little tidbits here and there. If you want good insight on some of what the really good players are playing, it's going to be tough, but mostly it's just going to be really polished and well piloted versions of the decks you hear about. Olexa is playing Cassie, Bittner is playing Zi Mei, Kohls was playing Astrid, Herr is/was playing himself, Dut is playing Hilde, A million people are playing King, there is some other sneaky good decks out there(We have one particular decktype in our meta that I preach about constantly but I dont think many people outside of our group take seriously yet) but in general you are not goign to be suprised, Shaneth tends to post the best decklists right now for competitve decks so if you want some competitve insight from a strong meta, look at those. Also consider the style differences that make it hard to figure out the meta, Dut likes his complicated thinking mans decks for example, even going so far as to say financial troubles is not a staple. In our area Financial troubles is not only a staple, but practically a win condition in some decks, neither one of us is neccessarily wrong, so much as what we like and how we play is very specific to the top level player you are dealing with.

failed2k said:

I am a top hat player.

Also, this sentence right there is why I always mention that I'm a REAL bad player, and an even worse deckbuilder. Not that I can't compete, but other than a top 8 in a regional what the **** have I done?

Oh yeah, a bunch of Photoshops.

failed2k said:

My secret is out. Thanks J-Ray

I post decks very rarely, cause I post the only ones that deserve to get posted. Get 'em while you can

I don't wanna come off as bragging, but I did have a UFS National Champion netdeck off me. PM me if you want the story It's very joocy.