On 11/18/2017 at 6:13 AM, Lecitadin said:I'll sure give it Try!
Did you try this deck out yet? I'm going to create it and try beating Mt.Doom. Only things is that Power of Orthanc should be in there. Do I just add them to the deck to make it 53 cards, or should they be swapped with something (if so, what is it?)?
On 11/17/2017 at 5:48 PM, JusticeLizard said:http://ringsdb.com/decklist/view/6904/mount-doom-hobbits-1.0
In my campaign play through I actually use Fatty Bolger and Bilbo Baggins, but this is probably a better line up. Also, I had a game end with an uncancelable Heavy and Tired. If that had happened again, I would have swapped in some Power of Orthancs.
This isn't a good deck at all, just FYI. Tried 5 times and lost them all on easy mode. One of the games was lost due to the Heavy and Tired that came out. I don't advocate using this deck whatsoever. Just not a good one at all.
If a deck did not accomplish for you what you wanted it to, so be it. Never play it again. But don’t harshly criticize someone else’s work (even if the deck is bad, which this one is not) especially when others might find the same deck very helpful.
Edited by Wandalf the Gizzard21 minutes ago, Wandalf the Gizzard said:If a deck did not accomplish for you what you wanted it to, so be it. Never play it again. But don’t harshly criticize someone else’s work (even if the deck is bad, which this one is not) especially when others might find the same deck very helpful.
It's amazing how in today's society, nobody can take criticism. What others may find helpful others do not. This is a fact in life, and you must accept that. If it's bad for me, I can criticize it however I want to. In fact, I can go into detail on why the deck is not helpful, but even that is likely to be branded as "oh no! You should not criticize this deck!" This same psychology reminds me of a GMT games group where anything negative said about a GMT game was censored and removed. If you want to live in a fascist totalitarian state, go do it somewhere else!
13 minutes ago, gpd924 said:It's amazing how in today's society, nobody can take criticism. What others may find helpful others do not. This is a fact in life, and you must accept that. If it's bad for me, I can criticize it however I want to. In fact, I can go into detail on why the deck is not helpful, but even that is likely to be branded as "oh no! You should not criticize this deck!" This same psychology reminds me of a GMT games group where anything negative said about a GMT game was censored and removed. If you want to live in a fascist totalitarian state, go do it somewhere else!
Actually, you probably would get less criticism and better feedback if you went into detail on how the deck wasn't helpful. By just bashing it and claiming "it's not a good deck at all...I don't advocate using this deck whatsoever." is going to ruffle feathers and make it easy to write you off as the brazen, foolish loudmouth who doesn't understand how to run other people's decks; particularly with the tone that you adopt regarding the game (with statements like "I'm going to sell this game if I can't beat this quest in X number of tries!").
You should *definitely* go into detail on why you found the deck not helpful. Dismissing a deck as "bad" because you lost five times in a row tells us practically nothing, especially against a quest where losing five times in a row isn't remarkable at all. Seastan's One Deck lost 24 times in a row, and that is a very very good deck (though ill-suited for this scenario). This deck seems to be a good fit for this scenario -- few characters, high willpower allies with lots of readying. On the surface it seems the sort of deck that *should* do well against the quest. So what made it fail in your play-throughs?
You mentioned that one loss had Heavy and Tired come out. The deck as published has no answer for that, lacking Power of Orthanc and possessing Test of Wills that are rarely useful in this quest. When published Drinking Song didn't exist, and that's a perfect card for this deck. It needs Gandalf or Gondorian Fire to kill anything. SpMerry is a hero I love, but with Dire keyword his ability is rather limited.
Specific criticism may be disagreed with and unwelcomed -- but that's OK. If it's reasonable to harshly criticize someone's deck, it's equally reasonable to harshly criticize someone's criticism. But blanket dismissal of a deck (that someone else has already succeeded with) opens the question of whether the problem is the deck or the pilot. Only telling us *why* something failed will help others and spawn discussion of the actual deck and the actual quest rather than meta-discussion about criticism, like this post.
It's really no use explaining the deck to people who criticize my criticism, so it's a waste of my energy.
I ended up beating it on the first attempt with a deck on RingsDB involving hero Gandalf, lore Elrond, and leadership Denethor. Fellowship sphere Frodo with the willpower boost was also used. When I asked for a specific strategy for the deck, the creator said "no specific strategy." Sure enough, he was right! You just let the cards fall where they may and they took over for themselves. One of the best, if not THE best, deck to beat the scenario.
11 hours ago, gpd924 said:It's amazing how in today's society, nobody can take criticism.
Know I know why you responded.
11 hours ago, gpd924 said:What others may find helpful others do not. This is a fact in life, and you must accept that.
Well said. Sincerely. No sarcasm meant.
11 hours ago, gpd924 said:If it's bad for me, I can criticize it however I want to.
I see two problem's with this:
First "if it's bad for me" is a touch ambiguous, and the "for me" is telling.
Second, can and should are two very different things.
11 hours ago, gpd924 said:In fact, I can go into detail on why the deck is not helpful
That actually sounds like a very good idea. Constructive criticism is almost never a bad thing.
11 hours ago, gpd924 said:but even that is likely to be branded as "oh no! You should not criticize this deck!"
Providing reasons on why the deck was not helpful (to you) would indeed be branded as criticism. Being branded as criticism is not a bad thing.
11 hours ago, gpd924 said:If you want to live in a fascist totalitarian state, go do it somewhere else!
I kid you not. I actually laughed when I read this. Actually, I do feel like I can in good conscience obey this suggestion. If I ever do want to be a fascist totalitarian, I will most certainly do so elsewhere. Thank goodness I haven't done so here. I would also encourage you to ask other members of this forum for their opinion on whether or not my posts indicate a fascist totalitarian state. Thank you for your time.
On 9/2/2019 at 5:52 PM, gpd924 said:This isn't a good deck at all, just FYI. Tried 5 times and lost them all on easy mode. One of the games was lost due to the Heavy and Tired that came out. I don't advocate using this deck whatsoever. Just not a good one at all.
This isn't good criticism at all, just FYI. Player just called deck bad instead of saying what about it didn't work for them. Player gave no insight on what went wrong other then mention of Heavy and Tired for one loss. I don't advocate listening to this criticism whatsoever. Just not a good one at all. 
55 minutes ago, Wandalf the Gizzard said:Know I know why you responded.
Well said. Sincerely. No sarcasm meant.
I see two problem's with this:
First "if it's bad for me" is a touch ambiguous, and the "for me" is telling.
Second, can and should are two very different things.
That actually sounds like a very good idea. Constructive criticism is almost never a bad thing.
Providing reasons on why the deck was not helpful (to you) would indeed be branded as criticism. Being branded as criticism is not a bad thing.
I kid you not. I actually laughed when I read this. Actually, I do feel like I can in good conscience obey this suggestion. If I ever do want to be a fascist totalitarian, I will most certainly do so elsewhere. Thank goodness I haven't done so here. I would also encourage you to ask other members of this forum for their opinion on whether or not my posts indicate a fascist totalitarian state. Thank you for your time.
Maybe you should be a linguist or some kind of charlatan lawyer since you like to reason through things or provide "explanations" for somebody else's criticism when it's a real waste of time. What REALLY made me laugh was "Thank you for time." LOL like, seriously? Who the **** are you to just pop up out of nowhere and criticize criticism nonsensically (which is exactly what it is...nonsense)? It's amazing how merely saying "this is a bad deck" can generate so many ridiculous responses. Like who would have thought that so many *wasted* words would be typed just by saying "this is a bad deck"? Man you people are sensitive af. Must be a generational thing...
Also, my replies on this thread had nothing to do with you at all, and "thanking me for my time" makes absolutely no sense. I have nothing to be "thanked" for (especially since I'm not looking for thanks for anything), and nobody should be thanking you either.
*notifications turned off, so anything you write will not be read by me, so please continue wasting your time since you have nothing better to do. I take great pleasure in denying you the satisfaction of me reading your senseless drivel. Quest has been beaten. End of story. Final post.*
Edited by gpd924On the small chance you do read this, I was thanking you for reading my post, or, as you called it "senseless drivel." I thank you now for recommending that I pursue occupation as a lawyer or linguist.
24 minutes ago, gpd924 said:Must be a generational thing...
This reminded me of something! If anyone wants a good laugh:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLpE1Pa8vvI
Enjoy!
10 hours ago, gpd924 said:It's really no use explaining the deck to people who criticize my criticism, so it's a waste of my energy.
I ended up beating it on the first attempt with a deck on RingsDB involving hero Gandalf, lore Elrond, and leadership Denethor. Fellowship sphere Frodo with the willpower boost was also used. When I asked for a specific strategy for the deck, the creator said "no specific strategy." Sure enough, he was right! You just let the cards fall where they may and they took over for themselves. One of the best, if not THE best, deck to beat the scenario.
To me, a waste of energy is complaining about complainers instead of discussing decks. Boring down on strategy is what interests me; meta-discussion about criticism is far less interesting. The only reason making specific criticsm could be a "waste of your time" compared to meta discussion is if discussion of strategy interests you *less* than meta-discussion, or you don't actually have any specific criticism to make.
"One of the best, if not THE best, deck to beat the scenario" is a bold claim, considering you played it exactly once. I can only find one published deck at ringsdb with Gandalf/Elrond/LoDenethor:
http://ringsdb.com/decklist/view/4636/ring-bearers-1.0
I'm inclined to be charitable to decks with unique hero lineups, and compared to other Vilya decks this has a couple assets against this quest -- LoDenethor's scrying and far fewer allies than is typical with other Vilya decks. But it's not designed for this quest, it was created for multiplayer use and there's a number of cards that aren't useful for this quest (Emery, 3x Errand-rider, Dark Knowledge, Galadhrim's Greetings). As a multiplayer deck it's also avoiding unique attachments that could be used elsewhere (e.g. Light of Valinor, *certainly* worth at least a 1x for this quest.) For readying it has 3x Shadowfax and 1x UC, and the only willpower boost is Elrond's Counsel. I'd think Fortitude tests would be an issue with this deck. LOS Frodo gives you a 4 wp option if you can exhaust the ring (I used him against Mt. Doom also), but that'd have more value if you had Rosie Cotton and Fast Hitch in the deck to take advantage of his round-long willpower boost!
No wonder I was confused. I misread LeDenethor as LoDenethor. The actual deck used is much, much better:
https://www.ringsdb.com/decklist/view/6947/solo-deck-mount-doom-1.0
14 hours ago, gpd924 said:*notifications turned off, so anything you write will not be read by me, so please continue wasting your time since you have nothing better to do. I take great pleasure in denying you the satisfaction of me reading your senseless drivel. Quest has been beaten. End of story. Final post.*
Alternatively, you may grow up. Walking away and slamming the door to "make sure you have the last word" speaks volumes of immaturity. You come across as arrogant, confrontational and condescending. I would bet you're coming back to check out if the rest replied anything. It's a pity, because this forum is usually full of interesting discussions and people respecting each others' opinions while debating.
It looks to me he is not the sort of person with the will and kidness to be able to throw the ring. In view of this, I don’t think it can be considered that you truly throw the ring. You son of Isildur!
Edited by Yepesnopes
I think the line about throwing that fits here is: "FOOL OF A TOOK!!!
Throw yourself in next time, and rid us of your stupidity!!"
this last page has been amusing on many levels...
- that wandalf wouldn't take the bait and instead patronized them into a tantrum...
- that someone would pick this place to come and be an internet tough guy...
- and that the same someone would use the whole 'get off my lawn' rant and yet still be like, 'uh, anyone got, uh, a deck i could use to uh, beat mountain of fire?... but one that uh, doesn't suck...
you cant make this stuff up
On 9/4/2019 at 6:01 PM, old toby said:this last page has been amusing on many levels...
- that wandalf wouldn't take the bait and instead patronized them into a tantrum...
- that someone would pick this place to come and be an internet tough guy...
- and that the same someone would use the whole 'get off my lawn' rant and yet still be like, 'uh, anyone got, uh, a deck i could use to uh, beat mountain of fire?... but one that uh, doesn't suck...
you cant make this stuff up
And you can't make posts like this up either! Just hits the spot. 
Some proper popcorn material for sure. Too bad he threw in the towel.
While I can understand the frustration of getting beaten again and again by the game (and especially Mt Doom), there is no need for calling someone else's deck terrible. There are no terrible decks, just terrible ways you can reveal the cards in that deck. Especially in such tough quests as this do you need a deck that is more finely tuned to the scenario, which is why Roka's deckbuilding series exists.
Shame to see someone using such an aggressive tone in this otherwise top notch community. Hy hat goes off to the rest of the people here who tried to deal with the situation with reason, but sometimes there can be no victory against a mindset like that. Looking at other posts, this was not an isolated incident. Best to move on and look ahead to the games to come, perhaps one day a One Deck is published that he does like.
Aa'menealla nauva calen ar'malta!
The best part for me was how the entirety of the criticism rested on the ambigious-to-the-point-of-meaningless adjective 'bad' and personal experience. In a constructive, co-operative context oriented around thinking together through problems, how could that sort of 'criticism' not be viewed as problematic!
I am suspicious in the most wonderful way regarding the timing of his quest completion 