Deck Originality

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

alan75

New Member
Ok heres my little rant again directed at no one in particular.Why (an i said this before) with the range of cards available to people is there no decks that aren't almost completely the same. Looking at deck lists(top 8 from latest comp) i only saw one deck that was original an it said the winner had 2 mirror matches of his deck now i think it came down to luck of the draw that he won if that was the case. And i like to put it forward to people that i think an im saying it for real i want to see Cyber Dragon, Demise,Dekochi,Treeborn Frog an other monser cards that are appearing in every deck in tournament play that i have seen of late. An get them all onto the advanced format band listing. Maybe then we'll start seeing something original fr a while till they become the victims of cookie cutters those people that seem to not be able to come up with there own deck ideas with out using a winning deck that they have seen an once again no one in particular is to blame
I'm going to put a challenage out there to you's pm me with a deck that you think can win a tournament that does'nt have the usually cards in it an set it to advanced rules well thats my rant sorry if i offend anyone not on purpose an good dueling people.And i also forgot to metion the monarchs as well.
 
First off, Dekoichi is not a commonly seen card anymore.

Second, Diamond Dude Turbo themed deck uses a whole slew of cards that you don't see anyplace else. Yes it's the "expensive" deck, but it's won quite frequently (even after the March Banned list was supposed to have made it hard to win with). Yet it's managed to guide people to 2 1st Place and 3 2nd Place finishes over the last few SJCs.

Third, there are rogue decks that manage to top as well. Look at the 2nd to last SJC and you had a large number of Burn decks that made it to day 2 (not to mention a Chain Strike deck that finished 2nd) not to mention a Cyber Dark deck (yes folks that's *2* decks that made it to day 2 based on the cards from Cyberdark Impact. GO FIGURE!)

Fourth, the Monarch decks decided to include Destiny Heroes that you don't really find in DDT (Disk Commander and Fear Monger).

No offense back but face it, if something does well at the "big events" people will copy it, not because they can't run something else, but because they want the best chance to win. That doesn't mean there's no originality. And if something rogue does top, well either it was a fluke or people will make it the New CC.

However, frankly whining that "everyone plays the same thing" is just so hollow right now. DDT may not have been a true "rogue" deck type because a lot of people saw how the cards ran in Japan and jumped on it. At the same time, it was a decktype that was new to the TCG and the best players managed own the competition with it. At the same time you had the Standard Monarch Build, Destiny Monarch Build, Chain Strike Burn, OG Burn, Gadgets, Six Samurai, Cyberdark, Bazoo/Return, and Demise all make it to Day 2 at the SJCs and from that I would say a large number of other Regionals too. Couple that with some other decks like the Trooper/Magical Explosion deck that came close and you are going to convince me that "everyone's running Cyber Dragon, Demise, Dekoichi, and Treeborn Frog"? HA!

Some cards are more useful in most decks than others. Yes, that's why they're considered staples. But even when staples are in a number of decks, there's still plenty of creativity that goes around when building the rest of the deck. After that it's just the skill of the player that will determine how well a deck will do.

P.S. Mix in Volcanics, revamped Monarchs, Crystal Beasts, Six Samurai/Reversal Quiz, and Harpie themed decks that will no doubt show up at big events inside of a couple weeks and stand a very good chance at winning. So why don't you take your own challenge and build something out of these and then practice it to find out the strengths and weaknesses rather than have someone else hand it to you since then if you did run it, you'd be doing the same thing you're accusing others of doing.

P.P.S. A friend of mine won the Regionals here with a Lightforce Sword Themed deck. But yeah, it was the same old thing like everyone else (NOT!)
 
densetsu_x said:
First off, Dekoichi is not a commonly seen card anymore.

Second, Diamond Dude Turbo themed deck uses a whole slew of cards that you don't see anyplace else. Yes it's the "expensive" deck, but it's won quite frequently (even after the March Banned list was supposed to have made it hard to win with). Yet it's managed to guide people to 2 1st Place and 3 2nd Place finishes over the last few SJCs.

Third, there are rogue decks that manage to top as well. Look at the 2nd to last SJC and you had a large number of Burn decks that made it to day 2 (not to mention a Chain Strike deck that finished 2nd) not to mention a Cyber Dark deck (yes folks that's *2* decks that made it to day 2 based on the cards from Cyberdark Impact. GO FIGURE!)

Fourth, the Monarch decks decided to include Destiny Heroes that you don't really find in DDT (Disk Commander and Fear Monger).

No offense back but face it, if something does well at the "big events" people will copy it, not because they can't run something else, but because they want the best chance to win. That doesn't mean there's no originality. And if something rogue does top, well either it was a fluke or people will make it the New CC.

However, frankly whining that "everyone plays the same thing" is just so hollow right now. DDT may not have been a true "rogue" deck type because a lot of people saw how the cards ran in Japan and jumped on it. At the same time, it was a decktype that was new to the TCG and the best players managed own the competition with it. At the same time you had the Standard Monarch Build, Destiny Monarch Build, Chain Strike Burn, OG Burn, Gadgets, Six Samurai, Cyberdark, Bazoo/Return, and Demise all make it to Day 2 at the SJCs and from that I would say a large number of other Regionals too. Couple that with some other decks like the Trooper/Magical Explosion deck that came close and you are going to convince me that "everyone's running Cyber Dragon, Demise, Dekoichi, and Treeborn Frog"? HA!

Some cards are more useful in most decks than others. Yes, that's why they're considered staples. But even when staples are in a number of decks, there's still plenty of creativity that goes around when building the rest of the deck. After that it's just the skill of the player that will determine how well a deck will do.

P.S. Mix in Volcanics, revamped Monarchs, Crystal Beasts, Six Samurai/Reversal Quiz, and Harpie themed decks that will no doubt show up at big events inside of a couple weeks and stand a very good chance at winning. So why don't you take your own challenge and build something out of these and then practice it to find out the strengths and weaknesses rather than have someone else hand it to you since then if you did run it, you'd be doing the same thing you're accusing others of doing.

P.P.S. A friend of mine won the Regionals here with a Lightforce Sword Themed deck. But yeah, it was the same old thing like everyone else (NOT!)
Click to expand...
ok for starters i wasn't naming anyone an secondly there is no original decks because the person that made the first deck has it copied over an over so it was only original when the first person came up with the concept and as for your friend good on them for being original an using there brain not just copying another deck an all those other decks you named will become copied just like all the others because people buy cards just to make the deck they see in a tournament so once again no originallity just because they change 1-2 cards doesn't make it original
 
Newsflash!

There are no "original deck ideas". Going as far back as the beginning of the game when the options were limited, people pretty much ran the same thing. Why? Cause then it was all they had. As new cards came out, some diversity came about but face it, if you managed to get your hands on Jinzo, Witch of the Black Forest, Imperial Order, etc. back in the day... You ran it otherwise you'd lose. It was that simple.

Further, just because you come up with an idea similar to other people doesn't mean it wasn't "original". At the same time those subtle differences in decks is where the originality comes in.

I had looked into Destiny Hero and Demise themed decks when I saw the Duelist Pack and Strike of Neos spoilers from Japan MONTHS before they came out in the US. I thought about Demise + Elemental Heroes to essentially accomplish the same thing that Demise + Insects are doing. What turned me off on it was consistancy issues. Destiny Heroes though I came up with something rather similar to the current DDT decks except that a) Elemental Hero Stratos wasn't out in the US nor was there any hint it would be and b) I played around with cards like Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster and Destiny Hero - Dogma as well. But the core of the deck revolved around 3 Destiny Hero - Malicious, Destiny Draw, Destiny Hero - Diamond Dude, and Destiny Hero - Dasher. I also played around with cards like Blowback Dragon, Strike Ninja, Don Zaloog, Mefist the Infernal General, and Spell Striker as part of the main deck. The core was the same though. So was I "unoriginal"? Not really since I did my own planning but at the same time, I did see what did worked and tried to incorporate some of those strategies as well. However, the core of any good deck type will be pretty much the same otherwise you've built a deck to lose.

The Crystal Beasts will have 3x Sapphire Pegasus, 3x Ruby Carbuncle, 3x Rare Value etc. to start. Why? Because those are the strongest cards for that deck type. Is it "unoriginal" to run that? No because if you're playing to win, you will use the best you have available to you and work on getting it if you don't. Volcanics will be running 3x Volcanic Rockets (the promo card) for the exact same reason.

I can build an "original" deck type out of Mobius the Frost Monarch, Hydrogeddon, and Treeborn Frog. Wait you say, those are all in an aggro-Monarch theme. Yeah, but is that the only theme you can build out of them? No... it's not. "Original" is in quotes though because any "theme" I do have though HAS been done before. The originality comes not from blindly copying over what someone else did (though it can make a good study point as to WHY it works or doesn't work), but rather putting in your own work and playtesting to find what works for YOU (even if it looks like what everyone else has done). Because your own spin on something can make someone else take notice in their ideas.
 
people run what's good, and what lets them win. people are easy like that. Having stated that, you can't deny UDE went all out this year with its releases and its banlist to succesfully assure a more varied format. So I really fail to see the point in complaining about this since the ongoing efforts are paying off.

Like densetsu says, there are no original ideas, and someone's take on originality can differ. For instance, last format I ran an aggro deck aimed at controlling the field with Ojama Trio and gathering as much attack on my side as possible. With 3 ojama trio's, 3 final attack orders and 3 copies of maju garzett, goblin elite attack force etc. To most that was far out and original, but that was a format of monarchs, and that deck owned monarchs. This format i've run a fifth gadget/opression gadget and the best Demise/Dozer deck you can imagine. No one would really consider those decktypes original, but they are tweaked to my ideas and playstyle, which makes them original in their own right. In fact, i daresay that Demise/Dozer deck is more original than my ojama trio/GMG deck, because if someone had thought of this deck before, they would run it, since it kills in 2.8 turns on average.
 
i dont know why people are getting aggro about this i wasn't mentioning anyone in particular if you dont like what i said theres alot of people that agree with me all i'd like to see is people using there brains not just remaking a deck they saw theres enough cards out there to be original
 
We know you werent mentioning anyone in particular but the thing is we try to tell you things from both experience and simple common sense which makes it appear as if we are only referring to at most one or two people or things but thats all in the way you interpret it.

As was said nothing is original. Every original deck that goes and wins a regional a nationals or an sjc will be copied in seconds and possibly other people who ran a similar deck (2-3 card difference max) will pop up saying it was their idea first. We all have similar ideas on everything. I can have many many many ideas on how to use lava golem in a deck and I can go out on the street and find 3 random yugioh players 1 of which will have thought up the exact same decks as i did. Thing is until there are an unlimited amount of cards with an unlimited amount of variation we will not have originality. The simple fact that our resources are limited tells us this. Yes there are a couple billion possible combinations of cards we can use in a deck but most combos have been weeded out and proven to be sub par at best. That leaves us with only a couple hundred (thousand at best) different deckbuilds that we can use and win with. Just because I use a lesser known one and win an sjc doesnt mean im being original. it just means i used a lesser known one.

The whole object of originality in yugioh isnt new decks because theyve all been done before. Its making as many of them as possible tournament worthy and of equal standing so that we will see more varied decks being used.
 
alan75 said:
i dont know why people are getting aggro about this i wasn't mentioning anyone in particular if you dont like what i said theres alot of people that agree with me all i'd like to see is people using there brains not just remaking a deck they saw theres enough cards out there to be original
Click to expand...

We weren't aggro, and we weren't mentioning anyone in particular either. We correct every noob with an opinion that is directly opposed to common sense, including those people who share your opinion :) Don't feel singled out ;)

I would just like to see people using their brains before they post stuff like this. There are plenty of cards, and most of them simply aren't viable in a given format. Sure, a lot of cards are incorrectly underused, and if you feel so adamant about it, by all means USE THEM to make a top deck and show everyone how its underused. I actually share that part of your opinion, and I don't hesitate to take cards like that to major events. The look on people's face is priceless. No one likes losing to those cards. That doesn't mean I'm so unrealistic as to assume just any card can be a top card in any given format. But please, nuance your comments. This just makes you look like you've never been to a tournament.
 
Blue--harshness.

It is true that with so many people playing and such a finite # of cards, originality is hard to come by. But you have to admit, there are some pretty cool combos coming out of left field. These are the ones I like to see. The first time I heard of the Geafried the Iron knight + Smoke Grenade of Thief as a free Confiscation, I thought...Nice!! People kind of looked at me funny when they saw my Acid Trap Hole in my Gravekeeper's Deck until they saw it used. I know I couldn't be the first to do it, but to a lot I was (and I hadn't copied it, so it was "original" to me). With great minds like these here at COG, it is rare that we see anything original to the game. But it is great to see something original to you (new and creative from your vantage, becaue you've never seen it before). But then again, isn't that part of what the Cookie Cutter Collective was founded for, to explore strange new ideas, to seek out new decks and new combinations? To boldly go where no deck has gone before?
 
DarkLogicianOfCaos said:
Blue--harshness.
Click to expand...

He seemed rather agitated that we had the audacity to reply to his statements, so I think it was a fair response. I feel stupid remarks deserve harsh replies. Makes one think.

It is true that with so many people playing and such a finite # of cards, originality is hard to come by. But you have to admit, there are some pretty cool combos coming out of left field. These are the ones I like to see. The first time I heard of the Geafried the Iron knight + Smoke Grenade of Thief as a free Confiscation, I thought...Nice!! People kind of looked at me funny when they saw my Acid Trap Hole in my Gravekeeper's Deck until they saw it used. I know I couldn't be the first to do it, but to a lot I was (and I hadn't copied it, so it was "original" to me). With great minds like these here at COG, it is rare that we see anything original to the game. But it is great to see something original to you (new and creative from your vantage, becaue you've never seen it before). But then again, isn't that part of what the Cookie Cutter Collective was founded for, to explore strange new ideas, to seek out new decks and new combinations? To boldly go where no deck has gone before?
Click to expand...

You mean the cookieslayer collective, no ? :)

I actually do agree with the initial posters statement that there is a tendency to leave a lot of cards to the wayside that are actually good, and that our current card pool should be expanded. But that is a job for all of us, and despite much complaining, not a lot has changed in that regard. I jusr find it a tad easy, lazy even, to accuse the entire community of a lack of diversity, just when UDE is working so hard (and that means a lot coming from me, UDE's harshest critic) to break the game open. It shows a distinct lack of insight in this game, and a lack of experience on his behalf.
 
Harshest critic? You haven't known me very long have you? ;)

Let me step in here. It's alright to friendly disagree with each other here on CoG. But lets watch that our comments aren't bordering on insulting. We police that a bit more closely here then anywhere else. We want everyone to feel comfortable to make statements, even if no one agrees with them. "Whining" has never been a fair accusation. What we have here, is disagreement. Let's treat it as such.

I'll post my response here in a few. But I didn't want to see this thread degrade in the meantime.
 
Alright, allow me to reiterate some points I recently made over at the Collective. It's my opinion that Yu-Gi-Oh! players have been so desperate for more diversity in the deck building for so long, that they'll take what they can get. Even if what we're getting isn't necessarily diversity.

Sure, we've got, what, five to ten decks topping the the major championships. That's great. I hope we see more. But the thing is, copying is copying, regardless of how much there is to copy. I'm seeing the same five to ten decks pop up on every forum, and in every Metagame article. It's somewhat of a respite from the same 3 decks we used to always see. But is it in any way a sign that players are really going for originality, or is it just the same old duplication we had, only on a larger scale?

You see, that's not mine, nor a lot of player's, idea of originality. To me originality is when someone strives to avoid those top tier decks in design and function. It would be the same if there were twenty decks up there to copy. If your not deliberately trying to do something no one else has done before, how can you make any claims to being original? You can't.

A broader palette with which to CC, is still CC.

Do I disagree with DX that there are no "original deck ideas". ABSOLUTLY. And I also don't agree that tweaking one or two cards is where the originality comes in. I've seen some wonderfully off-the-wall ideas at the Collective that disprove that.

What's wrong here is that we still have that mentality that we should "go with what works" and that if we don't, then we're just trying to be difficult. This is a major flaw in thinking that has not gone away just because the ban list has become more accommodating.

And let me address something, while I'm touching the subject. I won't be patting UDE on the back for it's ban list just yet. Sure, it may have opened up some potential, but that is, and always has been, strictly a marketing decision. Without certain cards on the ban list, newer sets are hardly as desirable, or playable, as cards already in trader circulation. I still see a lot of players, some of themed seasoned, make the comments that UDE is hurting themselves by making older cards loose their value. As if somehow, the high value of an already purchased card affects Konami's bottom line at all. They only make money on the sets you actually pay them, not your friend, for. And the ban list is specifically designed to make those new sets more palatable so more people have to go to the store to by them, and not garner them in trade.

And that's just not enough, in my opinion, to cry the death of CC, just yet.

Originality isn't taking what's already there and tweaking it. Originality is taking what's there and trying to do something totally different then that. There are enough cards in the game, for there to be more then five, ten even twenty deck thematics. And that doesn't mean that only a few of those decks "work".

Don't be so hard on the creative types. I'm a creative, and that means I look upon deck building much the same way I do upon drawing, sculpting, web building, etc. I can look to others for ideas, but ultimately, my personality won't allow me to carbon copy exactly what I see. At some point, I have to put a little of myself in my creation. And sometimes, that means deliberately not doing something somebody else does, even if what they do seems like a good idea that's always worked for them. That's what creativity, and thereby originality, is all about.
 
There are no original deck themes. Every type that exists in the game has already been done before. The part that changes is the means to accomplish that theme, but you're walking a very fine line here. Chain Strike wasn't exactly an "original" burn type. The concept of running cards to help you draw to replenish your hand that all could be chained off easily had been around for awhile. However, it wasn't consistant and therefore not as played as standard burn decks. However, Chain Strike and Accumulated Fortune made that kind of deck type more viable (along with changes to the banned list). But the idea existed long before so really was it all that "original"? Was Burn in general an original deck type? No.

Further, the people who complain the loudest about the lack of originality in the game I tend to find to be some of the worst players I've met. Not saying this towards everyone, just an overwhelming majority.

There's 2 ways to look at the game. Casual Play and Tournament Play. If we're talking Casual Play, then go ahead and run whatever you have fun with. If we're talking Tournament Play though, then we're looking at a whole new discussion. You are playing to win otherwise it's just a waste of money to go. You don't deliberately enter with the worst deck you can come up with.

Now this doesn't mean blindly follow the sheep like a generic lemming. But at the same time don't discount certain cards just because "everyone is playing with them". Like I said, do some research and playtesting on your own. If you have a deck type that you think can compete, build it the best you can. If that means running something that "everyone else is" then run it. Having Card Trooper alone in your deck does not mean you blindly follow along (case in point, the Trooper/Magical Explosion deck). And I'd further bet that the guy who ran it playtested it left and right until he came up with a variation that worked for his play style.

I consider myself to be an above average player. I win more than I lose and tend to give people I play fits even if they do win. Yes, I've run Monarch decks at regionals but guess what? I have taken Hino-Kagu-Tsuchi/Sacred Phoenix of Nephthys, Relinquished, Dice Jar, and Last Turn decks and came away with winning records of them at Regionals. My best 2 appearances were Rescue Cat (during the heart of the Chaos Era) and Cyber-Stein (before everyone else decided they had to run 1 in their deck).

Yeah I'm running DDT/Destiny Heroes now. I didn't get the chance to run it though at "big tournaments" until after it had made it's mark at the SJC. Does that make me a copycat? Um... no. Yes, there were some ideas in the popular decks I tried to see exactly how it worked. Some I kept, others I decided to skip just because it's not as fitting to the way I do play. However, as I said in my original post, I had looked at Destiny Heroes and Demise strategies long before the cards to make them viable were even available outside of Japan. Guess what though? I'm sure MANY other people came up with the same idea (as evidenced by those who ran said decks). So were we all original in our thoughts or did we all decide to copy ourselves?

Demise was fairly easy. Let's see. Thanks to Advanced Ritual Art, I have a nice easy way to get Demise to the field now and spend the 2000 to nuke the field. Gee... a free open shot now. What else can I do to maximise the amount of damage I can do with said free shot? See there's the idea in the works since LAST YEAR. But in a sense it's not an "original" one since gee, if you have a free open shot at your opponent, wouldn't you be thinking the same thing?

Let's look at a card that hasn't come out yet. Sky Scourge Norleras. I pay 1000 to not only clear the field but everyone's hand as well. Then I get to draw a card. Gee... a free open shot now. What else can I do to maximise the amount of damage I can do with said free shot? Sound familiar? The idea may be the same but the technique is different. However, I am doing my own planning and my own research just as I'm sure others are as well. Some of my ideas my be stronger than what other people do, some of their ideas can be better. Just because we might adopt other peoples concepts into our strategy doesn't make what we did any less "original". The concept though remains the same.

Further, take the Demise deck. It got some help with Metamorphosis becoming Semi-Restricted. However, the deck also includes a lot of Insect Monsters. Now, if any of you sit back and tell me that you saw Insect Knight, Metal-Armored Bug, Neo Bug, and Doom Dozer as all part of a OTK Ritual deck, I call you all a liar... at least not until Advanced Ritual Art came into existance. You don't like (or have) the Insects? Run Elemental Heroes with Demise. Half of you may say "I'm just running the same thing" but you'd be wrong. Why? For starters E-Heroes are more searchable than Insects and have their own win conditions outside of Demise. The mindset for running the deck is VASTLY different. Insects may provide an easier way for the OTK aspect of it, but there's nothing wrong with trying a different way on the same theme.

This just brings me back to the only real sense of "originality" in the game. That being do your own research and work when building your deck but don't be afraid to go with something that looks like what everyone else has. Show me your own reasoning as to why something is there and why it works for you. Then try and practice to get the skills needed to win (or at least make a respectable show). But frankly, don't sit back and show me something that avoids cards because "everyone else is running them" and parade it as something original. It's not. It's just a bad deck then. If you can show me a good reason as to why something is there even if looks like the worst card in the game and your playtests show that it worked for you, then by all means.

P.S. Those people still get more respect than those who say "everyone's running the same thing" and then don't do anything about it. THAT is where the whining comes in. Cause if you're not even going to try and come up with something (even if it's horrible) then you have NO RIGHT to complain about what everyone else is doing when you don't even bother to try to do something about it.
 
Your being far too specific and focusing far too much on your own general practices, DX. It makes your own personal reasonings behind running commonly run cards, the reason everyone runs commonly run cards. And that's not really fair to the discussion. What I mean to say is, if you ask the majority of players why they play the same cards/combos as the top eight, it won't be because they looked at the overall card pool first and then came to the same conclusion, it will be because they didn't consider anything else as viable.

densetsu_x said:
Further, the people who complain the loudest about the lack of originality in the game I tend to find to be some of the worst players I've met. Not saying this towards everyone, just an overwhelming majority.
Click to expand...
Consider the main reason for it. Common deck builds are just that, common. Meaning you have thousands, possibly millions of players running this deck though testing, refining, reorganization. There are twelve major forums that I can think of, and that doesn't include the hundreds more on InvisionFree and ProBoards, all of them discussing the same decks and invoking the same ideas. It's no wonder they are effective.

But consider someone like me who's main deck is a Jank Deck. (And yes, I take my deck, all my decks, very seriously, in spite of what I might say). How many people are working on that, refining the build, seeing eye to eye with what I'm trying to do and running it through trial and error besides me? And you wonder why they don't do as well?

There's a lack of support for anything that is not heavily discussed in forums or topping at Jumps and Nats. There's a great deal more possibilities to be mined here, but people prefer to dig where digging has already begun. Leaving the rest of us to mine our own personal hill, while tens of thousands of workers mine the mountain. That doesn't mean there isn't gold on my hill.

There are no original deck themes. Every type that exists in the game has already been done before. The part that changes is the means to accomplish that theme, but you're walking a very fine line here. Chain Strike wasn't exactly an "original" burn type. The concept of running cards to help you draw to replenish your hand that all could be chained off easily had been around for awhile. However, it wasn't consistant and therefore not as played as standard burn decks. However, Chain Strike and Accumulated Fortune made that kind of deck type more viable (along with changes to the banned list). But the idea existed long before so really was it all that "original"? Was Burn in general an original deck type? No.
Click to expand...
Let's go back to that first sentence, though. No original themes? But all our existing themes are fabrications. Their names we arbitrarily labeled to certain card effects. Originality is not dependant on coming up with a new theme, but on a focus that has not been thoroughly explored before. People will always attach a label to what your doing, regardless of how differently you go about it.

Again, your being far too specific. Originality, in a Yu-Gi-Oh! context, is not arbitrarily throwing together cards that have never been thrown together before. It's trying something that most everyone has either disregarded or not put enough thought into. Yes, we all fully realize that someone my have thought of doing that before. But the mere fact that it's an abandoned idea, or a black sheep, if you will, will make it far more appealing idea for a creative type to explore, because creatives don't like to follow the crowd. The sense of satisfaction is greater for them. And that doesn't mean that we should be restricted to the Casual Play arena.

P.S. Those people still get more respect than those who say "everyone's running the same thing" and then don't do anything about it. THAT is where the whining comes in. Cause if you're not even going to try and come up with something (even if it's horrible) then you have NO RIGHT to complain about what everyone else is doing when you don't even bother to try to do something about it.
Click to expand...
You mean like the CSC? No, there's no justification for accusing someone of whining when the primary motivation for it, is disagreement. That's what an open discussion forum is for. Not to have people classify what is a justifiable complaint and what isn't. I would prefer, and I think the Council would agree, that we don't make that accusation. It tends to be a inflammatory word to being with, wouldn't you agree?

And I again beg that you not be too hard on people who may complain, but, at least by forum appearances, do nothing. As it stands, original thinkers are not made to feel too comfortable on most forums and sometimes, regrettably, even here, and seldom garner replies when posting a deck that people don't immediately understand.
 
I am hard on someone who says "everyone's running the same thing". That might have been true back in the Chaos-Era (and even then you still found some diversity to "remove Light/Dark" etc.)

But right now there are what... 4-5 Top Tier decks? Even if all the top players run just that (which they're not) when before have you seen that kind of top level diversity? In this game, never before.

I'll have more on this later but briefly, if you are talking about Tournament Play, you need a different mindset for that kind dueling. Seeing the same deck over and over SHOULD be an advantage for someone who doesn't want to run it because you should have learned how to beat it. But on the Tournament level, you can't complain about a lack of originality. Most people will run what they think will give them the best chance to win. The key though beyond any deck choice you might make, be it a copy of someone else's or your own is to have the skills to win it. You need good people around you to win tournaments because they are the ones who will help improve your own game as well as can help you make your deck solid. Cause frankly if running Monarchs was all it took to win a regionals, then a lot more people would have topped than actually did. So if someone is criticizing the "net-deck", I ask back "So did you try to run it yourself? And if so, how'd you do?" Invariably most never tried it and those that did still didn't win. I wonder why.

(For the record, my Monarch decks were among the most disappointing decks I did run at Regionals. Why? Cause they really weren't my dueling style despite being "such the great deck that you can only win by running". Sorry again about the personal experiences too, but it is all I have to go on. And having both played and judged at the bigger events, I'd at least like to think I do have a reasonable opinion on what you have to do to succeed).

Anyway, like I said, more later.

P.S. Get on AIM DJ if you'd like to address a few other things I've said and where I don't have to be so politically correct.
 
That is, as I said, at the heart of the disagreement and a point I made earlier. A lot of us just don't see five decks as diversity, if that's all we see. I, personally, am more demanding then that.

Plus, there's a difference between someone who's playing something because they know it will win, and someone who's playing something because he doesn't know what else will win. The latter demands examination. The former incurs stagnation.

I'd also have to disagree on another point. Skills are varied no matter what you play. I'd venture to say that if you put a top tier deck in the hands of most original thinkers, once they grasped the strategy, they'd mop the floor with most players. This is because their used to dealing with overpowered adversaries and looking for holes and opportunities that others take for granted. You don't give Batman Superman's powers, and then expect him to not know how to use them.

Heh, I'll pass tonight DX. I've got about 2 weeks of CBS shows to catch up on CBS.com tonight before I head out tomorrow. And I'm going to try and tweak the website in the background while I'm watching. It's not the sleep, it's the drama I don't want to miss.
 
Digital Jedi said:
That is, as I said, at the heart of the disagreement and a point I made earlier. A lot of us just don't see five decks as diversity, if that's all we see. I, personally, am more demanding then that.
Click to expand...

This is something where I will have to call you out on somewhat. First of all I said 5 Tier 1 decks. I never said anything else about the Tier 1.5 - Tier 2 decks (competitive ones that could win and that at least do respectible at big events, but you don't hear much about). Metagame mentions them a little bit but you have to actually ATTEND a big event if you really want to see the kind of diversity that does exist these days.

Face it though, there's only a finite amount of ideas that are solid enough to win. Incorporating Destiny Heroes in a Monarch deck is an original take on the deck type, but the D-Hero engine in of itself isn't original. So what then? Do you criticize for taking something that worked in 1 idea and incorporating it in the other because you don't have any "new" ideas, or do you appreciate the fact that you can put a new spin on an old idea that may catch opponents by surprise without sacrificing your win conditions. Personally, I'm more inclined to look at the latter because just because an idea does work in 1 deck type does not guarentee that it would work in any others.

Plus, there's a difference between someone who's playing something because they know it will win, and someone who's playing something because he doesn't know what else will win. The latter demands examination. The former incurs stagnation.
Click to expand...

You must be kidding. The latter is where you have stagnation because the person is showing no thought whatsoever and blindly running what won. It's the safe approach. Most people though who run something because they believe it can win usually have had success with it before and are sticking with what worked for them.

I'd also have to disagree on another point. Skills are varied no matter what you play. I'd venture to say that if you put a top tier deck in the hands of most original thinkers, once they grasped the strategy, they'd mop the floor with most players. This is because their used to dealing with overpowered adversaries and looking for holes and opportunities that others take for granted. You don't give Batman Superman's powers, and then expect him to not know how to use them.
Click to expand...

Ok, you are completely off-base here. You're a good player or you're not. I'm sure these "original thinkers" grasp the concept of the top decks well enough. Heck, I think outside the box most of the time and I understood Monarch decks. Like I said though, when I ran it I had some of my most disappointing results. I'm certain you grasp the concept of Monarch decks and Demise decks but I'd be more willing to bet that people who know the complete ins and outs of said decks would probably beat you in a straight up duel.

Part of my issue btw stems back to the original post (which apparently I wasn't the only one who took issue to it).

I'm going to put a challenage out there to you's pm me with a deck that you think can win a tournament that does'nt have the usually cards
Click to expand...

Why should I bother doing YOUR work? Even if it's completely "original", you copying it makes it no better than copying a deck that's guarenteed to win. Why don't YOU try to build something original that can win a tournament using your own motivations as well as your own dueling style.

Using the Deck Forums here is a mixed bag at best though. Simply posting a deck and saying "here make it better please" won't accomplish much. a) Most changes made will make it look more "cookie-ish" because why not run the best if you have it? Mirror Force might be hard to get but it definitely should earn a spot over Sakuretsu Armor. b) The changes I suggest may not be fitting to your dueling style (which is something I've frequently encountered with people who have asked for help and then stubbornly put restrictions on themselves. Fine, do that, run your own thing, but don't ask for help if you don't want it!) c) Ideas are good though especially if you can PLAYTEST IT! That's what I did with the Rescue Cat deck I had posted here. I had gone through several revisions, taking some ideas people gave me, ignoring most, but most importantly actually trying them out to see what worked and what didn't. It's not a surprise that that deck proved to be one the strongest I ran as a result. I did the same thing with my DDT themed deck. Granted there's not as much wiggle room because the engine that makes it run takes most of the deck. But at least I didn't simply copy down what everyone else did and went with that instead.

Deepdark's Rock deck that he has up there is an example of how the Deck Forum works best. He has a fairly original idea. After all, Rock themes are not that common. People have made suggestions to help make it better (even if they make a Rock theme look more "Cookie-ish" for Rocks) and his ideas gave other people ideas as well (like using Granmarg to nuke your own set Sand Moth). Shocking! However, he's not the first person I've seen who's come up with a Rock theme deck. However he's putting his own work and own spin on the idea. Plus, he is a solid enough player who can take a rogue deck like that and come away with at least a respectible showing at a Regionals (See, that's where that "Skill" factor comes in). Myself, I'm working on a Harpie/Winged-Beast deck. Let's see though, the core of the deck... well, needs Harpies... Hysteric Party should be used (since I can have up to 5 monsters now that 1 trap can bring back)... Icarus Attack makes a nice Counter-thrust. Oh wait though, I bet anyone else with this idea would be using the same thing because the cards support it better than others. What a shock! I'm trying to win so I'm using the best cards made for my idea! That is the price sometimes for running an off-beat theme. But I'm not waiting around for someone else to post their deck even if it would look 99% like mine.

So again no. There's no complete originality in this game. The originality comes from your take on an idea working with it. (Hey... that Shrink Engine that works with Gadgets can also work with: Don/Parshath, Horus, Harpie, and Water Control. So even if part of the idea is recycled to support whatever else you're trying to do, the ideas are still original with the win conditions namely: Swarm (Gadgets), Hand Control (Don/Parshath), Field Control (Horus), Field/Bounce (Harpies), and well, Water has a slew of different ways it can go.) I can go on probably for a few more pages but I doubt there would be a point. I've seen what people have won with from both playing them and judging the events. There is more diversity out there than you are willing to give credit to and the fact that there is more than 1 dominant deck type at big events pretty much renders the "everyone's playing the same thing" null and void. Just because you're not seeing it doesn't mean it's not there.
​
 
ok my bad i did'nt mean send them to me an i admit i made a mistake there post them in advznced decks an explain your concept behhind it ok
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top