Author Topic: Sitelock?  (Read 1418 times)

Offline Ironisaac

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1662
  • 2070 Paradigm Shift Inbound
    • -
    • North Central Region
Sitelock?
« on: October 10, 2016, 04:12:10 PM »
0
Is it possible to make a good sitelock deck that will hold up in today's meta? Specifically against Joshua. I can see that Caesarea Philippi is pretty good, but it is a red site, which isn't exactly the best right now, seeing how many people use a red deck or a deck with at least one red character in it.
Some call me "Goofus"

Offline Red Wing

  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2379
  • Set rotation shill
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Sitelock?
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2016, 04:22:16 PM »
+1
I don't think site lock is viable in the current meta, which is good because sites hurt the game.
Kansas City Discord: discord.gg/2ypYg6m

Offline Gabe

  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+69)
  • *****
  • Posts: 10675
  • From Moses to the prophets, it's all about Him!
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • Land of Redemption
Re: Sitelock?
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2016, 04:27:47 PM »
0
Probably not viable. We did that on purpose.
Have you visited the Land of Redemption today?

Offline Kevinthedude

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1856
  • Yo
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: Sitelock?
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2016, 04:29:29 PM »
0
I played sites for quite a long time until recently. In addition to more and more decks having lots of brigades on offense, the number of anti-site cards has risen to an extreme amount. To have answers for every site counter requires the majority of deck slots (Not to mention the sites themselves). Until some site boosting cards come out I don't think its possible to build a top tier sitelock deck.

kariusvega

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Sitelock?
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2016, 05:45:35 PM »
+1
honestly i still maintain the idea that a soft lock deck is viable.

Guardian and ProfessorAlstad are two other people i know who utilize the concept along with myself.

there are a number of characters that take care of sites, but people don't always play them.

also if you have ways to tutor your sites you can set them up relatively quickly. i had a good experience playing a larger deck which used sites for soft locking purposes but were also useful on their own with Fortress of Antonia, Herod's Dungeon, CP, Chorazin etc.

using 1 site such as Hormah or Nazareth i believe is still tasteful as you can choose to play it situationally depending on what your opponent is using.

i do still feel that sites have a place in the meta, however, they must be used wisely as they can become a liability (which in my opinion is good for the game generally speaking)

now that doesn't include the consideration of other locking concept decks..

one of these decks utilizes medium in endor, complainers, either hsr or hhi, and potentially some sites or protector souls (female only, nt only, etc.) along with a forsaken soul with hero swapping/conversion to effectively lock out an opponent..

just some considerations if you are thinking of making a lock out deck.

Offline The Schaefer

  • Redemption Elder
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 543
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: Sitelock?
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2016, 07:18:41 PM »
0
Is it possible yes. But it is extremely difficult to pull off because you have to devote so much to defense to ensure that site lock works. Soul generation cards like Barnabas and anti site cards like Joshua are prevalent enough to make site lock incredibly difficult. The truth is you truly have to limit player interactions to an absolute minimum. FBTN type offenses or almost completely eliminating your opponents defensive responses have to be employed. The sites pretty much have to be blue or Teal since those brigades don't see much play. Opponents soul abilities often create souls in your territory so you either have to deal with that fact or negate souls. Defense almost has to be focused on not allowing your opponent to have initiative thus minimizing your opponents responses and you also have to be capable to handling whatever problems do arise quickly. You don't want to draw on offense because you risk creating souls for your opponent to rescue. Drawing on defense is fine since if youre using it you want card advantage. Basically you're slower than your opponent offense light and have to make near perfect decisions at critical moments and even with that your opponent may still find a way to win if they are smart or have some techy cards. Also soul differential is terrible in site lock so you can't really lose a game if you want to make top cut. It is just an incredibly tall order and not fun to play with or against for most.

I ran one for a while that was pretty brutal but this was pre CoW and pre souls discarded from deck go to territory rule which hurt Jephthah + Divination combo. It was a bit easier then.

Offline Watchman

  • Tournament Host
  • Trade Count: (+47)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2487
    • -
    • Southeast Region
Re: Sitelock?
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2016, 10:24:29 AM »
0
If you do run a site-heavy deck I would recommend using colors of good brigades of your offense in the event the sites are taken from you via cards like Joshua and Nimrod and your opponent uses the sites against you.
Overcome satan by the blood of the Lamb, your testimony, and don't love your life to the death!

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal