« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Disappointing so far  (Read 7689 times)

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Disappointing so far
« Reply #25 on: December 22, 2010, 11:25:05 PM »
0
Quote from: Minister Polarius on December 22, 2010, 09:54:21 PM
A lot of your arguments are in the vein of "it seems" or "I assume" or some such. I've played with a balanced deck since Di came out and my KDR is like 29. I'll take my observations and experience over anyone else's speculation any day.

then you must have played at least 58 games, as i know i served your herod deck a couple losses to my speed. :)

hobbit is right though, you have to be careful when dealing with the new di sites. none of them offer any outright defensive stops so already they could become negative deck space under some circumstances, and decking all 5 is very risky and dangerous in a normal type 1 deck. there are really only two which should be staple for a balanced type 1 nt defense deck, and the others are completely optional depending on how the deck is structured. it also doesnt help that the only viable defense to take advantage of the sites are herods, and even that comes up short to the standards set by other powerhouse ot defenses.
Logged
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Disappointing so far
« Reply #26 on: December 23, 2010, 12:46:52 AM »
0
Herods, Pharisees, Heretics, and Magicians all benefit from the new sites. The first three are all on the level of "powerhouse OT Civilizations" (which really means Brown). And I have played over 60 games with a finished deck and lost twice. I have lost a few more times when developing decks, but even then I win way more than I lose.
Logged
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Disappointing so far
« Reply #27 on: December 23, 2010, 01:45:56 AM »
0
phars and heretics are nowhere on the level of the ot powerhouses...they dont have anywhere near as much support as babs, phillies, egyptians, assyrians or persians (or brown in general). im surprised to see heretics even in the running considering they just broke ground in di and with very little support (and what support they got it actually came in anti-meta with exactly zero thematic enhancement battle winners).

however, i did fail to mention emperors that also benefit greatly from ht. they have proven viable in the past obviously, and could be even more potent now due to the extra support emps, romans, and grey in general got in di.
Logged
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Disappointing so far
« Reply #28 on: December 23, 2010, 02:22:06 AM »
0
Whether or not something has support is one thing, whether or not it's good is another. Phars are easily better than all the civilizations you listed, and Heretics are better than most of them. And I, too, forgot about Romans, who kick so much butt it's unfair.
Logged
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!

Offline Master KChief

  • Trade Count: (+9)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6963
  • Greatness, at any cost.
    • -
    • North Central Region
    • GameStop
Re: Disappointing so far
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2010, 03:40:27 AM »
0
more support equals more options available to the theme, which in turn equals more potential and viability in the meta. phars have been largely untouched for...ever. jah? yay, dou has been doing it and far better for years. hpp? almost every single evil ot theme fort is easily more powerful. and heretics cant even stand on its own yet. its just currently the flavor of the month, then will be largely forgotten unless it gets more support in the next set. just like phars.
Logged
"If it weren't for people with bad decision making skills, I'd have to get a real job." - Reynad

Offline Minister Polarius

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15920
  • Grand Minister of Music and Video Games
    • -
    • East Central Region
    • Macclelland Music
Re: Disappointing so far
« Reply #30 on: December 23, 2010, 05:20:02 AM »
0
Haha, have you even played a Pharisee defense? It's one of the fastest defenses out there, and Scribe, Entrapping Pharisee, and Proud Pharisee are three of the best EC's in the entire game. OT Prot fortresses better? Nope. None of them can hold UW. Furthermore, Phars and Sads are the only defense in the GAME to get redundant protection. Sword and Trumpet will wipe out almost any other defense single-handedly, but not this one. DoU better than JaH? Well, yes, but the rest of PG is pretty bad and you need Horses to play it pre-response. With Phars all you need is a character.

Now, I will admit, Pharisees truly shine when your deck is cohesive. Without Abraham's Decedent, my Phars defense would be weaker than it is. And without two feasts and a Provisions on offense, I'd have a harder time setting it up. But card-for-card, you get the most bang for your buck with the defenses that utilize Sites, with Brown maybe slightly stronger sometimes.
Logged
I am not talking about T2 unless I am explicitly talking about T2. Also Mayhem is fine now somehow!
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
« previous next »
 
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal