so why not a middle sized deck?

Strategies and Card File Construction

so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby teasel » Thu Nov 13, 2008 6:14 pm

seems like deck have either to all focus on cheap creature (lawtia lycans,gowen rush) or just have go straight to the highest level we have... why there isn't a single deck that focuses on level 4-5 creature... it's not like there isn't any good stuff here... any falkow level 5 rare card (or a beast...) is awesome and gowen level 4 makes for some awesome tanks
User avatar
teasel
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:23 am

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby YamiJoshua » Thu Nov 13, 2008 6:45 pm

I have a middle sized falkow file that can beat lawtia dalos files, big blue files, any refess and gowen rush. So these deck are out there just not very common as you need rare cards to run them which are expensive.
User avatar
YamiJoshua
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 6:42 pm

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby DanTheTimid » Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:12 pm

YamiJoshua wrote:I have a middle sized falkow file that can beat lawtia dalos files, big blue files, any refess and gowen rush. So these deck are out there just not very common as you need rare cards to run them which are expensive.

Any? Pretty big talk for a name I haven't seen in the top 3 RPs ever. Not saying you don't have a good deck, but I don't recall ever playing you and your claim that you could beat ANY refess or gowen deck seems a bit presumptious to me.

Anyway on topic, I have actually seen many solid mid level decks. I've seen some solid decks built purely around Renally (level 4), Zombie Lord (level 4), Deep Squid (level 4), Dalos (level 5), Noirweiden (level 4), and even Wasseir (level 5). Although I haven't seen it in a while I once also faced a very well built card file built around Distrier (level 5).

As for why mid level decks are less popular? Its because the way the games set up (and do to the +3 sphere level cards) its often more advantageous (and often easier) to just go as high level as you can as quickly as you can or to ignore high levels all together. If your going high levels, why step your way up with small stuff when you can go straight to the biggest stuff. I HAVE seen decks that do that, play some low levels, then some 4-5s, then finish with their highest levels, but they seem alot harder to pull off consistently and they use up alot of card slots that could have been used on cards that support your highest level units. If your not going to go high levels then outside of having a mid level card or two incase of cyclone/return its usually not worth investing the extra sp to get to the mid level units when you can more effectively maintain your pressure by swarming more low levels.

As for why I personally haven't run any mid levels decks since beta its because I can't seem to pull more then 2 copies of any mid levels. You don't get any playsets of mid levels in the starters and almost all mid levels (especially those worth building your card file around) are 3 star rare or higher.
The bunnies of Lavato have special abilities, like 'Action Skill: Make Carrot Disappear.'
User avatar
DanTheTimid
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby Candi » Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:57 pm

I run a mid level Falkow Monster file.. And I know of one other as well (actually it's mid level Falkow+Refess Monster, very cool). And the file is cheap to build.

There is also a highly competitive (top 3 RP I believe at one point recently) Falkow mid level file using Distrier, Renally and Larut.

But what Dan said explains why it's not popular.
Image
User avatar
Candi
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:14 pm

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby darklogos » Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:23 pm

The issue is the amount of return you get out of most of those cards. Gowen level 3-5 is not all that hot and lack the speed and damage of their lower counterparts. Renally is a good card that got abused by return decks using dryads. Reffess mid level your not really looking at anything to awesome either. Lawtia wins out in the mid range then other decks. There is a lot of different things out there that work with lawtia. Most of it gets overshadowed by Dalos.
User avatar
darklogos
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby teasel » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:01 pm

If your going high levels, why step your way up with small stuff when you can go straight to the biggest stuff.

see? this is the point... with the mana i could use to play an emperor i can play two level 4-5 their toughness and power would be more or less the same (if not more) and you are less susceptible to removal such as assasin not to mention having more stuff around therefore more versability in powers
User avatar
teasel
 
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:23 am

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby DanTheTimid » Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:29 pm

I'm not saying mid levels won't work, cause I've seen them worked, but the reality is they have to have some truly game changing effects to be worth the trouble, and not a lot of easily accessible (aka not of 3 or higher star rarity) ones do. Look at all the played high levels and you'll see one after another not just amazing stats, but game changing effects that can single handedly finish off, turn around, or dictate the flow of a match. Many of the mid level units are just beefy units with effects that either don't do much, are incredibly slow, or are incredibly expensive. The ones that do really stand out *cough*Dalos*cough* tend to be the ones that see play.

And again theirs something to be said for card conservation. If your using a level 4 and a level 5 in place of my single level 9, thats 6 card slots in your file used to my 3, thats 3 more cards I can use for all sorts of trickery that you simply don't have access to. To justify that card option disadvantage your 2 cards need to be significantly better then my 1 card... yet most of the time thats not the case.

As for the assassin weakness, that is a legitimate reason to go for mid levels and one of the reason mid levels have worked for some people (though losing a mid level to an assassin still hurts) but the most popular high level is near assassin immune (Legyre) so all he tends to have to worry about is Merciless Death or maybe Bardia (though bardia can be returned or other wise dealt with before he goes off), neither of which see much of any play (and very few even own) as far as single unit cemetery sending destruction is concerned. You could also argue that being a level 4 is downside too though cause it makes them vulnerable to things like Burning Sun, and being a mid level also makes them more vulnerable to grimoires like Judgment Hammer that tend to hit for just enough to drop a mid level but not a high level and hit multiple units.

So yeah, theres pluses to having mid levels over high levels, but theirs downsides too. And maybe mid levels are a little under played, but certain mid levels do see plenty of play and as we get more sets and more truly game changing mid levels I suspect they'll see even more play.
The bunnies of Lavato have special abilities, like 'Action Skill: Make Carrot Disappear.'
User avatar
DanTheTimid
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby Porky » Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:24 am

Wouldn't the Dalos/Broken Soldier decks be considered mid sized decks?

Transist from low level early game to mid level middle-end game. Whats mid level? 4+? How are you supposed to generate that much SP without just skipping turns early on with the +sp grims?

Think Vickz experimented with some falkow version with Rubia and others, not certain how successful it was.
"Talking to you is like having a period." -Toradora.
User avatar
Porky
 
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Australia

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby Candi » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:07 am

Porky wrote:Think Vickz experimented with some falkow version with Rubia and others, not certain how successful it was.


RP top 3.
Image
User avatar
Candi
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:14 pm

Re: so why not a middle sized deck?

Postby Porky » Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:32 am

No the RP top 3 one had renally, his other file was before that.
"Talking to you is like having a period." -Toradora.
User avatar
Porky
 
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:08 am
Location: Australia

Next

Return to Annarose's Sanctum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 2 guests