Challenging the Meta

Strategies and Card File Construction

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby Gota » Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:09 pm

Well, it did as this thread title said, it changed the meta lol

Anyways though, its like that in every game, that is why you don't see many people playing 7+ star monsters in Yu Gi Oh

or you won't see people playing 3rd evolution forms of pokemons in the card game.

because losing said monster will be a huge loss, since it requires you to use a lot of resources to use them.

But instead of all that, why don't we think of new decks to play that will counter it instead of getting mad over it? :/ you guys did say that it'll be less of a loss if it were used on lower LV monsters, so instead of forcably using all those dragon emperor, why not think of new strategies with lower LV monsters, or something? (You don't HAVE to play it just because you have it, I understand that you guys would LIKE to play it, since you used alot of cash to get those cards, but that doesn't mean that it should be an unbeatable card just because it was bought)

As someone said before, it should go like a rock paper scissors game, nothing should totally dominate the entire game. If we don't try and find a counter deck, then we have given up, and that deck will forever be at the top.

Off the top of my head, since I don't have the cards to test or anything, I can think of shear winds to counter it, at the same time, you could combo it with a Black Dragonrider / Millia SS as well, and make them lose 2 units on the field.

I'm not saying that I'm a know it all or anything like that, but what I'm trying to say is getting mad over 1(well 2) card(s) isn't going to change anything. I'm just trying to spark up some game discussion like this thread suggested, instead of reading about all the hate.

Sorry if I offended anyone, I don't mean any offense at all, this is just my 2 cents, I don't wish to argue, but lets face it, the card effect most probably isn't going to be changed.

EDIT: Ah, typed this same time as Xovian, please don't take this as a reply to your post, my post is directed at the general public.
Logress wrote:Gota: I just looked at your lottery logs... I officially declare you the most unlucky man on earth.
User avatar
Posts: 2545
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:52 am

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby vickz » Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:16 pm

There are many ways to deal with my deck. The biggest difficulty is knowing that I'm using 4 assassins. Now that you know though, you can come up with counters. I'll list some that people have used. Starting first with the smaller beat down decks.

Refess, magic bolt on my weenie forcing me to sacrifice my sea hunter.
Gowen, salamander " ", fire arrow works too.
Lawtia, flesh recycle " ", life conversion works too.
Falkow, return " ".

Once I lose my sea hunter to my own sacrifice, it's good game. I have 2 weenies in the back that you will kill, and since I run 2 copies of a lot of things, it means they'll be sacrificing anything that comes into the board immediately after, leaving me with no front line.

Also, generally, it's pretty easy to predict when I am planning to use sacrifice: when my chips are down. If you have board advantage, I HAVE TO SS, i cannot wait. If my opponent sets up 2 big front row units, this tactic becomes 'one step too late'.

For BIG decks I've seen the following counters:

Refess, rather than casting coatl, they first exploding spore, burning sun/ judgement hammer/ magic bolt. I won't enough SP to ressurrect everything, and i end up wasting sacrifices on his empty board, and also emptying my own. Then he drops coatl.

Gowen, cast petrification on his own flame emperor immediately after it comes in, making me waste assassin and 2 weenies. then rather than attacking me he just lets his emperor rest, and mana accels into a different big drop. I can either wait until he gets a flying dragon on the board.. or i have to kill flame emperor. If i kill flame emperor, he lets it die, and the recasts him, wiping my board again. Which leaves me not enough sp to revive, and i end up using all my sacrifices prematurely. Then he drops flame/earth dragon and finishes me off. If I just wait, then he'll get 2 dragons on the board and then start killing me off.. combined with a fire torrent (i forgot name, hits 4 units for 5* gowen level), it messes up my sacrifices.

Lawtia, use fenrir and eskatia and succubus in the beginning along with a life conversion on my sea hunter. This usually wipes my board, and forces me to sacrifice 2x to get rid of both fenrir and eskatia, just so I can start setting up. Then he'll mana accel first into oni, which i'll assassin, then he'll drop broken soldier, which I cannot handle easily either with just a sea hunter, and have to assassin, again. Leaving me with no assassins left, and then he'll drop another oni and start clearing board. Keep in mind, he hasn't even used any of his SS, a lot of which are AOE damage, which interrupts my ability to sacrifice.

falkow, manicialsoul just casts the 4 casting return all level 2 and below units right after his dragon hits the board, and my entire board is empty and i have nothing to sacrifice, and now no way of putting 2 units down on the board.

These are some things I've ran into that have rofled my deck. I'm not saying assassin isn't OP, it definitely is. But that's the game; gotta go with what's OP if you want to win. And there's no game that's perfectly balanced. What's important, and what this thread is about, is changing up the meta. I'm hoping that people will copy my deck and try to win with it, and then people will use these tactics I mentioned above to beat it. This way, our meta is changing on a regular basis, rather than changing every new set.

Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 8:23 pm

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby ANIMEniac » Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:53 pm

I see that most are looking at Assassin OP due to killing off Behemoths easily and cause a lost of 7+ SP to opponent. Then say it is okay if you run lvl 3 and less b/c it is easier to recover...

Isn't this basic META and match-up?

Multi Assassins work b/c many people are trying to play around Behemoths. I am fairly sure Multi Assassin Souls will fail against rush and lower lvl decks. It's just like how people began to use Water Dragon as anti-gowen, or how i used XXXX in my refress to kill off the Behemoths in the tourny. So someone smarts up and sets up their souls to kill off a certain deck.

This game goes through many Meta changes than most games. Usually a few top tiers stay up on the list each expansion. However, decks get constantly changed and tweaked to deal with what is popular. When less Behemoths are being played and the Quad Assassin deck starts losing to rush, it will change to deal with the new threat. I used to love to play my Lawt Behemoths, and it was great at first. But now more people have counters to them.

This game really pushes players to adapt and be very versatile. Either we have several decks, same decks with changed souls, or make a single deck able to handle a variety of situations. Personally, I like trying to make my deck as versatile as possible.
User avatar
Posts: 1390
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:56 pm

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby Forsakensoul » Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:58 pm

Xovian wrote:I guess I'll add this as my final argument, and I'll leave it at that, for people to agree or disagree with.
At least I'll have said my piece, and leave it at that.

The card in my opinion should be fixed in one of two ways:

1> Have a level cap on what can be killed, just like return and many other level based cards, including SS like the Dragon Riders (both lawt and refess).


2> It should return the SP for both creatures that are removed.

This would be so SP advantage/disadvantage of this magnitude does not happen, and have lasting effects for the meta and general game play.
It also prevents a single card from forcing a dominate play style and would actually let the so called "diversity among unit level" be justified and viable.

The forced play style does force those who have spent, to return back to a play style of those who did not spend (to remain competitive in folrart). There's already enough circular arguments for the spenders vs the non-spenders, and frankly put, this card makes it even more obvious.

Some will agree with this, some won't, but at least i've stated my arguments, and said what i needed to. Maybe I'll come back at the next expansion, but for now, the game isn't fun. I will say this as well, that no, this single card wasn't the sole reason for the lack of "fun", for me it was just the straw that broke the camels back.

What he said.
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 12:02 pm

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby Xovian » Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:17 pm

Gota wrote:But instead of all that, why don't we think of new decks to play that will counter it instead of getting mad over it? :/ you guys did say that it'll be less of a loss if it were used on lower LV monsters, so instead of forcably using all those dragon emperor, why not think of new strategies with lower LV monsters, or something? (You don't HAVE to play it just because you have it, I understand that you guys would LIKE to play it, since you used alot of cash to get those cards, but that doesn't mean that it should be an unbeatable card just because it was bought)

I read your edit, but i did want to comment on this.
This goes back to my "being forced" to a specific play style.

What were the top files in set1?
Mostly Gowen rush, cheap and easy to accomplish for little or no cost, monetary or otherwise (Eg. cheap to get them out too).
What was the only viable consistent counter? Falkow files that relied heavily on either return type effects, or effects that massively manipulated stats such as Agi.

Set two gets introduced.

Yay there are finally ways to get big creatures out (set 1's big creatures rarely if ever saw play, I cant think of a single time that during set 1, that i saw Proposition come out, even in set 2, i never did).

And there was much rejoicing that the same type of files would change, and the repetitiveness of set one would wane.

Several months later, due to many factors including that specific SS effect, you see pretty much the exact same type of files as set1.
Rush files, gowen or otherwise (well okay, Refess is still hosed in that department) are still the most common (not counting these last 3 weeks that i havnt played). There are countless reasons for this and they have all been listed before.

I will say this, you ask why i would/should forcibly have to use the high cost cards like dragon emp (because of a desire to play those cards), but thats a circular argument that has already been stated. Why should i be forced to play those files that only use 3 or less casting cost to be competitive? Why isn't it even kilter regardless of which type of file you choose to play, cause when i left it certainly was not.

I would also argue, that just because it is a good card with higher cost that it hardly makes it unbeatable.
2 or 3 creatures from rush files will still kill any creature on the board, Gowen has proven that from set 1 and still does.
So that argument doesn't stand up to play testing. The only sphere who has/had repeated problems vs large creatures was Falkow, and thats because their primary means of altering a game was through the use of return effects, which while they are still available, are far more costly sp/time wise then it was in set 1. Most players know, or agreed, Falkow could use some help in that department.
I'm Chromatic, I embody all Spheres.
User avatar
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:01 pm

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby lupos » Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:32 pm

Xovian wrote:The only sphere who has/had repeated problems vs large creatures was Falkow, and thats because their primary means of altering a game was through the use of return effects, which while they are still available, are far more costly sp/time wise then it was in set 1. Most players know, or agreed, Falkow could use some help in that department.

Though to be fair, Azure dragon still has the power to make a sylph do as much damage as some dragons. Considering it takes most dragon players several rounds to build up to playing the first real card it shouldn't be that difficult to get a good Falkow starter type file up and running with the right soul cards. Though I never really play as Falkow so I can't really say from experience except that me and Dalos have def struggled against him a few times.
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 959
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby slashzero » Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:51 pm

Falkow has trouble against such large creature files since usually there will be something thrown down on the field (Magic Sword Dual-Wielder, Devouring Lizard, Fenrir, etc) that has to be dealt with, and considering most Falkow openings are Haste or Undine our opening units tend to go squish rather fast while we try to bring out level 3s. And even if you do get those out where are you going to get the 5sp to summon Vordore early on? It either requires some SP generation or good timing with the death of your Haste Soldier. And even if you have Vordore out you can get Grimiore'd to heck (soul bind, fire bolt, fire bolt, fire bolt, Flare Tornado) while the heavy hitter takes out your units. Falkow's best answer (which isn't really Falkow's) is sacrificing undines/sylphs via assassin SS/SSSS, which is much less costly than getting Mystere on the field, keeping her alive and also playing an Undine the same turn.

Also, the earliest a level 9 card can get out is about 5 turns, given that no reviving goes on and first two soul cards are +3 sphere level. Usually longer because some reviving usually does go on, or all the set units don't get sent to the graveyard, but still it's only possible to get about 3 or 4 units on the field in that time. You're definitely limited to that if you want to get Vordore out that early.
Posts: 122
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:36 am

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby teasel » Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:09 pm

Xovian wrote:
teasel wrote:ok here is my problem with people saying assasin is broken because of SP loss
[card=207]this[/card] and [card=209]this[/card]
these cards can do the job just as fine... aren't they a problem because nobody uses them?

[card=207]this (Soul Keeper)[/card]
Requires a file built around her for field use.
The SS gives SP to both players, thus is does not give you an advantage in SP, and since it would be "your" SS slot, you actually helped your opponent more then you helped yourself. So im not seeing the argument at all for this one.

[card=209]this (Broken iron soldier, non ex version)[/card]
Doesn't do both that sp loss and get rid of a creature, again i fail to see your comparison.
The other problem is this, this SS does not guarantee SP loss when it goes off, its completely up to what your opponent did, not what you choose to do. If the assassin/salamander soldier goes off (which is often your choice, unless you couldn't revive all your creatures) and there are creatures on the board on both sides it IS guaranteed SP loss and creature removal. No other effect in the game can claim that...NONE.

The Assassin is still clearly more useful with your examples.

uh soul keeper set everyone to 3 SP that means that if your opponent had say 20 SP they just lost 17 SP...
and really i was just talking about SP draining SS but if you want to put it that way the soul bind+invisible druid (in fact i would say it's better since the only way you could counter it would be to engage another creature and then hope the effect lands on the other one... and you don't lose a creature unlike assasin...) would do the same... heck! rapidly flying apprentice SS specificaly says "return target creature which is level 5 or higher" that will easily hurt as much if not more than assasin yet nobody ever complained about it... why that's not broken? because nobody plays it? beside i might tell something that might probably shocks you... if SP loss hurt you so much,why you don't just add more SP generating stuff? i know that the tought of someone running archer scout/kesaran/sage owl it's shocking (i meant nobody plays them so...) alternatively you could pull off some medium sized creature as a safelock... if you looked around you would think there is some rule that said your deck has to have only level 5> creature or only level3< creature...
User avatar
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:23 am

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby DanTheTimid » Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:54 pm

There are some significant differences between the sp reducing/setting soul cards and assassin. Part of what makes assassin as good as it is is that it isn't one dimensional, it doesn't just provide you short term field advantage (by getting rid of a monster) or long term field advantage (by not allowing them to revive it) but also provides sp advantage as well (by costing you generally only 1 sp for their 2-9 sp). Its also more of a consistent sp advantage generator since its alot more common to find an opponent with a level 2 or higher unit on the field then it is to find and opponent with alot of sp sitting around unspent.

I'm still not convinced assassin is broken, but I do completely agree with Xovian that it strongly discourages high level cards use. Back in set 1 days assassin was the sole reason I never used high levels, and when set 2 announced high levels it was the sole reason I wasn't particularly excited about them. Running a high level is just asking for HUGE field and sp disadvantage in an environment that includes assassin. For a while high levels thrived, I myself enjoyed some wins with some poorly constructed high level decks, but soon the meta changed to counter the new high level threat. Soon everyone and their mother was packing assassin(s), I've even seen people using unicorns as soul cards, and sp reduction became all the rage. Now it seems the only high levels that are seeing consistent success are based around a pair of 5 stars, one of which auto-returns all the usual assassin fodder thus effectively being an assassin counter.

So does this mean assassin is too good since it effectively altered the meta single handedly? I could definitely understand that argument. At the same time though, Killing Machine / Lebeau completely altered the set 1 meta, yet not only was it never dealt with, in set 2 they actually released an even cheaper version of the same effect in Alphonse. But now we have other things to worry about and more counters to it so its not complained about as much. I can't help but wonder if set 3 won't do the same for assassin, giving us more ways of killing low level fodder, more ways of keeping our high levels around, or just in general giving us more options that aren't as badly hindered by assassin causing the soul card to be less frequently used.

Only time will tell, but I can understand why those who are unhappy with the current meta don't want to keep playing until that time arrives. I know of many people who stopped play during the Lebeau era as well because they didn't like the meta he created. Unfortunately far too many of them never really came back even after his reign of terror subsided. Hopefully that isn't the case this time.
The bunnies of Lavato have special abilities, like 'Action Skill: Make Carrot Disappear.'
User avatar
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ

Re: Challenging the Meta

Postby Logress » Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:12 pm

Don't forget there are ways to directly counter an assassin. When the Japanese built us sample dragon decks at the beginning of Set 2, all of them had one or two copies of an Assassin counter, and I've never seen that in a US deck. For example, to protect Allind, run a few copies of Petrification. If he's about to set of a soul skill, use it on the big guy. Sure he can't attack for one round, but he's got 30 DF, so he's probably not going to die, either. And, Assassin is bunked, because it doesn't work on engaged units. For Legyre, use Shear Winds. No one gets to do anything, so it's no loss and assassin is again bunked. Lawtia have the worst option with Soul Bind, because it doesn't protect the Dragon, only engages it. Lucky for Lawtia, even when the Jyu-zyva (girl now) dies, he still does his job. Of course, these options are there primarily to prevent catastrophic SP loss, they still require you to have other units on the field to fight while the dragon is paralyzed. Which means that you still need to build a field with units of different levels, and you can't just throw out your biggest card and dominate automatically. However, if you can get a dragon out and protect it, it can still overwhelm a game.
"Scissors are overpowered. Rock is fine." -Paper
Posts: 6318
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:36 am


Return to Annarose's Sanctum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests