Enough Already!!!!!!!!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The reason I don't like mobius is that he is almost considered a staple nowdays. From my point of view he's just highly overated. I would say the only TRUE staples are Heavy Storm and MST, and MAYBE a premature OR Call of the Haunted. OK, fine, great field advantage, plus great attk. So? Learn how to manage your hand and there are many ways to take ot a monster, and not by attk only. I even disagree with my girlfriend who uses a mobius in her water deck...

Same goes with Royal Decree. Also VERY overated, but, alas, thank goodness not as much. And that goes for the D.D. family, that are really start getting on my nerves nowdays. I'm personally thinking of removing the only D.D. Warrior Lady I'm using, and that's in a warrior/chaos deck.

Like said before, everyone has a card that has managed to get on his nerve... Mobius is one of those :haveaday_
 
Tkwiget said:
People move from trendy deck ideas to the next trendy deck idea. It's the nature of competitive players in any TCG. People don't go to a tournament after they've worked hard to make a highly successful deck to simply lose. People want to win and have fun. People consider winning is having fun. The more they win the more fun they have. Going to a tournament using a deck that won't even win might seem like fun to you, but there's going to be a lot more players looking at you with an arched brow wondering why you even wasted yours and their time by entering.

Decks that win are fun to use. I don't really see the notion of running a completely original deck and losing second and third round. Unless the deck has potential you shouldn't be wasting your money entering a tournament if you don't feel it's worth using in that tournament.

Naturally there's exceptions to what I've said. If you have an exception then all the more power to you. Whining about a card like Mobius isn't going to change the meta. It isn't going to change how people will build their decks and what cards they select to use.

People go to tournaments to win. They don't go to lose with their "fun" deck. Winning merits having a fun time. Everyone wants to win because it makes you feel like you're successful. Thinking otherwise is just flawed logic to me. =/
Well, I was one those player's being looked at with the arched eyebrow this last weekend. I did poorly. I lost 5 straight consecutive rounds. And I had the time of my life. I p***ed so many people off it isn't funny. Wait, yes it is. Then I had all these people telling me how I should not play that many spell and trap or this and that yada yada, not having a clue as to how or what my deck runs Z( or realizing I've been playing this game for a lot longer then they have). I made one guy side in three Mobius the Frost Monarchs. He actually tributed a Mobius for a Mobius. That was the funniest thing I ever saw. One guy sided all his Royal Oppression's in, only to have them destroyed by Double Snare, of all things. Oh, I beat my first opponent with a Nightmare Wheel activated on turn two and nothing else. He tried to deck me out with a sword of the deep seated, not realizing I run 52 cards. That was hilarous.

And that was the best I did all day. People want to win? Honestly, how many people are going to win in a tournament where 160 people show up all running the same thing? Only eight will ever get to the top. And I honestly didn't see to many people having fun if they weren't beating every single opponent they faced. The message is skewed. They want you to play CC because they say that this is the only way you can win. Then they put you in a room with 160 other CC decks and you wonder why your not having the fun you thought you were going to have. Winning is fun? Sure it is. Learning the combo's nobody else will even try is even better. I'll refine this deck untill it is tier one. But I can't do that if every major event I go to I try to turn it into a season 1 episode of Yu-Gi-Oh! My advice to anyone is to play what you want, and keep playing it untill you get it right. That's much more gratifying then loosing time after time with a supposedly winning deck.
 
Who said running a deck with a large number of CC-labeled cards isn't what someone wants to run? Maybe they have fun running those cards for whatever reason they have. People run what they think will win. If that happens to involve cards they like then more power to them. My deck is like that. I threw the deck together rather quickly and it runs alright.

This is a moot topic to discuss. You can argue one point and then have a counter argument to it in a few minutes. Reguardless of what any of us think, the majority of players use cards they want to use for whatever reason they have.
 
Most definitley not a moot point, I'm afraid. Many many player's are not running what they run for the fun of it. And the motivations behind entering these tournaments are far from "haveing fun" in many cases. Of course all arguments have a counter point, otherwise there would be no way to discuss it. This is the defnintion of discussion: points and counter points. And the fact remains that some play what they play just because sombody told them to. Not because they are truley playing what they want to. This is common theme of life in general, not just this little game. Many people do what they do, because the one's that came before them told them that was how it should be. Very few take the time and effort to find out if that is truley the case.
 
you should chose cards for your deck based on the synergy it's likely to have with the rest of your deck, not what possible card advantage it may or may not give you

if the card doesnt combo with 2 or more cards in my deck, it doesnt go in...period

only exceptions to this are basic staples, like Heavy Storm and mst
 
Digital Jedi said:
Most definitley not a moot point, I'm afraid. Many many player's are not running what they run for the fun of it. And the motivations behind entering these tournaments are far from "haveing fun" in many cases. Of course all arguments have a counter point, otherwise there would be no way to discuss it. This is the defnintion of discussion: points and counter points. And the fact remains that some play what they play just because sombody told them to. Not because they are truley playing what they want to. This is common theme of life in general, not just this little game. Many people do what they do, because the one's that came before them told them that was how it should be. Very few take the time and effort to find out if that is truley the case.
Wow. Just wow. I never knew you could read other people's minds, and figure out why they play the decks they do. You have GOT to teach me that trick, it's just awesome.

Seriously, DJ, this is too much hypocrisy for me to keep quiet about. Let's look at two different statements:

"So who cares if it's jank, I have fun playing with it!"

"So who cares if it's cookie cutter, I have fun playing with it!"

Note that the only difference between these two statements is what type of deck being run. They are the same grammatically, and carry almost identical meanings. Yet basically what you're saying is, "I, as Digital Jedi, am allowed to use the former statement in defense of my jank decks, but the people who play CC do it because others told them to, not because it's fun."

You don't know that. I once netdecked the Worlds winner deck to use as a punchbag for my jank decks, and quickly realized I honestly ENJOYED playing with that deck. In other words, "Who cares if it's CC, I have fun playing with it!" What gives you the ability to tell me I DON'T have fun with it, and I'm NOT using it just to amuse myself?

You are right: For every argument, there is a counterargument. So what gives you the right to confidently state:
Many people do what they do, because the one's that came before them told them that was how it should be. Very few take the time and effort to find out if that is truley the case
...without being able to read their minds?
 
I stopped putting a lot of thought into tournament decks. I don't copy other people's ideas really; it just appears that I do. Most of my decks contain cards I just throw together that I think work well together.

Deck building can be a tedious task for some players. So they copy other players and do simple modifications to the deck. This thread is about how the advantage everyone once scrambled to acquire for their decks might suddenly take a noes dive into the ground.

Methods to gain advantage will always exist. The level of difficulty is what will make it easy or extremely difficult to get.

Meh, I'm done with this thread. This kind of stuff is pretty pointless to talk about. Probably because I dont really have much of an opinion or even care that much. =P
 
Jason_C said:
Wow. Just wow. I never knew you could read other people's minds, and figure out why they play the decks they do. You have GOT to teach me that trick, it's just awesome.
No mind reading involved. Most of these young players wear there mood on their sleeves. I don't have to be a mind reader to read the face of a person who is no longer enjoying himself.

Seriously, DJ, this is too much hypocrisy for me to keep quiet about. Let's look at two different statements:

"So who cares if it's jank, I have fun playing with it!"

"So who cares if it's cookie cutter, I have fun playing with it!"

Note that the only difference between these two statements is what type of deck being run. They are the same grammatically, and carry almost identical meanings. Yet basically what you're saying is, "I, as Digital Jedi, am allowed to use the former statement in defense of my jank decks, but the people who play CC do it because others told them to, not because it's fun."
You have an interesting defnition of hypocrisy. I'm not speaking of the people who enjoy playing cookie cutter. You may very wll be one of those people. You've aparently payed no attention to the ones who aren't. I see these people at every small or large event I've attended. They shrink to the background while the motor mouths jabber on about how some kid tried this and I attacked him with this and he did this.

But these players, who are by no means a minority, can't for the life of themselves figure out why they don't do well playing the same decks that everybody else plays. They assume it's because they are bad players. As a result, they continuously play the same group of cards in different variations and combinations, just like they are told, and never venture into the seldom played cards and combos. And that's unfortunate, because there is this whole world of cards out there that would give them the experience they so desperatly need to become better players. But because they been convinced that they will not win exploring that world, they stick to their little corner of the universe and never gain that much needed experience.

You don't know that. I once netdecked the Worlds winner deck to use as a punchbag for my jank decks, and quickly realized I honestly ENJOYED playing with that deck. In other words, "Who cares if it's CC, I have fun playing with it!" What gives you the ability to tell me I DON'T have fun with it, and I'm NOT using it just to amuse myself?

You are right: For every argument, there is a counterargument. So what gives you the right to confidently state:
...without being able to read their minds?
It's called experience. There being a big difference between it and knowledge. As I said, you may very well enjoy playing Cookie Cutter. I never implied YOU didn't. I was speaking of a vast number of players, mostly younger, who look to people like you as examples and learn the wrong lessons. Grammatical structure has absolutly nothing to do with it. I play Jank for far more reason that that it's simply fun. I play it because it is a unknown and seldom explored territory. I play Jank because I discover things that those who stick to CC will never know. I play Jank because with every step I make it more and more competitive.

So before you go jumping of a cliff trying to swat a fly, read a persons statemments more closely. The lessons you learn in simple things are the lessons you will inadvertently aplly to the rest of your life. How do I know that? I learned it through observation and through experience. I didn't have to read anyone's mind.
 
No mind reading involved.
Darn! You mean you can't teach me to see into the human brain? Darn!
You have an interesting defnition of hypocrisy.
Wait... Are you saying your definition is different?

I define hypocrisy as one (or both) of these two things:

1) You can't do this, or you must do that, but me, I'm too good to live by those rules, and I do whatever I want.

2) I am not guilty of [accusation] because of [excuse] but you on the other hand ARE guilty of [accusation] despite [excuse].

You've aparently payed no attention to the ones who aren't
How can I not pay attention to what I've never seen? That's like when my mom tells me I ignored her commands to do the dishes, despite the fact that she never TOLD me to do the dishes.
I see these people at every small or large event I've attended. They shrink to the background while the motor mouths jabber on about how some kid tried this and I attacked him with this and he did this
Then you must have a very interesting definition of people who aren't happy. Because I have ALWAYS shrunken into the background at ALL social events, YGO related or otherwise. If you saw me at any tournament, party, etc, you'd think I was miserable. But I'm not. Which means, sir, that you, though older and more experienced than I, do not understand me at all.

I'm sure you know a lot, and have seen a lot. And I'm sure you're a very intelligient person and understand many things that others do not. But I highly doubt that you have as great an understanding of PEOPLE as you think you do.

I play Jank for far more reason that that it's simply fun. I play it because it is a unknown and seldom explored territory. I play Jank because I discover things that those who stick to CC will never know. I play Jank because with every step I make it more and more competitive.
Wait... don't all of those reasons = fun?
So before you go jumping of a cliff trying to swat a fly
You're not a fly. Nor is your post. This is an attitude I've observed in you for a long time; that post was just what finally made me explode. You defend your jank on the basis that it is fun, but you blatantly disbelieve CC players who say CC is fun. What proof have you that they don't enjoy it? You say you see it in their sleeves? Read on...
read a persons statemments more closely.
I read your statement VERY closely. And what I learned from it is that you are one of "them" and that you cannot relate to "us" no matter how hard you try.

There are two kinds of people in this world: Those who are outgoing, and those who prefer to watch from a distance. Those who are outgoing are convinced that the watchers are either insecure, confused, miserably, or retarded. But we aren't. And I highly doubt that the people you observe honestly hate CC yet play it anyway. They just have different ways of expressing themselves. Like me. I don't ever mean to insult any one, I think you've talked to me enough to realize that. I just have extremely abnormal and unusual ways of critiquing. Spelling?

I have tried to change my behavior to suit those on this forum. I think you know why I have done this. But that doesn't mean I will just sit quietly while you argue in a manner that almost-sorta-kinda-borders on insulting to many YGO players, when you can't be sure of your assessment.
 
TKWiget said:
People move from trendy deck ideas to the next trendy deck idea. It's the nature of competitive players in any TCG. People don't go to a tournament after they've worked hard to make a highly successful deck to simply lose. People want to win and have fun. People consider winning is having fun. The more they win the more fun they have. Going to a tournament using a deck that won't even win might seem like fun to you, but there's going to be a lot more players looking at you with an arched brow wondering why you even wasted yours and their time by entering.

Decks that win are fun to use. I don't really see the notion of running a completely original deck and losing second and third round. Unless the deck has potential you shouldn't be wasting your money entering a tournament if you don't feel it's worth using in that tournament.

Naturally there's exceptions to what I've said. If you have an exception then all the more power to you. Whining about a card like Mobius isn't going to change the meta. It isn't going to change how people will build their decks and what cards they select to use.

People go to tournaments to win. They don't go to lose with their "fun" deck. Winning merits having a fun time. Everyone wants to win because it makes you feel like you're successful. Thinking otherwise is just flawed logic to me. =/
not true, You stated every tcg competitive players play the same deck.

okay, lets find out if that is true..

Click on the link : http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/gphass06/welcome#13

thats drafting, So there would oviously be alot of originality, now lets go to constructed.

Click on the link: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/gplill05/t8decks

I dont know about you but both looked different to me.

see its not every TCG its only TCG's were the majority of the players are very young. Most of the Older player based games have different deck types.

think about it you have a 7000+ cardpool, will you serioulsy play the same 60 cards as somebody else?

thats rediculous and dumb, Yugi has about 3000+ less than 4000 and i see the same 40-41 cards beign played all the time.
 
Jason_C said:
Where did I say that? (Forgive me, it's late for me... well not really, but I'm still tired. e_e)
not you i was suppose to quote TKwiget, but i guess i forgot to push the quote feature. sorry for the misunderstanding.
 
Jason_C said:
Darn! You mean you can't teach me to see into the human brain? Darn!

Wait... Are you saying your definition is different?

I define hypocrisy as one (or both) of these two things:

1) You can't do this, or you must do that, but me, I'm too good to live by those rules, and I do whatever I want.

2) I am not guilty of [accusation] because of [excuse] but you on the other hand ARE guilty of [accusation] despite [excuse].


How can I not pay attention to what I've never seen? That's like when my mom tells me I ignored her commands to do the dishes, despite the fact that she never TOLD me to do the dishes.

Then you must have a very interesting definition of people who aren't happy. Because I have ALWAYS shrunken into the background at ALL social events, YGO related or otherwise. If you saw me at any tournament, party, etc, you'd think I was miserable. But I'm not. Which means, sir, that you, though older and more experienced than I, do not understand me at all.

I'm sure you know a lot, and have seen a lot. And I'm sure you're a very intelligient person and understand many things that others do not. But I highly doubt that you have as great an understanding of PEOPLE as you think you do.


Wait... don't all of those reasons = fun?

You're not a fly. Nor is your post. This is an attitude I've observed in you for a long time; that post was just what finally made me explode. You defend your jank on the basis that it is fun, but you blatantly disbelieve CC players who say CC is fun. What proof have you that they don't enjoy it? You say you see it in their sleeves? Read on...

I read your statement VERY closely. And what I learned from it is that you are one of "them" and that you cannot relate to "us" no matter how hard you try.

There are two kinds of people in this world: Those who are outgoing, and those who prefer to watch from a distance. Those who are outgoing are convinced that the watchers are either insecure, confused, miserably, or retarded. But we aren't. And I highly doubt that the people you observe honestly hate CC yet play it anyway. They just have different ways of expressing themselves. Like me. I don't ever mean to insult any one, I think you've talked to me enough to realize that. I just have extremely abnormal and unusual ways of critiquing. Spelling?

I have tried to change my behavior to suit those on this forum. I think you know why I have done this. But that doesn't mean I will just sit quietly while you argue in a manner that almost-sorta-kinda-borders on insulting to many YGO players, when you can't be sure of your assessment.
beign a hypocrite is Dj saying "DUde jank decks are stupid dont play it" and then you see him in 5 minutes with a jank deck saying "This deck Pwn J00"

thats being a hypocrite.

a smoker says "Smoking is bad, it kills" then they reach in their poket to grab a cigarette.

:)
 
Let's face the reality. Cards with good effects win games and matches. Many players enter tournaments because they want to win. Naturally, they will use the best cards available to them that they think will lead them on to the road to victory.

Why do they want to win so badly? That question has many answers ranging from turning a concept into a winning strategy, or playing for Hobby League points or playing for an invite to nationals. I'm sure you can give a few other reasons yourself.

It is not that these players with the drive to win haven't tested and thought about the rest of the card pool. They have, and after much testing and consideration, the result is the 40(+) card deck full of cards they think are good they intend to use to win the tournament.

Let's take a typical situation.

Player A starts the game and sets a Mystic Tomato and a face down Sakurestu Armor.

Now, "I" think both cards are awesome. Mystic Tomato can search for any dark monster with 1500 or less attack when destroyed by battle. This means when the Tomato is attacked and destroyed by battle, Player A will still have a total of 6 cards (4 in hand, 1 set Sakuretsu, 1 monster that was searched out by Tomato)

Player B draws, gives his moves a thought and summons a D.D. Survivor.

Now, this is a good move because D.D. Survivor is essentially immune to another commonly played trap called Bottomless Trap Hole. In addition, many players also set a D.D. Assailant or D.D. Warrior Lady, which fall prey to D.D. Survivor.

D.D. Survivor attacks the Tomato. Player A opts not to use his trap and lets Tomato search out a Sangan.

Anticipating a counter attack, Player B sets a trap (Sakuretsu Armor) and ends his turn.

At this point, both players have 6 cards each, counting both the hand and field.

It is now Player A's turn. He draws and tributes his Sangan for Mobius the Frost Monarch. Mobius uses its effect to destroy Player B's set trap, and that leaves the DDS wide open for an attack. In addition, Sangan's effect searches out an Exiled Force from the deck, to the hand.

Let's count the total card count of both players.

A has Mobius, a set Sakuretsu, and 5 cards in hand (including the Exiled Force) for a total of 7 cards.

B has a DDS, and 4 cards in hand for a total of 5.

When the Mobius destroys the DDS by battle, B has only 4 cards left. When B draws, he has 5 cards total, compared to A's 7 cards.

As you can see, B is -2. Even if he uses one card each to destroy the Mobius and the set Sakuretsu, he will be left with 3 cards, while A still had 5 in hand. If the game continues with 1 for 1 Exchanges, B is going to quickly run out of cards (resources) to handle A's onslaught.

From this example, we can extrapolate that cards that get rid of the opponents' cards are good, or cards that force the opponent to use multiple cards to get rid of your one card will serve to become beneficial in the long run.

This is why smart players take some damage before activating Torrential Tribute upon the opponent's summoning of a 2nd/3rd monster, or summon a bigger monster to destroy the opponent's weaker monster by battle.

Take a good look at the card pool and think about why certain cards are used much much more than others. Why would I want to use Two Pronged Attack when I can simply use Smashing Ground?

Remember that the card pool is constantly expanding and thus some cards may become obsolete or more playable down the road. Yes, a majority of decks look very similar, but there are most certainly variations among them.
 
Two-Pronged Attack can be used during the opponents turn. :)

it can also clear out tokens.


the example is good considering everybody is playing the same decks. BUT

what if we change that situation again.

your player A and im Player B.

my first move will be King Tiger Wanghu, and my set will be a Bottomless Trap Hole.

I decide to attack... What will you do.

the ovious is get the tomato to die to summon out the sanga so it dies immidiatly and lets you get your d. d. assailant.

No? that cant be right.

Okay lets try this my tiger attacks and you as the smart player uses Sakuretsu Armor. thats good.

your turn, you sacrafice the tomato for the mobious thinking "Ha i get a free shot" WRONG. I set a bottomless making the board clear. You will now go on ahead and set a 2 cards.

we both lost cards, but you lost 1 more than i did.

No?? again you say..

okay. lets see I attack with the Tiger you sakuretsu but this time you will play Mystical Space Typhoon on my Bottomless Trap Hole. Now you will go on and Summon D. D. Assailant.

okay.. thats fair. again i only lost 2 cards. Then you say you will set 2 cards.

Here comes the next ovious move. that will drop me to your hand size.

Heavy Storm.. It resolves your left with nothing then I play Dark Hole.

now I summon Spirit Reaper and attack you directly for 300 points. I oviously lost more Blood Last Turn but this turn you will lose more cards.

you just lost from your 4 on the board + 2 that were in the grave, thats 6 and now you lose 1 in hand, your left with 1 card now and will draw into your 2nd card.

hey were even 2 cards each.

but i have a creature on the board. advantage is me having that creature. thats all.

see the senario can be played multiple ways when the decks have different cards. BUT when the decks have the same exact identical cards... what will happen? the most ovious move.
 
Jason_C said:
Darn! You mean you can't teach me to see into the human brain? Darn!

Wait... Are you saying your definition is different?

I define hypocrisy as one (or both) of these two things:

1) You can't do this, or you must do that, but me, I'm too good to live by those rules, and I do whatever I want.

2) I am not guilty of [accusation] because of [excuse] but you on the other hand ARE guilty of [accusation] despite [excuse].
In fact neither of these is the definition of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is defined as the practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness. I believe in what I'm saying and practice what I preach.

As far as your "definitions" go, I have never stated a person can or can't do anything. Odd that you would glean some kind of command from my statements. I've stated my observations of the motivations of a population of players that largely gets ignored.

How can I not pay attention to what I've never seen? That's like when my mom tells me I ignored her commands to do the dishes, despite the fact that she never TOLD me to do the dishes.
Or perhaps you were'nt listening to her when she told you to. The fact that you didn't hear the tree fall in the woods, does not mean the the tree didn't fall.

Then you must have a very interesting definition of people who aren't happy. Because I have ALWAYS shrunken into the background at ALL social events, YGO related or otherwise. If you saw me at any tournament, party, etc, you'd think I was miserable. But I'm not. Which means, sir, that you, though older and more experienced than I, do not understand me at all.
Again your assuming I'm talking about you. I think we've established that I'm not.

I'm sure you know a lot, and have seen a lot. And I'm sure you're a very intelligient person and understand many things that others do not. But I highly doubt that you have as great an understanding of PEOPLE as you think you do.
Never claimed to be any of that. I've observed one group of people over the years and expressed my comments. There is no great understanding. Just appreciation of others feelings. Paticularly those who go ignored.

Wait... don't all of those reasons = fun?
Well, no. Some of them equal determination. Some equal personal ambition. Some just equal validation. Fun is both a by product and a motivation but not the pirmary reason for all things.

You're not a fly. Nor is your post. This is an attitude I've observed in you for a long time; that post was just what finally made me explode. You defend your jank on the basis that it is fun, but you blatantly disbelieve CC players who say CC is fun. What proof have you that they don't enjoy it? You say you see it in their sleeves? Read on...

I read your statement VERY closely. And what I learned from it is that you are one of "them" and that you cannot relate to "us" no matter how hard you try.

There are two kinds of people in this world: Those who are outgoing, and those who prefer to watch from a distance. Those who are outgoing are convinced that the watchers are either insecure, confused, miserably, or retarded. But we aren't. And I highly doubt that the people you observe honestly hate CC yet play it anyway. They just have different ways of expressing themselves. Like me. I don't ever mean to insult any one, I think you've talked to me enough to realize that. I just have extremely abnormal and unusual ways of critiquing. Spelling?

I have tried to change my behavior to suit those on this forum. I think you know why I have done this. But that doesn't mean I will just sit quietly while you argue in a manner that almost-sorta-kinda-borders on insulting to many YGO players, when you can't be sure of your assessment.
Well, again your making assumptions. Only this time your making them about me. Openess in an online forum is entirely different from openess in real life. I am one of those people that watch from a distance. I've spent most of my life as an observer. I am most definitly not outgoing in public situations. And I spent most of my childhood in the shadows and in the background. Many people also assumed that I was slow or incapable of achieving a life of my own. But they were wrong, and I proved them wrong in my own good time.

At events and gatherings, I'm usually the one talking wth the quite ones and the ones in the shadows. I seldom make freinds with the loud mouths or it takes time for me to get to know them. I simply bond with the quite ones better. I've observed them. I've made freinds with them. I've discussed this subject with them. I am one of them.

But as you said, we are all different. And you continually misinterpret what I've clearly stated several times. I spoke for a group of a people who seldom get spoken for. You keep coming at me like I'm talking about you and your desire and motivations. Guess what? It isn't all about you. ;)

I'll repeat this, 'cause you seem to be overlooking it. I'm speaking for a group of players who are largely ignored. Who make up a huge number of players in this game. I'm speaking about people, some of whom are personal freinds of mine. Some of whom I've spoken with at length. Some who have expressed their feelings on forums like these. But who never get the type of advice that I would suggest. I can't understad why you would try to defend yourself, when your not even being subtly attacked. I'm lamenting the plight of players who were just like me at one time. I'm lamenting the fact that they seldom find the fullfilment in the game that I found when I stopped listening to Cookie Cutter fanatics and just played the way I wanted to. How is that an insult to you or anyone else?
 
As far as your "definitions" go, I have never stated a person can or can't do anything. Odd that you would glean some kind of command from my statements. I've stated my observations of the motivations of a population of players that largely gets ignored.
Actually, I thought your post fell more into the second category. I didn't see any orders in it at all. I wasn't referring to the first category.
Or perhaps you were'nt listening to her when she told you to. The fact that you didn't hear the tree fall in the woods, does not mean the the tree didn't fall.
You'd be surprised. :eek:
Again your assuming I'm talking about you. I think we've established that I'm not.
I wasn't saying you were talking about me. I was using myself as an EXAMPLE. o_0
Never claimed to be any of that. I've observed one group of people over the years and expressed my comments. There is no great understanding. Just appreciation of others feelings. Paticularly those who go ignored.
Well, who says you claimed to that? I said you were those things. Argue with me all day long, criticize CC decks if you want, but DON'T EVER shove away a compliment when I give one to you. :D
Well, again your making assumptions. Only this time your making them about me. Openess in an online forum is entirely different from openess in real life. I am one of those people that watch from a distance. I've spent most of my life as an observer. I am most definitly not outgoing in public situations. And I spent most of my childhood in the shadows and in the background. Many people also assumed that I was slow or incapable of achieving a life of my own. But they were wrong, and I proved them wrong in my own good time.
Then we are more alike then I thought? Well, there goes my whole point...

*point blows up in flames*

*funeral music plays*

Geee...

Guess what? It isn't all about you. ;)
Well why didn't you tell me that BEFORE??!?!?!?!

:D :p ;) XD
 
karazykidpsx,

It is easy to type that ideal situation set of scenarios as you have done so. Likewise, you can say similar things about the example I gave, but yours is much more far fetched. It is possible no doubt, and I'm not going to go against it.

I was simply trying to get a point across to players that cards that create advantageous situations for yourself should be used.

Even the cards you mentioned in your example are advantageous cards. King Tiger will destroy any 1400 or less monster that is normal or special summoned. Spirit Reaper will force a random discard. Bottomless will create a 2 for 1 when the monster offered for a tribute does not have an effect that replenishes the hand/field/total card count (i.e, not Sangan or a face up Poison Draw Frog) and a tribute monster is summoned.

It is rare to have exact mirror matches. There will almost always be differences between different players' decks. Even if it is an exact mirror match, the cards drawn and how they are played will determine the outcome of the game.

The most obvious move would often be the move that would lead to maximum advantage or a maintenance of resources. You wouldn't summon a weaker monster to battle a stronger monster unless there was a good reason to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top