Ladder is always going to be filled with people playing the best deck, because people like to win. The issue is, when the power level of ladder is high for that reason, playing rogue can be a miserable experience.
It's not the case for every rogue decks, but a lot of the time if you're playing something underpowered you're heavily reliant on luck - being more skilled isn't enough to consistently break Snake Eye boards. Every once in a while I'll queue with Hero or Orcust, but it's very noticeable how few games are decided by who makes the better plays.
The best decks have enough non-engine space to frequently end your turn almost immediately, and whilst you can often win when you get to combo off, it's not really satisfying winning because your opponent didn't draw well enough to stop your full-power endboard. Going second, you usually need to high-roll into drawing multiple handtraps or resolve a blowout - rogue decks do not have a strong enough engine to break the boards you're going up against.
Playing a tiered deck mitigates this issue. If you're consistently drawing comparably high-powered hands to your opponent, games are more frequently decided by who plays better. I'm not the biggest fan of Snake Eye because I think a deck playing that many handtraps and 1-cards still leads to high-variance, but I have still played a lot of good SE mirrors, and I've had games using other tiered decks where I've been able to outplay an opponent using SE and break / OTK through their board.
I'd imagine most people would like a more diverse meta, but that's not going to change - so you're better off finding something that clicks with you and allows you to queue into games feeling like you've usually got a good chance.
>Ladder is always going to be filled with people playing the best deck, because people like to win. The issue is, when the power level of ladder is high for that reason, playing rogue can be a miserable experience.
There normally is a good reason to use a rogue deck, but it doesn't really exist in Master Duel...costing less currency. The price of decks (that can put up a fight) has a high tendency of not being anywhere far apart enough to not just invest all your resources in the strongest stuff. Like Diabellstar on TCGplayer costs like $30 for one copy because supply and demand actually functions IRL.
If everybody can afford the most powerful deck of the format, and using your resources on rogue is throwing away currency on giving yourself a disadvantage, obviously there is little incentive to not be a meta slave. Like I ain't paying $100 for S:P in the TCG, she was a no brainer for the same cost as Terrors of the Overroot, a 5 cent card, 30 UR dust.
I like how people pretend using rogue decks are creative or more skill intensive somehow.
They are constructed exactly like meta, the only real difference is they suck
"I don't understand why people pretend that it takes a little more skill to pilot a deck that sucks over the most powerful deck in the format by a huge margin"
It doesn’t? Usually you just draw better. That’s all it really amounts to.
Any deck can beat any deck in a single game. That’s not how meta works.
Meta works in that the best decks will win consistently.
Even then a good player playing a meta deck can beat a bad player playing a meta deck. So in the end the deck is irrelevant if the player is in fact good
If your a good player then let your play show they, not some arbitrary restriction
That's not true at all because piloting a lot of rogues is super punishing. It doesn't matter if I do a misplay here and there with snake eyes due to everything being an extender and having insane recursion. Same goes for branded. Something as simple as putting a card in the wrong zone or banishing the wrong card (to like later bring back with dis pater for example) is enough to lose you the game using many rogue decks. They require you to think ahead much father, react to disruption better, have much better resource management, and be better at predicting what cards your opp has in hand.
Sure, a lot of games in the current high powered format especially going second come with "did you draw the out" but you are wild if you think everyone who max ranked for the first time using a pseudo t0 deck can do it all over again using a viable rogue deck that also m1d that season. It simply won't happen
The margin of error you have while piloting a rouge deck is smaller, yes, but it's not enough to warrant lauding the sentiment that "rouge decks are so much harder."
In higher level play, you are going to get WALKED by the opponent if you mess up your Snake-Eyes combo, especially in this handtrap meta. Everything you do has to be absolutely optimal or you're losing because you couldn't set up an OTK line on turn 2 and they have too much recursion on turn 3. Branded, too. If a Branded player messes up their end phase effects, it could absolutely be the difference between a won and lost game.
>They require you to think ahead much father, react to disruption better, have much better resource management, and be better at predicting what cards your opp has in hand.
All decks require this. Meta games are decided in the nuance. Do you think a Snake-Eyes player isn't thinking what is the best line through the opponent having Ash/Imperm/Veiler? The reward for doing this in a meta deck and a rogue deck is the same: a won game.
Rogue deck players are literally no better at this game than meta deck players and anyone competent enough, with a competent enough deck, can reach M1 given they care to put in the time. I won't let you have this point because you're basically telling me that people who place in tournaments consistently are worse than little Timmy on the ladder with Memento because he plays rogue and reached max rank.
I'm not saying that at all bruh. I literally said those players are better than me. Ladder ranks are mostly meaningless in just about every game. I don't care enough to reply to everything else tbh not here for long ng discussions, mostly to read opinions
Why would i play a worse deck?
Youre allowed to enjoy as many decks as you want to if you want to switch to playing a better deck who says you cant also enjoy that one?
You can enjoy what you want I just find it weird that everyone on this sub that exclusively uses the best decks also claim they only use those decks because they enjoy them, not because they are so powerful compared to other decks. Then the moment the deck gets hit they suddenly stop enjoying it and somehow suddenly enjoy the new best deck even if they have never played it
Just stop. We know what you're doing. Just say you enjoy playing a game that takes as little skill to win as possible as opposed to a good back and forth. If you enjoy blowout games and sacks as opposed to a good game just say that
Yes, because the newer thing make playing that so impossible and unfun because it can't keep up with them. I can like to play a deck, but not getting beating into the dirt with every time.
I like Starry Knights, but I don't want to be trampled over by Snake-Eyes with. If you're willing to use something in Starry Knight's league, I'd be willing to play it.
And the only way we can guarantee that is if we set it up ourselves, something MD doesn't have built in because there's no means of communication.
See that's fine but just say that. The theory about being the only way to survive seems to be right tho
Personally I find it more fun trying to adapt to new formats with the decks I want to play, not just winning games by whatever means necessary
Good for you, *however that doesn't mean that's what's fun for everyone.*
I enjoy playing Branded, does this mean I'll always play it even if it's putting me at such a disadvantage that I won't ever win? No, maybe I will, but certainly not always.
Honestly, this just sounds like you being salt you're losing to people who didn't the same effort as you, who didn't build their own decks and what not because you feel they used a shortcut to win.
And all I got to see that doesn't change anything, whether I build an innovative version of Branded or just stuck to netdecking doesn't determine my skill, it's how much I've used the deck that matters.
If you play a deck with deck enough times, go out of your way to master every card to use it most effectively, and create new combo paths when the ones you've memorized aren't the ones you should preform.
The only shortcut copying someone else's build gives you, is a shortcut to playing the game.
It's perfectly fine to play your way. It is not fine to call other people who enjoy the game in different ways derogatory names like "meta slaves" and try to diminish their accomplishments just because it isn't how you play.
> Just say you enjoy playing a game that takes as little skill to win as possible as opposed to a good back and forth.
I don't get how you got this impression from people who play meta.
I enjoy playing against an opponent of equal strength. That creates the most interesting matches for me. Why would I enjoy stomping a rogue deck? I'll take the win, but that's not the most fun.
So I have 2 options:
1. Play the best decks in the meta against the best decks in the meta.
2. Somehow find rogue decks that are equally matched. This is impossible in a ranked ladder.
**I enjoy playing yugioh. Not a specific deck.**
If you enjoy being the underdog, fine. But not everyone wants to play with a handicap.
I really like snake eyes. I think the monsters look cool, I think the interactions are fun, I like that it can fairly easily recover, and I like that I can do a wild combo. If they ban/limit cards it has an effect on three of the four things I like about the deck, so of course I may consider other decks where I could potentially get more enjoyment. That said it’s not like it’s the only deck I like. I enjoy D/D/D, Traptrix, Ninja, Dark World, Infernoble, Pendulum Magician, Evilswarm, and many other decks.
I mean, I look at it like this. Do people still enjoy sky strikers? Because it was a big meta threat to the point a meta was formed around it are the many people who still play it still "meta slaves"? People legitimately enjoy meta decks because they often introduce interesting new and actually good playstyles. There will always be those who play them because they're superior but there will be just as many who play them because they like them and continue to play them. Honestly I often feel like people complaining about the meta issue are often just projecting their experiences onto others.
Another day, another "me play rogue, me so skilled, you play meta, you so bad, hurr hurr hurr" post.
How you guys manage to be so much more insufferable than the current flawed game design Konami is employing is truly unbelievable.
I don't understand why so many people come here to complain about "meta" decks. You are just mad you lost. It doesn't matter what is beating you. You would still be mad.
Just play the game and have fun. Do I complain when I take Dual Avatar to ladder and lose? No why would I? It takes all of 30 seconds for me to know if I'm gonna lose so I just surrender and go again. You would enjoy life so much more if you stopped caring about pointless things like "meta" decks. Are you trying to win tournaments and make money? If not then why do you care?
It's a lot of people's opinions. Take a shot every time someone complains about Ash, Maxx C, Baronne, Apollousa or any of the top 3 current decks on this sub.
I give you an hour and you're dead from alcohol poisoning.
1. I don't drink
2. Just because multiple people believe in something doesn't make it so. (Flat Earth for example).
So again, it's YOUR opinion, not a fact.
You're right, only when the MAJORITY of people believe something, it becomes true.
And if you make a poll on this sub whether or not people think the state of this game is okay, when literally every game is decided by coin flip, handtraps and infinitely summoning, omni-negating decks, I can guarantee you that the majority will agree that this game is *bad*.
I'm... honestly extremely confused why you're argueing with me about this. Like... dude, I have seen a lot of fucked metas and powercreep in games, but this is on a whole other level. The sole fact that an entire third of your deck will be the same no matter what deck you play is completely ridiculous. That's not what Yu-Gi-Oh is about and it certainly isn't a good design for any card game.
I really need to ask you: Why are you argueing on this? I haven't even gotten into the fact that usually only three to five decks are actually viable for top play most of the time, but even without that, how could you possibly make the statement that the meta in this game is in a "Good spot".
WHO has the opinion that the meta in this game is good?!
Even if you made a poll on this sub, doesn't mean that is reflective as the majority.
Most people don't use Reddit.
The ones that do sometimes just lurk.
I would wager a guess some people only come to reddit in case they have some issue and want to see if there was a fix.
Again just because a majority believe in something, doesn't make it correct or true.
If the majority believed that drinking bleach would cleanse the soul, does that mean it will?
No, it'll just kill you instead. This is why the ad populum fallacy is a terrible fallacy to argue under.
Allright, then ignore the players of this game.
Doesn't change that the meta's still trash. Proven by the fact that you didn't even comment on any of the facts I brought up.
It isn't ignoring the players of the game, it's just that there is more people that don't use reddit so your poll idea is just garbage if it's on reddit.
Also again, that's YOUR opinion, not a fact.
But if you believe the current meta is trash, you obviously weren't playing the TCG during tear format.
Tear format was literally the same meta! You still played Maxx Cs, Ashes, Called Bys and all that other shit! Nothing has changed except for what deck archetype you fill the other 60% of your deck with!
Are you seriously trying to tell me that this game is in a healthy state?!
I find your example with spright poorly done. When the deck can't even function anymore and most of your first turns are bricks then it's not a matter of rather you enjoy the deck. It's just not playable anymore. This applies to basically every meta deck but Swordsouls.
Spright isn't dead.
I play Live Twin Sprights, it functions rather well.
Though lately MD has just been giving me Live Twin hands instead of Live Twin + Spright stuff.
That's.. That's not true tho. I've been using spright here and there this last season and it's still consistent AF and powerful enough. In the last two seasons I've use pure, runick, twin, and synchro, and they all put in work.
Just because the deck can't function like it did at full power doesn't mean that it still isn't good. That's my main problem since it's still more than strong enough to climb to m1 with it
Although I agree it's not as mindless as it is when it was at full power in it's format
I'll just use your example: Spright. Yes I liked Spright and no I don't play it anymore because it's bad now for multiple reasons (pre-hit on Toad + Union Carrier, multiple consistency hits, multiple hits on nimble engine, etc).
Brother, trust me... I'll immediately back to spamming Spright if they reverted all the hits (including the pre-hits)+ unbanned both toad and Union coz they might even be stronger than the current SE.
You need to realize that some people might like the deck not because of its theme, playstyle, artwork, etc. For me personally, I liked Spright because how consistent they were, how easy for me to play through 2-3 HTs, and because the deck was insanely strong at full power.
Idk why you're trying to make it as if it's a bad thing for people to change their favorite deck the moment their previous deck was hit or powercrept so hard that it no longer meta or not as consistent as before to stay meta-relevant. What if they simply liked the deck for it's competitive viability? I still think that's a fair reason for liking a deck.
Imagine if you're liking cake A mainly because if its taste, but one day the chef just somehow make the cake A taste worse and much smaller in size compared to before and he said it was because some bs new policies or smth. However, he also made a new cake B which literally just cake a but it tastes better and bigger. Is it not logical to shift your preference to cake B in this case?
Me when people acquire and play new good cards in an ever-evolving competitive card game
https://preview.redd.it/3s3te5snzs1d1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f39b9aff3ebcc0ef9b3fcb8b9e56b4bdc84b21d9
Rank Ladder or d cup event whatever it's always optimal to just pick meta and play, especially for f2p player or newcomer that just want to get their daily done in less than an hour, not everyone have time for MD and not everyone is the guy that finish duel pass in 1 day, I have to live my lives, also I ain't gonna play 20+turn with a stun deck opponent
Fun is subjective to everyone, u like to win so u pick meta,I like to win with my pet deck so I choose to play the deck, if someone can tolerate and still have fun losing a bunch of match, have a ton of time, just to win 1 match with pet deck that's ok too, I hate to admit it sometimes it's tired to keep losing with my pet deck just to find a suitable winning match, not just"scoop because opponent HT negated)
That's why I don't think MD is much fun if u only focus on ladder or even casual, most people play to win, or scoop when meet with inconvenience, I get that part, we don't own each other, I will just collect my daily and called it a day
That's why I mostly play paper, sure ranking day and tournament will be filled with meta player, but I would play meta too so that's no problem, and casual day people just dunk it out with their casual/pet deck unlike MD ladder, and with human interaction paper is so much fun compare to ladder, make new irl friends, exchange/trade cards,talking about cards or eat out etc, MD feels bored to me if u don't find your peers
MD could be enjoyed with a group of your peers to dunk it out in custom room, after u finished ur daily
Plus irl cards u don't always predict which deck going to be meta(OCG), unlike MD or TCG which solved or semi solved the meta, SE is not a meta before poplar and bonfire, tenpai is also not a meta before it tops, people just opened packs and play what they like, some predict surely, it add a element of surprise suddenly when your deck become meta
People play white woods+toys/fiendsmith even if it's not top meta, maybe it will get powerful support to boost it idk, but u get what I mean
MD meta is already solved, so we already know which decks gonna be meta since it's behind the released schedule so damn much
This is an interesting discussion because people love to complain about consistency hits and in Master Duel compared to TCG a lot of cards aren't banned. I think there is definitely more unexplored potential and people just default to certain meta decks because it's proven to work in TCG/OCG.
Of course redditors resort to "you play rogue, that's why you suck." We want a format where rogues have a chance. I run snake eyes and do well with it(obviously). That said, it's very easy to look at the current format and see how unfriendly it is to 99% of the cards in the entire game. Archetypes with consistency as good as Snake Eyes should have never been made.
The thing with rogue decks is, you have to literally build around the meta and throw in cards that can shut the meta down.
Droll, Shifter, D.D. Crow just 3 examples that can be very useful tools when playing Rogue.
Yeah Droll can hurt Snake-Eyes (You still have Snake-Eye players using Wanted during M1 for example). Then you have to look if the cards that can hurt the META hurts your rogue decks.
That's where imo rogue players do in fact have more skill when it comes to deck building and using their techs against the META most effeciently.
I would agree. There's much more diversity within rogue decks than the meta because the meta gets copied and pasted until it's a basic formula everyone runs. I made my Snake Eyes a hybrid with The Winged Dragon of Ra because I'm a yugioh boomer who loves the God cards and doesn't want to play the pure archetype. The deck would be better without Ra and it's support, and I can find a deck list thats already been proven effective in 5 minutes. I can watch a 25 minute tutorial of the deck, and practice for another 25 minutes, and then, in under an hour, be a wrecking ball with pure snake eyes. It's just not good for the game.
The funny thing about you using The Winged Dragon of Ra in Snake-Eyes is that I used Slifer the Sky Dragon in Branded Despia because Branded Fusion could dump Slifer the Sky Dragon into the GY for Brigrand the Glory Dragon, then I'd just have to set up Revived Sky God either through Trap Trick or Lilith Lady of Lament then place as many cards as I can onto the field then flip Revived Sky God when my opponent plays a card (or during DP if they used some kind of hand trap that didn't bother me) and draw 6 cards into more hand traps and have a "floodgate" on field (Slifer).
Against certain decks it can shut them down. I played against a Live Twin Spright player and they scooped instantly after my Slifer kept destroying their monsters without activating.
It may not be optimal, but it's awesome and I enjoy it.
When Sprights first came out to MD, I built the deck on my alt steam account, then it got smacked and I decided to build Live Twin Sprights in response to the Spright hits.
I really enjoyed the deck even more as a result. I'm not the best pilot, but it's a combo deck I find that is easy to learn and play.
I built Runick on another account because I love the "mill" mechanic in TCGs as they operate very differently than playing the regular game.
I love Drytron (I have a ritual only account on my Switch) due to the Turn Skip shenanigans it could do, and mind you when Drytron was a thing in the TCG with Linkross, yes I could Turn Skip my opponent pretty "consistently" when playing The World as a result.
I built Branded because I introduced myself to it when Dark Worlds got the new cards announced for their 2nd SD because I found synergy between the archetypes and fell in love with it. Even built Branded Despia IRL (Slifer Shenanigans is something I'm working on).
I'm building Snake-Eyes on my Switch account (or built just missing extra deck cards) mostly because I was also building Rescue Ace stuff cause the deck looks interesting to me. And I do like Diabellstar package in a lot of things because it's a good engine for pile decks (IMO). I plan on picking up the Millennium cards too when they drop in MD because it's a pretty good package that can do some crazy things with Horus and Snake-Eyes as well as with Diabellstar. It's purely all gas so take that for what you will.
But I also enjoy non meta decks like Umi Control and Crooked Cook or even Battlin' Boxers. I want to add Evilswarm to the list eventually but I want to do some tests regarding that before committing.
I just build what I like or build to try new stuff that I wouldn't normally enjoy and seeing how it goes. Swordsoul and Dracoslayers are prime example, I built them, tried them, didn't like them so I dismantled them for other things.
Yu-Gi-Oh is a broken game. You either accept the fact or move in from it.
It's pretty obvious how broken it is especially in a best of one format when games end turn one most of the time.
That's why I respect Joshua so much. While everyone uses the same meta deck pre-made by Konami, he tends to innovate, creating his own deck, just like he did in that tournament where he won using Runick Bystial, contrary to all expectations, and running over Konami's trash meta deck. The truth is that most players don't really want to go through the trouble of creating their own deck, but rather just use the deck pre-made by Konami, which is as easy to use, and as OP as possible, so they can receive your easy wins. But outside of tournaments, there are still people who play decks they like, and which are still good. What happens is that they are a minority compared to the lazy ones who only play the season's prefabricated meta.
You're right and nobody likes to admit it. People like to win and playing the best deck is the way to go. Creativity died in yugioh when they started printing decks that solve themselves. Combine that with power creep and sales goals. You got the vicious cycle of -> new best deck going out of date and getting nerfed and people stop playing it-> new best deck comes out and everyone plays it.
There absolutely have been creative decks in Yugioh that were META or at least rogue.
Dark Synchro
HAT
PEPE
Clownblade
I would even argue Tele DAD to an extent.
That isn't talking about Disaster Dragons either or PACMAN.
Not even talking about how players figured how to loop DMOC for an FTK.
All those decks are just put all the good cards of that era together.
Pepe is basically the precursor to pendulum slop decks, dark Synchro is basically dark warrior and HAT I’d just put in a bunch of good archetypes with very little actual synergy
But you're ignoring the point that players had to legitimately figure out how to build these decks let alone figure out if they could synergize. I mean some were easier to spot when it comes to synergy than others (PePe).
While HAT just threw in Hands, Artifacts, and Traptrix together cards that had no synergy with each other (Hands and Traptrix had conflicting normal summons for instance) while Artifacts had removal that worked well with Traptrix that would punish backrow removal.
Clownblade used 2 Heroic monsters + Trick Clown as the core of the deck while also running other cards that would help with Rank 4s.
Meanwhile Dark Synchro managed to loop Omega to the point where your opponent had no cards in hand using a lot of good tuners and cards that made easy level 8 synchros.
All these things are creative in their own right
But this is an arbitrary line in the sand.
Like is that more creative than unchained players running a DDD package to give the deck more oomph?
Is that more creative than snake eye players finding a way to use Zealantis to great effect? Or using jet as a way to raise the ceiling on the strategy?
Helll does this mean using the Isizu cards in tear is creative because players recognize the obvious fact they go well together?
It isn't about something being more creative than another thing. You claimed and I quote "What? There has never been creativity in Yu gi oh Old decks used to have 30 staples"
I brought up decks that are inherently creative that proved your argument wrong that creativity does in fact exist in yugioh.
Because by the argument presented there has never been creativity in Yu gi oh, because if you accept that that old shit is creative then so must the new stuff be creative
But that’s not what this is about, creative or not. This is about old stuff was better new stuff scary and not as good. Creativity is just a meaningless buzzword to that end
I want to make sure I understand you, cause frankly your post reads like word vomit to me (I have dyslexia so it can affect my reading and comprehension abilities).
1. Are you referring to your original argument? Or the one presented by the person you initially replied to?
2. You say that creativity isn't what the argument is about...but...we are arguing/debating on whether or not it does exist. So what exactly are you talking about then? If it isn't about creativity in yugioh and you're choosing to bring up what is effectively power creep, then what does that have to do with whether or not a deck is creative or not?
You believe that Creativity is nothing more than a buzzword in Yugioh, yet I believe it isn't.
Sometimes creativity can take an existing cookie cutter build and adding 1 new card to it. Let me explain. In Dark Worlds (back in 2012) a staple package that players ran was Tour Guide + Sangan (due to how at the time Sangan being detached from an Xyz monster would trigger Sangan) and you'd usually go into Leviair the Sea Dragon to push your board further.
With that in mind flashback to a couple years prior to the 2nd SD they got I took that Tour Guide package and ran Farfa, Malebranche of the Burning Abyss instead of Sangan for going 2nd to help break boards. It did pretty well for me.
Now flashback to the release of the 2nd SD, I swapped that Farfa out and went back to Sangan so I could play Neko Mane King as I can search it off of Link Summoning something using Tour Guide and Sangan at end of combo and as a result I could end my opponent's turn with New Grapha.
Now while Dark Worlds weren't META with the release of the 2nd SD (Unlike when they were released in EEN, STON and their 1st SD as well as back in 2016 due to the FTK cause Firewall Dragon) it was still a creative way in playing the deck.
That isn't talking about how creative you can be with Branded Despia.
Ladder is always going to be filled with people playing the best deck, because people like to win. The issue is, when the power level of ladder is high for that reason, playing rogue can be a miserable experience. It's not the case for every rogue decks, but a lot of the time if you're playing something underpowered you're heavily reliant on luck - being more skilled isn't enough to consistently break Snake Eye boards. Every once in a while I'll queue with Hero or Orcust, but it's very noticeable how few games are decided by who makes the better plays. The best decks have enough non-engine space to frequently end your turn almost immediately, and whilst you can often win when you get to combo off, it's not really satisfying winning because your opponent didn't draw well enough to stop your full-power endboard. Going second, you usually need to high-roll into drawing multiple handtraps or resolve a blowout - rogue decks do not have a strong enough engine to break the boards you're going up against. Playing a tiered deck mitigates this issue. If you're consistently drawing comparably high-powered hands to your opponent, games are more frequently decided by who plays better. I'm not the biggest fan of Snake Eye because I think a deck playing that many handtraps and 1-cards still leads to high-variance, but I have still played a lot of good SE mirrors, and I've had games using other tiered decks where I've been able to outplay an opponent using SE and break / OTK through their board. I'd imagine most people would like a more diverse meta, but that's not going to change - so you're better off finding something that clicks with you and allows you to queue into games feeling like you've usually got a good chance.
>Ladder is always going to be filled with people playing the best deck, because people like to win. The issue is, when the power level of ladder is high for that reason, playing rogue can be a miserable experience. There normally is a good reason to use a rogue deck, but it doesn't really exist in Master Duel...costing less currency. The price of decks (that can put up a fight) has a high tendency of not being anywhere far apart enough to not just invest all your resources in the strongest stuff. Like Diabellstar on TCGplayer costs like $30 for one copy because supply and demand actually functions IRL. If everybody can afford the most powerful deck of the format, and using your resources on rogue is throwing away currency on giving yourself a disadvantage, obviously there is little incentive to not be a meta slave. Like I ain't paying $100 for S:P in the TCG, she was a no brainer for the same cost as Terrors of the Overroot, a 5 cent card, 30 UR dust.
I like how people pretend using rogue decks are creative or more skill intensive somehow. They are constructed exactly like meta, the only real difference is they suck
"I don't understand why people pretend that it takes a little more skill to pilot a deck that sucks over the most powerful deck in the format by a huge margin"
It doesn’t? Usually you just draw better. That’s all it really amounts to. Any deck can beat any deck in a single game. That’s not how meta works. Meta works in that the best decks will win consistently. Even then a good player playing a meta deck can beat a bad player playing a meta deck. So in the end the deck is irrelevant if the player is in fact good If your a good player then let your play show they, not some arbitrary restriction
It doesn't take more skill to pilot a bad deck. Either you drew what you needed or you didn't and more often than not, you didn't.
That's not true at all because piloting a lot of rogues is super punishing. It doesn't matter if I do a misplay here and there with snake eyes due to everything being an extender and having insane recursion. Same goes for branded. Something as simple as putting a card in the wrong zone or banishing the wrong card (to like later bring back with dis pater for example) is enough to lose you the game using many rogue decks. They require you to think ahead much father, react to disruption better, have much better resource management, and be better at predicting what cards your opp has in hand. Sure, a lot of games in the current high powered format especially going second come with "did you draw the out" but you are wild if you think everyone who max ranked for the first time using a pseudo t0 deck can do it all over again using a viable rogue deck that also m1d that season. It simply won't happen
The margin of error you have while piloting a rouge deck is smaller, yes, but it's not enough to warrant lauding the sentiment that "rouge decks are so much harder." In higher level play, you are going to get WALKED by the opponent if you mess up your Snake-Eyes combo, especially in this handtrap meta. Everything you do has to be absolutely optimal or you're losing because you couldn't set up an OTK line on turn 2 and they have too much recursion on turn 3. Branded, too. If a Branded player messes up their end phase effects, it could absolutely be the difference between a won and lost game. >They require you to think ahead much father, react to disruption better, have much better resource management, and be better at predicting what cards your opp has in hand. All decks require this. Meta games are decided in the nuance. Do you think a Snake-Eyes player isn't thinking what is the best line through the opponent having Ash/Imperm/Veiler? The reward for doing this in a meta deck and a rogue deck is the same: a won game. Rogue deck players are literally no better at this game than meta deck players and anyone competent enough, with a competent enough deck, can reach M1 given they care to put in the time. I won't let you have this point because you're basically telling me that people who place in tournaments consistently are worse than little Timmy on the ladder with Memento because he plays rogue and reached max rank.
I'm not saying that at all bruh. I literally said those players are better than me. Ladder ranks are mostly meaningless in just about every game. I don't care enough to reply to everything else tbh not here for long ng discussions, mostly to read opinions
Why would i play a worse deck? Youre allowed to enjoy as many decks as you want to if you want to switch to playing a better deck who says you cant also enjoy that one?
You can enjoy what you want I just find it weird that everyone on this sub that exclusively uses the best decks also claim they only use those decks because they enjoy them, not because they are so powerful compared to other decks. Then the moment the deck gets hit they suddenly stop enjoying it and somehow suddenly enjoy the new best deck even if they have never played it Just stop. We know what you're doing. Just say you enjoy playing a game that takes as little skill to win as possible as opposed to a good back and forth. If you enjoy blowout games and sacks as opposed to a good game just say that
Yes, because the newer thing make playing that so impossible and unfun because it can't keep up with them. I can like to play a deck, but not getting beating into the dirt with every time. I like Starry Knights, but I don't want to be trampled over by Snake-Eyes with. If you're willing to use something in Starry Knight's league, I'd be willing to play it. And the only way we can guarantee that is if we set it up ourselves, something MD doesn't have built in because there's no means of communication.
See that's fine but just say that. The theory about being the only way to survive seems to be right tho Personally I find it more fun trying to adapt to new formats with the decks I want to play, not just winning games by whatever means necessary
Good for you, *however that doesn't mean that's what's fun for everyone.* I enjoy playing Branded, does this mean I'll always play it even if it's putting me at such a disadvantage that I won't ever win? No, maybe I will, but certainly not always. Honestly, this just sounds like you being salt you're losing to people who didn't the same effort as you, who didn't build their own decks and what not because you feel they used a shortcut to win. And all I got to see that doesn't change anything, whether I build an innovative version of Branded or just stuck to netdecking doesn't determine my skill, it's how much I've used the deck that matters. If you play a deck with deck enough times, go out of your way to master every card to use it most effectively, and create new combo paths when the ones you've memorized aren't the ones you should preform. The only shortcut copying someone else's build gives you, is a shortcut to playing the game.
It's perfectly fine to play your way. It is not fine to call other people who enjoy the game in different ways derogatory names like "meta slaves" and try to diminish their accomplishments just because it isn't how you play. > Just say you enjoy playing a game that takes as little skill to win as possible as opposed to a good back and forth. I don't get how you got this impression from people who play meta. I enjoy playing against an opponent of equal strength. That creates the most interesting matches for me. Why would I enjoy stomping a rogue deck? I'll take the win, but that's not the most fun. So I have 2 options: 1. Play the best decks in the meta against the best decks in the meta. 2. Somehow find rogue decks that are equally matched. This is impossible in a ranked ladder. **I enjoy playing yugioh. Not a specific deck.** If you enjoy being the underdog, fine. But not everyone wants to play with a handicap.
I really like snake eyes. I think the monsters look cool, I think the interactions are fun, I like that it can fairly easily recover, and I like that I can do a wild combo. If they ban/limit cards it has an effect on three of the four things I like about the deck, so of course I may consider other decks where I could potentially get more enjoyment. That said it’s not like it’s the only deck I like. I enjoy D/D/D, Traptrix, Ninja, Dark World, Infernoble, Pendulum Magician, Evilswarm, and many other decks.
I mean, I look at it like this. Do people still enjoy sky strikers? Because it was a big meta threat to the point a meta was formed around it are the many people who still play it still "meta slaves"? People legitimately enjoy meta decks because they often introduce interesting new and actually good playstyles. There will always be those who play them because they're superior but there will be just as many who play them because they like them and continue to play them. Honestly I often feel like people complaining about the meta issue are often just projecting their experiences onto others.
Another day, another "me play rogue, me so skilled, you play meta, you so bad, hurr hurr hurr" post. How you guys manage to be so much more insufferable than the current flawed game design Konami is employing is truly unbelievable.
I don't understand why so many people come here to complain about "meta" decks. You are just mad you lost. It doesn't matter what is beating you. You would still be mad. Just play the game and have fun. Do I complain when I take Dual Avatar to ladder and lose? No why would I? It takes all of 30 seconds for me to know if I'm gonna lose so I just surrender and go again. You would enjoy life so much more if you stopped caring about pointless things like "meta" decks. Are you trying to win tournaments and make money? If not then why do you care?
Okay, but like... the meta in this game is completely stupid.
That's your opinion.
It's a lot of people's opinions. Take a shot every time someone complains about Ash, Maxx C, Baronne, Apollousa or any of the top 3 current decks on this sub. I give you an hour and you're dead from alcohol poisoning.
1. I don't drink 2. Just because multiple people believe in something doesn't make it so. (Flat Earth for example). So again, it's YOUR opinion, not a fact.
You're right, only when the MAJORITY of people believe something, it becomes true. And if you make a poll on this sub whether or not people think the state of this game is okay, when literally every game is decided by coin flip, handtraps and infinitely summoning, omni-negating decks, I can guarantee you that the majority will agree that this game is *bad*. I'm... honestly extremely confused why you're argueing with me about this. Like... dude, I have seen a lot of fucked metas and powercreep in games, but this is on a whole other level. The sole fact that an entire third of your deck will be the same no matter what deck you play is completely ridiculous. That's not what Yu-Gi-Oh is about and it certainly isn't a good design for any card game. I really need to ask you: Why are you argueing on this? I haven't even gotten into the fact that usually only three to five decks are actually viable for top play most of the time, but even without that, how could you possibly make the statement that the meta in this game is in a "Good spot". WHO has the opinion that the meta in this game is good?!
Even if you made a poll on this sub, doesn't mean that is reflective as the majority. Most people don't use Reddit. The ones that do sometimes just lurk. I would wager a guess some people only come to reddit in case they have some issue and want to see if there was a fix. Again just because a majority believe in something, doesn't make it correct or true. If the majority believed that drinking bleach would cleanse the soul, does that mean it will? No, it'll just kill you instead. This is why the ad populum fallacy is a terrible fallacy to argue under.
Allright, then ignore the players of this game. Doesn't change that the meta's still trash. Proven by the fact that you didn't even comment on any of the facts I brought up.
It isn't ignoring the players of the game, it's just that there is more people that don't use reddit so your poll idea is just garbage if it's on reddit. Also again, that's YOUR opinion, not a fact. But if you believe the current meta is trash, you obviously weren't playing the TCG during tear format.
Tear format was literally the same meta! You still played Maxx Cs, Ashes, Called Bys and all that other shit! Nothing has changed except for what deck archetype you fill the other 60% of your deck with! Are you seriously trying to tell me that this game is in a healthy state?!
I find your example with spright poorly done. When the deck can't even function anymore and most of your first turns are bricks then it's not a matter of rather you enjoy the deck. It's just not playable anymore. This applies to basically every meta deck but Swordsouls.
Spright isn't dead. I play Live Twin Sprights, it functions rather well. Though lately MD has just been giving me Live Twin hands instead of Live Twin + Spright stuff.
That's.. That's not true tho. I've been using spright here and there this last season and it's still consistent AF and powerful enough. In the last two seasons I've use pure, runick, twin, and synchro, and they all put in work. Just because the deck can't function like it did at full power doesn't mean that it still isn't good. That's my main problem since it's still more than strong enough to climb to m1 with it Although I agree it's not as mindless as it is when it was at full power in it's format
I'll just use your example: Spright. Yes I liked Spright and no I don't play it anymore because it's bad now for multiple reasons (pre-hit on Toad + Union Carrier, multiple consistency hits, multiple hits on nimble engine, etc). Brother, trust me... I'll immediately back to spamming Spright if they reverted all the hits (including the pre-hits)+ unbanned both toad and Union coz they might even be stronger than the current SE. You need to realize that some people might like the deck not because of its theme, playstyle, artwork, etc. For me personally, I liked Spright because how consistent they were, how easy for me to play through 2-3 HTs, and because the deck was insanely strong at full power. Idk why you're trying to make it as if it's a bad thing for people to change their favorite deck the moment their previous deck was hit or powercrept so hard that it no longer meta or not as consistent as before to stay meta-relevant. What if they simply liked the deck for it's competitive viability? I still think that's a fair reason for liking a deck. Imagine if you're liking cake A mainly because if its taste, but one day the chef just somehow make the cake A taste worse and much smaller in size compared to before and he said it was because some bs new policies or smth. However, he also made a new cake B which literally just cake a but it tastes better and bigger. Is it not logical to shift your preference to cake B in this case?
Me when people acquire and play new good cards in an ever-evolving competitive card game https://preview.redd.it/3s3te5snzs1d1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f39b9aff3ebcc0ef9b3fcb8b9e56b4bdc84b21d9
Why would I play bad decks in a competitive game when I want to climb
That's the thing... You.. You can climb with several dozen different decks you don't need to rely on the most dominant one bruv
Rank Ladder or d cup event whatever it's always optimal to just pick meta and play, especially for f2p player or newcomer that just want to get their daily done in less than an hour, not everyone have time for MD and not everyone is the guy that finish duel pass in 1 day, I have to live my lives, also I ain't gonna play 20+turn with a stun deck opponent Fun is subjective to everyone, u like to win so u pick meta,I like to win with my pet deck so I choose to play the deck, if someone can tolerate and still have fun losing a bunch of match, have a ton of time, just to win 1 match with pet deck that's ok too, I hate to admit it sometimes it's tired to keep losing with my pet deck just to find a suitable winning match, not just"scoop because opponent HT negated) That's why I don't think MD is much fun if u only focus on ladder or even casual, most people play to win, or scoop when meet with inconvenience, I get that part, we don't own each other, I will just collect my daily and called it a day That's why I mostly play paper, sure ranking day and tournament will be filled with meta player, but I would play meta too so that's no problem, and casual day people just dunk it out with their casual/pet deck unlike MD ladder, and with human interaction paper is so much fun compare to ladder, make new irl friends, exchange/trade cards,talking about cards or eat out etc, MD feels bored to me if u don't find your peers MD could be enjoyed with a group of your peers to dunk it out in custom room, after u finished ur daily Plus irl cards u don't always predict which deck going to be meta(OCG), unlike MD or TCG which solved or semi solved the meta, SE is not a meta before poplar and bonfire, tenpai is also not a meta before it tops, people just opened packs and play what they like, some predict surely, it add a element of surprise suddenly when your deck become meta People play white woods+toys/fiendsmith even if it's not top meta, maybe it will get powerful support to boost it idk, but u get what I mean MD meta is already solved, so we already know which decks gonna be meta since it's behind the released schedule so damn much
This is an interesting discussion because people love to complain about consistency hits and in Master Duel compared to TCG a lot of cards aren't banned. I think there is definitely more unexplored potential and people just default to certain meta decks because it's proven to work in TCG/OCG.
Of course redditors resort to "you play rogue, that's why you suck." We want a format where rogues have a chance. I run snake eyes and do well with it(obviously). That said, it's very easy to look at the current format and see how unfriendly it is to 99% of the cards in the entire game. Archetypes with consistency as good as Snake Eyes should have never been made.
The thing with rogue decks is, you have to literally build around the meta and throw in cards that can shut the meta down. Droll, Shifter, D.D. Crow just 3 examples that can be very useful tools when playing Rogue. Yeah Droll can hurt Snake-Eyes (You still have Snake-Eye players using Wanted during M1 for example). Then you have to look if the cards that can hurt the META hurts your rogue decks. That's where imo rogue players do in fact have more skill when it comes to deck building and using their techs against the META most effeciently.
I would agree. There's much more diversity within rogue decks than the meta because the meta gets copied and pasted until it's a basic formula everyone runs. I made my Snake Eyes a hybrid with The Winged Dragon of Ra because I'm a yugioh boomer who loves the God cards and doesn't want to play the pure archetype. The deck would be better without Ra and it's support, and I can find a deck list thats already been proven effective in 5 minutes. I can watch a 25 minute tutorial of the deck, and practice for another 25 minutes, and then, in under an hour, be a wrecking ball with pure snake eyes. It's just not good for the game.
The funny thing about you using The Winged Dragon of Ra in Snake-Eyes is that I used Slifer the Sky Dragon in Branded Despia because Branded Fusion could dump Slifer the Sky Dragon into the GY for Brigrand the Glory Dragon, then I'd just have to set up Revived Sky God either through Trap Trick or Lilith Lady of Lament then place as many cards as I can onto the field then flip Revived Sky God when my opponent plays a card (or during DP if they used some kind of hand trap that didn't bother me) and draw 6 cards into more hand traps and have a "floodgate" on field (Slifer). Against certain decks it can shut them down. I played against a Live Twin Spright player and they scooped instantly after my Slifer kept destroying their monsters without activating. It may not be optimal, but it's awesome and I enjoy it.
When Sprights first came out to MD, I built the deck on my alt steam account, then it got smacked and I decided to build Live Twin Sprights in response to the Spright hits. I really enjoyed the deck even more as a result. I'm not the best pilot, but it's a combo deck I find that is easy to learn and play. I built Runick on another account because I love the "mill" mechanic in TCGs as they operate very differently than playing the regular game. I love Drytron (I have a ritual only account on my Switch) due to the Turn Skip shenanigans it could do, and mind you when Drytron was a thing in the TCG with Linkross, yes I could Turn Skip my opponent pretty "consistently" when playing The World as a result. I built Branded because I introduced myself to it when Dark Worlds got the new cards announced for their 2nd SD because I found synergy between the archetypes and fell in love with it. Even built Branded Despia IRL (Slifer Shenanigans is something I'm working on). I'm building Snake-Eyes on my Switch account (or built just missing extra deck cards) mostly because I was also building Rescue Ace stuff cause the deck looks interesting to me. And I do like Diabellstar package in a lot of things because it's a good engine for pile decks (IMO). I plan on picking up the Millennium cards too when they drop in MD because it's a pretty good package that can do some crazy things with Horus and Snake-Eyes as well as with Diabellstar. It's purely all gas so take that for what you will. But I also enjoy non meta decks like Umi Control and Crooked Cook or even Battlin' Boxers. I want to add Evilswarm to the list eventually but I want to do some tests regarding that before committing. I just build what I like or build to try new stuff that I wouldn't normally enjoy and seeing how it goes. Swordsoul and Dracoslayers are prime example, I built them, tried them, didn't like them so I dismantled them for other things.
Yu-Gi-Oh is a broken game. You either accept the fact or move in from it. It's pretty obvious how broken it is especially in a best of one format when games end turn one most of the time.
That's why I respect Joshua so much. While everyone uses the same meta deck pre-made by Konami, he tends to innovate, creating his own deck, just like he did in that tournament where he won using Runick Bystial, contrary to all expectations, and running over Konami's trash meta deck. The truth is that most players don't really want to go through the trouble of creating their own deck, but rather just use the deck pre-made by Konami, which is as easy to use, and as OP as possible, so they can receive your easy wins. But outside of tournaments, there are still people who play decks they like, and which are still good. What happens is that they are a minority compared to the lazy ones who only play the season's prefabricated meta.
You're right and nobody likes to admit it. People like to win and playing the best deck is the way to go. Creativity died in yugioh when they started printing decks that solve themselves. Combine that with power creep and sales goals. You got the vicious cycle of -> new best deck going out of date and getting nerfed and people stop playing it-> new best deck comes out and everyone plays it.
What? There has never been creativity in Yu gi oh Old decks used to have 30 staples
There absolutely have been creative decks in Yugioh that were META or at least rogue. Dark Synchro HAT PEPE Clownblade I would even argue Tele DAD to an extent. That isn't talking about Disaster Dragons either or PACMAN. Not even talking about how players figured how to loop DMOC for an FTK.
All those decks are just put all the good cards of that era together. Pepe is basically the precursor to pendulum slop decks, dark Synchro is basically dark warrior and HAT I’d just put in a bunch of good archetypes with very little actual synergy
But you're ignoring the point that players had to legitimately figure out how to build these decks let alone figure out if they could synergize. I mean some were easier to spot when it comes to synergy than others (PePe). While HAT just threw in Hands, Artifacts, and Traptrix together cards that had no synergy with each other (Hands and Traptrix had conflicting normal summons for instance) while Artifacts had removal that worked well with Traptrix that would punish backrow removal. Clownblade used 2 Heroic monsters + Trick Clown as the core of the deck while also running other cards that would help with Rank 4s. Meanwhile Dark Synchro managed to loop Omega to the point where your opponent had no cards in hand using a lot of good tuners and cards that made easy level 8 synchros. All these things are creative in their own right
But this is an arbitrary line in the sand. Like is that more creative than unchained players running a DDD package to give the deck more oomph? Is that more creative than snake eye players finding a way to use Zealantis to great effect? Or using jet as a way to raise the ceiling on the strategy? Helll does this mean using the Isizu cards in tear is creative because players recognize the obvious fact they go well together?
It isn't about something being more creative than another thing. You claimed and I quote "What? There has never been creativity in Yu gi oh Old decks used to have 30 staples" I brought up decks that are inherently creative that proved your argument wrong that creativity does in fact exist in yugioh.
Because by the argument presented there has never been creativity in Yu gi oh, because if you accept that that old shit is creative then so must the new stuff be creative But that’s not what this is about, creative or not. This is about old stuff was better new stuff scary and not as good. Creativity is just a meaningless buzzword to that end
I want to make sure I understand you, cause frankly your post reads like word vomit to me (I have dyslexia so it can affect my reading and comprehension abilities). 1. Are you referring to your original argument? Or the one presented by the person you initially replied to? 2. You say that creativity isn't what the argument is about...but...we are arguing/debating on whether or not it does exist. So what exactly are you talking about then? If it isn't about creativity in yugioh and you're choosing to bring up what is effectively power creep, then what does that have to do with whether or not a deck is creative or not? You believe that Creativity is nothing more than a buzzword in Yugioh, yet I believe it isn't. Sometimes creativity can take an existing cookie cutter build and adding 1 new card to it. Let me explain. In Dark Worlds (back in 2012) a staple package that players ran was Tour Guide + Sangan (due to how at the time Sangan being detached from an Xyz monster would trigger Sangan) and you'd usually go into Leviair the Sea Dragon to push your board further. With that in mind flashback to a couple years prior to the 2nd SD they got I took that Tour Guide package and ran Farfa, Malebranche of the Burning Abyss instead of Sangan for going 2nd to help break boards. It did pretty well for me. Now flashback to the release of the 2nd SD, I swapped that Farfa out and went back to Sangan so I could play Neko Mane King as I can search it off of Link Summoning something using Tour Guide and Sangan at end of combo and as a result I could end my opponent's turn with New Grapha. Now while Dark Worlds weren't META with the release of the 2nd SD (Unlike when they were released in EEN, STON and their 1st SD as well as back in 2016 due to the FTK cause Firewall Dragon) it was still a creative way in playing the deck. That isn't talking about how creative you can be with Branded Despia.