A cardgame enthusiast who goes by many names, all of which include "Dan" and none of which are real. Sub to me for UniVersus, My Hero Academia and other TCG content. As well as the occassional card-based video gaming or high speed Sonic.
Classic Geek Retreat move closing down, they do it all the time as they scam anyone trying to fanchise. Hope you find another locals soon man, happened to us in Hampshire.
I've heard this a bit but leeds was one of the oldest and looked to be thriving. No-one expected it to disappear within a year of the old owner retiring.
Thank you for posting this it is very helpful for me and my wife we can now play together without having to buy other cards but have the decks be consistent. Appreciate the explanations as well I will be reviewing this more in detail later
The final round i had to play vs Kai we where both 3-1-1 our game matterd a lot to both of us my only match loss was to Steven who did amazing so me and you may have had the same score but my opponent win % was just better in the end. Saying that the final means nothing is completly false.
I don't think you're really understanding the weighting of SoS here. Where you place within swiss when on the same record has little to nothing to do with when you took the draw or even the loss, it is based off the combined performance of the people you played. The reason an early loss seems to weigh more than a later loss is because the players you play against will then all be x-1 thus when you beat them they will be x-2 at best versus losing to someone in a later round will drop down to x-1. So it weighs the "quality" of the player you played based on the record in the event. Whatever my personal opinions might be on IDs, they are something that can't feesibly be removed without removing draws from the game completely, which is also something I don't feel can happen.
being on the bubble can be rough but the top cut wasn't as clear as just everyone id'd Ricky and Adam took a risky id in the final round that very possible could have put them out (they assumed the risk of doing it cause the tables around said they would be better playing) Thomas won his last game and jumped him up Johnathan took an id with the 1st seed and risked it as well at that point it was just when the loss happened and strength of schedule personally i think its not a great take to have on this events standings it diminishes the records of those that played in the event by saying them taking a draw means they shouldn't be their over yourself for the record i finished in 3rd in Swiss both of my draws were round 3/4 and then i went on a win and in scenario so i dont like the consensus that all the draws is what defined the placements on day one ive personally taken some really tough losses Such as my run at nationals and it left me truly defeated and at other events ive been on the bubble as well but i dont think the right way to vent that frustration is to discredit the work of others on their journey for a game to fix intentional draws just leads to bad actors and collusion do i think the system is perfect No i do not but its the one we have as of right now on the points for collusion you should be calling that out when it happens i hope to see your Ghadorah deck list soon as we didnt see each other in swiss the journey ends when you stop moving forward
My apologies. I have taken the time to verify your claims and it appears I was a little hasty in comparing this situation to the nationals before last. It would seem that draws, in fact, only decided the majority of this top cut and that you, in particular, have my respect for breaking through. Something that I know, from experience, is no easy feat. As regards people being over myself, obviously at least half of those that took draws would still be if games had played out to any other conclusion. This is not about me thinking I deserve anyone's place as I did not go into this event expecting to win in the first place. Rather, this was initially meant to highlight my issues with the system and how it pushes players so close to the line (in my case tenth going into round 6) only for their efforts in the last round not to matter. Upon reflection, however, while my issue is not with any individual, I don't actually think it should be controversial to say that the people who played 6 matches put more work into their journey.
That sounds really dumb bro. Part of the reason I took a break from yugioh was dumb stuff like this, decks being op to the point new players like me can't compete unless I buy thousands of dollars of cards to stay meta relevant, does this ccg have the same problem or just people at regional being a bunch of dummy's? Cause I had my fair share of that when I went to my regional a few months back, I was there for fun and somewhat competitive but others were so serious it took the fun out.
Fortunately, top tier decks do not come even close to that price in this game and, while staple URs can hit mid double digits, they neither make up the majority of decks nor fall out of favour quickly. So, even if characters change, if you stay on the same symbols, you can keep playing the same money cards for some time. Plus, as the vast amount of Godzilla characters towards the top of this event showed, even precon characters can be powerhouses. So there's very little money in who fronts the deck unless you're looking to max out rarity. My gripe with the competitive scene is entirely in how vastly differently it handles incorrect determination of an outcome from games like YuGiOh and Magic and how mean-spirited some of the promos can come across when you're already feeling sore.
Something I notices looking at the uvs ultra website the decks you mention with rodan and godzilla and such have 4 copies in them of cards that range from 30 cents to 6 dollars a piece to one I saw was 20 a piece. That doesn't seem very cheap to me unless I am looking in the wrong places.
Shame to see you get so close to top 8 they really need to change how things happen in tournaments this isnt the first time it happens a thing really need to be changed players should not be able to choose to forfit and make it a draw. I know yugioh gives players a straight up ban if players even offer to give a draw and anything similer
They incentivise playing through by giving choice of turn in top cuts to the person who has higher seed so ID is potentially forefitting a huge advantage. As someone this has happened to twice as well im fine with it. Fact is unless you are close to unbeaten or unbeaten taking ID still comes with risks.
I have a side question I have 2 decks each of godzilla and ghidorah giving me 4 copies of all available cards from both sets. How would or should I build the decks to make them more cohesive I found one for godzilla as a pure deck curious if you had suggestions for ghidorah and the other available characters like kiyru, mothra, mechag, rodan?
@@TheTravelingMerchant199 Thanks for getting in touch, I saw your earlier comment on my Godzilla Minus One video and I'm working on getting some suggestions together for you but, in the mean time, consider trying Ghidorah as is. He, in particlar, is a deck that does well at local tournaments right out the box.
Thank you much I have always had a hard time deck building most games I have played. I found a good reddit page on a pure godzilla build but not one for the rest of the characters from the challenger series
I appreciate the few videos I have watched feom you you are the most straight forward in explanations. An example from another video you stated enhances can only be used in the enhance step, so to confirm there is no other time to use enhances not before or after the enhance step or during the block step correct?
Many enhances will set up effects that fire at a later point (for example, the "clear this card from your card pool after it resolves." on Sniper's Combo) but the actual declaration of the ability and any costs must still be completed during the enhance step.
That is very helpful thank you I will probably have more questions so thank you for replying. Also when should forms be played are they similar to assets in that you play them whenever applicable ?
Honestly, no good reason. This was a placeholder overlay that I used on my Twitch channel for the longest time and, whenever viewers asked for it to include something like player numbers or pronouns, I did my best to include them in a way that worked with my cardgame-based aesthetic. The cool little cut in for the traits comes from Digimon's TCG and it uses 3 traits per card. So I had to find a third thing beyond pronouns and title to put there to match. We happened to be playing a lot of visual novels at the time, so my cohosts thought that information would be the most relevant addition but I'll be cutting it in the next revision.
It's funny that you mention this, as we've been waiting on a 'magical' keyword for a very long time now. There is a LITERAL MAGIC SPELL CARD in the Seventh Cross set, and don't forget that characters like Rose from Street Fighter Two and probably a MAJORITY of the characters in Darkstalkers are magical; keeping in mind that Darkstalkers and Street Fighter were the games first sets.
I'd argue even a couple of the Penny Arcade cards could potentially warrant it but yeah, the Spell keyword has been a long time coming. And you make an interesting point. It's odd that the move away from fighting games, which are usually thought of as largely physical, has given us less licences that would utilise the keyword, not more.
It's a lot more precise than people give it credit for. Hence why we can have promos of the MHA movie outfits based on con promo art but not any actual content from the movies.
Yeah, she got hella banned. She facilitates some brutal effects, like blocking with Templar, now that it draws and can breaker again. I had my Combat Ash for about four days before he got banned lol.
Same here. I played a lot with him online and managed to import the actual card for me and my friends just in time for the ban. But even then, Ash was never a patch on Pea. Pea had reliable ways to draw through more than half her deck every turn, sometimes the whole thing, and get plus stats for most of it.
Yeah, I didn't even know she was real until recently. I'd seen her, but I always thought she was a promo that never got made. I'm still struggling to find a copy so my friend can put her in his cube. @@dankayur2910
Good ruling. I wasn't aware of this. Rules of state based life loss always amuse me because there's always gonna be some player that asks a judge if he can pay their last two life for an effect to kill their opponent in order to force a tie lol.
That tie was possible for a while but even then it was never practical, thank god, or we'd've got at least one event with a troll in top cuts forcing the rounds to go seven games long.
How does one card kill a deck? If so then the hero u play does not matter only if u play that card. Cuz if u don't play that one card as u say all the decks u made are useless. I find that to be a problem.
The card did 4 things and each was relevant to a different set of decks: 1) It gave +1 damage to decks that discarded cards like Deku 2 and Kamui Woods, increaing their damage output in a similar way to many other 2 diffs but with different requirements. In the case of spammier decks like Kamui, this was necessary to actually kill. 2) It gave an effective +2 speed at a high cost on symbols where is wasn't common, allowing characters like Nomu and Ojiro 2, who relied on being able to play a small number of attacks and have them connect, to do that and win. This was no different to what Snack Time still gives but having both allowed decks to rely on it. It was unfair when combined with the +2/+2 that Ojiro 2 could reliably get on every attack, of course, but Nomu also took a major hit with its loss and had to become an entirely different deck, reliant on attacks with card draw. 3) It hosed Plus Ultra and, in doing so, allowed All Might 1 to ignore one of his biggest threats. This ultimately wasn't relevant because he still had other answers in the meta like Eraserhead and, slightly later on, Mirio. 4) It triggered its own response, allowing characters to use both sides of it at once. This was nice for everyone but only really truly relevant to Ball Might, who both needed to ensure that he could connect with an attack and ensure that that attack would hit for six, on symbols were very few good attacks were printed with more than 5 damage. So, while it was a powerhouse across the board, decks were still very much defined by their, not it, character as that character determined what you wanted to get out of it and what it was enabling. With Ball might being a particularly extreme example as he was primarily using it to draw into better blocks, which is not something stated on the card at all. As we state in the video, though, the meta was very heavily reliant on it and that could still very much be argued to have been a problem. But answers to it were coming very shortly after this ban and it would have been great to either see how those played out or ban this card sooner so that it didn't get to rule the entirety of set 4's meta. I do not feel that the ban was unjust but the timing of it was very poor.
Nice I really like ur counter. An I'm sorry I've been playing this game since 2004...an so many other tcg CCG so on an it's offensive when they say one card kills decks an there not playable. When a lot of them were before that card an will be after it's just guys stuck in there Owen way of things.
@@heaimalavara1249 Depending on who you ask, this game has been around since late 2005 or early 2006 and I have been playing since the 3rd set (OG Soul Calibur 3) myself. I both do and don't agree with what you're saying here though. I do believe that old Nomu and Ball Might lists were rendered unplayable by the loss of this card and I do not think it unreasonable to say that the ban killed those decks as a result. I do, however, also know that it didn't kill those characters, since they have seen success with other, very different lists since then. And I think deck vs character is an important distinction to be made here. As for Kamui, his Petty Squabble build doesn't need a lot to be viable again so you may well see it come Jet Burn.
love seeing the analysis of the base structure deck and showing the pros of the new format of structure deck before going into the final list that managed to win the event and this real shows how a structure deck is done right which is a big change to some recent card games structures getting worse and worse
Yeah, there's so much good in these starter deck changes and I really think they'll bring a lot more people into the game. Hopefully those other TCGs follow suit.
Is it just that you don't like the name scrolling or is there something about them in particular that I'm not privy to? Either way, this video was made before they introduced the Echo keyword and I've been meaning to redo it for a little while now. So I'll definitely get on that.
There's a multiple choice test on the official website, under the rules/documents heading. I'd link it but you have limited tries and I think the link would start it automatically.
what is the point of playing other copies of all might true form? i think it's better playing 3x of another version to have more options when switching form.
At the time of this video, there were no other versions that weren't already in the deck but yes, you are correct in thinking that they can be replaced by All Might 6 now. Not that we use the transformation much anyway. The real reason for playing so many All Mights is that every one is a free +3 damage card that replaces itself, allowing you to go through your deck and see the good stuff faster, while also making every attack a threat.
Maybe Hardened Jab? Not much fills the same role of just being that free but Jab at least partially negates progressive by building and the deck does need more high blocks.
I agree that losing his +3 damage enhance is completely wack when you F[OPG]. That combined with getting a new hand size for Price for Peace completely killed my ambition to play around with this character.
The deck, as a whole, just does not benefit enough from the other characters to make up for the loss of the enhance and I hadn't even thought about Price for Peace playing with the new handsize because of that. If you draw the correct attacks for him, though, AM3 might just about be worth snatching a clutch kill with very occassionally.
@@dankayur2910 i can pretty much only see myself using it if i have exactly 1 all might in hand and limited draw or using AM1 to give a throw Powerful X vs a deck with no throw hate.
These bans were a horrific mistake. They should have errata'd her instead of outright banned cards necessary for other decks with other characters to work.
I know that people wanted Tsu banned and that the bans we did get have been a little controversial but I don't see either of the Tsu cards we lost as integral to a playstyle and they both did WAY more than they should have. I think this was the better choice.
@@dankayur2910 Her cards don't matter frankly, but Unwavering Slash was a staple in at least two other decks that are on iv support now because of it being banned.
@@lexedmonds9075 Yeah, as mentioned here and in our look at the last batch of promos, I can see why that was done. It gets around the cost of playing assets and causes terrain cards, in particular, to be extremely one sided. Yet it could have at least stayed until the release of set 3, since it's not breaking anything at the current time and Jasco have said as much themselves.
Stacking characters isn't bad. There are cards that can cause a player to discard a character card. You also didn't mention stacking: Stacking says that when you can only play a character card if it shares a name with your starting character, and if you do, your starting character gains all symbols and abilities in other character card's text box. Edit: I also forgot to mention, the retro placeholder card doesn't work anymore. It used to work because there's a url printed in the text box for an image, and the card counts as a copy of whatever card the image is of. Unfortunately, the url does not take you to a card anymore.
Stacking does not say what you think it says. Stacking rules say that when a character goes to your stage, the game checks if it matches your starting character and attaches to them if it does or is discarded if it doesn't. With what exactly counts as "matching" varying by format. Nothing prevents you from playing a non-matching character into your card pool but I guess I need to cover this further in a future video. As for 2012 World Championships, the printed text does not function as intended but every official retro tournament (of which there aren't many) comes with an announcement of what card it should be treated as. So the card still functions but in a way similar to errata.
Was annoying that you kept cutting him off. After a few minutes I turned it off because its so fucking rude that you wouldn't even let the guy finish his explanation let alone start them.
I appreciate the feedback and I see what you're saying. This video was intended to be the inverse of my usual content, where I have something to talk about and either Jota or another of my friends gets to react to it, so I didn't want it to turn into just Jota infodumping the whole way through but it does seem as if I was rather too ready to give my own opinions on his cards, yes. I will keep this in mind for the future and, while I don't think it's possible to completely avoid us talking over eachother (given the online nature of these recordings and my natural frame trap-like mannerisms), I can certainly do my best to reign it in.
