Big fan of the lorraine vs Allen love hate at the end there! You mentioned how a deck could sideboard to help against archetypes, how you you suggest an aggro deck sideboard to help vs midrange?
"Sideboarding into midrange as aggro is unfortunately a bit more context-oriented; general recommendations are to include more mixed damage, unpreventable damage, or to fatigue their resources faster than you do your own. You can also push into a small combo package to make the match up slightly more explosive. Since it is generally unfavorable, sometimes all you can do is try to side in the aforementioned effects to mitigate the losing percentage as much as possible" - Rex
You guys should go more in depth on these kinds of topics and break it down to its nitty gritty. you could easily make a 30 minute to an hour long podcast/video discussing this kind of theory, it would be really fun to hear your thoughts and see the discussion between your team with varying viewpoints. side comment: why choose "fair" and "unfair" to establish the X axis? while im sure everyone dislikes getting rai combod or seeing a double storm slime slap their face, what defines fair? and unfair?
"There are a few follow-up videos planned in relation to this theory and getting deeper into deck-building! We just wanted to test the waters before full-sending. Fairness is based on the presentation of information; a fair deck presents information readily on board and creates several windows for an opposing deck to interact. An unfair deck tends to reserve information by keeping cards in hand or gaining immediate impact from cards with very little room for interaction; this is why control and combo are inherently 'unfair' in nature. I'm a huge fan of unfair decks, personally!" - Rex
Thank you! Some of it is a carry-over from Chapin's logic on this type of game theory in MTG It just has to do with the fairness in how information is presented. A deck that gives you more of a window to interact with an object on board is more fair than something that either has a short interaction window or is generally harder to interact with I'm personally a bigger fan of more unfair decks at large, usually playing into more combo or control heavy styles I hope the video itself was useful; thank you for watching!
Because I only play YGO and Shadowverse, I never expect to see other card game that can end in 2 turns. Anyway, I'm uninterested before. But because I saw Grand Archive in Card Game Bazaar in my country few days ago, I'm now interested. Question, because I only play Yugioh and Shadowverse before, how difficult for me to learn this game?
Hey there, sorry for the late reply! It shouldn’t be at all difficult to pick up this game from having playing yugioh and shadowverse. Shadowverse’s rules are derivative of Magic the Gathering, similar to Grand Archive. The resource system in GA is very similar in how you pay for costs; you put X cards from your hand facedown on the field to pay a cost, versus using X play points or tapping X lands. This means that you have a higher “resource pool” available to you immediately in the game, and can play multiple cards a turn, which can feel reminiscent of yugioh (especially the combo decks in GA. Playing Rai or Silvie Slimes feels very much like playing yugioh). Creature stats are similar to shadowverse, and you can choose your attack target like in shadowverse and yugioh. A lot of keywords mechanically work similar to shadowverse/mtg, just different names cause different game systems There are also a lot of unique things to GA, but there won’t be a barrier to entry to learning the game for you. Hope this all helps! - Noel
video is great, but im not sure if "dishonest and honest" as basis for the X axis might be a better fit considering its long term use in similar gaming contexts (i think it comes from fighting games? not sure) "unfair and fair" suggests they might not be balanced or something of that sort
"It's difficult to really find a suitable replacement that still contextually has the same meaning; 'dishonest and honest' may also read in a stigmatized way, and may also be misconstrued, as the player isn't being dishonest as much as not creating substantial room for interaction. That being said, I'm happy to see another fighting game enthusiast in this community! I'm a huge fan of Tekken and Guilty Gear! Thank you for watching, and I hope you'll stick around for future uploads!" - Rex
Stay tuned for how we'd rate every deck and why, but I would describe it as a control deck. Your goal is to draw out the game, playing tons of answers, until you get your shadowstrike kill. You have some good 'combos', like DG into Mastermind + Shadowstrike, but I wouldnt call it a combo deck - Noel
T2 kills are uncommon, but totally possible. One of the main ways it’s possible is when you go first as fire Lorraine aggro: T1: materialize spirit, play creative shock discarding a fire card T2: level into Lorraine, materialize sword of adversity. During your recollection, play Hone by Fire targeting sword. Recollect and draw, then play rending flames, attack w/ sword and banish the 3 fire cards to double your dmg from 7 to 14. You have 2 cards left in hand, so you can now play blazing throw, sacrificing the sword to do another 4 dmg. Generally, T2 kills are stopped by any amount of interaction from the opponent, but it’s good to know they’re possible. T3 kills are much more likely, and can easily be done by any competitive aggro list through minimal interaction from the opponent. Lines include wind allies flooding the board, automatons getting a big swing w/ power cells and then waking the dude back up with second wind to hit again, or Fire Zander with poisoned dagger. Some combo decks can also get aggressive kills if they high roll, like rhapsody if they open with all the right pieces and have multiple +1s, or slimes if their opponent doesn’t level up (t3 dg + ethereal + storm slime is 14 dmg on its own)
