Day 3: Update

October 19th - October 22nd
PasTimes; 8351 1/2 Golf Road; Niles, Illinois 60714
http://www.pastimes.net/
Schele
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 11599
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 4:15 pm
Location: Ackbar is an anagram for Barack. It's a trap!
Contact:

Post by Schele »

_maul wrote:Well Luke, Luke(v) and Optimism(v) should never have been made in the first place, so using them as a reason that HD is overpowered is a terrible rationale.
I do believe on this one I get a valid "I TOLD YOU SO"? (Not to Alden, but to those who thought those cards were fine even after the redux.)

Regardless, the power of Hunt Down lies with in EC(V) and WTO(V). Those two in combination give HD the ability to activate a lot while giving up very little, and dominate the ground early game until the LS can get either enough force to deploy big characters or their own bg site to circumvent WTO(V) so EPPs don't suck. And while the LS player is setting this up, they're eating a bunch of damage. These two cards took HD from a good DS deck to a GREAT DS deck.

WYS isn't a problem, to be honest. I think what you were more seeing is the random goof meta allowing WYS to step in and perform very well. In a solid meta, DS mains will beat WYS off the ground(Watto gives the palace raiders a hard time), and set up S&D and randomly beat on guys that do come to the ground, while holding space waiting for an opening. It becomes a close game, and WYS does not survive extremely well in a solid meta with decks like HD at the top(and I know we all talk about HD being ridiculous right now, which it is, but it was not played much in day 2 or 3 because everyone was building a LS deck with HD in mind first, everything else second, virtually making HD unplayable...).

As was already mentioned, decks like QMC Ellors and SYC Fear(V) with super cheap S&Ds are the problem, not HD/WYS(or even TRM for that matter). This is the "chess match" we've always referred to, where it's just "deploy as much as I can and drain as much as I can" as opposed to focusing on interaction.


Image

XjedeyeX
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2412
Joined: September 7th, 2003, 8:31 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Contact:

Post by XjedeyeX »

lawtalkingguy wrote:
Jim Jerriko wrote: I would like to know what specifically you think is wrong with HD that would require 'neutering'?
You're making an unsupported assumption here. I never said HD had to be 'neutered.' It just has to be 'dealt with' -- and this is likely as not to affect the increasingly strong support network of cards which have pushed it to critical mass. That's actually its biggest problem. The mechanics of the HD deck itself are fine. We've had eight years to figure that stuff out. It's the dozen ways the deck can cover its weaknesses now that make it troublesome... and which prompt it to overrun day two of worlds.

In fact, one might say that HD is one of those bellwether decks which should always be floating somewhere aroudn the tier-1 level in any meta. Any deck significantly stronger is a problem, just as any deck significantly weaker could perhaps use help.
annnnd the cards that did the most to cover those weaknesses? WTO and ECv... cant say noone saw that coming

also luke luke v is a terrible card, was a terrible idea to begin with, and was terrible when it was called responsibility of command, targetted only rebels, an deployed only on a freaking war room. and also eventually got a defensive shield. making a better version of that for both sides was... bad, and a lot of people pointed that out from the beginning too.
Last edited by XjedeyeX on October 23rd, 2006, 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Schele
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 11599
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 4:15 pm
Location: Ackbar is an anagram for Barack. It's a trap!
Contact:

Post by Schele »

XjedeyeX wrote:annnnd the cards that did the most to cover those weaknesses? WTO and ECv... cant say noone saw that coming
We all know I certainly didn't. :D
Image

mryellow
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 2252
Joined: February 17th, 2005, 11:20 am

Post by mryellow »

Schele wrote:
_maul wrote:Well Luke, Luke(v) and Optimism(v) should never have been made in the first place, so using them as a reason that HD is overpowered is a terrible rationale.
I do believe on this one I get a valid "I TOLD YOU SO"? (Not to Alden, but to those who thought those cards were fine even after the redux.)

Regardless, the power of Hunt Down lies with in EC(V) and WTO(V). Those two in combination give HD the ability to activate a lot while giving up very little, and dominate the ground early game until the LS can get either enough force to deploy big characters or their own bg site to circumvent WTO(V) so EPPs don't suck. And while the LS player is setting this up, they're eating a bunch of damage. These two cards took HD from a good DS deck to a GREAT DS deck.

WYS isn't a problem, to be honest. I think what you were more seeing is the random goof meta allowing WYS to step in and perform very well. In a solid meta, DS mains will beat WYS off the ground(Watto gives the palace raiders a hard time), and set up S&D and randomly beat on guys that do come to the ground, while holding space waiting for an opening. It becomes a close game, and WYS does not survive extremely well in a solid meta with decks like HD at the top(and I know we all talk about HD being ridiculous right now, which it is, but it was not played much in day 2 or 3 because everyone was building a LS deck with HD in mind first, everything else second, virtually making HD unplayable...).

As was already mentioned, decks like QMC Ellors and SYC Fear(V) with super cheap S&Ds are the problem, not HD/WYS(or even TRM for that matter). This is the "chess match" we've always referred to, where it's just "deploy as much as I can and drain as much as I can" as opposed to focusing on interaction.
Still don't understand the chess analogy, but I agree that EC (v) and WTO (v) are problems. Why a virtual card was made (allowed to be made) that mimicked an existing card already neutered by shields is beyond me -- and WTO (v) definitely had its detractors throughout the process, as Y4 was a good deterrent for Hunt Down.

Basically pre-redux Light Side was wiping things around and the redux neutered everything good the light side had and boosted up dark side to boot. Next set hopefully will strike a better balance.

XjedeyeX
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2412
Joined: September 7th, 2003, 8:31 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Contact:

Post by XjedeyeX »

a solution might be to errata wto so it only deploys on a throne room again.
Image

_maul
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 16th, 2004, 9:10 pm
Contact:

Post by _maul »

mryellow wrote:Why a virtual card was made (allowed to be made) that mimicked an existing card already neutered by shields is beyond me.
Me too.

_maul
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 16th, 2004, 9:10 pm
Contact:

Post by _maul »

I think the chess analogy is that in chess, you can do a ton of different strategies (aka decks) and each one of them can win against your opponent. However, there is not one "super strong always do" strategy, because in chess, if you do that hardcore all out one strategy playing, someone will simply take a different strong strategy that works against it and defeat you.

In SWCCG, there are definitely the super strong decks. But, unlike chess, there are not anywhere near as many normal counter strategies- in chess, they all can win just as well. But in SWCCG, many "counter strong deck" decks are simply only good against that deck.

XjedeyeX
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2412
Joined: September 7th, 2003, 8:31 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Contact:

Post by XjedeyeX »

woops
Image

Jim Jerriko
Sealed Deck
Sealed Deck
Posts: 272
Joined: May 23rd, 2005, 4:55 am
Location: I wish I had more time.

Post by Jim Jerriko »

_maul wrote:Well Luke, Luke(v) and Optimism(v) should never have been made in the first place, so using them as a reason that HD is overpowered is a terrible rationale.
Thank you.

CubsFan
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1373
Joined: November 1st, 2002, 2:40 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by CubsFan »

I'm still quite on the fence about WYS, so I'm not specifically agreeing or disagreeing with either side, but...

Check out Michael Richards' version...I hope he posts it at some point. Here's why it's dominant against nearly everything*:

(a) decent generation, and cards deploy cheap enough that you don't need huge activation
(b) 2-3 destiny draws each battle in a fairly good destiny deck; and a staple card makes one of those draws a 5 or a 6
(c) you can overcome multiple destiny draws against you by forfeiting ONE character
(d) difficult to hit ships with weapons
(e) really good immunity to attrition
(f) can satisfy Battle Order really easily
(g) Raiders/Patrol Crafts get amazing destiny and are immune to weapons/4-LOM, plus they react
(h) a fantastic Admiral's Order to help with immunity to attrition, power in battles, AND drains on the ground
(i) retrieval (Celebration, Kessel Run, and/or On The Edge)
(j) an extra 10+ "cards" in the deck from interrupts played from lost pile...Control/TV used to pull a card AND cancel a drain; the used interrupt that cancels a drain at a related site if you have the system; It Could Be Worse, etc.

"J" is particularly annoying because most decks run one grabber, but WYS can take advantage of like 4 interrupts that can ruin your day if not grabbed.

Basically, it can do an amazing amount of damage and stops what you're doing cold.

As an anecdotal bit of "evidence", Richards' beat both my SYCFA and Hunt Down decks, and beat them both solidly. How many decks can destroy both a space-based deck and a ground-based deck equally well? (but of course this last point will be dismissed when people come back with "well, your SYC and Hunt Down decks stink" so I guess you can just ignore this, I suppose)



* When I say "everything" of course I am not including a deck specifically engineered to beat it. There are certain deckbuilds that will beat it, I'm not going to say it's completely unbeatable. However, I prefer a meta where a deck is balanced enough to be able to at least make the game competetive without having to resort to a deck specifically built to beat WYS. It's no fun to play if you go to a tournament knowing you HAVE to make an 'anti-WYS deck'.

Schele
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 11599
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 4:15 pm
Location: Ackbar is an anagram for Barack. It's a trap!
Contact:

Post by Schele »

WYS Raiders has never been "unbeatable", and definitely didn't get anything new to help it be even "better". Like I said, that's hardly a current problem deck, there are other decks to focus on instead.
Image

User avatar
deadbody
Lead Moderator
Posts: 5799
Joined: November 22nd, 2003, 10:45 pm
Location: Banning anyone that looks at me cross-eyed :)

Post by deadbody »

Kevin, WYS beats HD dueling every time. Solid HD gives WYS fits. You don't need to build a deck for a certain match-up, but be aware of it's existence if you want to play a deck.

SYCFear speed version gives WYS fits, too much early damage.
Terron wrote:Does some RPG book list the Rockwell hardness of AT-AT ankles? Can't we settle this like real virgins?
Image Image

Like good beer? http://www.surlybrewing.com

CubsFan
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1373
Joined: November 1st, 2002, 2:40 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by CubsFan »

Schele wrote:WYS Raiders has never been "unbeatable", and definitely didn't get anything new to help it be even "better". Like I said, that's hardly a current problem deck, there are other decks to focus on instead.
Again, as I noted with the asterisk, I am not saying it's "unbeatable". However, it's a lot closer to unbeatable than most other light side decks currently being played.

Here's what I don't like...while thinking of which decks I wanted to bring to the Not in Day 2 event and the Consolation event, I was forced to dismiss a host of possibilities just because they would get killed by WYS. I hate a meta where 4-5 deck options are dismissed just because of one light side deck.

Now, am I calling for errata or a bullet? No. But maybe a subtle dark side helper card that massages WYS matchups might be in order.

CubsFan
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1373
Joined: November 1st, 2002, 2:40 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by CubsFan »

deadbody wrote:Kevin, WYS beats HD dueling every time. Solid HD gives WYS fits. You don't need to build a deck for a certain match-up, but be aware of it's existence if you want to play a deck.

SYCFear speed version gives WYS fits, too much early damage.
I modified my HD to make it a little less dueling and a little more "regular". I still got locked down. I suppose if I had drawn EPP Dengar earlier I could have gotten rid of a Patrol Craft. But HD (even a non-dueling version) is going to be hard pressed to keep occupying the Tat. system AND the Tat. sites at the same time. I bet Richards' WYS would beat any HD as much as 80% of the time.

EDIT: Ask Richards...I think he said that he was 3-1 or 4-1 against HD.

CubsFan
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1373
Joined: November 1st, 2002, 2:40 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by CubsFan »

On another note, light side senate with 2x Queen and a senator modifying three destiny draws is just sick. I think I may have to build a senate deck, it's very, very good.

Schele
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 11599
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 4:15 pm
Location: Ackbar is an anagram for Barack. It's a trap!
Contact:

Post by Schele »

CubsFan wrote:On another note, light side senate with 2x Queen and a senator modifying three destiny draws is just sick. I think I may have to build a senate deck, it's very, very good.
It loses to SYC, and is virtually unplayable due to that matchup.
Image

User avatar
deadbody
Lead Moderator
Posts: 5799
Joined: November 22nd, 2003, 10:45 pm
Location: Banning anyone that looks at me cross-eyed :)

Post by deadbody »

CubsFan wrote:
deadbody wrote:Kevin, WYS beats HD dueling every time. Solid HD gives WYS fits. You don't need to build a deck for a certain match-up, but be aware of it's existence if you want to play a deck.

SYCFear speed version gives WYS fits, too much early damage.
I modified my HD to make it a little less dueling and a little more "regular". I still got locked down. I suppose if I had drawn EPP Dengar earlier I could have gotten rid of a Patrol Craft. But HD (even a non-dueling version) is going to be hard pressed to keep occupying the Tat. system AND the Tat. sites at the same time. I bet Richards' WYS would beat any HD as much as 80% of the time.

EDIT: Ask Richards...I think he said that he was 3-1 or 4-1 against HD.
Take one or the other. Give them the tatooine system. CLoak Maul at Kessel (lose 2 instead of 3) and beat them off the ground. Celebration is worthless if they are only occupying at most one site.

Even if Mike Richards is the worlds greatest WYSraiders player, I would be hard pressed to believe that he is beating good players playing good HD's more than 50% of the time.

The deck is strong, there is no arguement there, but it is not unbeateable.
Terron wrote:Does some RPG book list the Rockwell hardness of AT-AT ankles? Can't we settle this like real virgins?
Image Image

Like good beer? http://www.surlybrewing.com

CubsFan
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1373
Joined: November 1st, 2002, 2:40 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by CubsFan »

deadbody wrote:
CubsFan wrote:
deadbody wrote:Kevin, WYS beats HD dueling every time. Solid HD gives WYS fits. You don't need to build a deck for a certain match-up, but be aware of it's existence if you want to play a deck.

SYCFear speed version gives WYS fits, too much early damage.
I modified my HD to make it a little less dueling and a little more "regular". I still got locked down. I suppose if I had drawn EPP Dengar earlier I could have gotten rid of a Patrol Craft. But HD (even a non-dueling version) is going to be hard pressed to keep occupying the Tat. system AND the Tat. sites at the same time. I bet Richards' WYS would beat any HD as much as 80% of the time.

EDIT: Ask Richards...I think he said that he was 3-1 or 4-1 against HD.
Take one or the other. Give them the tatooine system. CLoak Maul at Kessel (lose 2 instead of 3) and beat them off the ground. Celebration is worthless if they are only occupying at most one site.

Even if Mike Richards is the worlds greatest WYSraiders player, I would be hard pressed to believe that he is beating good players playing good HD's more than 50% of the time.

The deck is strong, there is no arguement there, but it is not unbeateable.
I'm just going on what I saw, man.

User avatar
Anodos
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 3053
Joined: October 30th, 2002, 1:07 am
Location: Austin TX

Post by Anodos »

I know for a fact that mike has played almost that exact same deck off and on for years. It is a very good deck and he is very good with it. He knows exactly what to do against every matchup. The deck itself is a good one, but I'm afraid what you ran into was someone who really likes WYS and knows how to play it almost to perfection.
Blake Huffman

You know what I'm talking about. This is just like that time Captain Picard wanted Luke to go with Treebeard but Luke was all "I don't know what you're talking about, do you mean this dragon I caught?" and Captain Picard was all NO RETARD, I mean go with that tree and Luke just kept talking to his friends Anakin and Jar-Jar and then he left Picard on Mordor and forgot about it completely. I love that episode.

Quoted from an email my wife sent me.

CubsFan
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1373
Joined: November 1st, 2002, 2:40 pm
Location: Chicago

Post by CubsFan »

Anodos wrote:I know for a fact that mike has played almost that exact same deck off and on for years. It is a very good deck and he is very good with it. He knows exactly what to do against every matchup. The deck itself is a good one, but I'm afraid what you ran into was someone who really likes WYS and knows how to play it almost to perfection.
What I'm worried about is having a bunch of people who 'really like WYS and know how to play it almost to perfection'.

But Mike played it superbly, there's no doubting that.

Post Reply

Return to “[FY06] Worlds Weekend 2006”