Day 3: Update

October 19th - October 22nd
PasTimes; 8351 1/2 Golf Road; Niles, Illinois 60714
http://www.pastimes.net/
_maul
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 16th, 2004, 9:10 pm
Contact:

Post by _maul »

Ok guys, seriously:

TRM is not good anymore because of TWO things:

1) Reduxing of Mace, Civil disorder, Mothma, Bright hope. Especially Civil Disorder.

and

2) Wipe(v). Mace(v) is much less powerful without CD(v) and his change, and EPPs are rendered near useless by Wipe(v).

And to everyone who will say "just adapt your deck"

TRM does not work when you make it that way. It just plain is not good when you have to devote 5+ cards because you might see Wipe(v). It's not efficient. It doesn't get as good of activation. It has more floating zeros. It takes longer to get set up. It doesn't have as many "useful gameplay" cards. It just doesn't work.

Anyone who wishes to say that TRM is still good please strongly refute my two points. Because honestly, saying "just change your TRM" is not going to work, especially when everyone who's played TRM heavily (me, Pistone, Schele, etc) all say that it doesn't work that way.



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

Post by _maul »

Because of this, TRM is not played. Note my second point. This is a direct reason why TRM is not played.

You play TRM without anti-Wipe(v) tech, and you get pwned by Wipe(v). You make your deck anti-wipe(v), and you lose to other decks.

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

Post by CubsFan »

choongie wrote:However, I do have to agree with Scott. I was sick and tired of seeing WYS. Luckily I playtest with Shaner all the time, so I packed Guri (non-v) x2
Guri doesn't help that much when WYS gets one actual draw plus a 6 from All Wings combo.

User avatar
Pistone84
Member
Posts: 2730
Joined: November 23rd, 2002, 1:50 pm

Post by Pistone84 »

band_member wrote:On 2nd hand information, Piston is 0 and 4 and Schele is 1 and 3. Must be some really broken combo....
band_member wrote:Describe your polling method. Shele to Pistone, "This sucks, I can't find a deck that beats everything." Piston, "Yeah." Schele, "That's one vote for bad meta...."
My last name has an E on the end.

The deck has a bunch of potential, but I made a foolish mistake in one of my games against Shaner where I lost by 8, that probably would have won me the game.

My other loss with it was the Rippetoe by 10, where he outplayed me at the end, but I was able to recover from him killing IG and saving his captive on turn 2.

A single errata on (V) All Wrapped Up changing the line that lets you play Bounty on already captured characters (which doesn't make sense anyways) would remove the abusive deck from the meta.

choongie
Sealed Deck
Sealed Deck
Posts: 269
Joined: January 12th, 2003, 11:49 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Post by choongie »

True...and it sucks when the All Wings is 8...

:?

User avatar
3MW0J8
Member
Posts: 4234
Joined: January 29th, 2003, 8:54 pm
Location: I said I have the most 2nd places

Post by 3MW0J8 »

CubsFan wrote:
choongie wrote:However, I do have to agree with Scott. I was sick and tired of seeing WYS. Luckily I playtest with Shaner all the time, so I packed Guri (non-v) x2
Guri doesn't help that much when WYS gets one actual draw plus a 6 from All Wings combo.
hopefully not in that order
Brad Eier wrote:build better decks, play better cards, etc.
Advocate wrote:I would reply, but the site is down.
didn't choose the thug life..
Spoiler
Show
the thug life chose me

ImageImage

Psychobabble
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2453
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 6:25 am

Post by Psychobabble »

lawtalkingguy wrote:Schele/Pistone/Rogue4/etc's busted CCT deck may not have cleaned up against day 3 players, but it completely annihilates regular-caliber players, even when they play properly.
...
When you deal a Benjamin in damage and take away 25% of the opponent's life force permanently, you're supposed to win the game. The deck that can withstand that and still not lose is about as NPE as anything I've ever heard of.
Very true, and glad your on top of this. A number of v-sets ago design broke two rules (bounty -> captives and "immune to aim high") and I think they're lucky it took so long for that to bite.
deadbody wrote:More decks = more possibility for bad match-ups

BUT

More decks = more options and more fun
And this, I believe, is a true trade-off between promoting the casual/regular player scene and the day 3 scene. Given how likely I am to ever go to worlds, I know which avenue I'd prefer :).

Psychobabble
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2453
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 6:25 am

Post by Psychobabble »

Schele wrote:We knew that, but by that point you should have lando/ig/gun out and defensive fire in hand... so you can capture the guy with the saber. Believe me, there are ways around it.
Yup. But, specificially, I beat him with a combination of sabotage v (which he grabbed to stop me abusing it, which I was going to), satm/bp and free elis. Since then I've also added mandalorian mishap v. I'm pretty sure I can battle the deck off with test #5 and survive to get there, to boot.

User avatar
Shadow 13
Member
Posts: 16142
Joined: October 30th, 2002, 6:34 pm
GEMP Username: shadow13

Post by Shadow 13 »

btw, it looks to me like WYS has just replaced TRM as the skill-based deck used to beat a wide variety of DS decks. so let's not neuter it just because we already neutered TRM...
ryan french
rebel strike team founder
two-time washington state champion
rhendon wrote:why not just elect a puppy as president, or mikefrench.

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

Post by XjedeyeX »

Shadow 13 wrote:btw, it looks to me like WYS has just replaced TRM as the skill-based deck used to beat a wide variety of DS decks. so let's not neuter it just because we already neutered TRM...
which is sad
Image

lawtalkingguy
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1407
Joined: June 5th, 2005, 6:03 am
Location: Dreamland

Post by lawtalkingguy »

Pistone84 wrote:A single errata on (V) All Wrapped Up changing the line that lets you play Bounty on already captured characters (which doesn't make sense anyways) would remove the abusive deck from the meta.
Almost, and though I haven't kept up with the re-edit, I'm sure this is something they are looking at doing. The only thing this does not do is fix the IG-88 situation. Pat "my" Johnson whaled on the consolation tourney without even bothering to do the entire bounty tomfoolery just by running IG and drawing whatever he needed on his own turn and the opponent's. Jabba's Prize even ensured that he never got blanked at kickoff. When you don't have to use up card draws to get whatever card you need whenever you need it, that's rough. QMC has to flip to accomplish the same thing, and the DS player can disrupt that. IG is pretty robust on CC... but for the lack of drawing a Luke, I could have whaled in there turn one with Corran and Luke and took it all apart, but just because a countermeasure exists doesn't solve the issue.

AWU(v) and IG-88(v) are the trouble spots, and can be selectively dealt with. It's fortunate that IG isn't that useful in many dark decks, or it would have been a bigger problem

Psychobabble
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 2453
Joined: September 10th, 2005, 6:25 am

Post by Psychobabble »

ig88v is only immune to attrition <5 which is a fairly big weakness. It doesn't take much to blank any other forefit at the site and clear him. I'm playing cct a bit atm, and it's strong, no doubt, but not at all immune to disruption and I think ig88 v is quite balanced, esp b/c once you lose him you're way behind. I think the real problem with that deck was bounty and boba v, CC, it's just ig88 v made it much harder to disrupt which is why it sort of took off.

There's other problems with CCT atm, specifically the number of cards which add 2 to force drains or weapon destinies. Practically all of those 2s should be changed to 1s (def fire, hermie, feltipan/boba's gun, ito, despair). force drain or bonus cannot be canceled is also generally bad text (esp despair even though it's only bonus, and also rodian and bane).

User avatar
The Franchise
Member
Posts: 12606
Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:20 pm
Location: Akron

Post by The Franchise »

the cct pmj used was reids that he worked on forever. i tested it some, it never lost. its concept was simple, setup the unstoppable drain of 3 and the rest are just meta call disruption cards that iggy pulls. its very good, and can win vs hyperdrive :wink:
V set 6 and 7 release rountable analysis with Reid, Carulli and myself:

https://forum.starwarsccg.org/viewt ... =2&t=64906

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 »

Psychobabble wrote:ig88v is only immune to attrition <5 which is a fairly big weakness. It doesn't take much to blank any other forefit at the site and clear him. I'm playing cct a bit atm, and it's strong, no doubt, but not at all immune to disruption and I think ig88 v is quite balanced, esp b/c once you lose him you're way behind. I think the real problem with that deck was bounty and boba v, CC, it's just ig88 v made it much harder to disrupt which is why it sort of took off.

There's other problems with CCT atm, specifically the number of cards which add 2 to force drains or weapon destinies. Practically all of those 2s should be changed to 1s (def fire, hermie, feltipan/boba's gun, ito, despair). force drain or bonus cannot be canceled is also generally bad text (esp despair even though it's only bonus, and also rodian and bane).
IG-88 is also not immune to purchase. I almost lost him vs. QMC Ellors(v).

User avatar
Advocate
Advocate
Posts: 36314
Joined: October 29th, 2002, 5:18 pm
Location: Lawrenceville, NJ
GEMP Username: advocate

Post by Advocate »

Jim Jerriko wrote:
Psychobabble wrote:ig88v is only immune to attrition <5 which is a fairly big weakness. It doesn't take much to blank any other forefit at the site and clear him. I'm playing cct a bit atm, and it's strong, no doubt, but not at all immune to disruption and I think ig88 v is quite balanced, esp b/c once you lose him you're way behind. I think the real problem with that deck was bounty and boba v, CC, it's just ig88 v made it much harder to disrupt which is why it sort of took off.

There's other problems with CCT atm, specifically the number of cards which add 2 to force drains or weapon destinies. Practically all of those 2s should be changed to 1s (def fire, hermie, feltipan/boba's gun, ito, despair). force drain or bonus cannot be canceled is also generally bad text (esp despair even though it's only bonus, and also rodian and bane).
IG-88 is also not immune to purchase. I almost lost him vs. QMC Ellors(v).
does the presence icon stop that?
Image
@swccg - Twitter
@swccg - Instagram
swccgpc - Twitch

User avatar
Asphalizo
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1895
Joined: August 31st, 2003, 3:13 pm
Location: Stephenville, Tx
Contact:

Post by Asphalizo »

CRingwell wrote:does the presence icon stop that?
Yeah, we discussed it later on that night and that was our conclusion also. Good thing I never was able to pull it off. I've since looked it up in the glossary supplement.
Glossary Supplement wrote:The icon depicting a battle droid is used to indicate a unit (such as a battle
droid or droid starfighter) that is optimized for terrain acquisition and control.
A card with this icon has presence at its location for all purposes, even though
it does not have ability. Thus, a Destroyer Droid may occupy and control a
location, Force drain, block an opponent's Force drain, battle, be battled, etc.
Additionally, a card with this icon may not be the target of a Restraining Bolt,
and may not be ‘purchased' by Wioslea
Image
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 »

Asphalizo wrote:
CRingwell wrote:does the presence icon stop that?
Yeah, we discussed it later on that night and that was our conclusion also. Good thing I never was able to pull it off. I've since looked it up in the glossary supplement.
Glossary Supplement wrote:The icon depicting a battle droid is used to indicate a unit (such as a battle
droid or droid starfighter) that is optimized for terrain acquisition and control.
A card with this icon has presence at its location for all purposes, even though
it does not have ability. Thus, a Destroyer Droid may occupy and control a
location, Force drain, block an opponent's Force drain, battle, be battled, etc.
Additionally, a card with this icon may not be the target of a Restraining Bolt,
and may not be ‘purchased' by Wioslea
Well, then, I am just glad it never happened then.

lawtalkingguy
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1407
Joined: June 5th, 2005, 6:03 am
Location: Dreamland

Post by lawtalkingguy »

Brad Eier wrote:the cct pmj used was reids that he worked on forever. i tested it some, it never lost. its concept was simple, setup the unstoppable drain of 3 and the rest are just meta call disruption cards that iggy pulls. its very good, and can win vs hyperdrive :wink:
FWIW, I didn't play Hyperdrive. Too weak and restrictive. My credits decks were all CP/v mains & space decks. To be sure, Pat caught a break off my horrendous opening draw, but to his credit he capitalized on it by not making mistakes which would give me a window to catch back up. Nothing wrong with that, it's proper gameplay. He earned the win fair and square.

User avatar
Hunter
World Champion
World Champion
Posts: 14817
Joined: February 10th, 2003, 3:27 am

Post by Hunter »

Some comments on the thread:

"We'll never hear the end of it if Hunter wins"

**Don't really think that's true. Yeah, I've always considered myself good at the game. And if someone said I wasn't, I would defend myself. And defend myself fiercely. And yes, use examples of things I've done in the game to explain my position. BUT, I don't think I've ever really been one to come out of nowhere and start bragging about what I've done. I only talk about my accomplishments when people challenge me by acting like they don't exist.

"We'll never hear the end of it if Team Ohio wins"

**This may be true, but I don't think we'll be hearing it from Nate himself that much. Not only does he post on these boards (and the ones at Decktech) less frequently than his teammates do, but he also doesn't seem to carry around as much bravado as they do. That *could* change now, but it would surprise me if it does. I don't think we'll have to worry too much about Nate constantly bombarding us with Schele-esque paragraphs saying how great he is. But I suppose we might get bombarded by other Team Ohio members. We'll see.

"Hunt Down is too good"

**I don't really think this is true. We heard a lot before Worlds about how Hunt Down was simply the best dark side deck available. Hunt Down has many advantages, but because of this, the majority of players were very well prepared for it. And those same players who were prepared enough to be confident in their ability to beat Hunt Down, apparently decided they were NOT confident in their ability to win WITH Hunt Down, against other players who were surely preparing for it as well. So everyone knew HD was good, everyone built decks that can beat it, everyone expected the other players to build decks that can beat it...and hardly anyone had the guts to use it. The problem is that HD is just VERY easy to tech against. And the cards that are good against HD just happen to be good cards, period. If you're a HD player, what cards are you worried about? Mace and Obi? Those cards are pretty good in general, not just against HD. If you're dueling, you don't like to see Jedi's Resilience? It's destiny 6 and has pretty good text. You don't like to see OOC/TT? It's destiny 5 and a used interrupt when not needed to cancel visage. Don't like to see a spy cancel your visage, backed with a Houjix? A guy like Corran Horn is extremely versatile, and Houjix is a card that *almost* no deck should be without. The counters to HD are easy to identify, and usually are not "dead slots" in other matchups. So even if HD were to emerge as the best deck in the field, it would never be able to completely dominate the meta. It is too easy to stop, and the cards that stop it are generically useful in other matchups.

"WYS Raiders are too good"

**This is just nonsense, I think. HD has a tiny NPE aspect to it (direct damage caused by visage). WYS has a tiny NPE aspect to it (minor force choke at your non-battleground locations...but this is largely negated because the deck gives you two icons at the game's start, and often two more when Kessel comes out) I love WYS Raiders, and have played them in countless events. But they have never been anything approaching "broken". Sometimes I used WYS Raiders at major events (like DPC Houston) just because I liked them, and wanted to play them, even though the dark decks I was playtesting were able to consistently beat them. WYS Raiders is always a neat little deck, but has almost never been the best LS option available. And unfortunately, the one year when WYS Raiders probably WAS the best LS deck available, everyone figured it out, and we all devised a "secret weapon" DS deck to defeat it. We all bust out the Secret Watto Tech on the same day, and WYS gets obliterated on Day 2 of the 2002 World Championships (still known as "Watto Worlds" to this day, much as '98 is known as "Operative Worlds"). Raiders STILL practically auto-loses to Watto, and it also has a very difficult match against Senate and CCT. (because of Edcel Bar Gane, and Despair, respectively)

"Luke, Luke and Optimism are dumb cards"

**Hmm, dunno, I have mixed feelings on this one. The text on the cards may appear to be bad for the game, but I think that in reality, these "dumb cards" are actually used to counter cards that are even dumber. I normally use these two effects to stop one of two things. 1) To nullify a drain on Naboo against Lightsaber Combat. The Combat objectives are dumb cards, much worse than these two effects, and really screw up the meta. There are numerous good deck ideas for both allegiances that have to be tossed out the window EXCLUSIVELY because of those two objectives. 2) To nullify a drain that a deck is ridiculously over-reliant upon. Like the old "Maul deck" setting up a drain of 6 at one site, or the KDH (v) decks that set up a drain of 3 in the Cantina, or 2 (+1 to Credits) at the Junkyard. There should not be a force drain for 6, at one location, on turn 2. There should not be a drain of 3 set up before the game begins. That's DUMB. I am ALWAYS reluctant to say anything negative about a card that hurts Combat, Profit, Podracing, MBO, Inserts, Asteroids, or other DUMB deck ideas. If your deck tries to win in DUMB ways, it deserves to be screwed over by DUMB cards.

"Establish Control (v) is a dumb card"

**Disagree. This card is not even as good as Mobilization Points, much less the combo card with YCHF. Doesn't pull a ship like Mob Points could, and it deploys a system from reserve instead of just taking it into hand. Mob Points also didn't help your opponent by turning your DBs into battlegrounds if your opponent controlled them. Mobilization Points is a Hall of Fame card in the game's history. It and IAO/SP did so much for this game that there are only a handful of other cards that deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with them. EC (v) is not a dumb card. DDTA is a dumb card, and if that dumb card hadn't been made, then nobody would have needed to design (and then approve) EC (v)

"Wipe Them Out, All of Them (v) is a dumb card"

**Slightly. The text that interferes with permanent weapons affects both players. The text that interferes with the use of unrelated non-battlegrounds should also affect both players. And yes, there should be a LS equivalent. EPP Maul, Vader, and Mara Jade are just as broken as EPP Luke, Obi, and Qui-Gon. This card is not dumb. EPPs are dumb. But the DS ones are just as dumb as the LS ones, so for the Dark Side player to have full control over whether the EPPs are limited (and whether unrelated twixes are limited) in any given match doesn't make sense. A LS version will put the DS player to the same deckbuilding decisions that people have complained about the LS player having to make.

"Chess vs. SWCCG"

**Alright, so a drain race type of game in SWCCG is kinda like chess. And a battling type of game in SWCCG is kinda like pro wrestling. Well, pro wrestling has its own kind of appeal, and is enjoyable to its fans. But chess has its own kind of appeal, and is enjoyable to its fans. I would daresay that SWCCG's player-base probably contains SOME wrestling fans, and SOME chess fans. I don't honestly think that chess-style SWCCG games are inherently bad. And if there is a player who wants more of a pro wrestling game than a chess game, well, there are decks out there that are very interactive, and can come VERY close to forcing interaction from the other player. It is HARD to sit and do your own thing, in a game against Speeders, or Walkers, or Profit, or Combat, or Dark Deal. All of these decks can force a lot of damage at their own locations, and/or have good ways at preventing you from damaging them while you ignore them. Are Combat and Dark Deal good in a drain race? Sure. But that's why they end up in so many Pro-Wrestling style slugfest games instead.

"Winning at SWCCG is too much about deck matchups now"

**Sorry, but this wouldn't make SWCCG one tiny bit different from every other CCG out there. There is a Rock-Paper-Scissors element that is just hard-wired into CCGs. I played Magic: The Gathering for many years. Some decks were good against Deck X and bad against Deck Y. Some of the people complaining about this "matchup problem" have played games like LOTR or VS. You're really going to act like deck matchups wasn't part of the metagame at all for LOTR? There weren't decks that were good against some, but bad against others? And you didn't have to pick the deck that you thought would be best against the field you were guessing/predicting you would see? That's what metagaming IS. I know this is undeniably an issue in VS too. The best deck, and the best deck for a certain event, aren't always the same thing. You always have to consider what you're going to be up against. Most CCGs are more luck-based than this one, because it is harder to recover from a "bad draw". SWCCG gives you so many ways to pull cards from your deck, and makes it so easy to draw additional cards, that a "terrible opening hand" only puts you into a hole that you need to try and dig out of, instead of it being instant death. But "facing your bad matchups" is a luck factor that just can't be removed from CCGs. If you can't stand bringing a great deck but facing your auto-loss matchup, then maybe you SHOULD play chess. This year, someone from Team Albany used an example of bringing Hidden Base for Worlds. If you face 3 Hunt Down decks, you probably go 3-0. But if you face 3 SYCFA decks, you probably go 0-3. Rock-Paper-Scissors. You have to take your best guess of what the metagame is going to look like, and then HOPE you face the decks you can beat. Is this something that just developed in 2006? No. There have always been good matchups and bad matchups in SWCCG, just like any other CCG.

"All Wrapped Up/Fett/Bounty Shenanigans is broken"

**Possibly. Any card that retrieves force and says it ignores Secret Plans or Aim High is TRYING to be abusive. Cards like Battle Order and Secret Plans should be considered sacred. They aren't meant to be ignored by any card at any time. So I don't like the Leia that ignores Battle Order, and I don't like the Fett that ignores Aim High. There are numerous ways the PC could address this problem, if they decide it is a problem. They could make Bounty unique, that might be enough. They could remove the part on AWU (v) that lets you deploy bounty on a captive and call it a day. They could remove the part on Fett's text that makes the Bounty immune to Aim High, and that might be enough. Maybe just saying that you can't play Bounty on a *frozen* captive would be enough (because then they lose the 8 direct damage, and have a tougher time finding ways to actually KILL the LS player). I won't try to tell them which change should be made. I'm satisfied with "we're looking at it".

mserisman
Member
Posts: 5048
Joined: August 19th, 2005, 1:42 am
Location: Australia

Post by mserisman »

"All Wrapped Up/Fett/Bounty Shenanigans is broken"

**Possibly. Any card that retrieves force and says it ignores Secret Plans or Aim High is TRYING to be abusive. Cards like Battle Order and Secret Plans should be considered sacred. They aren't meant to be ignored by any card at any time. So I don't like the Leia that ignores Battle Order, and I don't like the Fett that ignores Aim High. There are numerous ways the PC could address this problem, if they decide it is a problem. They could make Bounty unique, that might be enough. They could remove the part on AWU (v) that lets you deploy bounty on a captive and call it a day. They could remove the part on Fett's text that makes the Bounty immune to Aim High, and that might be enough. Maybe just saying that you can't play Bounty on a *frozen* captive would be enough (because then they lose the 8 direct damage, and have a tougher time finding ways to actually KILL the LS player). I won't try to tell them which change should be made. I'm satisfied with "we're looking at it".
Well said!

Good post all around, one of the best I have read here in a while.

Congrats on a great showing at Worlds....enjoy the Colorado Fall weather... :)
"Never content to just rest on your laurels, you are always still reaching skyward, looking to achieve staggering new heights in douchebaggery." - Hunter towards someone who will not be named

Post Reply

Return to “[FY06] Worlds Weekend 2006”