- Fri Sep 04, 2020 4:04 am
I thought this was a pretty rational debate, until for some reason, you felt it necessary to refer to other players as having the mentality of a victimized trash duelist just because they don't play pure builds. Or calling someone stupid for not agreeing with your strategy. I've expressed my opinions in this article about several things about your deck that I didn't agree with, but not once did I resort to trash talking you. In fact, I even told you that everything I said was not intended as malice, but merely to discuss the deck's strengths and weaknesses and maybe even share ideas on how to improve on it. Since you can't seem to respond in a civil way I'll leave this final reply to your response.
- 2 turn setup is not perfect at all. It's actually 1 turn too slow. I already mentioned this earlier, but meta decks are extremely consistent in getting their field set up in one turn to stop you from setting up yours in the next turn (if they're going first), or are capable of breaking your board even with disruption. I don't know how you can actually claim that a 2 turn set up isn't slow and that it can hold its own against the meta playing like this. Maybe this has worked for you, but if it did, I'm inclined to believe that either you played some very inexperienced players who didn't know how to play their decks, or you're exaggerating your victories. I honestly don't care at this point.
- Most decks that are Top tier aren't pure builds. Sometimes people will splash in an engine to suit their strategy, like sky strikers or trickstars. Even SPYRAL managed to see some play again when Magician's Souls came out, because the card had so much synergy with the deck, you would think that it was actually meant for SPYRALs rather than DM. So if anything, nobody is playing the victim for choosing to play hybrid builds. They're only playing to win.
-You keep hyping Dragon Knight, and the only thing going for it is that it is immune to card effects, and it protects back row. So what? This deck's back row is so lackluster, it doesn't matter if your opponent stops it or not. Reviving DM once per turn to banish a card is not enough interruption to make a significant impact to the opponent, so he's literally just a Dark Blue-Eyes immune to effects. That's not a solid win condition. And I've already said what I needed to say about Destined Rivals so not gonna bother repeating that.
- Why Dragoon? Because he can break boards and win games. The fact that he doesn't need back row set up to give any kind of protection already makes him better. Plus, he's not just a big 3K beatstick that just sits there. He's an omni-negate that gets stronger, and he can pop at least one monster and burn your opponent while still being able to attack afterward. Also, the fact that you're only argument against him is that he can be kaiju'd or negated or super poly'd while Dragon Knight is immune to all that is a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. You assume your opponent is more than capable of taking down Dragoon with ease, and think they have no out to Dragon Knight. Let's apply the same logic. What if they Kaiju your Dragon Knight? He's no longer on the field protecting your backrow, so they can now use cyclone or twin twisters to wipe out your Soul/Circle combo. Or even worse, they can respond to your activation of soul to bring him back, by activating Ghost Belle, DD Crow, or Called by the grave. These are cards that are more common nowadays thanks to Eldlich. So yeah, both fusions have their weaknesses, but clearly one is better than the other.
I know you're probably gonna respond and say something illogical to dispute everything I said, because who would have the audacity to say that your deck isn't the greatest deck of all time. Heck, you might even insult me and call me a trash duelist or something petty like that. But I won't take it personal, 'cause I stand by everything I said, and at the end of the day, you believe whatever you want to believe, even if you're the only one that does. Peace.