Top 8 Regional Report with Nekroz!

Yesterday, I attend the last Regionals of our wonderful, January 2015 format. Personally, I believe this list of change will be great for the game. The odds of winning the game without relying on a floodgate will truly be tested, resulting is more skillful play. After all, who wants to lose to Skill Drain and Vanity's Emptiness at the same time... (R.I.P Qliphorts, you will not be missed!)

Nekroz was the choice for the Regionals. I learned my lesson from the YOCC last weekend and decided to utilize the best deck of the format, not the most "helmet" deck of the format. Here's a brief tournament report of my run with Nekroz:

Round 1 vs Yosenju (2-0) - Both games I defeated him within a couple turns. He opened no floodgates turn 1 and I had the answers for his floodgate game 2. Yosenjus cannot defeat Nekroz, unless they can maintain multiple floodgates, and a stream of beast-warriors.

Round 2 vs Qliphors (1-1) - Getting a draw round 2 was not fun. Honestly, there was nothing I could do. I lost game 1 rather quickly because I didn't have an answer to Emptiness. When I drew my Armageddon Knight to dump a Shaddoll Dragon, he had the Skill Drain... (Yay for losing to degenerate floodgates!) Game 2 we grinded back and forth. I didn't have the cards to make the strongest plays, but I at least had the answers to his floodgates when I needed them. Time was called when we both had low life points, and he was slightly ahead. I decided to create a risky play to his one set backrow, since I was going to lose if it didn't success. I summoned Trishula and he activated a Skill Drain. Thanks to that, I had game by swinging with a Decisive Armor and Forbidden Lance for enough damage to deplete my opponent's life points, and I won, effectively tieing the match. I don't think I have ever felt so relieved to see a Skill Drain flipped up!

Round 3 vs Nekroz (2-0) - He started with a Djinn lock. I got out of it, and made my Djinn lock which he couldn't break. Game 2 he started and chose to make the lock, again. I answered the lock, didn't make my own lock, and won in a few turns after outplaying my opponent.

Round 4 vs Nekroz (2-0) - He let me start first and I was able to create the Djinn lock with enough protection to keep it on the field the entire game (Gungnir and Lance). Game 2 I wasn't able to open with the lock, but started with a strong Valkyrus play, ending with double Mind Crush set. Let's just say that was enough to ruin his day, since I stopped any form of tempo he was trying to achieve.

Round 5 vs Nekroz (2-0) - He let me start, and my hand allowed me to make a strong Djinn lock, with spare resources for next turn. He had Raigeki for it, then used Mathematician to dump and summon Glow-Up bulb, attacked, and synchro summoned Herald of the Arc Light. After baiting it out with a Kaleidoscope, I OTKed him since he didn't have a Nekroz card in his graveyard so he could use Valkyrus. Game 2 dragged on until time was called. I had him stalled with the Djinn lock, then Emptiness, and he kept re-using Valkyrus until he had an answer to everything (over the course of the game), and proceeded to return the favour to me. However, I drew a Manju, and had enough cards in my hand stocked to finish the job.

Round 6 vs Burning Abyss (2-0) - Game 1 I had to fight through 3 Dantes and 1 Dark Law. Somehow, I went from having seemingly nothing to beating him, without the use of Raigeki or Preparation of Rites. To be honest, I'm not sure how I did it, but my opponent congratulated me in defeating him through such a disgusting field. Game 2 was nothing compared to game 1: I had control of the entire game. We spent a couple minutes before and after the match discussing Burning Abyss theory for the upcoming format, since we knew what we were playing (I'm not surprised, since we were both in the top tables).

Round 7 vs Nekroz (0-2) - I lost both games to the Djinn lock, and game 2 to an Emptiness after I cleared his Djinn lock. I figured it had to happen eventually...

Now I was placed on the bubble for making Top 8, with an X-1-1 record. For some reason, there was a feeling inside me telling me I could do it, and I had the support from others (A.K.A sexy girlfriend of mine, and friends).

Round 8 vs Satellarnights (2-1) - Game 1 I cleared through all his traps with all my resources and defeated him. Game 2 he defeated me with the Triverr/ Anti-Spell Fragrance soft lock. Game 3 he set 5 cards and he had no response to Denko Sekka. I established my board to contain Unicore to negate extra deck monsters, a Clausolas that was just there, and a Valkyrus in hand to protect my Denko and Unicore. I locked him out the game, and proceeded to win next turn. DENKO TOO STRONG!!!

I ended up coming 6th place, achieving my minimum goal of Top 8 and winning a mat. I was a little disappointed in myself, because my ultimate goal is to win, and if not win, make Top 4 (at least I get a deckbox). However, Top 8 is good enough to be proud of myself.

My next post will be one to discuss my Nekroz deck I used this weekend, and what changes I'll need to make, including the mandatory changes due to the format change. Let me know what you guys think, and thanks for reading!

Get your Helmets!

This weekend, I attended my first YOCC in Toronto, and I basically defeated myself. I caved and I decided to play Qliphorts instead of Nekroz... I feel like this was my greatest mistake since becoming serious in this game.

Going into this event, I built my deck list specifically to defeat Nekroz, and the mirror match, since these are currently the most powerful decks. I went in knowing that if I opened Scout and a few traps, I would be fine, and probably win the whole thing. However, that would be the only way this deck would prevail, since the deck's win condition is stopping the opponent with floodgates with a constant stream of spaceships (yes, spaceships). My final reason I wanted to play the deck was because I've never played the deck at a competitive event, and this was my last chance, since the deck becomes lower than Tier 1 next format (I understand that this isn't a good reason, but I decided to do it nonetheless).

So, as far as a tournament report, I played against 0 Nekroz decks, even though a 3rd of the players were playing Nekroz. Also, the only decks I lost were the ones where I didn't draw any traps, or didn't draw an monsters. Unfortunately, it was as simple as that. I lost half my games because I was unable to play the game. I figured I would brick a few times, but I didn't imagine I would brick as often as I did.

I'll take this as a learning experience, though. I would've had better results if I played Nekroz, and I'm 100% certain about that. Hell, I feel like I would've done better if I played Burning Abyss... The lesson I learned was to not play a deck at the competitive level if I'm not 100% sure it's the best deck. I decided to play a degenerate, helmet deck, instead of the better deck. I took the easy route, by relying on floodgates and drawing good, and I was punished since luck was clearly not on my side.
Now that I've finished explaining my experience with Qliphorts, I'll commence the real meat behind today's post: Can "Helmet" decks be the best deck?

First, I feel I should explain what a helmet deck is. These decks are decks with simple strategies that don't require to much of a thought process. These decks don't normally include a lot of complicated plays. Examples of these decks include Chain Burn, Dino-Rabbit, Fire Fist, Satellarknights, H.A.T, Yosenjus and Qliphorts. For example, a turn consisting of summoning Deneb, searching Altair, and setting 3 cards is pretty easy. Drawing an opening hand in Nekroz might contain a dozen options, and you need to make the best decision, otherwise you may not win the game. Making a misplay in a helmet deck usually isn't fatal; you can somewhat recover from it. Making a misplay in a deck like Nekroz, Shaddolls or Dragon Rulers could be fatal; it's harder to recover.

As well, I'd classify any explosive deck that makes the same plays a helmet deck. Madolches, Wind-Ups and Ritual Beasts do the same stuff every game; these are decks that are very predictable and easy to play against.

In September of 2014, I had both Satellarknights and Shaddolls built immediately, with Burning Abyss shortly after. At YCS Toronto, I decided to play Satellarknights as opposed to Shaddolls, and almost made the Top cut. I attended a Regional 2 or 3 weeks later and decided to play Satellarknights again, and I achieved my invite. The only matches I lost that event were because I bricked, especially against Infernity.

I decided to use Satellarknights as my first example because this Helmet deck had a few things that provided it with a lot of strength. First was it's counter trap, Stellarnova Alpha, which negated cards and let you draw. The other reason why this deck was so powerful was because it was a Rank 4 toolbox. This deck could make the most out of Rank 4 monsters and spam them quite easily.
Other helmet decks that were quite powerful were Dino-Rabbit and Fire Fist. These decks were capable of unlocking their toolbox as well. Dino-Rabbit in particular is probably my favorite Helmet deck, because of Laggia and Dollka, AKA monsters that can negate things. Fire Fists just focused on destroying stuff and managing a constant stream of attacking monsters. When Wolfbark was released, it retained those values, and became a rank 4 toolbox.

In regards to Qliphorts, it lacks the ability to utilize a rank 4 toolbox. You can only summon monsters from your extra deck if you don't control a Qliphort monster in the pendulum zone. This makes their strategies quite transparent. I enjoy that the deck made the most of the pendulum mechanic, but it really falls when being able to utilize the extra deck: Those rank 4s are amazing, and this deck cannot take total advantage of them.

For my conclusion and final thoughts, I believe a helmet deck will only be the best deck when it can take advantage of the extra deck, and have an amazing blow-out strategy. This is why Dino-Rabbit and Fire Fists were the strongest decks at their time; because they took advantage of both of these factors. Qliphorts cannot use the extra deck that well, but can create quite a blowout board. If the deck could take advantage of the extra deck, then this deck could've been the strongest deck of the format.

Let me know your opinions on this subject. Thanks for reading!

The Mathematics Behind Good Deck Building

I’ll start off this post with an example that telegraphs what I’ll be discussing today:

Two players choose between two decks of cards at random. The cards are blank, and each player draws 1 card at the same time, every second. The winner of the game is the player who draws all the cards in their deck first. Now, if one player has a 40 card deck and the other player has the 37 card deck, who will win? The player with the 37 card deck will always win the game, with the above specifications applied.

This example is obviously a very simplistic scenario, but gets the point across, and projects the topic of today’s discussion: Mathematics in respect to deck building. For as long as I can remember, ever since my first Regional I attended, I’ve always made it a mandatory requirement to keep my decks no greater than 40 cards. The smaller your deck is the greater chance you’ve given yourself to draw the cards you need. In every collectable card game (excluding games like Poker and 21) you are expected to have a deck size between a certain amounts of cards, or you are expected to use a defined amount of cards. Yu-Gi-Oh and Magic are games where you have a minimum deck size of 40 and 60, respectively. Essentially, one of the solid foundations of deck building is ensuring you draw the necessary cards to play the game properly.

The Most Basic of Mathematical Concepts

In regards to Yu-Gi-Oh, currently, a lot of players play a single copy of Book of Moon, because the card is limited to 1 copy per deck. If you choose to go second, you will draw 6 cards for your opening (I’ll re-visit this segment shortly). The odds of drawing Book of Moon, using the most basic mathematical concepts, in a 6 card hand is 6/40 (15%). If you play a 60 card deck, and decide to go second and draw 6 cards, the chance of drawing Book of Moon become 6/60 (10%). Notice that there is a 5% difference between them. I could start explaining how factorials and hypergeometric distribution works, but this will not benefit you if math isn’t your strong suit. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand you’ll draw Book of Moon more in a 40 card deck than a 60 card deck.

As well, there’s a mathematical difference between going first and going second. If you win the die roll and choose to go first, you’re only drawing 5 cards. In a 40 card deck, that’s 12.5% of the deck. I suppose some people will look at it and consider “it’s only one less card; it’s not a big deal”. Clearly, there are some decks that prefer to go first, but most should choose to go second. Keep in mind that we are in a format where most of the tier 1 decks are combo-based decks: Nekroz, Burning Abyss and Dragon Rulers in a few days when Dark Matter Dragon is released. Combo decks critically rely on having enough combo pieces to generate a play. Going second and drawing that extra card is an extra card that can enhance your combos.

That being said, there are particular decks that benefit from going first. Usually, these are more control-based decks that rely on grinding the opponent’s resources and/or stopping their plays all together. If you decide to go first, and open with multiple cards that auto-defeat your opponent, you are obviously in a winning position. Does that mean going first is necessarily better? Not entirely. Here’s a situation for you to review:

You’re playing Qliphorts and the first 5 cards of your deck are Scout, Raigeki, Skill Drain, Emptiness and Saqlifice.

Say you chose to go first and you drew these cards. Obviously, you’d play Scout, search a monster and summon it, equip Saqlifice and set your floodgates. It’s pretty amazing, but it’s rather underwhelming. You might stop your opponent from playing the game, and maybe they won’t draw an answer to your field. However, you will lose if they have an answer to the floodgates. It’s also relevant to mention that the opponent will just be saving their resources until they have an answer, and if they draw it, there will be a devastating outcome. But of course, you might win anyway if the answer to the floodgates doesn’t arrive: Advantage only matters if you can play the game.

Say you chose to go second instead. You have these 5 cards in your hand, and draw another card (the other card doesn’t matter in this example). If they wasted a lot of resources to establish a field, Raigeki will punish the opponent immediately, and then you’ll build a similar field to the first scenario, and actually deal damage. Keep in mind there’s no reason to waste Raigeki if you can clear their field courtesy of a Scout search. Now you have an extra card to work with because you chose to go second, and you’re in a good position once your turn ends; possibly better if you disestablished their board.

Is the best deck the smallest deck?

Currently, Nekroz is the best deck in the format. One of the reasons why this is the case is because the deck is so thin. So many cards thin out the deck for specific combo pieces, then other cards allow you to replenish those resources to thin out your deck next turn. Burning Abyss also has sufficient search power, however, it is quite different than Nekroz. Burning Abyss focuses on milling cards to accelerate your plays. If you mill more monsters, you are getting the most out of the deck thinning. If you mill all spells/traps, you might lose the game. Qliphorts have cards that can thin the deck for specific cards (Scout, Summoner’s Art, Saqlifice and Disk), but there’s not much more than that, unless you’re play drawing cards that let you draw directly, like Upstart Goblin. Dragon Rulers will have some solid draw and thinning power due to cards like Dragon Shrine and Cards of Consonance. The point of these examples is that Nekroz is just so consistent and the deck constantly sheds itself with useful cards, so your draw phase has a higher chance of being something amazing. Really, how lucky is drawing one of 3 Manjus if the deck has 10 cards by that point?

Heart of the Cards

I know I’ve stated this before, but the key to become a powerful duelist starts by building your deck right. The thinner you can make your deck, the more likely you’ll draw the cards you need to win the game. The Draw Phase is the most important phase during your turn, as it will dictate the events that occur during your turn. Why squander this phase by unnecessarily adding cards that will dilute your deck, and take away from the most brilliant top-decks? Most players call it “sacky” when you topdeck that Snatch Steal for game. However, it’s easier to topdeck that amazing card if your deck is smaller.

It’s during that deck-building phase where problems start to occur. People will squeeze their deck to 45 cards, justifying their actions with a thought similar to “this is a good card to play right now, why shouldn’t I play it”. Before you know it, you’ve done this a dozen times with random good cards like Mirror Force, Dark Hole, Mind Crush, and Maxx “C”, and then that deck is now over 40 cards. My response to thoughts like this can be summarized in a simple sentence: Suck it up. There are a lot of good, powerful cards in this game, and if you could play all of them, Konami would have to expand the maximum deck size allotted in this game.

Picking these amazing cards is the hardest part of deck building. Ideally, the key to building the best deck is playing the best cards. Picking cards that will crush the majority of your matchups will provide you a greater base to cover your deck’s weaknesses. You may also decide to play cards that are complete blowouts in certain matchups but ineffective in others. For example, topdecking Book of Eclipse is amazing against Nekroz, but no so much against Qliphorts. However, if your deck is lacking powerful cards to deal with Nekroz, and you need to ensure you have answers to the Djinn lock, you may need to consider maining cards that will assist you, like Book of Eclipse.

Once you decide which blowout cards to play, you need to make sure you draw them. In a deck like Nekroz, you’ll have the greatest chances of drawing them since the deck is good at thinning itself, usually. If you need to draw that Book of Eclipse for the mirror match, you’ll be more likely to draw it in a 37 card deck than a 40 card deck.

Now, I can’t use a heading “Heart of the Cards” without make some sort of Yugi reference. In the Battle City finals, there’s a scene where he is building his deck. He knows one of his win conditions is summoning Slifer the Sky Dragon. He had to ensure his deck would be able to generate three creatures that can be tribute summoned for the Egyptian God. If he knew what he was doing, he would’ve made his deck 40 cards to maximize the chances of summoning Slifer. Using the Pharaoh isn’t the best example for this, but the Heart of the Cards was always on his side. In real life, I don’t believe this exists, but you need to construct your deck to maximize those “Heart of the Card” moments.

Here’s the simple point of this discussion: Building the thinnest deck possible is mathematically the smartest decision you can make. It will reduce bricking in the long run and allow you to “sack” a little more often. You’ll still have those games where you draw unplayable. Keep in mind that an opening hand of Book of Moon, Raigeki, Snatch Steal, MST and Shurit is full of amazing cards, but it isn’t necessarily an optimal opening hand. You won’t be able to do much until you draw something that will allow you to create a strong play, and the odds of doing that in a 45 card deck aren’t as strong as a 40 card deck. This is math, and math is absolute.

Let me know what you guys think, and thanks for reading!

Nekroz: More Deck Analysis and Very Small Regional Report

This weekend, I attended a regional using my Nekroz deck. I almost ended up playing Qliphort, and it was an option until two hours into the car ride. Ideally, playing Qliphorts would imply that I’m playing the strongest anti-meta deck in the format. This implies if the opposing player has answers to the Anti-Meta part of the deck, or the initial Scout search, you’re going downhill fast. Even if you summon Apoqliphort towers first turn and draw 2-3 cards with Monolith, you can still lose if the opponent opens strong enough. However, this is a post for another day, because I do believe Qliphorts have great potential.

I’m not going to go into great detail with this tournament report, because there’s no need. The short story: I went undefeated (only losing 1 game in the process because I bricked in the mirror match) until the last two rounds of the tournament. During those rounds, 1 played 3 Nekroz, 1 Hero, 1 Traptrix Volcanic, and 1 Yosenju (in that order). I lost 2-1 to Qliphorts because I didn’t have answers for the floodgates game 1 and game 3, I destroyed the wrong set card with Decisive Armor and Trishula. That final turn, he had 3 set cards, and I could OTK him with my play. I used Trishula to hit one set card, Decisive Armor hit the second card, then I attacked and lost to Mirror Force… Then I lost 2-1 to Nekroz because of Djinn lock game 1, and I made a misplay game 3. I wanted to save my resources game 3 because I only had one play, since my hand was weak. I decided to hold off because he kept going and I wouldn’t be able to do anything because he had Valkyrus. Sure enough, I lost because I never drew anything to make my play more solid. Drawing multiple ritual spells with only two possibilities to ritual summon is no good.

Over the course of the weekend, I only completely bricked once, and semi-bricked another time. Here is the list I used:

3 Brionac, 3 Unicore, 2 Valkryus, 2 Clausolas, 1 Gungnir, 1 Trishula,1 Decisive Armor, 3 Manju, 2 Senju, 2 Shurit, 1 Djinn

3 Upstart Goblin, 3 MST, 3 Preparation of Rites, 2 Mirror, 2 Kaleidoscope, 2 Cycle, 1 Book of Eclipse, 1 Book of Moon, 1 Raigeki, 1 Dark Hole

2 Herald of Arc Light, 1 Leo, 1 Star Eater, 1 Dragon Master Knight, 1 Exciton Knight, 1 Lavalval Chain, 1 Daigusto Emeral, 1 Rhapsody in Berserk, 1 Castel, 1 Ragnazero, 1 Abyss Dweller, 1 Cairngorgan, 1 Cowboy, 1 Diamond Dire Wolf

Side: 2 Maxx C, 2 Kycoo, 1 Valkyrus, 1 Dance Princess, 3 Twister, 1 Shared Ride, 1 Book of Eclipse, 2 Decree, 2 Emptiness

I enjoyed this list very much on Saturday. I never wished anything was different about it. I did some playtesting on Sunday and my opinion changed. I played 2 matches against a Traptrix Volcanic deck (I just made), and 2 matches against Nekroz. I lost 3 of those 4 matches with the deck, and bricked 4 times. I wasn’t able to play the game until I drew something and at that point, it was too late or not strong enough.

Also on Sunday, another ARGCS passed by and Ben Leverett (one of the Hoban teammates) won the event with a unique Nekroz deck. Basically, Armageddon Knight engine instead of Senjus, and 3 ROTA to search the Knights, Shurits, or Clausolas. Armageddon Knight is in there to dump a Farfa to escape the Djinn lock, or dump a Shaddoll Dragon to get out of Emptiness. As well, it can dump the Djinn so you don’t need to make Lavalval Chain to access the card. It is quite clever, and consistency isn’t even hurt that much due to the ROTAs and main-decked Shared Rides. Forbidden Lances are still in the deck as well.

This could become the newest way to play the deck. My only concern would be drawing the Farfa and Dragon, since they become almost unusable if Djinn Lock or Emptiness is already active. As well, Armageddon Knight vs Skill Drain is a downhill fight, unless you have Lance or a Book. Inevitably, I’ll try out this variant of the deck and tweak it to my liking. If it turns out that this variant of the deck is amazing, then I’ll have to play this variant. I only plan on building and playing what I consider to be the best deck, and having the correct build is part of it.

Exploiting more of this list’s choices, there is no MST in the main deck to deal with floodgates, and no spell/traps to directly deal with the Djinn lock. Essentially, the Armageddon Knight play has to go through, or the game is lost. I’m not really sure how I feel about this. In all reality, I drew MST a lot this weekend, but I feel I drew it the most against the mirror match. Going into the regionals, if I knew half my matchups were against Nekroz, I would have main decked 1 or 2 less MST. Against the Qliphort player on the weekend, I lost specifically because I didn’t have MST during game 1. In retrospect, Armageddon Knight for a Shaddoll Dragon would’ve been nice, since I wasn’t dealing with Skill Drain. I also had the Book of Eclipse in that game, so even if Skill Drain was active, the dump would’ve worked through. Going back to the winning decklist, there were no Books; only Lances. In the above example from the Regional, Lance wouldn’t have been necessary, since the Book would’ve accomplished the same thing.

Discussing MST again, I really don’t like this card. I could write a whole post about this card, but I’ll just provide my basic opinion. It only handles one threat, unless Emptiness is face-up, and the card only gets full value against the Qliphort matchup. I’d rather have something else that advances a combo or something more powerful, like Cold Wave. Right now, we have Denko Sekka, which is the closest thing to Cold Wave. It’s useful in all matchups, and can sometimes put in work against Nekroz (if the opponent actually sets a spell/trap, then they are in Trishula range). Denko is a card I’ve always considered, but never made it past the “rough draft stage”. Unfortunately, it wastes the normal summon of the turn, and if I had a Manju or Senju, I’d rather normal summon that. However, I’m disliking MST more and more, and I’m trying to find an alternative, since I don’t want to lose to floodgates. The Armageddon Knight engine might be the answer, but I’ll have to test it first.

There are a few other cards that I want to discuss before I conclude this post. One of these cards is Nekroz of Decisive Armor. Originally, I had removed it from the deck. My reasoning for that is because it is technically a win-more card. If you have this card, and you are winning, it won’t do too much extra for you. Really, I only summoned it three times during the Regional. Once was to make a super-powerful Djinn lock, with Gungnir and Trishula in hand to protect it, the other times were to try and destroy traps. The only other time I felt like this card would be useful is using it with Dance Princess to beat over the Djinn Lock (assuming they don’t use a monster that’s Trishula or stronger). The problem with this combo is that you’ll likely need to invest Brionac searches just to do it, and this combo loses to Valkyrus, Gungnir, opposing Decisive Armor, and Book of Moon. I don’t main the Dance Princess anymore, so that combo is not an option. The only reason I re-included it into the deck is because one of my teammates told me I should. I had him play Nekroz against me when I was testing Qliphorts, and he felt the need to use Decisive Armor a lot. However, we swapped decks later that day and I never wanted to make it. I played it at the Regional and barely used it.

Book of Eclipse is another card I want to discuss. I played only one copy during the Regionals, and I enjoyed it at a single copy. I sided in the second copy for the mirror match. However, if I knew half my matches would be against Nekroz, I would’ve mained the second copy. It’s good at using Manju and Senju under Skill Drain, as well as other monster effects. I really enjoyed Book of Moon as well, and then Raigeki and Dark Hole were okay. Book of Moon I liked in particular since it`s another way to dodge a Valkyrus, besides Gungnir. Book of Eclipse just happens to be the only out to the Djinn lock that’s guaranteed to work, unless more people start playing Forbidden Lance.

Finally, I want to discuss Upstart Goblin in the Nekroz deck. Of course, this is a combo deck, and you have more chances in drawing your combo pieces if your deck is smaller. As well, I didn’t realize how those extra life points affected the game state. If the opponent has more life points in the mirror match, the opponent will be less tempted to drop Valkyrus if you are hitting for a good chunk of damage. If that`s the case, I can probably establish a good enough board where I can escape Valkyrus with Gungnir and Book of Moon, then proceed to win. This card really annoys me against Qliphorts, but even then it`s not the end of the world. Game 2 against Qliphorts, or whenever I`m about to go into time, I`ll side out the Goblins.

And this will conclude another deck discussion post about Nekroz. Eventually, I`ll discover that winning combination of 40 cards that will work for me. The ARG event on the weekend gave me a few more toys to consider, which is always nice. As always, leave any comments if you wish, and thanks for reading!

WHY DO I QLIPHORT???

I wake up this morning and start my preparation for Regionals tomorrow. I'm finishing my Nekroz deck, and I'm fairly comfortable in what I plan on playing...

Then Qliphorts come into mind. All the appealing thoughts start coming to me: Skill Drain, Mind Crush, giant swarms of mechanical monsters stomping people in the face... I try to suppress this thought as best as possible.

I end up going into work for a few hours. Sure enough, I start thinking about Qliphorts again. Before I leave work, I have a decklist printed off, ready to go! WHY???

After all this playtesting with Nekroz, I'm still considering going back to Qliphorts. I'm quite convinced Nekroz are the best deck, so why am I thinking about Qliphorts? It might be my interest in playing decks with traps. I have always enjoyed decks with traps.

If I decide to play Qliphorts, I'll have to accept that my plays will be obvious. Sure, I can try to outplay my opponent and such, but the deck doesn't have very many play combinations. The deck is too shallow: Setup your pendulum plays, make a big normal summon and pendulum summon, then back it up with traps. If any of that falls apart, of I brick, I know I lose. However, the deck is good because it doesn't brick all that often, and even when it does brick, you might have traps to stymie the opponent.

Oh what do I do? Nekroz are the best deck, and I've invested all this time and money into it. I never had a problem with Qliphorts until last week's tournament I attended. Then again, I only lost because I didn't have a timely response to the floodgate. That's why Qliphorts are floating around in my head. It's the better matchup against the current best deck, and floodgates prevent the opponent from playing. A win is a win, even if you lock the opponent with Emptiness all game...

I have to make a decision, like ASAP. This is ridiculous.

/End rant

*Sorry for the lack of posts this week. It's been a busy week at work...

Cheating in the Competitive Card Community

This is definitely a topic I’ve wanted to discuss since my return to blogging. Clearly, there would be no better time to discuss it then now, after the events of ARGCS Florida.

First of all, I’ll start with the technical definition of cheating, from Wikipedia:

“Cheating is the getting of reward for ability by dishonest means or finding an easy way out of an unpleasant situation. It is generally used for the breaking of rules to gain unfair advantage in a competitive situation. This broad definition will necessarily include acts of bribery, cronyism, sleaze, nepotism and any situation where individuals are given preference using inappropriate criteria.^[1] The rules infringed may be explicit, or they may be from an unwritten code of conduct based on morality, ethics or custom, making the identification of cheating a subjective process.”

What exactly does this definition include? The obvious cheating maneuvers in card games include stacking, drawing extra cards, marking cards and sleeves, and making illegal plays during phase. This definition will be stretched as my post continues.

At the ARGCS this weekend, a player named Travis Smith was disqualified on the premise that he was stacking and making illegal plays. The examples that have been public are using Gagaga Cowboy’s effect for game when a Unicore was on the field, and activating Effect Veiler while Majesty’s Fiend was on the field (so he can summon BLS). He was so close to winning the event as well; what a shame. I’m sure the accusations were obvious, and that’s why he was disqualified.

The above example is a clear-cut example of cheating, and the punishment that followed. Other plays have faced the same fate when doing similar maneuvers in the past. However, here’s another one for you, the one that probably stemmed today’s post:

At the ARGCS this weekend, Patrick Hoban and company were playing Nekroz, and this example is relative to their Nekroz mirror matches. Once game 1 concluded, he would ask the opponent if they wanted to both side out Djinn Releaser of Rituals. If the opponent agreed (which they probably did, because who likes to lose to the Djinn lock), Patrick would just remove the Djinn and place it on the mat, so the opponent knew he sided it out, and probably extended the same courtesy. What the opponent didn’t know was Patrick sided in a copy of the Djinn, until it was played, and probably won him the game because the opponent likely sided out Book of Eclipse and the like.

This event has been disputed ever since yesterday, when people started to find out. Some people consider it cheating, straight-out. Some people consider it “dirty play”, and unsportsmanlike conduct. I’ll attempt to break down the definition of cheating to determine whether or not this is actually cheating, or not.

Patrick Hoban is clearly smart, and based on his ARG articles, has a good enough command of the English language. He probably worded the question something like this: “Did you want to side out a copy of the Djinn?” Wording it like this would set a few distinctive rules. All he’s asking was to side out a single copy of this card. By setting this established question, he doesn’t directly reveal that he’s maining 2 copies or siding an addition copy. Technically, if he worded the question like this, he isn’t directly lying. All he did was propose an offer to the opponent, and the opponent accepted with proof that the terms of the offer were being met.

According to the definition I provided earlier, is this cheating? I’ll provide the first bit of the definition: “Cheating is the getting of reward for ability by dishonest means or finding an easy way out of an unpleasant situation. It is generally used for the breaking of rules to gain unfair advantage in a competitive situation.” On first glance, it would appear it is cheating. He wanted to win his reward by finding an easy out of the situation, by making the Djinn lock to win the game when the opponent sides out their counters.  However, he is not breaking the rules, even though he is gaining an unfair advantage.

Next, I’ll provide the other relevant part of the above definition. “The rules infringed may be explicit, or they may be from an unwritten code of conduct based on morality, ethics or custom, making the identification of cheating a subjective process”. I don’t believe this has ever happened before, so I suppose this could be considered “unwritten code”. However, if we apply by this final statement, then the question of whether or not Patrick Hoban was cheating or not would be considered subjective, otherwise known as opinion-based. As such, here’s my final opinion on the matter:

Patrick Hoban and friends did not cheat. They were deceptive, and they fought dirty, but they did not cheat, and as far as their thought process is concerned, it was a valid strategy. They played mind games with their opponent’s in the mirror match. I’m sure that they will face a good amount of disrespect from the card playing community, but they made it quite clear they’ll do everything they can to win, barring obvious cheating (I don’t think they’ve ever been accused of stacking or similar)… Now for the fun part of today’s post:

How far will you go to win a card event?

This can be as small-scale as Locals, to as grand-scale as Nationals. Every once in a while, somebody will be caught cheating, and then disqualified almost immediately. In the case of Travis Smith, he was disqualified right before the finals. If only he was playing properly, he could’ve won the entire event, potentially. If not, at least he would’ve been defeated with honour. Once you’re caught cheating, your reputation is ruined. If it’s done in your local community, you’ll be isolated as a cheater in your community. If it’s done at a larger tournament, you’ll be called out all over the Internet.

If Travis Smith was asked and forced to honestly answer the above italicized question, he would answer stating he’ll stack and make sloppy, illegal plays to gain an advantage. Usually, people that are identified as a cheater have a history that creeps up as time progresses (this isn’t just related to card games, I assure you). Travis Smith has other credentials, but now all those credentials will be questioned for sloppy play. His name will never be cleared, and he won’t have any respect from the larger population of the community.

If Patrick Hoban was asked and forced to honestly answer the above italicized question, he would answer stating he won’t cheat, but he’ll use any mind games to his advantage. Fortunately, he doesn’t have a history of this behaviour; he would’ve been called out on it a long time ago. However, he will lose respect from a good chunk of the community, and others will respect him for being a strategic genius. I’m sure he’ll write an article defending (or justifying) his actions, and I’m sure people will read it and base their own subjective opinion. His reputation will never be the same, but he doesn’t care, because all he cares about is winning, which is respectable in its own sense.

If I was asked and forced to honestly answer the above italicized question, I would answer stating that I don’t cheat, and I don’t engage in sloppy play. If I make an illegal play, it’s because I don’t know it’s an illegal play. I always try to remain up-to-date on rulings, and I’m not afraid to ask if I second-guess my own ruling. The point is I don’t intentionally cheat my opponent by making things up. As well, I would never stack, mark cards, or anything of the sort. There have been a few times where some butt-hurt people have accused me of cheating, but it’s never been proven, because it’s never happened. I also have not stooped as low as Patrick Hoban and friends, in regards to his decisive, dirty strategy for the Nekroz mirror match. I’d rather fight clean and honestly; it feels good winning the honest fights.

Also, just an aside, but why would you agree to side out the Djinn lock? I understand it makes the mirror match more skillful, but really? Why would you side out a win condition? Sometimes, you need a little luck on your side, and if you lucky enough to hold the Djinn lock in the Nekroz mirror match, you have a free win. On the opposite side of the coin, it sucks when it happens to you, but whatever, welcome to card games. To win an event, you need every advantage possible, and siding out a win condition goes directly against that. If I would’ve played Patrick Hoban or one of his friends, I wouldn’t have fallen for his trick because I wouldn’t have agreed to side out the Djinn lock. In my opinion, that’s just plain stupid. If you play an Exodia deck with only 4 of the 5 pieces, you deserve failure, and that example illustrated how I feel on this subject.

When I start topping more Regionals and other events, I want to make sure that I do it honestly and properly. If I ever cheated, and got called on it, my reputation would be tarnished forever, making my dreams and goals impossible to reach. Feel free to share your opinions, and thanks for reading!

Nekroz: Reflecting on the Weekend

I spent some time debating how I wanted to format today's post. Inevitably, I decided to just jump right in and start writing.

On Saturday, I attended a Locals in another city, since they were hosting a prize of a somewhat-complete Burning Abyss core. The prizes for 2nd-8th were packs of the Secret Forces. I realized it would be a good experience to travel there for the experience, and hopefully the prize. The tournament was 5 rounds than top 8, and I played Nekroz for the event.

Round 1 vs Yosenju (2-1) - I lost game one because I never drew an answer for his MST.
Round 2 vs Yosenju (2-1) - I lost game one because I didn't have enough MSTs for his multiple floodgates.
Round 3 vs Burning Abyss (2-0)
Round 4 vs Qliphorts (1-2) - I lost games one and three because I had the MST for Skill Drain, but I couldn't answer the Emptiness he would draw a turn or two later.
Round 5 vs Satellarknights (2-0)

Top 8 vs Yosenjus (0-2) - I lost game one because I bricked (no ritual monsters, nothing to search ritual monsters, and I had a bunch of ritual spells). I lose game two because he had Dimensional Fissure and Emptiness, and I did not draw MST until he had other traps to back him up.

It was disappointing that I went all the way to Top 8, just to lose because I couldn't play. I took my few packs of Secret Forces and left.

Today was our regular Locals (which is usually on Saturday but was today for some reasons). There were only 8 people, so it was 3 rounds and no finals. Store credit went to 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

Round 1 vs Nekroz (2-0)
Round 2 vs Blackwings (2-0)
Round 3 vs Yosenjus (2-0)

Now that I got this report out of the way, I'm going to provide the main deck I used at both of these tournaments:

Main:

3 Nekroz of Brionac
3 Nekroz of Unicore
3 Nekroz of Valkyrus
2 Nekroz of Clausolas
1 Nekroz of Trishula
1 Nekroz of Gungnir
1 Nekroz of Decisive Armor
3 Manju of the Ten Thousand Hands
3 Senju of the Ten Thousand Hands
2 Shurit, Stretegist of the Nekroz
1 Djinn Releaser of Rituals
3 Preparation or Rites
3 Mystical Space Typhoon
2 Nekroz Kaleidoscope
2 Nekroz Mirror
2 Nekroz Cycle
2 Book of Eclipse
1 Book of Moon
1 Raigeki
1 Dark Hole

Side:

1 Effect Veiler
2 Maxx "C"
2 Kycoo the Ghost Destroyer
1 Dance Princess of the Nekroz
3 Twister
2 Shared Ride
2 Royal Decree
2 Vanity's Emptiness

After my OTS experience last weekend, I realized Dance Princess was not worth it in the main deck (I moved it to the side deck), and I re-included my 2nd Clausolas for the extra consistency. I enjoyed how my deck flowed, and having the second one was really nice.

Now that I got my deck list out in the open, it's time to share another one. An ARG Circuit Series took place this weekend, and Ben Leverett made the Top 16. Since he's Patrick Hoban's friend and follower, I'm assuming they played the same deck because they convinced themselves that their build is superior (after much testing I'm sure). Here's the list, taken right off the ARG website:

Main:

3 Nekroz of Brionac

3 Nekroz of Unicore

2 Nekroz of Valkyrus

1 Nekroz of Trishula

1 Nekroz of Gungnir

1 Nekroz of Clausolas

3 Manju of the Ten Thousand Hands

2 Senju of the Thousand Hands

2 Phantom of Chaos

2 Shurit, Strategist of the Nekroz

1 Djinn Releaser of Rituals

3 Preparation of Rites

3 Forbidden Lance

3 Upstart Goblin

2 Nekroz Kaleidoscope

2 Nekroz Mirror

2 Nekroz Cycle

2 Reinforcement of the Army

1 Book of Moon

1 Book of Eclipse

Side:

2 Kycoo the Ghost Destroyer

2 Maxx "C"

1 Djinn, Releaser of Rituals

3 Mystical Space Typhoon

3 Storm

1 Twister

3 Vanity's Emptiness

I really enjoy this list for a few reasons:

- It's a 37 card deck. I originally wanted my build to be like this, a 40 card deck with 3 Upstarts, but never found the room.
- Phantom of Chaos is a nice trick. It could turn into an out to anything, depend on what's in your graveyard.
- Forbidden Lance is also nice tech. I foresee multiple application where this card can be useful against all of the current tier 1 decks.
- He sided a second Djinn. From what I understand, Patrick and friends asked to side out the Djinn, and keep it revealed to the opponent so he could side another one. It's a dirty move, but clever. I wonder how many games were won with that trick...

I have only a single beef with this list:

- Not enough answers to floodgates and the Djinn lock. Forbidden Lance can sometimes be an out to Emptiness, but other than that...

In regards to consistency, this deck list is the most consistent out of all of the ones I've seen and played. However, I'm pretty sure this is the only list I've seen that does not play MST and does play Upstart. I believe I understand how their tournament was planning to go:

- Completely beat Nekroz because their deck is more consistent, and build the deck to help this match-up.
- Lose game 1 to decks like Qliphort and Yosenjus, then side game 2 and 3 and hope for the best.

It's interesting that I lose all my game 1s to Yosenjus and Qliphorts because I didn't have the MST. It's almost like I could've removed the MSTs and put in Upstarts, because it really didn't matter.

For now, I'm going to conclude this topic. There is a Montreal Regionals on Saturday that I'm probably going to attend. Ideally, I would like to achieve Top 8 and win a decent-looking mat, as well as sell some bulk I picked up today.

I'm going to continue playing around with my Nekroz build. I really enjoy my build so far, but now I'm convinced the deck could be a little more consistent. I'll work around with the list and hopefully determine a better list. Until next time, thanks for reading!