Dukat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 17, 2022 1:39 am
As it has been said: No one at Kaiserfest actually complained. We were fascinated by how the deck works.
Americans however shit their pants and become cry babys 'meh meh meh ... bad deck ... ban cards ... do not likey playing with toys ... can make my deck bad bad'.
Come on guys, grow a pair and accept the fact that Peter's deck was not based on ONE card being overpowered, but the fact that he forced opponent's into making mistakes.
His deck could easily be countered with several cards in fact.
This whole thing is getting utterly ridiculous, just because the American continent likes their shitty 1E solitaire ...
1. Pretty much everyone in this thread, regardless of continent, is fascinated by the deck and has expressed admiration for its cleverness. I especially like the psychological element, a lot of players have forgotten that Ref-drain is a thing. (I'm curious to know if anyone actually let him play the Revolving Door via Parallax Arguers, though... the standard move is to give the opponent points, every time I've let someone start playing events I regret it, and usually fast.)
2. A deck with a good shot at a first-turn win does not belong in OTF, specifically
because it turns the game into "shitty 1E solitaire." Winning before your opponent can even take an action is literal solitaire. As others have said, Open exists for those who like playing in that sort of environment; and I have no problem if some player groups prefer that format and even want their major tournaments that way.
As for me, in general I'm fine with combo decks in OTF -- for example, I was actually a bit sad that "voluntarily" was added to Defend Homeworld; that's a deck that literally CANNOT work as solitaire, since the trick relies on an opponent attempting a mission. As brilliant as the Empok deck is, its best case scenario is an opponent that takes no actions whatsoever.
3. I'm pretty sure the "American continent likes shitty 1E solitaire" meme isn't true. I'm even more sure that it's not helpful for discussion, and 100% sure that it's completely backwards in this case (see previous point). The top 1E players here all have played their share of interactive decks. For Kevin and Kris it's practically their calling card. James won Worlds with an interactive deck (an interactive combo deck, no less). MVB's last deck was KCA battle. Sykes plays decks with good battle options. Franklin was the one who developed the Hirogen Talon loop deck. Drake and Tufts play interaction if they think that's the best shot at winning (Tufts won Worlds with Ferengi Military Operations, in 2011 I helped Jason put together a combo-ish Mah'Nlv/Blood Oath armada). I can go on and on... who specifically are the North American players that want to get rid of interaction?
4. Speaking from personal experience, over the years I've played many combo decks, and won a number of games on the first turn (or effectively won by destroying their only facility or some such). I like constructing
intricate Rube Goldberg-esque scenarios by making cards do things they were never supposed to do. But again I distinguish between complex combos (which absolutely belong in OTF) to first-turn wins/lockouts (which absolutely don't). The fun -- and the interaction -- happens when *both* players' decks have a real shot at winning.