Meej
11/8/2010 9:06:00 PM
On Nov 8, 3:07 pm, Petri Wessman <or...@iki.fi> wrote:
> On Nov 8, 8:58 pm, h...@iki.fi (Janne Hägglund) wrote:
>
>
>
> > Vincent <v.rip...@gmail.com> writes:
> > > On 8 nov, 15:26, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > > On Nov 8, 5:34 am, Vincent <v.rip...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On 7 nov, 23:17, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Nov 6, 12:49 pm, Vincent <v.rip...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Crappy crypt, how did Sonja Blue landed up here?
> > > > > > > And since there's no Diamond Thunderbolt to protect her, the Social
> > > > > > > Ladders are useless.
> > > > > > > 8 votes on 90 cards seems to little, especially for the 6 Bewitching
> > > > > > > and the 5 Iron Glare that only Gracetius and Hektor can play at
> > > > > > > superior. And you'll jam as hell with no way to enter combat actively.
>
> > > > > > > The idea behind Thin Blood + Catatonic Fear + TV is funny, but the
> > > > > > > crypt choices are too bad (especially if you want to add some
> > > > > > > potence).
>
> > > > > > > Crappy deck! :)
>
> > > > > > This deck is designed with a Diamond Thunderbolt heavy meta game in
> > > > > > mind. I usually play all my Sonja Decks at the same time on JOL.
> > > > > > Usually after someone gets burned in a game by 3x Diamond Thunderbolt
> > > > > > then they quit trying. You can then move to this style deck without
> > > > > > the Diamond Thunderbolts.
>
> > > > > > Yes, this might need some work, but if it didn't I wouldn't post it
> > > > > > here.
>
> > > > > It's a strange metagaming. Even then, I would've always try at least
> > > > > once to steal her.
>
> > > > > I'm not sure than posting ten decks is the best way to get comments.
> > > > > How many times have they been tested? We don't Even have any feedback
> > > > > such as "I 'd like to improve the combat part" or explanation about
> > > > > what the deck is supposed to do. Sorry to say, but it looks like spam
> > > > > to me (I can post 2 decks without any comments each day too...).
>
> > > > I can post 100 decks right now that you have never seen. And they all
> > > > have been played at least twice.
>
> > > Who is interested in 100 uncommented decks?
>
> > I am.
>
> > If you don't like to read his decks, then *don't read his decks*.
> > Problem solved. Sheesh.
>
> > HG
>
> Same here. I mean, sure, some commentary would be cool (what the deck
> tries to do, what it has problems with, etc). But even as is, there
> are some fun ideas here.
Y'know, I agree - there are some fun ideas in here. But to be honest,
I know I don't have the stamina to search through the half-baked ones
or the mis-titled ones or the same-old-same-old ones to find them when
he posts 30 in a row with no comment or differentiation.
His good ideas are getting lost in his own signal-to-noise ratio, in
my opinion.
- D.J.