Chromecatz
New Member
Why do you say you created Acid Liability?
Archetype or Rogue?
- Thread starter Ardoptres
- Start date
blastoise1992
New Member
Lol netdecking is a lame thing people say because they "hate archetypes"
Search deck help, I posted the deck the night of the DX prereleases, I was quite probably the first person to play it at a major tournament, and I coined the name Acid Liability on top of that.
higumaotoshi
New Member
You play to win the game.
And netdecking and playing archetypes is different.
Netdecking any random gymmer deck will NOT win you any tourneys.
And netdecking and playing archetypes is different.
Netdecking any random gymmer deck will NOT win you any tourneys.
Arcanine 274
New Member
Mostly archetypes. I'm not that creative when it comes to cards.
Papi/Manny
New Member
I'm 99% rogue. But I play rogue that's actually good. I'll try out crap before a tourney, but at the tourney itself, I'll have a good, random/unsceen/not mainstream deck ready to play.
the best time i had at a tourny is when i didn't know any of the decks i played against, i hadn't seen them before in my life. that was the most fun i have ever had at a tournament, because it was shocking to see what was played. a pure delight! ROGUE FTW! which is of course why i played rogue all the time.
no one can out metagame you if you play rogue!
and if you know what is in your opponents deck, doesn't that take some of the sport out of it? for me, it does, when i play a new deck, that is the best to me
no one can out metagame you if you play rogue!
and if you know what is in your opponents deck, doesn't that take some of the sport out of it? for me, it does, when i play a new deck, that is the best to me
Last edited:
Muk Man
New Member
i've never played an archtype... i've always played rogue decks... even when i Played SS gardy i hadn't even joined the gym yet. i had to go to collectorscach.com just to see what cards would be there, from there i built it on instict. parasect/exeggcutor called "Energy Explosion", The Poliwrath deck, built flaridos...F.A.M right after the DS prerelease and then Super Stantler... in fact Flaridos is as close to archtpe as ive ever been.
Ardoptres
New Member
I don't hate acrhtypes.. :///
After being away from pokemon for several years, I finally got around to picking up a handful of Holon Phantoms and Crystal Guardians boosters back in November. The cards that most caught my eye were Exeggutor d, and Raichu d, and Holon's Castform. I put together a deck, looked up my local league, visited on a saturday and found out that the deck I had built was actually pretty popular. I didn't have the proper holon cards for it yet, and for some reason I was using a 3-3 line of persian d, but it was pretty darn close to the Raieggs lists I've found online since then. Go figure. =)
charking
New Member
IMO...
Rogues are for leaders; Archetypes are for followers
...meaning usually archetypes are nobrainer decks that anyone with the herd mentality and half a brain can play, whereas rogue decks need to have the most strategic of players to not only play correctly, but to be created properly as well.
Of course I always played casually and will use anything I think is fun to play because it won't be in a tournament.
Rogues are for leaders; Archetypes are for followers
...meaning usually archetypes are nobrainer decks that anyone with the herd mentality and half a brain can play, whereas rogue decks need to have the most strategic of players to not only play correctly, but to be created properly as well.
Of course I always played casually and will use anything I think is fun to play because it won't be in a tournament.
It really depends. Most, if not all, archtypes start out as rogues. Also, people sometimes invent Archtype decks that get debuted and then become popular (like Mewtrick), so i wouldn't really call them "decks for followers", although blatent copy/pasting of online decks is pretty shameless. I personally play what I like, to a degree. I've been using Arcanine ex since it came out for example, and always considered it to be little more than a Rogue deck, no one really played it with all the LBS around, and to my surprise a lot of people around here now consider it a Tier 2 deck! I like it as a Poke, and have used it as much as I can because of that. However, if it had been an absolutely horrible card (like Light Arcanine was), I wouldn't use it even if it was my fav.
If a Rogue deck is good, it can surprise the opponent because they won't really see it coming, which can be a nice advantage. However, if a Rogue deck really is a good deck, it usually doesn't stay Rogue.
If a Rogue deck is good, it can surprise the opponent because they won't really see it coming, which can be a nice advantage. However, if a Rogue deck really is a good deck, it usually doesn't stay Rogue.
garsh0p
New Member
the assumption that archetypes require no skill is plain ignorant. skill comes with the card game as a whole.
i don't like this whole "rogue-means-i'm-a-better-player-than-you" mentality. i think that's something people say when they can't win
charking
New Member
I in no way said that rogues don't need strategy AT ALL, but you have to admit more people would win with them than most rogue decks. And what I said also don't imply that leaders aren't too great to play archetypes.
Don't force that competitiveness on me. I already said I'm a casual player. Sounds to me like you're the insecure one...i think that's something people say when they can't win
supertyranitar
New Member
IMO, it really doesn't matter either way. It's really just what works for any person at a time. But, I myself like rogue alot more then anything. Just thinking of a deck to surprise the competition is always fun.
the assumption that archetypes require no skill is plain ignorant. skill comes with the card game as a whole.
i don't like this whole "rogue-means-i'm-a-better-player-than-you" mentality. i think that's something people say when they can't win
Making statements like that just makes you sound like an *******.
Besides, you missed the context of "rogue-means-i'm-better" - winning with rogue tends to take exceptional skill. Just playing rogue for the sake of playing rogue makes you a scrub, especially if you think you're the bomb simply because you don't play archetypes.
SolarPichu
Member
I have a little story about netdecking...
So about six years ago, I went to one of those stadium challenges. I actually copied a deck from the internet card for card, and had been playtesting it for about a month. It was really rogue too, like Kabutops (N2) and Erika's Victreebel, I believe. Anyway, I take it to the tournament and play the person who actually made the deck! I was like "what a coincidence!" but I knew that he knew that it was his exact list. It was essentially a mirror match, except I outplayed him. So anyway, I beat him, and then I felt bad. So since then, I no longer copy lists, other than for playtesting purposes. My decks always come from my own personal play style and that seems to work well for me.
So about six years ago, I went to one of those stadium challenges. I actually copied a deck from the internet card for card, and had been playtesting it for about a month. It was really rogue too, like Kabutops (N2) and Erika's Victreebel, I believe. Anyway, I take it to the tournament and play the person who actually made the deck! I was like "what a coincidence!" but I knew that he knew that it was his exact list. It was essentially a mirror match, except I outplayed him. So anyway, I beat him, and then I felt bad. So since then, I no longer copy lists, other than for playtesting purposes. My decks always come from my own personal play style and that seems to work well for me.
Shmagoolski
New Member
Before the city championship that I went to, I had a Bandoom (or is it Boom?) deck. It wasn't perfect, but I could beat pretty much any of my friends with it. But while laying in bed the night before, all I could think about was the Electabuzz I'd seen going through one of my friend's cards. So the morning before we left I built it. I think I had more fun playing that than the Banette
For what it's worth, the most fun match I played at the city championship I went to was against a deck I'd never heard of before. It's always a pleasure to see something new working in a way you hadn't thought of before.
I think I rambled a bit... but mostly what I mean to say is that I've always had more fun thinking up ideas than playing, even. So it's rogue for me.
For what it's worth, the most fun match I played at the city championship I went to was against a deck I'd never heard of before. It's always a pleasure to see something new working in a way you hadn't thought of before.
I think I rambled a bit... but mostly what I mean to say is that I've always had more fun thinking up ideas than playing, even. So it's rogue for me.