Jump to content

The idiocy of 3 bribe, 0 solemn


Recommended Posts

I am incredibly disturbed by the astonishing lack of common sense being displayed by most deckbuilders lately. Whenever someone posts something like "2x Bribe, 1x Solemn", every time someone posts the most idiotic comment ever:

 

"Solemn sucks at one, run a third bribe".

 

Statements like this want to make me go to their house and murder their families. Seriously, what are you people thinking. Here's a hint, WHY ARE THEY RUNNING BRIBES IN THE FIRST PLACE?! Oh yeah, it's a substitute for the two solemns they lost! So WHY, given that bribe is clearly inferior, would you run it just because you have fanatical obedience to "solemn is bad at one, solemn is bad at one" mantras?!

 

The logic just baffles me. Are we going to start running Arcana Force 0 - The Fools at three just because Spirit Reaper is limited? Are we going to start running three Darklord Zeratos with DAD limited? When JD is limited, will everyone ditch it in favor of three Gragoniths or Celestias?

 

It gets even more idiotic when people start running polinosis at three instead of solemn. Now, all polinosis is is a (vastly inferior) version of solemn. Would people use their heads and realize that running a card at one may be bad, ditching it for an inferior card for no reason other than running a playset looks better is idiotic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't understand why people have dropped all copies of Solemn from their deck, Solemn can still save you from DAD, JD, etc while Bribe doesn't even come close. Sure at 1, Solemn comes with a hefty cost but if that hefty cost takes down a key card of your opponent and allows you that one extra turn you need to win I don't see why it's so bad to still run that 1 copy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 3, idiots could sack wins by drawing 3X Solemn in the opening hand and firing them off without thought. Limited to 1, it requires more skill to play, so stupid players will probably find themselves disliking it for the fact that they never use it properly and hence label it a bad card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 3' date=' idiots could sack wins by drawing 3X Solemn in the opening hand and firing them off without thought. Limited to 1, it requires more skill to play, so stupid players will probably find themselves disliking it for the fact that they never use it properly and hence label it a bad card.

[/quote']

 

True.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 3' date=' idiots could sack wins by drawing 3X Solemn in the opening hand and firing them off without thought. Limited to 1, it requires more skill to play, so stupid players will probably find themselves disliking it for the fact that they never use it properly and hence label it a bad card.

[/quote']

^I was actually going to post something like this^

Except mine would sound more like:

I think the reason why players are like that is because Solemn is at 1' date=' and would less likely be drawn at the start, and shut down the Opponent on turn #2. Bribe isnt as powerful, but can be ran in 3s. Same with MBaaS, which is just as situational(in this case) but not as powerfull as Solemn. But players still run it in 3s, for more "consistantcy".[/quote']

^And then from there I would probobly slap something in there about how DAD/JD/[Other awesome card] is limited^

Like what TC had writen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem people have with running Solemn when there's only 1 is that by activating a Solemn the massive amount of LP spent in activating it implies that you're going to focus on intensive control rather than maintaining life-points. This logic is faulty though as the only true problem people using too many Solemns had was DSF, who is now banned.

 

However, people ITT seem to be ignorant of the fact that Bribe and Solemn are best used in different decks. Bribe is good for decks that need a lot of S/T protection, since the opponent isn't going to draw into a Heavy after it has already been negated, and Solemn is a bad choice in decks subject to direct attacks if they don't get the proper cards right off the bat(especially at 1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*seconds rant* Solemn is still very valueable and is a game winner when timed right just like it was back at 3' date=' but since [b']when did LP start to matter?[/b] As long as you aren't dead and can play a Brain Control you are fine :?

 

To the bolded: Doesn't the official yugioh rule book say something like "If your Life Points reach 0, you loose."? Lowering your opponent's LP is the point of the game unless you run something like Exodia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mmmmmm I don't know...I actually stopped using solemn in my decks...but I don't think it is bad or nothing...just stopped using negation cards in general...since...there are plenty of options to replace in some grades they work...

BUT! there is the Most Pro thing that comes to play solems at 1....and is the surprise factor...now it is clearly more dificult to guess a set solemn...so it is easier to catch the opponent and shut him down....

Only Contra I found in running it at is the sightly huge mount of S/T destruction running around which may interfere with solemn if someone targets it with any 1 for 1 card...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...