Blake Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 So basically... You're not accepting criticism because you know better? Okay, I could've stated what I said better; There's no way you consistently win like you claim against good players. Everything about the deck is wrong. It's constructed badly, at best. You refuse to run a card simply because it causes s*** players to scoop at the sight of it. TCG is a fine reason not to run Angelly, but even then, this deck's awful by TCG standards. You've been shown a good TCG version of the deck that isn't gimmicky bull, and you just refuse to accept it. I also love how you harp on the only part of my argument you can even remotely try to come back against, and even then it was a vanity point you made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichigo420 Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 You don't play Angelly because people scoop. But only really bad scrubs are going to scoop just because they see Angelly, and given the bad build, there's no way you consistently win like you claim. And "3 chateau" is not a tech choice, nor is running multiples of bad cards. That's a horrible argument. If you're not trying to improve your deck to be the best it can be, don't play it. Hell, even TCG only this build's terrible because Maid and Baaple are terrible as is running 3 Ticket/Chateau. That's just being bad at deckbuilding. now black have you played against this build? I've seen how it runs as well as dueled it my self and like 99% of the time and has only lost once that i've seen so you dual his build then if you still find a problem give him constructive criticism not flaming just because its not how you would build it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I can accept constructive criticism. I understand some people want to help. But this is just blatant flaming. You have given no constructive criticism. You harp on the fact that I don't run Angelly, or that I run 2 of Baaple and Maide and 3 Chateau and Ticket, but you give me no solution. You say "Why aren't you running hand traps for Hootcake? Why aren't you running Maxx C? Why aren't you running Angelly? Your build sucks there's no way you can win" But I have explained time and time again why I use the cards I use, and you refuse to accept the possiblity that this deck work, and can win. You have no valid proof of your claims, and while you my have a few valid points, you have gone about it in a hostile manner which is completely uncalled for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Please, point out where I "flamed" you. Like, again, your only point thus far has been "flaming", and I've not "Flamed" you once. Unless you mean this: Flaming Verb Telling people what they don't want to hear In which case, yes, I "flamed" you. The closest thing I said to flaming was "get out"; Sure, that was harsh, but it's not flaming. I shouldn't have to explain when it's been explained by other people, and you still refuse to listen to them, as well. I mean, this right here: http://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/topic/315408-and-tiaramisu-said-let-them-eat-cake-madolches-2014/#entry6394056 But you just ignored this altogether. So clearly, you don't want constructive criticism, and you're just using it as a point to say "bluh i'm not wrong". But there's no helping someone who refuses to help themself, so please, continue to play bad Madolche and play agaisnt scrubs that would otherwise scoop to Angelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 He started by violating the Jack Witt clause by stating in the first post that he would refuse to run Angelly. The card practically makes the deck. You can't see it now that he's deleted his "reasons" but it was a mess of "I refuse to take this out and I won't run this because I know best." FUN FACT OF THE DAY: The Jack Witt clause doesn't exist anymore. Stop prattling about it everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Please, point out where I "flamed" you. Like, again, your only point thus far has been "flaming", and I've not "Flamed" you once. Unless you mean this: Flaming Verb Telling people what they don't want to hear In which case, yes, I "flamed" you. The closest thing I said to flaming was "get out"; Sure, that was harsh, but it's not flaming. I shouldn't have to explain when it's been explained by other people, and you still refuse to listen to them, as well. I mean, this right here: http://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/topic/315408-and-tiaramisu-said-let-them-eat-cake-madolches-2014/#entry6394056 But you just ignored this altogether. So clearly, you don't want constructive criticism, and you're just using it as a point to say "bluh i'm not wrong". But there's no helping someone who refuses to help themself, so please, continue to play bad Madolche and play agaisnt scrubs that would otherwise scoop to Angelly. Ok. What is your DN username? We can figure this out without having to say another word. The next time I am on DN I will let you know, you will duel my Madolches in a 2/3 match, and if you lose, then you will realise this is not a shitstain of a deck. If you win, you can say all you like. I may not agree, but I won't argue with you unless it's just blatant "This deck sucks, I was right, he was wrong, he shoud never play again" on this thread. Feel free to post a status about it, but just avoid the thread. That agreeable? I think so.So either get out or stop telling people you're not going to run Angelly. Considering you're touting a meaningless number, and you apparently revel in playing against scrubs who would normally quit against an Angelly, I'm going to say your point doesn't exist. ITT: Winning a duel by luck proves your deck is optimal this deck can't be taken remotely seriously and just shows this topic is a waste of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harpedp Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Hm... I see what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Yeah. You'v dueled it, so you know that it actually is a deck worth paying against, you've seen what it's capable of, you've lost to what it can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'd just like to mention that YCM is in no way a competitive forum and anyone who claims otherwise is lying to themselves. Instead of trying to pigeonhole this deck into the Madolche deck that is best, why don't we try to improve on the deck that's here keeping in mind the desires of OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greiga Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 FUN FACT OF THE DAY: The Jack Witt clause doesn't exist anymore. Stop prattling about it everyone. What the hell is a Jack Witt clause? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'd just like to mention that YCM is in no way a competitive forum and anyone who claims otherwise is lying to themselves. Instead of trying to pigeonhole this deck into the Madolche deck that is best, why don't we try to improve on the deck that's here keeping in mind the desires of OP. Thank you. That is all I wanted. DO you have suggestions? What the hell is a Jack Witt clause? Good question... I don't know either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 The Jack Witt clause was a rule that said you can't post a thread if you aren't going to be receptive to criticism. " 9. The Jack Witt Clause All deck topics are treated as rate and fix topics. This means that, when you post your deck, you will receive comments and evaluations of the deck's quality from other members and suggestions as to how to improve it. If you cannot deal with this, then do not post your deck. If you post your deck and then show that you cannot or will not accept constructive criticism, you will not only appear childish but also run the risk of having your topics closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyalist Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Good question... I don't know either What the hell is a Jack Witt clause? As I understand it, the jack witt clause is when somebody claims their deck to be prefect and disregards the opinions of others. Happens a lot on this site, I assure you. EDIT: Ninja'd, Welche got a better definition of it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Oh, this deck isn't perfect. There are just a few things I am stubborn about. I'm thinking about just running 2 Hootcake and 2 Magi, as Madolches all recyce, I may drop it in favor of a Veiler or 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazooie Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 FUN FACT OF THE DAY: The Jack Witt clause doesn't exist anymore. Stop prattling about it everyone. Apparently you already forgot the thread you made about TCG having no rules at all Welche. Literally the only reason it doesn't exist. In that case, lemme go jumble 60~ cards together and post it. I don't have to take criticism cause there aren't any rules at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Apparently you already forgot the thread you made about TCG having no rules at all Welche. In that case, lemme go jumble 60~ cards together and post it. I don't have to take criticism cause there aren't any rules at all! Just saying, last time you did that I got perma banned and that account is still banned ;-; Anyway, he hasn't broken the Jack Witt clause. He's explained all his choices in the deck even though the criticism he has gotten has been far from constructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazooie Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 Just saying, last time you did that I got perma banned and that account is still banned ;-; Anyway, he hasn't broken the Jack Witt clause. He's explained all his choices in the deck even though the criticism he has gotten has been far from constructive. That was a themed deck that combined all the top decks at the time. Plus I was making constant edits to it whenever I got good feedback. I was completely listening to Byak :< He totally has. Just because the criticism is blunt doesn't make it bad at all. I would much rather have GOOD BLUNT criticism then nice put horrible ideas. His choices are bad, and at this point, the thread should honestly just be abandoned. If you wanna discuss this anymore you can PM me Welche, I don't play on posting again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 In all seriousness. Everyone just knock it the fuck off. Stop arguing. This has gone far enough. If you have something constructive to say, while keeping in mind the faxt that I will be stubboorn about my Maides and my Baaples, don't post please. I've had enough. Just let it go, and if you want to say something like Holly just did, keep it over PM. This is getting none of us anywhere, except towards trouble. So just put aside all this petty arguing and move on. Not the most recent one, but the one at the tail end of page 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aix Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 I would like to summarize what they said in that first of all, it cannot be argued that Maid and Baaple do not contribute to the mainstream Madolche deck goal of OTKing and they are established to be, by mass testing and theory, sub par cards. If you are trying to build some non-OTK build then say so. But if you insist on OTKing and this still doesn't convince you then alright. This deck topic is now "Madolche Deck with Maid and Baaple and all those other cards that you refuse to remove" and we'll go by the premise that there's some rule preventing you from removing them and this is TCG so there's no Anjelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted April 25, 2014 Report Share Posted April 25, 2014 You should probably make some room for Anjelly. Maybe take out Bapple or Maide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeRainbowDash Posted April 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 If I were to do that I'd probably drop a ticket a Baaple and a chateau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.