Deck play styles regarding Custom Archetypes

[WhiteThunder777]

As per the custom card guide - there are these Deck types - combo, control, midrange, Ramp, and going 2nd decks.  I'll explain it to you as simple as possible in my own words, so it is easier to understand.  If you have anything to comment on, feel free to do so.  

Let's start off with combo.  These are the archetypes that have the ability to use multiple cards that extend your plays.  Most combo decks have Main Deck monsters that lack power in combat.  Their big drawback is that disruptive cards can affect their strategy like negates for example. Combo decks are those that want to focus on their finished end boards going 1st.  

Next we have control.  These types of decks have highly disruptive cards that try to "control" the game.  Usually, this comes in the forms of negates and disruptions.  Control wins by using card advantage to dominate over the opponent, meaning having more cards on the field/hand than the opponent. 

Midrange decks have equally defensive/offensive capabilities.  Their Main/Extra Deck is capable of tanking (i.e. tough and strong) threats.  These are very difficult to deal with as they have resilience to the harshest of threats. And one more thing, midrange decks tend to sacrifice power for consistency. Some control decks may have trouble dealing with midrange decks because they have the defenses necessary to protect them.  

Ramp decks are engine based.  They start off very weak at first, but later on become a fearsome foe that is tough to deal with in the late game.  A way to think of Ramp decks is a tree sapling, when it's young, it can't do much, but later on, it becomes a guard you'll have to deal with.

Going 2nd decks are decks with very slow opening hands. These are the types of Decks that intend to defeat the opponent as fast as possible.  Common OTK cards include Accesscode Talker and Borrelsword Dragon.  Other going 2nd cards include stuff that can get a lot of damage to the opponent such as Mage Power, United We stand, and attacking directly.   A lot of going 2nd decks will use Forbidden Droplet, Dark Ruler no More, Kaijus, Ra - Sphere Mode to break problematic boards, as part of their board-breaking abilities.  To put it simply, going 2nd decks focus on board breaking.  

And do keep in mind that ANY custom archetype you design may fall into 2 of these categories.  Even existing TCG archetypes may fall into this, as Tri-brigade is a decent midrange Deck.

[Loleo]

PERFECT EXPLINATION

[drowsyCoffee]

While this is correct, per say, i feel like some of the terms like Aggro/OTK have kind of lost their meaning in modern yugioh with the rise of so many tools to be able to OTK in the crackback on a generic, accessible way, as well as the general lack of value that LP has had in recent times. Your traditional meaning of Aggro decks who swarmed the boards with high statted monsters to hit in for a lot of damage and quickly finish out a game has almost dissapeared, and even in the decks were we see that, like Dino or Gran Maju from time to time, its not what we consider powerful about these strategies anymore. Nowadays, their identity has shifted away from being able to summon Big Monster TM and OTK or hit in for a lot in the spot (Since virtually any capable combo, midrange, and sometimes even control deck can do the same through a ladder into Accesscode) and more of being decks that have strong going second tools for board breaking. It has become less of being able to summon a big dude, and more of having some really good Super Poly target or a monster like Tyranno that can destroy a Droplet-ed board. Even in things like Fluffals, is less about Wolf or Kraken being able to deal a million points of damage and more about Cruel Whale and Tiger just tearing appart established boards

With that in mind, i probably would replace Aggro on the scale for "Going Second Decks" and have board breaking abilities as their focus

 

The other thing i have to add is that the definitions of Midrange and Combo arent quite clear and dont quite specify their goals or playstyle. If we were to put one against another, Combo are decks that focus their entire strategy on the power of their finished boards going first, while Midrange tends to sacrifice the overall ceiling of their turn one boards in exchange for resiliency, repeatability and consistency. A Combo strategy does things such as adding garnets into their deck, cards that do next to nothing when drawn and reduce the overall consistency of their strategy, just for the sake of injecting some much needed extra fuel during the combo they perform during turn one to help them extend through to an overall stronger board. A good example of Combo might be something like Phantom Knights or Adamancipators, decks that while capable of putting some quite mean boards even through a few interactions have to spend their entire Extra Deck to do so and lack a follow up play. Overall, what defines Combo as a strategy is the funneling of your resources in Deck and Extra Deck into strong turn one boards at the cost of hurting things such as follow up and the like. If we take a step further, we could say that FTK is even more commited to their turn one power, sacrificing things such as consistency and resilience for the sake of it to the degree were not only they cant take any interruptions but even then they can only win a fraction of the time

Midrange, on the other hand, chooses to reduce the overall ceiling of their deck and neglect lines that require heavy Extra Deck space investment or garnets for the sake of making their combos repeatable, hard to interrupt, and allocating resources towards other tasks. A good example would be forgoing playing extra extenders for the sake of freeing space for handtraps or going second cards post siding. The current meta game pre BODE was centered around such decks, decks that were capable of consistently getting 1 card starters, played through an inordinate number of interruptions with ease, and after that still managed to have resources left over to do so again. In modern yugioh, a good way to try to define which decks lean more towards combo and which ones to midrange (Since this kind of analysis is more of a gradient from Combo to Control, based on how explosive a strateg is) is counting number of garnets and handtraps, as that is a good way to get a feel of how much the deck has prioritized extension

 

Finally, i think that Ramp and Control are, kind of the same thing. Both strategies are centered around using advantage generating resource loops to make so that, if you were to keep trading and interrupting your opponent for a long enough time (Which is what they try to do), you'll eventually come up on top by virtue of having generated an overall higher amount of resources. I guess you could call Ramp some particularly glacially slow Control strats, like Ghostrick, Amazement, Subterror and the like, but even then, in the modern world of yugioh where Dragluvion, Accesscode, Borrelsword and many other OTK tools are running around, those decks are barely even playable. If anything, Ramp is to Control what FTK is to Combo. Just, iterations of the strategy that went too far in one end of the explosivity scale for them to be really playable

[WhiteThunder777]

27 minutes ago, drowsyCoffee said:

While this is correct, per say, i feel like some of the terms like Aggro/OTK have kind of lost their meaning in modern yugioh with the rise of so many tools to be able to OTK in the crackback on a generic, accessible way, as well as the general lack of value that LP has had in recent times. Your traditional meaning of Aggro decks who swarmed the boards with high statted monsters to hit in for a lot of damage and quickly finish out a game has almost dissapeared, and even in the decks were we see that, like Dino or Gran Maju from time to time, its not what we consider powerful about these strategies anymore. Nowadays, their identity has shifted away from being able to summon Big Monster TM and OTK or hit in for a lot in the spot (Since virtually any capable combo, midrange, and sometimes even control deck can do the same through a ladder into Accesscode) and more of being decks that have strong going second tools for board breaking. It has become less of being able to summon a big dude, and more of having some really good Super Poly target or a monster like Tyranno that can destroy a Droplet-ed board. Even in things like Fluffals, is less about Wolf or Kraken being able to deal a million points of damage and more about Cruel Whale and Tiger just tearing appart established boards

With that in mind, i probably would replace Aggro on the scale for "Going Second Decks" and have board breaking abilities as their focus

 

The other thing i have to add is that the definitions of Midrange and Combo arent quite clear and dont quite specify their goals or playstyle. If we were to put one against another, Combo are decks that focus their entire strategy on the power of their finished boards going first, while Midrange tends to sacrifice the overall ceiling of their turn one boards in exchange for resiliency, repeatability and consistency. A Combo strategy does things such as adding garnets into their deck, cards that do next to nothing when drawn and reduce the overall consistency of their strategy, just for the sake of injecting some much needed extra fuel during the combo they perform during turn one to help them extend through to an overall stronger board. A good example of Combo might be something like Phantom Knights or Adamancipators, decks that while capable of putting some quite mean boards even through a few interactions have to spend their entire Extra Deck to do so and lack a follow up play. Overall, what defines Combo as a strategy is the funneling of your resources in Deck and Extra Deck into strong turn one boards at the cost of hurting things such as follow up and the like. If we take a step further, we could say that FTK is even more commited to their turn one power, sacrificing things such as consistency and resilience for the sake of it to the degree were not only they cant take any interruptions but even then they can only win a fraction of the time

Midrange, on the other hand, chooses to reduce the overall ceiling of their deck and neglect lines that require heavy Extra Deck space investment or garnets for the sake of making their combos repeatable, hard to interrupt, and allocating resources towards other tasks. A good example would be forgoing playing extra extenders for the sake of freeing space for handtraps or going second cards post siding. The current meta game pre BODE was centered around such decks, decks that were capable of consistently getting 1 card starters, played through an inordinate number of interruptions with ease, and after that still managed to have resources left over to do so again. In modern yugioh, a good way to try to define which decks lean more towards combo and which ones to midrange (Since this kind of analysis is more of a gradient from Combo to Control, based on how explosive a strateg is) is counting number of garnets and handtraps, as that is a good way to get a feel of how much the deck has prioritized extension

 

Finally, i think that Ramp and Control are, kind of the same thing. Both strategies are centered around using advantage generating resource loops to make so that, if you were to keep trading and interrupting your opponent for a long enough time (Which is what they try to do), you'll eventually come up on top by virtue of having generated an overall higher amount of resources. I guess you could call Ramp some particularly glacially slow Control strats, like Ghostrick, Amazement, Subterror and the like, but even then, in the modern world of yugioh where Dragluvion, Accesscode, Borrelsword and many other OTK tools are running around, those decks are barely even playable. If anything, Ramp is to Control what FTK is to Combo. Just, iterations of the strategy that went too far in one end of the explosivity scale for them to be really playable

Alright - I'll replace Aggro/OTK with Going 2nd Decks as a starter to make this guide more effective.

[The Nyx Avatar]

On 10/8/2021 at 7:56 AM, Surge77754 said:

As per the custom card guide - there are these Deck types - combo, control, midrange, Ramp, Aggro/OTK.  I'll explain it to you as simple as possible in my own words, so it is easier to understand.  If you have anything to comment on, feel free to do so.  

Let's start off with combo.  These are the archetypes that have the ability to use multiple cards that extend your plays.  Most combo decks have Main Deck monsters that lack power in combat.  Their big drawback is that disruptive cards can affect their strategy like negates for example. Consistency varies, as some combo decks rely on 2 or 3 cards.

Next we have control.  These types of decks have highly disruptive cards that try to "control" the game.  Usually, this comes in the forms of negates and disruptions.  Control wins by using card advantage to dominate over the opponent, meaning having more cards on the field/hand than the opponent. 

Midrange decks have equally defensive/offensive capabilities.  Their Main/Extra Deck is capable of tanking (i.e. tough and strong) threats.  These are very difficult to deal with as they have resilience to the harshest of threats. Some control decks may have trouble dealing with midrange decks because they have the defenses necessary to protect them.  

Ramp decks are engine based.  They start off very weak at first, but later on become a fearsome foe that is tough to deal with in the late game.  A way to think of Ramp decks is a tree sapling, when it's young, it can't do much, but later on, it becomes a guard you'll have to deal with.

Aggro/OTK are decks with very slow opening hands. These are the types of Decks that intend to defeat the opponent as fast as possible.  Common OTK cards include Accesscode Talker and Borrelsword Dragon.  Other OTK cards include stuff that can get a lot of damage to the opponent such as Mage Power, United We stand, and attacking directly.   These are decks that prefer to go 2nd.    

And do keep in mind that ANY custom archetype you design may fall into 2 of these categories.  Even existing TCG archetypes may fall into this, as Tri-brigade is a decent midrange Deck.

Do you want this to be an additional guide to cardmaking on this platform?

[WhiteThunder777]

Just now, The Nyx Avatar said:

Do you want this to be an additional guide to cardmaking on this platform?

Yeah - as I don't want to explain too much to overwhelm new custom card designers.  But thanks for asking.  

[The Nyx Avatar]

13 minutes ago, Surge77754 said:

Yeah - as I don't want to explain too much to overwhelm new custom card designers.  But thanks for asking.  

Alrighty. I'll Pin this so other users can see it easier.

[WhiteThunder777]

Okay, so control as previously discussed has 2 flavors.  

• Stun - this is to stop your your opponent from snowballing.  For example, the Koa'ki Meiru aspect of Adamancipator has a Summon negate, monster negate, Spell negate and Trap negate. 
• Ramp - this is an engine based deck.  They start out weak turn 1, but later on become stronger.

 

[WhiteThunder777]

An archetype that is described as midrange/combo is harder to beat with a Control deck as the midrange component gives it resiliency.  

[WhiteThunder777]

Given a custom card archetype, how can we tell if it's a going 1st or 2nd deck?  It's hard to say, but let's boil it down to the simplest point possible.  

A going 1st deck requires setup, and lots of it.  Going 1st decks tries to hinder what the opponent will do (or thinks the opponent will do).  For example, Traptrix is a going 1st deck because it needs a lot of setup to do so.  It's a control strategy because you want to use the Trap Hole cards on your 1st turn to disrupt the opponent's strategy.  Altergeist is a better example, as they have a Trap Card that protects the Altergeists from getting negated.  They will usually end on a couple negates.  

A going 2nd deck has cards required to break the opponent's board and then destroy them in one turn. They will use cards like Kaijus, Ra Sphere Mode, Droplet, etc. to get rid of problematic cards before destroying them in one turn.   

So here's the rundown, look in the archetype for any board breakers, that is telling you that are in there.  The board breaker in the archetype tell you that is a going 2nd component. Read every card thoroughly.  

Nowadays custom archetypes have going 1st and going 2nd cards to a degree.  Midrange decks have a combination of both.

[WhiteThunder777]

Forgot to mention multiple attacking can be a part of a going 2nd strategy.

[WhiteThunder777]

There's a way to tell if a custom archetype is best going 1st or 2nd  

• Going 1st means to set a board and using it to interrupt or try to "control" what the opponent does. This usually involves disruptions to control what the opposing player does (or at least tries to).
• Going 2nd means to finish the opponent in one fell swoop using cards that give a huge stat boost and attacking directly/multiple times.  They will have Kaijus to remove a problematic threat.  That's where the aggro/OTK component comes in.    

Some custom archetypes have both to adapt to the opponent.  

Altergeist is a strictly going 1st deck ... as it needs its traps to be played on the 1st turn, as it is a control deck.

 

[WhiteThunder777]

Again, an aggro deck is not just about high beatsticks.  You want stuff to play on your opponent's turn like handtraps.  If you get Raigeki'd, then that is a sign that the aggro deck wasn't designed well.  Aggro decks aim to disrupt the opponent on their turn, and then OTK them the time is right.

The term aggro has gone out of date, and should be referred to as a strictly going 2nd deck.  Aggro decks are strictly going 2nd, even if they lack defense. 

Not every deck has their own Ultimate Conductor Tyranno which is literally the king of ALL going 2nd strategies.

Aggro decks combine with a control strategy to compliment the aggro, because the control strategy intends to disrupt the opponent before they do something.

  

[WhiteThunder777]

You can never make a custom Trap based deck that focuses on going 2nd rather than 1st because in the end it will be a hassle for reviewers to balance.  It's better to make something that's easier to balance in some cases. Plus if you made a trap based archetype that focuses on going 2nd rather than 1st, it will be less than optimal.  

Don't forget that Midrange based decks have a mixture of going 1st and going 2nd stuff inside of them. 

[WhiteThunder777]

On 12/27/2021 at 7:58 AM, Surge77754 said:

Given a custom card archetype, how can we tell if it's a going 1st or 2nd deck?  It's hard to say, but let's boil it down to the simplest point possible.  

A going 1st deck requires setup, and lots of it.  Going 1st decks tries to hinder what the opponent will do (or thinks the opponent will do).  For example, Traptrix is a going 1st deck because it needs a lot of setup to do so.  It's a control strategy because you want to use the Trap Hole cards on your 1st turn to disrupt the opponent's strategy.  Altergeist is a better example, as they have a Trap Card that protects the Altergeists from getting negated.  They will usually end on a couple negates.  

A going 2nd deck has cards required to break the opponent's board and then destroy them in one turn. They will use cards like Kaijus, Ra Sphere Mode, Droplet, etc. to get rid of problematic cards before destroying them in one turn.   

So here's the rundown, look in the archetype for any board breakers, that is telling you that are in there.  The board breaker in the archetype tell you that is a going 2nd component. Read every card thoroughly.  

Nowadays custom archetypes have going 1st and going 2nd cards to a degree.  Midrange decks have a combination of both.

Like a going 2nd Trap based deck is impossible unless you are talking about Magical Musket.  

[WhiteThunder777]

Do not forget that a going 2nd deck can also make going 1st plays, but in some cases, it can be not good, but that all depends on the effects.  

Also, the end boards of midrange decks aren't as good as combo decks in most cases.  Midrange is committed to making their strategies hard to interrupt whereas combo aims to put a strong (but beatable) end board.  

Midrange decks have some cards in their archetype that focus on board breaking.

 

[WhiteThunder777]

Helpful tip for making a going 2nd deck (formerly known as aggro decks).  Keep in mind that "less is more" when making a custom archetype.

• Cards that give a massive ATK/DEF stat boost (e.g. Mage Power, United we Stand, etc.)
• Direct attacker(s), or stuff that grants a monster to attack directly.  
• Monster card(s) that can deal piercing damage, or card(s) that grant piercing damage.  
• Monsters that can make multiple attacks (e.g. second attack during Battle Phase)
• Uninterruptible attacks (preventing your opponent from activating card/effects until the end of the Damage Step).
• Protection (but don't overdo this - for example, don't make your cards unaffected, but if you choose to do so, do it so that something is conditionally unaffected, and those conditions are very strict).  In some cases, if your archetype uses Equip Spells to cause an OTK, try to protect those Equip Spell(s) temporarily with something. These can include card(s) that protect your board.  
• Having a massive field presence 
• Back-row removal  and other board breaker(s).

You can also use this as a helpful tip to check to see if your deck is a going 2nd (a.k.a. aggro).  Your deck can even have a going 2nd component (a.k.a aggro) component without knowing it which can be done by looking at the helpful tip listed above.  Don't see this as a bad thing - see it as another component of your custom archetype.

For a going 1st archetype, you want to keep in mind the power of your end board, because your opponent has to play against you if they go second.  Keep in mind that yugioh is a 2P game.  Here are some tips to help you check a going 1st archetype. Also, going 1st decks try to stop you in any way they can so that you don't get to go 2nd. 

• Have 0-1 negates at best, as increasing this # will make the opponent not play against you.
• You'd want to keep the disruptions to a controlled level so that the opponent can play against you. 
• Don't use too much card advantage.
• Try not to make oppressive cards for the sake of winning - that's no fun. (e.g. Mask of Restrict is not an oppressive card even if Flunder and Drytron were running about and also, not all decks want to Tribute Summon.)

And also, archetypes with multiple ways to play are more fun than ones which require that you play it a specific way because the former has flexibility.  

[WhiteThunder777]

Adding onto what was said on May 4th, you'd want a mechanic that is cohesive as possible to make a good custom archetype. Keep in mind, the simpler the mechanic is, the more likely you are going to be able to make it cohesive.  A non-cohesive archetype has each card doing its own thing, and has no identity.  In other words, all the cards in the archetype have to focus on whatever goal you have in mind for your archetype (i.e. its identity/purpose) otherwise it becomes inconsistent.  

The mechanics of the archetype is how that archetype operates.  Every card in the archetype has to use the mechanic in order for the archetype to function.  A mechanic doesn't need to be really complex.  Some of the obvious mechanics include the following:

• Battle Position manipulation (Morphtronics and Karakuri)
• burn damage
• co-linking
• columns (Mekk-Knight)
• counters used <in some way> (Alien, Cloudians, etc.)
• equipping (Union monsters and other things that equip)
• LP manipulation (Aromas)
• Trap monsters (e.g. Paleo Frogs).  

Spam is NOT a mechanic for an archetype because every archetype spams to some degree.  

Make BOTH you and the opponent interact as much as possible is the key to making a really good archetype.  You want to make the archetype so that your opponent can play against you, otherwise it's just a one sided game where the opponent has to draw an out just to beat you, which isn't any fun at all. If you go 1st, you want your opponent to try to play against you and vice versa. 

 

Control tries to "control" the game by limiting what you can do.  Combo decks use pieces that work together to form an end board that may give you a hard time when maxed out.  Midrange is in between combo and control and have a mixture of going 1st and 2nd moves, meaning it is the same thing as combo/control.  

 

 

[WhiteThunder777]

Keep in mind, regarding balance - here's a short summary regarding custom archetypes.

1. Most cards have 2-3 effects on them.  Having more cases problems.
2. Put a HOPT or H1OPT on your cards to prevent loops. H1OPT is used for cards that have 2 really good effects on them (e.g Dragon Rulers).
3. A searcher is balanced or not depending on what it searches, even if that searcher has a HOPT or H1OPT on them.
4. Have a very clear and concise goal (or mechanic) when designing a custom archetype besides spam.  
5. Some people design archetypes to play with existing archetypes as an engine.  You'd want to be careful here, as you don't want your engine to be the new "Brave Token".  An engine is meant to help some existing archetypes to some degree.
6. Regarding the post on May 4, 2022, you want your opponent to play against you.  
7. If you want a searchable hand trap for your archetype, make sure it is weaker than Ash Blossom.

 

 

 

[WhiteThunder777]

Keep in mind card advantage when designing your custom cards.  This holds true for removal as well as searchers and recyclers.  If a card makes you go plus, it should have some drawback.  Sometimes keeping whether a card targets or not can affect balance, as that will affect the opponent's board if you aren't careful.  This is also true for board breakers as well.  

Now if you are wondering what makes a card in a custom archetype banned, here's a list of possible reasons why other may say your archetype is broken.

• cards that prevent your opponent from playing the game (floodgates, though they have to be reasonable).    
• cards that do too much without some sort of cost.  
• cards that lack a HOPT or H1OPT on them, as they can cause some sort of loop if not careful.  
• Even if the card had a H(1)OPT on them, the effect that it can do can pose a problem as well.  
• If a card is balanced with H(1)OPT in mind, but the target(s) it sends are broken, the card itself is broken as well because of those target(s).  
• Cards that can cause an FTK.  Keep in mind that this doesn't mean "no burn decks". If we look at the Normal Spell Sparks, it requires that you use this card 40X to cause an FTK which is impossible to pull off.  

Another thing to keep in mind when designing an archetype is to keep the number of cards in check.  No one makes an archetype of 165 cards, as that does not make any sense whatsoever.  Most custom archetypes have a maximum of 20 cards, and have a mechanic that they use to define/design the archetype. If you want to make further support, you can submit expansions.  Think of it this way, if you needed 165 cards to make an archetype playable, that's terrible card design, and may put the archetype at risk of being tier 0 because the archetype can play through everything.

Also, do not make a custom archetype that is described as an engine that does everything.  An engine is supposed to make a weak archetype (or very specific archetypes) become playable.  An engine that enables everything is just like making Adventurer 2.0, which no one wants to see in design.  

Keeping it simple, no one wants to play against an unbeatable archetype.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WhiteThunder777]

There are three ways any custom archetype can be made, combo, control, and midrange.  

The three play styles are defined as follows regarding archetype design:

• Control - these are stuff that try to "control" what the opponent does in order to slow them down.  Usually control comes down to highly disruptive cards that interact on your opponent's turn so that the cards can out grind you.  Simply put, control slows down tempo and win by out-resourcing you. Some control decks have highly disruptive back row to slow you down (e.g. Altergeist, Labyrynth) in which case operate best going 1st.  
• Combo - these are stuff that rely on multiple cards working together in order to achieve something (usually an unbreakable, but beatable end board).  Combo decks are very susceptible to hand traps and will end on a much weakened board if a hand trap (or two) or some other disruption interferes with their strategy.  Combo archetypes tend to speed up tempo.  
• Midrange - these are the types of decks that do NOT mind going 1st or 2nd.  They have a high resilience against hand traps, which is dependent on their opening hand.  They will have stuff to either make their board, or break them if necessary.  They fall in the middle between combo and control in terms of tempo.  Should a hand trap try and disrupt them, these types of deck will always have a backup strategy in mind.  Their end board isn't as strong as either combo or control are.

 

 

 

[WhiteThunder777]

In simpler terms,

1. Control involves using disruptive effects (not necessarily negates) to slow down the opponent from assembling their end board (i.e. tries to control your opponent).  Wins by out grinding your opponent by having resource advantage.  Usually good going 1st, as control requires you to invest your 1st turn to assemble your board, but terrible going 2nd. 
2. Combo involves using other cards to form a very strong end board once the combo has been completed.  Very prone to hand traps like Ash, Effect Veiler, Imperm, Nibiru, as one hand trap can slow the combo down, or eventually end the turn if hit at the right time.  Can either perform well going 1st or 2nd depending on design. 
3. Midrange involves the flexibility of going 1st and 2nd.  Their end board is not as strong as combo or control in terms of ceiling, but make up for it by playing through multiple hand traps.  

 

[WhiteThunder777]

If you want to look at a going 2nd control deck, look at Mekk-Knight Invoked.  Going 1st, you'd want to turn Aliester the Invoker into Mechaba so you can put Mechaba to put pressure on the opponent lest they bring out a Kaiju (preferably Gameciel).  Going 2nd, you'd utilize the powerful column like effects of the Mekk-Knights.  

 

[WhiteThunder777]

Just a recap, going 1st involves putting disruptions to try to slow down/stop the opponent.  This includes negates, but popping/banishing on opponent's turn is now used more often as opposed to negates.  Interacting on your opponent's turn to bring out stronger bodies (usually from the Extra Deck) is also common as well.  

Going 2nd involves stuff that breaks a going 1st end board.  This includes back row removal, Kaijus (not to mention Lava Golem and Ra - Sphere Mode), Lightning Storm, Dark Ruler no More.  

Other going 2nd stuff would include giving monsters a huge stat boost, but are not limited to:

• Multiple attackers 
• Piercing Battle Damage 
• United we Stand 
• Mage Power 
• Direct attack 

 

[WhiteThunder777]

The design space of ANY custom archetype is affected by the locks put on the archetype and the mechanics put on said archetype.  A archetype that isn't locked may run the risk of having a wide design space, hence the difficulty of balancing the deck is very high, because adding 1 card to the archetype may run the risk of breaking the yugioh game as a whole. This is often the case when an archetype is generic, or when the archetype is an engine meant to supplement existing TCG archetypes. 

An archetype with a narrow design space has a lot of potential to add cards to it without breaking the game as long as the cards added adhere to the mechanics of said archetype in question. When the design space is very narrow, one can safely add cards to the archetype without the fear of breaking the game, thus making it easier for balancers to check.