Really interesting points about Lightsworn

[Guest Star]

For awhile I’ve been trying not to post too much with regards to deck-fixing etc. because once I get going' date=' I usually end up writing a wall of text :P. But now, whilst I’m not doing anything, I thought I’d post this before going to bed, to see what kind of responses I get. Also, I thought having a topic other than "Person A posts a Decklist, Person B flames it/gives advice etc." would add something different to the forum.

 

This is basically a topic for discussion about the Lightsworn Theme. For the past few months my builds have been pretty far off what you’d been see in the SJC Top16, simply because I think the general makeup of those decks is garbage. Certain (horrible) trends seem to carry over into almost ALL LS decks that are posted, while other more solid choices are being neglected. So I have a few questions I hope people can answer intelligently. All of them relate to LS consistency issues. [i'] The questions are relevant to matches against “Top Tier” decks.[/i]

 

Why are people playing 3 Celestia?

- The majority of the time she ends up dead in your hand because you can’t keep field presence up against decks which pack a lot of spell/trap removal e.g. Gladiator Beasts. At one point (before CoTLB) my Celestia count was down to one, simply because drawing two without Recharge was brutal in the opening.

 

Why are people playing 3 Wulf?

- I can understand people wanting to test out how much sackier Wulf has become since Charge’s release. But even before that, people were maxing out on him. Once I reduced the number of Wulf to two, and generally lowered the emphasis on “lucky Wulf summons” in my deck, I found the deck/opening hands to be more consistent. Do people not experience the horror of opening with multiple Wulf? Solar Recharge and (more recently) Charge (if you mill a LS) are the only cards that can atleast help you to survive. Even then, you’re being forced to make the play/over-commit because of the clogged Wulf(s), which isn’t ideal.

 

Why are people NOT playing defensive traps?

- In almost every LS deck I’ve played, I mained at least 2x Bottomless Traphole and/or D-Prison. Simply because they open options in terms of how you play the deck. If you play no defence, then every game you are literally forced to Summon, and if your monster gets destroyed, you’re near guaranteed to be eating damage next turn. Necro Gardna IS NOT, a substitute for defensive traps – if you test D-Traps in LS you should realise the dramatic difference. Playing 3 Honest IS NOT enough to warrant maining no other destruction/removal effects with simple requirements, because in a deck like LS, Honests can easily be milled off. People have started adapting PWWB into LS, but I fail to see how that simple -1 isn't hurting them more often than not. I don't feel LS is a deck which can afford to discard in this way, unless it's getting back a game-winning monster e.g. Judgment Dragon.

 

Why are people NOT playing Aurkus?

- Seriously you need to think clearly to understand. This point goes in hand with the above (regarding defensive traps) as he will not be as effective without their aid. Thought Ruler Archfiend is becoming increasingly popular, because (bar Mirror Force, CCV and Torrential Tribute) the majority of commonly played competitive Spell/Traps Target (Mind Control, Brain, PWWB, D-Prison, Shrink, E-Con, Book of Moon etc.). Moreover DAD, Gyzarus, Caius, Celestia and Goyo Guardian (I think :unsure:...) are just a few of the commonly played monsters that have targeting effects. Aurkus gets around them ALL, AND helps all other LS get around them too. He’s also just another LS with a different name.

 

- Aurkus can even foil opposing LS players plans, by preventing them using Lumina/Celestia.

 

- If you play GB (while maining Aurkus alongside D-Traps like Bottomless and/or D-Prison) you’ll find yourself in a strong position more often than not, knowing that your opponent won’t be able to Gyzarus you at will. In addition, his 1800 DEF means most decks simply can’t get past him – for GB it also isn’t as simple as tagging out for Murmillo (like they’d do against any other big defender).

 

- If you play a DAD deck (while maining Aurkus) you’ll feel confidant summoning Aurkus with Honest in hand, as you’re near guaranteed to have it survive for your next turn. Bar smashing ground/vortex, it’s hard to think of a way your opponent will get rid of it. They won’t even be able to target your potential Wulf(s) with D.D. Crow.

 

- In order to play Aurkus you need to sacrifice early aggression, but this is in exchange for better stability and means you’ll fear DAD, Gyzarus and all those other targeting effects a lot less than other LS builds. Before Charge, it was hard to play multiple Aurkus alongside multiple Lumina, because of the clash between the two. However, Charge’s toolbox effect now means you can search for the right LS at the right time, which lessens the impact of this clash in my experience.

 

 

I'll leave it at that for now, because like I said earlier, I could go on for much longer. Other issues I have with LS builds are the use of Beckoning Light over Monster Reincarnation (when in a format like this and terms of consistency, the latter is by far superior imo), and players unwillingness to play/build Lightsworn WITHOUT Necro Gardna(s). Gardnas add to the potential for dead hands in the deck.

 

Hopefully I can get some responses that either answer my questions well or further discuss the good/bad aspects of current LS Builds. Maybe I've got everything wrong and/or am looking at things in the wrong way? I want to know what people are thinking.

 

I got that from Ukaypro.

 

I didn't read the entire thing, but most of what I read was interesting.

 

Are we overlooking Aurkus?

 

EDIT: Removed some stuff from the top

part so that the quote would work and look neater.

[Guest PikaPerson01]

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent, which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

[Guest Star]

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

I have a question.

 

Have you ever tried using Aurkus?

[werewolfjedi]

we need to look at the ocg lightsworn as well as the tcg, and find a good balance between them. thats what this sounds like to me at least.

[The Dark One]

Aurkas is meh. I think people should be testing him a lot more seriously than they presently do, but I guess it just depends on your local environment. As for why it's not being used in the top LS decks, I don't know. The fact that he requires such support automatically makes him a burden on the deck. Aurkas in opening hand without an Honest isn't a whole lot better than Wulf. Still, I agree that people dismiss him rather too quickly.

 

Defensive Traps: I couldn't agree more. I love Bottomless in my Lightsworn deck. Or I did, I took then out for PWWBs and love them even more. Still, I might try to fit in the Bottomless as well, though they have taken a huge hit in playability due to Stardust.

[tonisanoob]

only trap tht should be in ls is ccv

[Guest Star]

only trap tht should be in ls is ccv

 

Not really. Especially when LS only uses 3 DARK monsters.

[Skuldur]

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

 

defensive traps can also save Kuriboh easily so what's your point

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

 

defensive traps can also save Kuriboh easily so what's your point

Kuriboh doesn't negate DAD.....

[Luna Diviner]

I think the only thing underplayed is Gragonith, it is pretty powerful when it comes it out and I find it very effective, though not as much as JDs and Guardian of Orders.

[Skuldur]

I think the only thing underplayed is Gragonith' date=' it is pretty powerful when it comes it out and I find it very effective, though not as much as JDs and Guardian of Orders.

[/quote']

 

Gragonith is just a large beatstick and a bad one. There is a reason he isn't used much.

 

Celestia is a much better choice

 

 

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

 

defensive traps can also save Kuriboh easily so what's your point

Kuriboh doesn't negate DAD.....

 

you said that Aurkus didn't suck because defensive traps can save him. The same logic can be used on every bad card in the game saying they don't suck because Negate Attack can save them. Therefore your logic concerning this matter fails and Aurkus should not be run since he sucks.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

I think the only thing underplayed is Gragonith' date=' it is pretty powerful when it comes it out and I find it very effective, though not as much as JDs and Guardian of Orders.

[/quote']

 

Gragonith is just a large beatstick and a bad one. There is a reason he isn't used much.

 

Celestia is a much better choice

 

 

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

 

defensive traps can also save Kuriboh easily so what's your point

Kuriboh doesn't negate DAD.....

 

you said that Aurkus didn't suck because defensive traps can save him. The same logic can be used on every bad card in the game saying they don't suck because Negate Attack can save them. Therefore your logic concerning this matter fails and Aurkus should not be run since he sucks.

 

The only thing that sucks about him is the ATK, and that can be easily stopped. You act like defending monsters to take advantage of their effects is bad....

[The Dark One]

I think the only thing underplayed is Gragonith' date=' it is pretty powerful when it comes it out and I find it very effective, though not as much as JDs and Guardian of Orders.

[/quote']

 

Gragonith is just a large beatstick and a bad one. There is a reason he isn't used much.

 

Celestia is a much better choice

 

 

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

 

defensive traps can also save Kuriboh easily so what's your point

Kuriboh doesn't negate DAD.....

 

you said that Aurkus didn't suck because defensive traps can save him. The same logic can be used on every bad card in the game saying they don't suck because Negate Attack can save them. Therefore your logic concerning this matter fails and Aurkus should not be run since he sucks.

 

The only logic that's bad here is yours. Aurkas is at a disadvantage because of his relatively low ATK. Aurkas has a useful effect. Therefore, the only question is wehther nor not it is worthwhile to devote deck space tp him, even though he requires some support.

 

Don't make bad assumptions. Are you saying that Lumina is terrible? Her ATK is even lower than Aurkas's.

[CrabHelmet]

Aurkus doesn't stop DAD from nuking the backfield, and with whatever backfield you might have had gone, the 1200/1800 Aurkus isn't going to be doing much to stop the 2800 ATK DAD.

 

Lumina's +0 effect provides swarm, which is exactly what Lightlord decks need; furthermore, since she doesn't need to survive, her low ATK is not so large a hindrance. It also helps turn dead cards in the hand, such as a drawn Wulf, into useful cards on the field. Aurkus's effect is purely passive; it merely serves to limit the opponent's options for the duration of his time on the field, and thus his ability to not die is far more critical than that of Lumina. (Incidentally, he also limits your own options by preventing your own Lumina from using her effect.) The DM2K rant lists quite a few monsters whose effects target the opponent's cards, but every last one of them has enough ATK to run right over Aurkus. The only real exception to this is Murmillo, but since he often comes out after the Battle Phase anyhow (i.e. after Aurkus has died), that's not a huge problem.

 

Also, if you're going to dedicate your defensive traps to defending Aurkus, why not use them to defending the monsters that Aurkus himself is supposed to be protecting instead? If your opponent can eliminate Aurkus, he is useless, and if your traps are preventing your opponent from eliminating Aurkus, then Aurkus is unnecessary, since your opponent can't get around your traps either way.

 

If you must use him, you could add in one copy and use Charge/Lumina to toolbox him out when you want him. Running more than that is not useful.

[Skuldur]

I think the only thing underplayed is Gragonith' date=' it is pretty powerful when it comes it out and I find it very effective, though not as much as JDs and Guardian of Orders.

[/quote']

 

Gragonith is just a large beatstick and a bad one. There is a reason he isn't used much.

 

Celestia is a much better choice

 

 

Aurkus sucks. It has to be faceup to do anything decent' date=' which is pretty much guaranteed to never happened. Either it'll die before battle, or you'll set it and then get wiped out by an opening hand Stardust and DAD combo.

[/quote']

 

He also talks about defensive traps not being used. They could save Aurkus easily.

 

defensive traps can also save Kuriboh easily so what's your point

Kuriboh doesn't negate DAD.....

 

you said that Aurkus didn't suck because defensive traps can save him. The same logic can be used on every bad card in the game saying they don't suck because Negate Attack can save them. Therefore your logic concerning this matter fails and Aurkus should not be run since he sucks.

 

The only logic that's bad here is yours. Aurkas is at a disadvantage because of his relatively low ATK. Aurkas has a useful effect. Therefore, the only question is wehther nor not it is worthwhile to devote deck space tp him, even though he requires some support.

 

Don't make bad assumptions. Are you saying that Lumina is terrible? Her ATK is even lower than Aurkas's.

 

i said nothing about ATK, why waste deck space on defensive traps so you can main Aurkus, which does nothing for lightsworns since they're all about speed. It only slows them down. And since you mention ATK and Lumina. Lumina doesn't need high atk her effect provides good swarming and turns those wulfs in your hand into something useful. However the only thing Aurkus does is negate effects which does very little for Lightsworns and you have to either set him and have your opponent attack him or play him in attack position, whereas your opponent doesn't need his effects cause he can just run over him.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

How does DAD wipe out the field when Aurkus is on it? And I don't think that Attack Negation cards like Threatening Roar to save Aurkus would protect you from effects as well, but w/e.

[JesusofChaos™]

obviously this guy cant keep up wulf and celestia have been chosen at 2 for the last meta

[Blue Lightning]

You can use aurkus to stop your opponents lightsworns. yay.

[Phantom Roxas]

Ctrl+F: "Dimensional Stronghold Weapon pwn Lightsworn" not found.

 

Something is clearly amiss. Clearly.

[Aximil]

I use 1 Aurkus, 2 Wulfs, and 2 Celestias. And, yes, I do play a couple defensive Traps. Not many though. My build is close to what the quote up there is talking about.

[Guest PikaPerson01]

Ctrl+F: "Dimensional Stronghold Weapon pwn Lightsworn" not found.

 

Something is clearly amiss. Clearly.

 

Dimensional Stronghold Weapon is bad. Not even worth siding against LS. Light Imprisoning Mirror is better.