This was an amazing tournament and I hope they continue to make more events just like this but this events brought people together; was so happy to see all the content creators. That said, TCG Rewind couldn’t have said it better in this video 👏
If we operate on a results based analysis then sure. But my losses were all high variance. 3 dustshoot on my first loss a g3 perfect opening with mind con on the second. One game I hit 3 cards out of my opponents hand and they had 2 perfect outs left for my board. Im not one to get in my own head and assume my build sucks when losing like that. Fraizer smith lost to infernity with heros that should be near impossible. Luck plays a role. My last round vs plants didnt matter bc my team already won but I played it out my opponent opened 2 econ with tengu + puppet plant and blew me out. In testing the list performed well. But also my deck was built with plants agents t.g. heros and gk in mind. It functions well vs those decks but its not a free win, no deck in the format is. That being said a loss vs chaos control on d.d. warrior lady means nothing to me because thats an unpredictable circumstance. But ive also given up on demonstrating x-sabers strength to other people. Im gonna keep pushing the deck to its limits because I like it and ill leave it at that.
@@tcgrewind You say the decks built with plants in mind but you side 15 cards for it? I feel like losing g1 and siding 15 cards is not a great strategy (partially why you went 0-2 against it yea?) Idk we can blame variance all day long but when your fundamental plan against a deck is we NEED our entire sidedeck to win its just not legitimately good vs it to me. And being bad vs random decks can't be dismissed in the evaluation of your deck i'd argue. I agree variance is a factor but you're dismissive of what appear to be real issues to me. We don't have to argue though just stating my perspective. You can have fun with the sabers man all good. Support tengu format and its continued growth.
@@lukefeeney2852 I went to g3 vs plants both times. I also one of my matches were won in g1 vs plants pre side. I only lost 0-2 to the weird chaos control build. My side is good vs many decks in the format but all of it is relevant vs plants. I didnt HAVE to side it all in and moving forward I would make adjustments. Random decks cant be accounted for. If I play sabers vs the one guy on macro cosmos and lose to macro cosmos im not going to change my side deck to beat macro cosmos. Lets assume for example my team won the first round I lost. Theoretically the more you win early the less probable it will be that I go vs odd things. I knew going into this event that my deck will typically win a standard game of yugioh. However there are exceptions to the rule cards like econ, and mind con are very bad for me and the reason I side in lance in g2 vs plants to have more counter play to econ. So the circumstances of that tournament was my opponents successfully saw the cards that swing the matchup and I didnt see my counter play. Does that remove the merit of the theory or my testing prior? Not really. One of the agent players that beat me drew absurdly well and played the matchup poorly he went on to top 8 the event with an x-3 score. Luck will play a massive role in this type of event. Were there some issues? Yes I mentioned creature swap didnt perform well an may be cut in the future. But I dont chalk that tournament up to my build feeling bad. In most cases it worked as intended my opponents just saw their answers. Which again can apply to virtually any deck.
@ind I do find it odd that you use Dustshoot as a reason you lost but you don't main it. Wouldn't that be something to consider changing? Not playing Dustshoot in a regular deck feels like a crime to me, and I don't see what makes X-Sabers so different that you shouldn't main deck it.
you're the one who said you dont want to argue so we dont have to go back and forth any longer. i will say that whether you lose 2-0 or 2-1 has no bearing at all on the match a loss is a loss my g. and you are 0% vs the most represented deck in the format so thats something to think about.@@tcgrewind
In magic 3v3s the difference in game speed is sometimes an interesting thing people use - if someone is playing control sometimes they would be in the middle seat so that both other players can help out with their game after the other matches finish. Or some teams would know that and put a deck which matches up well against control in the middle rather than just having the best player in the middle.
good meeting you for that quick sec i saw you with naturia beast and decree against a guy and he didnt want to scoop lol. overall good event sad i dint have 2 ppl to join with the 3v3.
I wouldn't say it was war... I just spoke out about the fact that people refused to try tengu because Edison existed. The goal was always to encourage people to try tengu not to harm Edison. That being said, I still think Edison is not very good.
I think there were 2 reasons mentioned. 1. CURRENTLY tengu is just the better format. 2. Goat doesn't share a similar gamespeed to tengu or edison. I hope i could answer your question.
Imagine being an Edison player in this event and seeing both of your teammates dropping a BLS at the same time. That would be hype as hell NGL
He proved that XSabers are indeed, not good. 😂
Dont do me like that 😭
It was cool meeting you!!! The event was great too, and it was nice seeing Tengu get so many pods.
This was an amazing tournament and I hope they continue to make more events just like this but this events brought people together; was so happy to see all the content creators. That said, TCG Rewind couldn’t have said it better in this video 👏
going 2-4 and saying we don't want to change anything in the deck seems kinda wild to me tbh
If we operate on a results based analysis then sure. But my losses were all high variance. 3 dustshoot on my first loss a g3 perfect opening with mind con on the second. One game I hit 3 cards out of my opponents hand and they had 2 perfect outs left for my board. Im not one to get in my own head and assume my build sucks when losing like that. Fraizer smith lost to infernity with heros that should be near impossible. Luck plays a role. My last round vs plants didnt matter bc my team already won but I played it out my opponent opened 2 econ with tengu + puppet plant and blew me out.
In testing the list performed well. But also my deck was built with plants agents t.g. heros and gk in mind. It functions well vs those decks but its not a free win, no deck in the format is. That being said a loss vs chaos control on d.d. warrior lady means nothing to me because thats an unpredictable circumstance.
But ive also given up on demonstrating x-sabers strength to other people. Im gonna keep pushing the deck to its limits because I like it and ill leave it at that.
@@tcgrewind You say the decks built with plants in mind but you side 15 cards for it? I feel like losing g1 and siding 15 cards is not a great strategy (partially why you went 0-2 against it yea?)
Idk we can blame variance all day long but when your fundamental plan against a deck is we NEED our entire sidedeck to win its just not legitimately good vs it to me.
And being bad vs random decks can't be dismissed in the evaluation of your deck i'd argue.
I agree variance is a factor but you're dismissive of what appear to be real issues to me. We don't have to argue though just stating my perspective. You can have fun with the sabers man all good.
Support tengu format and its continued growth.
@@lukefeeney2852 I went to g3 vs plants both times. I also one of my matches were won in g1 vs plants pre side. I only lost 0-2 to the weird chaos control build. My side is good vs many decks in the format but all of it is relevant vs plants. I didnt HAVE to side it all in and moving forward I would make adjustments. Random decks cant be accounted for. If I play sabers vs the one guy on macro cosmos and lose to macro cosmos im not going to change my side deck to beat macro cosmos. Lets assume for example my team won the first round I lost. Theoretically the more you win early the less probable it will be that I go vs odd things.
I knew going into this event that my deck will typically win a standard game of yugioh. However there are exceptions to the rule cards like econ, and mind con are very bad for me and the reason I side in lance in g2 vs plants to have more counter play to econ. So the circumstances of that tournament was my opponents successfully saw the cards that swing the matchup and I didnt see my counter play. Does that remove the merit of the theory or my testing prior? Not really. One of the agent players that beat me drew absurdly well and played the matchup poorly he went on to top 8 the event with an x-3 score.
Luck will play a massive role in this type of event. Were there some issues? Yes I mentioned creature swap didnt perform well an may be cut in the future. But I dont chalk that tournament up to my build feeling bad. In most cases it worked as intended my opponents just saw their answers. Which again can apply to virtually any deck.
@ind I do find it odd that you use Dustshoot as a reason you lost but you don't main it. Wouldn't that be something to consider changing? Not playing Dustshoot in a regular deck feels like a crime to me, and I don't see what makes X-Sabers so different that you shouldn't main deck it.
you're the one who said you dont want to argue so we dont have to go back and forth any longer. i will say that whether you lose 2-0 or 2-1 has no bearing at all on the match a loss is a loss my g. and you are 0% vs the most represented deck in the format so thats something to think about.@@tcgrewind
Nice seeing you in person again Brian. Huge fan of the channel. *hugs*
You too Karpath keep up the good work in toss format.
This event needs to happen again, with different mixes. Gimme like, Edison Tengu Meadowlands, or throw in something like TOSS
In magic 3v3s the difference in game speed is sometimes an interesting thing people use - if someone is playing control sometimes they would be in the middle seat so that both other players can help out with their game after the other matches finish. Or some teams would know that and put a deck which matches up well against control in the middle rather than just having the best player in the middle.
Oh i saw you at the event. Haha good seeing you man
What’s better the third decree or the pot of avarice in testing?
I like the avarice. It let's me keep a wider extra deck. And 2 decree has felt like enough.
good meeting you for that quick sec i saw you with naturia beast and decree against a guy and he didnt want to scoop lol. overall good event sad i dint have 2 ppl to join with the 3v3.
Im surprised you weren’t on gozen before. It’s a huge draw to play the deck because of how hard it skunks plants.
no offense man, but you were the guy who always went to war against edison. Peace is fine but war is much more entertaining.
I wouldn't say it was war... I just spoke out about the fact that people refused to try tengu because Edison existed. The goal was always to encourage people to try tengu not to harm Edison. That being said, I still think Edison is not very good.
If tengu is better than edison, tell me how to win with blackwings in tengu format!?
@Hymne273 a can do attitude and deck devastation virus
Why cut GOAT? Just cut Tengu, easy.
Your on the wrong channel saying cut tengu 😂
Haha @@W_Sir_Morpheus
I think there were 2 reasons mentioned.
1. CURRENTLY tengu is just the better format.
2. Goat doesn't share a similar gamespeed to tengu or edison.
I hope i could answer your question.