That's not the case, the servant doesn't take anything away from the swarm, this deck still special summons like crazy, often 3 or 4 at a time, leaving no room to abuse cydra. You'd have to tribute to get it on the field. That was the point.

On top of that, if you are any good at protecting or maintaining necrovalley, the discard cost of the servant will add up and create a major advantage.

Of course I could switch up the style and find something to take out the servant for something that will yield even more advantage, a pair of lightning vortexes really help GK's well, and they laugh at discard costs, but if I'm going to make up a dedicated GK for an example in 5 minutes, I'm making it dedicated :)

I saw your deck a few days back. I noticed you were having some trouble getting respect for your pivotal card. I'll print it out and see what I come up with.

1) Like Belgian said, GK decks don't require attack power to win, more often than not, its the GK lock that wins it for them.

2) Why on earth would you need Cyber Dragon in a GK deck as tribute fodder when you have Gravekeeper's Spy that is far more versatile than it.

3) Not that many people are running GK Chiefs anymore. Monarchs have taken over the Chiefs in all the GK decks I've played against.

4) Cyber Dragon's ss effect goes in direct collision with Gravekeeper's Spy's effect. And Spy is the main core of a Gravekeeper deck -_-.

5) If you say that Cyber Dragon is there to add field presence, then what is the use of Rite of Sprite?

1. Against Chaos, maybe, but the CC this format is less reliant on the Graveyard.

2. Because GK Spy is slow. You have to set it, then hope it's still there next turn. Cyber Dragon is much faster fodder.

3. What does that have to do with Cyber Dragon?

4. Just because its the main core of the deck doesn't mean it will always be on the field. It doesn't even mean it will be on the field more often than not, because it won't.

5. Same. Your point?


Those arguing that a Gravekeeper deck doesn't need Cyber Dragon are still under the impression that the Gravekeeper deck will always have a monster on the field. It WON'T. No deck will. That's the whole point of this. All it would take is for the opponent to have a little f/d monster removal, and you will NEVER build any momentum. This goes for any deck, not just Gravekeepers. It is true that in a perfect situation you probably shouldn't need Cyber Dragon. I'm not arguing that, and I never was. I'm arguing that building your deck for when you reach that perfect situation is impractical. You have to plan for the worst case senario, or else you may as well scoop the second you get even a little bit behind. Cyber Dragon helps you rebuild and counter attack.

1.Reliance on the graveyard varies throughout a format without much warning. Especially this format is the most versatile we've seen in a while, so there is little we know what will follow the initial slew of aggro decks.

2.Not when there is a monster on the field. See below for more.

3. I think he was just making a general statement. I find chief to be good to GK decks because you get back what you trib, not so much the rest of its effect as you can't be reliant on your graveyard at any point. Monarchs just generally take the lead in the new format because they form the epitome of aggro. Me, being the upstart that I am, have been using Dark ruler and end of anubis more. Its fun to edge out your opponents strongest monster by 50 or 100 points and walking all over their recruiters. Meh, I'll never be a top duellist because by the time I get an idea worked out, the meta changes, but I'll take wins over CC decks over Top 8's any day :)

4.Of course it won't. But some monster will be on the field 90% of the time, negating cydra's effect. Spy is the core, but there is plenty of special summoning in a GK deck.

5.yes, I didn't get that argument either. The more field presence the better. Cydra just doesn't add to it unless you guarantee his effect goes off.

6. (i'll call the rest of your quote point 6) I argued this point before. Of course it won't always have a monster on the field, and you are right, no deck will. A simple lightning vortex will take care of that. The problem with the assumption you make out of this fact, is that you are ASSUMING that cydra will be in your hand in the rare event that occurs. Which seems unlikely. Even with 3 cydra's, which in themselves will already be decreasing the GK field presence engine. THAT was the point.

I think that using a gravekeeper's deck was an inefficient example. People can successfully add Cyber Dragon to any deck that seeks to win via beatdown and have an arguement for Cyber Dragon.

The arguement is essentially: Cyber Dragon can smashing my opponent. My deck wins by smashing the other guy. Therefore, Cyber Dragon will fit in the deck.

If we attack the premise of what the decks' goal is then the arguement falls apart and Cyber Dragon no longer fits in the deck.


There are several deck types that would actually be hindered by using any number of Cyber Dragons. Some of them include Royal Magical Library OTK, Manticore Exodia, Magical Explosion, Mill, and Life Equalizer. In previous formats Last Turn, Time Seal and (to an extent) Exchange of Spirit.

For any of the above the simplified arguement goes as follows:

My decks' goal is to search out my win condition and use (*insert alternate win condition here*) to win. Cyber Dragon has high attack power and is fast to play, but it is neither part of my win condition, nor is it a tutoring* card. Therefore Cyber Dragon has no place in this deck.


*Tutoring card = a card that allows you to search your deck for something.

BTW, thanks for the fix Belgian.

(this seems to be the main point where we disagree).

And YOU'RE assuming that this event is rare. It's not. It's common no matter what deck you're using.

-_-

Obviously Cyber Dragon doesn't go in the decks you listed. No one ever said they did.

I like how people name decks that dont use cyber dragons and the fact is none of them T8 at any Major event and gk decks r bad. And Ork decks r no skill in the first place and they arent even orginal they r so bad and cheaper then cc and other things people said..... only at locals where the biggest competetion at some1's local is probably facing a Dark Magician deck.


Which is sad.

Overall in amazing competition where you have all pro's or people who use cc and take advantage of its power usually run Cyber dragons. And thats what wins.......

Pro's should know putting the best cards together wins....

When you take chances and build something orginal its not putting the best cards together its putting ideas and theories that may not work which makes it unstable and most of the time you cant always draw them and this is why they r not great at all.


If someone tells me they can beat Cc players then your facing bad cc players.... When you go toa regionals or a sjc you face talented experienced cc players who would wreck you because he is smart and is using oen of the best reliable stable decks to run.

idc idc idc if you disagree... because when you prove to me that u have more credentials then me who uses cc while u use orginal decks with No cybers or w.e then u can tell me im wrong.

But stats prove Cc is Better and Cyber is a Staple, because majority uses it...


Who ever disagrees keep it to ur self because idc what u say.

You have anything to tell me find me

Im ranked 1st in Pa so its easy to find my info by clciking the link to my address and my area so u can play me if you live close. Other then that idc what u say unless your a SJ Champion who is some1 that matters other then people who go on this site who think they can beat cc but get owned lose and cry and say ban cc on many threads before( idc if u never did that). If you think u can beat cc players thats amazing...... GO TO 1 event and prove it...


Prove it ... Prove it.... Other then that CC wins Orginality Loses. GG People.

Therefore, Cyber= A Staple as the point of this Thread. GFG.

I thought that the main arguement was that Cyber Dragon was being crammed into too many decks and that it didn't belong everywhere.

I tried to point out that Cyber Dragon can belong in just about every aggro deck and doesn't belong in decks that have no intention of going aggro, thus allowing this debate to come to a conclusion.


If not, then could you point out the main premises of this debate? Thank you for your time.


I've never really seen an Ork deck. I assume you mean OTK. You must have really got beaten down by someone's Magical Scientist deck for you to feel this bad about it.

Have you ever used an OTK deck? Please don't say that they take no skill to pilot as you've got to take everything into account in order to play them right and get off whatever combo you're trying to use.


Reversal Quiz took top 4 at Worlds in the GBA tourny. Stein OTK reliably takes top 8s both in American SJCs and across the globe. Cookie Jar, a mill deck, won the Mexican Nationals a while back. Chimeratech OTK took several top 8 spots in Japan's Nationals before the new ban list (five I think). I even heard something about a Harpy deck at worlds.

Thus, CC does not always win.

That said, originality does not win. If you want to throw together 40 totally random cards simply because you think nobody plays them you are naive. If you'd like to win you look at what most everyone else is running and you play a well thought out rogue deck.

Well thought out and seriously tested tech wins, not losers who use ctrl + c to plan their SJC appearance.

First of you are new here. Secondly, if you don't care then why post. Third no one has to prove anything to anyone. Fourth no one knows you are trully who you claim to be and what you claim to have done, so stop bragging about being the best, there is always someone better. And lastly not everyone chooses to use Cyber Dragon in their decks. It may be a good card and everything but there is always the small amount of players that like to play without the "Staples" in their decks.

And I have one last thing to say to everyone.

Have a nice day :)

It's that Cyber Dragon goes in all Aggro/Control decks, just like the first line on my article stated. No one is arguing that it belongs elsewhere.


Tony,

That was uncalled for. Actually, the statistics backing it up isn't what makes it staple. It's staple for the reasons I listed. Check your PMs.

First off, I was well aware of what the ariticle talked about and what your intital point was. My argument was mainly that your earlier remarks held little legimate ground as a counter argument from an objective point of view rather then from a personal perference point of view.

Another point I decided not to really dive into was that you shouldn't just disregard Cyber Dragon just because 1) "Its CC to play CD." 2) It doesn't fit the theme of the deck, before you weight its benefits and negative effects it will have on a deck. Generally Cyber Dragon is card that should at least be considered for any deck when the goal of your deck is to reduce LP by attack. Which is what the article was all about. I don't think ZaQ777 was telling use "CYBER IN ALL DECKS OR DIE!" like your arguing it to be.

Honestly I can't see how you can disregard my earlier response as a moot point since attack is the only way for GK decks to win. Yes they have control elements; unique control effects; and asides from recruiter decks, they maintain better field presence then the general deck, but its still an aggro deck. I think one of your problems is you give your opponent little credit for their abilities and your too focused on ideal situations rather then focusing on realistic situation and preparation for when your deck doesn't flow they way it should or can at the time. Your not alway going to have your key card and your opponent may have been able to snuff out your strategy and now controls the tempo of the game. For attack based decks Cyber Dragon is a decent source when you need to start rebuilding or regaining ground. He could retake field presense, he can become a decent blocker since few monsters played today exceed the 1600 mark, and for swarm or aggro decks he can push that littlle bit of need damage to end the match.

I've never denied the advantages of field cards but it doesn't change the fact thats also their weakest point for decks that depend on them. This is one of the main flaws in deciated decks since they often follow a "hit or miss" mentality or rely on "key cards" to meet their win conditions. OTK decks get around this flaw by capatilizing on opportunities and finishing off their opponents quickly. Mill and Equalizer decks follow the same policy and look to generate huge advantages or effects in one turn to compensate for their shortcomings. But even then even these decks will still take key loses and falter. Other decks that need to stall, burn, or theme dedicated attack have to hope their strategies hold until they win. GK is no exception. GK decks are aggro/swarm decks in essence and look for quick swift victories because they seek to avoid taking key loses/hits or running into road blocks that can cost them the match if they don't attack quickly enough or maintain tempo. More can be said but that should be reserved for a different counter argument and article.

Love The Topic, Love The Debate Guys...
I Run a Gravekeeper's Deck Myself, and a Couple Cyber Dragon Decks
My Gravekeeper's Are Great, I Had Actually Been thinking About adding a Couple of my Great Beasts, (Cyber Dragons), I don't use Mobius, and Actually i don't need to rely on Necrovalley, with my mage power, and united we stand.
My Cyber Dragon Decks Are Pretty Sweet too. Got All Fusions in 1 and the other is a laser/barrier combo... sorry i've been rambling on with no words of wisdom...
All Of My Decks Could Make Better with a couple of Cyber Dragons though, From My Beast/ Beast Warrior Deck to My Water Deck,(Mobius Is In There:classic: ), Mainly Sacrifice, but the nasty bonus effects that Zaq. had began the article with for any deck. Cyber Dragon Offers A Great Edge Over The Opponent w/o 1 due to over-rate,(intimadation), or if they're smart bonus protection

Like idc what you guys say... t8 a locals.... then talk to me how im wrong....


or even if u did t8 a local, t8 a regionals. I got my Invite, you? j/p

Anyways i just got different oppinions on things... probably was not needed for me to say that but yeah o well. Im just sayin cybers a staple cuz most of teh field uses it. And is a widely used card.... Because no1 uses 1 certain card always. It always been on whats been seen Most...

Like Charity
Mst
Heavy


etc

thats what it is.

That is considered a staple. Why, I dunno because cyber dragon is used alsmot as much as these cards, and cyber dragon isnt concidered a staple?

y not?

1) This meta is too early to decide what works and what doesn't -_-.

2) So what? GK Spy fits the theme and has plenty of support cards in the deck.

3) Yes, its just a general statement that not many people use Spies anymore.

4) So what? When you have triple Spies and triple Rite of Sprites, the chances are that you will have a Gravekeeper on the field.

5) The point I am saying is that he states that Cyber Dragon is to build field presence and to keep up the tempo. I'm saying that Rite of Sprite basically does the same thing too so why have Dragon?

6) I'll call that Quote 6 as well. So what? There are a truckload of cards that can replenish field presence besides Cyber Dragon in a Gravekeeper deck. They do have three Rite of Sprites and three Gravekeeper Servants, I'm just wondering WHY it has to be Cyber Dragon. Even Gravekeeper's Chief can build huge field advantage too.

Okay, here's a deck-type that I believe doesn't need Cyber Dragon "in most situations". Warrior-DDV decks.