1. It'd be really hard for me to go back on my word when I said it in front of everyone on Realms. I've never lied before, I don't see why I'd start now, especially over some cards. You should have given me the benefit of your doubts and we could have had a friendly wager for your success, but no, you had to go and be a fish about it.

2. Alllrightythen.

Why are you complaining if i said i'd give you your lid back at no cost? Geez, you're weird..

Refresh your shave.

Since we are having a quotefest:
That's not what he said... he said it's not **ALL** about the deck. Quite a few people like to blame the build or the draw on why decks lose... when in fact... much of the blame lies in how it is played.

We know deck construction matters... but just because you decide to splash in this card or that card will not make the deck all of a sudden a match for every other deck out there. It's a matter of balance (like I said previously) and being able to handle the situations with what you have. That's where playskill comes into it.
Did he say that? For a second time you are reading too much into his statements. What he is saying is that sometimes, a better player with a weaker deck can beat a weak player with a strong deck. And if decks are almost equal, the better player will win. That is not a bold statement... it is fact.
Examples from high-level events should not be ignored. The top MtG players do well because they have the skill. If a high skill level MtG player can learn a VS deck in a week and beat players who have been using the same deck for months... what does that tell you?
Again... he made a general statement. Odds are that CE beats Rigged... sorry that I do not have exact numbers for you.
Isn't this "bold" of you? This was a civil discussion of how to play Curve Sentinels right... read the subject again. PLAY RIGHT being the key phrase. All Majestic was doing emphasizing that point.
Criticizing how other people post is also as unproductive and pointless. Did you not read his analysis of how you would play againts CE at the end of his post? That's part of the decision making process on how to play this deck against CE... there are more but that is the meat of it.

And here are some for other decks (from other threads where I've posted Sentinel tech):

Titans: This is a bad matchup... but not an auto-win for Sentinels. Key things here are Mark II (negate Roy) and Bastion (you don't need to be in combat to pump the guys Roy is trying to stun).

TNB: Name a deck that doesn't have a hard time with early rush. The thing is, Sentinels can hang with the race and reinforce to prevent damage. Finishing Move keeps board control and you need to use your defenses early to keep your bots alive. Again... not a good matchup for CS but is winnable if you "play right".

The point is... every deck has bad matchups... and what it comes down to is how well it's played. You can modify a deck all you want to compensate, but by doing that you weaken it in other areas. One thing I see is people taking out characters to add PTs or Locs... which of course will ruin the percentages of hitting your curve. Is that good or bad?

And one last thing... we are all entitled to our opinions... but it seems that whenever someone disagrees they become dismissive. Our team tests daily... it was Majestic's West Coast Sentinels build that won the first PCQ event and is now being netdecked all over the place. We have tested it more than any other player group because Majestic has been playing CS since MOR first came out. He even did well with a pre-MSM CS build at the Comic Book tournament at Indy.

If Anthony Justice posted his opinions about Common Enemy or Michael Thicke posted his reasoning on how he built Vomit, would you also criticize as much? Many pro players don't like to discuss how their tech works... maybe this is why.

We are just trying to help... that's all.

Amen. This is exactly why we "pro players" do not get into these kinds of discussions. It degenerates into a flame war. I don't have to give my insight, but some people want to hear from players who have played the deck at a high-level event to some success. This is why a lot of "pro players" let their results do the talking. I may sound arrogant and ego-centric and whatnot (I apologize to the rest of you who are reading, I need to defend myself), but my reputation on this board, and the fact that I played the build in a PCQ, should give my argument and insight some merit. Disagreeing with me is one thing, but being condescending and dismissive is another. Before you go "reading between the lines," make sure you know what I am writing about.

My apologies if I came off poorly during my last post, however I find it irritating when one claims something called skill being important to the game without actually bringing anything meaningful to a discussion.

I believe I used the word "imply" but I suppose that is neither here nor there. In any case, I realise that no one can state in full honesty that in-game play skill is the only skill that matters, and I believe I didn't make that clear that I know he wasn't claiming that, which I apologise for. In any case, my point is that Majestic did not bring anything to the conversation by saying skill matters.



Sometimes yes, sometimes no. The process of how to determine where the problem lies is an interesting topic though.

Well, obviously.

Now here is something for people to ponder over:

What is play skill?

My apologies, my intent was to try to illustrate that his comments did not add much to the conversation, not to attack his person.

Well, obviously. Sometimes a weak player with a weak deck beats a stronger player with a stronger deck, but such statements contain nothing pertaining to what are correct plays and what are better decks in given matchups.

I am pretty sure you do not mean this how it has come out. Given even odds deckwise a better player does tend to win more often, obviously. But how does that make me a better player of deckbuilder?

What happens when they contradict evidence from high-level events?

Now this is much better form of evidence which I applaud. More numbers give you a lot more support for your argument.



I think it's a large leap to conclude that a player is better given that he wins an unfavourable matchup. With that said, I recognise that Craig Edwards is certainly a good player of no small measure. I however do not believe you can, for example, conclude that he is better than Neil Reeves based on the data provided.

Huh? Basing theory on phenomena is "bold"?

Okay. Skill matters. Never disagreed. So, what is skill then and how do you apply it to Sentinels?

To that I do give credit.

Huh? Bad matchup for who in particular?



Titans, maybe?

I'm sorry but this does come off as a little arrogant though it is probably not intentioned to be so.

I do not believe I have claimed that Sentinels is a bad deck in any way. I have said it has bad matchups (Common Enemy is not one in my opinion) but I have not claimed it is a bad deck.

I, however, would expect people to be critical of me if I was under the spotlight regardless of my success.

People handle criticism differently. I would hoever recommend that you avoid posting on a discussion board or reading a discussion board if you would rather avoid criticism.

I won' t criticise your intentions.

I hold no issue with whether you are good player or not and apologise if I have said anything that has directly lead you to believe that I think you are a bad player.

Nor do I believe that Curve Sentinels is a bad deck and apologise to any purple robots which may be listening if I have stated anything that has directly lead them to believe that they sucked.

The PCQ he is refering to is at the Dugout here in St.Petersburg/Pinellas Park area.

I believe it is somewhere around the middle of December...um...the 18th or 19th I think.

You know Torch...I have to agree. It seems that Florida does turn out its share of Sentinel players. With so many you'd think there was an Underground Sentinel Base around here somewhere just spittin' us out!

Perhaps CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX have it all wrong. Florida is neither a Red state nor a Blue state...nope, Florida is a PURPLE state!

Entity, I find it irritating when people feel the need to prove their intellegence by inciting and continuing flame wars. It seems to me that you are hell-bent on fighting with someone here. Can you please tell me why I should not give you a warning for instigating/provoking other members? I feel bad vibes on this truly spectacular thread, and they have all begun with you. This is a personal crusade with me, and I do have the power to enforce it. Talk to me. Why should I let you call people "absurd" and incite bad feelings? A great deal of what you have said could be re-stated simply as "You're wrong." We know you feel that way, do we need to see it over and over again?

People should not need to handle criticism here, IMHO. People should be able to post their ideas without having to brace for an attack. I would, hoever, suggest that you keep posting, we love everyone here in the Realms... just cut the heavy emphasis on criticism.

I will criticise your intentions.

ok peeps, you had to instigate papa stu to lay down the law...

erick and majestic: i enjoy your insights and posts, even when i question some of them. for example: tag team. i have tried it in my build. i like it for the mirror match, or evenly fought battles (similar character atk/def combat), but not for large atk teams like tnb and big bro. since i feel my build is strong for semi-mirror and similarly matched characters, i have tested my build without it. does that mean tag team is not good? no. does it mean it shouldn't be in a sentinel build? no. obviously majestic's build is a proven winner (at least when he is the one piloting it), and en-kur drove something similar very well also. As long as we all remember that there is no 'right' or 'wrong' build, and that insight from players that have succeeded with a certain build is valuable information that should be taken in, digested, and learned from, we can all grow from the discussion.

Entity - i can tell you are intelligent and introspective. are you a student of philosophy? i agree with much of what you say, if not necessarily in the way you say it. keep in mind that being critical is fine, but if you insult someone you are essentially throwing down the gauntlet and declaring war. the person can either ignore or attack you, but constructive discussion cannot proceed. if you feel a statement is made and presented as fact without any supporting argument, then by all means ask the poster to elaborate on his or her claim, but please refrain from using terms such as 'absurd', ' that is junk', 'preposterous', 'poopy head', and 'that is the most asinine thing that has every been written on a message board in the history of the internet', since regardless of how accurate or inaccurate the statements may be, they bring about violence and war. Please do continue to post though, as we can all benefit from your input.

Arkham - you hit the nail on the head! red + blue = purple! eureka, you've found it!! :grin:

P.S. Stu - I hate you. (go ahead, give me a warning baby - make me feel the burn!!) :devious:

Darling, you are not worth the fingerprints. Just make sure you play nice like the rest of them because I know where you live. And I know how gorgeous your wife is. I will see you at the PCQ.

Can't we all just get along?

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. Not even plastic cups with beer.

Our society today takes everything so personally. As I've watched the aftermath of the NBA fight, I keep hearing that disrespect was the reason for running into the stands and should therefore be OK, since you can't let someone disrespect you.

Why not? Why can't you let someone disrespect you? It's just words and just their opinion. Who cares. You are not my wife or family, so I don't care what you think of me. 80% of the fights in our school are because someone felt disrespected. I'm not sure if they know what disrespect means as these same students constantly disrespect their teachers. Should I then beat the crap out of one of them. As much as I sometimes wish that I could, I don't. Because it really doesn't matter. If someone calls you a name, take it with a grain of salt and know that they don't really know you, and even if they did, if they feel that way, then they shouldn't matter to you.

The only time I care how someone feels about me is my wife, kids and Jesus. Everyone else doesn't matter. Call me ugly, call me stupid, call me a bad vs player. Doesn't matter. Life is too short to be petty. Enjoy.

Gator is a poopy-head! :p
Just kidding by the way, i agree with what you said. Life is pretty short and personaly i came to this thread to read about curve sents. I am appreciative of erick, and majestic, and stu for their insights. *i mention them because they are the "high level" players*. I am very appreciative of everyone's insights even those who seem to be rabble rousers.
As to what deck does not have a problem with early rush?
TTG still has its issues with early beats. infact TNB is pretty good against TTG. But these are my opinions and honestly i dont care what you think. On that note i will simply say "Stubarnes is a neener head!" :p
Lbx!

Congratulations on the big win. Salvaged the season... eh?

Off the football field, out of the NBA and the hallways of school, back in the Realms... my friend, I think you are wrong.

Everyone else matters here. Call me a wimp, call me soft, but I am trying to make a safe place to chill and talk about the game without fear of verbal attack. I disagree strongly. I don't want anyone to be called ugly, stupid, or a bad Vs. player. It has absolutely no constructive benefit to this community. Don't do it.