Instosis [FG][OTK][Arena]

[zhangvict]

I would like to make a point about play strategy. Against non - chimera gods, it is way easier to summon your chimera on an empty field than to  discard it (assuming you already cast 3 supernovas). It will die immediately after your turn ends and will not activate gemini's phase shield.

Oftentimes I find my hand full of combo cards before I finish drawing from all my dials and hourglasses. Summoning the chimera instead of discarding dosen't end your turn, so you can continue drawing from unused permanants.

And yes, the non-essentialness of chimera really is key to the deck's sucess. Hand clogging is a huge problem against the easier chimera needed gods and is the major reason why I lose against them. With my TU + 3 shard version, I can reduce hand clogging by TU'ing an opoment's dragon (e.g. incarnate) but this is not possible with the 4 shard version. After getting my 4th shard from farming the arena, I found that 3 shard + TU is more stable against all false gods in general (but u need chimera more), and the 4 shard version is much easier against non-chimera gods and slightly harder against chimera needing gods. Overall I found 4 shard to be better with a (very) slightly higher win rate though.

[Chapuz]

I would like to make a point about play strategy. Against non - chimera gods, it is way easier to summon your chimera on an empty field than to  discard it (assuming you already cast 3 supernovas). It will die immediately after your turn ends and will not activate gemini's phase shield.

Oftentimes I find my hand full of combo cards before I finish drawing from all my dials and hourglasses. Summoning the chimera instead of discarding dosen't end your turn, so you can continue drawing from unused permanants.

And yes, the non-essentialness of chimera really is key to the deck's sucess. Hand clogging is a huge problem against the easier chimera needed gods and is the major reason why I lose against them. With my TU + 3 shard version, I can reduce hand clogging by TU'ing an opoment's dragon (e.g. incarnate) but this is not possible with the 4 shard version. After getting my 4th shard from farming the arena, I found that 3 shard + TU is more stable against all false gods in general (but u need chimera more), and the 4 shard version is much easier against non-chimera gods and slightly harder against chimera needing gods. Overall I found 4 shard to be better with a (very) slightly higher win rate though.

I don't have enough time, but someone could count the "4 Shards + Chimera"-needed FGs and the "TU + Chimera" FGs. Notice that TU FGs are:
.Those who have a dragon or high attack creature (don't know exactly the min att it must have, is just (200 - 26*7)/2 )
. they must not have any healing stuff, because the early TU would be obsolet.
. Every FG must have an "expexted turns it kills the TUed dragon" variable to the minimum.

This way, we can see if the 4 shard deck is more needed than TU one.

[zhangvict]

I don't have enough time, but someone could count the "4 Shards + Chimera"-needed FGs and the "TU + Chimera" FGs. Notice that TU FGs are:
.Those who have a dragon or high attack creature (don't know exactly the min att it must have, is just (200 - 26*7)/2 )
. they must not have any healing stuff, because the early TU would be obsolet.
. Every FG must have an "expexted turns it kills the TUed dragon" variable to the minimum.
This way, we can see if the 4 shard deck is more needed than TU one.

Noo, I do not mean that TU'ing the opponent's dragon before you can use the combo. I mean right at the end when you have almost all cards of the combo, but for some reason cannot summon the dragon to clear your hand. You might have 7 cards of the combo (1 card left, bottom decked Silurian dragon) + an extra hourglasses and only 12  . Thus you cannot cast the hourglass to clear your hand or else you won't have enough  to summon the dragon. When this happened to me against incarnate, I just TU his bone dragon, which cleared 1 space. Now I can draw from my sundial to get the siluarian drag. Mitosis + SOR as normal, kill the god. With the 4 shard version, that game would have resulted in a loss. There are plenty of other situations, almost all to do with hand clogging, that would benefit from a TU.

The TU + 3 shard version can deal exactly 200 damage if the opponent has a 1 damage absorbing shield, since it has 8 dragons each dealing 26 dmg. So you don't need a chimera if the god has a 1 dmg shield, but TU is not recommended unless on a min 13 attack drag.

The minimum attack of an airborne creature needed to be suitable for TU (with chimera) needed for it to work with the combo is 9. ( (200 dmg - 7*26)/2 ) = 9. If a creature has 18 or more attack but is not airbourne, you can TU that as well.

I ddin't count, but from my experience, some TU + Chimera gods that that have strong suitable creatures for TU are Elidnis, Neptune, Seism and Incarnate. Incarnate has bone dragon, Elidnis had Jade drag, Seism has basalt drag and Neptune has artic drag. Note that Incarnate also requires chimera for the 4-shard version, so incarnate is easier to beat with the 3 shard + TU.

Akebono is also suitable, since it has overdriven massive dragon, but you need to wait 1 turn for it's attack to rise from 8 to 11.

And its just in my experience the 4 shard works better for me, I didn't test anything, just noticed that I started winning more games than I lost. Probably needs more investigation to figure out if that is really the case.

[Gandora]

by Gandora

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

560 5c9 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6rq 6rq 6rq 6rq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 7n9 7q5 7q5 7q6 80d 80d 8ps

i was using your deck and i liked it. i was able to make my own version .
unupped sundials doesnt screw mulligan so thats that there is a 100% chance where you draw a pend.
with that percentage you can actually get a 2nd turn SN or a first turn SN. but the instosis deck haz 3rd turn sn.
with the 2nd turn SN you can use your sundialz for drawing power
so far 74% win rate atm

Sorry if this was already mentioned somewhere between those 25 pages but are there precise stats to this version?

[Sevs]

by Sevs

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

560 5c9 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6rq 6rq 6rq 6rq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 7n9 7q5 7q5 7q6 80d 80d 8ps

i was using your deck and i liked it. i was able to make my own version .
unupped sundials doesnt screw mulligan so thats that there is a 100% chance where you draw a pend.
with that percentage you can actually get a 2nd turn SN or a first turn SN. but the instosis deck haz 3rd turn sn.
with the 2nd turn SN you can use your sundialz for drawing power
so far 74% win rate atm

Sorry if this was already mentioned somewhere between those 25 pages but are there precise stats to this version?

Nope but feel free to take some. The more the better

[Gandora]

by Gandora

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

560 5c9 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6rq 6rq 6rq 6rq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 7n9 7q5 7q5 7q6 80d 80d 8ps

i was using your deck and i liked it. i was able to make my own version .
unupped sundials doesnt screw mulligan so thats that there is a 100% chance where you draw a pend.
with that percentage you can actually get a 2nd turn SN or a first turn SN. but the instosis deck haz 3rd turn sn.
with the 2nd turn SN you can use your sundialz for drawing power
so far 74% win rate atm

Sorry if this was already mentioned somewhere between those 25 pages but are there precise stats to this version?

Nope but feel free to take some. The more the better

Hm... I'm not very used to play against FG's so I guess my stats wouldn't be correct because there are people who have more experience. I will try 50 games though and post the results. (There's always a first time)

[Sevs]

by Sevs

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

560 5c9 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6rq 6rq 6rq 6rq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 7n9 7q5 7q5 7q6 80d 80d 8ps

i was using your deck and i liked it. i was able to make my own version .
unupped sundials doesnt screw mulligan so thats that there is a 100% chance where you draw a pend.
with that percentage you can actually get a 2nd turn SN or a first turn SN. but the instosis deck haz 3rd turn sn.
with the 2nd turn SN you can use your sundialz for drawing power
so far 74% win rate atm

Sorry if this was already mentioned somewhere between those 25 pages but are there precise stats to this version?

Nope but feel free to take some. The more the better

Hm... I'm not very used to play against FG's so I guess my stats wouldn't be correct because there are people who have more experience. I will try 50 games though and post the results. (There's always a first time)

The stats in the OP are the first i have ever posted as well. And it is a great way to actually grind

[Gandora]

by Gandora

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

560 5c9 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6rq 6rq 6rq 6rq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 7n9 7q5 7q5 7q6 80d 80d 8ps

i was using your deck and i liked it. i was able to make my own version .
unupped sundials doesnt screw mulligan so thats that there is a 100% chance where you draw a pend.
with that percentage you can actually get a 2nd turn SN or a first turn SN. but the instosis deck haz 3rd turn sn.
with the 2nd turn SN you can use your sundialz for drawing power
so far 74% win rate atm

Sorry if this was already mentioned somewhere between those 25 pages but are there precise stats to this version?

Nope but feel free to take some. The more the better

Hm... I'm not very used to play against FG's so I guess my stats wouldn't be correct because there are people who have more experience. I will try 50 games though and post the results. (There's always a first time)

The stats in the OP are the first i have ever posted as well. And it is a great way to actually grind

Made 51 Games (didn't face all gods and sorry for the bad table, don't know how to do this ):

Akebono              1w/1l
Chaos Lord   1l   
Dark Matter   1 skip
Decay      not encountered
Destiny      not encountered
Divine Glory   1w/4l
Dream Catcher   not encountered      
Elidnis                 3w/1l
Eternal Phoenix   3l
Ferox                 3w      
Fire Queen   1w      
Gemini                 2w      
Graviton                 1w/2l
Hecate      not encountered
Hermes      not encountered
Incarnate   not encountered
Jezebel      2l
Lionheart   1w      
Miracle                 1w      
Morte      not encountered   
Neptune                 1w
Obliterator   1w/2l
Octane      1l
Osiris                 3w/2l
Paradox                 1w/1l
Rainbow        1w/1l
Scorpio                 2w/2l
Seism                 1w/1l
Serket                 2w   

Overall Wins: 50.98%

I'd say this deck could do better. Phase Shield is a card that can block for three turns, compared to Sundial this is great. Disadvantage is of course the need of 3 SN.
I often wasn't able to use the second Phase shield because of lack of or because I already drew a lot with HG and Sundial, so I had to discard it.
I also made some playing mistakes (draw too much, wrong discard etc.). I guess I also was unlucky with gods that I could have won easily.
Divine Glory always had all his explosions early and Jezebel had both times an Amber Nymph. Once I didn't draw any pends; Octane played 5 UG in 6 turns and so on.
Anyway, I guess 60% would be possible with this deck. I'd personally change though a Phase Shield for something else. Maybe HG.
I guess someone with more experience can play this better. Also I have a feeling that because of phase shield sundials can be played earlier.
This way you can chain Sundials with a phase shield between.
In the end, I'd say it's worth to do more testing and that this deck is a little more difficult to play correctly.

Here the version I used (upped chimera and mitosis instead of the one BloodlinE213 used):

by Gandora

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6rq 6rq 6rq 6rq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 6ve 74g 7ap 7n9 7q5 7q5 7q6 80d 80d 8ps

[MyNameIsJoey]

Mind you i diddnt read all the 25 pages to see if that has been said before, but.

Im using the deck in the OP with -1 dial and +1 tower, it seems to work a lot more for me. Perhaps because some of my dials are unupped, but the additionnal tower really helps a lot.

[jacker]

Does 6 Up sundial mess up with the starting hand? I'm trying 3 and 3, just to have more % of a tower in starting hand. 1/3  is not really a problem

[Sevs]

Mind you i diddnt read all the 25 pages to see if that has been said before, but.

Im using the deck in the OP with -1 dial and +1 tower, it seems to work a lot more for me. Perhaps because some of my dials are unupped, but the additionnal tower really helps a lot.

A lot of people actually use a 31 card version if they used unupped dials. instead of taking out a sundial. but i can imagine either way works.

Does 6 Up sundial mess up with the starting hand? I'm trying 3 and 3, just to have more % of a tower in starting hand. 1/3  is not really a problem

Sometimes it does sometimes it doesnt. i havent thought of a 1/2 upped and 1/2 unupped though  possibly an improvement.


Using http://elements.alanbeam.net/qi.php and http://xenocidius.webs.com/openinghandsimulator.htm here are some stats

Deck	Instosis	Instosis(3 upped dials)	Instosis(all unupped dials)	Instosis(all unupped dials+1 Tower)
Time QI	3.75	4.06	4.38	3.89
% time tower	81%	86%	95.5%	98.3%

Other possibly notable facts
 - the % of a starting hourglass is 5% greater in the original instosis than the fully modded one.
 - On the other hand does QI take into effect from the massive drawing? because with less turns to generate quanta you would probably want to a lower QI, making the first and last variation the most ideal
 - Seism is a much harder with unupped sundials

[Sk1llsIll]

really nice deck, thank you