Supercell

[eaglgenes101]

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 710 711 711 713 713 713 714 714 714 717 717 717 71c 71c 71c 7n1 7n8 7n8 7n8 7n8 7n9 8pr

Double meaning. Can you find it?

[furballdn]

Only 1 (2) lightning storms. Are you kidding me.

[mwaetht]

If I understand correctly, it's OTK-ish, so it doesn't need more.

[furballdn]

If I understand correctly, it's OTK-ish, so it doesn't need more.

It's an FG proposal. AI does not know how to OTK.

[mwaetht]

Whoops, wasn't paying attention to the board...

[Pineapple]

It's funny because you don't have an Eagle's Eye in there, despite it being your avatar.

[Annele]

It's funny because you don't have an Eagle's Eye in there, despite it being your avatar.

Do you put a mind flayer in all your decks? 

[Pineapple]

It's funny because you don't have an Eagle's Eye in there, despite it being your avatar.

Do you put a mind flayer in all your decks? 

Actually, yes, I put a mind flayer in all shield-based water-aether duos that don't already contain Lobo. >.>
The only CC in the deck is Lightning Storm, which may as well not count, and Aflatoxin, which is still too slow without Shockwaves or Eagle's Eye. Plus, there isn't a weapon at all and is an insane excess of Air quanta for a stall (Wings), and most decks should use weapons because of how cost-effective they are.

[Annele]

It's funny because you don't have an Eagle's Eye in there, despite it being your avatar.

Do you put a mind flayer in all your decks? 

Actually, yes, I put a mind flayer in all shield-based water-aether duos that don't already contain Lobo. >.> But not all
The only CC in the deck is Lightning Storm, which may as well not count, and Aflatoxin, which is still too slow without Shockwaves or Eagle's Eye. Plus, there isn't a weapon at all and is an insane excess of Air quanta for a stall (Wings), and most decks should use weapons because of how cost-effective they are.

Then why not say so, instead of a comment about the OP's avatar? Especially if it seems like trolling.

[Pineapple]

It's funny because you don't have an Eagle's Eye in there, despite it being your avatar.

Do you put a mind flayer in all your decks? 

Actually, yes, I put a mind flayer in all shield-based water-aether duos that don't already contain Lobo. >.> But not all
The only CC in the deck is Lightning Storm, which may as well not count, and Aflatoxin, which is still too slow without Shockwaves or Eagle's Eye. Plus, there isn't a weapon at all and is an insane excess of Air quanta for a stall (Wings), and most decks should use weapons because of how cost-effective they are.

Then why not say so, instead of a comment about the OP's avatar? Especially if it seems like trolling.

Because "it's funny you don't have this card" is equivalent to "you should put in this card"? I'm a man of little words.

[Annele]

It's funny because you don't have an Eagle's Eye in there, despite it being your avatar.

Do you put a mind flayer in all your decks? 

Actually, yes, I put a mind flayer in all shield-based water-aether duos that don't already contain Lobo. >.> But not all
The only CC in the deck is Lightning Storm, which may as well not count, and Aflatoxin, which is still too slow without Shockwaves or Eagle's Eye. Plus, there isn't a weapon at all and is an insane excess of Air quanta for a stall (Wings), and most decks should use weapons because of how cost-effective they are.

Then why not say so, instead of a comment about the OP's avatar? Especially if it seems like trolling.

Because "it's funny you don't have this card" is equivalent to "you should put in this card"? I'm a man of little words.

No it's not. If you said "it's funny you don't have this card because it is needed in this deck", then maybe, but "it's funny you don't have this card because you have expressed a liking for it" does not give any information apart from the fact you seem to be trolling.

Anyways, your point is now across, eaglgenes101 can do what they now.