[Massive Dragon OTK]

[Hyroen]

Commented. Hur hur hur.

In all seriousness, I really like this deck. It's ability to pull out cards fast is the main flaw in something like a UG deck. This is one of the main synergies of and you my friend have pulled it off quite effectively in this deck Malignant.

Good job and nice deck. ^_^

[MrBlonde]

Lol.. i've seen your OTK's many times Mal. This one looks pretty cool though but not sure if i like this variation better.

[ddevans96]

With quantum towers you can still outmaneuver BH, and either way you're much less susceptible to BH than with a supernova variation. Also there is less failure to launch with Quantum Towers because you have twice the amount of Towers than Supernovas, and you can play them first turn, whereas with Supernovas you have to wait until turn 3.

[Pineapple]

There are 6 snovas in the deck, which means that you'd have to replace them with 6 QTs, which would not only mess up the drawing of your time towers but also would probably be too little quanta by the time you draw through your deck. Therefore, on average, this version works much better, unless you plan on changing the deck by tweaking in/out cards.

As for BH, one BH drains 3 of each element, which means that 1 QT would take 12 turns to recover, 2 QT would take 6 turns, 3 4, 4 3, 5 3, and 6 2. I'd hardly call that outmaneuvering, as no one packs a single BH within the first 7 turns (14 cards, 1/14 = ~2/30). QTs are just as susceptible to Black Hole as snovas.

[ddevans96]

You replace all the time towers too and change the mark to time. That wasn't obvious? Did you expect the mark to still be entropy?

And no, because QT towers keep producing quanta, and supernovas don't. This is a simple fact.

[Pineapple]

I thought it would be pretty obvious that you would barely be able to power more than 2-3 hourglasses and that you'll have problems (assuming you only draw 1-2 QTs in starting hand) getting the dials to work quickly enough.

[ddevans96]

You can power 5 hourglasses off the mark with 13 Quantum Towers easily. Four with 11 is no problem at all. Use your brain or use trainer, either one works.

[Pineapple]

I used trainer, and in all 10 AI games never once did I have enough quanta to play/maintain all the hourglasses I drew.
Then, I tested against a custom AI3 with 3 black holes and 27 pillars, and experienced "failure-to-launch" 2/5 times with 9.66 TTW over 3 games for the QT version and, for the snova version, 1/5 "failure-to-launch" with 7.75 TTW over 4 games. Hardly conclusive test results, I know, but I could feel the deck being much slower after switching novas/towers to QTs.

[ddevans96]

mhm. I'm supposed to believe something that's the EXACT OPPOSITE of every test I've done, without any proof. Try 6 black holes so it actually makes a difference in most games, for starters.

EDIT: Oh, before you try saying things again: Don't try to call someone who's probably tested OTK decks (and posted them, and listened to advice about switching to supernovas, and tested it extensively, and then months later posted a new version detailing why supernovas were worse) more than you wrong without proof. I don't trust words, I trust unbiased screenshots.

[Pineapple]

1. If I tested against 6 black holes, they would both win 0% of the time, assuming I tried to speed through the deck as fast as possible. That doesn't prove anything.

2. What am I supposed to do, post 6 screenshots of 6 turns of 0-3 time quanta with 3 hourglasses in my hand? I hardly think that's "evidence." You can't draw through the deck like you do with the tower-snova build, and that's that.

But yes, you are right, ddevans. I bow down to your uncanny ability to test dragon OTKs and the like. Let's just drop it, we aren't going anywhere with baseless accusations on others' testing biases.

[ddevans96]

QT's + Time Mark would not win zero percent of the time because mine keeps gaining quanta after BHs. SN's + Time Towers dies to one single BH. This is a simple fact.

You're contradicting yourself here. Against BH decks, you don't want to draw as much so you can power past the black holes. If you draw too much early, you will not have the cards left to defeat black holes. This, again, is a simple fact.

And that last comment is totally out of line. My rainbow OTK doesn't use dragons AT ALL. I find it offensive that you want to say a smart-ass comment like that without knowing what my deck even is.

[Chapuz]

Sorry guys, but there are not many OTK styles that are playable against a bit more than a little Quanta Controlling deck. In fact, i don't remember any single one.

Vodoo + BB + GP can play combo in 1 turn, but still needs aether for TU and a bit of luck og putting the whole combo in only 1 turn.

Fractal BoL needs aether and air for Sky Blitz, a pestal would beat it too.

Don't wanna mention rainbow / single dragon OTK (i have seen ruby dragon, very funny).

I have seen even a fractal BoL + graveyard + eclipse OTK, one of the bests.

Another ones are UG decks.

Rainbow OTK generally fails against 3 BH (rainbow dragon OTK for example).

duo/trio OTK die with earthquakes and fractal + (nasty) pests.

Conclution: this deck is funny and original, but not an exception. Quanta (and pilar in QT version) control will suck the quanta and the result of the game. It's not bad at all, as OTK is more a funny style than a massinve winning one.