Shard of Readiness | Shard of Readiness

[finkel]

I just spent something like half an hour looking through this thread. The original idea was simple and solid. The wyrm-abuse would finally give a deck that could gain score from farming FGS :/

without the readiness, this card is much less useful. In a nymph-tear deck, for example, there would really be no point in running a SoR, since you'd still need a quint to keep that aether nymph alive until it can use it's ability, and at that point (adding tower, using up a NT, waiting a turn), it's actually worse than just packing quintessences.

As was mentioned, pharaoh+anubis looks intriguing, and I have a feeling that might actually be plausible against AI5s as a mono-time deck with mark of gravity (6 pharoahs, a few anubises, a few SoR, and the rest time pillars/towers), but again, without the surprise, it's not very useful. Being able to use an effect the turn you play the creature is  much much much more interesting and strategy-opening than making the cost 0.

[rakazy8564]

Rustler can only use its ability once after Readiness.

That just killed my jade dragon fractal rush idea. =(

Same here 

[MaxMilen]

without the readiness, this card is much less useful. In a nymph-tear deck, for example, there would really be no point in running a SoR, since you'd still need a quint to keep that aether nymph alive until it can use it's ability, and at that point (adding tower, using up a NT, waiting a turn), it's actually worse than just packing quintessences.

Oddly enough, Shard of Readiness has been a huge help to my Nymph deck. I can see it being different if you're using Nymph's Tears to generate your Nymphs, but I'm actually using Water Nymph, and it's my first-priority target for SoR. (Second place is a flying Eternity.) Paying 8 quanta once to bring out Water Nymph, then 3 quanta once is a lot more efficient than paying 8 once to bring out Water Nymph, then 4 quanta every time you want to make a Nymph.

[finkel]

Interesting idea. so you play NT on a saphire pillar, then immediately SoR and quint it?

[miniwally]

Interesting idea. so you play NT on a saphire pillar, then immediately SoR and quint it?

No he's playing a nymph queen then SoRing it or it's what it seems like.

[MaxMilen]

Interesting idea. so you play NT on a saphire pillar, then immediately SoR and quint it?

No he's playing a nymph queen then SoRing it or it's what it seems like.

Exactly. I have 2 Nymph Queens, and therefore no need for Nymph's Tears. Just lucky, I guess.

[miniwally]

Interesting idea. so you play NT on a saphire pillar, then immediately SoR and quint it?

No he's playing a nymph queen then SoRing it or it's what it seems like.

Exactly. I have 2 Nymph Queens, and therefore no need for Nymph's Tears. Just lucky, I guess.

Mind posting the deck? I have two as well and interested how to use them considering most people say they're too expensive to be worthwhile.

[MaxMilen]

No problem, here it is. The Nymph is optional -- it could easily be replaced by a Tower, or with an entirely different card.

Code: [Select]

4vg 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 5rp 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6rn 6rn 6rq 6rq 6ts 6ts 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 719 719 74o 77f 77i 77i 7aj 7am 7h8 7h8 7ms 7n2 7n3 7q5 7q5 7q5 7q7 7q8 7t4 7t9 7t9 808 808 80d 80d 80h 80h 80h

[miniwally]

Why's the dissapation shield unupped? I'll probably replace the gravity nymph with a quantum tower if I test it out.

[MaxMilen]

Why's the dissapation shield unupped? I'll probably replace the gravity nymph with a quantum tower if I test it out.

Personal preference. The unupped version defends at 3-to-1 instead of 1-to-1, and when it's gone, I'm only out of quanta, meaning that I'm more likely to be able to do something on my next turn.

Probably a good call, having the Gravity Nymph be another Quantum Tower.

[Kurohami]

The deck is for anti-FG I suppose? How consistent is it? What's the win rate like?

[MaxMilen]

The deck is for anti-FG I suppose? How consistent is it? What's the win rate like?

Primarily, yes, it's anti-FG. I've been known to also use it for T50 farming.

The win rate against FG's seems to be greater than 20%, less than 30%. (I haven't yet done enough games with this version to be more specific than that.) A little more than half of its wins seem to be EM's.

It is slow, but then, it IS a 60-card deck based on the classic Time-Mark Rainbow methodology. Even with 60 cards, I'll often end up completely drawing out, and using the Eternity loop for a number of turns. (Luckily, if I get that far, chances are my quanta will hold out.)