Seek And Destroy

[fasp_3000]

Dont you like of the cards in the enemy field...?
  >:(DESTROY IT ALL!!!

Spoiler for Hidden:

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

744 744 744 744 744 74b 74b 74b 74b 74b 75m 75m 75m 75m 75m 77d 77d 77d 77d 77d 77f 77f 77f 77f 77f 7n2 7n2 7n2 7n2 7n2 8pm

[Manuel]

what's the point of using pulvy when gpulled sofo is better?
the deck really lacks damage, u should probably cut one copy of every card with a decent mid attacker, like charger/steel golem (both of them have downsides, but u can't use graboids).

even keeping the deck like this, -1 pulvy, -1 aw, +2 towers; otys aren't really cheap, swallow use 9 towers and 3 pendulums (or 10 and 2); idk if u really need so much pends.

[Monox D. I-Fly]

what's the point of using pulvy when gpulled sofo is better?

Because sofo has zero attack?

[Manuel]

what's the point of using pulvy when gpulled sofo is better?

Because sofo has zero attack?

gp + sofo take less slot than pulvy + aw (and gp add something that pulvy can't do), is less expensive in terms of quanta, it doesn't force u to run pends in this case, because HA can be fueled by the mark; 5 pillars and 5 pends is terrible in this deck, 10 pillars still require at least 2 more pillars (look swallow); IN THIS CASE, sofo is a lot better than pulvy, for a better quanta balance and saving some slots for adding something that can do real damages.

[Calindu]

what's the point of using pulvy when gpulled sofo is better?

Because sofo has zero attack?

gp + sofo take less slot than pulvy + aw (and gp add something that pulvy can't do), is less expensive in terms of quanta, it doesn't force u to run pends in this case, because HA can be fueled by the mark; 5 pillars and 5 pends is terrible in this deck, 10 pillars still require at least 2 more pillars (look swallow); IN THIS CASE, sofo is a lot better than pulvy, for a better quanta balance and saving some slots for adding something that can do real damages.

But doesn't that pretty much become swallow with no damage?

[Manuel]

what's the point of using pulvy when gpulled sofo is better?

Because sofo has zero attack?

gp + sofo take less slot than pulvy + aw (and gp add something that pulvy can't do), is less expensive in terms of quanta, it doesn't force u to run pends in this case, because HA can be fueled by the mark; 5 pillars and 5 pends is terrible in this deck, 10 pillars still require at least 2 more pillars (look swallow); IN THIS CASE, sofo is a lot better than pulvy, for a better quanta balance and saving some slots for adding something that can do real damages.

But doesn't that pretty much become swallow with no damage?

and saving some slots for adding something that can do real damages

even the deck in the OP is pretty much the same as swallow without real damages, i don't really consider like damages a 5 atk creature that require 2 cards to be played like "damage"

Hover over cards for details, click for permalink

Deck import code : [Select]

744 744 744 744 744 744 744 744 744 744 744 745 745 745 745 74b 74b 74b 74b 74d 74d 752 752 752 752 77d 77d 77d 77d 77d 8pm

(can tweaked with one more charger over something)

something like this i think is somewhat better (totally better thinking about quanta balance), it deal more total damage with less cards, but is still a bad version of swallow, u can't do something better than probably the best deck in the game for farming.

[CactusKing]

What I don't get is why is this in the trio/quartet section? AW doesn't cost any  when upped so this is really just a duo.

[Manuel]

What I don't get is why is this in the trio/quartet section? AW doesn't cost any  when upped so this is really just a duo.

it still count as , don't look the cost of the card

Spoiler for Hidden:

nice signature