I like how much you are fond of yourself
Too fond infact.
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to…
Great discussion so far, looks like I’m not the only one who felt similar. This discussion helped me re-evaluate how I have been building decks in this meta. I noticed a lot of the usual decks I play are mid-range(a lot of mid-range Magmar) & with the extra control decks introduced by trials I found myself up against a bad match-up more often than not.
I created a few more true aggro decks to my line up & I have been pleasantly surprised by the extra wins against the control heavy meta.
That’s not a control deck lmao
I was responding to the first post not the title… in the first post he says
But I was fiddling around with some fun decks which weren’t trial decks and I sort of feel like if it isn’t a trial deck is has to be a quick aggro deck…
The title is a more yes or no subject (which Vanar proves no… though it isn’t overly strong)… so the only other point worth discussing seemed (to me) to be that little tidbit… which Eggmar, Cataclysm, etc etc… Also, for what it’s worth… my Cataclysm has a lot of bounce and people play really weird once you start dropping Exhuming Sand tiles… so… even then I think it’s got some control elements (not saying it’s a control deck… just hints of it).
In the Duelyst card game, historically control seems to have problems way before Mythrons. And OP you don’t have to play just aggro to counter Mythrons. Sometimes not even aggro can deal with them due to flooding the board. Midrange and Tempo are still good. So basically having Mythrons kill non trial control decks? Not necessarily. Control Fault without rush Ka can still be good, but why switch Midrange to Control? That be a downgrade.
I consider a “true” Control deck to be “this high cost, powerful card will win me the game once I play it (and it survives) successfully. My game plan is to set up this card (baiting removal or applying its conditions) and survive until I draw it and can play it.”
if your control Isn’t a strong and consistent 3-of 8-9 mana wincon (Obliterate, Kraigon, Extinction, Wake, Fabrication, Worldcore, Excelcius) Trials may be more consistent and have more finality (Permanent effects after their conditions are met).
Little “c” control decks (full mana/ 2 turn combos, burst damage or 1-of Topdecks as insurance) exist and can beat trials, but “true” Control decks are few and far between, well known, usually telegraphed and are still viable.
I’m curious, would anyone here consider Titan a control deck?
I see it as a bit more of a tempo deck
Is Gate a control deck by your definition?
Undervault? Absolutely. 8Gates, not so much, though that answer is more complicated.
Titan is tempo, you often win without it purely because of tempo so we should replace it with less dead in hand cards.
You don’t win the game by playing Titan at least 2 units have to stick first.
This is the Magic definition “control deck is a type of deck or archetype that focuses on dominating the game using some or all of the following kinds of strategies: long term card advantage, resource denial, permission, and inevitability.Control decks are based around efficiency and controlling the board, which is where the name comes from”
This definition holds true to duelyst and part of reason Control decks don’t do good in duelyst is that they are really reactive and Duelyst is centered around tempo a lot. One passive turn is often enough to lose the game. There is difference between a deck with late game and control deck
this definition kinda fits many aggro decks in duelyst i think. Take aggro reva atm: You clear board and push damage every turn. you maintain board and hand advantage until you assemble enough of it to finish the opponent off. So is aggro Reva actually control?
i dont think control decks have to be slow at all actually. like @kirabi said, its about controlling the board, and answering your opponents board and then pushing them into unfavourable situations is something every aggressive deck tries to accomplish. its just that people think playing very reactive means control and playing very proactive means aggro, but i think doing something reactive to negate the proactive thing your opponent did last turn and then also doing something proactive the same turn is what makes a lot of the meta decks meta. most of them even deal a little face damage on top of those 2 things in a turn. always playing threats but having no reactive plays leaves you wide open if your board gets answered and you get a threat in your face in one turn. that is why emp was/is so good. always being able to clear board but not bein able to develop any kind of threat will keep the game going until you run out of reactions, because you can never close a game out. i think i may also be describing just tempo here idk. all of a sudden all these words make no sense to me anymore… xD
I don’t know has it changed but in the past the decks archetype was decided by the curve and Control had a heavy lategame curve, Aggro usually ends at 4 abd Midrange has a lesser early game than aggro but has a lategame.
i guess you would just say that because most of the time that was the case. but its more of a by-product that the curve looked like that. aggro ends at 4 mana because that way you can spam more cards per turn and do a lot more things. you run out in the lategame tho. control only had/has a highcurve, cause the lowmana cards where almost fully catered to removing the board and answering a wide variety of things, while the wincondition cards where highmana like pandora or dark nemesis. now i would call mantra and artihai control decks too though, because you control the game until you can kill them. but this doesnt require a high curve, their curve actually looks much more like the one of an aggro deck. but if they would play like an aggro deck, they would lose quickly. sending 2 phoenix fires face on turn 2 sucks hard. going face with saberspine seal and bangle earlygame instead of clearing board with it or something else and saving it might deal some strong damage right away, but you are open after that. i dont think you can say how a deck plays by just its curve. apex decks have arguably the highest curve but dont really play control at all.
Mantra and Arthai are combo, they control the board till they build up the cards for the combo.
but then what is the difference between control and combo. both control the board until they can play a wincondition safely right?
Edit: is it just that the wincon in control is one card and in combo is many cards? seems weird to me