Aggro. Your non-minions are threats, your minions are threats, your combos care about face more than board. You can come back from behind easier than a Tempo deck, but can be fragile due to needing a body for so many cards. You have multiple minions that do face damage without actually having to cash in their health totals. Itâs all damage acceleration, and your card flow is limited by Sojourner and Blaze Hound- because any card you draw will probably increase your pressure output.
Understanding Terminology Better
1 Like
Thereâs overlap. Bloodtear and Maw are tempo because they remove things while putting a body on the board, which is very efficient. But they fit a midrange deck too because theyâre good for controlling board, which allows you to play nice 4/5 drops.
Like I said, you donât have to squeeze your deck into these categories. Theyâre only used to describe decks, not generally to build them. And they arenât the only way to describe a deck. Your deck could be built around specific cards you wanted to use, or have a different method of play.
Itâs up to you, the creator, if you want to call your deck midrange or a Zendo deck or a Divine Bond deck or a Pressure deck etc.
1 Like
True, almost all of my games end up pretty face vs face
I would have thought that tempo decks can come back easier than aggro, as when aggro runs out of steam, youâre usually finished.
Guess so, but I canât go running around everywhere telling people to check out this sweet control deck 
Actually, I would describe them actually as devices to help build decks. While there certainly arenât hard and fast cards that only cater to a single archetype, viewing and revising your deck with archetype based logic tends to make cuts and decisions easier to understand. The operative idea isnât to treat them as âsacred cowsâ, but as templates for what values you have in mind for the deck. Deck names are often wrong or hardly descriptive lol. I call my main Midrange Zirix deck âSpace Lordâ, because I think the song is really fun to play Duelyst to.
@seraphicreaper
Tempo decks require a type of tigherope play. You have to get ahead and position yourself to constantly be ahead- and tend to be less forgiving than a traditional aggro deck, because you have fewer sweet topdecks, and canât just jam in a few value cards that double as threats as tech. Veteran âaggro playersâ (there really is no such thing as âarchetype playersâ, but we all have archetypes were are more comfortable with than others,) know when not to over-develop or to play something a little more value oriented to keep themselves going. Playing LâKian, Spelljammer or Hollowed Grovekeeper isnât going to ruin your Reva deck- but Sunset Paragon or Ruby Rifter just arenât playing the kind of game you want to be involved in even if one is perfect tech, and the other is a strong threat.
Then flameblood warlock flashes in the background.
1 Like
@Owlington
Until you remember that both combo and tempo use them as pressure tools 
And theyâre certifiably okay in an aggro deck with lots of reach.
I think this hits a point I struggle with in regards to decking, the idea of balancing board attention and face attention. As Iâd say we established and Iâve experienced, my deck is pretty aggro oriented. My question then is, how much or how does an aggro deck typically mind the board?
Additionally, would flamebloods suit my deck better?
In my opinion yeah it does suit your deck but i dont see any card to substitue it for
I suppose I prefer to build my decks off concept 
1 Like
Do you feel like youâre playing it in aggro fashion? If so, would 3 face damage and a 3/1 body be useful? If so, try it out. If it doesnât work, toss it. No deck is perfect straight out of crafting, you have to play with it and rotate cards and find what works best with your deck and how you play.
1 Like
I only have 1, so currently not really an option lol.
And simplified question to whoever: How does aggro attempt to handle an opposing board?
Lol aggro⌠handle⌠not face? error invalid_request
1 Like
Well that depends. Aggro is an archetype that swallows up many kinds of decks. âBig Aggroâ describes decks that might want to make trades to simply given them better positioning. Most aggro decks want to make trades if it wins them the damage race- or the thing theyâre removing is enough of a pain, that it will overwhelm them before they could outrace it.
Generally, if trying to play an aggro deck, I prefer minions that have disruptive abilities rather than make the trades (you do want to force your opponent to make most of the trades.) But, you also donât want your opponent to run away with the game because of something like Kelaino, Four Winds, Nimbus, Silverguard etc.
Flameblood would make your deck significantly more all-in with the aggression, but itâs another card that will punish you in the topdeck war. If anything, the first change I would make is ditching the Ethereal Blades for Onyx Bear Seals.
A pair of Flamebloods could probably be played over a copy of MDS and the DSS, if thatâs the route you want to take. But then, youâd really want Chakris, Primus Fist, Rust Crawler, Bloodrage Mask or Cryptographer over Maw.
Deal with critical threats (potential Divine Bond targets, Kelainos, Sunforge Lancer, provokes) and keep hitting face. Every deck, control or not, has to deal with their opponentâs board in at least some fashion in order to not get completely wrecked.
Toward the end of the game you can start to ignore more things, as even if they drop an Ironcliffe on your face youâre likely to have lethal soon. Additionally, you can kite and position to avoid threats that arenât immediate, like Dioltas, while continuing to burn their face off. The slower their big plays come, the quicker yours do, the more face damage you get. For burn decks anyways.
Could you elaborate please?
Examples?
Not my blades! 
Hmm, I guess I havenât been playing with the true aggro spirit, as I always look to answer threats before proceeding with face.
Iâve never really cared for Chakriâs as they never seem to do much unless being utilized in a inner focus combo; something my deck hasnât looked to do unless itâs for finishing at end.
Sometimes you run your smaller threats into their threats if youâre playing an aggro deck with fatties, because the HP of your fatty is a resource. The more attacks you get to put on their general with it, the more valuable it is to you- where a bunch of 2/2s are worth more than 2 damage if they donât let your opponent pressure your own face, or trade into your fatty easier.
Rust Crawler, Hollowed Grovekeeper, Dancing Blades, Blistering Skorn. Things that allow you to âhate outâ problem strategies, without really sacrificing minion count or slowing down. They can be played without value just fine- but when you do get value, itâs often a blowout.[quote=âseraphicreaper, post:43, topic:7902â]
Not my blades!
[/quote]
Without Tigers and Boars, you just donât have the support to make that kind of cheap burst work.
Iâve made changes and I canât tell if itâs shifted to tempo or midrange. I THINK itâs shifted from aggro to more tempo, but you guys can judge. Doesnât hurt to learn to identify decks 
Reposting my previous deck 1st:
And the deck I modified it to:
Now it just looks like it has no clear purpose rather than a strong early game
Imo
2 Likes
Seems really random. Why one ghost lighting and one Skorn? Pick one.
Why 3 Blaze Hound, 2 Sojo and 1 Jammer? If you need a ton of draw why wouldnât you just go 3 Sojo instead of 2 and 1?
2 Bloodtear and 2 Shroud also seems odd, id take a third of both and drop the Maws, take some more 3 ofs to fill the gaps.
Whatâs the purpose of this deck? Itâs a whole bunch of just⌠cards. Sure, theyâre all decent cards, but thereâs no clear synergy. Has lots of removal and a really low curve as well, like an early game control deck when you just burn out and have no offense, hoping for a Geomancer finish.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.