Post Plasma Ninetales/Amoonguss

Hello, my name is Antonio Perez. I’ve been playing the Pokémon TCG since Noble Victories was released. I started playing because of Kwandaoren66. He mainly did Pokémon Wi-Fi battles, but then began to upload TCG content, and I was hooked, even to this day. I’ve haven’t had that much success in tournaments, but I feel that I know a lot about the TCG by reading multiple forums and articles, and by playing every single day.

When you hear the term “Hypnobank,” what combos come to mind? Most of you would say Darkrai EX, some would say Tornadus EX, and a select few of you would say Raticate BCR. However, I’m not going to be talking about any of these. Instead, I’m going to talk about Ninetales.

ninetales-dragons-exalted-drx-19pokemon-paradijs.comFor those of you who do not know, Ninetales was a card released in Dragons Exalted. It is a 90 HP Stage 1 Pokémon with 1 retreat. It has an Ability called “Bright Look,” which, whenever you evolve into Ninetales, acts as a Catcher.

Its single attack is called Hexed Flame, which does 20 damage and 50 more damage for each Special Condition affecting the Defending Pokémon.

At first glance, it looks promising. The Ability is good, providing you with extra Catchers in your deck. Its HP allows it to be searched by Level Ball. However, 90 HP is fragile, being the perfect amount for Darkrai to KO it in one shot.

During the time of BLW-DRX format, Ninetales/Amoonguss was an archetype that received a small amount of hyped. Amoonguss NXD has an Ability that when you evolve into it, you can inflict the Defending Pokémon with Poison and Confusion, letting Ninetales hit for 130 damage (120 base + 10 Poison) with 1 energy. Combine this with Devolution Spray and you have a fast, hard hitting deck.

However, as most people figured out, the deck would always trip up right before it reached the finish line. It didn’t have enough fire power to take down EXs, while they could knock Ninetales and Amoonguss right off the board. After that, the deck has had little to no talk. Until now.

With Plasma Storm out, Ninetales can ditch its old buddy for the new Hypnotoxic Laser. Combined with Virbank City Gym, Ninetales can now do a minimum of 100 damage for 1 energy (70 base + 30 Poison), and 150 if you hit the Sleep flip.

Even though Ninetales can work without Amoonguss, I feel that it’s the combination between Amoonguss and Hypnobank that will help Ninetales that most. This way you have two ways to get two Status Conditions on your opponent.

Here’s a basic list for a Plasma Storm Ninetales/Amoonguss deck:

Pokémon – 13

4 Vulpix DRX
4 Ninetales DRX
2 Foongus NXD
2 Amoonguss NXD
1 Emolga DRX

Trainers – 29

4 Professor Juniper
4 N
2 Skyla
2 Colress

 

3 Level Ball

3 Hypnotxic Laser
3 Devolution Spray
2 Switch
2 Pokémon Catcher
1 Computer Search/Dowsing Machine

 

2 Virbank City Gym

Energy – 8

8 Fire

This leaves you with 10 free spots to do whatever you please with. There are few ways to fill up these spots.

Thicker Lines

amoonguss-next-destinies-nxd-9pokemon-paradijs.comYou can thicken the Pokémon or the Items. Bumping up to 3-3 Amoonguss or 4 Hypnotoxic Laser would be good. Two to three Emolga is something to be considered as well. Lastly, more Supporters would do nicely if you feel like 12 is too little.

Backup Attackers

When 4 Ninetales isn’t enough, and most of the time it won’t be, you have the option of adding in back up attackers. You can include Victini with V-create to 1-shot everything in PlasmaKlang. However, Ninetales already does this, and it doesn’t need a full bench.

You could add in DCE so you can put in Mewtwo EX, Tornadus EX, or both if you so please. These two work well with Hypnotoxic Laser, namely Tornadus EX, and they both hit pretty hard when set up. Plus, they both help the Blastiose matchup, with Mewtwo Knocking Out Keldeos, and Tornadus donking Squirtles.

Lastly, you could add Blend Energy GRPD and Giratina from Plasma Storm. Its first attack for PCC does 50 + 50 more if the Defending Pokémon is affected by a Special Condition. That obviously flows with the theme of the deck. Using Blend Energy also allows the option to use Sableye DEX to bring back your Lasers and Devolution Spray.

With all that said, here’s the final list that I have been testing to positive results:

Pokémon – 18

4 Vulpix DRX
4 Ninetales DRX
3 Foongus NXD
3 Amoonguss NXD
2 Emolga DRX
2 Mewtwo EX

Trainers – 30

4 Professor Juniper
4 N
2 Skyla
2 Colress

 

3 Level Ball

3 Hypnotoxic Laser
3 Devolution Spray
3 Switch
2 Pokémon Catcher
1 Computer Search

 

3 Virbank City Gym

Energy – 12

8 Fire
4 Double Colorless

And that’s pretty much it. I hope you all enjoyed my first article and have learned something from it. Peace out.

Reader Interactions

28 replies

  1. Joseph Baggs

    Great list! good read.
    Have you tested with a 1-1 or a 2-2 line of Roserade? really help you grab what you need, and what about Mew EX? he can easily do 240 damage to a mewtwo ex for only 1 fire.

    • Antonio Perez  → Joseph

      I have not tested with rosearade, but I have thought of it. It seems like a good idea. I will begin testing it later today. As for Mew.Ex I think that is a waste of space because of how easy it is to kill. Bouffalant, Mewtwo with DCE, darkrai with laser, Keldeo, etc.

  2. Ed Mandy

    I like this Ninetales & Laser pairing. I’m not sure if the focus should be solely on that combo or if the addition of the other “come into play” sort of effects and devolution is the way to go.

    I like TechnoLegend’s addition of Roserade if you’re going Devolution. I just think that maybe Ninetales doesn’t quite need Bright Look here. It’s just an added bonus. The Hexed Flame is really where it’s at for me.

  3. Joseph Lee

    Why just one Emolga in the “skeleton”?

    If you mean to start with it, a single copy requires you are able to retreat your Active or burn a copy of Switch. If you plan on running Ditto I could see it, as obviously you could search an Emolga out after the fact (if needed) and Transform into it.

    While I realize in your example list you chose to run two… that is still low unless the card is meant to be “filler”. Nothing better was available, so Emolga makes it into the deck. If the “skeleton” is to feature the minimum level allowed for cards in the deck (which I thought is what a deck skeleton was supposed to be)… then two Emolga is probably the absolute minimum; one is pretty pointless; either has to be built up or it should be dropped.

    Two Emolga isn’t that great either: your example build runs two Emolga and nine other Basic Pokémon for a total of 11. Consider checking out this older article: its statistics are still valid.

    http://www.pojo.com/Features/X-Act/Odds%20In%20Pokemon%201.htm

    Seems like you’re wasting two slots. Just add an extra Level Ball and Ultra Ball if you’re not worried about mulligans, and find something else to run if you are.

    Lastly, any reason for Computer Search over Dowsing Machine?

    Despite these concerns, I enjoyed your article. Some testing results would have been appreciated, however.

    • Mekkah  → Joseph

      1 Emolga is fine for a skeleton. It gives you the option of getting it out with the minimum space. If you want 2, that’s what the free spots are for.

      • Joseph Lee  → Mekkah

        Explain please.

        My entire point was a single copy of a Pokémon is a waste if it is just being run to open. So is there more strategy I missed, or is the skeleton a lie? If you are always going to add more or drop the single copy, it shouldn’t be in the skeleton.

        I also pointed out I didn’t even want two; for something run only to open, less than three is a waste. Yes, you are not going to use all three… but if you have less than three you have pathetic odds of actually opening with it; the spares may be wasted space later, but are necessary for it to do its job. If three or four slots for an “opener” is too much… you don’t run it at all.

        If this deck didn’t need Virbank City Gym and ran Skyarrow Bridge (so that most things could retreat for free), it would be different.

        • Mekkah  → Joseph

          Maybe if playing 4 guaranteed starting with it, but it doesn’t. So instead, you make the choice of running 1. Now when you do open with it, it’s very nice, and if you don’t, you still have the option of using it turn 2. What’s so difficult here? The skeleton provides a minimum. The minimum according to OP is 1.

        • Joseph Lee  → Mekkah

          What is so difficult is you’re not making much sense.

          Playing four copies of a card never guarantees it. What it does do is increase your odds of starting with it. Three cards still makes sense, especially in a deck running 12 or less Basic Pokémon; a quarter of your possible single Pokémon starts would be with the desired opener, and obviously you still have better odds of starting with it if you have a multi-Pokémon start.

          In this particular deck, you don’t open with Emolga, you don’t get the option of of using it without burning a Switch, whether you go first or second. On your own second turn (whether that is the overall second or third turn of the game), you shouldn’t be burning an Energy attachment and an attack to get two Basic Pokémon from your deck. You had to draw or search for Emolga… an Emolga that could have been a different Pokemon.

          The format is fast enough that Emolga isn’t even immune to being donked, let alone surviving a solid hit once the average deck is set-up. If you open with it, you still have solid odds of getting off an attack with it, maybe even two. Past the (overall) first/second turn of the game? Like I said, it becomes a bad trade…. well unless there is something more important to KO in play.

          A deck skeleton is for the minimum useful amount of a card; it makes no sense to list a false minimum. If you list a card at one but then have to add “…but you will always have to burn one of your open slots on a second copy” then you lie. You have claimed the minimum is lower than it really is and that there is an extra slot not truly there.

          If the writer chooses to use his own personal definition for a term, s/he is obligated to explain that in a work. Doesn’t matter if you’re a World Champ or just an enthusiast without a tournament win to your name; articles are about communication.

        • Mark Hanson  → Joseph

          It makes perfect sense.

          I ran 1-3 Emolga in my Empoleon/Accelgor solely because it’s a Pokemon that sets up well. But 4 is a waste of space.

          In this deck, all you need is a Level Ball and a Switch to pull of a T1 Call for Family, and you haven’t taken up extra space with dead Emolgas. Skyla can be either of those 2 cards, and both are run in relatively high numbers.

          Not that I necessarily agree with the direction/list that the OP has taken, but 1 Emolga in a skeleton is definitely an acceptable proposal.

        • Joseph Lee  → Mark

          So… read the rest of the discussion, or just jumping in? I’ve got one of my nice, detailed responses if you have read everything, but before I post it I want to make sure it is needed; the article’s author explained why he was running only one or two Emolga, and how they were meant to function. It was in a manner I didn’t expect to be worth it. I don’t know if it is, but I know understand the reasoning behind it.

        • Mark Hanson  → Joseph

          Yes. I did read the rest of the discussion. You last said: “but it sounds like Emolga really is high functioning filler.” Your admission of “I can accept that and the usefulness of other Pokémon in your open as being reason not to bog the deck down with too many copies of a Pokémon like Emolga.” isn’t actually an acknowledgement of the usefulness of 1-2 Emolga in a deck, as a starter.

          I responded to the post most relevant to my point, where you unabashedly defame the mere notion of using 1-2 of a Starter Pokemon.

          So I gave you an example of a recent deck that had seen fair success, which ran only 1-3 Emolga (often settling on 2). The deck had no other good starters (though the 1 copy of Mew EX could technically copy Emolga’s attack). But I could instead use the example of Thundurus in ZekEels. True, some people played heavy counts. But many others played only 1, despite a full intention to try and open with it when possible.

          So other Pokemon and their usefulness as alternate starters aside:

          “1 slot in a skeleton for a starter Pokemon is more than acceptable.”

          Is my point.

        • Joseph Lee  → Mark

          If you want to explain how Emolga works as a good starter in an Empoleon/Accelgor deck, then go ahead: explain it, don’t “name drop it”. Then after you explain it there, you’re going to have to further explain how this transfers to the Ninetales/Amoongus deck.

          It may be hard to believe, but when I am wrong I want to know it… but for me to recognize it requires someone explain it so that I can comprehend. When you are writing a strategy article, if I am not a part of your intended target audience (a mediocre player with a long history but comparatively little first hand experience for the current format), then as a writer your job would be to communicate with me.

          As someone responding to my points in a thread, you still need to make sure I understand. If I don’t, it doesn’t matter even if you are otherwise “correct”; you still fail at communicating. I know this, because it is the bitter pill I have to swallow quite often due to my many spectacular failures over the years.

          As was finally explained to me… Emolga is a bit of filler. It is useful
          enough to open with, but not something you burn a Level Ball and Switch to ensure you attack with first turn. The Switch may not be that big of a deal, but this is a deck that is going to need every Level Ball it has.

          It seems unlikely Emolga will attack more than once, and highly
          unlikely it would get more than two attacks off. If Emolga gets
          two attacks off, it would be worth the investment; a Level Ball, a Switch, an Energy (and attachment), and attack for four Basic Pokémon.

          If you only get one Call For Family off, it doesn’t work out that well; will you really need to Bench two Mewtwo EX first turn that often? Mewtwo EX is the only target in the example build Level Ball can’t hit. If you burn a Level Ball, Switch, and Energy attachment on Emolga and you don’t go for two targets Level Ball can’t snag, you only net one additional Pokémon for that Switch, Energy (and attachment), and attack.

          When a Pokémon is vital to your opening, you run three or four copies to improve your odds of opening with it, and you make sure your deck can deal with the extra copies. This deck doesn’t run Ultra Ball or Pokémon Communication or anything else that would put spare Emolga to use; if Emolga opens were important enough, it would need to adjust for that.

          As for Thundurus and Zeels, this is exactly why you have to really look at how your “example” worked. Of course, maybe I don’t know that deck well enough; feel free to let me know when I’ve got such a thing wrong, even if I may be less than grateful at first. ¬_¬

          Zeels decks have Eelektrik for Energy acceleration, and it is “from the discard” Energy acceleration. This means discarding Energy to Retreat isn’t a total loss and can function as a form of Energy transference. It ran (runs?) Skyarrow Bridge to zero out the Retreat Cost of at least some of the Basic Pokémon in the deck… which means you aren’t burning a Switch to promote a lone Thundurus after you searched it out from your deck.

          Speaking of searching, since we are wanting to fuel Dynamotor, if you need to discard Energy for Ultra Ball to search out Thundurus, you are still fueling the core strategy of the deck even before Thundurus attacks. Thundurus isn’t attacking to Bench Pokémon, but to accelerate Energy from the deck; something at the time no Item did.

          So even if you did have to use a Switch to get your previous Active to the Bench and promote a Thundurus you just used Ultra Ball to snag from your deck, you aren’t trading an Item for a Pokémon you need to attach an Energy to and attack with to get two more Pokemon. You are trading an Item for a Pokémon, possibly setting up for Dynamotor the next turn, and attaching an Energy to a Pokémon to attack with to fetch a replacement Energy in a deck that wanted to run very few Energy.

          There is also the difference of Thundurus having an HP score that still isn’t an easy FTKO now. Back then there were even less Pokémon that could efficiently put the hurt on it and still have a great showing elsewhere. Thundurus was likely to get two attacks and possibly three off before it was KOed, and was a significant enough threat in its own right that it wasn’t safe to ignore.

          So maybe now you can understand why I am unclear on the matter.

          tl;dr: Please explain the Empoleon/Accelgor example in more detail, remember that you then have to make sure the same principles apply here, and Thundurus in Zeels doesn’t really compare due to many differences in how the decks and respective openers (Thundurus and Emolga) operate. I was wrong that there was no reason to run a lone Emolga or two Emolga; as the article’s author kindly explained it isn’t a high priority opener but more of a buffer; when he opens with it “great”, when he doesn’t, not a big deal.

        • Joseph Lee  → Joseph

          Oh, and when I am not a part of the target audience, then I am best ignored, even if I may find it annoying. ;-)

        • Mark Hanson  → Joseph

          “In this deck, all you need is a Level Ball and a Switch to pull of a T1 Call for Family, and you haven’t taken up extra space with dead Emolgas. Skyla can be either of those 2 cards, and both are run in relatively high numbers.”

          Explanation. And similarly this also applies to Emp/Acc. One Level Ball to nab an Emolga, which nets you 2 Pokemon from your deck (turning 1 Level Ball into the effect of 2). Totally worth it first turn.

          Not that I think more justification is required, but a mid-game Emolga for a setup-deck has the same sort of utility that a mid-game Sableye has for a Darkrai deck.

          Similarly, even if a starter is not “vital” to a deck’s open, it’s still worth including the option. Thus, back to the original point, a 1-of starter in a skeleton is more than acceptable.

          Now I’m sorry for bringing up Thundurus as it caused us to deviate from the point, but nonetheless the point of Thundurus was to setup for 2nd turn pressure (similar to an Emolga in a setup deck). Discarding lightning using a search card was irrelevant, as Thundurus did that anyways by turn 2. That was the point of that example. Same principles, different method. T2 pressure, different ways to go about it.

          tl;dr: Look up at my first post. All I’m saying is: “1 Emolga in a skeleton is definitely an acceptable proposal.”

        • Joseph Lee  → Mark

          II wanted to be careful how I said this: hopefully I will succeed. >_<

          My earlier comment was that a skeleton shouldn't contain a single copy of a card that was either going to just be cut or added to and seldom if ever played as a single. I stand by that; what has changed is now I understand how the card I was addressing (Emolga) is being used in the deck.

          Some of this comes down to semantics, but when you are engaging in a discussion semantics can be quite important. "Opener" has a certain meaning to me, and from what I can tell I am not alone in how I use it; your opener is the Pokémon you want to open with. If you have more than one "opener" candidate, you might have a "main opener" and an "secondary" or "alternate" opener, or perhaps they all are equally proficient.

          Alternate openers also serve another purpose in the deck; you don't see an alternate opener that is only good for opening, unless it is an "aggressive" alternate opener, such as a donk deck would use for Type-matching and even then it is still often a decent fallback attacker.

          In all cases, you wish for your "best" opener to be your initial starting Pokémon as often as possible, or at least want to make sure odds are better one of your openers is opening for you instead of your "non-openers".

          I now comprehend the concept of a different kind of opener: the "optional" opener. This is similar to the "alternate" opener, except this optional opener has no other purpose but to open and is not vital to open with. There are shades of this in some of the other opener categories, but something you want to open with but not badly enough to run in a manner that it will either be your initial starting Pokémon or is easy and effective to make your Active after the fact.

          In some decks, you can fudge things easily to get your opener up front even if it wasn't in your opening hand. We (you Crawdaunt and myself) disagree on if it is worth burning a Level Ball and a Switch just to get an Emolga up front to then attach an Energy and attack to search your deck for two Pokémon when at least one could have just been fetched with the initial Level Ball.

          The previous paragraph is not limited to this deck, but specific to decks that would function similarly. When we come to the Thundurus in older Zeels (perhaps current; I am behind on this), while similar, there are some distinct differences. The Zeels deck has an easier time of getting a non-opening hand Thundurus up front, and what Thundurus does for set-up isn't easily replicated with an Item.

          Thundurus can also can function as a solid beatstick, while Emolga is only useful as a token free retreating Pokémon or emergency attacker. While you could promote Emolga to attack with between Ninetales being KOed, Call For Family is of a much more limited use than Thundurus and or Sableye (another example of an opener used mid or even late game). While there may be no Energy for Thundurus to further accelerate, again it is a solid beatstick. Sableye will rarely if ever lack one (and often two) useful Items it can retrieve.

          I am sorry if I seem like I am being overly precise, but this is how I approach this game. I do recognize that I was wrong and that at least conceptually, the skeleton for this deck can justify a lone Emolga. I am not completely convinced this is the optimal play, but it isn't the "waste" I originally thought it was when I was under the impression it was something you had to work to make Active, instead of something to take or leave.

        • Mark Hanson  → Joseph

          If that works for you. Alternate or whatever. In Emp/Acc for instance, Emolga isn’t really an alternate opener, it’s just straight up the only opener the deck has. In this Ninetales/Amoongus deck, yes the deck has weaker openers. But my initial reaction stemmed from the idea that you could use Emolga exactly as you use it in a deck like Emp/Accelgor.

          In this format, you don’t want to use Juniper recklessly in setup decks. A Sykla for a Switch/Level Ball on the first turn can save you from having to discard an extra copy or two of something like a Rare Candy, or a Ninetales etc… This example is specific, but I hope you can see how useful “burning” a switch/level ball would be if the Switch was just going to end up in the discard anyways.

          And when the deck’s goal is to bench as many Pokemon on the first turn as possible, if you can turn one Level Ball/Switch into 3 Pokemon (Emolga at least functions as a free retreater throughout the game, serving as utility), I’d say that’s a fair trade.

          Semantics aside, I don’t see how “My entire point was a single copy of a Pokémon is a waste if it is just being run to open.” can be taken any other way.

          That is all, no point in continuing beyond this. Cheers, peace out.

        • Joseph Lee  → Mark

          shrugs

          There were aspects I didn’t understand (explained elsewhere) and aspects I didn’t agree with. I can still tell a lot of what I am trying to say isn’t coming across, and given some of your conclusions, I assume the same holds true from your end.

          Personally I think this was discussed not quite as much as it needed to be, because I still don’t understand, still didn’t agree with your examples, etc. That being said, thanks for trying.

          Happy gaming! ;)

    • Antonio Perez  → Joseph

      First, Im really sorry for taking so long too reply. I’ve been in school all day. The reason for the whole emolga thing is bevause Emolga isn’t supposed to be the starter in every single match. Don’t get me wrong, it is good, but all the other basics do a good job at leading as well. Mewtwo(for just a DCE) and add early game damage. Foongus is sorta like Emolga, so leading with that is like leading with Emolga. Lastly, if you start with vulpix, you get the option to do turn 2 180 damage hexed flamed(because of vulpix’s attack). So thats why the focus of a starter is not Emolga. Also, I just simply like Search more than Dowsing Machine. It helps get the last piece you need for a big early attack. Oh, and Im a guy. Though my name would have made that clear :P

      • Joseph Lee  → Antonio

        Honestly it wasn’t that long to reply; your apology is nonetheless gratefully accepted.

        Also is your further explanation of strategy. Not to force what you said into my preconceived notions, but it sounds like Emolga really is high functioning filler, then. Dropping it would lower your Basic Pokémon count, and I take it there isn’t something else you would prefer to open with, such as another Foongus… or am I still not understanding?

        The likelihood of making a first/second turn burn stick seems kind of low, but again I can accept that and the usefulness of other Pokémon in your open as being reason not to bog the deck down with too many copies of a Pokémon like Emolga. Thank you for explaining.

        Not convinced on Computer Search over Dowsing Machine; great you get off a big early attack… now what? Is it really that significant a bump in reliability? Especially since past early game, Dowsing Machine provides a similar benefit with respect to otherwise irredeemable Trainers? Thanks for saying why, though.

        As for your gender… yes I would assume your name belonged to a guy. However I made a comment or two that were about things in general… such as the goal of a writer; modern conventions mean I can no longer just write “he” without some balking and using the third person masculine term as gender neutral. Such comments could apply here (but don’t seem to, now that you have weighed in), but since it wasn’t specifically about you… yeah doesn’t restrict it to just being a dude. ;)

        • Antonio Perez  → Joseph

          Oh ok. I didn’t know that you were talking about writers in general. Thanks for explaining and understanding my views :]

  4. Bryant

    I have been testing this a lot ever since virbank laser came out, and it does a pretty decent job. It is meant to set up fast and hit hard early in the game, disrupting Stage 2 decks and putting early pressure on those big EXs. Before Plasma Storm, the deck had trouble mid to late game, seeing as you would run out of devolution sprays or all of your foongus were already evolved into amoonguss. Seeing as you now have another way to inflict status conditions, the deck now has a way to push through into the late game. What also makes this really great is that this second source is searchable, making skyla essential in consistently hitting for at least 70+30 poison. The only downside is that if you can’t shut your opponent down quick enough, for example darkrai, it has a really tough time throughout the whole game. And if they play max potion, it makes the match up even tougher. I was originally going to play this deck for states. After play testing a lot with a friend, I realized that it just doesn’t pack as powerful of a punch as I thought it would. It is still a fun rogue deck though that I expect to see at states, especially with plasma klang being the dominant rogue deck among players.

  5. Jonathon James

    I’ve been playing this deck since its release in Black and White: Dragons Exalted. While I like the list you have. I would ssay that Emolga is a tad unneccesary. I feel as if Sableye gives you the best opening option in terms of chances to setup. Emolga is a bench liability late game and with Sableye its possible to get ack valuable tools the deck needs to thrash unsuspecting opponents. But Im glad you gave the deck the recognition it deserves. It’s not a good idea to forget about it.

  6. Laurent Straten

    I’ve extensively tested this (with my own build); and also played it at Scottish regionals, and will probably be bringing it down to Manchester in two weeks time. I did alright in the tournament, though not spectacular, and for something as rogue and donkable as this, that’s a good sign.

    It is ridiculously fun to play.

    Matchups wise, I’ve concluded that big basics is favourable, keldeo is favourable, and plasmaklang obviously so.
    However, Darkrai causes problems. It’s not unwinnable, but it’s tough from the onset, and one misplay, one wrong choice will ruin you the game.
    Garbodor obviously wrecks this build, and it’s going to increase in popularity again, especially with the recent wins all over the place featuring the garbage heap.
    I’m currently running one tool scrapper with a dowsing machine as well, but think it might even be worth bumping to two.
    But that’s the problem with this deck now. No longer is it a running out of steam issue, but rather a running out of space issue. These builds are destined to be extremely tight, and that leaves little room for metagame flexibility.

Leave a Reply

You are logged out. Register. Log in.