Is conservative play still rewarded?

[SynchroKing]

This is my first article so please be nice.


As this format closes another one opens. While this is true, we need to see that it is not a good thing. Things are not really going to change, and what i mean by this is that it is still going to be a aggro populated format. With sabers and sams in the same meta it will wreak havoc.

What i am getting at is that conservative plays are not really rewarded anymore. When your opp. can rip 4-5 synchros in a turn. You can have the best control deck in the world, but your plays just wont reap the same kind of reward they once did. these are my thought although dis organized i tried lol like i said it is my first article so please be nice lol. without further adu please discuss

[moopadoop]

yur rite sams and sabers r aggro. but debris blackwings and maybe gk scraps and monarchs mite still be competitive. i mean gks just won a ycs. gks aren't super aggro like they can't explode in one turn. yet they were able to win a ycs. albet that mite be cuz of Royal Tribute being sacky. but at least that proves these aggro decks aren't super dominate. they can still be beat. and if sams really do wreck the meta they'll prolly b hit by banlist anyway haha

[SynchroKing]

yur rite sams and sabers r aggro. but debris blackwings and maybe gk scraps and monarchs mite still be competitive. i mean gks just won a ycs. gks aren't super aggro like they can't explode in one turn. yet they were able to win a ycs. albet that mite be cuz of Royal Tribute being sacky. but at least that proves these aggro decks aren't super dominate. they can still be beat. and if sams really do wreck the meta they'll prolly b hit by banlist anyway haha

lol your right but that wasnt the whole point of the article though lol it was basically showing that even though there are still some con. decks that do well most of the time they are wrecked by the meta

[bitbna]

lol your right but that wasnt the whole point of the article though lol it was basically showing that even though there are still some con. decks that do well most of the time they are wrecked by the meta

Aggro decks are not the "meta", and neither are control decks. Both make up the current metagame.

Honestly, Sabers are not the best deck currently, and Samurai's have yet to be released in America. Playstyle has a lot more to do with gamestate and matchups than it does with "Sabers are faster that GK's, and make more syncros = better."

In any format, both aggressive and conservative playstyles are rewarded if utilized properly, with any deck, excluding some decks like Frog FTK.

If anything, Dark Hole promotes conservative play with aggressive decks, as blowing your whole hand to make Gottoms and discard 3 is good, a topdeck Dark Hole will most likely mean a loss for X-Sabers. A conservative method would be to sit on Fulhelm, Pashuul or Emmersblade and gather enough cards to comeback from something like Dark Hole, or even force your opponent to use it if they have no other answer.

[NeoGuilt]

To answer OP's question, no. Personally, running sabers, I often smack conservative players, although I do run into a Veiler every once in a while.

Additional Comment:

If anything, Dark Hole promotes conservative play with aggressive decks, as blowing your whole hand to make Gottoms and discard 3 is good, a topdeck Dark Hole will most likely mean a loss for X-Sabers.

Quoted for truth.

[The_Dark_Monarch]

I would also have to say no.

I run a stun deck...Chaos Stun. My deck is meant to be 'ultra conservative' and is meant to control the field from Turn 1.

As Chaos Stun doesn't really have any 'searchers', 'Recruiters' or 'raw draw power'...whenever I post my deck, people will tell me 'your deck is too slow...you need to put the Gravekeeper Engine' in it...you need to run Snowman Eaters, Dekoichis and the like...'

I usually retort with 'making a control deck 'faster' will not make it any better. It's not like my deck relies on one combo that I must bring out and all you are doing is sacrificing consistency for speed'.

Then, they are like 'have fun losing to Gravekeepers, Sabers and the like'.

So, in all, no. Conservative play is not rewarded.

[perzeus]

I'm a conservative player, and i have to agree, it's not rewarding enough to play conservatively and hasn't been since a good while ago.

I think it was around the time that Phantom of Darkness was released that i had to adopt a more aggresive playstyle since decks got so faster and there was so rampant destruction that you either adopted an aggresive style or would find yourself overwhelmed by the amount of destruction and resources those decks could generate.

[cocy965]

Conservative play will always be rewarded.
For example,
lets say you get the whole crazy samurai combo off and end with a field of.
Gateway (Solemn Judgment)
Grandmaster Kizan Kizan Shien
and a hand of the six in hand

Thats great, but if your opponent has a single Battle Fader, and can get over the solemn, hand and the shiens effect, he is in control. Now that may sound like a lot to get over, but in actually it takes maybe 4-5 cards (pretend you're playing frog monarch)
summon treeborn (sorry for such a specific scenario)
play econ <- negated by shien
mst the solemn
tribute fader for caius, remove shien
set spiritual art aoi.

Done.
And that was a more worst case scenario for the monarch player.
Now I may be saying this because I lean towards conservatism, but its better to conserve too many cards than too overextend.

Thats why a lot of top end players also end up just like setting a monster and a spell/trap pass. Even if they have some loop. Its because they want to wait for more control cards to really dominate the game state.

Also as mentioned before Dark Hole helps conservative play a lot, now if only we had Heavy Storm...

[DarwinDawkins09]

I play plants and as with any deck I play conservatively most of the time but play style really depends on what deck you're playing against and what the situation is currently like. Decks like plants, sabers, and blackwings can be played flexibly and in order to top at a regional or YCS you have to be able to go from conservative to aggro between match ups and even within the same duel.

Playing conservatively will not give you the edge all the time but doing it at the right time will give you game.

[katamura]

i like to play blackwings very liberally tbh, but on the occasion where I do decide to play conservatively, it produces good results (particularly against machina, GBs and Sabers).

[Silver Contrail]

Conservative play is still rewarded...but you need to be able to switch from conservative to aggressive in any deck you play. That's what makes LSS so effective. Playing just aggro means running into every D-Prison, Ryko, and Snowman out there while losing your field time and time again to Monarchs, Dark Hole, Torrential, Mirror Force, JD, DAD, Icarus, and so on. Playing just conservative means your opponent can just wait for the OTK, and Cold Wave + Boggart into game.

[The Golem Knight]

Mosquitos punish the high attack monsters so if you can make it through that turn of several synchros with a Waboku or something you still got a chance
but first I gotta make it to locals lol

[QKForever]

Conservatism is only good to an extent, a good player needs to know when to push and control the pace of the game throughout.

[PKpwnage]

In a word, yes. Several duels still revolve around card advantage, tempo, and field control. It just happens less often than previously due to the huge influx of cards that can spooge out 8000+ atk in a single turn.

[The Golem Knight]

Aka konami being a *******

[Kitsune Blue]

OTKs are way too fast and too powerful for conservative play to be entirely viable.

Free cards abound, makes it impossible for conservative play to stay on top 100% of the time. Dumping your hand for game CAN still happen.

[Vespa]

I would hardly call this an article, but anyways. Conservative play is not always rewarded, but going complete aggro, aka overextending (man I don't think I've seen this word since Heavy was banned) is not always rewarded either. A lot of skill comes with trying to read your opponent, and knowing the right times to play defense, and to go aggro

[Dark-Sephiroth]

Obviously you HAVE to be conservative to a certain extent. If you drop every single resource you can, as soon as you can, most likely you'll lose.

But holding back on plays or trying to hold out that extra turn to pull off that +1 play is giving your opponent an ample chance to either cripple your field or take game in one shot.

[YuGiOhChampion]

I agree with that. I usually play conservative. My chances to lose something big in a turn are very small.

[Kitsune Blue]

What people in this topic fail to realize is, I can play conservative all day, have a +3 over my opponent, and have a nice field just to have them play Cold Wave, double Faultroll, and suddenly my advantage is gone.

[Calvin Tahan]

This is a lucksacking, topdecking format before. Plays made through Debris Dragon, Blizzard, Monster Reborn and the like are all really broken. Personally, I do play conservatively. I like to wait until I have what I need for the finishing push, and then go for it. That's my play style; I find it rewarding. However, conservative decks themselves, such as Gadgets? They're seeing less and less play, for pretty much the reasons you stated above. This format is simply too explosive for a good control to be accomplished. Having 3 Gadgets and a Doomcal in your hand is a nice plus on your opponent, but when they Cold Wave your backfield and drop a high-level monster, there isn't much you can do.

So yeah, conservative decks are dead. Conservative play is not.

[XxGearxX]

I play conservatively with every deck i have, weither its normally played that way or not. I think playing a deck a different way than most people normally face it during game one can set me up for a match win, due to confusion.

This theory has yet to be proven though.

[bencher]

No real reason to play conservative when i can drop 2 synchros and 2 back rows and still have 4-6 cards in hand when i end my turn

[QuantumWreck]

I slow played against a bw deck (with duality/warning) at my local and beat it (ended up 3-1), after setting up for an OTK with a quickdraw deck. I guess I'm a passive/aggressive player now.

[megacloud]

In my opinion you only get rewarded mid-late game, if a game goes that far.

[Xylyze]

Good decks tend to play conservatively (not losing advantage) and then can explode to deliver a game winning state to you. How you proceed from there is just a matter of taste, like bringing out 3 synchros for game or just keep poking at their lifepoints. Sabers can summon alot of beefy monsters while still not losing advantage. The difference is in what kind of floaters your deck uses.
TL;DR: set 5 go still wins games if you know how to counter the deck you are playing

[trenchi]

conserving wins games. but only beacuse when the OP pushes for game you can stop it, then push right back. you almost have to be agro at some point during the game this format. if you wait to long you get run over by 0219341289238 syncros on one turn, play to early and one warning,cumpolsory,bottomless, will leave you open for those big monsters next turn. i play GB's and i fing the best fiels is herk in defence untill i can trunade gyzarus spam find the plays you win with and don't be afraid to push when you can