Commentary: The "RAP" system of dueling /deck-building

[bu-ultimate]

[Originally posted in "Gossip," but someone suggested this forum might enjoy it also.]


I’ve been playing this game for almost four years now, and in the course of having my son’s friends (and some of mine) want to know how to play the game and build decks – I’ve come up with a simple system that has successfully helped them in understanding -- and becoming more proficient at -- the game.

I call it “RAP” -- Remove-Attack-Protect. It’s also centered mainly around three phases of gameplay: Main Phase 1, Battle Phase, Main Phase 2.

Obviously this is oversimplified for the beginner, but allow me to share the principles behind the system.

REMOVE: Remove obstacles on your opponent’s field (or hand). Typically in Main Phase 1, you want to remove Spells, Traps, and/or Monsters from your opponent’s side of the field (if possible) so that you have a clear field with which to attack. In Main Phase 1, the use of spells, such as Heavy Storm, Mystical Space Typhoon, Fissure, Hammershot, Smashing Ground, Lightning Vortex, etc. are all applicable.

From that point, you summon (or set) a monster. Obviously setting a monster is considered a “protective” move, so if the only thing you can do is set a monster, move directly to “Protect.”


ATTACK: In the Battle Phase, after removing whatever obstacles you can, attack your opponent. If you can’t, move on to “Protect.”


PROTECT: Probably one of the most crucial steps in this system is “Protect.” If you have removed all the obstacles possible, and successfully attacked, then protect yourself with defensive cards that can be used during your opponent’s turn, or that prevent your opponent from their "Remove-Attack-Protect" process. Some of the basics: Book of Moon, Enemy Controller, Scapegoat, Swords of Revealing Light, (Bottomless) Trap Hole, Mirror Force, Sakuretsu Armor, Torrential Tribute.

I see players who are not beginners make mistakes here all the time. When they move to the stage of “protecting” their field, they overextend themselves.

When going into the “Protect” step, don’t set every option possible because your opponent may come back with heavy removal, and you’ll lose your protection. A typical deck plays 6-8 Traps, 2-3 Quickplay spells, and maybe 1-2 "stall" cards. If you set four cards to the Spell/Trap Zone, that's almost half of all your protective Spell/Trap cards.

Don’t win the battle, but lose the war.

Also note that certain deck types (such as BURN, EXODIA) rarely go through the "Attack" step (or even the "Remove" step), but instead rely heavily on "protecting" themselves -- preventing the opponent from successfully going through their "Remove-Attack-Protect" steps -- while creating their specific win condition. If you are looking to build one of these deck types, you'll need to take into consideration that possibly 1/3 of your deck is simply "stalling" your opponent.

The same can be said for determining what cards to place in a side deck that combat against these deck types. Cards that "remove" your opponent's field or hand advantage, or that "protect" you from damage being inflicted by card effect become crucial.


CONCLUSION: I think that most duelists, whether they realize it or not, ask themselves these three things during a duel: “Can I Remove?” “Can I Attack?” “Can I Protect?” These questions can also be asked when attempting to build decks. “What cards can I put in my deck that give me one of these three things?”


So that’s it. Hopefully you find this information helpful in the process of gameplay / deck-building.

I invite any constructive comments / feedback to this, and maybe start a conversation about methods that help you become more effective at the game.

Thanks for reading.

[Haiti]

Originally Posted by bu-ultimate

[Originally posted in "Gossip," but someone suggested this forum might enjoy it also.]CONCLUSION: I think that most duelists, whether they realize it or not, ask themselves these three things during a duel: “Can I Remove?” “Can I Attack?” “Can I Protect?” These questions can also be asked when attempting to build decks. “What cards can I put in my deck that give me one of these three things?”


So that’s it. Hopefully you find this information helpful in the process of gameplay / deck-building.

I invite any constructive comments / feedback to this, and maybe start a conversation about methods that help you become more effective at the game.

Thanks for reading.

you're thinking to linearly with this method. you don't need to remove to attack. you can have monsters that have already gained you something/will gain you something when destroyed (mainly Sangan and THB) to attack. this way, you will make your opponent think twice about attacking. if you already gained something from the monster or will gain something from the monster when it's destroyed, your opponent will not try to stop it, most likely. this way you can press attacks without fear.

it also depends on what you read the spell/trap to be. if you don't think it's threatening/a bluff, why would you need to remove it? no point, right? so don't, and just let it go.

those are just some examples of where your theory fails. it's a pretty bad theory.

[Screaming.Mantis]

heres how it really goes:
a.)make original deck and lose
or
b.)netdeck something and win and become noticed. thats all this game is about

[blitzaro]

Originally Posted by 1okr

heres how it really goes:
a.)make original deck and lose
or
b.)netdeck something and win and become noticed. thats all this game is about

haiz... wadever happened to originality???
honestly i would prefer a original deck which is fun but at the same time, competetive.
imagine u lost to a well built plant deck with ur chimera...
or losing to a phantom thief deck.
i m nt saying u r wrong, but i beg to differs with (b)

[Kaiba-san]

Originally Posted by 1okr

heres how it really goes:
a.)make original deck and lose
or
b.)netdeck something and win and become noticed. thats all this game is about

People like you need to shut the **** up. Competitive does not equal netdecking. Those who netdeck to win are weeded out by those who make decks by themselves.

But someone could netdeck to innovate as well. An idea can be expanded on something by someone who did not originally create the deck.

[bluesilversword]

"bu-ultimate" speaks the truth, the article is very insightful to the very core of how many people play this game, his RAP system I find is used by many players in one way or another and is highly effective at teaching players how to play efficently. Once they have learnt this method of play, they can branch out into all differant kinds of decks.

I have also been playing this game for about 4 years myself and use a similar teaching method to your own, but I put a little more importance on being able to counter rathar then just protect. Protecting yourself is all well and good, but you need to learn how to counter certain situations and turn them in your favour aswell. I also use specific situation tests on my students, like the win in one turn tests etc. It really helps them develop their styles at duelists. Overall I find your theroy is pretty solid.

"1okr" Sorry buddy, although I do agree with alot of what you say on other parts in this forum, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on your above post. Original decks can and have won many times before (maybe not where you live but definatly where I live) There are netdeckers in my area but they fall into two differant groups.

(c) The ones who netdeck to gain a foothold in this game to gain experiance then move on to develop their own style, these are the netdeckers that get noticed.

(d) The kind that are just there to win with little to no effort and have no interest in learning anything else and think thier great. These people get less attention then the newbies that ask "Can I summon a monster in face-up def mode?" Those people are not liked and are often kicked out of tourny wherever they go.

So I disagree completly with part (a) but agree with you if the netdeckers(b) you are talking about fall under part (c) if your talking about the part (d) kind well then I just can't agree with your statement. But that your opinion and this is my after all.

[bu-ultimate]

bluesilversword: Thank you for the feedback. I completely agree with the "countering" of your opponent's move(s). I should definitely elaborate on it within the "Protect" stage of your turn.

That's probably why I love to play this game so much -- it's not a "Your-Turn-My-Turn" game. You're always having to think about your moves, and anticipate your opponent's response, and next moves.

Yu-Gi-Oh! It's a lot like chess, but the pieces are much cooler looking ...

[X-elemental]

agreed
,But I don't think YGO is simple as chess
chess is alot more simple, yet signifacially harder

1otk:
Do you realise every dek has been orginal at some point

cyber-stein has been orginal
Royal Magical Libary has been orginal
goat control has been orginal
I remember times when playing RFTDD deck was considred such orginal move.
even Chaos Sorcerer was once orginal, or attacking with spirit reaper orginal
playing without tributes has been orginal.

you need to realise, something needs to be created first.If you netdeck last winning deck, well.....you've first deck in action.but someone created it.If you do something thats over it, its next deck in action.you get fame and you win more, because you know your deck better