First topic message reminder :

This is the Quest for the Perfect Deck. Some say it is impossible. Before you agree with them you must ask yourself, does being perfect mean the deck never loses, or that it is perfect for the duelist that uses it?

If you answered with the second option, then I invite you to join me in my quest!
If you answered with the first option, well why are you still reading?

Anyways I just recently started this quest. I am looking for a deck that is perfect for me. Now I am only one person, with only one mind! So if you have any ideas on decks that might be my perfect deck, please let me know your suggestions.

If you would like to join me in my quest check around for deck ideas, deck types, anything that will inspire you to make different decks. A perfect deck for each duelist exists, now its our responsibility to find it. Are YOU up to the challenge?

You must be another meta player, which is why you got so mad about he six sams.

dont see how madolche spellbook would work.......... only thing that brings them together is they both have a rather broken field spell, and some good spellcasters. I guess it could work, but dont know how consistant it'd be.

pretty much the spellbooks would give the power to the weak madolche's

zart you play lightsworns... that was meta at one point still is its been seen at regionals from this format... meta is common decks used not how good a deck is remember that so six sams are meta yes however theyre win condition went down soo much so you cant say theyre OP still its all on how you play the deck so therefore you dont know two shits on your search for the perfect deck

This was made to get posts and a list of more original decks for people to build, and everyone turned it into a "use six sams" thing. Quit being butthurt that I insulted your little six sams, and either contribute to what this was originally made for or go away.

my perfect deck is my chaos agents i've meticulously hand choosed each card my self worked to get the ones i need via trades and other means till it was finnally finished and now its a part of me my deck and i are a team and constantly evolving

perfect decks are one with theyre duelist ;D
(also, what kind of perv signature is that zart?!?!)

Lol its not a perv signature, its the story of my life xD

yeah, sure...

w.e agents are so being overplayed by everyone

For clarification purposes only, no, I'm not arguing because I am a meta player. That is not the point of the argument. And I'm pretty sure I explicitly stated in a previous post or in that statement that I build my own decks and that I have my own original OTK that has never been seen in competitive play. So no, I am not a meta player.
The point of my previous statement was that either 1) all decks are autopilot because there's a certain win condition/optimal combo with each deck which takes out the argument that "oh I don't like this deck because it's autopilot", or 2) no decks are autopilot and therefore unwarranted complaining about presumably autopilot combo which is actually just a popular combo, not "autopilot" is completely unjustified.

I bet you've been dueling before and you were thinking about, "Oh if I drew this card, or this card, I would win." Totally. Because that's exactly as you guys define autopilot. A systematic way to win in which anyone who knows it could use it to almost guarantee a win. Which means, EVEN IF you had an original deck, it would be autopilot based on your definition. Therefore I offered an alternative which was to consider that no decks are autopilot and that even when you do decide to combo, sometimes it relies on your decisions and thinking ahead of your opponent. There's a reason he/she is there, to not allow you to win. Which means, even if you were to mass swarm the field with lets say windups, you hit a torrential on your last giga-brilliant/utopia/shock master, depending on whichever combo you choose to go with, where are you now? Now tell me, how is that autopilot? My own original deck relies on combos, of course, and can also play explosively when the time is right. When is that timing right?

It's like a game of Starcraft (@cheesfactory @twi LOL), there are timing pushes in the game. It's not like it's an autopilot way to win. In theory it grants you the game winning push because your opponent has not reached a certain point in their tech tree/unit production to be able to win a battle/is expanding. But in actuality, what really happens? If it were so simple, wouldn't everyone timing push instead of fast expand? For an era in SC2, yes, timing pushes were a huge thing. Anyone who got the timing down correctly would instantly win the game. But how come it doesn't see as much use now and fast expand is better? Because people have responses. They won't sit back and die to the timing push every game (metaphorically linked back to dueling as in they won't just sit there letting you faceroll with 10000 kizans/laggia dolkka/triple grapha/utopia, papilloperative, giga-brilliant, zenmaighty (or whatever combo you decide to go)/BLS, Hyperion, Kristya/Moulinglacia, Abyssmegalo, or any mermail-atlantean Otk. They will always find an answer. If you do manage to lose to a combo, don't go blaming it on the "OH THAT DECK IS SOOOOO AUTOPILOT, HE JUST MAGICIAN SHARK'D ME, SO OP, NEED BANS." or "OH GATEWAY OF THE SIX IS THE MOST BROKEN CARD EVER, GIVES SO MUCH ADVANTAGE AND MAKES SIX SAMS AUTOPILOT." or "OH LAGGIA/DOLKKA IS SO BROKEN, I COULDN'T DO ANYTHING! AUTOPILOT!"

So tell me now, ESPECIALLY in this format where we see that many different decks have been winning YCS and not ONE deck is completely wrecking the format, do people just sit around and let decks win? What happened after YCS Toronto? Not only did people tech in cards like Maxx-C, Effect Veiler, Gozen Match, they massed them. Maining Maxx-C was the new thing. Everyone ran copies of Gozen Match in their side. That overcompensation allowed a different deck to win the YCS the next tourney. Same thing happened every YCS. How autopilot is Wind-ups after YCS Toronto? It wasn't. Magician, reveal shark, opponent discards Maxx-C. Now what? How autopilot are you now?

tl;dr, either 1) all decks are autopilot under your definition or 2) take my alternative for it, no decks are autopilot unless you are willing to go play solitaire. You can't really be serious about dueling with yourself.

the story of your life has amazing boobs xD

Lol that exact girl isnt the story of my life, redheads making the world go round is the story of my life.

Oracle apparently you don't know me, because with decks not even tier 3 i beat six sams, wind-ups, darkworlds, and others. I don't care what other people play, i plainly said I don't want an auto-pilot deck.

I have many decks where its all set up to work together without trying to work for a certain point.

You also havent noticed where i said to drop the argument or leave, because this topic was made to get posts about people favorite decks, not actually to look for a perfect deck, and not to argue.
So seriously drop the argument and help with the posting, or leave this topic, please.

well the way i see it, running something as odd as a top tier doesnt just payback, i mean, it can be hard to make a good deck, no matter what style youre going for, but when using something like that you dont need to think that much, for the combos you already know, how about exploring a bit more possibilities?, ive been kicking top tier asses with gem-knights, ive found a lot of huge proportioned combos that can be used, the problem here is that everyone is simply too lazy to go for something that doesnt seem to have massive combos, instead of discovering some, they rather just work with something already done and modify it a bit to theyre style, how much can you progress in deck building and in the game itself that way?, now, some people can work it off, that doesnt mean everyone has to think ''maybe im that guy'', just go ahead and be creative!!

I agree with the second sentiment....autopilot decks are broing if theyre like that from the start, however I know many duelists who use nonmeta decks, and the way they use them, it would seem like that deck was running on autopilot mode......But like you Zart, I have yet to find a deck perfect for me, I mean ofc I have some decks which I love to death but none of them define me as a duelist.

If I ever do find a deck thats perfect for me, hopefully it wont be one where I end up using my resources up real fast, since I tend to do that with most of my decks.

But Zart as for you, hmm I RECOMMEND VAYU BLACKWINGS!!! lol Idk I just remembered dueling someone who killed me with that deck, because you can swarm, and your opponent cant solemn the monsters....hmm but yea just a suggestion......I think I am going to go make a Dark Deck, just random dark monsters put together, lets see what I can get form that, crud I have my final in two hours...so I shall make the deck tonight xD

the whole autopilot concept goes from using the same strategies, the same combos, of course when you face a troublsome situation you want to do the best you can, but some people cant manage not being in the usual situations

But AutoPilot as describe by Zartious is one where a deck comes with a challenge not one that can be used to win a easy duel Hence Inzektors basically it dont matter the strategy. All that matters in this case is how you win the duel either as easy as a meta player or winning the simple way with a challenge.

well basically if you want to play on a competitive level you'll face meta thats basically it. Cant do anything about it so might as well stop arguing I guess XD.

Disclaimer: If you don't like reading large bodies of text, this is not for you. Skip to the bolded section labeled "TL;DR" below my post for a very simple overview. If you wish to review what I wrote in depth and actually consider my view on certain topics, then continue below.

Does it really look like I'm doing this for the sake of arguing? I have much better things to do let alone just sit on a forum all day an argue. I'm trying to teach something called "being open-minded." Why do you insist that certain decks have a set formula in order to do well? Is someone a bad duelist because he/she plays these decks? No. Is there always variation in play style? Yes. All roads lead to Rome; metaphorically, any way you achieve winning the duel you're still winning the duel. You don't have to follow the so-called "auto-pilot" way to win. There are many other possibilities.

And if you didn't see my first post, before this all got into talking about which decks are autopilot and therefore boring to play, I did contribute to the post.

It's very simple, you still hold a grudge on me for the old argument about netdecking where you insisted it was a bad way to play the game, and that is the only reason you disregarded the actual idea of my posts. Don't look at decks and say, that's so mainstream/meta/overused and therefore I'm not going to play it. Just because it is meta doesn't mean that you're obligated to play something original.

And to reiterate my opinion from before, I play mostly controlled aggro. Usually two card combos that generate advantage and then usually 1-4 backrow. Macro Rabbit, Wind-Up, Ophion Control/Rabbitswarm, Evols with all the answers (@twi), my own original deck, T.G. stun, GK stun, and my favorite of all time? Back after the TeleDAD era? Synchro cat. Explosive yet control. I've played anti-meta for numerous formats in the past and transitioned into stun variants instead of full anti-meta. Especially after Solemn Judgment went to one and Royal Oppression was banned. That is my two cents on favorite decks because I like to sit back and watch my opponent try to plus and fail. And then with two cards, I plus so hard.

Reason why these posts are long? Because I'm actually trying to help the community out of this hole of "ewwww thats so autopilot" or "take no skeeeeel to play that deck" mindset. If you don't agree with it then it is fine. I'm not just leaving a post about my favorite deck. I'm giving you insight of what I feel from an actual competitive player IRL back in the pre-TeleDAD to post-Synchro cat format. Anti-meta and stun are for me because controlling field, hand, and graveyard presence is important to the game in my opinion. Taking different strategies in each deck and picking apart their options is especially hilarious. Triple Laggia? Shock Master and 4 backrow? Necrovalley and Descendant? Ophion ftw? Wanghu + bottomless? If anything, I should be the player advocating that there ARE autopilot decks. Because I build stun/anti-meta to stop those combos. But that is just simply not true. Autopilot is simply a term used in competitive play to evaluate different players skill level. If you lose to an autopilot deck, it is a very simple excuse. "I'm still better than him even though I lost because he runs autopilot; he has no skill."

TL;DR, I contribute to the conversation more than you give me credit for @zartorius.
Not only did I present my favorite play style and decks, but I try to educate the community about the use of terminology and why it is completely unjustified to use them to describe certain decks. Favorite Decks? Evols, GK Stun, Macro Rabbit, Wind-Ups, Anti-meta, Chaos stun, Original Build, and Rabbitswarm/Ophion Control. I like taking away options from the opponent.

thanks!!