TCGs run on shorthand all the time. The best player in the room is the one with the trophies. The hate card is good against the deck it hates. Sounds simple, sounds circular, but because you know them you never have to check them.

Both pieces this week are from the people who checked. Drake Sasser argues the players worth testing with give themselves away in conversation, not in standings. And in part two of the side deck series, Eric Shen asks the question nobody asks: not whether D.D. Crow is good, but whether it's better than the card you cut for it.

One last thing, we’ll be at Gen Con this week, more at the bottom.

Let’s get into it.

■   ■   ■

Wondering whether you communicate well enough to get into the good testing groups? Sasser says if you have to ask, the answer is probably no.

By Drake Sasser

If you asked most competitive players to call out the best player in any event or gathering, they would likely point either to the player that has won the most directly against them and/or the player that has the most decorated tournament resume. While both of these things can be functional shorthand, that approach has its shortcomings. For instance, if the best Riftbound player entered a Magic: The Gathering tournament, it is unlikely any of the competitors would identify them as one of the best Magic players in the room despite most, if not all, of the competitive skill set translating between the two card games. Additionally, using records and resumes as shorthand breaks down even more among groups with less competitive experience, or among total strangers. It's a useful shorthand but it is not foolproof. There is, however, a better way.

Conversation is the fastest, clearest, and most accurate way to identify the best players among the ocean of competitive players. While finding the best person in the room may not have broad applications, finding the best players in smaller groups has near endless applications to professional aspirants and grinders alike. No matter what card game you play, the best way to succeed is to collaborate, and conversation is the way to facilitate optimal collaboration for group success. Since the early days of professional-level events, small testing groups often in dedicated spaces for long periods of time were determined to be the optimal way to divide, conquer, and iterate over formats and metagames. That remains true, if not even more so in the digital-oriented age we live in today. Therefore, the best way to be one of the best is to work with the best. If you want to work with the best you have to be noticed by the best. To do that you have to communicate quickly and effectively.

The natural follow-up most players have to this principle is to ask whether they communicate well. Truthfully, if you have to ask, the answer is probably no. Communicating effectively about competitive games is a skill that generally has to be identified and actively improved upon. It is rarely something that happens passively, and even the folks who find success without improving these skills are often avoided in collaborative environments because they are labeled “intuitive players” who make plays but cannot properly explain why, and therefore hold little value to collaborative efforts. That said, there are some quick dos and don’ts to go over that can help get you thinking about the right things.

…speak in extremes unless speaking in terms of fundamentals. The draw of hyperbole is strong for many players desperate for validation and attention, but it is rarely productive for collaborative improvement.

…reference hard statistics, personal or otherwise, as primary evidence of a claim. Competitive gamers are almost always mathematically inclined people, and gravitate towards data. But data has countless variables involved that generate it, and those are hard to account for outside of their direct context and should be talked about incredibly sparingly if at all. Aggregated data from a wide range of players is even more variable-ridden, and is closer to useless than definitive.

…ridicule unorthodox plays. One of the most telltale signs of someone that thinks they are much better than they actually are is someone that thinks they can distill an “optimal” play in a given situation, and ridicules plays that diverge significantly from their assumed optimal line.

…provide context for your opinions and experiences based on your perceived plan. One of the earliest level-ups for players to make is to start forming plans for various matchups or configurations so grounding your conversation in that context is not only important, but signals you are a player that understands this tool and utilizes it regularly.

…be curious and ask questions. Competitive card games are known to attract misfits, and the desire to be viewed as adept and intelligent often outweighs the desire to learn for early and mid-level grinders that still think their improvement trajectory will occur passively. Instead of refuting or scoffing at information that is counter to your beliefs, ask questions about how new or opposing positions were arrived at. Often, the outcome is that you will learn something, even if that something is just that the idea in question isn’t well founded.

…take strong positions only when you have clear fundamentals and supporting evidence to work with. It can be easy to read this entire article as a critique of taking extreme positions, but that isn’t the case. In many instances, it is important to take firm positions, and when you do not have one, you should actively seek one. Progress is made by making assumptions and then testing them so arriving at a position on any topic is critical, but it's important to have fundamentals to back up your positions so that, when others are curious about how you arrived at your conclusion, you have clear evidence and intentionality behind it.

…know when it is best to stop engaging or just not engage at all. Competitive players are often arrogant and hard-headed, even some of the best ones. As such, it can be easy to get into heated discussions or arguments under the pressure and stress of tournament iteration and preparation. The best players know when the conversation is veering out of range of productivity, and even if it means allowing some clearly false or even ludicrous statements to go uncontested, continuing to engage would just waste more time.

These are some easy wins to get you started, but a valuable way to continue to optimize how you communicate is to study how the best players in the room and in the game entirely engage with people on various levels. Streams, articles, videos, and even just post-event dinners are all excellent opportunities to study how the most successful players engage with all sorts of different positions, questions, and claims. If you want to play at the highest level, it is imperative you collaborate with people who play at the highest level and you won’t be able to do that unless you can hold a conversation at the highest level. Competitive gaming is a social endeavor and despite having a reputation for attracting a demographic of socially inept people, success at the highest level of any game is directly dependent on being able to leverage not just your game skills, but your social skills. So this week, instead of playing one more match or agonizing over that last slot for hours while laying in bed, take some time to hone your conversation skills, and be more active and intentional with how you talk about your game.

■   ■   ■

Breach the Bay 2 features a $25k CEDH tournament, and a $15k Riftbound Trios tournament. The event is August 22 in San Mateo, CA. Registration is live now.

■   ■   ■

Part two on the side deck's most misunderstood cards. The question was never whether Crow and Vanity's Fiend are good — it's whether they beat what you're taking out.

By Eric Shen

Excited to be back in part 2 of this series! If you haven’t seen part 1 of this article, you can check it out here. We went over why I believe Kycoo the Ghost Destroyer and Fossil Dyna Pachycephalo are overrated or misunderstood.

Today, we will be going through why I believe D.D. Crow and Vanity’s Fiend are also overrated and misunderstood!

Let’s start with Vanity’s Fiend.

Vanity’s Fiend is a hard card to evaluate in Edison Format. You probably hate this card being being dropped on you if you come from modern Yugioh. However, Edison Format is a completely different landscape where traps and other forms of removal are very common. 

Because of this, the risk/reward ratio for Vanity’s Fiend is very different. For example, Vanity’s Fiend is not very good against the popular “bird” decks like Blackwings and Vayu Turbo. Blackwings have a large number of outs to this card in both their monsters (Gale, Kalut) and play a plethora of trap cards to out this monster. Vayu Turbo notably main decks three copies of Ryko, Lightsworn Hunter. 

So what decks is Vanity’s Fiend typically good against then? 

Frog decks are the most popular answer as they typically do not main deck any monster outs and rely on their trap cards to out Vanity’s Fiend, which they play few of. Other notable mentions would be any combo deck such as Gigavise, Zombies, or Diva Hero. 

The Biggest Problem with Vanity’s Fiend

However, the biggest problem with Vanity’s Fiend is that it requires a tribute, so you must play a deck that can support tribute summoning. Which means you probably already main deck the best tribute summon in the format, Caius the Shadow Monarch. 

When you side deck Vanity’s Fiend, often times you are siding out Caius to balance out your tribute summon ratio. You don’t want to play too many tributes or else you will clog on them.

This brings me to the question that many cannot confidently answer when side decking Vanity’s Fiend: 

Can you confidently say Vanity’s Fiend is better than Caius the Shadow Monarch? 

I think it depends on the matchup you’re playing against. Vanity’s Fiend is better into open board states while Caius is better into established fields. If you’re playing against a deck that plays very passively until they combo, Vanity’s Fiend is probably the better answer. If you’re playing a deck that special summons a lot but only special summons once or twice a turn, I would be hard pressed to say Vanity’s is straight up better than Caius. 

So when siding out a tribute summon for Vanity’s Fiend, it’s tough to say how much better of a card you are siding in vs siding out. You must critically evaluate if Vanity’s Fiend is truly an upgrade or a side grade.

I think most people just see Vanity’s Fiend and think of how good it can be, but if everytime you drew Vanity’s Fiend and compared which card would be better, I don’t think it’d be overwhelmingly in Vanity’s favor (if at all).

I think D.D. Crow might be the most misunderstood side card in the format. People will bring this in all the time when they see any deck using their graveyard. I’m here to change your mindset on how you use this card.

Be careful of siding in D.D. Crow against Frogs.

This is probably the number one side decking mistake new Edison players make. They believe using D.D. Crow to banish Treeborn Frog is a good strategy and I’m here to tell you that is not enough to justify siding in D.D. Crow.

You must draw MULTIPLE D.D. Crow for this strategy to be efficient. Frog decks almost always play two Treeborn Frog. Banishing one Treeborn Frog only delays their turn.

You might also be tempted to use D.D. Crow on Miracle Fusion against Hero Frog. The problem is Miracle Fusion does not target, so as long as they have more than 1 Water and more than 1 Hero, Absolute Zero will still be summoned. Elemental Hero Stratos is the first Hero the deck goes for, which searches another Hero. Substitoad, Swap Frog, and even Dupe Frog give access to another frog, which means they will also have 2 waters. Because of this, D.D. Crow rarely stops Miracle Fusion.

EVEN IF you somehow draw both D.D. Crow and banish both Treeborn Frogs…

D.D. Crow is a minus one

I don’t hear this being talked about enough. Even if you were to banish both Treeborn Frogs, you are down two cards. Swap Frog basically ripped two cards out of your hand. You must now hope that your opponent has two or more dead cards in their hand because of no Treeborn access to be “even” in card advantage.

I also see many duelists side in D.D. Crow against Pot of Avarice decks. While that is a decent option, there are some decks like Machina Control where the only card D.D. Crow would be efficient against is Pot of Avarice.

I don’t believe that is an efficient strategy. You are basically siding in D.D. Crow to trade one for one. Furthermore, the whole time you are waiting for them to activate Avarice, you have a dead card in your hand. So you are essentially minus 1 the whole time until they activate Avarice just to go one for one. I’d rather have an active, consistent card in that situation and just let them get their plus one off avarice.

D.D. Crow is more efficient against cards like Monster Reincarnation or Plaguespreader Zombie, where you are actually trading D.D. Crow for two cards. 

Please consider what you are taking out for D.D. Crow.

When reviewing most duelists’ side deck plan when they bring in crow, I find most often they are siding out a trap. Which makes sense! You are siding in a hand trap, so the most logical conclusion would be to side out a trap card. However, is D.D. Crow really better than that trap card?...

One example I will give is against Vayu Turbo. Many duelists believe D.D. Crow must be brought in against Vayu Turbo and typically take out trap cards such as Dimensional Prison or Bottomless Trap Hole. Well, if you use D.D. Crow on a Vayu effect, was D.D. Crow actually better than either of those trap cards? You could have used the trap card on the Blackwing Armed Wing that was being summoned and both Vayu and the synchro material would both be banished instead of just Vayu.

Obviously, D.D. Crow has other uses and CAN be better than the trap cards. But the trap cards CAN also be better than D.D. Crow. Which is why I think D.D. Crow is a side grade rather than a straight upgrade against Vayu Turbo in particular.

When siding in D.D. Crow, you must evaluate which scenarios you would prefer Crow over the card you are siding out and only when there are more scenarios in favor of Crow should you side it in. 

To close out, I’m not saying any of these cards are bad. I just think they are heavily misunderstood and I hope that you use these cards more efficiently in your future duels!

■   ■   ■