My Skellige Deck Cannot Win Against Nilfgaard

[klille]

My Skellige Deck Cannot Win Against Nilfgaard

I've been busy for quite some time and just recently got enough time to get back into playing, at first my experience was quite enjoyable, using my "graveyard shift" deck, a skellige revive deck with clan tuirseach skirmishers. with quite a lot of success. However, once i started to play against the new nilfgaard decks i noticed something..... they win against me. And im not talking about a 50/50 chance that is decided by skill and a bit of luck, no. they crush me, every match. they steal my Skirmisher with the medic, banish it while on the field with letho or shuffle it into my deck, without any real chance of getting it out again by using assire. Not only to these cards completely ruin my deck, they are also impossible to play around, if they go before me a round then i will be unable to bring my skirmisher out quick enough to avoid their medic, and it's lost. I can't _not_ bring out my Skirmisher, since i will simply lose that way, which allows them to letho it and i've pretty much lost the match.

It's not fun to play against, you can't "play around" it and it completely kills what seems to otherwise be a completely functional deck archetype, removing deck diversity, which the game so desperately needs. Im not really sure what else to play, since there really doesn't seem to be a whole lot of fun decks still around, it makes me not want to keep playing.

 

[zantclick]

Honestly, NG doesn't have any intensely powerful matchups besides Queensguard/Skirmisher decks. Its saving grace is that it can Medic you. Also, when you get on in the ranks and levels you'll run into cards like Caretaker, Katakan and Griffin for MS, (uncommonly) Dethmold for NR, and even sometimes Udalryk from other SK players. It's a risky deck to play, not much else to it. Those cards mentioned are all intended to counter decks like yours that rely on resurrection, and aren't always consistent enough to be run in every single deck. They're tech cards essentially (besides Medic really, which again is just strong in NG's case because its deck doesn't have many roflstomp matchups) and it's just something you've gotta deal with.

I'd recommend not relying on Skirmishers personally, I know the deck is good early on but once you have a larger card pool, start relying on more than one win condition, or rather one that doesn't get countered by a single card. Me personally, I really like the Harald SK deck with Axeman right now, but a nice Scorch or Dimeritium Bomb can easily shut me down. It's just a risk you've gotta take.

EDIT: I also wanted to mention that the intention of the game is for you to play reactively to your opponent and have to deal with one another's cards - if all you do is discard Skirmishers and resurrect them with no counterplay towards you, it's kinda like playing by yourself, just going through the motions until you have the cards you need, and that doesn't make for compelling gameplay.

 

[Ruthless95]

love it, first time i see someone complaining about the power of nilfgaard
shows how bad skellige is. i have the highest win rate against skellige with both my MS deck and NG deck.

 

[KasumiGoto]

Skellige isn't that bad against Nilfgaard if you have a proper deck. Though yeah, I feel like Vicovaro Medics need to get some sort of a nerf, because it completely negates Skellige's graveyard play. That's why Morkvarg is so popular these days, you can't steal it (only banish with Letho but that's another story).

 

[4RM3D]

klille

Hi and welcome to the forums.

I've changed the thread title a bit and moved the thread to the dedicated Skellige subforum.

As for the topic itself... The meta is shifting a lot and if you try to play the same deck without adjusting it to the meta, you'll run behind. The deck you have now was pretty hot a few patches back but nowadays fairs a bit worse. Because the new patch is incoming next week, it's better to wait until then to recreate your deck. Now you're stuck in limbo for a bit.

 

[Shuls02]

klille I recomend you try to build an Axeman deck since it has a much better winrate against all meta decks right now because it doesn't rely on resurrects to win and you can win even if you don't get Axeman.

love it, first time i see someone complaining about the power of nilfgaard
shows how bad skellige is. i have the highest win rate against skellige with both my MS deck and NG deck.

http://imgur.com/a/PglbT :comeatmebro:

 

[Ruthless95]

indeed i never said you can't win with it. with good RNG skellige doesn't stand a chance against control decks. lacerate, alzur's thunder D-bomb D shackles with NR or monster weather. skellige can still beat that but only when the opponent has sh*t hand. it is obvious he lacked removal cards, your spectral whale murdered him.
weather effects and wildhunt warriors, or D-shackle and alzur's thunder later and i'm not sure if you could win that game.

 

[Shuls02]

indeed i never said you can't win with it. with good RNG skellige doesn't stand a chance against control decks. lacerate, alzur's thunder D-bomb D shackles with NR or monster weather. skellige can still beat that but only when the opponent has sh*t hand. it is obvious he lacked removal cards, your spectral whale murdered him.
weather effects and wildhunt warriors, or D-shackle and alzur's thunder later and i'm not sure if you could win that game.

I don't know what you were looking at but that guy got a pretty good hand, all Goldens on Round 2 and Nekker+2xNekker Warrior (on Round 1) he also had an Ekimara+Katakan.

Also my Whale didn't do that much since he ate it with the Kayran almost inmediatly, a combination of Dbomb+Harald was what kept his Nekkers in check.
He did underestimate my deck like you were doing just a moment ago saying it only wins against bad hands and he got 2-0 for that.

 

[Ruthless95]

what i see is inconstancy on your opponent's behalf and/or poor card choices (and possibly a very good skellige leader to counter consume MS) his inability to deal with what ever was responsible for his crones being 1 whether it was spectral whale yencon. how did donar got back to his side of the board? i assume he care takerd or decoyed him but why knowing that he is going to give you avalach as well?
yes basically that's how skellige wins, counting on the opponent underestimating you or counting on the enemy having a bad hand. i only lose to skellige when RNG goes full retard.

 

[Shuls02]

what i see is inconstancy on your opponent's behalf and/or poor card choices (and possibly a very good skellige leader to counter consume MS) his inability to deal with what ever was responsible for his crones being 1 whether it was spectral whale yencon. how did donar got back to his side of the board? i assume he care takerd or decoyed him but why knowing that he is going to give you avalach as well?
yes basically that's how skellige wins, counting on the opponent underestimating you or counting on the enemy having a bad hand. i only lose to skellige when RNG goes full retard.

In case you are still blind and don't want to see my opponent's board I played Birna so him playing Donar did nothing to help me win, and I doubt you've played against a good Axeman deck in high rank since I'm probably part of a 1% of players doing so.
And claiming to have beaten Discard SK with Monster/Nilfgaard means nothing because those are some of the hardest match ups for that deck together with Swim Dorfs.

By the way here you go anotherone from the previous match and just before he used Dagon to cast that Fog so you see he even had the last play http://imgur.com/2KnVCZ5

:hatsoff:

 

[Ruthless95]

In case you are still blind and don't want to see my opponent's board I played Birna so him playing Donar did nothing to help me win, and I doubt you've played against a good Axeman deck in high rank since I'm probably part of a 1% of players doing so.
And claiming to have beaten Discard SK with Monster/Nilfgaard means nothing because those are some of the hardest match ups for that deck together with Swim Dorfs.

By the way here you go anotherone from the previous match and just before he used Dagon to cast that Fog so you see he even had the last play http://imgur.com/2KnVCZ5:hatsoff:

it's simple math buddy, avalach 8 + donar 10 =18, birna 12 18 > 12 so donar did help you over all. and yes i have played against a "good" axemen deck and again you know when i lose to it? when i can't remove them in time thx to shit RNG or don't have fog. that's called "counting on your opponent having a bad deck" situation. you faced a proactive deck, face a reactive deck and if he has what he needs and he is sober you are done. more so than other faction's proactive decks, see the guy complaining about not being able to beat NG? NG is almost entirely proactive.

 

[Shuls02]

it's simple math buddy, avalach 8 + donar 10 =18, birna 12 18 > 12 so donar did help you over all. and yes i have played against a "good" axemen deck and again you know when i lose to it? when i can't remove them in time thx to shit RNG or don't have fog. that's called "counting on your opponent having a bad deck" situation. you faced a proactive deck, face a reactive deck and if he has what he needs and he is sober you are done. more so than other faction's proactive decks, see the guy complaining about not being able to beat NG? NG is almost entirely proactive.

But he did have Fog and he did kill my Axeman more than once (and Axeman aren't the only threats in my deck by the way) but I have lots of revives so unless his hole hand was removal I would have won anyways because he would not have enough units to even come close to beat me and even if he had killed my Axeman it would have changed nothing because as you said "it's simple math buddy" you didn't even bother to count how much the Axeman where adding and to make it easy for you it was 6/73 while he had 55 so if he managed to kill my Axeman (let's say with a lacerate after he played Fog with Dagon) I would be 64 to 55 (and that's adding an extra imaginary card to his hand he didn't had).

It's clear you don't really want to accept the fact that Axeman is a very good deck and can beat any deck in the meta right now so you say things like "counting on your opponent having a bad deck".

It's also clear you haven't actually played the Axeman deck I run otherwise you wouldn't jump to conclusions saying its "proactive" (at least that's what I understand since your english is not great) when you don't even know what deck list I run

And its very funny to me that you think a "bad deck" can beat Monster Consume/Swim Dorfs/NG Control/Discard SK pretty efficiently, just finished climbing today to rank 13 and only lost twice (against NR control and a weird ST deck) and I beat every Monster Consume I faced and there were a lot and I also won against Monster Weather Control/NG Control and a lonely Discard SK player.

 

[Ruthless95]

But he did have Fog and he did kill my Axeman more than once (and Axeman aren't the only threats in my deck by the way) but I have lots of revives so unless his hole hand was removal I would have won anyways because he would not have enough units to even come close to beat me and even if he had killed my Axeman it would have changed nothing because as you said "it's simple math buddy" you didn't even bother to count how much the Axeman where adding and to make it easy for you it was 6/73 while he had 55 so if he managed to kill my Axeman (let's say with a lacerate after he played Fog with Dagon) I would be 64 to 55 (and that's adding an extra imaginary card to his hand he didn't had).

It's clear you don't really want to accept the fact that Axeman is a very good deck and can beat any deck in the meta right now so you say things like "counting on your opponent having a bad deck".

It's also clear you haven't actually played the Axeman deck I run otherwise you wouldn't jump to conclusions saying its "proactive" (at least that's what I understand since your english is not great) when you don't even know what deck list I run

And its very funny to me that you think a "bad deck" can beat Monster Consume/Swim Dorfs/NG Control/Discard SK pretty efficiently, just finished climbing today to rank 13 and only lost twice (against NR control and a weird ST deck) and I beat every Monster Consume I faced and there were a lot and I also won against Monster Weather Control/NG Control and a lonely Discard SK player.

hahaha now my english isn't great, mate... skellige is the strongest deck ever. nobody beats skellige, vikings of the witcher world don't have any rivals not on the fields nor on the gwent board, you can beat all factions with just half of your skellige deck. my gwent tracker Win/Loss ratio on all my decks suggests other wise tho. my english is fine i just don't wanna pronounce full words and write full sentences for an argument like this which i know goes to nowhere. destroy everything with skellige, and i destroy skellige with everything.

 

[Shuls02]

hahaha now my english isn't great, mate... skellige is the strongest deck ever. nobody beats skellige, vikings of the witcher world don't have any rivals not on the fields nor on the gwent board, you can beat all factions with just half of your skellige deck. my gwent tracker Win/Loss ratio on all my decks suggests other wise tho. my english is fine i just don't wanna pronounce full words and write full sentences for an argument like this which i know goes to nowhere. destroy everything with skellige, and i destroy skellige with everything.

You sound like a kid, you don't want to do math or acknowledge that someone can win with a deck that you don't play with or that the deck is any good even tho you clearly haven't played against it and now you are telling me you don't want to pronounce with full words so it's hard to understand what you want to say (wich may be what you want cause your arguments have been very childish).
I just don't get why even bother answering when you don't want to talk (it just makes you look bad), if it's true then just drop it "mate".

Also remember you were the one coming here mocking the OP because he was having trouble with some match ups

 

[Ruthless95]

You sound like a kid, you don't want to do math or acknowledge that someone can win with a deck that you don't play with or that the deck is any good even tho you clearly haven't played against it and now you are telling me you don't want to pronounce with full words so it's hard to understand what you want to say (wich may be what you want cause your arguments have been very childish).
I just don't get why even bother answering when you don't want to talk (it just makes you look bad), if it's true then just drop it "mate".

Also remember you were the one coming here mocking the OP because he was having trouble with some match ups

skellige stronk. i child. you very good. you master. now you are pissing me off mate, what do i have to say to you to stop responding or stop insulting indirectly? i am what you say i am and a thousand times worse, but don't forget you are having trouble accepting skellige is just sh*t. skellige is sh*t. how much does that sentence bother you? a lot apparently. i have positive win/loss ratio against skellige with the most retarded decks of mine. skellige is sh*t.
now insult some more. i have my popcorn

 

[Shuls02]

now insult some more.

And when did I insult you? You think calling you childish is an insult? If you cared to write with better grammar and actually think before writing what you think are "arguments" then I would have never called you so.

At this point it just seems like you want attention.

 

[4RM3D]

Let's keep this thread civilised. Thank you.

Discussing tactics is fine. But don't go around attacking each other.

 

[Sunsibar]

One post deleted. Seriously, back to civilized manners and Skellige strategies instead of personal comments.

 

[Shuls02]

It was a joke sunsibar but whatever.

 

[Deferigon]

Try to include more weather cards.