The Tech Update: Anti-Meta.

Anti-Meta is filled with Tech, none of while has a perfect spot in any deck, but can work very well at stopping mechanics which drive the top decks. In my first Tech - Update blog is a go over of a few key Anti-Meta cards, what they do and what they exectly dont. The key to picking tech is to know what they do and why they do it well.

Doomcaliber Knight

Before LS came to be, DCK (Doomcaliber Knight) was the best Negation card in the game. Yes, Solemn Judgment could stop spells and traps, but DCK was far better at stopping monsters. With a mandatory effect, it could hurt you, but came down to good playing. The ability to use up to three in a deck is why it was good. You could stop a set-up or a big monster itself to instantly gain control of the game. In essence, it was the perfect simplification card. More over, it worked under Skill Drain, and according to judge rulings common effect stopping card Book of Moon could not stop its negation effect. What this ment was simple, it was the perfect resource waster. If you wanted a card to remove DCK, you had to give up a play establishing of game pushing monster, or waste one of few resources which could handle it.

DCK was a simplification and a complication card. It complicated game play, and gave your opponent something to stop or they could not win the game. This either allowed you to have an open window the following turn or to build advantage. Either way, no other card in the game was like it.

Then LS came to be, and unlike other previous decks, LS had one win condition outside of JD, and ample support. What that did was essentially give a deck with only two main win conditions atleast ten outs (Of monsters you dont need to win) to DCK. Add in Necro Gardna and cards which are summoned back from  the field from the grave and/or only serve the purpose of simple beatdown monsters or simplification/anti-meta effects, it easily handles DCK, making it a wasted summon. Even as a resource waster, it did so in a bad way for the format due to effects which activated in the grave for LS, thusly not serving a real/good purpose.

Even against other match-ups, like Zombies, the format give it ample ways to force the activation of DCK. With a plethora of recruiters and play set up potential, it may not even set back the OTK push a whole turn. Thusly making DCK a bad card in the realm of Anti-Meta tech. Maybe in the side-deck for lower tier decks, but even then you should have better solutions sided. The beauty of DCK is the fact it will become better with the next ban-list unless LS dont get hit. Even if they dont, Zombies will get hit, making it a better main-deck option and a much better blanket card for the side-deck. Its a simple, gamebreaking card which takes skill to play correctly. Not much better tech than that.

Kycoo and Banisher.

These two cards are the gold standard of Anti-Meta. Removing from the grave allows you to prevent Special Summoning, DAD, Zombie OTK's, JD, and most recusion. But both work under/through different methods of handling this. Yes, they both remove from the grave, and have different stats, but the level of control varies.

Kycoo is bigger, dark attribute, and allows you to pick what is removed. It can dive back into the grave and selectively remove threats. Banisher removes anything from the summoning point foreword, is a tad smaller, and is light, giving it less actual support. These differences are small, yet huge in terms of which is superior for a deck to run. At face value, with one being continous and the attack difference being only 200, most would assume Banisher is better, but this is false.

Kycoo can remove two LS or two Dark monsters to make a OTK push by DAD or JD respectively impossible. It also lets you remove protection from LS, and OTK set-ups from Zombies. The beauty of Kycoo is you can use it at any point in the game rather than it being needed to draw early. What is also does is prevents your opponent from removing cards from the grave. Which makes the Zombie OTK push dead reguardless, which in this format is ideal.

Dont count Banisher out though. Banisher is better Early game. LS can pump monsters in the grave in a turn, meaning Kycoo can't always stop the JD play. Sure, it requires more skill/luck, but it still happens. If your deck can support banisher then its a better option. But enough support and getting it out early is the problem Banisher has.

Banisher needs ample support, more than any TCG decks offers. Gadgets do not run enough support. Let me say this again, GADGETS DONT RUN ENOUGH PROTECTION. The OCG hasnt had many decks with enough protection. The Meta-Beat deck design only rarely runs enough. Thats why the Stun-esque decks dont all even run three Banisher. The original breed of Stun/Meta-beat did main-deck three Banisher but it also had over fifteen traps, atleast ten of which being protection, and of the eight or so spells, BoM was atleast two slots. Thats over a fourth of your deck being protection. Meaning you could drop Banisher and keep him out long enough to get a lock card or something which more directly impacted strategy.

Outside of such conditions, Banisher is easy to run over as the 'beat-stick' strength of this format is 1800. Banisher can be better if searched out and you can get another monster out, like a special summon, protecting the other monster from being destroyed. But thats a situational occurance most decks cannot support now. Slower format, the main-decking of protection/Gold Sarco, then Banisher is better than Kycoo. For now, it simply is not with Meta trends. Splashability is a key factor, you cannot always re-tool a deck for one card.

D.D. Assailant


Why on earth would I pick a feature of DDA over DDWL? Well, the next format and rogue decks make DDA better in many respects. DDA removes Stardust, is bigger, and is mandatory. But thats not the beauty of the card. If you read it, you should be able to tell why its great. Heck, a small child can tell you why. It must hit something bigger. Set-up monsters dont waste its effect. Its not one of the gold standard 1800 beaters we all have come to love, but its just under that. So any set-up monsters easily gets run over, and if so occuring the plays goes.

What happens when the big play is made? DDA will then remove the big monster. Synchro's, especially Stardust, is easily handled. But the best match-up for DDA is the battle against GB's. In a slower format GB's will be huge. Thats a given. Next format will change for sure as top decks will be hit, leaving room for a viable tier two deck to make waves at early events. DDA is easily side-decked to beat GB's.

But the arguement against DDA is simple, plays can still go off, making it bad. Right? Wrong. Against GB's I would rather beat a smaller GB by battle and allow a bigger monster to come out, or a contact fusion to occur, which DDA would then remove. Lower tier and GB type decks dont have a lot of extra resources to handle such threats. Making DDA the perfect match-up.

In the past this card has been over and under hyped. Dont make this card into something its not. Its a decent size beater. Its effect is great against specific occurances only. And it allows resources to be wasted to prevent a big monster play later when you dont have resources. But its not a card with depth, so take this tech card at face value alone.