Talk:Assault Mode Deck

Deletion
I don't know whether i support the delete or not, gladiator beasts have a deck page but the difference is that Gladiator Beasts are the only archetype page to have a list of support cards like it's a deck page--Moneypony 21:12, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I would consider the Gladiator Beast Deck to have the same problems as this and would be in favour of deleting it too. Effectively anything that's Card name Deck, Type Deck, Attribute Deck or Archetype name Deck, I think should be deleted. They're pretty much forums where people post what they think would be good ideas for a Deck revolving around that card, type, etc. It's things like "Beatdown", "Burn", "Diamond Dude Turbo", "One Turn Kill" and "Twilight" that need articles to describe what they are. (Articles that don't need the word "Deck" stuck at the end in order to exist). Whereas the description of an Assault Mode Deck is a Deck that uses "/Assault Mode" cards, which does not need an article.
 * Any valid tips/strategies that are on such card Deck pages can be posted on the card's tips page. Any that are on Type/Attribute/Archetype Deck can have a section on the corresponding Type/Attribute/Archetype page. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really sure if the page should be deleted or not either, but I have seen some people using /Assault Mode strategies. SkyFire1249 15:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * This isn't a case of whether it's playable or not. The situation isn't playable material gets an article, weak Decks don't. If there was a term that refers to a particular weak move, that is very common among the fandom it would get an article. Mainspace articles are for encyclopedic content, not Deck advise specifically issued from the editors, which would effectively make it a forum. (... although the tips mainspace does)
 * As I said on Talk:Guardian Deck, The definition of a Guardian Deck is a Deck that uses "Guardian" monsters. Nothing else on this page is mandatory for a Guardian Deck. So it's just a place to post whatever goes with Guardians. If that's allowed what's to stop someone creating an article like "Exodia Synchro Zombie Stall Deck"?
 * -- Deltaneos (talk) 12:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

"Burn" decks have a lot of options, though, and are quite varied. As with "Twilight," which was merged with Lightsworn and "Skill Drain," with Beatdown. If there are multiple deck types within that Archetype, then I support a page for it. But in the sense of Gladiator Beasts and Assault Mode, they mostly remain the same, save a few cards.--DarkSignerSpade 15:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If there are multiple Deck types, within an Archetype, they should each get articles. "Diamond Dude Turbo" and "Perfect Circle" are both Deck types that may be classified as Destiny Hero Decks. They are specific Deck strategies that need an article to decribe how they work. However, "Destiny Hero Deck" is by definition a Deck that uses Destiny Heroes, so all the reader would need to look up after that is Destiny Heroes, which has an article. -- Deltaneos (talk) 13:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Similar pages
I propose the pages listed here all be deleted for the same reason as this page. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree on deleting those but we will need to move some deck information to make it similar to the Gladiator Beasts page.--Moneypony 23:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree with deleting those. Apart from perhaps the 'Lightsworn Deck' page - maybe adding that to Lightsworns? --Clockwork-Artichoke 02:52, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes indeed. There should be section how Archetypes are used on their pages. -- Deltaneos (talk) 09:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Arguments?
Are there any arguments in favour of keeping these articles? -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * This website has been a source of for many Yugioh players for the reason that it is so complete. The deck section types being some of the most useful since these sections usually contain strategies and useful cards. I belive deleting some of these would take away from wikia's encyclopedic caracteristic which has made it so popular.

71.179.85.7 Carlo 13:31, 6 June 2009


 * The Deck type section is not encyclopedic. It is for the most part fan-composed ideas made-up by the people who post them here. Encyclopedias document information, not offer suggestions. Anything that's X Deck is pretty much suggestions on what to include in a Deck based on X. It's whatever is at X is the important part that needs documenting. In this case "Assault Mode", which has an article. How "/Assault Mode" Decks are typically run can be covered there.
 * As a rule of thumb, if you need to stick the word "Deck" at the end of something to create an article, it's unnecessary or should be posted elsewhere. -- Deltaneos (talk) 10:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that the Assault Mode deck page should stay. It's very helpful to anyone wanting to build a deck entirely around all these cards and they have plenty of support cards, enough to make a solid deck out of them. - Trygon 22:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Very repeating myself but I said this in the chat room - Assault Mode Activate + The Assault Monsters and other Assault Mode monster related traps and spells offer up a good reason for the page to be here. - Trygon 22:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * There can be decks that use Assault Mode Activate and Monsters related to it along with a deck that is entirely based on the card and all cards that go with it. A couple weeks ago I was looking at the page/deck list and I said to myself. I'm surprised someone took the time to do a deck like this.  I didn't judge the deck even looking at it for a while.  It's still nice to know a deck like that is possible. And it should be here in case anyone else would like to try making a deck like it. - Trygon 22:52, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Fixing Assault Mode
I have currently made changes to the Assault Mode Deck page with some good strategy and tip on how to play it. I am currently using an assault mode deck and I know the pros and cons of this deck. If anyone wants to message me concerning this page, please do so. TheGuruofGaming 06:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

No one mentioned the Stardust Dragon/Assault Mode version which is the most famous one and the only one who made top 16 in a Shonen Jump tournament.