uria lord of searing flames vs slifer the sky dragon
URIA LORD OF SEARING FLAMES VS SLIFER THE SKY DRAGON
We've seen all the god cards and their destructive power, but these recent cards spewed out three good cards that could rival them. But who's better? Read on...Obelisk the Tormentor vs. Hamon, Lord of Striking ThunderBoth cards share the same 4000-point ATK and DEF stats. Obelisk can be tribute summoned with any three monsters; Hamon can only be summoned by getting rid of three face-up Continuous Spell Cards. Additionally, Obelisk can be Special-Summoned (at least for a turn) whereas Hamon can't be brought back at all. Bein immune to targeting effects is also a big plus for Obelisk. The rest of Obelisk's effect is nearly useless, as it would be incredibly difficult to have two additional monsters to Tribute for his effect where it already takes three to summon him. Hamon has more of a chance of using his effects, as he's very likely to destroy a monster in battle and do the 1000 bonus damage. I don't see too many people putting him in face-up defense position to stop attacks when they could just attack with him otherwise. Overall, I say Obelisk as more playable given his targeting immunity, along with being able to actually Tribute three monsters instead of trying to keep three Continuous Spells on the field.Edge: Obelisk Winged Dragon of Ra vs. Raviel, Lord of PhantasmsRa is quite the unwieldly card. He requires three Tributes, and gains the combined ATK and DEF of the three tributed monsters. Except for his targeting immunity, he has no other effect in Nightmare Troubadour unless he's Special Summoned. Raviel also requires three Tributes, but it's possible to Tribute three weak Fiend-type cards to gain a 4000 ATK power-house (and also have food in the Graveyard for Dark Necrofear later!) Ra's secondary effects only apply upon Special Summon, and even then he'd only be around for one turn. Paying 1000 Life Points to remove a monster from the game seems pointless with so many better removal cards available; paying all but one Life Point to feed Ra's ATK and DEF for the turn is not only a waste but leaves the player dangerously close to losing the duel. Raviel has a way to tribute monsters to feed his ATK score for a turn, but he also has a way of generating those those monsters (by generating Phantasm Tokens when the opponent Special Summons.) Raviel is just infintely easier to play than the Nightmare Troubadour Winged DragonEdge: RavielSlifer the Sky Dragon vs. Uria, Lord of Searing FlamesSlifer requires three monsters to Tribute Summon, whereas Uria requires three Continuous Trap Cards. Their ATK and DEF raising work similarly, however. Slifer has 1000 ATK and DEF for each card in your hand, giving a bonus to players who can keep their hand full. Uria gains 1000 ATK (but no DEF) for each Continuous Trap in the Graveyard; this can help as Traps can be used to protect him that would later feed his ATK score. Slifer's secondary effect can force an opponent to play even more defensively, preventing them from summoning most of their monsters. Uria's effect is also rather useful, being able to get rid of set Spells or Traps that may prevent him from attacking later AND stopping the opponent from chaining them in response. However, looking at the attack boosting effects, it's much easier to get extra cards in the hand than Continuous Traps in the Graveyard.Edge: SliferSo, there you have it; even with the slightly weakened effects than the anime provides, the Egyptian God cards would most likely defeat the newer Sacred Beasts, mainly given their protection from most effects and being easier to summon. However, don't let this discourage you from making a deck with the Beasts, which is something you can't do with the Egyptian gods at all. So, enjoy all six of them while you can.
Members2,977 postsLocation:The Capital WastelandGender:Male any deck that revolves around only one specific card isn't made to compete. Having them in is an Option, but even so, there isn't a double (And CERTAINLY isn't a triple) sac monster in the game right now that most would consider playable. It's not good card advantage wasting multiple cards on the feild or in your hand to bring out a monster that can be brought down by a single Fissure or Sakaretsy Armor I run a couple single sac monsters in my decks and I run 2 Necrofear (graveyard summons) in my Fiend deck.Also, it's obvious that the Gods are infinitely better than the ripoffs from GX.
Members6,426 postsLocation:My workshop, making fanfiction, sprites and miniature weapons of mass destruction.Gender:Male Agreed. The Sacred Beasts are more of the modern duelist's God Cards, though they are no match for the genuine article. Even if you had all three Sacred Beasts on the field, if the other guy had all three Egyptian Gods out, he'd be dead; Obelisk's special ability (sacrifice two monsters) would wipe out the monsters, and then a direct attack would end the duel in a snap. I'd prefer the God over the Beasts.I wouldn't make a deck that revolves around the Gods OR Beasts, though. If anything, I rather make my deck to wipe out the Gods and Beasts. You know what they say; power corrupts and blinds.
Posted 20 July 2009 - 03:40 PM
Ok. the gods pwn. and i happen to like ra better because his life point ability could save you if you had like sacaritsu armor or magic cylinder up or somthing. But gods arent allowed in tourny. and sacred beasts are. so i tie them