Author Topic: POLL: Is sitelock still viable? (Read 10175 times)

The M · « **on:** June 16, 2011, 08:36:43 AM »

A) Yes

B) No

C) A little, maybe the NT sites or Babs

D) A lot, with NT sites or Babs

E) Not until the next set

Master KChief · « **Reply #1 on:** June 16, 2011, 08:41:46 AM »

E) not until next set

hi123 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 16, 2011, 08:51:17 AM »

Quote from: The M on June 16, 2011, 08:36:43 AM

A) Yes

Daniel TS RED · « **Reply #3 on:** June 16, 2011, 09:17:26 AM »

If you're playing against anything other than disciples, than yes. I still think it's site stall though, instead of site lockout with all the ways you can create ls's.

uthminister [BR] · « **Reply #4 on:** June 16, 2011, 09:26:33 AM »

In and of itself it is not a viable defense. Combined with anything else it is a stall at best. Everyone who plays compeditively will include site access in one form or another.

Carl deuty · « **Reply #5 on:** June 16, 2011, 09:29:29 AM »

In type 2 it is still viable. Heretics can stall for days on end, add in phillys with land disputex5 and you are in business.

Nameless · « **Reply #6 on:** June 16, 2011, 10:09:47 AM »

Quote from: The M on June 16, 2011, 08:36:43 AM

A) Yes

SomeKittens · « **Reply #7 on:** June 16, 2011, 10:45:35 AM »

No. It's just too easy to get into a site. It's a stall at best.

Rawrlolsauce! · « **Reply #8 on:** June 16, 2011, 03:30:43 PM »

Did a mod create the poll, or does Schaef let us make them now?

Bryon · « **Reply #9 on:** June 16, 2011, 04:19:01 PM »

I created it.

Smokey · « **Reply #10 on:** June 16, 2011, 04:22:24 PM »

The optimism in this thread is fairly astounding.

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #11 on:** June 16, 2011, 04:28:03 PM »

If you try to use a completely random style of sitelock, it might work against anything except disciples.

Silver sites are actually pretty effective for early game stalling.

RTSmaniac · « **Reply #12 on:** June 16, 2011, 06:56:43 PM »

unless your playing against a new player because they love silver- then you should beat them because they are new, right?

SomeKittens · « **Reply #13 on:** June 16, 2011, 10:49:00 PM »

Quote from: RTSmaniac on June 16, 2011, 06:56:43 PM

unless your playing against a new player because they love silver- then you should beat them because they are new, right?

Not as often as one may think.

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 16, 2011, 11:18:04 PM »

Martin says yes.

redemptioncousin · « **Reply #15 on:** June 16, 2011, 11:25:33 PM »

B) No

Fishing Boat is just too powerful.

Master KChief · « **Reply #16 on:** June 17, 2011, 12:15:49 AM »

thats exactly the reason i added e...

The M · « **Reply #17 on:** June 17, 2011, 09:14:19 AM »

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on June 16, 2011, 11:18:04 PM

Martin says yes.

Hahahahahaha because an RLK beat you with a site-lock.

For the people who say yes, why?
I've gotten some reasons about stall but is lock still usable in a tournament?

Professoralstad · « **Reply #18 on:** June 17, 2011, 01:06:29 PM »

Quote from: The M on June 17, 2011, 09:14:19 AM

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on June 16, 2011, 11:18:04 PM
Martin says yes.
Hahahahahaha because an RLK beat you with a site-lock.

For the people who say yes, why?
I've gotten some reasons about stall but is lock still usable in a tournament?

I would disagree that Neal is an RLK...he beat Jonathan, Martin, and Josh in succession. I'd say he's for real.

The M · « **Reply #19 on:** June 17, 2011, 01:18:53 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on June 17, 2011, 01:06:29 PM

Quote from: The M on June 17, 2011, 09:14:19 AM
Quote from: TheHobbit13 on June 16, 2011, 11:18:04 PM
Martin says yes.
Hahahahahaha because an RLK beat you with a site-lock.

For the people who say yes, why?
I've gotten some reasons about stall but is lock still usable in a tournament?

I would disagree that Neal is an RLK...he beat Jonathan, Martin, and Josh in succession. I'd say he's for real.

I've played him over 10 times with him using the same deck and never lost.
And if I can beat someone they're definitely a noob. (or I got extremely lucky.)

Nameless · « **Reply #20 on:** June 17, 2011, 01:21:18 PM »

then beat Josh or Martin to prove that you are better than him

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #21 on:** June 17, 2011, 02:53:57 PM »

Quote from: Professoralstad on June 17, 2011, 01:06:29 PM

Quote from: The M on June 17, 2011, 09:14:19 AM
Quote from: TheHobbit13 on June 16, 2011, 11:18:04 PM
Martin says yes.
Hahahahahaha because an RLK beat you with a site-lock.

For the people who say yes, why?
I've gotten some reasons about stall but is lock still usable in a tournament?

I would disagree that Neal is an RLK...he beat Jonathan, Martin, and Josh in succession. I'd say he's for real.

Yeah we know that is just the running joke. I will never let martin forget it

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #22 on:** June 17, 2011, 11:35:00 PM »

For everyone voting E...wut?

Lamborghini_diablo · « **Reply #23 on:** June 17, 2011, 11:38:46 PM »

I have to say.... option E really makes no sense whatsoever. If anything, sitelock is gonna die a brutal death when the next one comes out. O_o

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #24 on:** June 17, 2011, 11:45:48 PM »

Exactly. Sure, the silver bullet for Sitelock will lose some of its shine, but have you seen the rest of the set?

News:

Poll

Is sitelock still viable?

Author Topic: POLL: Is sitelock still viable? (Read 10175 times)

Rawrlolsauce!

Lamborghini_diablo

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13

Lamborghini_diablo