Is UniVersus a "Skillful" Game?? – UniVersus Study Hall | TCGU


Cards Custom Build | Get 5% off your WHOLE order when you mention TCGU

Inked Gaming | Get a Discord at Check out When you use Promo code : TCGUNIVERSITY at check out!

Follow us at:
Twitter ►
Facebook ►
Patreon ►
TCG Player ►
Merch Store ►


Xem thêm bài viết khác:


  1. What James mentioned about the luck of your deck changing every time you make a check is one of the things I find the most interesting about this game. Even something as simple as making an extra check or drawing an extra card once or twice completely changes what cards you draw and check for the rest of the game.

  2. A lot of the in-game skill in UVS is about risk-reward decisions. So it can be hard to separate from luck, when the task at hand is to navigate your luck as best you can.
    The luck that you get may lead to no-solution. But it may well have lead there because you and/or your opponent made decisions that raised the odds of that happening.

    Or, decisions may have lowered the odds but you got stuck anyway. Or things were aligned so badly that decisions weren't able to play a role. In those cases it's fair to say that gameplay skill did not play a role.

    But then you have to carve out a chunk for deckbuilding skill. When I play Death Yusuke and have a relatively-high ratio of middling attacks, then I made pre-game decisions that raised my odds of no-solution in certain scenarios. I did that as a trade-off for other benefits, but I made that decision all the same.

    So when I lose to a Gill because I didn't find the right pieces, that's not purely luck, that's also the result of my deck decision requiring me to find certain cards. When Scott "draws hot" and nukes me, that's not purely luck, it's because he built a deck where almost any three attacks will comprise a "hot draw". And I didn't.

    In tandem, that leaves fairly little room to have a purely skill-didn't-matter game. Severe check luck scenarios can qualify, given typical attack counts / difficulty curves, though even then you'd examine whether any risks taken were clear correct calls. Maybe some turn 2 kill strings that the victim was appropriately prepared for to no avail, maybe some terrible mulligans, stuff like that.

    And even then, you still have two other games in the match to try and win. All the more reason to address going-first but that's a whole other matter.

    "Less" skill is perhaps a different question. In theory the more non-trivial decisions a given game presented the more "skillful" it was. If you get double Spiral'd on 2 despite holding the extra card, you may be correct to point at deckbuilding. But also, at the end of the day the game on the table mostly played itself, to a degree that was arguably less common a year ago. And it's not like deckbuilding mattered any less back then.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here