>>28158499That's not a strawman, it's reductio ad absurdum.
All he said was his EXs are beating non-EX decks. He even goes on to say he wishes non-EX decks were "actually viable".
So I'm showing him how absurd a statement that is.
Even if you ignore the current meta where EXs are the minority, there are still a shitload more good non-EX cards than there are bad EX cards.
>>28158531You're right, I'm sorry. I'll only post broken EXs that win 100% of non-EX matchups from now on.