>>28158709I reduced the statement
>My vague EX "spam" deck is better than the garbage non-EX decks I'm playing againstto
>EX decks are just better than non-EX decksThe guy literally said "I wish non-EX decks were viable", which is an absurdly ignorant thing to say.
What was his "point"? Do you agree with him? Do you think a vague EX card like pic related can compete with Night March, Trevenant, Greninja, etc?