heavy Storm - With solid Logic

[GingerChris]

tl;dr version -- what everyone's already said' date=' just thoroughly explained for the OP.

 

The existence of Heavy Storm means that players can't set all their s/t's unless they hold Solemn Judgment. Solemn aside (ideally banned, but we'll just assume players haven't drawn it) both players can only set minimal s/ts. If your opponent doesn't have Heavy Storm, setting all s/ts would be better. Odds are actually in your favor for this. However in a 9 round tournament if you play with this strategy all the time you'll lose about 2 matches because of Heavy Storm. This is why the existence of Heavy Storm limits players to setting 1 or 2 s/ts. By setting 1 you ensure Heavy Storm won't amount to anything more than a 1 for 1 trade, while setting 2 you defend yourself against MST or Monster Reborn while risking nothing more than a +1 in the case that your opponent has Heavy Storm.

 

Because you can only set 1 or 2 it's up to you to decide which of the cards in your hand should be set. This is where all the skill comes in. Do you set your best cards, so that you can answer any scenario? Or do you set the weaker cards, or a bluff, banking on the fact that those cards will be destroyed by Heavy/MST, and try to save your better ones for when they're s/t removal is gone? Experience, cognitive skills and reads all come into play, which make for a more skill-based game.

 

With Heavy Storm out of the game the need for this thinking no longer applies. As some people have said already players could substitute Heavy for cards like Black Rose Dragon, Malevolent Catastrophe or Destructortron. However it would simply be a matter of playing the right s/ts and changing game play a little to prevent this from happening. Book of Moon/Bottomless can prevent the Synchro Summon of Rose Dragon entirely, Catastrophe could easily be dealt with by cards like Icarus Attack, Trap Stun (which would see a HUGE increase in play) or Breaker/MST. Destructortron would fall into BTH/Book/PWWB or whatever. The bottom line is that these aren't REALLY effective answers.

 

Players could just set all there s/t's because there's no reason not to. Instead of having to decide which s/ts you'll need before actually needing to use them, you simply have to decide which s/t to flip.

 

IMO Heavy Storm is one of the cards that make Yu-Gi-Oh! the game it is.[/quote']

 

In a game with no Storm you can set all your s/t's and maximize the effectiveness of all your cards because you can use each one at the best time. Imagine you have in your hand Book of Moon and Bottomless Trap Hole. Being unsure which one to set' date=' you decide to go with Book of Moon first. We'll assume this isn't a misplay, given the rest of your hand. Now your opponent summons Breaker the Magical Warrior. You would rather have had the Bottomless Set. Without Storm, you'd be free to set all your s/t's and could use the Bottomless now, saving the Book for later.

 

This is why Solemn Judgment is so ridiculous for the current game state. Mass s/t removal only comes in a few forms, and Heavy Storm is the only one that's completely cost-free. Heavy also happens to be the only one that isn't attached to a monster. Dark Armed Dragon, Gladiator Beast Gyzarus, Arcanite Magician, Icarus Attack and Black Rose Dragon all come in monster form, meaning you can use (and therefore chain) the s/ts that would be destroyed to kill the monsters. In the case of Dark Armed or Arcanite, you can chain the first one targetted and DAD becomes a 1 for 1. In the case of Black Rose Dragon, the answer is to play your s/t's to remove the ability to tune for Black Rose. Gladiator Beast Gyzarus and Icarus would get to take out 2, but as long as you chain 1 to destroy the Gyzarus, it's still a 2-for-2 trade, and Icarus is at best a 2 for 2 trade, even if you can't chain.

 

EDIT -- I realize Icarus Attack isn't a monster. However because you have to sacrifice a monster the same argument applies, only the cost is already part of the card, and so the opponent doesn't need to chain to destroy it.

 

Only Judgment Dragon will make a positive trade on multiple s/ts. However, because of the nature of the Lightsworn deck, Judgment Dragon will rarely get to make this happen. First, Judgment Dragon can only be played later in the game, because you have to mill a bunch of monsters and because you'll usually get it with Sarco/Beckoning, which take until around turn 3-4 to get. Secondly, because the deck is made up almost entirely of monsters, and because you need to get those monsters in the graveyard, you have to start doing things. This gives your opponent's chances to respond to your things with their spell and traps. They'll want to do that, since using s/ts to answer your monsters does a lot to the deck. It slows down the rate at which you can use JD, turns off Honest, and prevents you from milling on the end phase. Thus even JD will usually only get, at best, a +1 from the spell and trap cards, and more than likely will be destroyed in the process.

 

So we can conclude that there is only really 1 form of commonly played s/t destruction that prevents players from setting all their spell and trap cards: Heavy Storm. And we have 3 copies of Solemn Judgment per deck, which negate it. Futhermore, every single deck uses it's monsters to put the opponent in a position where they can't win.

 

Lightsworns mill Gardnas, Wulf, etc and get access to JD, Beckoning for multiple Honests and Celestia by playing their monsters, and just by playing Lumina they can easily have 2-3 monsters PLUS wulf by the end of turn.

 

Gladiator Beasts use their monsters to generate effects, and when left alone multiply in numbers and eventually drop Heraklinos.

 

Blackwings and Cat Synchro will just win the game if you don't prepare to answer their monsters.

 

The result is that the best way to play the game is really, really simple. If you draw Solemn Judgment, set all your spell and trap cards, because why the hell not? If your opponent has Heavy Storm then you'll just have to burn a Solemn. If you didn't play this way you'd lose your 1 card, but then you'd lose more advantage or just lose the game to your opponent's monsters. This way you lose your 4k and Solemn, but you have s/t's that can't be destroyed in a way where you'll lose advantage. You can also prevent your opponent from doing much with the ones you have left.

 

If your opponent doesn't have Heavy Storm they're extra ****ed. You get to use all your spell and trap cards as answer cards, using them at times when they'd be most effective, and your Solemn turns from protection to a trump card.

 

If you don't draw Solemn you set 1 s/t and then ee what your opponent does. If they don't use s/t removal and try to play a monster and you stop it, you know they don't have Storm. Since every deck uses monsters to gain advantage, throwing Storm for a 1 for 1 actually nets you a +1 through monster effects or wins you the game. Now you know for next turn to just set everything and hope they don't draw the Storm within the next 2 turns.

 

There's really no other way to play, and in my opinion this is what's wrong with the format, in addition to OTK's with DSF. Personally I think you need to bring back Magician of Faith as a way to keep players from playing like this. If Magician of Faith was back setting Solemn, Book, Bottomless and Mirror Force wouldn't be a good play because my opponent could throw a Storm and then set MoF, getting it back and effectively winning the game next turn. IMO Solemn should also just be banned outright, so that players can't play the game like this. Playing like this is very uninteresting and the winner is determined, if both players play correctly, on whoever drew the hand that beats the other player. Yet it's the only way to play.[/quote']

 

Just an FYI for all you people, Conspire is Matt Peddle's DGZ name, so if you got problems and want to argue, be my guest.

[T_HaXx]

adam corn reports in this sjc tournament thread's

 

round 1 guy from yugioh card maker forum

 

game 1 i open storn and win

 

game 2 i open storm 3 charge double jd and win

 

round 2 some other guy from yugioh card maker

 

game 1 what a suprise i open godly i storm him and smash him he QQ's

 

game 2 i cant be bothered to play him so i stack storm game 1 and win

 

 

round 3

 

go on... u guessed it another guy from yugioh card maker

 

game 1 i open storm and cause im pro i set it and end he sets 4 cards and end i draw and flip the pro storm over he has nothing i then triple charge him and double jd 2 wulf for game

 

game 2 was different i set 3 and end he storms me im liuke omg what u doin that's my move i chain all 3 reckless greeds and he QQ's more he summons stratos and ends he dont search(who does this guy thinks he is me lol) i draw yes i drew after reckless the guy is to dumb to realize and i storm his field and smash him with 3 charge lumina lumina 2 jd for game

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

moving swiftly on

 

final i lose cause i never win a final

 

fili luna wins his 5th title

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

So Heavy isn't banworthy because it's the only card that can do what it does, essentially? What happens when there are more balanced alternatives released?

[GingerChris]

The reason we play storm is because there is no alternative, and there won't be unless they banned storm which they won't cause it doesn't need to be banned.

 

Also, post a BALANCED fix for storm. I'd like to see where this goes (:

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

And we have 3 copies of Solemn Judgment per deck' date=' which negate it.[/quote']

 

lol wow.

 

 

Just an FYI for all you people' date=' Conspire is Matt Peddle's DGZ name, so if you got problems and want to argue, be my guest. [/quote']

 

Are we supposed to be awestruck just because he's a rich likely stacker? Are we supposed to have our arguments invalidated because he's Matt Peddle?

 

Here's my argument. Heavy Storm doesn't promote skill. The only skill from the use of Spells and Traps in the first place is timing. Monsters can't all be thrown down at once unless there're certain circumstances in which they can be, in which case those circumstances are subject to an evaluation. Monsters have to be chosen above eachother in the order that their played, and they need to , which adds whole new dimensions.

 

Monster overextention leads to quicker Duels, Heavy leads to monster overextension by preventing TT, MF, and 1-for-1s like attack responders, Solemn, or (B)TH. With monster extension at an all time high, Heavy needs to go for longer Duels, for more of a skill margin.

 

Heavy removes Spells and Traps. Spell and Traps destroy monsters. Heavy protects monsters by removing obstacles. One SHOULD skillfully evaluate the situation and remove obstacles by stalling or drawing them out and chipping for game bit by bit. The "BIJILLION TRAPS" argument isn't good enough. Side Decrees or Jinzos FFS. We can have more balanced removal like MST and remove broken S/Ts when it's necessary.

 

In a no-Storm format, one could easily chip away through stall with Skill and siding. Sure it'd take longer, but there's more of a margin for skill.

[tonisanoob]

WHAT HAVE I DONE!!!!!

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

The reason we play storm is because there is no alternative' date=' and there won't be unless they banned storm which they won't cause it doesn't need to be banned.

 

Also, post a BALANCED fix for storm. I'd like to see where this goes (:

[/quote']

 

Painful Storm

Normal Spell

Your opponent selects 1 Spell or Trap Card they control and remove it from play. Destroy all Spell and Trap Cards your opponent controls. Place the removed from play Spell or Trap Card back on the field in the position it was in when it was removed from play.

 

Meh, probably could do better.

[GingerChris]

The reason we play storm is because there is no alternative' date=' and there won't be unless they banned storm which they won't cause it doesn't need to be banned.

 

Also, post a BALANCED fix for storm. I'd like to see where this goes (:

[/quote']

 

Painful Storm

Normal Spell

Your opponent selects 1 Spell or Trap Card they control and remove it from play. Destroy all Spell and Trap Cards your opponent controls. Place the removed from play Spell or Trap Card back on the field in the position it was in when it was removed from play.

 

Meh, probably could do better.

 

LOL

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

"your opponent controls"? WTF?

[Dark_Armed_Zombie]

WHAT HAVE I DONE!!!!!

 

You have done nothing wrong' date=' it's the others that have made this into a huge "lolfail" discussion.

 

Until they come out with a fair, cost worthy heavy storm, I don't think it needs to be banned. Not saying it isn't uber cheap and doesn't need to be replaced, but until something comes out that is fair (like LV from Dark Hole/Raigeki), it's fine.[hr']

"your opponent controls"? WTF?

 

The card wouldn't be bad if it weren't for the fact that it fails to do crap. If it came out, noone would set more than 1-2 cards and nothing would be solved -.- but yes, the "you opponent controls" also ruined it.

[GingerChris]

toni started this, he's an idiot, what do idiots do? Post things in idiot places.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Trunade, 1-for-1s, Nukers (BRD being the most accessible), theme support, MST, Trap Stun, Decree, Cold Wave, etc are all alternatives to Storm.

[tonisanoob]

what i think need to be done is inform all the people from ukay pro on the 3 or 0 style of play that everyone here loves, that way maybe that can see why you think storm should be banned!

 

somone explain, dibs not me!

 

also huuur duur im such an idiot who posted somthing on a forum i forgot im not ment to do that! especially on a forum, whos the bigger idiot? the idiot or the idiot whos reacted to the idiot?

[Dark_Armed_Zombie]

Trunade' date=' 1-for-1s, Nukers (BRD being the most accessible), theme support, MST, Trap Stun, Decree, Cold Wave, etc are all alternatives to Storm.

[/quote']

 

True, true, I had forgotten about them, but s/t wise Trunade and Cold Wave are the only ones worth splashing, and noone is going to use it unless it's an OTK deck. MST is great, but that's already being splashed so much. Heavy won't be banned (or atleast it's very unlikely) until something that is equivalent to it but with an acceptable cost comes out, that's almost a fact simply because it's failnomi :?

---

what i think need to be done is inform all the people from ukay pro on the 3 or 0 style of play that everyone here loves' date=' that way maybe that can see why you think storm should be banned!

 

somone explain, dibs not me!

 

also huuur duur im such an idiot who posted somthing on a forum i forgot im not ment to do that! especially on a forum, whos the bigger idiot? the idiot or the idiot whos reacted to the idiot?

[/quote']

 

I would like to see a 3/0 list. I'm technically for it, but I'm really uninformed on it. It sounds good in principal though.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

We don't really do "will/won't" here. We do "should/shouldn't". So far, all I'm seeing for Storm is "its for punishing idiots who set more than what you Set +1 rite?", but NOBODY does with Storm around, so it isn't really all that sensible.

 

Without it, they likely would. That's to keep monster overextension at bay though, which is signficantly worse than s/t overextension, as they damage your opponent and can destroy without using their effects.

 

Being cautious about throwing down monsters > being cautious about throwing down monsters any day. More Skill in having to think about what monsters you play first, attack with, and use the effects of than what S/Ts you Set and time. WIth S/Ts you can just follow simple rules like "don't Set more than your opponent does +1", monsters have much more depth.

 

The value of a 3/0 list is that a card is either bad for the game or it isn't. Only exceptions are cards like Malicious, Stratos, and Night Assailant which interact with eachother in an objectionable manner. Why should a card be bad for the game at 3 but not at 1 otherwise? Because they need luck and not skill to pull it from their Deck and have fun? >_>

[Dark_Armed_Zombie]

Should it?

Yes.

 

Will it?

Probably not.

 

I don't have much else to say <<

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Right, that's because Ginger and Pix aren't giving us anything to counter. =/

[N e o n Pix!]

Better things to do than troll randys on some site.

 

We've given this site enough traffic for one night.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

victory! 8)

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Trunade' date=' 1-for-1s, Nukers (BRD being the most accessible), theme support, MST, Trap Stun, Decree, Cold Wave, etc are all alternatives to Storm.

[/quote']

 

Don't bother. Ginger's logic lies in "this guy is famous!!!!!!" and hasn't bothered responding to anything you've said.

 

 

You're probably going to LOL at this attempt at a balanced replacement without added reason, but whatever.

"You can only activate this card while you control at least 1 Face-down S/T card on your side of the field. Destroy all Spell and Trap cards on the field. You cannot declare a direct attack during the turn you activate this card."

Adds an extra card to use(face-down s/t), making this card start at -2, and stops most OTKS the extra cost wouldn't of with the direct attack negation.

[Dark_Armed_Zombie]

Trunade' date=' 1-for-1s, Nukers (BRD being the most accessible), theme support, MST, Trap Stun, Decree, Cold Wave, etc are all alternatives to Storm.

[/quote']

 

Don't bother. Ginger's logic lies in "this guy is famous!!!!!!" and hasn't bothered responding to anything you've said.

 

 

You're probably going to LOL at this attempt at a balanced counterpart, but whatever.

"You can only activate this card while you control at least 1 Face-down S/T card on your side of the field. Destroy all Spell and Trap cards on the field. You cannot declare a direct attack during the turn you activate this card."

Adds an extra card to use(face-down s/t), making this card start at -2, and stops most OTKS the extra cost wouldn't of with the direct attack negation.

 

It would just be simpler to add a discard, then it might actually see some use...

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Needing a face-down S/T only has the following differences from discarding:

 

a. Needs to be a settable S/T you're using as fodder.

b. Can activate it's effect if it's a chainable that has been set for a turn.

c. Prevents monster discarding which can aid in a few OTKS.

d. Adds some more use for "when this card is destroyed by a card effect" cards.

e. Cost doesn't apply if the card is negated and you've simply set a S/T.

f. Something else I forgot.

 

In essence it does the job that people claim Heavy does. "Punish" those who play too many S/Ts without protection. It does not however assist in all the other horrible things Heavy does.

Sigh' date=' do I actually have to make a serious post about Storm, can't you idiots think about yourself and how you can become better at the game rather than whinning about losing to storm?

[/quote']

Sigh, do I actually have to make a serious post about CED, can't you idiots think about yourself and how you can become better at the game rather than whining about losing to Chaos?

 

 

And screw you Toni, you've attracted a bunch of clueless cynics that are basically a carbon copy of you but with some semblance of grammar and at least a trace of charisma.

[BehindTheMask]

ITT: People from UkayPro poop all over YCM.

 

Read the first post, or QQ more.

[iAmNateXero]

Yeah my fans have come to greet me in my absence. How fun.

 

Also.

 

ITT: It takes great wisdom to Copy and Paste; Intelligence is not needed.

[Dark_Armed_Zombie]

I have no idea what ITT and QQ mean...

 

And not to be offensive, but all of the new joinies from UKayPro don't show much intelligence... like at all. "Your logic is wrong because it is *INSERT INSULT HERE!!!111!! ROFLcopter?!*" is pretty much how they post.

 

lrn2reasonorGTFO