Caine's Soapbox

[OMGAKITTY]

Again, using the word "ghost" in place of the word "fiend" does not show creativity...

[Sploda]

Perhaps I shed a little light on what we mean by "Fake-Type". "Ghost" and "Fiend" are similar and I agree it fits perfectly into "Undead". But what about Rouge? They might not fit into "Warrior" because they aren't front line soldiers, but where else can you put them? So you create a Rouge-Type and post it in AoC. This is where the FTK got started. People dock points off of cards in AoC because they have "Fake Types". Well that is why they are in AoC. In regards to the Pop Culture section; sure you could make say Sonic the hedgehog into a "Beast" but the Series lists him ans an Anthromorph. So you make him an Anthromorph and post the card. Suddenly your being called a noob and are told that Fake-Types suck. I agree that fake Types don't belong in the Realistic card section, but at least in the AoC section, they should be tolerated. This seems to be the Unwritten rule of YCM: "If it isn't a type used on a real Yu-Gi-Oh card, then it is unacceptable." What is the point of creating a YCM, if you can show your creativity in creating a Unique type. I'm against things like "Ghost" and "Demon" but where would you fit "Rouge" or "Angel"?

[Amethyst Phoenix]

Perhaps I shed a little light on what we mean by "Fake-Type". "Ghost" and "Fiend" are similar and I agree it fits perfectly into "Undead". But what about Rouge? They might not fit into "Warrior" because they aren't front line soldiers' date=' but where else can you put them? So you create a Rouge-Type and post it in AoC. This is where the FTK got started. People dock points off of cards in AoC because they have "Fake Types". Well that is why they are in AoC. In regards to the Pop Culture section; sure you could make say Sonic the hedgehog into a "Beast" but the Series lists him ans an Anthromorph. So you make him an Anthromorph and post the card. Suddenly your being called a noob and are told that Fake-Types suck. I agree that fake Types don't belong in the Realistic card section, but at least in the AoC section, they should be tolerated. This seems to be the Unwritten rule of YCM: "If it isn't a type used on a real Yu-Gi-Oh card, then it is unacceptable." What is the point of creating a YCM, if you can show your creativity in creating a [b']Unique[/b] type. I'm against things like "Ghost" and "Demon" but where would you fit "Rouge" or "Angel"?

 

I stopped caring after you started calling Rogues "Rouges".

 

 

Also, all angels in yugioh easily fall under Fairy.

[Sploda]

I'm sorry that word is so confusing (it get me mixed up easily). IMo "Angel" and "Fairy" are two totally diffrent things. A "Fairy" is a small creature of nature that travels around nuturing and protecting the planet. An "Angel" is the harbinger/Messenger of a higher being and is capable of summoning Divine Wrath.

But thats off-Topic, did you have any other arguments besides that?

[Amethyst Phoenix]

Let's see....

 

Rogue's are technically a specialized form of warrior.

 

Yugioh has anthropomorphic animals in it. They're called Beast-Warriors.

[Sploda]

Let's see....

 

Rogue's are technically a specialized form of warrior.

 

Yugioh has anthropomorphic animals in it. They're called Beast-Warriors.

 

"Warrior" is specified as a frontline "In your face" type of person. Where as a Rogue is someone who hides in the Shadows and relies on decit and guile to defeat opponents.

 

Anthromoprhs aren't necessarly warriors and therefore might not fall under that type.

[OMGAKITTY]

I'm sorry that word is so confusing (it get me mixed up easily). IMo "Angel" and "Fairy" are two totally diffrent things. A "Fairy" is a small creature of nature that travels around nuturing and protecting the planet. An "Angel" is the harbinger/Messenger of a higher being and is capable of summoning Divine Wrath.

But thats off-Topic' date=' did you have any other arguments besides that?

[/quote']

 

The reason they are called "Fairy" in TCG is because Konami didn't want to deal with conservative American parents jabroniing and whining about their kids playing Demons and Angels.

 

In Japanese, they are supposed to be Demon/Angel.

 

Making more specific types doesn't make it any more creative. Unless you create an entire set that supports a type, changing a couple words does not show creativity.

[Kailyn Leona Kyosuke]

Id like to ask then...*not trying to get hate flowing*

 

if this were true then Konami had no reason to make Psychic an official type.

 

Yet it is.

 

Discuss?

[Spirit of DMG]

Yes, someone noticed. Haters, wouldn't Psychic fit nicely under "Spellcaster" or maybe "Fiend"?

but no, they made it "Psychic." why? because they wanted to make a new type of card to place some new monsters under and then later, as they came up with ideas for support for those monsters, could support the psychic monsters without affecting cards they don't want the effects working on.

Scenario:

They have a duel between a fiend user and a psychic user. They don't want every card targeting every monster of a specific type working on everything on the field: it'd throw off the point of playing those cards. They perhaps wanted similar, yet clearly different people dueling each other in 5D's (so it'd make sense that without the "Psychic" type, they'd be using the same idea of structure deck, either "Spellcaster" or "Fiend") so they make a new type, (they may not have any ideas for support cards now, but they will later) and then when that happens, they'll actually be able to make an interesting duel.

End of scenario.

Now, people have said "If you don't make support for it, don't make it." (in regards to both fake types and vanillas. But, lets face it, making a whole slew of support cards at the same time as making a new type of card, or a vanilla? What do you want? one card with a decks worth of support? just face facts: that won't happen. if you think its possible to do, then you do it, and do it so that we think you copied 80 of Konamis cards. Because apparently, thats what it takes to get new ideas accepted around here.

[Lemniscate]

I am getting sick and tired of all of the Class Warfare' date=' Hatred, and other crap going on around here. Instead of doing nothing, I have this as my platform to speak out my personal opinions on the issues of the YCM forums.

 

To start this new forum of free speech, I would like to start with the Hate mongering going on as we speak.

 

I am a proud member of the Fake Type Knights, I support them for many reasons, such as the belief that creativity shouldn't be stifled by limiting types or such things, but more so for the fact that the Knights are effectively going to change the way people on this site think. I have put my full support behind the FTK giving up much of my free time to see it succeed, because it is more than just an attempt to get new and creative types recognized, it is something that has brought quite a few members of the YCM forums together. Right now it is being attacked by people calling it a Spam Breeding Ground, because we are attempting to become a Sticked thread. Our post count is the second highest in the Clubs/Organizations section, and we have gotten there in less than a month, causing many to believe that we are nothing more than spammers, which is hardly the case. Spam accounts for at most 5% of the FTK thread. Many of us tend to be on at the same time, resulting in fast pace conversation, resulting in the rapidly raising post count. The thread may be growing by Leaps and Bounds as I am writing this, but it is not from spam.

 

Now that I have explained that, I would like to go to the people who are calling us spammers. They obviously have a bias opinion of us, either because they have a dislike of Fake Types, or more likely because they fear what the FTK could become. You see the FTK is comprised of people with a strong will to break down the accepted rules of card making. Several of our members have even created new sub-types of cards, which where met with mixed reactions, but that is to be expected. The FTK could be the beginning of something much greater than just trying to get Fake types to be accepted. Eventually there may be another group that breaks up the class Warfare that is going on between the Elitist and the New Comer. Something I believe that many of the Fake Knight's opposition has an issue with. Many of the people who are taking arms against the fake Knights are members with Higher post counts and more well known members of the site, who are obviously basking in the fake light of being on top of the "World".

 

Class Warfare will be my next topic at a later date, for now I hope you enjoyed reading my opinions, and I would enjoy to hear arguments from both sides, so long as we don't resort to insults or flame wars.

[/quote']

 

lolYCM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly, the elites will win, consistently, please insert $25 for further education.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Class warfare battlefield GO!

[Amethyst Phoenix]

I am getting sick and tired of all of the Class Warfare' date=' Hatred, and other crap going on around here. Instead of doing nothing, I have this as my platform to speak out my personal opinions on the issues of the YCM forums.

 

To start this new forum of free speech, I would like to start with the Hate mongering going on as we speak.

 

I am a proud member of the Fake Type Knights, I support them for many reasons, such as the belief that creativity shouldn't be stifled by limiting types or such things, but more so for the fact that the Knights are effectively going to change the way people on this site think. I have put my full support behind the FTK giving up much of my free time to see it succeed, because it is more than just an attempt to get new and creative types recognized, it is something that has brought quite a few members of the YCM forums together. Right now it is being attacked by people calling it a Spam Breeding Ground, because we are attempting to become a Sticked thread. Our post count is the second highest in the Clubs/Organizations section, and we have gotten there in less than a month, causing many to believe that we are nothing more than spammers, which is hardly the case. Spam accounts for at most 5% of the FTK thread. Many of us tend to be on at the same time, resulting in fast pace conversation, resulting in the rapidly raising post count. The thread may be growing by Leaps and Bounds as I am writing this, but it is not from spam.

 

Now that I have explained that, I would like to go to the people who are calling us spammers. They obviously have a bias opinion of us, either because they have a dislike of Fake Types, or more likely because they fear what the FTK could become. You see the FTK is comprised of people with a strong will to break down the accepted rules of card making. Several of our members have even created new sub-types of cards, which where met with mixed reactions, but that is to be expected. The FTK could be the beginning of something much greater than just trying to get Fake types to be accepted. Eventually there may be another group that breaks up the class Warfare that is going on between the Elitist and the New Comer. Something I believe that many of the Fake Knight's opposition has an issue with. Many of the people who are taking arms against the fake Knights are members with Higher post counts and more well known members of the site, who are obviously basking in the fake light of being on top of the "World".

 

Class Warfare will be my next topic at a later date, for now I hope you enjoyed reading my opinions, and I would enjoy to hear arguments from both sides, so long as we don't resort to insults or flame wars.

[/quote']

 

lolYCM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly, the elites will win, consistently, please inset $25 for further education.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Class warfare battlefield GO!

 

I call the higher than thou sniper rifle!

[Dark Mousy]

Let's talk about Bush. (seeing you completely ignored my previous post.)

 

Do you know why Bush was president? He has clearly demonstrated that he is better than you. Otherwise' date=' he wouldn't have been president in the first place. He didn't do it once, he did it twice!

 

Of course, he messed up. But at least he is capable. Society is self-correcting, the old economist's saying is "if it doesn't work, it doesn't exist." These "classes" are in the system for a reason, they work, just like Bush was president, he demonstrated they worked. If it stops working, the we change, but there is a time and place for change.

 

On the other face of the coin, Bush's opinion will never have a serious impact on this world again.

[/quote']

 

A Mod should have locked this thread as soon as he saw this post. I hate it when I'm ignored.

[fenrir]

I am getting sick and tired of all of the Class Warfare' date=' Hatred, and other crap going on around here. Instead of doing nothing, I have this as my platform to speak out my personal opinions on the issues of the YCM forums.

 

To start this new forum of free speech, I would like to start with the Hate mongering going on as we speak.

 

I am a proud member of the Fake Type Knights, I support them for many reasons, such as the belief that creativity shouldn't be stifled by limiting types or such things, but more so for the fact that the Knights are effectively going to change the way people on this site think. I have put my full support behind the FTK giving up much of my free time to see it succeed, because it is more than just an attempt to get new and creative types recognized, it is something that has brought quite a few members of the YCM forums together. Right now it is being attacked by people calling it a Spam Breeding Ground, because we are attempting to become a Sticked thread. Our post count is the second highest in the Clubs/Organizations section, and we have gotten there in less than a month, causing many to believe that we are nothing more than spammers, which is hardly the case. Spam accounts for at most 5% of the FTK thread. Many of us tend to be on at the same time, resulting in fast pace conversation, resulting in the rapidly raising post count. The thread may be growing by Leaps and Bounds as I am writing this, but it is not from spam.

 

Now that I have explained that, I would like to go to the people who are calling us spammers. They obviously have a bias opinion of us, either because they have a dislike of Fake Types, or more likely because they fear what the FTK could become. You see the FTK is comprised of people with a strong will to break down the accepted rules of card making. Several of our members have even created new sub-types of cards, which where met with mixed reactions, but that is to be expected. The FTK could be the beginning of something much greater than just trying to get Fake types to be accepted. Eventually there may be another group that breaks up the class Warfare that is going on between the Elitist and the New Comer. Something I believe that many of the Fake Knight's opposition has an issue with. Many of the people who are taking arms against the fake Knights are members with Higher post counts and more well known members of the site, who are obviously basking in the fake light of being on top of the "World".

 

Class Warfare will be my next topic at a later date, for now I hope you enjoyed reading my opinions, and I would enjoy to hear arguments from both sides, so long as we don't resort to insults or flame wars.

[/quote']

 

lolYCM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honestly, the elites will win, consistently, please inset $25 for further education.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Class warfare battlefield GO!

 

I call the higher than thou sniper rifle!

 

I'll get the Trenches ready guiz. :D

 

Let's see....

 

Rogue's are technically a specialized form of warrior.

 

Yugioh has anthropomorphic animals in it. They're called Beast-Warriors.

 

"Warrior" is specified as a frontline "In your face" type of person. Where as a Rogue is someone who hides in the Shadows and relies on decit and guile to defeat opponents.

 

Anthromoprhs aren't necessarly warriors and therefore might not fall under that type.

 

No, OMGAK is totally right.

 

It's like discussing if dogs are canines. You're basically saying that canines are only wolves, and dogs are something completely different. A rogue, is technically, a warrior. A highly specialized warrior, but a warrior none-the-less. A warrior is someone that does combat, do rogues fight? Yeaup. Same can be said for archers, They are warriors, just highly specialized ones. :/

[六兆年と一夜物語]

After reading this 4-page thread, this is what I have to say.

 

While it is nice to have creativity around here in YCM, the biggest problem is the fact that every new Fake Type being thought of is immensely unoriginal. If the Fake Type Knights thread is one gigantic boat load of spam, then you should already stop at it. Face it, why should you support something with an idea with a bad reputation? Even with new and original Fake Types, there are new types Kazuki Takahashi is making here and then. So right now, I see no reason why there should be Fake Types.

[Spirit of DMG]

I think you meant "Here and there

ps: I love being ignored, so I'll say it again <-sarcasm

 

Haters' date=' wouldn't Psychic fit nicely under "Spellcaster" or maybe "Fiend"?

but no, they made it "Psychic." why? because they wanted to make a new type of card to place some new monsters under and then later, as they came up with ideas for support for those monsters, could support the psychic monsters without affecting cards they don't want the effects working on.

Scenario:

They have a duel between a fiend user and a psychic user. They don't want every card targeting every monster of a specific type working on everything on the field: it'd throw off the point of playing those cards. They perhaps wanted similar, yet clearly different people dueling each other in 5D's (so it'd make sense that without the "Psychic" type, they'd be using the same idea of structure deck, either "Spellcaster" or "Fiend") so they make a new type, (they may not have any ideas for support cards now, but they will later) and then when that happens, they'll actually be able to make an interesting duel.

End of scenario.

Now, people have said "If you don't make support for it, don't make it." (in regards to both fake types and vanillas. But, lets face it, making a whole slew of support cards at the same time as making a new type of card, or a vanilla? What do you want? one card with a decks worth of support? just face facts: that won't happen. if you think its possible to do, then you do it, and do it so that we think you copied 80 of Konamis cards. Because apparently, thats what it takes to get new ideas accepted around here.

[/quote']

[Spirit of DMG]

I just need to clear up one thing (sorry for the double post):

"According to the Random House Dictionary, the term warrior has two meanings. The first literal use refers to "a person engaged or experienced in warfare." The second figurative use refers to "a person who shows or has shown great vigor, courage, or aggressiveness, as in politics or athletics.""

"Rogues are typically dextrous and possess many skills allowing them to excel in many areas of expertise. This focus on finesse over raw strength means that many rogues prefer trickery and traps before direct confrontation in a fight, and are often adept at picking locks, disarming and laying traps, stealth, and other unconventional approaches to accomplishing their goals, hence their name. Though many rogues are thieves and con men, rogues can just as easily use their skills to become scouts, archers, and many other professions." (specialized, I'm not thinking that at this point.)

[六兆年と一夜物語]

Psychic doesn't necessarily mean Spellcaster or Fiend.

 

IMO, Spellcaster is Psychic, however their power is amplified and controlled, whereas Fiend has melee too.

[.Requiem]

I also asked the might Random House:

 

It says nothing about a rogue being a warrior, but there is an rogue warrior:

 

rogue

  /roʊg/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [rohg] Show IPA noun, verb, rogued, ro⋅guing, adjective

Use rogue in a Sentence

See web results for rogue

See images of rogue

–noun

1. a dishonest, knavish person; scoundrel.

2. a playfully mischievous person; scamp: The youngest boys are little rogues.

3. a tramp or vagabond.

4. a rogue elephant or other animal of similar disposition.

5. Biology. a usually inferior organism, esp. a plant, varying markedly from the normal.

–verb (used without object)

6. to live or act as a rogue.

–verb (used with object)

7. to cheat.

8. to uproot or destroy (plants, etc., that do not conform to a desired standard).

9. to perform this operation upon: to rogue a field.

–adjective

10. (of an animal) having an abnormally savage or unpredictable disposition, as a rogue elephant.

11. no longer obedient, belonging, or accepted and hence not controllable or answerable; deviating, renegade: a rogue cop; a rogue union local.

[fenrir]

I just need to clear up one thing (sorry for the double post):

"According to the Random House Dictionary' date=' the term warrior has two meanings. The first literal use refers to "a person engaged or experienced in warfare." The second figurative use refers to "a person who shows or has shown great vigor, courage, or aggressiveness, as in politics or athletics.""

"Rogues are typically dextrous and possess many skills allowing them to excel in many areas of expertise. This focus on finesse over raw strength means that many rogues prefer trickery and traps before direct confrontation in a fight, and are often adept at picking locks, disarming and laying traps, stealth, and other unconventional approaches to accomplishing their goals, hence their name. Though many rogues are thieves and con men, rogues can just as easily use their skills to become scouts, archers, and many other professions." (specialized, I'm not thinking that at this point.)

[/quote']

 

Yes, two meanings.

 

While the Rogue certainly doesn't fit the second one, it fits the first one fine. Warfare is combat, Rogue's participate in combat. Therefor Rogues are a highly specialized form of Warrior. You could say that Rogues have evolved from Warriors, does that make them an entirely new Type?

[六兆年と一夜物語]

I just need to clear up one thing (sorry for the double post):

"According to the Random House Dictionary' date=' the term warrior has two meanings. The first literal use refers to "a person engaged or experienced in warfare." The second figurative use refers to "a person who shows or has shown great vigor, courage, or aggressiveness, as in politics or athletics.""

"Rogues are typically dextrous and possess many skills allowing them to excel in many areas of expertise. This focus on finesse over raw strength means that many rogues prefer trickery and traps before direct confrontation in a fight, and are often adept at picking locks, disarming and laying traps, stealth, and other unconventional approaches to accomplishing their goals, hence their name. Though many rogues are thieves and con men, rogues can just as easily use their skills to become scouts, archers, and many other professions." (specialized, I'm not thinking that at this point.)

[/quote']

 

Yes, two meanings.

 

While the Rogue certainly doesn't fit the second one, it fits the first one fine. Warfare is combat, Rogue's participate in combat. Therefor Rogues are a highly specialized form of Warrior. You could say that Rogues have evolved from Warriors, does that make them an entirely new Type?

 

If you think about it, you CAN make a rouge card WITH the Warrior-Type.

 

Make it have a speedy-type effect.

 

No reason why there should be a new rouge-type.

[Amethyst Phoenix]

Hey look, we have rogues. May I direct your attention to the type.

 

[OMGAKITTY]

Having fake types without creating support cards for said fake type is just being nit-picky, not creative. It would be like me jabroniing that BEWD isn't actually a white dragon, but blue tinted, so it needs to be called "Blue Eyes Blue-Tinted Dragon" ....

[Sploda]

Like I said i'm not pushing for them to be put in the Realistic section, I just want people to stop rating in the AoC section based on if the type is real or not.

[DL]

After reading this 4-page thread' date=' this is what I have to say.

 

While it is nice to have creativity around here in YCM, the biggest problem is the fact that [b']every[/b] new Fake Type being thought of is immensely unoriginal. If the Fake Type Knights thread is one gigantic boat load of spam, then you should already stop at it. Face it, why should you support something with an idea with a bad reputation? Even with new and original Fake Types, there are new types Kazuki Takahashi is making here and then. So right now, I see no reason why there should be Fake Types.

 

 

I'd like to bring your attention to this particular word. every. Every fake-type we create is unnoriginal?

Is Frost unoriginal? What is defined as an original Fake-type? Original is basically something that hasn't been done before. Fake-types are fake-types because of that. They are original. Every one of them. A ghost is not neceserily an undead. Back to another topic, true, rogues and warriors can fall under the same categories, just like ninjas can also be warriors, but they have traits that set them apart. A ninja can mean a spy, an assasin, or a naruto kinda ninja. Warriors are just warriors. If you think they're anything else, those are just "specific categories", as stated in above posts. It all depends on the card itself, and the picture. If it's a card about a fighting ninja, like "Ninja Fighter of the Valley" then it can be a warrior, but what if it's something like "Stealth Ninja"?

Something like warror wouldn't fit, now would it? That's where fake-types come in. You could mke the type spy, or ninja, or such. See where I'm getting at? Fake-types are needed to fill in the gaps. Think humanoids. Where do the poor humans go? Warrior? Spellcaster? What if they are not warriors OR spellcasters? What if they're just a book nerd with an awesom eeffect, and his type is nerd? Will the rate be lowered? probably. Should it be? No. Cause the maker had no choice.

[fenrir]

After reading this 4-page thread' date=' this is what I have to say.

 

While it is nice to have creativity around here in YCM, the biggest problem is the fact that [b']every[/b] new Fake Type being thought of is immensely unoriginal. If the Fake Type Knights thread is one gigantic boat load of spam, then you should already stop at it. Face it, why should you support something with an idea with a bad reputation? Even with new and original Fake Types, there are new types Kazuki Takahashi is making here and then. So right now, I see no reason why there should be Fake Types.

 

 

I'd like to bring your attention to this particular word. every. Every fake-type we create is unnoriginal?

Is Frost unoriginal? What is defined as an original Fake-type? Original is basically something that hasn't been done before. Fake-types are fake-types because of that. They are original. Every one of them. A ghost is not neceserily an undead. Back to another topic, true, rogues and warriors can fall under the same categories, just like ninjas can also be warriors, but they have traits that set them apart. A ninja can mean a spy, an assasin, or a naruto kinda ninja. Warriors are just warriors. If you think they're anything else, those are just "specific categories", as stated in above posts. It all depends on the card itself, and the picture. If it's a card about a fighting ninja, like "Ninja Fighter of the Valley" then it can be a warrior, but what if it's something like "Stealth Ninja"?

Something like warror wouldn't fit, now would it? That's where fake-types come in. You could mke the type spy, or ninja, or such. See where I'm getting at? Fake-types are needed to fill in the gaps. Think humanoids. Where do the poor humans go? Warrior? Spellcaster? What if they are not warriors OR spellcasters? What if they're just a book nerd with an awesom eeffect, and his type is nerd? Will the rate be lowered? probably. Should it be? No. Cause the maker had no choice.

 

Ninjas are still classified as Warriors.

 

You and others are thinking the bloodthirsty, battle crazed warrior.

 

The stereotype so to speak.

 

The warrior I'm referring to are basically humans that do battle without magic.

 

I won't repeat the whole, Rogue/Ninja specialization thing, because I'll just get ignored.

 

Also, I believe Frost falls into the category of Aqua. >_>