BulletMan Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Konami decides where it goes on the ban list' date=' not YCM.[/quote'] If you can't understand the concept of hypothetical scenarios by now, you should leave. Now. We don't decide. Besides, I already said how I wanted it to be done. It won't happen, unless I was like the boss at konami. There wasn't much of a good reason to post that either. Don't know what you were thinking. >__> That's why its hypothetical. FFS man. Well, I'm so sorry my joke upsetted you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PikaPerson01 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ... What joke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BulletMan Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ... What joke? Konami decides where it goes on the ban list, not YCM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ... What joke? Konami decides where it goes on the ban list' date=' not YCM.[/quote'] That's not a joke, that's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabHelmet Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Trunade should be banned long before heavy. This is pretty much my favourite post in the topic. ITT: If you're a super mod' date=' you're allowed to have multiple accounts. And everyone else gets really excited about it.[/quote'] Why does everyone automatically assume that everything I do relates to me being a Super Mod? If I insult someone, it's because I'm a Super Mod. If someone agrees with me, it's because I'm a Super Mod. If I want Dark Armed Dragon banned, it's because I'm a Super Mod. At any rate, the account in question is on GameFAQs, not YCM, and GameFAQs permits multiple accounts - in fact, it allows banned members to return with new accounts, and only in the most extreme cases gives permanent IP bans (called KOS - "Kill On Sight" - that lead to all new accounts being autobanned). He was obviously joking. Correct. ... What joke? Konami decides where it goes on the ban list' date=' not YCM.[/quote'] That's not a joke, that's true. And it's also irrelevant. And it's also constantly parroted by idiots who don't understand what the word "should" means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark One Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ITT: If you're a super mod' date=' you're allowed to have multiple accounts. And everyone else gets really excited about it.[/quote'] Why does everyone automatically assume that everything I do relates to me being a Super Mod? If I insult someone, it's because I'm a Super Mod. If someone agrees with me, it's because I'm a Super Mod. If I want Dark Armed Dragon banned, it's because I'm a Super Mod. At any rate, the account in question is on GameFAQs, not YCM, and GameFAQs permits multiple accounts - in fact, it allows banned members to return with new accounts, and only in the most extreme cases gives permanent IP bans (called KOS - "Kill On Sight" - that lead to all new accounts being autobanned). My comment was in jest. More than anything, it was ridiculing the very assumption that you accused me of making. ^.^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BulletMan Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 ... What joke? Konami decides where it goes on the ban list' date=' not YCM.[/quote'] That's not a joke, that's true. True in one direction, a joke in another, really. I was saying that, just to be funny, that it was true and we don't, but I knew it was hypothetical this thread. There was really no need. But somebody just had to reply and say that I don't understand that we're "hypothetical" doing something and to butt out because they think I don't. Well, I think so, and I made a joke that they think degrades me to an unintelligent person. I'm much smarter than that. If you want to barge in on a joke like that, why don't you just keep on replying to jokes made throughout the TCG Section, and ask "Why are you saying that? Idiot." when they're just joking. That's annoying. So are jokes but they keep this thread and such from being dull. And if your funny, your smart, like Crab. I'm done discussing in this thread, since I've said all that I need to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 [spoiler=hmmm]... What joke? Konami decides where it goes on the ban list' date=' not YCM.[/quote'] That's not a joke, that's true. True in one direction, a joke in another, really. I was saying that, just to be funny, that it was true and we don't, but I knew it was hypothetical this thread. There was really no need. But somebody just had to reply and say that I don't understand that we're "hypothetical" doing something and to butt out because they think I don't. Well, I think so, and I made a joke that they think degrades me to an unintelligent person. I'm much smarter than that. If you want to barge in on a joke like that, why don't you just keep on replying to jokes made throughout the TCG Section, and ask "Why are you saying that? Idiot." when they're just joking. That's annoying. So are jokes but they keep this thread and such from being dull. And if your funny, your smart, like Crab. I'm done discussing in this thread, since I've said all that I need to. Not to offend, but you used that same statement (Konami decides banlist) in the Oppression thread. Its not a very funny joke and gets a little annoying to hear, specially when it really is irrelevant. I bet that's why there was a reply.. OT:Trunade is basically a -1, but Brionac is also a minus itself. (This sounds like something interesting to discuss). Its not about gaining card advantage. It also discriminates in general to all non-chainable card effects (just like Heavy does). Something I love about trunade is that it bypasses several hindrances of heavy storm' date=' making it actually considerably superior in several instances. The first and funniest one is that it completely bumfucks endymion. Magical super special awesome endymion that is totally immune to heavy storm, mst and your mother gets demolished by trunade. Next, trunade stalls decks like geartown abusers in a way heavy can't. Obviously heavy storm destroys a geartown, giving them the dragon, but trunade just bounces it for the turn, allowing you to clear their backfield without unleashing a beast. When used in a control type deck, it's infinitely superior to heavy storm. Oppression, swords, steel cage, bind, level limit, messenger, counter traps, even field spells (not counting endymion, gear town, morphtronic map), any of these cards like to be protected. stall, oppression, low level beatdown, counter fairies lol, etc, these decks prefer to run trunade over heavy storm. These kinds of decks might not be making a big otk sweep, but even so, their sweeps like to be protected, and so do their sts, as they usually form the backbone of the deck. And last, you get to re-use coth. Sweet. Do I think it should be banned though? If heavy storm stays limited, this stays limited. It's a variant thereof and provides interesting strategy. New train of thought, what if the banlist stipulated that a deck could only run heavy [i']or[/i] trunade? I pretty much agree with this post so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metal Skull Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 You people are crazy...You want to ban Heavy Storm...I see HS is OP and it's ok ban itBut Giant Turnade?LOL should be at 2 or unlimitedYou want to ban all the good Spell/Trap destructionHS at 1?So GT at 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Griffin Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 HS is undeniably good for the game and should stay where it is. I don't feel like explaining this again.GT encourages OTKs, it has good and bad points and is debatable to its position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabHelmet Posted December 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 You want to ban all the good Spell/Trap destruction See, I told you: the smart people know I just have a random hatred of good cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 This! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tronta Posted December 29, 2009 Report Share Posted December 29, 2009 ....That's pretty... special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ P O L A R I S ~ Posted December 29, 2009 Report Share Posted December 29, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Heavy Storm to 3 too. Just conveyin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizarus Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Heavy Storm is needed at one, and will always be needed at one, until Konami decides to make a balanced replacement. In a format where OTKs are few and difficult to achieve, Trunade could very well be put to 3. But as of now it should be banned, since OTKs are virtually everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombiepromking Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 A -1 that supports OTK's and FTK's by removing the some of the most dangerous hazards. Sort of like Brionic in a sense. But you can reuse cards left on the field like CotH. You can reuse CoTH, but that's with the exception of losing your current monster and having to wait another turn to revive again. Trunade is good at 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Heavy Storm is needed at one' date=' and will always be needed at one, until Konami decides to make a balanced replacement. In a format where OTKs are few and difficult to achieve, Trunade could very well be put to 3. But as of now it should be banned, since OTKs are virtually everywhere.[/quote'] Trunade and MST to 3 is enough to make up for the loss of 1 Heavy Storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Heavy Storm is needed at one' date=' and will always be needed at one, until Konami decides to make a balanced replacement. In a format where OTKs are few and difficult to achieve, Trunade could very well be put to 3. But as of now it should be banned, since OTKs are virtually everywhere.[/quote'] Trunade and MST to 3 is enough to make up for the loss of 1 Heavy Storm. Agreed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanAtlus Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Heavy Storm is needed at one' date=' and will always be needed at one, until Konami decides to make a balanced replacement. In a format where OTKs are few and difficult to achieve, Trunade could very well be put to 3. But as of now it should be banned, since OTKs are virtually everywhere.[/quote'] Trunade and MST to 3 is enough to make up for the loss of 1 Heavy Storm. Agreed! Seconded. Wouldn't it be lulzy if Trunade was Quick-Play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombiepromking Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Heavy Storm to 0Giant Trunade to 3Mystical Space Typhoon to 3 Heavy Storm is needed at one' date=' and will always be needed at one, until Konami decides to make a balanced replacement. In a format where OTKs are few and difficult to achieve, Trunade could very well be put to 3. But as of now it should be banned, since OTKs are virtually everywhere.[/quote'] Trunade and MST to 3 is enough to make up for the loss of 1 Heavy Storm. Agreed! Aximil! Ditto! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizarus Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Heavy Storm is known to punish overextention, something MST and GT can't do. Once HS is taken out, no one would have a reason not to overextend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboss144 Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Lol if Trunade should be banned then every copy of Heavy Storm should be torn to shreds. ^THIS^ (except for COTH, HS>Trunade pretty much 100% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manjoume Thunder Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Trunade helps OTKs.Heavy helps OTKs, too, but it also punishes overextension. Trunade only has a bad side. Cold Wave is more broken than both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Griffin Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Trunade helps OTKs.Heavy helps OTKs' date=' too, but it also punishes overextension. Trunade only has a bad side. [s']Cold Wave is more broken than both.[/s] This. Heavy Storm is needed at one, and a balanced replacement is almost impossible without removing the threatening part of HS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.