Jonny Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 No' date=' only if they are really well done. So good, that they could be a real type and if they perfectly match the set. And as subtypes.But else: no.[/quote'] WiiOmi , i will kill you soon for that report..... They can be good , but they suck mostly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 So what if we compile a list of types that are reasonable? Jonny: how are you sure if WiiOmi reported you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womi Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 No' date=' only if they are really well done. So good, that they could be a real type and if they perfectly match the set. And as subtypes.But else: no.[/quote'] WiiOmi , i will kill you soon for that report..... They can be good , but they suck mostly... It wasn't me reporting you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 So what if we compile a list of types that are reasonable? Jonny: how are you sure if WiiOmi reported you? OMG , IT'S YOU! ~~~~~~~~ Anyways dog,bird and other animal type are useless... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 So what if we compile a list of types that are reasonable? Jonny: how are you sure if WiiOmi reported you? OMG ' date=' IT'S YOU! ~~~~~~~~ Anyways dog,bird and other animal type are useless...[/quote'] thn dont menchion dem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Berserker- Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 The thing of the people that defend the fake types is that they think that everything the monster needs to fit perfectly not the type, but the name of the type. Like saying "that's a wyvern, not a dragon" or "ghosts and zombies are totally different things in my dictionary", but even konami put them together to avoid making 300+ types. For me? I know pterosaurs are not dinosaurs, and clouds are not fairies, but their types fits well for them. Also, everything knowledge related can go in Psychics, like scientist, inventor, alchemist, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 The thing of the people that defend the fake types is that they think that everything the monster needs to fit perfectly not the type' date=' but the name of the type. Like saying "that's a wyvern, not a dragon" or "ghosts and zombies are totally different things in my dictionary", but even konami put them together to avoid making 300+ types. For me? I know pterosaurs are not dinosaurs, and clouds are not fairies, but their types fits well for them. Also, everything knowledge related can go in Psychics, like scientist, inventor, alchemist, etc.[/quote'] What was Magical Scientist?A Spellcaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womi Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 And what would Psycho Scientist be? :I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 supah Spellcaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womi Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 Of coz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 inorite? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehmani Posted January 7, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 defidently *adds word to dictionary* Could you please list four examples of Types that are defidently needed? Otherwise' date=' I don't see a point of your argument.[/quote'] Umbra gets +1 internetz, which is rare in a Mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 defidently *adds word to dictionary* Could you please list four examples of Types that are defidently needed? Otherwise' date=' I don't see a point of your argument.[/quote'] Umbra gets +1 internetz, which is rare in a Mod. That same post has been done so many times... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T. Sankara Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 defidently *adds word to dictionary* Could you please list four examples of Types that are defidently needed? Otherwise' date=' I don't see a point of your argument.[/quote'] Umbra gets +1 internetz, which is rare in a Mod. That same post has been done so many times... It's funny because none of it actually matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehmani Posted January 7, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 defidently *adds word to dictionary* Could you please list four examples of Types that are defidently needed? Otherwise' date=' I don't see a point of your argument.[/quote'] Umbra gets +1 internetz, which is rare in a Mod. That same post has been done so many times... It was the defidently part in combination with the straight remark, Mr. Bot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexev Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 Anyway if fake types are so bad what's with Psychic. They either use fancy equipmant and look like Machine or just have psychic powers, like a spellcastor. Also Parables, Magical Scientist is not a good example. Magical Scintist is magical. Magical people use magic. So as long as a inventor/scientist can use magic then they can be a magical scientist. Unfortunitly, not all cards can be as magcal as Magical Scientist. The other Scientist Kozacky is a fiend, but he looks the part. Look at Cyber Dragon, it has Dragon in it's name but it's a machine. So clearly foolowing your logic, if dragon type never existed in Yugioh all dragon like cards would belong to Machine. The only advantage your arguement has over my example is that Magical Scintist looks more like a scietest than a robot. Plus if dragon never existed and a guy made a dragon fake type everone will say "LOL noob, fake types suck. They are clearly reptile or Winged-Beast." However not only does dragon exist it has some of the best support. So the only disadvantage some of the fake types have is that the makers don't work for Konami. Though animal and swordmastor and human are dumb fake types. Look at Deus's cards, they use a fake sub-type but they work. Plus if you eliminated the subtype they would need so much rule text that if Konami made them they will have to distrubute mcroscopes at torunamets. At the very least a bunch of fake sub-types work. Wait... why the hell is this not in debate or polls? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 Not having Dragon as a sub-type would be plain stupid.you and I both know that so don't give me that crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womi Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 Wait... why the hell is this not in debate or polls? Cuz nobody goes there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 lol debate forum.doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womi Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 The Debates Forum: - maximum 3 posts per day- 4 of them are spam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T. Sankara Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 Anyway if fake types are so bad what's with Psychic. Psychic is an actual type. And it's decent. What's your point? They either use fancy equipmant and look like Machine or just have psychic powers' date=' like a spellcastor. [b']lolno. Spellcasters don't have Psychic Powers. They cast spells. What are you getting on about?[/b] Also Parables, Magical Scientist is not a good example. . . . Wut. Magical Scintist is magical. Magical people use magic. And yet, in his card image, he's using machinery. ( http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Magical_Scientist ) So as long as a inventor/scientist can use magic then they can be a magical scientist. See my last point. Because if that's the case, Kozaky should be a Spellcaster. Unfortunitly, not all cards can be as magcal as Magical Scientist. Clearly. Irrelevant point. The other Scientist Kozacky is a fiend, but he looks the part. Here we go. He looks like a fiend? I mean, it's your opinion, but he doesn't fit a Fiend profile to me. If anything, he fits a Psychic or Machine profile. Why? Because the first thing that comes to mind when I think of a scientist is all the little vials and jars and machines that they use to perform experiments. Look at Cyber Dragon, it has Dragon in it's name but it's a machine. The first part of it's name is Cyber (lol). >.> So clearly foolowing your logic, if dragon type never existed in Yugioh all dragon like cards would belong to Machine. Following your logic, everything is dumbshit backwards. No offense, but it has a lot of loopholes and is very confusing. The only advantage your arguement has over my example is that Magical Scintist looks more like a scietest than a robot. Okay, that makes sense. Plus if dragon never existed and a guy made a dragon fake type everone will say "LOL noob, fake types suck. They are clearly reptile or Winged-Beast." Good point. But fake types that are already defined more clearly make no sense. I.E. Dog. However not only does dragon exist it has some of the best support. LOL So the only disadvantage some of the fake types have is that the makers don't work for Konami. And hopefully, they never will. Though animal and swordmastor and human are dumb fake types. Agreed. Look at Deus's cards, they use a fake sub-type but they work. Plus if you eliminated the subtype they would need so much rule text that if Konami made them they will have to distrubute mcroscopes at torunamets. What the hell? I can't even make out those words. -_- Are you actually trying? D< At the very least a bunch of fake sub-types work. LIES. Wait... why the hell is this not in debate or polls? Because this isn't debate worthy. -_- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 omg someone understood where I was going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Zero Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 time for me to opine as to this.insofar as creating cards that you might want to have submitted as part of the card game in some konami contest, yes, fake types are somewhat useless.however, let us look beyond that narrow view for a moment. you see, fake types allow people to stretch their creative wings so to speak. this is especially useful for those first starting out as when they join threads where fake types are allowed and can have their cards critiqued, they an also improve before moving on to real types if they choose to do so. aside from that, card making is supposed to be fun, (that is the point of this site, is it not?) and it takes a lot of the fun out of things when you can't create fake types where you might have otherwise found it creatively helpful, and again, fun. in addition to this, there are archetypes that are created in the which of the cards created might not fit into any of the already existing types (the absorber types for instance).does anyone see anything wrong with this line of thought thus far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sander Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 time for me to opine as to this.insofar as creating cards that you might want to have submitted as part of the card game in some konami contest' date=' yes, fake types are somewhat useless.however, let us look beyond that narrow view for a moment. you see, fake types allow people to stretch their creative wings so to speak. this is especially useful for those first starting out as when they join threads where fake types are allowed and can have their cards critiqued, they an also improve before moving on to real types if they choose to do so. aside from that, card making is supposed to be fun, (that is the point of this site, is it not?) and it takes a lot of the fun out of things when you can't create fake types where you might have otherwise found it creatively helpful, and again, fun. in addition to this, there are archetypes that are created in the which of the cards created might not fit into any of the already existing types (the absorber types for instance).does anyone see anything wrong with this line of thought thus far?[/quote'] Oh will you shut up about this "creativity"? There's nothing logical about this creativity that you guise are always ranting on about, seeing as every fake-type CAN be associated with already existing types. This "creativity" is nothing but changing the Type to something else, nothing more. Let's take those "Inventors" as an example. Yeah, I admit, they're probably planned out better than the other fake-types, but even so, they're stupid. Their types could easily be changed into either Spellcasters or Psychics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Zero Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 that is true, there are many fake types that could easily enough be transferred into another already existing type. however, there are many that could fit into multiple other types alrady in existence, but not necessarily belong to any of them. take absorbers for instance. they could fit into either the Spellcaster or Psychic area's, but they don't really belong in either one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.