Dark Hole

[The ReBeL]

everyone is just going to starlight it themselves unless they are sure the opponent does not have starlight

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

Breaker is at 3 now. You think that's where Dark Hole is going? (Yeah you said, it won't go higher than 1 but do you think there's a chance?)

 

I agree on the rest though, Dark hole should be banned it's usually a Raigeki.

 

With Starlight Road around, I wouldn't rule it out but then again, that didn't stop them from killing Heavy Storm so IDK.

[Manjoume Thunder]

After a lot of testing yesterday I started to believe that Dark Hole is good for the game. Even more so than Heavy. It really slows the game down and thanks to the huge backrow, it very rarely leads to OTKs. Then again, it could be just us not having the right mindset yet but the fact is that

-1 Heavy Storm

+1 Dark Hole completely changes the game.

[^l~Soul~l^]

 

This is now at 1.

 

Discuss the impact this returning will have, and why this was even brought back in the first place.

I used to use this card when i was 9 and i was getting owned....I would have like a kuriboh on the feild and he would have 2 god cards and an exzodious.....All of a sudden ME-"I summon Dark Hole!"

FREIND-"Wait What!...at least my exzodious is brought back with Calling of the dead....."

ME-"I summon Brain Control!"

FREIND-"Ohhh...you have got to be F-ing kidding me.....O well at least i can bring silfer back with my call f the haunted."

Me-"I summon Dragon Capture Jar!"

FREIND-"Of course.....he takes two of my best cards......."

Me-"I activate breaking of the Ruins!"

FREIND-"And of course the duels over...."

 

 

Funny part was he said at the beggining "Whatever cards are left over on your side of the feild at the end get to keep them!"XD

[valliant12]

Will make Summoning Rainbow Dragon a snap.

[Brinolovania]

Will make Summoning Rainbow Dragon a snap.

 

LOL

[The Dark One]

After a lot of testing yesterday I started to believe that Dark Hole is good for the game. Even more so than Heavy. It really slows the game down and thanks to the huge backrow, it very rarely leads to OTKs. Then again, it could be just us not having the right mindset yet but the fact is that

-1 Heavy Storm

+1 Dark Hole completely changes the game.

I haven't tested much yet, but I've been wondering the same thing. I wouldn't go so far as to say it belongs anywhere but 0, but it certainly would affect the way the game is played ,and that, at the very least, makes for an exciting change.

[Great Unclean One: VK]

Will make Summoning Rainbow Dragon a snap.

 

Rainbow Dragon Meta FTW!

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

After a lot of testing yesterday I started to believe that Dark Hole is good for the game. Even more so than Heavy. It really slows the game down and thanks to the huge backrow, it very rarely leads to OTKs. Then again, it could be just us not having the right mindset yet but the fact is that

-1 Heavy Storm

+1 Dark Hole completely changes the game.

 

Indeed although I'm still not convinced Dark Hole is good for the game. The fact Dark Hole rarely leads to OTKs is probably more due to the lack of Heavy Storm than anything else because without Heavy Storm, you can no longer eliminate your opponent's backrow all at once. MST itself is not enough because your opponent can set more of a backrow without any real fear of losing it by Heavy Storm.

[Rose]

After a lot of testing yesterday I started to believe that Dark Hole is good for the game. Even more so than Heavy. It really slows the game down and thanks to the huge backrow, it very rarely leads to OTKs. Then again, it could be just us not having the right mindset yet but the fact is that

-1 Heavy Storm

+1 Dark Hole completely changes the game.

 

I find that rather interesting. Im going to start to play the game again when it's september and looking at the banlist the first thing i said "Just, Why?" to was Dark Hole, atleast thats the first thing that caught my eye. Im actually going to enjoy this format, I love Dark Hole, although I still believe it should be banned regardless.

 

@Judgement Phoenix: I think what we should believe then at this time is that Dark Hole is better for the game then Heavy Storm, but Dark Hole still should be banned, anyone agree?

[werewolfjedi]

Indeed although I'm still not convinced Dark Hole is good for the game. The fact Dark Hole rarely leads to OTKs is probably more due to the lack of Heavy Storm than anything else because without Heavy Storm, you can no longer eliminate your opponent's backrow all at once. MST itself is not enough because your opponent can set more of a backrow without any real fear of losing it by Heavy Storm.

however a backrow makes swarming aganist no monsters still a dangerous play with no heavy to use, and then after I block your swarm I play dark hole and the rest is history because I also happened to have giant trunade, which has become the new problem card/ otk opener.

 

well, I guess it's back to village lock to protect my monsters, even with dark hole and monster reborn to fuel my citadel.

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

@Judgement Phoenix: I think what we should believe then at this time is that Dark Hole is better for the game then Heavy Storm, but Dark Hole still should be banned, anyone agree?

 

At this time it is probably true. The problem combos that Heavy Storm helps no longer have help in that area this format so going up against a back row is riskier than ever now since there is now an even greater risk of it blowing up in your face. Still, the problem combos that Heavy Storm helps should not exist in the first place but none-the-less do exist and the lack of Heavy Storm means that players can now overextend in their back row with little to no risk of it blowing up in their face and that isn't good for the game. Dark Hole itself can't really enable OTKs since there is now that back row that is a problem. Dark Hole itself should not exist in the same format as Heavy Storm because it is costless and splashable mass Monster removal and together they would create a splashable 2-card field nuke and that isn't good for the game either. In a good format, Heavy Storm is needed to punish Spell and Trap overextension and in a good format, Dark Hole would be banned. The game can do without Dark Hole since we have other means of punishing Monster overextension in Lightning Vortex and Mirror Force although it could be argued that Mirror Force itself is banworthy. I don't believe it is but I sure as hell wouldn't like a format with that at 3 because it pretty much punishes you for attacking which isn't good. Still, at 0, it would allow players to overextend without fear of retaliation. For that reason, Mirror Force should be at 1 because it offers a benefit to the game that it couldn't at 0 and if you overextend recklessly and run into Mirror Force, you honestly deserve to be punished for it otherwise Mirror Force will usually only take down 1, 2 or maybe 3 Monsters. Lightning Vortex is much the same way except it can be used during your turn, it comes with a cost and it destroys face-up Monsters only and again, it would usually only take down 1, 2 or maybe 3 Monsters. If it didn't have the discard cost though, it would be banworthy. There's Giant Trunade but that's really only good if you're able to win the same turn you use it since you have to deal with the Spells and Traps you return next turn if you don't win.

 

however a backrow makes swarming aganist no monsters still a dangerous play with no heavy to use, and then after I block your swarm I play dark hole and the rest is history because I also happened to have giant trunade, which has become the new problem card/ otk opener.

 

well, I guess it's back to village lock to protect my monsters, even with dark hole and monster reborn to fuel my citadel.

 

Indeed. Well I sure as hell wouldn't risk swarming against a field with no Monsters and a heavy back row without a plan. I guess that means that my Solemn Judgment and My Body as a Shields are even more important in protecting my Monsters this format than any other format in a long time. There's Starlight Road too but My Body as a Shield does the job better for me in most cases.

[Rhiannaers]

I really don't like this card. I never have. It's completely useless to me. I understand how it could be useful, but I'm very meh about his card.

[The Dark One]

I think we're all making too big a deal out of storm's absence, actually. Starlight Road already existed, and I know at least from my locals that people regularly set 3+ cards first turn in the confidence that I could do nothing about it. When there's so many counters available to deal with Heavy Storm, its chilling effect on sets is already approaching nil.

 

That's what makes me think that maybe banning Storm was the right choice. It's clearly a broken card, and since it's not doing it's job, it has to go. Of course, the counter in the little argument in my head says that this is all Starlight Road's fault, and the true solution is simply to get rid of that.

[Flame Dragon]

I think we're all making too big a deal out of storm's absence, actually. Starlight Road already existed, and I know at least from my locals that people regularly set 3+ cards first turn in the confidence that I could do nothing about it. When there's so many counters available to deal with Heavy Storm, its chilling effect on sets is already approaching nil.

 

That's what makes me think that maybe banning Storm was the right choice. It's clearly a broken card, and since it's not doing it's job, it has to go. Of course, the counter in the little argument in my head says that this is all Starlight Road's fault, and the true solution is simply to get rid of that.

Would that logic apply to Dark Hole as well? I really don't get why they brought it back.

 

And why is Road the problem and not Stardust?

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

I think we're all making too big a deal out of storm's absence, actually. Starlight Road already existed, and I know at least from my locals that people regularly set 3+ cards first turn in the confidence that I could do nothing about it. When there's so many counters available to deal with Heavy Storm, its chilling effect on sets is already approaching nil.

 

That's what makes me think that maybe banning Storm was the right choice. It's clearly a broken card, and since it's not doing it's job, it has to go. Of course, the counter in the little argument in my head says that this is all Starlight Road's fault, and the true solution is simply to get rid of that.

 

I'm actually not convinced Starlight Road is a problem either. The fact it gives you a Stardust afterwards is what really breaks it. Even if it can only negate a destruction effect once. Without Stardust, Starlight Road isn't actually a problem at all. In fact, it is on par with stuff like Dark Bribe and My Body as a Shield. Neither of which are banworthy. Stardust Dragon itself is the culperit since it is a generic recurring My Body as a Shield with legs and 2500 ATK. Being a My Body as a Shield with legs once isn't a problem (then you could argue Starlight Road is a problem) but the fact Stardust can continuously do it turn after turn is. By being recurring, it basically eliminates the main way of dealing with cards. Starlight Road in a good format at best is really only good for stopping the aforementioned Heavy Storm as well as stuff like Lightning Vortex, Mirror Force and Torrential Tribute somewhat as well as the themed mass removal that wouldn't be banned in a good format. Regarding Starlight Road. Since Stardust is banworthy anyway, ban Stardust and leave Starlight Road alone since it can no longer summon a Stardust which is what breaks it and it still works since summoning a Stardust isn't compulsory.

[The Dark One]

Of course you're right that Stardust itself has that same effect. Starlight Road is distinct from My Body in that it can shut down S/T destruction, but otherwise is rather unremarkable. Stardust has only ever not been a problem because of the ease with which your opponent can simply summon a larger synchro and attack over it, but when the Stardust comes down after the resolution of an already useful effect, for free, the effort it takes to dispose of him is already putting your opponent at a disadvantage.

 

So yes, killing Stardust might be a handy solution to all our troubles.

 

Also, Flame Dragon, the difference between Heavy And Dark Hole is that it takes no special maneuvering to lay down multiple sets. When a Dark Hole goes off, it costs you more than just card advantage, it costs you options. Decks don't have an infinite number of ways to swarm the field.

 

That being said, the same logic does apply, which is really just further justification that Dark Hole remains banworthy.

 

Though I think I overstated my initial case too. It's not that Heavy has no effect, it's that it has a lessened effect. So the question is simply this: is what remains of its chilling effect still sufficient to justify its own damaging presence?

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

Though I think I overstated my initial case too. It's not that Heavy has no effect, it's that it has a lessened effect. So the question is simply this: is what remains of its chilling effect still sufficient to justify its own damaging presence?

 

I think it is. I just don't think anyone should be allowed to recklessly set multiple Spell and Traps without thinking twice or without fear of retribution. Also, if Heavy Storm is gone, should only Decks that have balanced mass removal deserve to have it? Of course there is the whole "if a Decktype needs a banworthy card to live, it doesn't deserve to live" argument but in this case I think an exception can be made for Heavy Storm because it offers a benefit to the game it couldn't offer if banned. Or you could just declare that punishing overextension is not needed and/or is just bad for the game and just kill Heavy Storm. Without Heavy Storm, players can indeed set multiple Spells and Traps without fear of retribution which isn't something that good players would do if Heavy Storm wasn't banned because that is indeed bad play that deserves to be punished.

[Flame Dragon]

Of course you're right that Stardust itself has that same effect. Starlight Road is distinct from My Body in that it can shut down S/T destruction, but otherwise is rather unremarkable. Stardust has only ever not been a problem because of the ease with which your opponent can simply summon a larger synchro and attack over it, but when the Stardust comes down after the resolution of an already useful effect, for free, the effort it takes to dispose of him is already putting your opponent at a disadvantage.

 

So yes, killing Stardust might be a handy solution to all our troubles.

While you can simply run over Dust, it sitting at 2500 makes it much harder then would first appear.

 

TBQH any card that does something then gives you a free beatstick would be broken. It's just in this case the fact that alone Dust is also broken saves Road.

[werewolfjedi]

and just to give mention to the future, dark hole triggers the machine emperors, which are already playable in any deck since their requirement to play is even more common in this game than the damage needed for trag or gorz.

I mean it's going to be bad enough that I'm going to have to worry about playing mst when there might be a level 1 ass kicking monster in their hand, and I am not maining/siding infinite dissmissal just to make sure they don't stick around, but any deck playing sangan (a searcher that can grab grand) or any other searcher triggered by effect kill can be popped off with dark hole, summon the emp, and attack directly for an unfair advantage there, most certainly if it's wisel, since it can negate a spell once per turn, which stops shrink or moon from reducing the damage.

I mean at least T.T. has the forcing option that it must be at the time of summoning, meaning I can't play breaker and get a little extra off the field. with dark hole, I can now.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

I think we're all making too big a deal out of storm's absence, actually. Starlight Road already existed, and I know at least from my locals that people regularly set 3+ cards first turn in the confidence that I could do nothing about it. When there's so many counters available to deal with Heavy Storm, its chilling effect on sets is already approaching nil.

 

That's what makes me think that maybe banning Storm was the right choice. It's clearly a broken card, and since it's not doing it's job, it has to go. Of course, the counter in the little argument in my head says that this is all Starlight Road's fault, and the true solution is simply to get rid of that.

This. I don't see why everyone thinks getting rid of heavy storm will have a large impact on play.

[Mehmani]

This happened when I was on holiday? FU--------