Jump to content

Very insightful response

BehindTheMask

Recommended Posts

Manjoume Thunder Newbie

Manjoume Thunder

Posted
Posted
Agree with the Dark Hole part, but I am still not sure on Heavy's banning. You cannot say that there is a replacement. Cards like Trap Stun, Cold Wave and Trunade just buy you a turn, so to best utilize them, you need to OTK, something that must not exist in a consistent form. Cards like Mystical Space Typhoon and Nobleman of Extermination are one-for-one removal. Decks that run bigger backrows like to play in a more simplified state and losing one of their many backrow cards to get rid of one of your options will be good for them in a lot of situations.

EDIT: Is that the Spaceship guy in the end of the video?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
poopybuttoxes Newbie

poopybuttoxes

Posted
Posted
[quote name='TMD (Barushi)' timestamp='1282714888' post='4563483']
Lmfao@the ending
[/quote]
yus

Anyway, I dont really care about the heavy thing defensively. I just dont wanna play without it offensively, and hes right about us having alot of cards that destroy spells and traps, but not like heavy. Heavy was a potential +2 or more for -1 advantage. Now all we have is 1 for 1 (except for breaker, which i think is a really underrated card to begin with). We gotta switch up everything and its annoying. People should have been using NoE or dust more often anyway, but now that you can have 2 MST's its going to bring more attention to spell and trap destruction (which has been really overlooked), and i dont like it personally. And everyone was all like "Starlight road, yea, starlight road." It was more useable before because of lightning and heavy. Now people are probably gonna stop using lightning as often so thats 1 staple starlight doesnt have to worry about. Im sure it'll all turn out ok. It just leaves a sick feeling about the game having to worry about stupid crap like this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
evilfusion Newbie

evilfusion

Posted
Posted
I have tested a little in the wake of Storm's banning, and I still think it's interesting. I haven't modified my playstyle too much, I just can't rely on drawing Heavy, nor do I have to sweat over Heavy. It puts more strategy into things like what S/Ts you run, which ones you set, and bluffing is still crucial because instead of having your backrow wiped, you and your opponent have to conserve some of your S/T removal or counters and shoot at certain cards. So if you set 2 S/Ts, one being a bluff, rather than both getting wiped by Storm, MST and the like can only hit one.

I never liked investing in a backrow for whatever reason just to have it cleared out. It's true, S/Ts are WAY harder to replenish than monsters. Dark Hole and Reborn are pretty interesting cards, even if I really don't approve of them, they add an odd element to the game that didn't exist last format, especially with Storm now gone. I haven't decided if it's good or bad yet, but it's definitely INTERESTING.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
.Leo Newbie

.Leo

Posted
Posted

[quote name='Manjoume Thunder' timestamp='1282730908' post='4563776']
Breaker is 1-4-1 removal. You summon, I bottomless. ;)
[/quote]

I still remove your Spell/Trap card. ;)

I agree in that Dark Hole would be better for the game than Heavy Storm, because, with Sangan and stuff, you can get pluses when it hits the grave. The only problem is, it might be easier to otk with dark hole than storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
arkel Newbie

arkel

Posted
Posted
The problem with this is the guy in the vid is discussing everything in this and past formats. When discussing the banlist position of any card, you have to consider the rightful banlist locations of all cards. For example, a lot of people say Starlight Road should be banned because it summons Stardust, but if Stardust is banned like it should be, Starlight Road is fine at 3.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
evilfusion Newbie

evilfusion

Posted
Posted

[quote name='LeoMence' timestamp='1282774126' post='4565419']
I still remove your Spell/Trap card. ;)

I agree in that Dark Hole would be better for the game than Heavy Storm, because, with Sangan and stuff, you can get pluses when it hits the grave. The only problem is, it might be easier to otk with dark hole than storm.
[/quote]

No, you don't. Upon the summon, Breaker's effect to get a counter activates. Its effect to remove the counter is separate and as an Ignition effect, is Spell Speed 1. So when you summon Breaker, its effect (to get a counter) activates and your opponent activates Bottomless. Breaker dies and is RFG. It never got a counter, so it could never remove it to nuke an S/T

Link to comment
Share on other sites
poopybuttoxes Newbie

poopybuttoxes

Posted
Posted
[quote name='evilfusion' timestamp='1282775486' post='4565499']
No, you don't. Upon the summon, Breaker's effect to get a counter activates. Its effect to remove the counter is separate and as an Ignition effect, is Spell Speed 1. So when you summon Breaker, its effect (to get a counter) activates and your opponent activates Bottomless. Breaker dies and is RFG. It never got a counter, so it could never remove it to nuke an S/T
[/quote]
Lol, you remove the bottomless because the opponent uses it on breaker. 1 for 1 dude. Yea you lose normal summon, but if its not bottomless you get +1, and its a risk worth taking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sleepy Mentor

Sleepy

Posted
Posted
I was of the ones to support this "banned Heavy" idea. There is enough generic S/T removal, + some Arch-Type related S/T removal too. If it wasn't enough, we also have some card removal effects.

Dark Hole limited is interesting, and it DOES sound like its better than Heavy for the game in that video, but I don't think its "good" in general, once you stop comparing it with Heavy in the list placement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...