arkel Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Accumulated_Fortune One of the few cards that I have no idea where to place on a 3-0 banlist. Anyway, discuss what you believe to be its proper list position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♥ ЅϯᵲåώӀӞ℮ᴙʀɣ−ɴɨɨ−ƈħåɴ ♥ Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [center][color="#9932CC"][b]Terrible. Next.[/b][/color][/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scyire Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote name='♥ ЅϯᵲåώӀӞ℮ᴙʀɣ−ɴɨɨ−ƈħåɴ ♥' timestamp='1283276329' post='4585166'] [center][color="#9932CC"][b]Terrible. Next.[/b][/color][/center] [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted August 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 Lolycm. Don't post if you don't know what you're talking about. This card is very arguably banworthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scyire Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote name='arkel' timestamp='1283276512' post='4585173'] Lolycm. Don't post if you don't know what you're talking about. This card is very arguably banworthy. [/quote] Cool story. You go ahead and put that card in your deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manjoume Thunder Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote]Terrible.[/quote] lol [quote]banworthy[/quote] lol 10/10 topic. Will recommend it to friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 Chain Burn would like this card, but...not much else would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted August 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote name='Scyire' timestamp='1283276570' post='4585178'] Cool story. You go ahead and put that card in your deck. [/quote] I did. http://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/topic/219863-frazburndek/ [quote name='Manjoume Thunder' timestamp='1283276626' post='4585180'] 10/10 topic. Will recommend it to friends. [/quote] Extremely easy +1 in a dedicated deck. Arguably banworthy. It's like Allure; even the best 3-0 theorists disagree on its list position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 While that deck looks awesome, ironically, Accumulated Fortune IS NOT IN IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted August 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote name='evilfusion' timestamp='1283277368' post='4585221'] While that deck looks awesome, ironically, Accumulated Fortune IS NOT IN IT. [/quote] ... >.> fix'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manjoume Thunder Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote]While that deck looks awesome, ironically, Accumulated Fortune IS NOT IN IT.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 I do note that it's a Chain Burn deck, though, which does cement my belief that Chain Burn will like this, but few other things will. It's like that Miraculous Revival or whatever it's called, that needs 4 links for Monster Reborn's effect. It's not splashable enough to be banworthy, and can be a dead draw if you can't make/force 3 other links. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 Broke in a chain deck. Horribly situational everywhere els. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 Just because a card is good in one deck DOES NOT mean banworthy or even limit/semi limit worthy in that case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted August 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote name='Canadian' timestamp='1283280296' post='4585361'] Just because a card is good in one deck DOES NOT mean banworthy or even limit/semi limit worthy in that case. [/quote] By that logic JD isn't banworthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 I'm sorry, but the JD comment is foregoing the logic of the argument in favor of trying to prove it wrong. Crab herself falls into this at times when trying to point out the stupidity of someone blatantly wrong, but I've found such responses to lose impact because it ignores the actual argument. Accumulated Fortune is not comparable to JD. Accumulated Fortune has a very specific activation requirement, and the effect is not broken. It is not splashable in decks because of the activation requirement. It needs deck dedication in some form that most decks cannot afford to give. JD has a specific, but simple summoning condition, a very low cost, and a very broken effect. Lightsworn decks have the means to accumulate 4 different Lightsworn into their graveyard with ease, and JD's cost and condition becomes laughable after a few short turns. Outside of Lightsworn/hybrid, JD is useless, but that's because it's archetype specific. Accumulated Fortune relies on chain links, something most decks cannot consistently assemble 4 of, without relying too much on the opponent. This makes Accumulated very unreliable, except in decks like Chain Burn, which make a lot of chains without losing much, if any, card advantage. So Accumulated Fortune works well in Chain Burn, but horribly most everywhere else. At which case, you have to consider the effect. You need 3 other chain links to activate this, and in exchange, you draw 2. It's not a reliable draw engine, it's only a +1 in Chain Burn, since that deck focuses on not losing advantage and unlike Chain Strike, it doesn't inflict variable amounts of burn, so it really doesn't warrant a limit. On its own, it's a very conditional draw engine, much like Fortune Lady Water. When considering whether a card is bannable/limitable based on being good in one deck, do make sure you're not talking about an archetype specific card, which OBVIOUSLY only works in that type of deck, or that if you are, the archetype/the specific card can't be splashed elsewhere with good results (Rekindling w/ Flamvell's very splashable Synchro engine). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aesirson Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 This has no place whatsoever at The List, neither should it be banned, semi'd or limited. It is not a bad card when you're actually able to use it. But how often do you get to use it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YamiMario Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 [quote name='arkel' timestamp='1283276512' post='4585173'] Lolycm. Don't post if you don't know what you're talking about. This card is very arguably banworthy. [/quote] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Tv_goof_troop_pete.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted August 31, 2010 Report Share Posted August 31, 2010 Only good in one type of deck. Thus it sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted September 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2010 [quote name='General VK-Duelist/Shepard' timestamp='1283295780' post='4586404'] Only good in one type of deck. Thus it sucks. [/quote] Black Whirlwind is only good in a Blackwing deck. Thus it sucks. ...wait, what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted September 1, 2010 Report Share Posted September 1, 2010 Okay fine. This card is just to situational to really work. Now......if we somehow shifted to a Chain meta. Then this'll be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted September 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2010 [quote name='General VK-Duelist/Shepard' timestamp='1283300285' post='4586716'] Okay fine. This card is just to situational to really work. Now......if we somehow shifted to a Chain meta. Then this'll be banned. [/quote] Oh, you're so cute. You think the meta should determine what should be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted September 1, 2010 Report Share Posted September 1, 2010 [quote name='arkel' timestamp='1283300453' post='4586725'] Oh, you're so cute. You think the meta should determine what should be banned. [/quote] No not really. It's just that I don't see this card being broken. The Meta doesn't really make cards broken. Combos or the card itself make it broken. This requires 4 long chain. Now most chains I've seen last only around 2. Thus, from my experience, this card can hardly be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Judgment Dragon Posted September 1, 2010 Report Share Posted September 1, 2010 A lot of the posts in this topic are full of fail. Arkel, I don't think YCM is a good place to discuss cards and their list position based on 3 or 0 logic since a lot of YCM is stupid, doesn't understand it or both. I for one don't think this is banworthy only for the difficulty it requires to set off. Then again it is only due to my own experiences so I guess it's open to interpretation. A lot of times I've fallen short of the activation requirement or drawn it when I wish I had drawn something else or maybe I'm just doing it wrong. There's also the option of declaring that the activation requirement isn't enough to balance Accumulated Fortune and just declare that it is banworthy because of that fact. Oh and guys, a card can be terrible and banworthy so just because a card is terrible, it doesn't necessarily mean it isn't banworthy. Hell, Inferno Tempest is terrible but because of the fact it allows the Necromill OTK to exist and it is only good for that while Necroface is good for more than the OTK, I believe it is banworthy. There's also Victory Dragon. Difficult to use but because of the fact it can force a scoop or lose the match situation and because of the fact a match should not be allowed to be decided in 1 duel, it is banworthy. Seriously, think before you post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted September 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2010 Thank you very much JD for supplying the only post in this topic with an ounce of intelligence. Your post perfectly explains why Accumulated Fortune is open to either 3 or 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.