Let's Fix The Banlist.

[Professional Duelist]

I can bet a billion dollars that Monster Reborn will be banned.

[Flame Dragon]

[quote name='Loki el Señor de los Aesir' timestamp='1297006460' post='4992800']
shut up canadianfaggot

shut up fa****
[/quote]
Why do people treat ban list threads as super serious business? I get some of the stupid statements are bad, but that is not a good reason to act like that.

[quote name=':: -OmeGa DeviL- ::' timestamp='1296980909' post='4992308']
Banning Stardust, PSZ, and duality ??
Limiting Malicious ??
c'mon that's stupid and will NEVER happen >_>
[/quote]
Who cares if it will never happen? When you make your own ban list you make the calls regardless of what the next banlist may or may not have added to it.

[quote name='Odin el Padre de los Aesir' timestamp='1297007825' post='4992830']
Bestiari at 2.
Putting Bestiari at 3 and banning Gyzarus would kill Glads.
And Glads dont deserve to be killed.
[/quote]
As already said, if a deck type needs broken card to be be good, then they should die. And really, I don't think Glads will die just by losing Gyz.

[Yeezus]

srs mod is srs

[Superdoopertrooper]

[quote name='Mystery Guest' timestamp='1297008512' post='4992849']
Heavy Storm is too powerful for its designed purpose and creates OTKs. It should stay at 0.
JD should be banned, along with DAD. JD is a 1000 point field nuke that blows up 3000 of the opponent's Life Points. Its conditions of summon are laughable.
The last two suggestions are fine.
[/quote]
Heavy Storm is good for the game. It can punish over extension and it can reward people who play more conservatively instead of summoning a monster and setting 5 back rows. The problem without having this card in the format is that there is really no disadvantage in setting your whole hand, why not just put all your cards out so you can deal with any situation? With heavy around, you have to think strategically about what resources to commit to the field. If you set them all, you risk losing them all. The same goes for Dark Hole, both of these cards should be at 1.

[Flame Dragon]

[quote name='Loki el Señor de los Aesir' timestamp='1297025362' post='4993547']
srs mod is srs
[/quote]
Try confused mod is confused. I don't get why people react this strongly to stupid statements.

[quote name='Superdoopertrooper' timestamp='1297036451' post='4994045']
Heavy Storm is good for the game. It can punish over extension and it can reward people who play more conservatively instead of summoning a monster and setting 5 back rows. The problem without having this card in the format is that there is really no disadvantage in setting your whole hand, why not just put all your cards out so you can deal with any situation? With heavy around, you have to think strategically about what resources to commit to the field. If you set them all, you risk losing them all. The same goes for Dark Hole, both of these cards should be at 1.
[/quote]
No one is going to set 5 cards back row. With or without Heavy most people don't play more then a 2 or 3 backrow cards on average. Granted, this might have changed since I last changed but I don't see people having 4 or 5 facedowns all to often. As such, the use it has, punishing over extension, isn't what it's main use will be.

Also, how much of an advantage do you gain by setting that many cards? Really you gain a number advantage against MST and the like, but how much of a problem is that.

Lastly, do you think punishing over extension is a good enough reason to leave a card in the game that makes OTKs that easy? And it's not like their aren't cards that give large scale S/T hate that are much more balanced then heavy.

Also, unlike Heavy, Hole as MANY similar monster hate cards. Lightning Vortex and Mirror Force are both great answers, and unlike S/T their are many more answers to monsters in the game. As such, I can understand the argument for wanting Heavy in the game but Dark Hole needs to go.

[Professional Duelist]

Honestly if someone sets 4 cards fd I'd be at a disadvantage.

[Mysty]

[quote name='Superdoopertrooper' timestamp='1297036451' post='4994045']
Heavy Storm is good for the game. It can punish over extension and it can reward people who play more conservatively instead of summoning a monster and setting 5 back rows. The problem without having this card in the format is that there is really no disadvantage in setting your whole hand, why not just put all your cards out so you can deal with any situation? With heavy around, you have to think strategically about what resources to commit to the field. If you set them all, you risk losing them all. The same goes for Dark Hole, both of these cards should be at 1.
[/quote]

There is a reason to save your powerful spells and traps in your hand: spell/trap destruction. If you set your Dark Hole, for example, your opponent can blow it up with a spell/trap destruction card.
If you haven't noticed, there isn't too much good hand destruction in the game that isn't broken. Most of the discarding lets you choose what you discard (hence you can choose cards other than that Dark Hole) and some causing you to discard randomly (which is a lot of luck and actually does make your Dark Hole vulnerable, but a lot less vulnerable than being on the field). Cards that let you look at the opponent's hand and choose what you get rid of are usually either banworthy or unplayable.

The only time a player sets a monster and five cards is if their facedown monster is Morphing Jar.

Your hand is a lot safer for your non-Quickplay spells than the field. As long as an abundance of spell and trap destruction exists, skilled players will play conservatively when it comes to S/Ts. We don't really need an OTK-starter to help with that.
If Heavy Storm had a card cost and a restriction that made OTKs less likely, then it would be fine.

[quote name='Flame Dragon' timestamp='1297037942' post='4994092']
No one is going to set 5 cards back row. With or without Heavy most people don't play more then a 2 or 3 backrow cards on average. Granted, this might have changed since I last changed but I don't see people having 4 or 5 facedowns all to often. As such, the use it has, punishing over extension, isn't what it's main use will be.

Also, how much of an advantage do you gain by setting that many cards? Really you gain a number advantage against MST and the like, but how much of a problem is that.

Lastly, do you think punishing over extension is a good enough reason to leave a card in the game that makes OTKs that easy? And it's not like their aren't cards that give large scale S/T hate that are much more balanced then heavy.

Also, unlike Heavy Hole as MANY similar monster hate cards. Lightning Vortex and Mirror Force are both great answers, and unlike S/T their are many more answers to monsters in the game. As such, I can understand the argument for wanting Heavy in the game but Dark Hole needs to go.
[/quote]

Both Heavy and Dark Hole need to go.
inb4DarkHolecanstay@1: Personally, I understand your logic and I wish I could believe it, but I still think Dark Hole needs a card cost, such as Tributing a monster, and a condition to help prevent OTKs, such as not being able to attack that turn.

[King of Nothing]

[s]Ponder[/s] Pot of Duality Limited

Reason: Splashable, Free draw, almost a search, can get whatever you need in a pinch, etc...

[Flame Dragon]

[quote name='Professional Duelist' timestamp='1297039403' post='4994128']
Honestly if someone sets 4 cards fd I'd be at a disadvantage.
[/quote]
How? And again, it's not like Heavy is the only answer to the opponent over extending that much.

[quote name='Mystery Guest' timestamp='1297039883' post='4994141']
Both Heavy and Dark Hole need to go.
[/quote]
I didn't mean to sound like Heavy didn't need to go. I just find the reason to keep Hole in the game to be much worse then Heavy.

[Professional Duelist]

I mean if I have no counters as well. I'm at a disadvantage.

[Zkaiser]

[quote name='Superdoopertrooper' timestamp='1297036451' post='4994045']
Heavy Storm is good for the game. It can punish over extension and it can reward people who play more conservatively instead of summoning a monster and setting 5 back rows. The problem without having this card in the format is that there is really no disadvantage in setting your whole hand, why not just put all your cards out so you can deal with any situation? With heavy around, you have to think strategically about what resources to commit to the field. If you set them all, you risk losing them all. The same goes for Dark Hole, both of these cards should be at 1.
[/quote]
[img]http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100723074449/yugioh/images/thumb/b/b9/BlackRoseDragonCT05-EN-ScR-LE.png/300px-BlackRoseDragonCT05-EN-ScR-LE.png[/img] [img]http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100723074449/yugioh/images/thumb/b/b9/BlackRoseDragonCT05-EN-ScR-LE.png/300px-BlackRoseDragonCT05-EN-ScR-LE.png[/img]
[center][img]http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100723074449/yugioh/images/thumb/b/b9/BlackRoseDragonCT05-EN-ScR-LE.png/300px-BlackRoseDragonCT05-EN-ScR-LE.png[/img][/center]

[Superdoopertrooper]

^ Monsters are far easier to stop than spells. Those 5 backrow cards set aren't just there for decoration. Most of them will be able to stop Black Rose from even being able to be summoned in the first place and then there are the counters which actually negate the summon itself. Thats what the backrow is for. Heavy is actually a proper counter for this situation

[quote name='Flame Dragon' timestamp='1297037942' post='4994092']
No one is going to set 5 cards back row. With or without Heavy most people don't play more then a 2 or 3 backrow cards on average. Granted, this might have changed since I last changed but I don't see people having 4 or 5 facedowns all to often. As such, the use it has, punishing over extension, isn't what it's main use will be.

Also, how much of an advantage do you gain by setting that many cards? Really you gain a number advantage against MST and the like, but how much of a problem is that.

Lastly, do you think punishing over extension is a good enough reason to leave a card in the game that makes OTKs that easy? And it's not like their aren't cards that give large scale S/T hate that are much more balanced then heavy.

Also, unlike Heavy, Hole as MANY similar monster hate cards. Lightning Vortex and Mirror Force are both great answers, and unlike S/T their are many more answers to monsters in the game. As such, I can understand the argument for wanting Heavy in the game but Dark Hole needs to go.
[/quote]

I don't think the "it helps OTK's" argument is a good one at all. The OTK's are the problem. And on that note, OTK's aren't necessarily always bad for the game either, provided that they require a fair amount of setup to pull off. Heavy Storm is also much worse at enabling OTK's in comparison to Cold Wave and Giant Trunade because it destroys cards, which makes it much easier to counter/negate. So in that respect, heavy is much healthier for the game than either of those two.

[Mysty]

[quote name='Superdoopertrooper' timestamp='1297068272' post='4994853']
^ Monsters are far easier to stop than spells. Those 5 backrow cards set aren't just there for decoration. Most of them will be able to stop Black Rose from even being able to be summoned in the first place and then there are the counters which actually negate the summon itself. Thats what the backrow is for. Heavy is actually a proper counter for this situation
[/quote]

Counbterability =/= balance. Just because a card can be stopped, doesn't mean that you'll always be able to stop it.

There are many ways to get rid of a backrow, even without Heavy Storm, Giant Trunade, and Cold Wave.

Remember that, for BRD, you have to dedicate two resources with somewhat specific conditions to the fieldbefore you can summon it. Some people say that's why it should be let at 1 or 2. As long as it's around, the one with the BRD has to be wise on how to use BRD and the opponent just had to either have a counter that they won't want to use on something else (which isn't 100% likely all the time) or play conservatively so that the BRD user won't gain too much advantage from BRD.

[quote name='Superdoopertrooper' timestamp='1297068272' post='4994853']
I don't think the "it helps OTK's" argument is a good one at all. The OTK's are the problem. And on that note, OTK's aren't necessarily always bad for the game either, provided that they require a fair amount of setup to pull off. Heavy Storm is also much worse at enabling OTK's in comparison to Cold Wave and Giant Trunade because it destroys cards, which makes it much easier to counter/negate. So in that respect, heavy is much healthier for the game than either of those two.
[/quote]

I'm quite sure that the only cards that specifically stop destruction are banworthy (Stardust Dragon) or pretty much unplayable (Starlight Road after Stardust is banned). Therefore, your "can be easier stopped because it destroys things" argument is rather rather invalid. It's further invalidated by "counterability =/= balance".

Remember another thing: Heavy Storm was used in pretty much every deck while Giant Trunade were pretty much used only in decks that can OTK.

Heavy Storm provides a crazy amount of advantage with little cost (the only one being the card in your hand). It's not unreasonable to think your opponent would have three S/T set. You slap HS down and you could easily be at a +2, and you can push for game right after it. And remember that this is S/T removal we're talking about: S/Ts don't often give +1s or pay for themselves, so that card advantage is completely lost.
As I mentioned, HS was designed to fight overextension but it's so powerful and has too little restrictions on it that it gets used for many other reasons as well, many of which are bad for the game.

Giant Trunade is less devastating to the game because pretty much all it does is help OTK and doesn't get rid of a player's resources (only their ability to use them for a turn).

Sure, there are OTKs that require a rather lot amount of setup and will make for an inconsistent deck. Those OTKs are fine because the user is "unskillful" because he is trying to run it. However, the more consistency that gets added to the game (such as by Pot of Duality), the more consistent those OTKs can become, reducing the number of "unskillful" OTKs.
Note that the banlist this is trying to design isn't one that eliminates all viable OTKs, otherwise this list would be so long that nobody would really bother.
As we slowly weaken broken decks and new cards are made, some OTKs may become viable. Getting rid of the cards that help the OTKs will make that less likely.

Remember that Cold Wave is much different from Giant Trunade in such that Cold Wave provides insurance that your push for win probably won't be stopped next turn if your opponent used a monster effect to stop it this turn, which is why Cold Wave is already on the banlist.

At the very most, of those three spells, we can leave Trunade in the game. The other two are banworthy for other reasons.

[Resident Fascist]

Six Strike -Triple Impact @1.

I had it used once on me at sneak.

[quote'Six Strike - Triple Impact']Lore:
If you control 3 or more face-up "Six Samurai monsters, you can activate 1 of these effects:
[list]
[*]Destroy all face-up monsters your opponent controls
[*]Destroy all face-up Spell/Trap Cards your opponent controls
[*]Destroy all Set Spell/Trap Card your opponent controls
[/list][/quote]

[Yeezus]

[quote name='Shard Of Stardust' timestamp='1297100829' post='4995337']
Six Strike -Triple Impact @1.

I had it used once on me at sneak.
[/quote]

no srsly no

[Resident Fascist]

[quote name='Loki el Señor de los Aesir' timestamp='1297101009' post='4995345']
no srsly no
[/quote]

Stop being dumb. How hard is for 6 sams to get out 3 monsters? Then look at these effects.

[Flame Dragon]

[quote name='Shard Of Stardust' timestamp='1297100829' post='4995337']
Six Strike -Triple Impact @1.
[/quote]
How does putting it to one change anything about the damage it can do? All that happens is it shows up less often making the game more dependent on luck, something you don't want.

As is it's either a situational Lightning Vortex or Heavy Storm (or close enough to heavy) so does that warrant list attention?

[Brandon Michael Geren]

Can we put Duality at 4? Is that possible?

[Resident Fascist]

[quote name='Flame Dragon' timestamp='1297131710' post='4996397']
How does putting it to one change anything about the damage it can do? All that happens is it shows up less often making the game more dependent on luck, something you don't want.

As is it's either a situational Lightning Vortex or Heavy Storm (or close enough to heavy) so does that warrant list attention?
[/quote]

Yes. It does deserve list attnetion. I lost the entire game because of the card. 1 card shouldn't win you a game.

[Sephiroth_The_Legend]

[quote name='RobotBowtieOfDestruction' timestamp='1297170397' post='4997000']
Can we put Professor Oak at 4? Is that possible?
[/quote]

I'm sure Konami will say yes.

[~British Soul~]

[quote name='Shard Of Stardust' timestamp='1297173813' post='4997050']
Yes. It does deserve list attnetion. I lost the entire game because of the card. 1 card shouldn't win you a game.
[/quote]
.... but whose gonna use the card in their six sams deck anyways (besides it was only at the sneak it shouldn't happen elsewhere)

just another perfect example of how dumb you are saying that card (six strike triple impact) should be on the list

[Manjoume Thunder]

Ban:
Shard of Stardust

Reason: He is a cancerous fa**** who makes the average ycmer look smart.

[Resident Fascist]

[quote name='Manjoume Thunder' timestamp='1297188827' post='4997433']
Ban:
Shard of Stardust

Reason: He is a cancerous fa**** who makes the average ycmer look smart.


[/quote]

Limit:
Manjoume Thunder

Reason: Doesn't accept the fact that a card that breaks entire games should be limited.

[Manjoume Thunder]

Thanks for proving my point.

[Flame Dragon]

[quote name='Shard Of Stardust' timestamp='1297173813' post='4997050']
Yes. It does deserve list attnetion. I lost the entire game because of the card. 1 card shouldn't win you a game.
[/quote]
I've lost games because of Lightning Vortex, doesn't mean it needs list attention. Just because a card cost you ONE game doesn't make it broken. The fact that it was a sneak match only makes this more true since it's totally different from real world play.

[quote name='Manjoume Thunder' timestamp='1297188827' post='4997433']
Ban:
Shard of Stardust

Reason: He is a cancerous fa**** who makes the average ycmer look smart.


[/quote]
You can't ban people for being stupid.

[quote name='Shard Of Stardust' timestamp='1297190415' post='4997463']
Limit:
Manjoume Thunder

Reason: Doesn't accept the fact that a card that breaks entire games should be limited.
[/quote]
Wow, their are so many things wrong with this post.

1) That come back was horrible. Limiting Manjoume (wtf would that even mean, limit his posting ability?) changes nothing about him. He will still be the same, just show up less. Much like how limiting a card changes nothing about it. Also, your reason for limiting him is horrible.

2) You think Six Strike break the whole game......what? Yea, it's a good card for the archetype but their are MANY other cards that create a much bigger problem to the health of the game then that ever could.

3) If you REALLY think the card is that broken BAN IT. If a card breaks the game it shouldn't be in the game. It's that simple.

Really, this has to be a joke.