Yata? No, not quite

[seattleite]

[img]http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/4193/98186.jpg[/img]


Credit goes to Aditya777 @ Deviantart

Comments/etc. are appreciated

[-Griffin]

No. This is bad for the same reason Yata is bad, it's only real use is lockdowns, which are bad for the game for destroying player-player interaction. Bad Seattleite! Bad! Go and think about what you've done!

[SunshineSoldier]

[quote name='seattleite' timestamp='1295065534' post='4935230']
[img]http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/4193/98186.jpg[/img]



Credit goes to Aditya777 @ Deviantart

Comments/etc. are appreciated
[/quote]


You already posted this card in a contest. Isn't that cheating? Sorry if I was wrong, I'm kind of new to this.

[.Ash]

[quote name='Dingo_is_cool' timestamp='1295085995' post='4935538']
You already posted this card in a contest. Isn't that cheating? Sorry if I was wrong, I'm kind of new to this.
[/quote]

Not really. If the contest says you can't use a pre-made card then it would, but I'm not too sure if this is one of those cases.

As for the card, you know my thoughts already. Very strong effect, but is... harder to abuse than Yata was, mainly due to a low chance of getting this being physically played. Yata was broken, yes, but much easier to use than this especially as CED was also un-banned at the time.

There still remains the fact that something as simple as Dark Hole followed by this card can potentially win you a Duel, but there are a variety of self-reviving cards (and a lack of monsters that also nuke your opponents hand) that means there are some counters to this card. For this to completely lock down your opponent would be very situational.

But yes, Griffin is right, and a card that even has a remote chance of locking down your opponent is not good for the game.

[seattleite]

Ok, thanks for the comments griffin and snowy.

Guess I shouldn't have entered that into a contest =/

[seattleite]

Ok, I've changed it, tell me how it is now *crosses fingers*

Basically i've made it so that the "Lockdown" is more based on luck and usually only can last 2 turns or so in a specific deck.

[-Griffin]

Alright. It's not only functional in a Deck that empties your opponent's resources, then your own, then manages to draw only burn cards like Poison of the Old Man.


So where were you planning to use this? It seems you need to be already losing, and in that case, they'll probably just attack it. Wouldn't playing Drop Off/Drastic Drop Off work better in most Decks for being usable in more situations and not taking the Normal Summon?

[seattleite]

I guess it would make a fun deck with Normal Spell Burn like you were saying. Not the most consistent choice but a choice nonetheless.

But, on to your second point, with that kind of deck (mixed in with a little hand/field destruction), you could get rid of your entire hand, get rid of your opponents field (maybe also take away some options in their hand), and play this then it can give you a few more turns, if you're lucky to draw more normal spell burn. But it might be easier if your opponent happens to overcommit.

Also I didn't think this would be incredibly useful in the TCG but I plan to submit (the new version) into the CCG to see how it fares there.

And thanks for your informative comments griffin +1 rep