byak Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 [center][img]http://i.imgur.com/2F3Cz.png[/img] Either player can pay 800 Life Points to negate the Special Summon of a monster(s), and/or an effect that Special Summons a monster(s), and destroy those cards.[/center] It should be @2 or @3 imo. There are too many good decks that are good simply because they can go off on bigass special summoning combos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Berserker- Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 It goes in the way of most of my decks. They should release a Normal Summon counterpart and see what people think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anbu-of-Sand Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 It should go to 2 and stay there. It can be somewhat cloggy / dead drawy at 3 and the same goes with 1, along with not being able to draw it when you need it / drawing it when you don't need it the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted February 17, 2011 Report Share Posted February 17, 2011 I really hate this card in a number of decks. Depending on the score, your opponent can utterly lock you down, and you can't do a thing because you can't really afford to pay/they don't need to SS any more because they dominate the field already. One or two duels I remember losing simply because my opponent had about 7000 LP and Bamboo shoot, and the only way I could break his lock was to Synchro Summon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth_The_Legend Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 It shuts down alot of Decks.. i reckon it should've have stayed at 2. the limit on it was unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 Isn't shutting down or ruining tons of decks considered a BAD thing? Good card, bad for game sort of thing? How is Oppression different in that its utter ability to control the game is heralded as a card that should be allowed in more copies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-Rrey Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 Bushi Oppression was such a troll deck Anyway, card really deserves to be at 2 because as the TC said, there are too many decks that are good because "they Special Summon". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Majishan Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 Shutting down an entire game mechanic is bad...Should stay at one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeppeli Gyro Supreme Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 [quote name='Mark of the Bloo-D Rose' timestamp='1298017741' post='5016067'] Shutting down an entire game mechanic is bad...Should stay at one. [/quote] A game mechanic which can break it, and has a cost of 1/10 your Life Points to boot. If a deck relies completely upon Special Summoning, then it deserves to take a bit of punishment anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Majishan Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 [quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1298018717' post='5016077'] A game mechanic which can break it, and has a cost of 1/10 your Life Points to boot. If a deck relies completely upon Special Summoning, then it deserves to take a bit of punishment anyways. [/quote] SS'ing is not the problem, its the broken s*** that people special summon that is the problem. Its not fair for a deck to auto-lose just by your opponent flipping over 1 card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 Duels are done for fun. This card robs that. So IMO this should stay at 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CNo.101 S.H. Death Knight Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 by all mean it should be at 1 permanently!!, because of heavy storm gone, it it would have to take decks that specialize in destroying back row to defeat decks with this card in them rather than special summoning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaouJudai Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 [quote name='Sephiroth_The_Legend' timestamp='1298011591' post='5015979'] It shuts down alot of Decks.. i reckon it should've have stayed at 2. the limit on it was unfair. [/quote] Konami seems to be taking away a lot of our favorite toys lately. I think this card got hit probably because they wanted to promote solemn warning. Plus warning is a little more balanced imo. It costs a lot more. idk about this at 1 though - I could easily feel comfortable with it at 2. funny thing about Eugene Krabs (konami) I think they like to move any obstacle to their 'baby' deck out of the way so people will buy the boosters. Oppression and Book of Moon would hurt baby (samurai) so they have to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VolTama Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 Should stay @ 1. It's too easy to get rid of to be @ 0, but the game would be hell if it was at 2 or 3. If I remember correctly, generic 1-card lockdowns are typically bad for the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manjoume Thunder Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 there are too many decks that make their "bigass special summoning combos" and then flip this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brinolovania Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 [quote name='Scheath&Thanatos' timestamp='1298022231' post='5016105'] by all mean it should be at 1 permanently!!, because of heavy storm gone, it it would have to take decks that specialize in destroying back row to defeat decks with this card in them rather than special summoning. [/quote] Or I could use MST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted February 18, 2011 Report Share Posted February 18, 2011 Gotta' love the pic in the OP [quote name='Mark of the Bloo-D Rose' timestamp='1298021121' post='5016094'] SS'ing is not the problem, its the broken s*** that people special summon that is the problem. [/quote] Same with Magician of Fai- OWAIT, KONAMI'S LOGIC BEHIND CARD DESIGN. [quote name='Manjoume Thunder' timestamp='1298051714' post='5016516'] there are too many decks that make their "bigass special summoning combos" and then flip this [/quote] Blackwings? *shot* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azuh Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 You can only activate this card if you didn't Special Summon last turn. *Royal Oppression effect* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 What I dislike most about this card is that, behind the right setup and with enough LP, your opponent just agonizes while you reign supreme. With a Synchro-heavy meta, a lot of decks have low stat monsters that can be easily Special Summoned, and are meant to bring out the high ATK/good effect Synchros. While both players can use it, and it does cost 800 LP per instance, it's way too costly to your hand and options to just spam Specials in the hope you can reduce them enough that they can't afford or are reluctant to continue negating, and with just Normal Summons, you probably won't get very far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Fun fact, Stardust Dragon/Assault Mode can negate this face-up card. I only did it once, and boy was my opponent dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 [quote name='Expelsword' timestamp='1298089784' post='5017923'] Fun fact, Stardust Dragon/Assault Mode can negate this face-up card. I only did it once, and boy was my opponent dumb. [/quote] That's true, because Assault Mode doesn't have to chain specifically to a destruction effect like regular Stardust (Oppression negates Summons, so the negated monster isn't treated as if on the field). Of course, Oppression can still negate Assault Mode Activate or SD/AM's recursion effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.