arkel Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 A 3-0 banlist is one in which almost all cards are at 3 or 0. I may be wrong, but I think the only 3-0 idealists left on the site are Pika, Flame Dragon, Crab Helmet, and myself. A card's either bad for the game or not, take your pick. Cards like Judgment Dragon don't suddenly become less broken just because they're put at one as opposed to being at two or three. A card's balance doesn't change by Limiting or Semi-Limiting it the vast majority of the time. It only changes when Limited or Semi-Limited if it interacts with other copies of itself, like Malicious, Stratos, Night Assailant, et cetera. A card could also be limited if it can provide good for the game at that number. Mirror Force is a great example. At 0 people can overextened without fear, but at 3 your opponent won't even attack for fear of a MF. All you're doing by Limiting or Semi-Limiting is reducing the chances of that card being drawn. Does that fix the card? Nope. Now your opponent just has to be a little more lucky to nuke and swing for massive damage than they did before, luck promotion being bad for the game by being counter-productive when one of the main goals here is to promote skill. The following explains how a card's position is determined: [spoiler=spoiler]PROHIBITED Category 1) The card gives too large a reward too easily for too small a cost. Most of these cards are splashable, but not all; a theme support card that lets you draw 7 cards for no real cost would be banworthy under this, despite not being splashable. Example: Raigeki. Category 2) The card enables one or more OTK's and/or FTK's to be accomplished easily. Often, these cards are used solely for the purpose of OTK's and/or FTK's. Example: Magical Explosion. Category 3) The card invalidates a basic mechanical part of the game by effectively preventing it from ever being used with any merit; a good game does not turn its back on its basic mechanics. Example: Nobleman of Crossout (invalidates Flips). Category 4) Similar to number 3, the card invalidates a certain playstyle that would otherwise contribute to the game. Example: Cyber Dragon (invalidates Stall). Category 5) The underlying idea of the card's effect is, as a matter of principle, completely unacceptable in any form. Example: Victory Dragon. LIMITED Category A) The card cannot remain at 3 due to one or more of the banning conditions (probably Condition 1) but provides some benefit to the game at 1 that allows it to remain. Example: Mirror Force. Category B ) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with another copy of itself; at 1, however, it cannot interact with itself, and thus can remain legal. Example: Night Assailant. SEMI-LIMITED Category X) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with two other copies of itself; at 2, however, it cannot interact with two other copies of itself, and thus can remain Semi-Limited. Example: currently none Again, these classifications reflect the logic, and not the other way around; furthermore, each card is an individual case, so even if a card might seem to fall into a category, it might not belong in that place on the list - or even on the list at all. They're simply there to describe trends in logic, not set concrete policy. Because each card is handled individually, it is impossible to give an accurate summary of the reasoning involved without delving into each individual card on (or not on) the list. The above categories are the best I could do to give a general idea of what the logic typically involved.[/spoiler] This is an example 3-0 list: [spoiler=list] Only changes to the 09/01/11 banlist are listed. [spoiler=Forbidden] Allure of Darkness Arcana Force 0 – the Fool Arcanite Magician Archlord Kristya Black Luster Soldier – Envoy of the Beginning Black Rose Dragon Black Whirlwind Blackwing Armor Master Blackwing – Kalut the Moon Shadow Blackwing – Vayu the Emblem of Honor Breaker the Magical Warrior Brionac, Dragon of the Ice Barrier Call of the Haunted Card Destruction Ceasefire Celestia, Lightsworn Angel Chain Strike Chaos Sorcerer Cyber Dragon Cyber End Dragon Cyber Twin Dragon Dandylion Dark Armed Dragon Dark Hole Demise, King of Armageddon Elemental HERO Stratos Exodia the Forbidden One Fishborg Blaster Future Fusion Gateway of the Six Gladiator Beast Gyzarus Glow-Up Bulb Gold Sarcophagus Gorz the Emissary of Darkness Gravity Bind Honest Infernity Launcher Judgment Dragon Legendary Six Samurai – Shi En Level Limit - Area B Limiter Removal Lonefire Blossom Mage Power Magic Cylinder Magical Explosion Marshmallon Messenger of Peace Mezuki Mind Control Monster Reborn Morphing Jar Naturia Beast Naturia Exterio Necroface Plaguespreader Zombie Pot of Duality Raging Mad Plants Rekindling Return from the Different Dimension Royal Tribute Sangan Scrap Dragon Shooting Quasar Dragon Snipe Hunter Solemn Judgment Spore Spirit Reaper Stardust Dragon Superancient Deepsea King Coelacanth T.G. Hyper Librarian Tempest Magician Tragoedia Trap Dustshoot Treeborn Frog Trishula, Dragon of the Ice Barrier Ultimate Offering United We Stand Wulf, Lightsworn Beast XX-Saber Faultroll XX-Saber Hyunlei [/spoiler] [spoiler=Limited] Destiny Hero – Malicious Reborn Tengu [/spoiler] [spoiler=Semi-Limited] No additions [/spoiler] [spoiler=No Longer on List] Advanced Ritual Art Blackwing – Gale the Whirlwind Book of Moon Bottomless Trap Hole Burial from a Different Dimension Charge of the Light Brigade Debris Dragon Destiny Draw Dewloren, Tiger King of the Ice Barrier Emergency Teleport Foolish Burial Formula Synchron Gladiator Beast Bestiari Left Arm of the Forbidden One Left Leg of the Forbidden One Lumina, Lightsworn Summoner Magical Stone Excavation Magician of Faith Metamorphosis Mind Crush Monster Gate Neo-Spacian Grand Mole Necro Gardna Ojama Trio Pot of Avarice Primal Seed Reasoning Reinforcement of the Army Right Arm of the Forbidden One Right Leg of the Forbidden One Royal Oppression Scapegoat Shien’s Smoke Signal Solemn Warning Summoner Monk Wall of Revealing Light [/spoiler][/spoiler] Anyway, discuss 3-0 lists. And please let's try to be intelligent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 This is like saying you should only run cards @0 or 3 in your deck, or else you're getting too lucky if you draw it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 No, I'm more or less a big supporter of that mentality too. Back when I was really into the game and really active in the section I was a major contributor to ban list discussions. Also, X-0 ban lists have been done in other games. I know for a fact that all but 1 MTG formats use that mentality. Personally I think the problem with moving it into yugioh is the sheer volume of cards that would need to get the ax and the fact that Konami often screws up a few cards each set causing more and more cards to need to be chopped down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 The problem is a large volume of cards are OPed by virtue of power creep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='evilfusion' timestamp='1313516866' post='5447688'] The problem is a large volume of cards are OPed by virtue of power creep. [/quote] This is why I would love for Konami to adopt a rotating format. While I know most people won't be really happy with that, the best thing to fight power creep is to have all the old powerful cards simply leave the format. Again, using MTG as the example, they were recently under a cycle of power creep, but because they were able to catch it, they were able to pull down the power level of the most recent block and were just going to wait it out for the old cards to leave for a much better balance to be restored to the standard meta. When you don't have that in order for the new sets to remain relevant you need to keep pushing the power to be at least at the level of the past sets other wise no one is going to want to buy the new set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkel Posted August 16, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='Flame Dragon' timestamp='1313516794' post='5447682'] No, I'm more or less a big supporter of that mentality too. Back when I was really into the game and really active in the section I was a major contributor to ban list discussions. Also, X-0 ban lists have been done in other games. I know for a fact that all but 1 MTG formats use that mentality. Personally I think the problem with moving it into yugioh is the sheer volume of cards that would need to get the ax and the fact that Konami often screws up a few cards each set causing more and more cards to need to be chopped down. [/quote] YOU'RE ALIVE <333333 Flame Dragon is a genius, guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 I won't be surprised if one day Konami just puts out a set of new cards, and bans all previous ones up to a certain "original" release date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Cakey Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='arkel' timestamp='1313518030' post='5447765'] YOU'RE ALIVE <333333 Flame Dragon is a genius, guys. [/quote] Because he agrees with you. [/mostlyjk] As you said, each card is treated on a case-by-case basis, but I would like to submit 2 cards for consideration because they don't fit into any of the above categories: Foolish Burial and Necro Gardna. We all know Foolish Burial's power - that's why it's @1 - but part of that power is the ability to set up your Graveyard however you like. With only a single copy of Foolish, you have 1 single opportunity to prepare your Graveyard, and of course Foolish is a -1. Necro Gardna was just bad card design, making it chainable, but it negates just one attack. Stopping one attack can prevent an OTK. Stopping three attacks can reverse the game. Thoughts? EDIT: Cyber Dragon doesn't invalidate stall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeezus Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 i'm not really a fan of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zauls Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 I'm actually against this idea. With it, a deck is either broken or unplayable. There will be no decks that aren't broken and the game would be too fast. Semi limits and limits were made to make decks less consistent if they needed to be hit, but not completely kill the deck. Plant engine is an example of this. With the September list, it's a balanced engine rather than hellishly broken or unplayable. 3-0 banlists are a bad idea for a game in this kind of state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='arkel' timestamp='1313518030' post='5447765'] YOU'RE ALIVE <333333 Flame Dragon is a genius, guys. [/quote] Why thank you. And yea, I've still been on the forum, just lost interest in yugioh. As you can guess MTG is taking up most of that brain space now. Still, I do kind of miss the game so every now and then I come on and post in some threads. [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1313518439' post='5447782'] I won't be surprised if one day Konami just puts out a set of new cards, and bans all previous ones up to a certain "original" release date. [/quote] They really should. Having 3 formats, Eternal (what is Traditional), Classic (what we have now), and Modern (recent sets) would be a great way to divid things up. Plus with a new cycle now starting with Zexal now would be a good time after a few sets come though. Also, side from the obvious backlash, it would also be hard to keep things backwards compatible, and how something like the DT would play into this system. [quote name='機皇神龍アステリスク' timestamp='1313518607' post='5447787'] Because he agrees with you. [/mostlyjk] As you said, each card is treated on a case-by-case basis, but I would like to submit 2 cards for consideration because they don't fit into any of the above categories: Foolish Burial and Necro Gardna. We all know Foolish Burial's power - that's why it's @1 - but part of that power is the ability to set up your Graveyard however you like. With only a single copy of Foolish, you have 1 single opportunity to prepare your Graveyard, and of course Foolish is a -1. Necro Gardna was just bad card design, making it chainable, but it negates just one attack. Stopping one attack can prevent an OTK. Stopping three attacks can reverse the game. Thoughts? [/quote] Foolish is only as good as the cards it can put into the graveyard. Ban most of the problem ones and you have a perfectly fine card. Reversing the game is a good thing. In any game you need back and forth and Necro can provide that by stopping blowouts. Also, unlike a lot of other cards that stop attack you can see it coming. [quote name='::Archfiend::' timestamp='1313519046' post='5447818'] I'm actually against this idea. With it, a deck is either broken or unplayable. There will be no decks that aren't broken and the game would be too fast. Semi limits and limits were made to make decks less consistent if they needed to be hit, but not completely kill the deck. Plant engine is an example of this. With the September list, it's a balanced engine rather than hellishly broken or unplayable. 3-0 banlists are a bad idea for a game in this kind of state. [/quote] I like how you assume it is one or the other. Because first if every deck is weakened being less good still good enough. Because I love MTG and how I can find loads of great examples there, they recently banned 2 cards in standard. This is very rare, and most people said the deck they were a major player in was now dead. After a couple weeks the deck that just had its 2 best cards go from 4 to 0 put 6 people in the top 8 of US Nationals. Just because the most obvious way to do a deck is gone just means you need to think outside the box and try something new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDDRodrigo Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 Not the best idea for my taste, but sounds very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zauls Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 ^That would mean spending hundreds of £££ every time a new format was released... I'd quit the game, and I think others would as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysty Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='::Archfiend::' timestamp='1313520184' post='5447898'] ^That would mean spending hundreds of £££ every time a new format was released... I'd quit the game, and I think others would as well. [/quote] I think you are replying to the Rotation system, correct? I have two responses: • The rotation system would be ONE way to play the game. There would probably be two types of yugioh tournaments: Advanced and Rotation (since nobody plays Traditional). Both Legacy and Standard are popular in MtG, so why wouldn't both be popular in Yugioh? • Don't we already have an implied rotation system? Konami keeps on releasing broken archetypes and decktypes and nuking the top decktypes. In order to be playing the top deck, you have to buy new cards every year or so anyway. A rotation system would be good for the game since it would allow the game to power down in some kind of format.[quote name='::Archfiend::' timestamp='1313520184' post='5447898'] ^That would mean spending hundreds of £££ every time a new format was released... I'd quit the game, and I think others would as well. [/quote] I think you are replying to the Rotation system, correct? I have two responses: • The rotation system would be ONE way to play the game. There would probably be two types of yugioh tournaments: Advanced and Rotation (since nobody plays Traditional). Both Legacy and Standard are popular in MtG, so why wouldn't both be popular in Yugioh? • Don't we already have an implied rotation system? Konami keeps on releasing broken archetypes and decktypes and nuking the top decktypes. In order to be playing the top deck, you have to buy new cards every year or so anyway. A rotation system would be good for the game since it would allow the game to power down in some kind of format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='Mystery Guest' timestamp='1313520931' post='5447958'] I think you are replying to the Rotation system, correct? I have two responses: • The rotation system would be ONE way to play the game. There would probably be two types of yugioh tournaments: Advanced and Rotation (since nobody plays Traditional). Both Legacy and Standard are popular in MtG, so why wouldn't both be popular in Yugioh? • Don't we already have an implied rotation system? Konami keeps on releasing broken archetypes and decktypes and nuking the top decktypes. In order to be playing the top deck, you have to buy new cards every year or so anyway. A rotation system would be good for the game since it would allow the game to power down in some kind of format. [/quote] More or less this. If you look at decks the old archetypes always get pushed out by news ones. Partly because they have the best cards banned and partly because they stop getting support. That is actually why a quit playing. I didn't want to keep spending money on packs if I wasn't getting cards for the decks I played, and at the time I had several, including crappy variants of BW, GB, and Zombies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote]A card's either bad for the game or not, take your pick.[/quote] It's usually a "Combo" is either bad for the game or not. Butterfly Dagger isn't inherently bad for the game. Neither is Gearfried. Yet clearly when the two are combined, infinite combos are made. When that happens, examine which card in the combo contributes more to the game and whether or not the problem is solved when the card is banned. [quote]We all know Foolish Burial's power - that's why it's @1 - but part of that power is the ability to set up your Graveyard however you like. With only a single copy of Foolish, you have 1 single opportunity to prepare your Graveyard, and of course Foolish is a -1.[/quote] Most of the cards that can set up a big swing would rightfully be banned if a 3-0 banlist came around. What exactly did you have in mind anyway? [quote]Necro Gardna was just bad card design, making it chainable, but it negates just one attack. Stopping one attack can prevent an OTK. Stopping three attacks can reverse the game.[/quote] Other then lightsworn, I can't think of a decktype that can get 3 Necro Gardnas in the grave consistently enough for that to even be considered a problem. And even then, considering most 3-0 people think JD, Celestia, and Wulf should be banned, I don't see that much of a problem. tl;dr - Further testing is required for Necro Gardna. But for Foolish, most of the broken cards that work with it would be banned. [quote]I'm actually against this idea. With it, a deck is either broken or unplayable.[/quote] Pro-Tip: people actually do play formats on custom made 3-0 banlists and find it much more challenging and entertaining. [quote]Having 3 formats, Eternal (what is Traditional), Classic (what we have now), and Modern (recent sets) would be a great way to divid things up.[/quote] The only way 3 formats would work is if the price of Yu-Gi-Oh cards dropped significantly, which would cripple the secondary market. ... Which would prolly be a good thing. Lower rarities. Make reprints of rare cards more often (took 10 years to get a common Mirror Force) and stuff like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 Lonefire@0 Debris@0 One for One@0 Foolish Burial@0 Dandylion@3 ????????? Future Fusion@0 Cyber End and Twin@0 Both Chimeratechs@0 Demise@0 Metamorph@3 ??????????? I dunno', we always set it up like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 Demise doesn't need Cyber Twin and Metamorphosis to be banned. A two card field nuke (Demise + ARA) with a 2400 beatstick attached is pretty damn bannable. The problem now is that more cards are bannable then Demise is at this point. Why does Foolish Burial need to be banned? Treeborn and Wulf and Glow Up Bulb would be banned on any logical list, and if you're somehow afraid of 2 tokens being used for Synchro, why not ban Fires of Doomsday and Instant Fusion and Scapegoat or any quick low level "lol, I SS myself" cards. What exactly are you afraid of? Likewise with One-For-One. I can't think of any level 1s that wouldn't already receive list attention. What's the problem exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='Armadilloz' timestamp='1313531490' post='5448468'] Lonefire@0 Debris@0 One for One@0 Foolish Burial@0 Dandylion@3 ????????? Future Fusion@0 Cyber End and Twin@0 Both Chimeratechs@0 Demise@0 Metamorph@3 ??????????? I dunno', we always set it up like that. [/quote] I more or less stopped playing when Debris started becoming big, but I think with the right cards banned he can stay. One for One, seems perfectly fine. Again, anything broken it may search up would be gone. Foolish Burial: See above. Only of the 3, I'm must sure in this being able to stay at 3. Dandylion, is hard to say, but based on how the game has changed, I think this is better at 0. However I'm not sure on that. The rest seems right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='PikaPerson01' timestamp='1313532342' post='5448510'] Demise doesn't need Cyber Twin and Metamorphosis to be banned. A two card field nuke (Demise + ARA) with a 2400 beatstick attached is pretty damn bannable. The problem now is that more cards are bannable then Demise is at this point. Why does Foolish Burial need to be banned? Treeborn and Wulf and Glow Up Bulb would be banned on any logical list, and if you're somehow afraid of 2 tokens being used for Synchro, why not ban Fires of Doomsday and Instant Fusion and Scapegoat or any quick low level "lol, I SS myself" cards. What exactly are you afraid of? Likewise with One-For-One. I can't think of any level 1s that wouldn't already receive list attention. What's the problem exactly? [/quote] I'll be honest. I just picked cards at random and/or off the top of my head. And Twin would need to be@0 if Metamorph would be@3 ARA would also be@0 .....Guys, we need to make a B& list to start with, then work off that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solemn Silver Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote]This is why I would love for Konami to adopt a rotating format. While I know most people won't be really happy with that, the best thing to fight power creep is to have all the old powerful cards simply leave the format. Again, using MTG as the example, they were recently under a cycle of power creep, but because they were able to catch it, they were able to pull down the power level of the most recent block and were just going to wait it out for the old cards to leave for a much better balance to be restored to the standard meta. When you don't have that in order for the new sets to remain relevant you need to keep pushing the power to be at least at the level of the past sets other wise no one is going to want to buy the new set.[/quote] But what happens to old archtypes? They'll never be able to be played again, and making the game state always new. Which is accually quite boring. I personally love to play scraps. With this logic, one day I won't be able to play my favorite deck beacause of a stupid ratation rule? I call bs. This is EXACTLY why I stopped playing the Pokemon TCG. Old cards are always forbidden, despite there lack of power compared to todays pokemon meta. iirc, there is now a card, if you have 6 or more banished (lost zone) pokemon, you win. If konami would ever do this, I'm sure they would in fact lose alot of profit, since alot of players still enjoy old cards. No disrespect in any of my post, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='Ctrl+Alt+Win' timestamp='1313535397' post='5448667'] But what happens to old archtypes? They'll never be able to be played again, and making the game state always new. Which is accually quite boring. I personally love to play scraps. With this logic, one day I won't be able to play my favorite deck beacause of a stupid ratation rule? I call bs. This is EXACTLY why I stopped playing the Pokemon TCG. Old cards are always forbidden, despite there lack of power compared to todays pokemon meta. iirc, there is now a card, if you have 6 or more banished (lost zone) pokemon, you win. If konami would ever do this, I'm sure they would in fact lose alot of profit, since alot of players still enjoy old cards. No disrespect in any of my post, btw. [/quote] Rotation does exactly what it says. It ROTATES. Meaning you won't be able to play Scraps 1 format, but they'll come back in a later format. Though I doubt yugioh would be able to go to rotation now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solemn Silver Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote]Rotation does exactly what it says. It ROTATES. Meaning you won't be able to play Scraps 1 format, but they'll come back in a later format. Though I doubt yugioh would be able to go to rotation now.[/quote] I'm still unclear with this. But thats sounds like a dumb idea, I can only play my favorite decks half of the year? Hypotheticly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 [quote name='Ctrl+Alt+Win' timestamp='1313536808' post='5448745'] I'm still unclear with this. But thats sounds like a dumb idea, I can only play my favorite decks half of the year? Hypotheticly. [/quote] That's why I said Yugioh's gone too far for a rotation list. If they had used it long ago, you'd be freaking out at the idea of allowing us to use every card made with only 1 banlist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solemn Silver Posted August 16, 2011 Report Share Posted August 16, 2011 Good point :L I'm glad its not rotation though >.> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.