Catterjune Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 Firstly: You're not the first person to suggest that cards that are generally useless, yet broken with other cards should be allowed as long one of the offending pieces in the combo isn't allowed in the deck, so calling this the "developous" format is pretty damn conceited. Secondly, you REALLY think Sinister Serpent is only broken because of one card with a discard cost? Not Snipe Hunter, not Lightning Vortex, not Phoenix Wing Wind Blast, not Brionac? Nope, it's only Abyss Soldier! In any case, what cards do you assume are parts of broken combos that aren't helpful to the game? Because Butterfly Dagger's always seemed pretty OP-ed to me, even without Gearfried around for endless +1 spell counters. It's a generic floater card that you can equip to anything with no real ramifications that instantly gives you a small boost in attack. Someone could argue it deserves to be banned, regardless of Gearfried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiithepeople Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Why would a card game borrow a format from a video game? Seriously, are are you a fan of pro Pokemon play? Because it feels like that. You seem to be stealing certain ideals of that banlist such as: Shadow Tag ability banned on Chandelure. Stealth Rock and Spikes together are illegal. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wave_Sine Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I thought about posting that his thread felt like the debates on Smogon over "complex bans" like Drizzle and Swift Swim on the same team. (BTW, I think that ultimately ended in just banning Drizzle in OU, but I digress.) Only difference is, they directly affect their metagame. This forum, and many other Yu-Gi-Oh! forums do not directly affect our metagame, if at all. As for this idea, it's interesting, but... it seems too complex to be easily implemented. People will have to memorize which cards they can deck together when and just make deckbuilding more of a challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I didnt borrow that fundamental from other games. Infact, I never gave that element a thought. I only thought of the principle behind this ruling, even if there are no cards that ANYONE thinks could get unbanned this way. I dont see butterfly as quite as oppd as some see it. its not quite as potent as sinister, though its dangerous. Take out the potential for infinites, and all you have is a super weak equip that sorta reminds me of a glorified sword of the deep seated... A weak, Repeating +300 on ONE monster. Axe of despair could kill that in a heartbeat, and its NOT banned. Infact, it has a way to return as well, and they allow [u]three[/u] of that card. Or you could compare it to [b]spear cretin [/b]as well. A flip monster that keeps giving both you and your enemy a monster... Thus... I support such advanced Recursion cards in the game. recursion in itself is not bad, even infinite, but combos that result in infinites, especially things like life, atk, etc... make this by far too oppd. However, your right about sinister. There are too many awesome discard cards out there to merit its return no matter how you look at it. Further, that infinite recursion lets sinister constantly defend against monsters if it just enters in def position... a 1 card unbeatable def is definitely OPPD, even if it can be pierced or rfpd... though D.D scout plane is almost as good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 You just compared 2 crappy cards to one that returns itself and gives you +s ._. Oh, a 3100 Beater with a renewable destruction source to blow up the opponent is nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 o-O is that the ONLY combo you can see in that matter? That only makes 2 such forbidden combos for Butterfly dagger... definitely doable even by my standards. ... some would probably set it at 3 per card. Others perhaps 5... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airride Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Axe needs a cost & returns to top of deck iirc Spear cretin give your opp a mon. DD scout plane is usually bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 [quote]Take out the potential for infinites, and all you have is a super weak equip that sorta reminds me of a glorified sword of the deep seated[/quote] Take out the field nuke and the special summon and Chaos Emperor Dragon is a super weak monster that sorta reminds me of a glorified Blue Eyes White Dragon. [quote]Thus... I support such advanced Recursion cards in the game. recursion in itself is not bad, even infinite,[/quote] Infinitely repeating combos just about always have the potential for abuse. Hell, even a small series of repeatable +1s is broken. CoSR is still broken even if you remove Manticore of Destruction. But on a more specific note: [quote]Axe of despair could kill that in a heartbeat, and its NOT banned. Infact, it has a way to return as well, and they allow three of that card.[/quote] Axe of Despair's recursion effect has a cost. Butterfly Dagger does not. [quote]Or you could compare it to spear cretin as well. A flip monster that keeps giving both you and your enemy a monster...[/quote] Spear Cretin only works once, unless you keep choosing Spear Cretin. And it also gives your opponent a monster as well. [quote]D.D scout plane[/quote] It requires another card at the very least to come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 true, but its a good comparisson to butterfly... or sinister. Still, it could become complicated if it were implemented, and there would probably be too few cards to make those rulings worthwhile, right? That would make a good argument to slay this... seeing if there isnt enough 'victomized' cards to merit this. If this new set of rulings can only help to bring back butterfly, what use would it have in the first place? useless even with me. PIKA: Even I would ban CED. mass destruction on a major scale is practicly an instant win. But... all that RECURSION can do is be good with COMBOS, usually --> I dare you to prove this wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiithepeople Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 [quote name='Developous' timestamp='1319165021' post='5590674'] PIKA: Even I would ban CED. mass destruction on a major scale is practicly an instant win. But... all that RECURSION can do is be good with COMBOS, usually --> I dare you to prove this wrong. [/quote] who's this slimy little piece of s*** twinkle-toed cock sucker over here who just signed his own death warrant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Just look 2 posts above yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 [quote name='ケニヨン • ボリンガー' timestamp='1319167237' post='5590735'] who's this slimy little piece of s*** twinkle-toed cock sucker over here who just signed his own death warrant? [/quote] The internet is full of slimy little pieces of s*** twinkle-toed cock suckers. OT: Idea is bad, nuff said. I want this locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Of course you would complain about the complexity let alone validity of this. "If its not broken, why fix it?" "Because it can be BETTER." "So...?? Better is harder, and we want nothing to do with complexity." " Well then, dont blame me if you never get $100,000 a year..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Too bad this isn't really better :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 What? It wouldn't be better at all. Instead, it would be "I can't do X or Y, but I can do Z, but Z sucks, so we can't win" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Actually, the concept is THIS: Certain cards cannot be in the same decks as other cards. You see... this format would allow some cards to get better ratios, etc, but also have combos that are forbidden. But the problem is... your only slamming this down, and not thinking of good combos in the first place for this kind of ruling. Here's the format: [b]You cannot use ???? if ???? is in the same deck.[/b] Thats all to the new ruling. Thats what we are attacking. Complex, maybe. But not if we limit how many such rulings can be on each card. I would set that limit to 5... if that. "You cannot have Butterfly Dagger - Elma in a deck with Gearfried the Iron Knight" "You cannot have Card of safe return in a deck with Manticore of darkness." "You cannot have graceful charity in a deck with GOLLD or SYLVA" get my jist? Basicly, dont deny the cards just because of overpowered combos... ban those combos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 So I use Card of Safe Return in my Zombie Deck. Or my Plant Synchro Deck. Or with freaking Fishborg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Just NOT with Manticore of Darkness. etc... Ban the combo, not the card, unless there's too many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 You obviously don't get the point of my post. Zombies make love to the Graveyard with Summons. Plant Synchro relies on the Graveyard for Synchros. Fishborg is a self reviving tuner that isn't once per duel like Glow-Up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 >Graceful Charity YOU THINK THAT's BALANCED IN THE LEAST? Any deck modern day could use that and, hell, most would go for it over Pot of Greed if given the choice ._. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developous Posted October 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I dont argue that point. I am only saying that SOME cards could use returns with banned combos. It doesn't mean you would unban Raigeki for example, which would do monster rape. Nor would it allow Witch of the black forest to return... Basicly, it would open old cards that were banned/limited for a reason OTHER than being oppd. In this case, it would attack the cards that actually ALLOW such oppd combos. But with too many, like with those 3 plus several more... it would just be too many to allow return. COSR count - 4 known combos. ehh, pushing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 There are other Dark Worlds that would love Graceful Charity that aren't Goldd and Sillva. We're going to always have to accept that MOST cards on the banlist are not there because of a combo. They're there because they're BROKEN. They're cheap and/or generic, give too much advantage to one player, or end the game in ways that are not fair. Graceful Charity is a +0, but it lets you do so many insane things in addition to shortening your deck by 3 cards. Pot of Greed is a generic +1. Crush Card Virus destroys too much for almost nothing. Witch of the Black Forest has an absurdly flexible range of targets. Card of Safe Return does have the Manticore loop, but Zombies, Junk Synchron, and Plants love it too. There are VERY FEW cards banned because of one combo. Right now, I can really only think of Butterfly Dagger as the most combo-centric banned card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpsy Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 [quote name='ケニヨン • ボリンガー' timestamp='1319155840' post='5590384'] Why would a card game borrow a format from a video game? Seriously, are are you a fan of pro Pokemon play? Because it feels like that. You seem to be stealing certain ideals of that banlist such as: Shadow Tag ability banned on Chandelure. Stealth Rock and Spikes together are illegal. etc. [/quote] Just popping in to point out that the Pokemon community only did something like that once, ever. That would be banning Drizzle and Swift Swim from being on the same team. They refuse to make other combination bans, and Drizzle is still broken with that ban in place. Otherwise, people would have gotten their way when they wanted Blaziken w/Speed Boost banned instead of Blaziken in general banned. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 This guy doesn't know the meta and thinks he can actually make this sort of topic without being flamed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 [quote name='Darkplant - FEAR' timestamp='1319190646' post='5590999'] This guy doesn't know the meta and thinks he can actually make this sort of topic without being flamed... [/quote] My thoughts exactly after reading this thread. As has been stated, they're banned because they're broken, no matter how you want to put it, they're broken. Also, I doubt anyone wants to put in the effort to construct a perfectly balanced "combo banlist" when in reality without said combos to balance the cards they're just as well off being banned entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.