Overextension (Another "Ancients" card)

[thekazu4u]

Aside from the problem of speed causing an extremely luck-based environment, another problem I have noticed is the problem of deck X being far behind in card advantage, but just being able to spam big monsters out until an OTK is generated. The problem is, that there are too many ways of killing the backrow cards like Torrential and Mirror Force which are supposed to discourage this kind of play. Thus, there needs to be a card that achieves a similar result from the hand. There is only one problem, however. Say, for example, Dark Hole was a effect-veiler style hand-trap. This would cause people to play it as a replacement for torrential, causing things like Heavy Storm to lose their whole point - i.e. punish people for using too many traps. So, we need to make it work from the hand, but be weaker than Torrential Tribute or mirror force in effect. The obvious way of making it weaker: limit when it can be used. Limit it to when your opponent seems to be trying to pull off an OTK. Hmmm... what card punishes people that OTK and works from hand... yea you got it. GORZ. What is wrong with Gorz? Well, first off there is the whole problem of it being limited to 1. Secondly, many OTKs these days have ways of simply trampling over that gorz. Next, gorz lets the first damage go through which is often enough for an OTK. Finally, gorz does not actually destroy anything. Lets make a version of gorz that instead of summoning a big monster out instead destroys stuff and stops their attack that way. Believe it or not, the first effect I came up with was this:

"You can discard this card from your hand when your opponent declares an attack while you control no monsters. Destroy all face-up attack position monsters your opponent controls."

It should be pretty obvious that card is a bit busted. It would probably be played as much as an offensive card than a defensive one. Also, it has nothing to do with OVER-extension. The opponent could just be playing normally and this would punish them. Also, the final thing I thought of was it could be played in those dumb final-countdown or deckout decks as a better version of Battle Fader or Swift Scarecrow. We only want to punish players that summon TOO many monsters out. In order to better quantify too many monsters, I decided that should be based on the number of cards in their hand. People should be worried about summoning lots of monsters if they don't have many cards in hand, hence over-extension. Thus, this.

If your opponent declares an attack while he/she controls more face-up monsters than cards in his/her hand: Discard this card from your hand; Banish all face-up attack position monsters your opponent controls.

 

 

Important questions answered:

Q: Why does it only count face-up monsters?

A: Because a person that is OTKing or over extending typically does not control face-down monsters. Face-down monsters should be monsters that are in reserve. Plus, we don't want to take away all of Torrential Tribute's awesomeness.

Q: Why does it have 1500 attack? Don't most hand-traps have less?

A: It needs to be a viable option first-hand. If you get a opponent that does not overextend, you should at least be able to use it as an 'average' monster. 1500 seems exceedingly 'average' to me.

Q: Why dark? Don't darks have enough support?

A: I want it to be doing something in the Graveyard. So, that basically limits me to LIGHT or DARK. I picked LIGHT only because of the name, and the fact the other 'ancients' card was DARK. If I create a cycle of ancients, however, say 2 LIGHTs and 2 DARKS, then I will consider changing this to LIGHT.

Q: Why does it Banish not destroy?

A: Because I hate decks that overextend that much. And also because many of them can get around a Destroy with something like a zenmaines.

Q: Why is there a picture of a random fiend holding a orb of light?:

A: The implication is that he is going to throw it at your monsters...

Your thoughts? I realize that it is on the powerful side, but I honestly believe it would be good for the game. Oh yea, and the OCG is terrible so I need help on that part. Thanks!

[Guest Yuzuru Otonashi]

Yugioh is faster than MTG. Stop trying to turn it into MTG.

 

You're comparing your card to Gorz, which is banworthy, so I do't see any reason to take this seriously.

 

This is hideously broken so I am obligated to lock it.

[Miror B]

So basically to make the game slower, you make Mirror Force that's 5 times better.

 

It's a hand trap so it doesn't get away from destruction.

 

It banishes, so it gets by Stardust, Starlight etc.

 

1500 attack makes it searchable.

 

Dark gives it a fuckton of support.

 

Do you see what I'm getting at? You do not make a f*cking broke card to "fix" the meta. That's what the banlist is for.

[Guest Icy]

Or we can simply ask you, did you INTEND for this card to be so hideously broken? Or did you not understand at all how it would be based on your given observations of the current game?

[Guest Yuzuru Otonashi]

Or we can simply ask you, did you INTEND for this card to be so hideously broken? Or did you not understand at all how it would be based on your given observations of the current game?

He understands. He stated he wants the game to be slowed down to all control and that combo decks have to stall =T

 

He made it to counter any and all overextension to the point of making all decks stay the same way.

[thekazu4u]

... thank you for unlocking the topic. No, I did not intend for it to be broken. I intended for it to be powerful and playable, but not OP'd. I would seriously appreciate it if instead of locking the topic somebody would tell me how to make it LESS Op'd. Also, I forgot the phrase "and you control no monsters." It accidentally got edited out when I was changing the card from the even more broken first form. And probably banishing was a bad idea. Fixed.

 

He understands. He stated he wants the game to be slowed down to all control and that combo decks have to stall =T

I understand that it will slow down the game. I did not want to make it OP'd however, and I am trying to fix it. And all I said was that combo decks have to wait before using their combo, not pulling it off on first turn, because that is sort of the whole balancing factor of combo decks.

[Guest Icy]

He understands. He stated he wants the game to be slowed down to all control and that combo decks have to stall =T

 

He made it to counter any and all overextension to the point of making all decks stay the same way.

 

Then there really is no reason to keep this topic open at all, ever. Locked. We don't mind cards that are limitable, etc. It happens but purposefully doing so is hardly "Realistic" by any standard. Let it be a consequence, not factor.