El Majishan Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Ok so this has been on my mind for quite some time and I actually what to have a serious discussion about it. All opinions are respected It always happens when new sets are introduced...New cards and archtypes are introduced and are deemed broken by the community. We b**** and complain about Konami's terrible management of the game, how they killing the game by making so many broken cards ect ect. We complain about the power creep with cards such as JD, DaD, Shi En, Zenmaity, Rescue Rabbit ect ect. We complain about the loop summons, the field nukes, free +1's ect, we complain about 2 deck formats, we rage about best.dek topping all events, we rage about some decks not getting support....yet we still play this game. (don't give me any bullshit about you don't play IRL...if you use DN, YuGiOh Pro or even YVD, playing is playing) Why? If the game is in such a bad state, and we rage and complain about almost every thing, why continue to associate with the game? If someone complains about and does not like something..isn't the most logical action to take is to disassociate yourself with the source of your grief? We also see this in Video Games...Take UMVC3 for example...I get so much grief from my friend when he loses to my Wesker (he's so broke, he so free, he needs a bigger nerf blah blah blah) Yet every time I am online, or he comes to my house, he demands we play. Again Why? The answer to this is...we enjoy these games...the fact that we rage is because we lose either due to a luck sack (which will be a part of YGO no matter how much you "fix the ban list" or balance the cards) getting out played or we are just using "bad" Decks or Characters. As the game of YGO progresses, as with any other game there would obviously be a power creep as designers come up with ways to keep the game interesting. This includes new mechanics, new card effects and new deck concepts. Think about it...would the game have lasted as long as it has and reached to the point where it is the top TCG in the world if we were still playing with cards similar to those in the Metal Raiders and Magic Ruler era? I honestly think not. Games evolve in order to remain interesting...with new cards decks would be able to do a lot more than they currently do...we can either adjust to the current state of the game in order to have continued enjoyment or take our leave. The game has gone from someone only being able to summoning 1 or 2 monsters per turn, and its now no big deal to summon 3 or more. We understand that this is the current state of the meta and the only things we can do is adjust if we wish to keep playing...or quit...complaining solves nothing. Yes it may not seem fair that we are forced to use a limited number of cards or decks in order to keep up with the Meta but like with most things in life, nothing is ever equal, something is always going to be better than the next. tl;dr? Stop bitching and adjust to the meta if you want to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Honestly, I think the game's gotten so much more fun since it evolved from its roots, they added a new level of speed to the game, and with all the newer concepts and deck types and even the power creep, they've given the game a unique form of player-player interaction that makes it incredibly fun to continue playing. With these new standards, it's also reduced luck to be a much more miniscule factor than in a lot of card games and honestly I think that's what makes it such a popular competitive game. Matches are based largely on skill, more so than luck. Yes it's still present, but that's card games for you. I like Konami's direction with the gamestate for the most part, and their banlist helps keep it balanced to a point anyway. And as for people who complain that you can't "use any deck" there is no way to orient the banlist so that every deck is balanced, and if anything it leads to a vicious cycle of banning cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Yay at complexity creep. Nay at power creep. Konami should really try an Escher staircase approach. It works well for Pokemon and MtG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='.Rai' timestamp='1335710458' post='5928304'] Yay at complexity creep. Nay at power creep. Konami should really try an Escher staircase approach. It works well for Pokemon and MtG. [/quote] Isn't the whole reason people like Yugioh because it's uniquely different from them? imo Konami should be staying as far away from Pokemon and MtG design-wise as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='Chris' timestamp='1335710598' post='5928308'] Isn't the whole reason people like Yugioh because it's uniquely different from them? imo Konami should be staying as far away from Pokemon and MtG design-wise as possible. [/quote] It's not really a MtG and Pokemon rule. It's just one of the things utilized in pretty much most TCGs (using MtG and Pokemon as examples, because they use it the most). It's basically making the game overall more complex and developed in order to trick people into thinking there's power creep even though there's not. YGO already use it, just not enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Majishan Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I enjoy the power creep as long as long as its reasonable, I would have left this game a long time ago if Monarch were still the best monsters ever. I love complex decks that have a s*** load of possible plays (i was in love with plants, just could never afford them). People who complain about "power creep" are usually just to stubborn to adjust to the new game state. And as Chris said it is not possible for all decks to be competitive, some decks will always be better than others if its based on the match up, or its has more support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not-so-Radiant Arin Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Because of the recent change in Meta, I've all but given up on trying to play those said Decks that are Tier 1 (The Wind-Ups, lolZektors, and Rabbit), and focus more on the TIer 2 Decks (Dragunitys, Blackwings, Six Sams (which may or may not be Tier 1.5)) to try and get them as close as possible to toppling the other Tier 1 Decks. While it may not work some of the time, whether I be humiliated by the evil bunny's transformation into a massive red dinosaur that can negate any card it wants to, or whether I be humiliated by the constant +18 the Inzektors tend to generate, I still find the game fun with my Tier 2 Decks, and always try to make those Decks as competitive as possible. [/rant] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTurtleOnceCalledGod Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 The variability isn't usually in the main-deck so much as it is in the side-decking, where you can keep your opponent guessing more. True, there are quite a few generic sides that are practically necessary against certain overly population decks (inzectors, hieratics, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I don't play on DN anymore, so I really am not categorized as "Still playing the game". Priority's removal makes me want to go back, but the game seriously needs to adopt a "shuffle hand to deck and draw the same number of cards if you opened up with a bad hand until you get a hand you like" system, like Pokemon and MtG does. That way, it would feel less luck-oriented and make skill a much more prominent force in the game. That way, if one loses with this system in place, it would be because either they don't have a good deck or it is their fault that they lost. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Majishan Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='Koloktos' timestamp='1335713418' post='5928346'] I don't play on DN anymore, so I really am not categorized as "Still playing the game". Priority's removal makes me want to go back, but the game seriously needs to adopt a "shuffle hand to deck and draw the same number of cards if you opened up with a bad hand until you get a hand you like" system, like Pokemon and MtG does. That way, it would feel less luck-oriented and make skill a much more prominent force in the game. That way, if one loses with this system in place, it would be because either they don't have a good deck or it is their fault that they lost. Simple as that. [/quote] I like the idea of a mulligan hand...losing because you opened terrible is really not fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='Le Magician' timestamp='1335713688' post='5928349'] I like the idea of a mulligan hand...losing because you opened terrible is really not fair. [/quote] It truly isn't fair with that situation happening. That is a major complaint that people who play have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTurtleOnceCalledGod Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 True, but that could easily backfire, due to exodia and such, and god-hands where you [i]will[/i] win if you play it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='TheTurtleOnceCalledGod' timestamp='1335714388' post='5928357'] True, but that could easily backfire, due to exodia and such, and god-hands where you [i]will[/i] win if you play it right. [/quote] Exodia is Exodia. Even if it opens well, it doesn't mean that it will necessarily do well afterwards. At least if one gets a god-hand, the other player has a chance of getting a god-hand as well. So that equalizes the opposing forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monsieur Madeleine Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I've never complained about formats. But, yugioh always has a section sanctioned from the meta. Also, at some point you realize that the characteristics of tier-1 decks don't make it impossible to play against them, you can easily play vehicroids and beat inzektor if you have a good build, the right player interaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizarus Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='Koloktos' timestamp='1335713418' post='5928346'] I don't play on DN anymore, so I really am not categorized as "Still playing the game". Priority's removal makes me want to go back, but the game seriously needs to adopt a "shuffle hand to deck and draw the same number of cards if you opened up with a bad hand until you get a hand you like" system, like Pokemon and MtG does. That way, it would feel less luck-oriented and make skill a much more prominent force in the game. That way, if one loses with this system in place, it would be because either they don't have a good deck or it is their fault that they lost. Simple as that. [/quote] Yugioh simply cannot do this due to the sheer amount of OTK/FTKs in the game. In order for that change to happen, Yugioh would have to go through a huge structural change. OT: Honestly I have mixed feelings about the power creep. Its not difficult to adjust, hell my Volcanic deck smacks around lolrabbit and Wind-ups too are pretty easy to win against if I manage to go first or draw Veiler. Even Inbroktors aren't terribly difficult to side against, but it requires me to run 3 Veilers, 3 Tour Guides, and BLS, and from that point, the deck might as well be a Chaos deck with a Volcanic engine. I'm not saying at all that the game should be changed to make Volcanics competitive, but I'm saying that adjusting for many decks means to actually change the deck to the point where its not the same deck it was designed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Crouton Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I stop playing major decks because the banlist hit them, and I would have to either change it, or use another deck. I played 6Sams for a bit, then the banlist hit them. Last format, I played Inzektor Agents, and Agents got hit. I mainly lean towards fun decks now like Monster Mash variants because they're less likely to get hit. Format-wise, I never keep up on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Wait, how would YGO need a massive revamp in order to incorporate mulligans? Mulligans basically reduce your handsize by 1 each time, and each time you mulligan anyway, you have less and less chance of getting the hand you want and more chance of starting bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 [quote name='.Rai' timestamp='1335739076' post='5928802'] Wait, how would YGO need a massive revamp in order to incorporate mulligans? Mulligans basically reduce your handsize by 1 each time, and each time you mulligan anyway, you have less and less chance of getting the hand you want and more chance of starting bad. [/quote]Mulligan is only used up to a point too. YGO should have different formats like MtG, I saw a lot of comments about how it should be like Pokemon or MtG, so I thought I would do the same. [/Joke] YGO is fine as is, the card types add a more interesting idea to it. It is like MTG, for each set, we get a new mechanic and it makes the game more interesting, along with what cards will come out. Of course they shouldn't spam new types and all that, but it is fine how it is with the new types. Synchros, Xyz, Gemini. Every now and then, they could add a new type with a story line too. I never understand why they just randomly add things. It is one of the reasons I am so interested in MtG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowferret Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I haven't really played in tournaments lately, but before I stopped going, I always enjoyed taking tier 2 decks (like Devil's Advocate) and trying to outplay stuff like Rabbit with them. It's seriously fun, even if you don't win. (and when you end up getting 2nd or 3rd it's even more amazing) And personally, I enjoy the big creep Yugioh's done over the years. It's really apparent that there's a huge gap in the abilities of old cards versus new cards, but seeing it like that makes someone like me wanna try to have an old deck keep up with a new deck. I think it breeds a lot of creativity, and it's seriously fun. (also, lol UMvC3. I used to think Wesker was effing broke too but then I realized he's really just super basic and not that hard to play around) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manjoume Thunder Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 [quote]Wait, how would YGO need a massive revamp in order to incorporate mulligans?[/quote] Mulligan until you draw Future Fusion. Win Card Games. And don't say that FuFu getting the axe would fix the problem. Over the years there have been plenty of 1-3-card otks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 [quote name='Manjoume Thunder' timestamp='1335769897' post='5929170'] Mulligan until you draw Future Fusion. Win Card Games. [/quote] Mulligan until your Opening hand is 2x Warning, Storm, Luster, and something like Ryko that sets up your Grave and screws the Opponent over. Win Card Games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Althemia Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 tbh, I only find that YCM complains about the metagame because they make no side to try and combat against the decks with. They also don't know all of the combos of the deck or even how to play AGAINST them, seeing as how nearly everyone on this site is a hipster who wants to play "the most original deck" and not the best one. If they're going to do this, I feel that they have no right to complain when they're losing because they're refusing to do research on things that they [i]will[/i] have trouble against. Also, on the topic of mulligans in YGO: There are so many cards that could potentially just... you know, be abused by this that it would never be put in place because of the fact that stuff happens. It allows you to open up with your combo pieces in some decks, for example. It also allows you to remove an entirely bad hand (when it's your fault that you got that bad hand in the first place because your deck should at least have mediocre hands at worst) when bad hands are what make you good. Learning to come back from bad hands increases your knowledge of the deck you're playing, enabling you to learn and adapt to better moves. Also your friend's a b**** if he complains about Wesker. He should play against TT and then b****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTurtleOnceCalledGod Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 ^ ITT: Play Inzectors, Hieratics, Rabbits, HEROes, Wind-ups, or a tier 2 deck, or gtfo. What you really said: Learn how to side well and actually play through matches, you might actually win against meta.dek that way. Learn to work with what you have and find a way to win, or change up the recipe until you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 [quote name='TheTurtleOnceCalledGod' timestamp='1335782207' post='5929213'] ^ ITT: Play Inzectors, Hieratics, Rabbits, HEROes, Wind-ups, or a tier 2 deck, or gtfo. What you really said: Learn how to side well and actually play through matches, you might actually win against meta.dek that way. Learn to work with what you have and find a way to win, or change up the recipe until you can. [/quote] What I find weird is that you go as far as to mention Hieratics but not the beautiful Dark Worlds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTurtleOnceCalledGod Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 [quote name='Chris' timestamp='1335782582' post='5929216'] What I find weird is that you go as far as to mention Hieratics but not the beautiful Dark Worlds. [/quote] I kept considering it, but I couldn't decide whether to include it or not. I'm still a noob, give me a break Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.