RyanAtlus Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 So, there's this theory of me that I'd like to share with you people. Some people might have heard me say: "A format where [card X] is techworthy is a healthy format." Some of these cards include Breaker, Dust Tornado, Mirror Force, Neo-Spacian Grand Mole, etc... I was wondering whether other people share this thought, and could maybe give other examples of such indicators? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manjoume Thunder Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 In a good format the mirror matches should almost always be won by the better player. This is definitely not the case with Inzektors and Dragons and if car-d really makes burn and countdown popular, the matches between these decks are going to be retarded. Another important thing is not to have a deck that greatly influences deck building. Unfortunately, that's exactly what Inzektors do atm. RPS formats are also fairly bad (rabbit>inzektor>dragon>rabbit is exactly that) In short, this format is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 I once played Tele-DAD format with friends. Boy, it was fun. Now, most of what I wanted to say was taken away by Manjy, but the main problems with this format right now are: -The existance of Hornet. Just that was enough to make Veiler a staple, reduce the obviously-meant-to-be-gamebreakingly-broken Mirror Force to toilet paper, and make everyone think twice before even getting out over 2 cards on your turn unless you've got Warning or something. That's like, just retarded. -Formats full of consistent and autopilot OTKs. Sure, OTKs themselves are fun, as in DSF-less Tele-DAD and Quick Junk Doppel. However, Chaos Dragons (and Hieratics and Lavals in the OCG) are autopilot, require no skill, and are pretty much coin toss games. Also, Wind-Ups aren't an OTK, but it's pretty much the same thing unless you're playing against Infernities and the opponent topdecks Archfiend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSektor Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 A healthy format is that one where casual/underused decks can at least stand a chance against meta decks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Cakey Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Well, based on what I've seen, a healthy format has a good variety of viable decks and no decks that can OTK consistently. Right now we actually have a bunch of good decks - Inzektors, Hieratics, Chaos Dragons, Wind-Ups, Rabbit, and apparently Six Samurai are doing reasonably well, too - but 2/3 of those are OTK builds, Sams can OTK as well, only it's pretty inconsistent, and Laggia goes so far in the control direction it's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='HSektor' timestamp='1337609904' post='5943897'] one where casual/underused decks can at least stand a chance against meta decks.[/quote] Not sure if a slow format would be considered healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Call of the Haunted~ Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='Armadilloz' timestamp='1337615782' post='5943949'] Not sure if a slow format would be considered healthy. [/quote] Not slow, but controlled. Where a dice roll at the beginning doesn't dictate the winner. Where a turn doesn't consist of dropping 2 Xyz and getting rid of 5 cards in a hand, or playing a 2400 Solemn Judgment and back it up with traps like Macro Cosmos and Vanity's Emptiness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSektor Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='Armadilloz' timestamp='1337615782' post='5943949'] Not sure if a slow format would be considered healthy. [/quote] Not really slow, but a fair format were a Gishki deck for example can at least stand a chance against a Inzektor or something. PS.: I'm not saying that Gishki is a bad deck, just not competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='HSektor' timestamp='1337617663' post='5943965'] Not really slow, but a fair format were a Gishki deck for example can at least stand a chance against a Inzektor or something. PS.: I'm not saying that Gishki is a bad deck, just not competitive. [/quote] A format where Gishki AKA Zealgigas OTK is a good deck is not a good format. But I get your point. A great format is one where you shouldn't be able to point out the horribly broken part of the deck after playing it a couple times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 A good format is one where there is no one clear best deck, but the metagame isn't swamped with "good" decks. It's also a format where a game isn't always dictated by the first few turns (naturally a player opening significantly better than another will result in a dictated outcome in a good format, but that's yugioh) and the game can't be won based on the die roll, FTK decks aren't even remotely viable and stall is either easily broken or plain isn't good enough. The format would also have a good amount of player-player interaction between the big deck-types and preferably all the "tier 2" options, things like chain burn etc aren't viable, for whatever reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Jesse Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 I just think any format where you have a lot of options is a good format. Like, there's variance in how the deck(s) is/are played, regardless of the amount of decks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.