Blake Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 [quote name='Dementuo Black Sun' timestamp='1341875202' post='5972378'] You're taking what I'm saying at the literal face-value and not even thinking about what I'm saying otherwise. I never said topping defines everything, I'm saying that the only thing that Fu-Fu is a real threat in is Dragons, and Dragons are a part of today's meta. I'd like you to name one or two decks that can both OTK consistently with Future Fusion, as well as combat today's metagame (Or at least be considered competitive-level decks). Rekindling in Lavals is a completely different situation. In Lavals, Rekindling is, quite literally, a 1-card OTK engine. There isn't a secondary card that makes Rekindling super-broke (Unlike Fu-Fu and FGD). Case in point, Future Fusion is only a problem so long as its targets make it a problem. Now, arguing with you any further would be pointless. It's obvious that you won't change your opinion, and I'm holding firmly to mine as well. I've made my point, it's just up to everyone else to either accept or reject it. [/quote] See, there's your problem. Your argument is "Show me why FuFu isn't balanced in relation to the meta." That's an absolutely idiotic thing to ask because it doesn't change the fact that FuFu is the problem. You have no source to defend your point except that Chaos Dragons are the only deck topping. But, here's the thing- As time goes on FTKs and OTKs steadily get more and more consistent, until they become too good. On top of that, I named multiple decks that can OTK just by drawing FuFu, and you disregarded them because they don't top enough for you, so stop being a hypocrite. The existence of FuFu promotes restrictive card design so that it won't become an OTK, thus limiting the decks that are getting the Fusions. All of the existing abused monster are fine if not for the multi foolish, which is never fine. Gem-Knights, for example, don't even NEED Dia to use FuFu efficiently, so are we just gonna ban Gem-Knight Fusion instead, thus defeating the point of your reasoning behind FuFu not dying? And while you are correct about Rekindling, that doesn't change the fact that a double foolish is bad design. I mean, hell, If Foolish is @1, why would a multi-foolish EVER be good design that is ever "balanced support"? And your point is completely WRONG, so go ahead. The reason I'm arguing is so that you don't ruin the thoughts of the other people here.[quote name='mido9' timestamp='1341875263' post='5972380'] Proposition: FHD and chimeratech go away(their only use IS to be a part of the future fusion combos that make OTKs since they suck raging earth without it.) Everything really problematic to use even with the consistency loss from running jank like bubbleman or etc for the omni hero dump goes away ad infinitum (hornet,Judgment dragon,BLSEOTB,etc.) Future fusion moves up. The double foolish for lavals would be bleh without rekindling abusing whatever you dump anyway. Edit: Dementuo beat me to it. [/quote] I refer to Gem-Knights again. A multi-foolish cannot be defended, ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementuo Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 This is exactly why I said there was no point in arguing further, Black. All you're going to do is say that I'm wrong whilst also saying I'm an idiot for thinking otherwise. My opinion still stands that FGD should be banned as opposed to Future Fusion. I doubt your opinion of the matter will change, nor do I expect it to change. Believe what you wish to, I'm only doing the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingdom Xathers Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 >A topic on FHD >segues into discussion/argument about Future Fusion ok.avi Hey, I know: let's also go around blaming REDMD for being a part of this whole FuFu Chaos Dragon mess/bullcrap, that should be so much fun![/sarcasm] As much as I hate to say it, FuFu would still be a problem even after one would ban every 3-to-5-plus-Material Fusion Monsters, since it would still be an instant multi-Foolish, not to mention that cards like Brio or Mist Valley Falcon would allow multiple uses of it (hypothetically speaking) if your opponent doesn't MST it first. OT: As for this card itself... eh, there wouldn't be a consistent way to bring this out without possibly depleting hand/field advantage. Unless: Discard 3 White Stones, grab 3 Blue-Eyes Poly *shot* into BEUD Dragon's Mirror into FHD ??????? Profit? *gets crushed by a Thwomp* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1341875915' post='5972395'] I refer to Gem-Knights again. A multi-foolish cannot be defended, ever. [/quote] If master dia doesnt see play except with future fusion and is broken when future fusioned,but is useless and terribad when it isnt future fusion'd out,what makes it any different from gustaph max or atlanthal? I really dont like to hit stuff that's broken in a non topping deck,but [b][i]only[/i][/b] if said stuff can have balanced uses like with a tech'd hero engine in stuff that likes to get stuff in the grave in higher competitive circles. Giving a deck that wont top even with the power cards a few power cards in exchange for opening a few competitive doors seems like an even tradeoff. Who knows? Maybe this is multi-foolish done right,dont hate on it just because it's multi foolish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1341877026' post='5972428'] If master dia doesnt see play except with future fusion and is broken when future fusioned,but is useless and terribad when it isnt future fusion'd out,what makes it any different from gustaph max or atlanthal? [/quote] Congrats on reading. I just said that Gem-Knights don't even NEED Dia. They can do it with almost any of their monsters, easily. [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1341877026' post='5972428'] I really dont like to hit stuff that's broken in a non topping deck,but [b][i]only[/i][/b] if said stuff can have balanced uses like with a tech'd hero engine in stuff that likes to get stuff in the grave in higher competitive circles. Giving a deck that wont top even with the power cards a few power cards in exchange for opening a few competitive doors seems like an even tradeoff. [/quote] There's a difference between balanced and balanced in a situation. Balanced in a situation should almost NEVER be argued, only in cases such as Wind-Up Hunter where its ONLY use is the hand drop . [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1341877026' post='5972428'] Who knows? Maybe this is multi-foolish done right,dont hate on it just because it's multi foolish [/quote] You should always hate on multi-foolish. The ability to dump what you want in the grave, when you want it (Of course at time of drawing) is absolutely terrible design. There's also the fact that Escuridao is JUST as much a problem card with FuFu as the others, albeit not consistent now, but is nothing but a good option in HEROes. It's a balanced card that is usable AND fine without FuFu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1341874350' post='5972363'] And topping defines everything? [/quote] SPOILER: Yes. Kevin Tewart pretty much said so. [quote]First, just because a card is popular does not mean it will appear on the F&L List. Second, just because a card is powerful does not mean it will appear on the F&L List. But if these two things come together, AND a card or Deck is – or looks like it will – negatively impact deck diversity, then action may be warranted.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airride Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 How about we just ban everything that's a problem. In terms of a business standpoint, Banning FHD would be better, as it's not in any set that's been released within a year. (Plus all those little Nublets that like using this for their bad monsters means they'll still buy it.) Logically, Ban FuFu just to prevent abuse. FHD though...It's a cool monster, But it's hardly usable outside of FuFu. OWhat they should have done with it, for materials, just 1 Monster of each attribute except LIGHT, as that's what it was in the anime...(Essentially.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 [quote name='Hatcher' timestamp='1341877737' post='5972452'] SPOILER: Yes. Kevin Tewart pretty much said so. [/quote] Speaking in ideals. I know that to Konami it does, just not in the design scope that should generally be what's looked at, hence why Ecodia/Countdown/Brio/FuFu/Etc. are heavily pushed as bannable by the playerbase, even when Konami doesn't listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1341877884' post='5972460'] Speaking in ideals. I know that to Konami it does, just not in the design scope that should generally be what's looked at, hence why Ecodia/Countdown/Brio/FuFu/Etc. are heavily pushed as bannable by the playerbase, even when Konami doesn't listen. [/quote] You asked if topping defined everything. The answer is yes. I'm honestly on the fence over the whole issue. Half the cards that people bring up when discussing Future Fusion should be banned anyway. "Oh but Brionac!" Bannable. "Oh but Blackwing Revives-From-Grave-When-You-Pick-Up-A-Card-And-Pay-400-LP!" Bannable. "Oh but Chimeratech Overdragon!" Bannable. "Oh but how about Elemental Hero I-Can-Foolish-Burial-Any-Dark-Monster!?" The dark monster you're discarding is probably bannable, or the card you're using to abuse it with is probably bannable. I can see the argument of it limiting card design however it seems... rather moot. Just be a good card maker and you won't have that problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted July 9, 2012 Report Share Posted July 9, 2012 @ earlier post Fair enough. By balanced in a situation you mean balanced with list changes and other hits? Setting up a lot for an appropriately hefty cost isnt all that hateful. Running heroes to dump alongside the other card you want to dump is a hefty cost,which means that we can look at the thing being dumped more than esc,and losing the things that make exc dumps broken isnt a loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Crouton Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 #1 Play this Choose Escuridao Dump Zephyros + 1 HERO Bounce this for Zeph Play this Choose Escuridao Dump PSZ + 1 HERO SS PSZ Synch for Brio Activate Brio's eff Bounce this Play this Choose Nova Master Dump Volcanic Shell + 1 HERO Activate Shell's effect Add 1 Shell from your Deck your hand Discard Shell for Brio's eff Bounce this Either hope your opponent quits out of annoyance at this point, drop a Miracle, drop a BLS, or do both of the latter. #2 Play this. Choose Overdragon Send Cydra, 3 Jinzos, [b]then [/b]3 Jinzo - Returners, [b]in that exact order[/b] Activate all 3 Jinzo - Returners SS all 3 Jinzo Play Limiter Removal GG [quote name='Dementuo Black Sun' timestamp='1341866800' post='5972180'] Ban this and Future Fusion can stay. [/quote] Ban everything that benefits from Painful Choice and Painful Choice can come back. Ban everything that helps Exodia and Exodia can stay. See my point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1341878383' post='5972470'] @ earlier post Fair enough. By balanced in a situation you mean balanced with list changes and other hits? Setting up a lot for an appropriately hefty cost isnt all that hateful. Running heroes to dump alongside the other card you want to dump is a hefty cost,which means that we can look at the thing being dumped more than esc. [/quote] Balanced in a Situation, I mean more what the meta is, the list at a time, etc. All the things that build the current game. FuFu, for the longest time, was balanced in the situation that the game was in, because of the fact that it couldn't do much more than a multi-foolish that resulted in an EP REDRUM or 2 at times. Of course, 5x Foolish was still as bad as ever before, it just wasn't able to make a real splash because of the deck it was in. But, now... We have Chaos Dragons that make it completely bananas, even in the higher tiers of the game. And the problem is that, as long as those HEROes and FuFu exist, the potential will always be there. [quote name='Hatcher' timestamp='1341878309' post='5972468'] You asked if topping defined everything. The answer is yes. I'm honestly on the fence over the whole issue. Half the cards that people bring up when discussing Future Fusion should be banned anyway. "Oh but Brionac!" Bannable. "Oh but Blackwing Revives-From-Grave-When-You-Pick-Up-A-Card-And-Pay-400-LP!" Bannable. "Oh but Chimeratech Overdragon!" Bannable. "Oh but how about Elemental Hero I-Can-Foolish-Burial-Any-Dark-Monster!?" The dark monster you're discarding is probably bannable, or the card you're using to abuse it with is probably bannable. I can see the argument of it limiting card design however it seems... rather moot. Just be a good card maker and you won't have that problem. [/quote] There are also things like Volcanic Shell, Gem-Knight Citrine, Five-Headed Dragon, etc., though FHD is mildly debatable because of the fact that it's pretty unusable outside of this situation. The problem is Konami makes things either too good or too bad most of the time, and being a good card maker isn't something that anyone can just do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [quote name='God Machismo!!!!!' timestamp='1341878673' post='5972477'] Ban everything that benefits from Painful Choice and Painful Choice can come back. Ban everything that helps Exodia and Exodia can stay. See my point? [/quote] One difference: Making exodia fine would need us to ban things that would have been better for game than exodia,and the same applies to painful. Losing chimeratech,FGD,zeph,BLS maybe hornet isnt really a bad tradeoff,two of those cards are either useless or broken,and the other 3 are just flat out broken. We cant always assume future fusion is always the bannable part in anything that happens in the future so we cant ban it off potential. Shell is not all that problematic really,gem knights might get an unhealthy boost,but the deck will still be not topping and not worth caring about compared to competitive future fusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementuo Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 I see that Fu-Fu promotes inconsistent OTKs. Never did I say Fu-Fu was good card design, I know that it's terrible. I've only said that FGD could be banned, and it would be sufficient for this format. How often do you see an inconsistent OTK deck, even on DN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [quote]Dump Zephyros[/quote] [quote]Synch for Brio[/quote] [quote]drop a BLS[/quote] [quote]Choose Overdragon[/quote] [quote]Play Limiter Removal[/quote] All of the above are bannable for reasons that have nothing to do with Future Fusion. [quote]Ban everything that benefits from Painful Choice and Painful Choice can come back. Ban everything that helps Exodia and Exodia can stay. See my point?[/quote] I see your point but FuFu requires significantly more deck dedication then Painful Choice. You main Painful Choice once and that's it. You need an extra deck dedicated in part to fusions, a fully formed dragon deck, etc etc. Exodia is bannable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Tracks Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Atem recently shared a few posts on the topic of FHD and Future Fusion. I thought someone might find this interesting: [quote name='Atem'] If something's a problem when set alongside one of the few things to ever make Fusions worth a good goddamn, chances are that it is reasonable to consider the resulting monster the problem, instead of the methodology.[/quote] [quote name='Atem'] [quote]Also, why the f*** does every retard keep saying ban FHD and not FF? How can you be that blind to the actual problem card? [/quote] The insistence that FF is the real problem is one that seldom thinks the matter through. I would know, I'm responsible for the entire notion of "maybe we should just hit FGD." Superfoolish does not strike fear in me, boys, not in all cases. I'll pick out some I find inane, sure: but not in all cases. Outside of Superfoolish, what does the card exist to do? Seldom, it brings a Fusion along - and should that Fusion be costed so "low"? Does the timelapse and the use of materials in-deck make for enough of an opportunity cost on its own? Essentially, FGD is a card that, from some design perspectives, is too high-risk high-reward to be sensible as a legal thing. Either it's legal and sucks too f***ing hard to ever hit the field, or it hits the field at no amount of effort one could reasonably consider an appropriate "cost" and thus rewards one with a pseudofree (if slow) dumbass beatstick. The notion of being a dumbass beatstick and nothing more is in and of itself a design weakpoint. Rai-Oh is better-designed than Elf and SDM and many of the other 1900s, because they have reason to exist and plays to make BEYOND "hurr durr kill s***." Some of the problems with making larger, quicker, lower-cost costed mons has been how their bigger stats, easier and faster summoning, and lower risks have almost made them akin to playing 1999 Gemini Elf over and over in terms of their impact on a game. Just dropping a beater and hitting direct for 1/4-1/2 of someone's existence is excruciatingly simplistic gameplay, and putting all onus on the defender to stay alive makes for a poor situation as well. Winning's being harder would import more value into each win.[/quote] [quote name='Atem'] I think you guys missed my point. My point is that "if there's a problem with FF being foolish, it's better-solved by banning the Fusion in question, when the Fusion is something like FHD." FHD without FF legal is essentially banned from all worthwhile gameplay JUST BECAUSE FF isn't around for it - bar Dragon's Mirror, of course. Consider the concept also that it is idiotic for one-card 5000 ATK mons to exist just because one's grave is primed by the natural consequences of gameplay. Or in short, FHD without FF and w/ Mirror is either uncompetitive-and-thus-worthless-to-our-designing-a-good-format, or bad-for-the-game-when-competitive-and-thus-worth-eliminating-as-a-threat-to-our-design. If it's too slow, it's trash and thus doesn't do anything for enriching the game. If it's not too slow, it has moronic consequences. Consider Stein - when Veiler isn't around, it has moronic consequences, and when it is around, it's trash and doesn't enrich the game anyway. At least we can somehow SALVAGE FF's methodology for other monsters; it is only FF-FGD that poses a primary problem to us. (The deck Pennington put together for an OTK build is resolved by eliminating Brionac, which itself is part and parcel to many silly OTK videos.) It might be some voodoo next-level witch doctor insanity for me to say this, but banning 1 card can often be a choice and a move that bans something more like 5 cards. Banning FF, frankly, eliminates not just FF from our sight, but eliminates FGD as we know it (which is, right now, nothing more than a tool for superfoolish). Eliminating FGD does the same for us, while also destroying the rare chance of an idiotic 5k late-game no-cost-drop as an option, while also letting FF do its thing in ways that AREN'T necessarily worth bitching about. You'd have a case against me right now if, say, you could point out how FF MUST BE THE CARD TO HIT in various situations. No, saying "we ought be able to play FGD as a late-game drop w/ Mirror" will not be taken seriously. Sure, it's a Miracle Fusion move of sorts, but at least Miracle Fusion's resulting stats are halfway-reasonable and at least the monsters summoned by them do something more nuanced than just have ATK and take up space. Nor will "hitting FF solves all the problems with one stroke, so it's better" argument be entertained. It is juvenile to consider a list better just because of brevity. Brevity is trash when its consequences are undesirable.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 idgaf what Atem thinks, Future Fusion will be banned and I laugh at anyone who thinks otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingdom Xathers Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [quote name='Canadian' timestamp='1341893681' post='5972689'] idgaf what Atem thinks, Future Fusion will be banned and I laugh at anyone who thinks otherwise. [/quote] Of course it'll get banned... ... ... in the next century or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 It'll get banned, he's just saying that they should hit FGD instead. Like how we want JD gone and the LS stuff back, or Gyzarus and Bestiari to be switched (and Gyzarus banned) Konami has a habit of banning the card that gets to the problem cards, rather than hitting the problem cards. You could have cases for FuFu being either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Fufu getting banned is like me stop taking plastic crack. I personally haven't gone up against FuFu nor FGD that much. Though why no one mentioned BW FGD is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 There will always be a way to abuse FuFu unless you want to ban perfectly balanced cards. Just axe it and be done with it. .-. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Chris, that'll just momentarily stop YCM from talking about how some cards should be banned. I honestly say we should take the people who handle the effects, and replace them with Phil Kelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingdom Xathers Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [quote name='~Batshit Insane VK~' timestamp='1341907387' post='5972806'] Chris, that'll just momentarily stop YCM from talking about how some cards should be banned. I honestly say we should take the people who handle the effects, and replace them with Phil Kelly. [/quote] Hell, even kingdom Neos could do a better job than those f-- --wait, is that going a bit too far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Unclean One: VK Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 Nope. But I suggest we get Phil Kelly. He knows how to make stuff balanced, fluffy (True to the backstory) and competitive LONG after it's prime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Tracks Posted July 10, 2012 Report Share Posted July 10, 2012 [quote name='Canadian' timestamp='1341893681' post='5972689'] idgaf what Atem thinks, Future Fusion will be banned and I laugh at anyone who thinks otherwise. [/quote] I'm not saying your'e wrong. I'm just saying that the ban FHD side has better reasons for their position than ban FuFu camp. [quote name='Chris' timestamp='1341907298' post='5972805'] There will always be a way to abuse FuFu unless you want to ban perfectly balanced cards. Just axe it and be done with it. .-. [/quote] It's possible that you're entirely right but it doesn't matter what will be. For the sake of discussion of whether FHD and FuFu and there place on the ban list we should only consider cards in the current pool. The current arguments for keeping FuFu are that it's a good mechanic for Fusion summons and that the cards being used along side it are bannable (Brionac) or that cards offer no skill to the game even under the most skilled circumstances (FHD) and there is no harm in removing them. The ban FuFu camp says that FuFu because it banning the fewest number of cards to stop the problem is the correct choice and to a lesser extent that some of the fusion monsters offer more merits to the game. Both have arguments with reasoning to support it. And for the record; It'll be much easier for the ban FuFu people to more strongly emphasize their point once they dismantle the argument that Future Fusion is a good mechanism for fusion summons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.