ITT: We try to figure out what each specific Type and Attribute does

[TerrorKingA]

The long title says it all. I saw someone mention that Yu-Gi-Oh needs more generic Type/Attribute support, so eventually the issue of what each type and attribute does came up. Naturally, this won't be particularly easy with the myriad of different effects in YGO, but nonetheless I'd like your opinion.

 

Tl;dr version: Say what each Attribute or Type specializes in

 

My opinion:

 

1. WATER: Primarily control. Before Abyss Rising, WATER focused on slowing down the opponent while you build up enough resources to eventually win. This can be seen with the Ice Barrier archetype and cards like A Legendary Ocean, Salvage, Surface, Spiritual Water Art - Aoi etc. After Abyss Rising, WATER became a bit more aggressive, but the same theme of hampering the opponent is still very visible with the Atlantean monsters' "cost effects". The theme of building up resources can be seen with the new Mermail Archetype.

 

2. FIRE: FIRE primarily focuses on Burn damage done through board control. It never could lock the game as well as WATER, but it was always more aggressive. The Volcanic archetype exemplifies this with Blaze Accelerator and the Shells- slowly dwindling the opponent's Life Points while also maintaining some semblance of control through monster destruction. Solar Flare Dragon is perhaps the most well-known Burn-related FIRE card. More modern FIRE archetypes like Evol and Jurrac don't burn, but the board control theme is still very apparent (to the chagrin of many players) with the Evolzars and Guaiba. {FIRE has another gimmick: spam spam spam, due to Rekindling, but let's ignore that abomination of a card.}

 

3. WIND: WIND is sort of the redheaded stepchild of the Attributes (looking at you Poisonous Winds), but even it has a prevalent theme. WIND's monsters have always been low on ATK, but usually had some effect relating to your opponent's Set spells and traps, or returning cards from the field to the hand or Deck. Divine Wind of Mist Valley, Harpie's Hunting Ground, Swift Birdman Joe, Stormshooter, Quill Pen of Gulldos, Dark Simorgh and Battlestorm all relate to the aforementioned themes.

 

4. EARTH: This is where Attribute specialty starts getting a bit fuzzy. Earth is the largest Attribute in the game, with a variety of different playstyles and gimmicks. I'm stumped here.

 

5. DARK: Spam spam spam, destroy destroy destroy. Aggressive.

 

6. LIGHT: Restrict, beaters. Passive.

 

I won't even try to get into the Types. Discuss.

[ekko1990]

Nice. This will help my deck building guide.

 

I've already gone into this a bit so I'll add a bit of what I already got.

 

Fire: also specializes in setting up and utilizing combos. This is best seen in Laval, where the main game (correct me if I'm wrong) is setting up the graveyard while getting of effects at the same time.

 

Light: In the past it used to go around negation, drawing cards and increasing lifepoints. These days it is mostly about control and increasing advantage.

 

Dark: Revolves a lot around banishing, graveyard control and removing field presence (the latter having become more focused on destruction lately).

 

Earth: Specializes in increasing (through swarm mostly) and keeping field presence in addition to having good beatdown options.

 

 

For the types I don't have many that I'm certain of, but I'll add a few.

 

Aqua: Consists of mostly low level water monsters and a good deal focus on hand control.

 

(and there I'll have to interrupt as something came up).

[Guest .Rai]

This is idiotic. This doesn't work for any of the major TCGs apart from MtG (and that's only because the game is based on a colour system).

 

If you summarise what each type and attribute does, you're basically summarising the one or two archetypes within those restrictions.

 

Not to mention half of all decks don't run Type or Attribute support.

[Guest Kokomoe]

This is idiotic. This doesn't work for any of the major TCGs apart from MtG (and that's only because the game is based on a colour system).

 

It works for Cardfight if you categorize the Clans as Attributes/Types, as every clan really does have 1 distinct playstyle.

 

Also, yeah. This is very idiotic. There's more than 1 way to play a Type/Attribute and honestly, the ones you've listed are... not what I would agree with at all.

 

Also personally, I feel that LIGHT is moreso to do with the Banish Zone (Agents, Lightrays, etc etc.) and revolve around collecting their resources from there. Might just be me, but that's how I've personally always seen it. DARK somewhat seems to oppose this by being relevant in the Graveyard.

[TerrorKingA]

Idiotic? Not at all. This is merely an exercise to see how well Attribute and Type support could be implemented in this game.

 

Not to mention half of all decks don't run Type or Attribute support.

 

 

Did you not read the OP at all? This thread exists to see if Attribute or Type support would work in this game by finding the core theme of each Attribute or Type. Everyone knows YGO currently has shitty T and A support.

 

[~Brian~]

Idiotic? Not at all. This is merely an exercise to see how well Attribute and Type support would work in this game.

 

And we need a thread for this because...?

 

Even very new players know, or have a grasp, at what each Type or Attribute would do logically.

 

This feels more like a thread for Created Cards, but even then I don't see necessity for it.

[TerrorKingA]

And we need a thread for this because...?

 

Even very new players know, or have a grasp, at what each Type or Attribute would do logically.

 

This feels more like a thread for Created Cards, but even then I don't see necessity for it.

 

 

1. This is purely for me.

 

2. Lolwut? Do tell.

 

3. Wut. At what point did I ask for any created cards?

[Mugendramon]

Thing is Rai forgot the [/thread] tag.

 

Different Archetypes give different uses to the different Attributes. Because different Decks sharing those Attributes can do veeeery different things. The perfect example is the one you yourself gave with fire.

 

What the hell do Volcanics have to do with Evols.

 

And saying "some kind of control" is random as hell and is at most you trying to sound fancy.

 

[/thread]

 

Did you not read the OP at all? This thread exists to see if Attribute or Type support would work in this game by finding the core theme of each Attribute or Type.

 

If would if you wanted to turn it into MtG.

 

Everyone knows YGO currently has shitty T and A support.

 

Uhm... Your definition of shitty seems to be different from mine. Elaborate?

[~Brian~]

 

1. This is purely for me.

 

2. Lolwut? Do tell.

 

3. Wut. At what point did I ask for any created cards?

 

 

Those are some mad reading skillz you got there, big man.

[Guest Vengevine]

Christ almighty, go back to Pojo, you make even YCM look smart.

[TerrorKingA]

stuff

 

Please read the OP. I'm asking you all if there is a central theme in every Type or Attribute, so that generic T&A support may be possible. This isn't a Xenoform concept. Someone suggested that this game could use more generic cards, but for that to happen, said generic cards must be able to be used in most Decks of an Attribute.

 

And yes, Yugioh doesn't have enough generic support. Archetypes or go home. This is likely because Konamis R&D department can't make GOOD cards. They make terrible cards, and they make broken cards, but GOOD cards are few and far between.

 

Christ almighty, go back to Pojo, you make even YCM look smart.

 

Flame war or intelligent debate, I can do either really well

 

That banlist of yours suggests the latter might be impossible though...

 

Those are some mad reading skillz you got there, big man.

 

> addresses every terrible point you made

> I'm the one lacking comprehension

 

Lolpoj... LolYCM

 

Well, I've humored you long enough.

 

Nice. This will help my deck building guide.

 

No, it really won't.

[Guest Airride_Master]

This is purely for me.

Then why did you post this.

It's like the president posting the codes to launch the nukes here.

 

 

Also it's dumb.

Well, I've humored you long enough.

Does that mean you'll leave?

Because I'm pretty sure everybody would be ecstatic if you do.

[~Brian~]

> addresses every terrible point you made

> I'm the one lacking comprehension

 

I just said that this thread is unnecessary because everyone who plays Yugioh knows what each Attribute/Type's identity is. Thus, we don't need a thread for it.

 

And you completely misunderstood what I said about Created Cards. I meant that this thread would be better used in CC because it's a list of what each Type/Attribute does, giving a guide to card makers as to how to create cards for Types/Attributes. And even then it's not necessary because of what I said earlier.

 

Bottom line is, yes, you're the one lacking comprehension.

 

Besides, "This is purely for me". So, you decided to do something individual on a community forum? Well done.

[Guest .Rai]

[spoiler=bad explanation]This is a gross simplification, by the way. I mean, some are obviously hybrid and some are just in the wrong places because I didn't go over this.

 

> WATER Synchro; Gishkis; Frognarchs; Mermails

> Ice Barriers; Cloudians

 

WATER only has two significantly control-based archetypes really. Make control-based generic WATER support; the majority of WATER decks don't use it? Either that, or make completely generic WATER support like Salvage or something, in which it doesn't matter what WATER's 'focus' is.

 

> Vylons; Lightsworns; Fableds; Hieratics; Ojamas; Batterymen

> Watts; Photons; Fairies; Arcana Force; Constellars; Lightrays

 

So, assuming YGO is going to make more generic support, how do you support a majority of these well? Unless you reject the ones that don't fit your template or 'passive, beatsticks, blah blah'.

 

> Flamvells; Lavals

> Evols; Jurracs; Volcanics

 

Burn isn't a FIRE mechanic really. And if you really wanted to make it specific to FIRE, you'd have to make: 1. good FIRE monsters that burn and 2. good generic support cards for FIRE...that also burn. lolwut. And then, all FIRE decks are basically archetypes. You will never think of support that works for all these archetypes.

 

> X-Sabers; Gadget OTK; Geargias; Karakuris; Madolches

> Amazoness; Ancient Gears; Gadgets; Gem-Knights; Naturias; Scraps; T.Gs; Machinas

 

Of all things, it's easy for EARTH anyway. Most are control-based (even the random OTKy ones are supposed to be control decks). Generic EARTH control support always works...outside of the fact that they all have their own archetype support and therefore don't need attribute support. Which is the same problem. Pretty much everywhere.

 

> Gustos; Harpies; Mist Valleys; Dragunities

 

Let's make generic WIND support without good WIND monsters? Even outside of archetypes, WIND has little good generic monsters. Okay, so their theme is 'spinning/bouncing'. It isn't, unless for some reason, WIND benefits from suddenly having cards which can spin or bounce. Otherwise, you're just trying to unify WIND's flavour themes for no reason, especially when Konami have obviously put YGO beyond that.

 

> Infernities; Blackwings; Inzektors

> Archfiends; Dark Worlds; Destiny HEROs; Evil HEROs; Dark Scorpions; Gravekeeper's; Meklords; Ninjas; Reptillianes; Evilswarms; Steelswarms; Infernities

 

The funny thing about DARK is that all the meta decks are the ones that are characteristically non-DARK. Throughout YGO, DARK has always been beatdown/control until a few decks popped up. Even Dark Worlds should be a control deck, if it weren't for Broww and Snoww. So the way the OP says 'spam, spam, spam' is insanely misleading. Not to mention that's only because Konami has pushed DARK aggro-orientated stuff (DAD, Allure, Tour Guide, the slightly bad Veil of Darkness) more than DARK control based stuff. And then, we have Chaos which influences our view on the attribute (Sorcerer and BLS; Twilight).

 

So technically, DARK is a slow beatdown attribute. Lol, I'd like to see Konami fix the current situation.

 

Oh, yeah:

 

> Crystal Beasts; Phantom Beasts; Aliens; HEROs; Fortune Ladies (actually Chaos though, awks); Gladiator Beasts; Morphs; Roids; Six Sams

 

What you propose would technically make any multi-Attribute deck, or multi-Typed deck (if you also propose Type support), worse than a normal deck if your support was good.

 

 

tl;dr

 

> Konami tried doing that early on

> They failed

> They replaced Attribute and Type support with archetypes

> Game is still equally as diverse

> i.e. why bother with this insanely complicated revamp.

 

Also, Konami's made plenty of decent generic cards. Duality, a lot of generic Xyzs, half of all their generic spells and traps. The rest is pack-filler which aren't 'terrible cards', so I'll re-direct you to an MtG article (not for the fact that it's MtG, but to explain why every single TCG has 'bad cards'):

 

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr185

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr52

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/ld/164

 

tl;dr

 

- They have to make money

- They cater to casual players

- Power level is relative

 

It works for Cardfight if you categorize the Clans as Attributes/Types, as every clan really does have 1 distinct playstyle.

Also, yeah. This is very idiotic. There's more than 1 way to play a Type/Attribute and honestly, the ones you've listed are... not what I would agree with at all.

Also personally, I feel that LIGHT is moreso to do with the Banish Zone (Agents, Lightrays, etc etc.) and revolve around collecting their resources from there. Might just be me, but that's how I've personally always seen it. DARK somewhat seems to oppose this by being relevant in the Graveyard.

 

All of that is very true. Although, Cardfight is still kinda archetypes, rather than Attribute/Type.

[Mugendramon]

Please read the OP. I'm asking you all if there is a central theme in every Type or Attribute, so that generic T&A support may be possible. This isn't a Xenoform concept. Someone suggested that this game could use more generic cards, but for that to happen, said generic cards must be able to be used in most Decks of an Attribute.

 

You speak of generic Support...

 

Remember Icarus Attack?

 

Yeah, that was nice. Except that by giving "most" Winged Beasts a nice, generic tool they can use, they gave the other, broken Deck an upper hand that out-weighted said benefit by becoming abusable.

 

Remember, uh, I dunno, Fishborg?

 

Look where that went.

 

Making "generic" support is a terrible idea. It would never be used generically. And eliminating variety would not make a better game either.

[Guest .Rai]

Basically, why on earth should Konami have to balance archetype support, tiers, generic support, attribute support, type support, figuring out a niche for each attribute and type, making sure the support works for everything in the niche while not making it play like other TCGs?

[TerrorKingA]

"This is purely for me" = This is purely for my purposes. That means I want your input for future reference. How is this a difficult concept to grasp?

 

Also it's dumb.Does that mean you'll leave?

Because I'm pretty sure everybody would be ecstatic if you do.

 

This place seems to be a lot more tolerant of flaming than NAC and Pojo, so I'll stick around. My kinda place.

 

Quite a bit of you don't quite comprehend what the thread is about and call it bad, so here's a really complicated solution: ignore it. Or don't. Whether through gaining different interpretations of the Attributes, or through picking apart every feeble argument thrown at me, I will be entertained.

 

Basically, why on earth should Konami have to balance archetype support, tiers, generic support, attribute support, type support, figuring out a niche for each attribute and type, making sure the support works for everything in the niche while not making it play like other TCGs?

 

Not the point of the thread. I'm neither arguing for nor against more generic support. All I wanted to know was if it was at least possible to make more generic cards, but then lolspam happened. Though I do think it is possible if we had a competent R&D Department, which we don't.

[~Brian~]

 

Let the games begin, then.

 

So it means that you want to gather different views on what people think of how each Attribute/Type works. Except there aren't different views because everything's so obvious.

 

We'll settle with feeble arguments for your entertainment then, good sir.

[TerrorKingA]

 

Let the games begin, then.

 

So it means that you want to gather different views on what people think of how each Attribute/Type works. Except there aren't different views because everything's so obvious.

 

We'll settle with feeble arguments for your entertainment then, good sir.

 

 

I asked you to tell me what each attribute does above. You've yet to do that. Do you have any idea how hard I had to bullshit that OP? No, no newb will have any idea of what any of the types do beyond setting up DAD or BLS.

[Guest .Rai]

Not the point of the thread. I'm neither arguing for nor against more generic support. All I wanted to know was if it was at least possible to make more generic cards, but then lolspam happened. Though I do think it is possible if we had a competent R&D Department, which we don't.

 

> Is it possible to make more Attribute/Type support? Yes.

> Does the support have to fit the Attribute/Type's 'specialisation'? No, because they don't have a specialisation.

[TerrorKingA]

> Does the support have to fit the Attribute/Type's 'specialisation'? No, because they don't have a specialisation.

 

Honestly, I'm far more weary of completely generic support. Konami doesn't have a very good track record with that, but it's still the best way to go.

[Mugendramon]

The big problem is, that while you're asking for our opinion on what do you think each of the Attributes does, we are all telling you that they go far and wide, because of the huge variety of cards and Decktypes.

 

Finding a specialization is unrealistic. There isn't one...

[TerrorKingA]

Except no

 

Most of the users here seem to have massive butthurt about pojo for some reason and all decided to say "bad thread" and choose to remain in said "bad thread".

 

Had any of you simply said "I don't see any specialization in T&A" this would've gone far more smoothly.

 

But then again I wouldn't have gotten many lulz.

[Mugendramon]

Except no

 

Most of the users here seem to have massive butthurt about pojo for some reason and all decided to say "bad thread" and choose to remain in said "bad thread".

 

Had any of you simply said "I don't see any specialization in T&A" this would've gone far more smoothly.

 

But then again I wouldn't have gotten many lulz.

 

Well then, I just did, Rai has been trying for a while too.

 

Could we, uh, just bring this thread to a close because you have your answer now?

[TerrorKingA]

Well then, I just did, Rai has been trying for a while too.

 

Could we, uh, just bring this thread to a close because you have your answer now?

 

 

I wanna see other opinions, so it should stay open.