El Majishan Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [center][img]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120607014657/yugioh/images/thumb/0/09/MysticalSpaceTyphoon-GLD5-EN-GGR-LE.jpg/300px-MysticalSpaceTyphoon-GLD5-EN-GGR-LE.jpg[/img] [img]http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120616113639/yugioh/images/thumb/d/df/HeavyStorm-BP01-EN-R-1E.png/300px-HeavyStorm-BP01-EN-R-1E.png[/img][/center] [center]So the format is coming to a close and I just wanted to get YCM's opinion on the format where we finally got MST at 3. People have been asking for this a long time "Put MST at 3 and ban Heavy"...Konami gave us the 3 MST but forgot to ban Heavy and it gave some players a mentally of "I set one...I get MST'ed...I set more and off course they would have the Heavy"[/center] [center]To me being able to pick off back row...or just blow it all up is a bit much...either we have MST at 3 and no Heavy..or MST at a lower number along with Heavy. Personally I rather no Heavy. I know we will just go back to a "Summon, set 4" format like we had when Heavy was banned but with 3 MST, 3 Night Beam, Trap Stun ect ect...would that be such a bad thing?[/center] [center]I think it would be a good thing because it will promote a slower format that requires a bit more skill to play, there would be no more paranoia around playing non-chainables, and we wont get Derp Heavy'ed and OTK'ed. [/center] [center]Discuss.[/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Best way to fix this is to make S/Ts not as super needed to survive a turn by banning wind ups,inzektors,dino rabbit,hieratics,and whatever else,if that happens getting all your backrow decimates becomes much less painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Majishan Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 That made no sense.... Unless you're playing a super aggro deck that does not care about protecting itself, losing back row always hurts. Even if Konami did what you suggested...most decks still need back row for protecting and general control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Alda Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1343911727' post='5995284'] Best way to fix this is to make S/Ts not as super needed to survive a turn by banning wind ups,inzektors,dino rabbit,hieratics,and whatever else,if that happens getting all your backrow decimates becomes much less painful. [/quote] So basically ban virtually every meta archetype to balance out one card? Sure, that's a [i]great[/i] idea. And while we're at it, why don't we ban Monster-oriented decks to balance Raigeki? In other words: No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Only the broken meta archtypes,or the broken parts of them. And raigeki is terrible for game compared to heavy+3MST. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 MST to two. Heavy stays. Best way to do it. Just like Gorz, Heavy Storm is kinda nessesary. And I know I spelled that wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Alda Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1343912820' post='5995292'] Only the broken meta archtypes,or the broken parts of them. And raigeki is terrible for game compared to heavy+3MST. [/quote] You're missing the point. It's stupid to ban whole archetypes--even if they are broken--just to allow one card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Stan Alda' timestamp='1343913182' post='5995298'] You're missing the point. It's stupid to ban whole archetypes--even if they are broken--just to allow one card. [/quote] Depends on the card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 No, hitting the insane decktypes is the right way to do it. The problem right now is that if you get your backrows destroyed, you get OTK'd. They're good cards for the game, and we never asked for Heavy to get banned at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizarus Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Stan Alda' timestamp='1343912368' post='5995287'] So basically ban virtually every meta archetype to balance out one card? Sure, that's a [i]great[/i] idea. And while we're at it, why don't we ban Monster-oriented decks to balance Raigeki? In other words: No. [/quote] To be fair, those decks are bannable [i]anyway, [/i]but your point still stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Majishan Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Chris' timestamp='1343915932' post='5995307'] No, hitting the insane decktypes is the right way to do it. The problem right now is that if you get your backrows destroyed, you get OTK'd. They're good cards for the game, and we never asked for Heavy to get banned at all. [/quote] When we had MST at 1 and Heavy at 1, a lot people on this site were saying "MST @ 3, Heavy Banned" other were siding with the opinion that Heavy is needed to punish over extension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Le Magician' timestamp='1343921341' post='5995333'] When we had MST at 1 and Heavy at 1, a lot people on this site were saying "MST @ 3, Heavy Banned" other were siding with the opinion that Heavy is needed to punish over extension. [/quote] Anyone that's ever said "Heavy banned" is retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Heavy stays, MST at a lower number (or just as is, I don't really care), Hornet banned, Rabbit limited, (between other changes, but these are from the top of my head, the ones more related to S/T hate) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synchronized Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Mystical Space Typhoon is a good, balanced card that is fine @3. The problem is the Decks that utilize it to clear the path for an OTK (i.e., Hieratics, etc.). I do like Night Beam and I've seen it being tech'd in some places, but other than that, I think we're pretty much good as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newhat Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Chris' timestamp='1343555515' post='5995336'] Anyone that's ever said "Heavy banned" is retarded. [/quote] Why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='newhat' timestamp='1343930335' post='5995432'] Why [/quote] Summon a monster, set 5, is the worst type of format and just removes the skill from the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newhat Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I would like to compare Heavy Storm and Royal Decree. Heavy Storm destroys everything and isn't Chainable. It can be negated by Starlight Road. Royal Decree destroys nothing--it modulates the game. It can be chained to a Trap to negate it, except a Counter Trap. It has no effect on Equip Spells or Quick-Play Spell Cards. It can be removed via MST. So. Can Royal Decree be used as a substitute for Heavy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='newhat' timestamp='1343935230' post='5995501'] I would like to compare Heavy Storm and Royal Decree. Heavy Storm destroys everything and isn't Chainable. It can be negated by Starlight Road. Royal Decree destroys nothing--it modulates the game. It can be chained to a Trap to negate it, except a Counter Trap. It has no effect on Equip Spells or Quick-Play Spell Cards. It can be removed via MST. So. Can Royal Decree be used as a substitute for Heavy? [/quote] It's probably easier to compare Trap Stun to Heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alice Moonflowyr Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Naturally, I'm completely ignored. With Heavy staying @1, and MST @2, we dont have set five gg format, nor do we have the problem right now, which is four heavy storms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 No Heavy promotes stall and set 5 pass formats, both of which are bad things to promote. MST, on the other hand, is a perfectly balanced 1-for-1. It's not harmful to the game at all and doesn't deserve a hit. IDK why people hate S/T destruction so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1343937215' post='5995529'] IDK why people hate S/T destruction so much. [/quote] They lose because they get Heavy'd once because they overextended their backrow and get buttmad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizarus Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Iwasawa' timestamp='1343937107' post='5995526'] Naturally, I'm completely ignored. With Heavy staying @1, and MST @2, we dont have set five gg format, nor do we have the problem right now, which is four heavy storms. [/quote] People will just replace the MST with Night Beams. S/T destruction will always be a part of the game at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSektor Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1343937215' post='5995529'] No Heavy promotes stall and set 5 pass formats, both of which are bad things to promote. MST, on the other hand, is a perfectly balanced 1-for-1. It's not harmful to the game at all and doesn't deserve a hit. IDK why people hate S/T destruction so much. [/quote] "Hey, I can't wait to play this Continuous Spell/Trap car-" *Gets brutally raped by Storms, Typhoons[s] and Hornets*[/s] MST @1, Heavy @1. Crisis averted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='HSektor' timestamp='1343948474' post='5995696'] "Hey, I can't wait to play this Continuous Spell/Trap car-" *Gets brutally raped by Storms, Typhoons[s] and Hornets*[/s] MST @1, Heavy @1. Crisis averted. [/quote] Hitting Spell Trap destruction promotes stall, which is bad for the game. Continuous S/T aren't even that good, unless they're like Chain, CotH, or Horn of the Phantom Beast, all of which can still see use. So, what was your point again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1343948570' post='5995697'] Hitting Spell Trap destruction promotes stall, which is bad for the game. Continuous S/T aren't even that good, unless they're like Chain, CotH, or Horn of the Phantom Beast, all of which can still see use. So, what was your point again? [/quote] Note how CotH for example is only @3 because we have 3 MSTs. This is a good thing. It shows how much 3 MST keep stronger backrow cards in check. They're a good thing for the game. If you want to think of it this way: You play 3 MST, where you could play 3 backrow, to trade with their backrow. Seems fair to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.