Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [center][img]http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111205235616/yugioh/images/thumb/2/20/GishkiAquamirror-HA05-EN-SR-1E.jpg/300px-GishkiAquamirror-HA05-EN-SR-1E.jpg[/img][/center] [center]I'm sure this is gonna generate a LOT of butthurt, but... Should definitely be banned.[/center] [center]Gishki are a horrible decktype for the game that promote OTKs and Pseudo-FTKs. It's not like this is their only Ritual Spell, even if it is their only good one. If they need this loop-supporting mirror, they should die, simple as.[/center] [center]Of course, this is in ideal world. Probably won't get hit this format, at least.[/center] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Just ban all the Gishki monsters because then it's less broken! Like how banning the Zars makes Rabbit less broken, and banning Inzektor Dragonfly makes Hornet less broken! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Chris' timestamp='1343945589' post='5995651'] Just ban all the Gishki monsters because then it's less broken! Like how banning the Zars makes Rabbit less broken, and banning Inzektor Dragonfly makes Hornet less broken! [/quote] God, this and what Yuzuru said in the OP all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeppeli Gyro Supreme Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Even putting it at 1 does nothing to it, since it's extremely searchable, and, of course, brings itself back from the grave. If it were ever going to be touched, it would have to be banned, but then Gishkis would have to rely on much crappier methods of going off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This Account is Unplayable Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 Gishkis deserve to die. They can have their crappier methods of not going off for all I care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byak Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 limit gustkraken pls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='βyakk' timestamp='1343946117' post='5995664'] limit gustkraken pls [/quote] And the reasoning behind this is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newhat Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 This is key to the Hieratic Gishki OTK. :< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byak Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 With only one Gustkraken it becomes slightly harder to loop it back to your hand. Arguably you can hieratic combo and detach it for M7 but w/e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildflame Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 The half-assed "If X archetype doesn't work without Y card, then it shouldn't exist" argument might work sometimes, but if you use it against a card that IS SUPOSSED to be the only/main way of playing the archetype, then you are doing it wrong. That being said, this is probably the most awsome Spell Card ever *starts doing ritualist chants to the Aquamirror* Seriously, if Gishkis EVER become a threat, the card to go should be Gustkrake, not this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='βyakk' timestamp='1343946513' post='5995669'] With only one Gustkraken it becomes slightly harder to loop it back to your hand. Arguably you can hieratic combo and detach it for M7 but w/e [/quote] ... Yet it can still loop, which still makes it effectively a Pseudo-F/OTK that's just a bit harder to pull off and nothing was solved except consistency. And that everything is still stupid searchable. [quote name='Wildflame' timestamp='1343946681' post='5995672'] The half-assed "If X archetype doesn't work without Y card, then it shouldn't exist" argument might work sometimes, but if you use it against a card that IS SUPOSSED to be the only/main way of playing the archetype, then you are doing it wrong. That being said, this is probably the most awsome Spell Card ever *starts doing ritualist chants to the Aquamirror* Seriously, if Gishkis EVER become a threat, the card to go should be Gustkrake, not this. [/quote] Uh, no, it applies here just like it applies to Rekindling. Get your head out of your ass. Gustkrake's not even a problem without this. None of the Gishki are. This is the broken card. And Gishkis do have some presence, so, again, head out of ass. 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='Wildflame' timestamp='1343946681' post='5995672'] The half-assed "If X archetype doesn't work without Y card, then it shouldn't exist" argument might work sometimes, but if you use it against a card that IS SUPOSSED to be the only/main way of playing the archetype, then you are doing it wrong. [/quote] So, first you make an oxymoronic statement, then prove your massive bias. Cool story, sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Wildflame' timestamp='1343946681' post='5995672'] "If X archetype doesn't work without Y card, then it shouldn't exist" argument [/quote] [quote]if you use it against a card that IS SUPOSSED to be the only/main way of playing the archetype, then you are doing it wrong[/quote] ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byak Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1343946823' post='5995673'] ... Yet it can still loop, which still makes it effectively a Pseudo-F/OTK that's just a bit harder to pull off and nothing was solved except consistency. [/quote] If M7 didn't exist you can't actually loop without going minus everything. I'd rather have a ritual based archetype existing in the game rather than M7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='βyakk' timestamp='1343947072' post='5995678'] If M7 didn't exist you can't actually loop. I'd rather have a ritual based archetype existing in the game rather than M7. [/quote] But it's a ritual based deck that does nothing but Loop -> OTK. I mean, what other deck can summon a +0 minimum 3200 beater so easily, and then proceed to loop copies then OTK? I know that's not even the optimal variant, but that's still pretty damn bad card design. If they wanna make a Ritual Archetype, they can do better than this. And not defending Ptolemys at all, just saying Gishki are just as much at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byak Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 The only major problem with Gishkis is summoning Gustkraken multiple times in one turn since you can literally wipe their whole hand in one turn with the new Undine -> Searhoseman + Moulin Glace s***. I don't care much for Zealgigas.dek, considering you need a lot of deck dedication to make it work consistently, resulting in low defense potential and the deck autoloses to Thunder King anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Yuzuru Otonashi' timestamp='1343947194' post='5995680'] But it's a ritual based deck that does nothing but Loop -> OTK. [/quote] Cant we fix that without hitting mirror? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted August 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='βyakk' timestamp='1343947343' post='5995684'] The only major problem with Gishkis is summoning Gustkraken multiple times in one turn. I don't care much for Zealgigas.dek, considering you need a lot of deck dedication to make it work consistently, resulting in low defense potential and the deck autoloses to Thunder King anyway. [/quote] The major problem is that they've never been anything except a Loop/OTK deck. At least, from a design standpoint, the problem is most definitely Mirror. It enables the deck far too much. [quote name='mido9' timestamp='1343947369' post='5995685'] Cant we fix that without hitting mirror? [/quote] By hitting its bosses instead, leaving it with a chance to loop/OTK nonetheless because all of the cards used are searchable? It's like Rekindling for Gishki. If they need it that badly, they don't have a right to breathe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I blame the other decks being super herpderp for gishki variants that arent OTK/Loops being bad,rather than gishki sucking outside of OTK/Loops. And really,limit/ban M7 and gustaph/zeal and the deck becomes a slow rolling control deck that cant loop/OTK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildflame Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 I really don't see anything wrong with my statement. Lavals can work without Rekindling (a card that was initially made for Flamvells), and HEROs can do stuff without Stratos (maybe a little slower). But hitting the only decent way that a RITUAL based archetype has to RITUAL summon is like saying "Hey, Gem-Knights can't work without Gem Fusion, so that makes them a s*** of a deck, let's just ban the only way they have to exist as an archetype". Plain stupid in my oppinion. I don't know, you people won't probably see my point, I don't care anymore. I'm just glad that this won't get hit. Like, never. 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='Wildflame' timestamp='1343947992' post='5995691'] I really don't see anything wrong with my statement. Lavals can work without Rekindling [/quote] I stopped reading here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 [quote name='Wildflame' timestamp='1343947992' post='5995691'] I really don't see anything wrong with my statement. Lavals can work without Rekindling (a card that was initially made for Flamvells), and HEROs can do stuff without Stratos (maybe a little slower). But hitting the only decent way that a RITUAL based archetype has to RITUAL summon is like saying "Hey, Gem-Knights can't work without Gem Fusion, so that makes them a s*** of a deck, let's just ban the only way they have to exist as an archetype". Plain stupid in my oppinion. I don't know, you people won't probably see my point, I don't care anymore. I'm just glad that this won't get hit. Like, never. [/quote] Lavals can't work without Rekindling really considering half the archetype is dump stuff into your graveyard then OTK. awks. Heroes don't rely on Stratos, i.e. they're allowed to exist. The point is Gishkis can exist still because they still have two other main Ritual Spells. Its just that Aquamirror is the abusable one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 lol lavals without rekindling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byak Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 If anything, Lavals without Rekindling would simply be using Cannon/Burning Lake Chick Their synchros are pretty sturdy too I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementuo Posted August 2, 2012 Report Share Posted August 2, 2012 It's poorly designed. It would've been better had it returned both cards to the deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.