Bringerofcake Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 ^ How do we do this, YCM? Which ones do we limit, ban, or leave alone? It's obvious that the game is going to suck more for a while, so until then we can pretend to be Konami and see what we can do in a minimalist fashion. My list thus far: Banned: Tidal, Elemental Dragon of Cascades Banning this effectively bans Stream, and the two combined would (and do, I've seen) make merlanteans go completely nuts. So, like I said, this should be done in as few cards as possible. Have at it. inb4banallofthemanyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cute Rotten Yoshika Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 you literally have to hit all four (at a minimum) or else decks will just shift to be more focused on the ones that arent hit. plus, the differences between them are minor considering they have 3 nearly identical effects and one thats actually different for each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 Basically, what Claire said. Big Eye might also warrant a hit to 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L0SS Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 Basically, what Claire said. Big Eye might also warrant a hit to 1. Big-Eye, please- http://youtu.be/E32JDwrS374 Hateful, hateful little card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Banning Bie Eye when Big Eye requires 2 Level 7 monsters to be summoned in the first place strikes me as more than a little dumb -- examine all preferred Exceed Materials and then the process of Exceed Summoning using said materials before hitting on a random Rank 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Banning Bie Eye when Big Eye requires 2 Level 7 monsters to be summoned in the first place strikes me as more than a little dumb -- examine all preferred Exceed Materials and then the process of Exceed Summoning using said materials before hitting on a random Rank 7. Tell me more about how a free steal is a good card for the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Tell me more about how a free steal is a good card for the game. But Big Eye isn't a free steal -- this isn't Change of Heart we're talking about here. Big Eye isn't a Normal Spell, it's an Exceed Monster, and Exceed Monsters need Exceed Materials to be Summoned. The end is important, but so are the means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 [quote name="Suibon" post="6183803" timestamp="1366333145"][center]But Big Eye isn't a free steal -- this isn't Change of Heart we're talking about here. Big Eye isn't a Normal Spell, it's an Exceed Monster, and Exceed Monsters need Exceed Materials to be Summoned. The end is important, but so are the means.[/center][/quote] It's still not healthy to have at anything more than one, because a deck shouldn't be able to steal that many damn monsters. However, if you take big eye out of the picture, you find decks making actually balanced rank 7s such as Dragosack, which is fairly ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 But Big Eye isn't a free steal -- this isn't Change of Heart we're talking about here. Big Eye isn't a Normal Spell, it's an Exceed Monster, and Exceed Monsters need Exceed Materials to be Summoned. The end is important, but so are the means. It's also permanent, and is relatively free. It's an awful card to have around because it limits the design of level 7 monsters, making it so that you can't have an easy way to summon them or it's broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 It's an awful card to have around because it limits the design of level 7 monsters, making it so that you can't have an easy way to summon them or it's broken. Why should we have easily-summoned Level 7 monsters to begin with?It's still not healthy to have at anything more than one, because a deck shouldn't be able to steal that many damn monsters. However, if you take big eye out of the picture, you find decks making actually balanced rank 7s such as Dragosack, which is fairly ok. If they paid accordingly for such stealing, why shouldn't they be able to steal as they wish? If there were no easy means to drop a single Big Eye, let alone all three of them as needed, why ban Big Eye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cute Rotten Yoshika Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Why should we have easily-summoned Level 7 monsters to begin with? If they paid accordingly for such stealing, why shouldn't they be able to steal as they wish? If there were no easy means to drop a single Big Eye, let alone all three of them as needed, why ban Big Eye? because many of them are fair and balanced in their own right. should we ban fog king because of big eye? or is it prudent to recognize that big eye is problematic by itself? the answers are no and yes respectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Why should we have easily-summoned Level 7 monsters to begin with? Why shouldn't there be? What's the point of Xyz if you can summon them without jumping through hoops? I mean, is Gagaga Magician bad for the game? Is Fusilier Dragon bad for the game? Are Puppet King, Chaos Hunter, Cyber Dinosaur bad for the game? How about Hell Centipede? Fog King? King of the Beasts? How about Illusory Snatcher, who gives you the fuel off the bat? How are any of these anything bad for the game? Now tell me how Big Eye isn't bad for the game, especially when this format proves it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dokktorawesome Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Perhaps limit or semi-limit the baby dragons? Also limit Seven-Star Sword maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Perhaps limit or semi-limit the baby dragons? Also limit Seven-Star Sword maybe That wouldn't work as well as hitting each individual big dragon. The deck was a force to be reckon with even before the chibis showed up, and it will be without them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Why shouldn't there be? What's the point of Xyz if you can summon them without jumping through hoops? Because there might be something to those hoops that we need to retain if we are not to stumble into another Tour Guide-inspired mess. Unless this forum thinks TGU is good design? I mean, is Gagaga Magician bad for the game? Is Fusilier Dragon bad for the game? Are Puppet King, Chaos Hunter, Cyber Dinosaur bad for the game? How about Hell Centipede? Fog King? King of the Beasts? How about Illusory Snatcher, who gives you the fuel off the bat? Illusory Snatcher and Fusilier Dragon are Level 7? But in any case -- none except Snatcher are instant Exceed Material, which is what Elemental Dragons w/ their corresponding chibis are, in spades -- and Illusory Snatcher gets its effect when a Tribute Summon occurs, which is certainly a mitigating factor towards potential abuse. How are any of these anything bad for the game? Now tell me how Big Eye isn't bad for the game, especially when this format proves it is? I'm not necessarily stating Big Eye to be faultless -- I'm saying that given the costs of bringing Big Eye out, it will be worthwhile to examine the process as well as the end before coming to any conclusion.because many of them are fair and balanced in their own right. should we ban fog king because of big eye? or is it prudent to recognize that big eye is problematic by itself? the answers are no and yes respectively. I refer you to my reply to Gangrel, but I shall give you guys something to work on -- how is Tour Guide problematic design, and something like Feedback Warrior isn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Because there might be something to those hoops that we need to retain if we are not to stumble into another Tour Guide-inspired mess. Unless this forum thinks TGU is good design?Are you stupid or what? This comparison alone makes all of your arguments moot. There's no comparison to make here, and it's basically just an attack on our credibility. And a horrible one at that.We're saying that you shouldn't have to, say, put the same effort you'd put into summonign something like Quasar (also awful design) into making a Rank 7.Illusory Snatcher and Fusilier Dragon are Level 7? But in any case -- none except Snatcher are instant Exceed Material, which is what Elemental Dragons w/ their corresponding chibis are, in spades -- and Illusory Snatcher gets its effect when a Tribute Summon occurs, which is certainly a mitigating factor towards potential abuse.Frogs would beg to differ.And even so, being "instant" doesn't matter. Machina Fortress does it too, and it's not the worst card for the game, at least less so than Big Eye.I'm not necessarily stating Big Eye to be faultless -- I'm saying that given the costs of bringing Big Eye out, it will be worthwhile to examine the process as well as the end before coming to any conclusion.Except it's an obvious conclusion that a free-ish permanent steal is badly designed. That's not hard to debate. It's been so since its creation, it's just in the limelight now. I refer you to my reply to Gangrel, but I shall give you guys something to work on -- how is Tour Guide problematic design, and something like Feedback Warrior isn't?Again, a retarded comparison.Our point was that level 7 should be able to be brought out in a realistic, not abusable, manner. We aren't saying Tour Guide is good design, and you're being stupid to try and attack our credibility in this manner.Tour Guide's awful design because it's a costless Rank 3 that's fairly fucking splashable. Feedback Warrior is a useless level edit. They aren't comparable in the least. It's not a hard question, it just shows that you're grasping at straws.How about you tell me how a card that's a walking +2 per use (stealing a card is a -1 to the opp and a +1 to you) in the form of permanently stealing a card, when the next best thing is Drago-Sac (Who is totally balanced on its own) is anything short of banworthy design?Also, tell us how Big Eye isn't a problem when cards like the Mecha Phantom Beasts will always exist, and those are perfectly fine on their own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 [quote name="Suibon" post="6183847" timestamp="1366339503"][center]Because there might be something to those hoops that we need to retain if we are not to stumble into another Tour Guide-inspired mess. Unless this forum thinks TGU is good design?[/center] [center] [/center] [center]Illusory Snatcher and Fusilier Dragon are Level 7? But in any case -- none except Snatcher are instant Exceed Material, which is what Elemental Dragons w/ their corresponding chibis are, in spades -- and Illusory Snatcher gets its effect when a Tribute Summon occurs, which is certainly a mitigating factor towards potential abuse.[/center] [center] [/center] [center]I'm not necessarily stating Big Eye to be faultless -- I'm saying that given the costs of bringing Big Eye out, it will be worthwhile to examine the process as well as the end before coming to any conclusion.[/center] [center]I refer you to my reply to Gangrel, but I shall give you guys something to work on -- how is Tour Guide problematic design, and something like Feedback Warrior isn't?[/center][/quote] I'm sorry, but I can't take your reply seriously due to the fact that you compared Feedback Warrior to TGU. While we're on the subject, why are you suddenly bringing TGU into this discussion? It has absolutely nothing to do with anything said so far. Furthermore, there are plenty of balanced ways to make rank 7s, such as fog king and mecha phantom beasts. Those cards don't need to be hit because they're inherently fine for the game. Big eye, on the other hand, is not. It rewards you way too much for simply dropping it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vla1ne Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Because there might be something to those hoops that we need to retain if we are not to stumble into another Tour Guide-inspired mess. Unless this forum thinks TGU is good design? Illusory Snatcher and Fusilier Dragon are Level 7? But in any case -- none except Snatcher are instant Exceed Material, which is what Elemental Dragons w/ their corresponding chibis are, in spades -- and Illusory Snatcher gets its effect when a Tribute Summon occurs, which is certainly a mitigating factor towards potential abuse. I'm not necessarily stating Big Eye to be faultless -- I'm saying that given the costs of bringing Big Eye out, it will be worthwhile to examine the process as well as the end before coming to any conclusion. I refer you to my reply to Gangrel, but I shall give you guys something to work on -- how is Tour Guide problematic design, and something like Feedback Warrior isn't? Your posts make sense somewhat, but there is 1 flaw to it, the way this game is made, you can easily summon 1-3 big eyes. In decks like mermails and Spellbooks. limiting big eye to 1 would at least make sure that it can't be abused by summoning 2 of them out at the same turn. Even 2 Big Eye on the field would mean at least 2 of your monsters being stolen per turn for possibly 2 turns straight. 2 Big Eye is not as hard as you may think. Heiratics can put 2 on the field in 1 turn as early as their 2nd turn, and they aren't even tier 1. Elemental Dragons, Mermails, Spellbooks, and even some Synchro decks can put 2 big eye on the field with little to no issue. big eye is a powerful monster, and putting it at 1 is a reasonable way to balance it. but big-eye is not an E-dragon, so it really is kinda off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Your posts make sense somewhat, but there is 1 flaw to it, the way this game is made, you can easily summon 1-3 big eyes Then why not question 'the way this game is made'? Something must give -- either the way we drop the required materials for our Exceed Summons (or Synchro Summons, or Fusion Summons, or Tribute Summons) -- or the monsters we are supposed to bring out, if we are to avoid very unpleasant things like dropping Dragossacks and Big Eyes and Gaia Dragons and Abyssteuses once a turn, or even several times a turn if need be, courtesy of Lord of the Tachyon Galaxy. 2 Big Eye is not as hard as you may think. Heiratics can put 2 on the field in 1 turn as early as their 2nd turn, and they aren't even tier 1. Elemental Dragons, Mermails, Spellbooks, and even some Synchro decks can put 2 big eye on the field with little to no issue. big eye is a powerful monster, and putting it at 1 is a reasonable way to balance it. but big-eye is not an E-dragon, so it really is kinda off topic. Given that I emphasize the role Exceed Materials play in determining Big Eye's or any other Exceed's place on the list, you will find me straying off topic more often than not, to ensure that an appropriate course of action is taken. As for the shenanigans that different decks pull to bring this out, I think that it'll be worthwhile if we question the way we bring out our Exceeds (and Synchros and whatever else) as these monsters need you to relinquish some of your resources or momentum to bring them out, and where they are brought out without any requisite loss in momentum or resources, there are bound to be problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dokktorawesome Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 That wouldn't work as well as hitting each individual big dragon. The deck was a force to be reckon with even before the chibis showed up, and it will be without them. It will not be as spammy though, also you cannot draw as many cards for Super Rejuventaion users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 [quote name="dokktorawesome" post="6183874" timestamp="1366343683"]It will not be as spammy though, also you cannot draw as many cards for Super Rejuventaion users.[/quote] The problem: it would still be very spammy and unfun to play against. E-Dragons without babies are still dumb. In order to contain E-Dragons without babies, you'd also have to hit 7-Star Sword and possibly gold sarc as well, in which case you're hitting 6 cards for the price of 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dokktorawesome Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 The problem: it would still be very spammy and unfun to play against. E-Dragons without babies are still dumb. In order to contain E-Dragons without babies, you'd also have to hit 7-Star Sword and possibly gold sarc as well, in which case you're hitting 6 cards for the price of 4. Yes... perhaps limit or semi-limit 7-star sword. Maybe Gold sarc to 2? Problem is Gold sarc only became annoying because of the E-dragons. So I'm not too sure about hitting Gold sarc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cute Rotten Yoshika Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 dont hit gold sarc. its simple. hit. every. adult. dragon. big eye too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dokktorawesome Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 Wouldn't that just kill the deck then? Well, if semi-limiting them might work, I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 It's a deckthts totally bad for the game, it has no business living in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.