Jump to content

Gorz the Emissary of Darkness


Recommended Posts

Why shouldn't we ban it?  It's an unhealthy mind game that rewards the user way too much for losing.  We already have fader, swift scarecrow, and trag to deal with OTKs anyways.

 

Stopping OTK's is merely 1 of Gorz's healthy properties, and is the least important. Gorz is like Heavy in that it makes players think more before doing things. Banning Gorz would just dumb the game down. And who said anything about losing? Gorz doesn't "reward you for losing", it allows you to punish your opponent's reckless choices, like attacking with their highest monster on an empty field without having any follow-up to the Gorz if their opponent has it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stopping OTK's is merely 1 of Gorz's healthy properties, and is the least important. Gorz is like Heavy in that it makes players think more before doing things. Banning Gorz would just dumb the game down. And who said anything about losing? Gorz doesn't "reward you for losing", it allows you to punish your opponent's reckless choices, like attacking with their highest monster on an empty field without having any follow-up to the Gorz if their opponent has it.

I once lost because someone Gorz'd my Ryko.

You call that "stopping an OTK"?

It rewards players in a losing position just as much as it stops otks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name="Superdoopertrooper" post="6184344" timestamp="1366430790"]Stopping OTK's is merely 1 of Gorz's healthy properties, and is the least important. Gorz is like Heavy in that it makes players think more before doing things. Banning Gorz would just dumb the game down. And who said anything about losing? Gorz doesn't "reward you for losing", it allows you to punish your opponent's reckless choices, like attacking with their highest monster on an empty field without having any follow-up to the Gorz if their opponent has it.[/quote] If simply attacking directly is a reckless choice, then I don't want to play Yugiohcardmaker anymore. If you don't think that empty field usually characterize a losing situation, then you should probably tweak your definition a bit. Furthermore, punishing players brutally for winning and rewarding them graciously for losing off of a single card is inherently bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If simply attacking directly is a reckless choice, then I don't want to play Yugiohcardmaker anymore. If you don't think that empty field usually characterize a losing situation, then you should probably tweak your definition a bit. Furthermore, punishing players brutally for winning and rewarding them graciously for losing off of a single card is inherently bad.

 

Attacking directly on an empty field with your highest monster knowing that doing so will severely harm you if they have Gorz IS a reckless choice, and is completely your own fault. It's not rocket science; if you don't think you should take the risk of doing so, then don't. Heaven forbid that players have to actually make choices right? Why should you ALWAYS be able to attack your opponent if they have an empty field without having to think?

 

Gorz doesn't punish players for winning and reward losing either. You can be up in card advantage and be winning and drop Gorz on a losing opponent as well. It has nothing to do with winning or losing, it has to do with punishing the player who makes a risky and ill backed-up decision. And if you're wining and you're opponent is losing, you should be able to deal with their Gorz because you'll have more resources and a better position anyway, so I have no idea why you're spitting chips over that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...