Superdoopertrooper Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 You know the drill, to 1. Any consistent OTKs that can use it are already a problem without it (as evidenced by the current format and all others since its ban). Importantly, it provides a way to temporarily clear the backrow without involving destruction, which is certainly a positive and unique thing as it allows things like Starlight Road and other destruction negators to be played around, and it does so at a -1. It gives a slight and desirable boost to continuous cards as it allows them to be potentially bounced for re-use, which can inspire some strategic and interesting combos. Any continuous card that could be deemed problematic (i.e. Tenki) is already a problem in itself and is no fault of Trunade's. Let's hear the YCM consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 "It's already a problem so Trunade's not a fault" Perfect way to explain how this card makes problem cards even bigger problems. Bravo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 "It's already a problem so Trunade's not a fault" Perfect way to explain how this card makes problem cards even bigger problems. Bravo. As for the OTK argument, I really don't see the logic behind it. They say "it's an OTK enabler" which to me is just plain BS, because if I set 1 backrow (which is a sensible thing to do because of Heavy), then all of a sudden MST and Night Beam become magical OTK enablers too. Do we ban them? Hell no, we hit the damn OTK's themselves, because nothing "enables" them except themselves. Furthermore, what if you don't open any backrow at all? Is that your fault for not drawing any traps to counter this OTK which is apparently enabled by backrow removal? No. Did you therefore "enable" that otk? No. So therefore, we can conclude that Trunade in no way makes this worse at all, it's purely the OTK combo which is at fault. Similarly, with the continuous S/T example, if Tenki was rightfully limited, then Trunade wouldn't be problematic with it in the slightest. It would a] be very rare to have the two together and b] even if you did, you would go -1 with Trunade to bounce Tenki which then breaks even. Nothing to be uptight about at all. You could only theoretically + with Trunade if you bounced multiple S/T cards which both directly generate card advantage (like Tenki does), which would be rare and easily within reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 Well, let's look at some evidence: 1. It restricts card design on continuous cards because it reuses them in a potent and widespread manner. 2. We have a meta-level archetype that revolves around using powerful continuous cards for advantage. 3. We already have MST at 3, DT at 3, night beam at 3, and heavy at 1. There's no need for this to return, as we already have enough backrow removal as-is. 4. This has fewer counters than heavy. 5. The mentality this card encourages is "Win nao OTK OTK go go go!". It promotes players to overextend and go all-out without thinking. In short, it's really bad design. You could argue that those OTKs themselves are the problem, but that doesn't change the design on this card in any way. So yeah, it really can stay at 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mido9 Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 What about bouncing multiple continous cards in one go ie add tensen+tensen+tenken? It's really the only thing that bothers me, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 What about bouncing multiple continous cards in one go ie add tensen+tensen+tenken? It's really the only thing that bothers me, I guess. That's still not really a big deal. Those 3 cards together are already boosting everything by 900, so playing Trunade there is merely making you go -1 in order to allow those cards to pump a monster by an extra 700 again for a turn (which you have to wait a turn to use again) and if you control 3 of those, then I'll be happy you haven't already used them to destroy my cards with Bear and Gorilla, or replaced them with Chicken. To put it simply: Trunade is independent of Fire Fist. If Fire Fist are broken (which they are now), it's because they are broken themselves (not because of Trunade), and if they are balanced, they'll be balanced (equally, regardless if Trunade is legal or not). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 I'm not usually too into Superdoopertrooper's controversial ideas, but this thread does have some interesting points. Tbh, I feel like there's too much Spell/Trap hate out there nowadays, but I also see that people really don't stop setting even 3+ cards at times. That's most likely because so much of that abundant S/T hate is in the form of one-for-one removal, so it's mostly blind MST-like. There is also that it does kinda sound like wouldn't matter all that much to OTKs if they are already absurdly easy anyways. An example, try a hand with just Tour Guide and Instant Fusion. Tour Guide > target > Xyz M-X-Saber > search for Extra Sword > Instant into Carbonala Warrior > Xyz into 3200 ATK Blade Armor > 8000 potential damage. Though Fire Fists still make this problematic. Not because of broken targets necessarily, but there are "good" targets that can make them stand on their own against many good decks this format. Having one of them bounced for re-use is not bad, but when both players are around even, and you bounce a bunch of them, it's like refreshing their plays at Morphing Jar-level out of nowhere, while your opponent will just put up with a temporary clear field of face-downs. Which kinda tilts the balance of the game too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 Call of the Haunted/Fiendish Chain shenanigans as well. There only needs to be one of this kind of card between Storm and Trunade, and the amount of recycleable abuse makes it clear that it needs to be Storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 Call of the Haunted/Fiendish Chain shenanigans as well. There only needs to be one of this kind of card between Storm and Trunade, and the amount of recycleable abuse makes it clear that it needs to be Storm. and the way the game goes, it looks like that tendency will just keep getting more extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGATHODAIMON BANGTAIL COW Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 If you play this card, you're either: 1: Going for game by stopping your opponent from using their TTs, Mirrors, Solemns, and Holes against you. 2: Abusing your cards for extra use, such as lolSwords, CotH, and Dragon Ravine. 3: Being dumb and knocking the backrow back into the hand only to be re-Set. When playing Heavy, you're either: 1: Going for game by stopping your opponent from using their TTs, Mirrors, Solemns, and Holes against you. 2: Generating advantage by wiping out several potential threats at once. 3: Just really paranoid and don't have a MST to kill that one card. With Trunade around, you get to wipe the backrow without actually losing your cards. Granted, your opponent does not lose their cards either, but your opponent doesn't always have a turn after the turn that you play this. Heavy, on the other hand, makes you pay for the cards you have Set by never getting them back in the duel. As your opponent permanently loses these cards too, Heavy promotes the whole "don't over-Set" ideology better since if your OTK attempt does fail, Trunade means they get their cards back. If I remember right, the only reason Heavy is still around is to prevent over-Setting, proven by the disaster that was wrought upon the game by its temporary ban. As previously stated, Trunade also has the ability to re-use cards such as Fire Formations, Call of the Haunted, and other 1/turn effects. Not all of them are so powerful that they should only have one use (per turn in some cases), but it can lead to crazy OTK moves, where Heavy is used sorely for letting OTKs roll, as well as punishing your opponent for Setting 11.875 cards in their backrow. As strategic as it may make you feel for using this to abuse lolSwords to stay safe from your opponent for up to 5 turns rather than 3, abuse is still abuse, negative connotations and everything. As for blaming it on Tenki, you're basically saying that you would rather have this card be back in the game than to have Continuous Cards that have 1-use effects exist. Yes, Tenki's RotA effect is a problem on its own, but the whole "Use a card twice" sounds less well-designed than "Use two of the same card once each." Plus, using Trunade in this way basically turns it into another copy of the card you are abusing (as opposed to a Dragon Ravine and a Tenki), combined with a free "Get rid of your opponent's backrow" that may or may not be problematic, depending the potency of what you can do at the moment. Trunade doesn't do anything good, except for bad things. So does Heavy, aside from the "don't over-Set" mindset. It is worthless outside of these ugly sides of the game, and all of the abuse and temporary removal amount to much more than bypassing Starlight Road. Part of this is solidified with the whole "wariness towards the banlist" feeling that you seem impervious to, but the only real reasons to bring this back that I can see are "mass S/T hait and card reuse." Ideally, there needs to be a card that stops these "Set 11.875 gg" moves that isn't absolutely stupid or absolutely stupid. Tl;dr/ABC is will never be an effective speaker nor does he ever know what he's talking about/completely unnecessary paragraph of insults: Get your ass back to Pojo where you are actually respected for suggesting that Konami can unban half of its Forbidden Cards because the game is that messed up (in a mock-xenophobic sense, and Pojo because the user that made this said he's from Pojo and he said they agree with him or something). We here at YCM support theories of what can be done to YCM in a rather contrasting manner than what you're suggesting. I may be in error, but I believe the correct proclamation is, "Put up or shut up." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildflame Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 I kind of miss this card a bit..., in a couple of OTK decks I used to have. Yep, please don't come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synchronized Posted April 21, 2013 Report Share Posted April 21, 2013 Id be all for it if Fire Formations weren't a thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suibon Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 This card's main problem has always been with OTKs and the like, that I agree on. It does not follow that once you get rid of the OTKs, Giant Trunade comes out of it smelling like a rose -- you still have aggro plays coming out of the wazoo, plays that will take advantage of a bare backrow, each and every time. And I haven't even mentioned Fire Fist plays yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 This card's main problem has always been with OTKs and the like, that I agree on. It does not follow that once you get of the OTKs, Giant Trunade comes out of it smelling like a rose -- you still have aggro plays coming out of the wazoo, plays that will take advantage of a bare backrow, each and every time. And I haven't even mentioned Fire Fist plays yet. Those said aggro plays could happen just as easily if your opponent has no backrow or you MST their 1 backrow card or have 2 MST's to their 2 backrow cards. And MST does that without going -1 as well. You don't want the game to be "draw more than 1 backrow or get rofl stomped by MST + swarm" do you? Aggro plays and OTK's will never be a legitimate argument for keeping Trunade banned. Any consistent and powerful aggro play already needs looking into and easy OTK's speak for themselves. There's no need to mention Fire Fist plays either, because with Tenki at 1 as it should be, Trunade would have only mediocre synergy with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Those said aggro plays could happen just as easily if your opponent has no backrow or you MST their 1 backrow card or have 2 MST's to their 2 backrow cards. And MST does that without going -1 as well. You don't want the game to be "draw more than 1 backrow or get rofl stomped by MST + swarm" do you? Aggro plays and OTK's will never be a legitimate argument for keeping Trunade banned. Any consistent and powerful aggro play already needs looking into and easy OTK's speak for themselves. There's no need to mention Fire Fist plays either, because with Tenki at 1 as it should be, Trunade would have only mediocre synergy with them. It also happens just as easily with a Trunade, and MST doesn't hit 2 backrows unless you have 2 of them, where Trunade stops them just by itself (because last I checked Warning and Bottomless were worthless in the hand unless you had fascinating fiends). Also, Tenki's not at 1. It probably won't go to 1. Until it goes to 1 there is no argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 It also happens just as easily with a Trunade, and MST doesn't hit 2 backrows unless you have 2 of them, where Trunade stops them just by itself (because last I checked Warning and Bottomless were worthless in the hand unless you had fascinating fiends). Also, Tenki's not at 1. It probably won't go to 1. Until it goes to 1 there is no argument. Of course, but it also does it at a -1, unlike what the MST's do. And last time I checked, BTH and Warning were much more useless in the grave than in the hand. After a Trunade, they can just set them again next turn to block any of your further summons. I'd also actually argue that even with 3 Tenki, Fire Fist isn't a good justification. Trunade is only really good if they control 2 or more Tenki's, which isn't really that common because only 1 can be activated per turn and they usually send them straight away to the grave to activate the Fire Fist effects. Bouncing a single Tenki with Trunade is just a +0, there's literally nothing wrong with that. Bouncing 2 is a +1, which the deck already does incredibly easily and frequently anyway. Simply activating Tenki, searching Bear, sending Tenki to pop a monster, attacking and getting another Tenki with Bear's effect is a +2, so using a Trunade on 2 Tenki's is actually less effective in terms of generating advantage than what their most common play is. The deck itself is naturally a constant stream of free +1's, so Trunade occasionally being able to make an extra +1 wouldn't make much of a difference to the deck at all. The deck is obviously broken, so it should be hit, and when it is, Trunade would literally be entirely fine in it. Even now, the deck is so powerful that Trunade would hardly make a difference, so even using the current deck as an excuse isn't valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Why are you focusing on the tenkis and not their +700 ATK or their Forbidden Lance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Why are you focusing on the tenkis and not their +700 ATK or their Forbidden Lance? Because those don't directly generate +'s. Going -1 to pump a monster by 700 ATK is not the epitome of good ygo's and isn't anywhere near discussion worthy in terms of Truande's ability to safely return. The deck can also easily make Beastlord Volcan practically whenever they like at a +1 or more (Spirit into Chicken, +1 search with Chicken for another Spirit, send face-up used Formation card to search Tenki, activate Tenki for another +1, Synchro for Volcan, bounce Tenki and an opponents card). So they already have the ability to easily bounce their cards every turn anyway, while also bouncing monster threats that Trunade can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Because those don't directly generate +'s. Going -1 to pump a monster by 700 ATK is not the epitome of good ygo's and isn't anywhere near discussion worthy in terms of Truande's ability to safely return. The deck can also easily make Beastlord Volcan practically whenever they like at a +1 or more (Spirit into Chicken, +1 search with Chicken for another Spirit, send face-up used Formation card to search Tenki, activate Tenki for another +1, Synchro for Volcan, bounce Tenki and an opponents card). So they already have the ability to easily bounce their cards every turn anyway, while also bouncing monster threats that Trunade can't. Why are +'s the only thing that matter? Why isn't destruction immunity a benefit? Why isn't a one turn battle advantage a benefit? Foolish Burial is a -1, is that bad now? Super Poly in the end is a -1, is that bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sora1499 Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 It really pains me that people still think that +s are the only measure of a card's balance. FuFu is a -1 at first. Dustshoot and forceful sentry are both +0s. Etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 It really pains me that people still think that +s are the only measure of a card's balance. FuFu is a -1 at first. Dustshoot and forceful sentry are both +0s. Etc. It's not the only measure of course, but it's still a very damn important one nonetheless. The naysayers are also using the same argument as well, saying that Trunade is apparently broken because it can bounce continuous cards which can then go onto to make +'s, like Tenki. Also, FuFu is NOT a -1, like, at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 It bounces continuous cards and, more importantly, it makes OTKing everything easier. If you played in the format before it was banned, you'd know this. And please don't tell me that you're about to argue for Future Fusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 It bounces continuous cards So? and, more importantly, it makes OTKing everything easier. Ah, the classic OTK argument again. You know they've got nothing when they keep bringing that up all the time. And please don't tell me that you're about to argue for Future Fusion. You have terrible deduction skills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted April 22, 2013 Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 Ah, the classic OTK argument again. You know they've got nothing when they keep bringing that up all the time.You're the one who doesn't have an argument if you're just going to shrug off OTK-enabling as something that's legitimately okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdoopertrooper Posted April 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2013 You're the one who doesn't have an argument if you're just going to shrug off OTK-enabling as something that's legitimately okay. Do you have marbles for eyes or something? I explained why that view is stupid on page 1, and even briefly in the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.