Giant Trunade

[Agro]

Your points are utter shit.

Not all OTKs need to be hit, you'd know that if you played the game when this was banned. Though I'm beginning to believe you've never actually played Yugioh.

And no, it getting around Starlight road is NOT a positive. It makes this card virtually uncounterable, which is ANOTHER reason that it was banned in the first place.

Seriously, do you even play Yugioh?

[Superdoopertrooper]

Not all OTKs need to be hit, you'd know that if you played the game when this was banned. Though I'm beginning to believe you've never actually played Yugioh.

And no, it getting around Starlight road is NOT a positive. It makes this card virtually uncounterable, which is ANOTHER reason that it was banned in the first place.

 

No, not all OTK's need to be hit. And the ones that don't won't magically become fundamentally any more consistent if Trunade is legal. And I still think it's hilarious how you're openly defending the OTK, yet hating on what you call "the enabler". The logic behind that is just retarded.

 

Right, so SLR should always be a universal answer to all mass removal... without any exceptions, checks or measures...

 

And using the "banned in the first place" argument is stupid. Konami have a terrible reputation with their hits, they banned Heavy Storm for god's sake, which was a complete disaster and everyone with a brain knew what was going to happen and it did.

[Miror B]

No, not all OTK's need to be hit. And the ones that don't won't magically become fundamentally any more consistent if Trunade is legal. And I still think it's hilarious how you're openly defending the OTK, yet hating on what you call "the enabler". The logic behind that is just retarded.

 

Right, so SLR should always be a universal answer to all mass removal... without any exceptions, checks or measures...

 

And using the "banned in the first place" argument is stupid. Konami have a terrible reputation with their hits, they banned Heavy Storm for god's sake, which was a complete disaster and everyone with a brain knew what was going to happen and it did.

The issue isn't consistency it's counterability, because that happens to be an answer.

No SLR doesn't have to be a universal answer. But tell me what stops Trunade that can't stop Heavy. Heavy has more counters than trunade, thus Heavy is the more balanced evil.

[Superdoopertrooper]

The issue isn't consistency it's counterability, because that happens to be an answer.

No SLR doesn't have to be a universal answer. But tell me what stops Trunade that can't stop Heavy. Heavy has more counters than trunade, thus Heavy is the more balanced evil.

 

Heavy isn't evil whatsoever. It's literally the most healthy card for the game. Without it, there would be no skill in choosing what backrow to set and you would always just throw down every trap you had.

 

And seriously, wtf. Yes, Trunade has less counters than Heavy, which makes perfect sense because Heavy destroys the backrow permanently and can directly generate advantage while doing so, whereas Trunade does not. In exchange for having no destructive power, Trunade has increased resilience to being countered.

[Agro]

Wrong, the most healthy card for the game is Thunder King Rai-Oh, which is currently Semi'd for some reason.

 

You REALLY just not have played in the format where Trunade was first banned. Also happens to be the format where Heavy was brought back. Why? Because EVERYONE knew how broken Trunade was.

 

It allows a player to take out all of the opponent's defenses for one turn without being countered at all. There's only one card in any deck that could counter Trunade and it's Solemn Judgment.

 

Yes, many consistent OTKs need to be hit, but that doesn't mean that any assortment of cards that can OTK should be hit. Most cards that find a way to OTK do it because there's no resistance, something you're encouraging by calling for Trunade's limiting.

 

Konami doesn't always make good decisions, no, but they've been virtually flawless when it comes to the cards they've actually banned. Heavy may not have been the best decision, but the only reason it wasn't good was because people started running Trunade in its place. There's a reason that they switched.

 

Lastly, even if my logic were "I support OTKs" and "We should kill the cards that enable them"-which it isn't, I just happen to understand that you can't kill OTKs entirely by hitting all the cards involved and if you do, you're going to end up hitting cards that aren't problems in the first place- It's still better logic than "I support bringing back an OTK enabler" and "I'm going to ignore the fact that decks that are perfectly acceptable and run perfectly acceptable cards can OTK"

[Superdoopertrooper]

Wrong, the most healthy card for the game is Thunder King Rai-Oh, which is currently Semi'd for some reason.

 

Ok, now I know you're bad at this game. Heavy is infinitely more needed in the game than TKRO.

 

You REALLY just not have played in the format where Trunade was first banned. Also happens to be the format where Heavy was brought back. Why? Because EVERYONE knew how broken Trunade was.

 

Why the absolute **** do you keep mentioning "the first format where it was banned"? That time isn't now, is it? And yeah right, the actual broken OTK's had nothing to do with it... sure. If the OTK decks that were using it were actually balanced, they wouldn't be topping.

 

It allows a player to take out all of the opponent's defenses for one turn without being countered at all. There's only one card in any deck that could counter Trunade and it's Solemn Judgment.

 

You do realize that most decks don't actually run Starlight Road right? Therefore, in probably 90% or more of decks, Heavy Storm is just as uncounterable as Giant Truande.

 

Konami doesn't always make good decisions, no, but they've been virtually flawless when it comes to the cards they've actually banned. Heavy may not have been the best decision, but the only reason it wasn't good was because people started running Trunade in its place. There's a reason that they switched.

 

That makes zero sense. That means you're saying that if Trunade didn't exist, then banning Heavy was the right thing to do. Which is absurd because Heavy needs to be legal at all times to stop people from setting as many traps as they draw without it being a risk. You don't even know what you're saying do you?

[Sora1499]

[quote name="Superdoopertrooper" post="6185650" timestamp="1366655691"]Ok, now I [i]know[/i] you're bad at this game. Heavy is [i]infinitely[/i] more needed in the game than TKRO.     Why the absolute **** do you keep mentioning "the first format where it was banned"? That time isn't now, is it? And yeah right, the actual broken OTK's had nothing to do with it... sure. If the OTK decks that were using it were actually balanced, they wouldn't be topping.     You do realize that most decks don't actually run Starlight Road right? Therefore, in probably 90% or more of decks, Heavy Storm is just as uncounterable as Giant Truande.     That makes zero sense. That means you're saying that if Trunade didn't exist, then banning Heavy was the right thing to do. Which is absurd because Heavy needs to be legal at all times to stop people from setting as many traps as they draw without it being a risk. You don't even know what you're saying do you?[/quote] Agro knows exactly what he's talking about. The one who doesn't know what he's saying is you. You've managed to completely misinterpret his argument and make yourself look like a buffoon. Well done.

[Agro]

Why the absolute **** do you keep mentioning "the first format where it was banned"? That time isn't now, is it?

 

Wait, wait, wait. We're talking about bringing it to 1 NOW?

 

NOW? In the format that OTKs the living daylights out of literally everything.

 

I was talking about a more ideal format. The format where this was hit was infinitely more ideal than what we have now.

 

But you? You talk about an ideal format and when people tell you that having it at 1 in an ideal format is still a bad idea, you change it to talking about our current situation. WHICH IS AN EVEN WORSE IDEA THAN BRINGING IT TO 1 IN AN IDEAL FORMAT.

 

And yeah right, the actual broken OTK's had nothing to do with it... sure. If the OTK decks that were using it were actually balanced, they wouldn't be topping.

I wasn't talking about broken OTK's. I was talking about pretty tame combinations of cards that result in enough firepower to take out 8000 LP. Combinations that are infinitely less likely to occur if a virtually uncounterable spell isn't put into play that wipes away any defenses the opponent had so they can do whatever the fuck they want.

 

Heavy Storm isn't a perfect card. The fact that it enables OTKs is a serious problem. If it weren't for the fact that it forces a player to conserve their resources and not set 5, go, it'd be absolutely god awful for the game and would definitely be deserving of a ban. You know, like Trunade.

[Legend Zero]

There is so much wat in this thread that I don't even know anymore.

[Sleepy]

Realistically speaking and after reading a few more comments. Yes, it's a bad idea to unban it.

Yes it is already easy enough to OTK as is, it doesn't mean the format needs more help.

Yes there are situations when MST can clear the backrow because only a single card was set, but I either very rarely see it, or it only happens early game after a few turns. Later on there usually are more face-downs than that, and it all becomes the famous blind MST.

 

Even without taking OTKs into account here, you are getting 2 benefits from the card in one use. You clear your opponent's backrow for the turn while you try to make that damage go in, and you recycle your continuous cards. Fiendish Chain, Call of the Haunted, and virtually all Fire Formations.

It's not even about advantage. Each of those already had it's use fulfilled, and your opponent had to already deal with them. Giving them all a second use out of nowhere is potentially bad. I get to search again with that Tenki, I get to have my monster gain 1000 again, My fiendish chain already prevented your monster from doing that attack and effect last turn, I'll just set it again on Main Phase 2 so you know you are in a slippery slope.

Yes I'm aware there's a Synchro that has a similar bouncing effect, but that's limited to 1 card on each side each turn, and that's already plenty good.

Trunade will give you 3+ of these in one go, allow you to use them immediately if able, and will clear your opponent's backrow as effectively as heavy, but without the counters.

 

No, the counterability of Heavy is not just about Solemn and Starlight. There is random anti-destruction floating around in the game that can actually be mained. Those are viable options regardless of wether they are used as great staples or not. In the other hand, anti-bouncing effects are what? 1 card?.... options are important, too.

 

Not to mention the other very random negative use. It makes Orichalcos even less playable.

 

I'm sure there was something else I wanted to say.... I'll probably remember it later...

[Expelsword]

How is this thread still on?

Trunade gives the same OTK potential as Heavy with less counterability by SLR/Stardust/Whatever, and allows for easy and ridiculous combos from Continuous Cards which archetypes like Firestar and even Sacred can use in droves.

 

I don't know what drugs you're on to think that this can come back without a lot more cards getting hit.

[Superdoopertrooper]

Agro knows exactly what he's talking about.

 

Yeah, a guy who thinks TKRO is better for the game than Heavy Storm totally knows what he's taking about.

 

Trunade gives the same OTK potential as Heavy with less counterability by SLR/Stardust/Whatever, and allows for easy and ridiculous combos from Continuous Cards which archetypes like Firestar and even Sacred can use in droves.

 

I don't know what drugs you're on to think that this can come back without a lot more cards getting hit.

 

This is infuriating. You guys literally keep saying the same thing over and over, and most of it revolves around OTK's. The vast majority of decks DON'T play SLR, therefore most decks DON'T have a counter to Heavy Storm that isn't Solemn Judgment. That DOESN"T make Heavy Storm banworthy, and equally, it DOESN"T make Trunade banworthy either. There are LOTS of powerful cards that have no or extremely few common counters other than Judgment. Just because a card doesn't have a commonly played counter, it doesn't mean it's banworthy. So in probably 90% or more of situations, Heavy is better than Trunade for aggressive pushes/otk's, because it's basically just as likely to go through as Trunade, and if your OTK doesn't work out (they have Gorz/Trag or w/e) then you still don't need to worry about those backrows you destroyed anymore and they can't just reset them again next turn. And easy and 'ridiculous' combos with continuous cards? So you're going to draw 3 or more decent continuous cards together and Trunade, and not a single one of them is going to get destroyed or used for an effect... right. That's theory-oh at its finest right there.

[Expelsword]

This is infuriating. You guys literally keep saying the same thing over and over, and most of it revolves around OTK's. The vast majority of decks DON'T play SLR, therefore most decks DON'T have a counter to Heavy Storm that isn't Solemn Judgment. That DOESN"T make Heavy Storm banworthy, and equally, it DOESN"T make Trunade banworthy either. There are LOTS of powerful cards that have no or extremely few common counters other than Judgment. Just because a card doesn't have a commonly played counter, it doesn't mean it's banworthy. So in probably 90% or more of situations, Heavy is better than Trunade for aggressive pushes/otk's, because it's basically just as likely to go through as Trunade, and if your OTK doesn't work out (they have Gorz/Trag or w/e) then you still don't need to worry about those backrows you destroyed anymore and they can't just reset them again next turn. And easy and 'ridiculous' combos with continuous cards? So you're going to draw 3 or more decent continuous cards together and Trunade, and not a single one of them is going to get destroyed or used for an effect... right. That's theory-oh at its finest right there.

 

First of all, SLR might be a good card to have in your side. Hell, just for Icarus Attack countering it's amazing.

 

What keeps Heavy Storm from being banworthy is the fear of overextension, Trunade doesn't punish overextension, but it does promote OTKs in the same way or arguably even more than Heavy, as various destruction negation cards can't stop it.

 

All that aside, you are STILL ignoring the applications other than OTKs, particularly with Firestar or Sacred engines

[Sleepy]

Yeah, a guy who thinks TKRO is better for the game than Heavy Storm totally knows what he's taking about.

 

 

This is infuriating. You guys literally keep saying the same thing over and over, and most of it revolves around OTK's. The vast majority of decks DON'T play SLR, therefore most decks DON'T have a counter to Heavy Storm that isn't Solemn Judgment.

You still see SLR once in a while, though. If not mained, sided. As of right now, mass destruction is not really the main issue to take care of, but that is something that just applies to this horrible format. SLR might or might not come back depending on each format's new meta. That's talking in a more timeless manner.

 

That DOESN"T make Heavy Storm banworthy, and equally, it DOESN"T make Trunade banworthy either.

Here's where I'm gonna say, Heavy is necessary for the game, but that doesn't mean we are assuming it's balanced here. It is not. 

That is the first misconception of that statement. Trunade's statement can't be truth because the bridge of "Heavy is not banworthy" is under maintainance. It is commonly called "necessary evil" because it is widely agreed on that it is a broken card that creates a needed mindset in the game. That is all.

 

There are LOTS of powerful cards that have no or extremely few common counters other than Judgment. Just because a card doesn't have a commonly played counter, it doesn't mean it's banworthy.

 

So in probably 90% or more of situations, Heavy is better than Trunade for aggressive pushes/otk's, because it's basically just as likely to go through as Trunade, and if your OTK doesn't work out (they have Gorz/Trag or w/e) then you still don't need to worry about those backrows you destroyed anymore and they can't just reset them again next turn.

I agree that it is as likely as Trunade to go through in most situations, but as I said above, Heavy is more of an "excused" card than a balanced one in it's own right. It's not about "we have one, why should we not have the other too?", it's about "we need 1 card that takes care of this situation. We have no balanced alternatives, one, and only one, will have to do it". Giant Trunade is still not automatically excused just because Heavy is out there.

And once that is explain, the remaining thing you have to do is to think which one is more benefical for the game. Which one has more counters even JUST as possibilities to make it a little bit more fair.

 

Which one has less combos or which one can create more player advantage and/or control in an abusive way of interacting with other cards ( Hint: It's not Heavy)

 

And easy and 'ridiculous' combos with continuous cards? So you're going to draw 3 or more decent continuous cards together and Trunade, and not a single one of them is going to get destroyed or used for an effect... right. That's theory-oh at its finest right there.

Because we all know that Fire Fists always have a clear backrow, right? Nothing ever survives S/T hate, and blind MST doesn't exist. These people and their thoughts that anything Continuous serves any function other than bait.