Macro Cosmos

[Nathanael D. Striker]

When this card resolves: You can Special Summon 1 "Helios - The Primordial Sun" from your hand or Deck. While this card is face-up on the field, any card sent to the Graveyard is banished instead.

 

For those who don't know, I am a fan of Anti-Meta. I honestly adore this card because it combats the Graveyard-centric meta we live in. I understand why Konami limited this to protect their new toys that love the Graveyard, but I feel that this was the thing that was keeping them in check to an extent. Feel free to point me in the right direction if my argument is flawed or to discuss this card in general. And now for the obligatory saying: discuss?

[Sora1499]

I do not like this card.

Granting banish-based decks a niche is great and awesome, but outright mutilating graveyard-centric decks just isn't. It becomes a one-flip wincon, and that is hardly fair in any context (save for something like Droll + Lock Bird vs Exodia).

[Blake]

... You mean the TCG List where Heavy Storm was banned? =|

 

It wasn't limited to help new decks. It was limited to not be an abslute blowout when people could easily set 2-3 and give no flux when Heavy didn't exist.

 

It's why everything was hit. To improve the overall health of the game.

[ZeRainbowDash]

I love Macro Cosmos. But I am also that one guy who doesn't even use it for Helios. I use it + Gravekeeper's servant and Soul Release to lock down my opponent and prevent their ATKs. All the trollsyness

[Nathanael D. Striker]

... You mean the TCG List where Heavy Storm was banned? =|

 

It wasn't limited to help new decks. It was limited to not be an abslute blowout when people could easily set 2-3 and give no flux when Heavy didn't exist.

 

It's why everything was hit. To improve the overall health of the game.

 

Yes, I understand that that was a part of the reason. Though, you could make a case for Konami wanting to help its new decks. Both reasons have their influence on the overall result.

[Trebuchet MS]

I love this card (and its close cousin Dimensional Fissure) since it's a relatively low-costed means of shutting down every form of Grave-centric Deck running in the meta. The notion of being able to easily defeat an opponent without spending as much as they do is something that appeals to me.

 

It's not without its flaws, though. If the opponent gets the jump on filling their Graveyard before it gets activated at any point, they keep what went in first. It's not as harmful as Rest In Peace.

 

Kinda bummed out that TCG has Limited both Macro and D-Fissure. Maybe I'll try Banisher of the Radiance + Safe Zone...

[Not-so-Radiant Arin]

I'm in the same boat as pretty much everyone here; I'm glad it got the attention it deserved. it's always annoying when you can't draw MST/Heavy to get rid of it and basically all of your plays just go down the drain.

[mido9]

I could almost swear nobody in the world wouldve thought of this being hit before it did.

[Wildflame]

While I wholeheartedly despise this card and Macro decks, its limiting was dumb and undeserved, like a lot of other ones in the TCG list.

[evilfusion]

I think the TCG list had mostly focused not just on hitting problem cards (they banned the exact same things as the OCG, and then some) but also to wound the Decks that could easily just waltz in and take those Decks' place, like Dark Worlds got hit with Card Destruction, and banning Storm was both good and bad, but that's an argument on a whole other scale. There's a lot of careful experimentation on the list, and they probably knew that, without Storm, Decks like Macro and so on that can wield a heavy backrow and utterly destroy meta Decks (Macro/Fissure/etc) had to be held back during the transition period.

 

I expect Macro or Fissure to have a looser restriction in December, when the TCG list changes again. They don't deserve to be hit, necessarily, but there's a huge hate involving these types of constant banish effects that are easier to preserve than monsters (like Banisher of the Light/Radiance), because of how completely they can shut down a player with very few checks against them.

[Blake]

I think the TCG list had mostly focused not just on hitting problem cards (they banned the exact same things as the OCG, and then some) but also to wound the Decks that could easily just waltz in and take those Decks' place, like Dark Worlds got hit with Card Destruction,

No, that was a hit to Dragons. Dragons mained Card Destruction as a win button. They still do in the OCG. With the single Super Rejuvenation.

And sad as it is to say, that's arguably more broken than Sixth Sense in Dragons.

[Sleepy]

These types of cards are in my personal black list. Lots of decks in the game depend on their interaction with the Graveyard to even work. Having means to banish is fine, but when it is something continuously active, it becomes a decisive factor. Sure, there's MST and other S/T removal effects, but the fact that you need to hope for one to continue playing at all is not a good sign. Not only is it a sacky factor, but if a card is gonna be so harsh in a game that depends so much on it, it should have some natural ways of playing around it. Like a cost for not banishing them, a small opening at some point, something build into the card that made it more fair.

 

I've heard players saying the card sucks, that you can play around it easily, that anti-meta is not good X format, that it's far from the biggest threat, and I don't care. I'm talking of the core design. Decisions that could have been incorporated into so many cards at the time of their creation and could have resulted in a much slower power-creep, less of a need for spots in the list, a potential increase on deck variety, and the existence of a bigger casual player-base, but many cards led me to believe that Konami's play-testers aren't payed enough.