Changes to the current format of the game to make everyone enjoys what they prefer

[Reptorian1125]

Considering that meta has replaced most decks and in some cases, you can easily win in 5 turns while there are people who complains about these cards because they say that a child could become hardcore with these cards, I think there should be different rules.

Proposal to changes to current rules and format
There are 3 sections where players can go into.

1) Sections of rooms : Meta-only ; Unlimited ; Classic
1a) Meta-only : This is the room for those that prefers to stick with meta style gameplay that you see on advanced on Dueling Network. Cards that prevents meta are banned by default into this room. All duelists start with 15000 LP to make the duel last longer.

1b) Unlimited : This is the room for those that are ok with cards like royal oppression, vanity's emptiness, and so on while at the same time, they are also ok with XYZ/sychros cards as well. I propose additional cards for this section. Cards like MoF and Heavy Storm are also allowed here. Here, there should be at least 10000 LP at start.

1c) Classic-only : All cards that aren't fusions, effect monsters, normal monsters, trap cards, magic cards, and ritual monsters are banned from this section. This means no XYZ, light sychros, and dark sychros. In here, they can bar some the current banned cards if they wish to such as Yata-Garasu, but not royal oppression or heavy storm. Also, players can choose to start with only 4000 LP or 8000 LP.

For unlimited, I think there should be cards that are named in the format of "AM -"+((Name of Spell card)∨(Name of Trap Card)) which belongs into an additional extra deck while players have to pay to be able to play them from their main deck. These cards are to be specifically designed to negate all trap/spell/equip cards that the opponent played and only targets XYZ, Sychros, whatever else that caters to meta-lover and they also negate their effects as well. AM is short for anti-meta. For example, the "AM - Raigeki" card can be placed into main deck and shuffled as long as you pay 500 LP (Small, but the low-cost of XYZ and Sychros demands these cards to have low cost for balance) and it can destroy only XYZ/Sychro cards while negating all cards that protects these. Another idea is to create cards that are designed to wipe out extra deck. This forces players to rely on meta less and rely on the slight older style.

[Synchronized]

No.

[Reptorian1125]

No.

And why not? I would rather play a game with many options and the current format just doesn't allow classic players to avoid sychros/xyzs and in those case, I'd imagine these people will be keeping cards like royal oppression and so on in case if they bump into these. Right now, I'm sticking to friends duel until there is some changes to the rule that will allow classic players to have their own room as well as meta players as well as people who are okay with both.

At this rate with vanity's emptiness going to be banned as while royal oppression is banned as they severely hurt XYZ/Sychro cards while there are a lot of people out there who are opposed to XYZ/Sychro cards, I believe it is appropriate that different types of player get their own rooms. For the records, they are not broken at all and in some cases, these aren't even always effective in traditional old-school duels. From what I see, the only people that mostly complains that these cards are broken are those who relies on meta-style dueling. In some cases, these people prefers to win the duel in like 2 turns.

[Synchronized]

Because none of this makes any sense...

 

15,000 Life Points is in no way necessary and just makes it so you can run 3 Pot of Greed with Ancient Leaf.  Is that what you're trying to encourage? More random thoughtless draw power?

 

Just because people are "okay" with Royal Oppression doesn't make it (and Vanity's Emptiness, to a lesser extent) any less broken.  It's still a bad card for the game and you shouldn't have to isolate certain cards into certain formats in order for the game to be played.

 

And that last one...that one's just bad.

[Reptorian1125]

15,000 Life Points is in no way necessary and just makes it so you can run 3 Pot of Greed with Ancient Leaf.  Is that what you're trying to encourage? More random thoughtless draw power?
 
Just because people are "okay" with Royal Oppression doesn't make it (and Vanity's Emptiness, to a lesser extent) any less broken.  It's still a bad card for the game and you shouldn't have to isolate certain cards into certain formats in order for the game to be played.
 
And that last one...that one's just bad.

The reason I suggest more LP for meta-based duel is basically to have the duel last a little longer than it is usually nowadays.

Why should royal oppression and vanity's emptiness should be banned? I can understand why meta-players wouldn't like these cards as it disrupts their XYZ/Sychro cards, but these cards should be less limited upon other sections such as unlimited and traditional.

As for second last one, I can't see how it's a bad thing considering playing old-school yu-gi-oh takes a lot more strategies and thinking to take down your opponent. If the opponent got a good deck and you too got a good deck, the duel can sometimes last to the point where both player slowly deck out their cards to near 0. Even with raigeki and heavy storm on play by your opponent, you can still recover. There's more costs to the old-school style and it was actually a heap load more balanced.

On the last one, it's a idea to slow down meta players and forces the duel to crawl slower. Thus, this forces new strategies to workaround against these cards when you're a meta-player. Thus, requiring some more thinking than operating on auto-pilot.

[Miror B]

The reason I suggest more LP for meta-based duel is basically to have the duel last a little longer than it is usually nowadays.

Why should royal oppression and vanity's emptiness should be banned? I can understand why meta-players wouldn't like these cards as it disrupts their XYZ/Sychro cards, but these cards should be less limited upon other sections such as unlimited and traditional.

As for second last one, I can't see how it's a bad thing considering playing old-school yu-gi-oh takes a lot more strategies and thinking to take down your opponent. If the opponent got a good deck and you too got a good deck, the duel can sometimes last to the point where both player slowly deck out their cards to near 0. Even with raigeki and heavy storm on play by your opponent, you can still recover. There's more costs to the old-school style and it was actually a heap load more balanced.

On the last one, it's a idea to slow down meta players and forces the duel to crawl slower. Thus, this forces new strategies to workaround against these cards when you're a meta-player. Thus, requiring some more thinking than operating on auto-pilot.

Longer duels get boring though. See stallwars.

 

Oppression and Emptiness are actually loved by certain Xyz/Synchro decks. Blackwings used to maindeck max Oppression when they were in their prime. Spam the field, flip Oppression, good luck coming back.

 

Old school yugioh takes strategy? And how do you recover from a Monster Wipe that lets your opponent keeps all of his beaters?

 

Also, meta doesn't mean Xyz/Synchro. Meta means top tier decks that win. Go look at last format's Spellbooks, they only had an Extra Deck as a dust collecting luxury.

[Toffee.]

1a)Meta-only: This is the room for those that prefers to stick with meta style gameplay that you see on advanced on Dueling Network. Cards that prevents meta are banned by default into this room. All duelists start with 15000 LP to make the duel last longer.

Isn't that the whole point of anti-meta stuff? To slow the game-state to a specific point and potentially make it last longer?

[vla1ne]

Please define "meta preventing". No offense, but "meta preventing" is a baseless word that has no meaning without context. Two competing meta decks are both "meta preventers" from the opposite points of view, so what do you mean by meta preventing?

 

Restricting versatility is bad for a myriad of reasons that I don't need to get into at the moment, even if you increase LP (I do feel we might need a LP increase soon, but I doubt it'll happen without solid reasons). 

 

If your solution on this thread listed cards you thought of as degenerate and gave reasons for removing them from the game, or listed cards you thought of as not degenerate anymore, and gave reasons for bringing them back, this thread would be more viable. but removing an entire bracket of cards or creating a new competitive gameplay style can't be considered a stable solution, or even be taken all that seriously by anyone, unless you take into account far more factors than you have here.

 

Feel free to flesh out this plan later if you wish though, I like game mechanics discussions that bring out a different point of view.

[Reptorian1125]

Longer duels get boring though. See stallwars.
 
Oppression and Emptiness are actually loved by certain Xyz/Synchro decks. Blackwings used to maindeck max Oppression when they were in their prime. Spam the field, flip Oppression, good luck coming back.
 
Old school yugioh takes strategy? And how do you recover from a Monster Wipe that lets your opponent keeps all of his beaters?
 
Also, meta doesn't mean Xyz/Synchro. Meta means top tier decks that win. Go look at last format's Spellbooks, they only had an Extra Deck as a dust collecting luxury.

I agree, sometimes long duels do get boring. I'd do rather watch these than 3 turns duels.

Yes, I see that they're loved by certain decks.

As for your old-school question, that's easy. Waboku or mirror force can be the protective measure. Then, you can go with cyber jar, monster reborn, raigeki, and so on. These are the solution to that issue. If one doesn't take or have the option to protect oneself with the ability to eliminate these monsters, then that one person is basically gonna get beaten. There's also "Messenger of Peace" as well. Of course, this is assuming that the opponent doesn't have the ability to thwart me.

Are you talking about "Prophecy Spell Book Deck Profile (september 2013 tcg banlist)" ?

Please define "meta preventing". No offense, but "meta preventing" is a baseless word that has no meaning without context. Two competing meta decks are both "meta preventers" from the opposite points of view, so what do you mean by meta preventing?
 
Restricting versatility is bad for a myriad of reasons that I don't need to get into at the moment, even if you increase LP (I do feel we might need a LP increase soon, but I doubt it'll happen without solid reasons). 
 
If your solution on this thread listed cards you thought of as degenerate and gave reasons for removing them from the game, or listed cards you thought of as not degenerate anymore, and gave reasons for bringing them back, this thread would be more viable. but removing an entire bracket of cards or creating a new competitive gameplay style can't be considered a stable solution, or even be taken all that seriously by anyone, unless you take into account far more factors than you have here.
 
Feel free to flesh out this plan later if you wish though, I like game mechanics discussions that bring out a different point of view.

I define anti-meta as preventing special summoning and disabling monsters which comes with the special summoning.

As for restricting versatility, as much as I do agree with you, I'd have to say that is what the banlist does. Basically restrict versatility to a extent. A player must always look for alternative solution if one wants to go into advanced format. There are people who would quit duels if it last longer than 3 turns and others who complains about recent cards. Because of this observation, I conclude that it would be great to have restricted versatility for players who prefers different groups of cards while having full versatility in a format where players are fine with more recent cards as well as banned cards.

[vla1ne]

I define anti-meta as preventing special summoning and disabling monsters which comes with the special summoning.

As for restricting versatility, as much as I do agree with you, I'd have to say that is what the banlist does. Basically restrict versatility to a extent. A player must always look for alternative solution if one wants to go into advanced format. There are people who would quit duels if it last longer than 3 turns and others who complains about recent cards. Because of this observation, I conclude that it would be great to have restricted versatility for players who prefers different groups of cards while having full versatility in a format where players are fine with more recent cards as well as banned cards.

For your anti-meta definition, bujins and spellbooks are often at their best when they only have 1 or 2 monsters on the field to look after, and certain builds can go entire games without needing to Special Summon more than once or twice. yet they still count as meta. you have a point that much of the meta revolves around special summoning currently, but not all of it needs more than one or two Special Summons. in the name of fairness though I have to give you my definition of anti meta so that you can see if it fits better or argue against it:

 

Personally, I see anti meta cards as the kind of cards that can best harm the current top tier decks. So while restricting special summons can seen as anti meta, to me it's really only a small part of the definition. currently, cards that prevent searching your deck are actually higher up on the list than cards that prevent SSing at the moment (for example, rai-oh hurts more decks than ophion does at the moment, hell rai-oh even hurts ophion)

 

but onto the second part, the banlist we have does restrict a certain amount of versatility, but ALL banlists restrict versatility to an extent, the issue I had with yours was that it restricted a bit too much versatility, and not in the right ways, our current banlist (even though it's not really a good banlist by card game standards) is meant to restrict cards that hurt the gamestate as a whole, (Super Rejuvenation, Chaos Emporor, Yata, Makyura, Shock master, Babies, Brionac) your rules might be fun for an occasional tournament or three, but as a long term game rule, it's not likely to be any good.

[Sleepy]

I'd rather have Ancient Leaf banned than not get higher Life Points. At least 12,000 to 14,000 would be a good amount, as stated in previous topics throughout time.

And longer duels don't mean stall. Don't get so used to the current pace as to forget that.

 

I'm not backing or disproving any other points in this thread, since I did not bother to read the stuff again today before commenting. Except well... Royal Oppression should never come back.