My personal take on the next TCG banlist

[goddamnit names are a pain]

ok then...
Anyway it's gone from my list. I'll put herald and krystia in limited on my list instead of banned.

I actually kind of agree on the Kyristia thing.

But who the heck runs more than 1 or Herald anyway? Kind of NVM on that, but not really. I could see 2-3, but dead draw a lot.

[Sleepy]

Seeing as the OP is clearly flat-out inept at understanding the basic principles of a banlist, I'm going to ask just one question.

 

Why the fuck are other people advocating for banning Herald of Perfection?

 

It's in no way degenerate, and just because you don't enjoy playing against it doesn't mean that's a good reason to ban it. Bannings should be held for cards that are simply overpowered or make something else that has the potential to be overpowered consistent enough to be so. Almost all other reasons are total horse shit.

Herald of Perfection is degenerate.

The game moves around effects and this is a potentially total lock-down on effects.

Regardless of how good or bad Herald or it's deck are, the only place it can be used is in a deck entirely focusing on negate negate negate negate  negate where you either have enough discards to negate, or you don't and that's the end of it, and it's not like Dinno Rabbit's positive side, where you had Laggia's one-shot at negating something and had to think well when to use it. For Herald, you either get the luck of opening with the right set-up or get a horribly inconsistent opening hand with crappy draws. That is yet another luck-based inconsistent negative trait the deck has, and further shows how unhealthy it's design is.

 

Even if it's not a relevant card, that's not what being degenerate is.

I personally said it shouldn't have been made from a design standpoint, not that it should/shouldn't be banned.

Lockdown cards in yugioh are pretty crappy design in general the majority of the time.

[Zincoshine]

well in that case is there really anyone in this thread who doesn't believe the whole "herald" archetype should never have been created?

Anyway, let's get back to the unresolved issue of the different dimention. Now, I am totally aware of the biggest reason why those 2 cards were limited, but at the same time I hate that angel of zera, DD monarchs, and DD decks in general have become garbage as a result. I essentially hate them being limited for the same reason i hate rescue rabbit being limited: The destruction of original creative decks. So how about this idea: d fissure to 3, macro cosmos to 0. I don't know why but I just feel this would work. d fissure is a much milder version of macro cosmos, even xyz material would still find it's way to the grave. Besides, the polar opposite of macro cosmos is unlimited (iron wall of whatever). I think it would be balanced if we have 3 d fissures and 0 macro cosmos. D.D decks can live again and the damage to meta decks won't be too severe as it is with macro cosmos. xyz is what konami wants people using and they are barely affected by d fissure. (except silent honors dark knight ofcourse)

 

Also, DDV and CCV, both limited or banned? discuss

[goddamnit names are a pain]

well in that case is there really anyone in this thread who doesn't believe the whole "herald" archetype should never have been created?

Me! The archetype is rather nice, in my opinion.

Anyway, let's get back to the unresolved issue of the different dimension. So how about this idea: d fissure to 3, macro cosmos to 0. I don't know why but I just feel this would work.

It wouldn't. Both essentially do the same thing. And you can't ban one and lift the other to three, its still an improvement. Not to mention, Macro is a trap, which takes a turn of setup over D. Fissure. They are both fine at 1. 2 instead of 6= your deck is dead, then you are doing it wrong. Now, I can see why you want it at 3, since 2 is still tricky to play and 3 would make it easier.

d fissure is a much milder version of macro cosmos, even xyz material would still find it's way to the grave. Besides, the polar opposite of macro cosmos is unlimited (iron wall of whatever). 

Like I have said, as well as others, a card is never a reason to not limit another. Stop using that, please.

I think it would be balanced if we have 3 d fissures and 0 macro cosmos. D.D decks can live again and the damage to meta decks won't be too severe as it is with macro cosmos.

How is it anymore severe with Macros? Banishing Spells that most likely aren't coming back, oh my. Fire Fists and Spellbooks are the only ones that might be affected by Cosmos more.

Also, DDV and CCV, both limited or banned? discuss

Nothing to say here against or for, sorry.

[Zincoshine]

remember, xyz materials still go to the grave, so fire fists for example would not be affected much by d fissure, and <insert any xyz deck except SH dark knight> would not be affected either.

[goddamnit names are a pain]

remember, xyz materials still go to the grave, so fire fists for example would not be affected much by d fissure, and <insert any xyz deck except SH dark knight> would not be affected either.

But this still hits too many decks out there to be a good card. Heck, shutting down one deck still sounds like too much to me.

[Zincoshine]

shadow imprisoning mirror also hits many decks as dark is the most popular attribute, it's not limited. The problem with macro cosmos and d fissure is its two cards doing the same hit to other decks, that is just way too much consistency...... so lets simply get rid of the stronger of the two cards and keep the other one at unlimited rather than having both at limited. Believe me, if you try running 3 macro cosmos in an xyz deck and then try running 3 d fissures instead you will feel they are completely different cards.

[goddamnit names are a pain]

so lets simply get rid of the stronger of the two cards and keep the other one at unlimited rather than having both at limited. 

No, with that logic, Fissure would be at 2.

Hitting one, and plussing another is balanced.

Hitting one, and adding 2 of the other kinda sucks.

Is it wrong that I think Macro should stick around because it supports a creative deck? Helios is pretty awesome.

[The Hounds Of Anubis]

Herald of Perfection is degenerate.

The game moves around effects and this is a potentially total lock-down on effects.

Regardless of how good or bad Herald or it's deck are, the only place it can be used is in a deck entirely focusing on negate negate negate negate  negate where you either have enough discards to negate, or you don't and that's the end of it, and it's not like Dinno Rabbit's positive side, where you had Laggia's one-shot at negating something and had to think well when to use it. For Herald, you either get the luck of opening with the right set-up or get a horribly inconsistent opening hand with crappy draws. That is yet another luck-based inconsistent negative trait the deck has, and further shows how unhealthy it's design is.

 

Even if it's not a relevant card, that's not what being degenerate is.

I personally said it shouldn't have been made from a design standpoint, not that it should/shouldn't be banned.

Lockdown cards in yugioh are pretty crappy design in general the majority of the time.

If it were actually "negate negate negate negate" then I still wouldn't agree with it being degenerate. They have x amount of Fairies, to your generally higher number of cards given they have to invest in Herald itself. There are a ridiculously large number of ways to get over the 1800 body if they're actually attacking you with it, otherwise they don't even have a clock to kill you and you can generally grind them out. A game revolving around a boss isn't a new concept to Yugioh, and sorry if you feel bad that you actually have to adapt to things being played.

[Zincoshine]

helios is a broken archetype because the effects of the monsters take effect when being sent to the grave,,,, which is exactly what macro cosmos prevents.

By the way, I just had the most epic combo in at least a month. check this out
beginning of my main phase: http://gyazo.com/e34896fe1a954da95d33f8f5da8ec4a7
end of my main phase: http://gyazo.com/2c97add51003012d02c97d96a0fea8fc

This is why I love yugioh.
 

[Toffee.]

helios is a broken archetype because the effects of the monsters take effect when being sent to the grave,,,, which is exactly what macro cosmos prevents.

woah, Woah, WOAH.
Helios/Duo/Trice not only conflicts with cards that would otherwise fuel it, but at the same time it has to be destroyed by battle for it to come back. Simply discarding/tributing/milling/etc it, doesn't permit it to do so.
Add to it, if you destroy it by battle with Macro/Fissure out, then it's Banished, and can't revive, because in addition to being destroyed by battle it has to be sent to the Graveyard at that.

So..... Yea.

[Sleepy]

If it were actually "negate negate negate negate" then I still wouldn't agree with it being degenerate. They have x amount of Fairies, to your generally higher number of cards given they have to invest in Herald itself. There are a ridiculously large number of ways to get over the 1800 body if they're actually attacking you with it, otherwise they don't even have a clock to kill you and you can generally grind them out. A game revolving around a boss isn't a new concept to Yugioh, and sorry if you feel bad that you actually have to adapt to things being played.

One would think you'd rather put Herald in Defense Position with it's flashy 2800 and attack with something stronger like Tethys's 2400 ATK. Also, the deck has Venus so it can make Gachi, and has access to Honest too.

But I shouldn't be talking about specific plays like that because it's like saying "paw mah monster can kill shock master with Fissure so it's good". I know very well the deck's not relevant or on pair with the metagame in any way nowadays.

 

Making a Herald build is like making an Exodia build. You are not gonna really play differently regardless of your opponent.

Stall > [s]negate[/s] prevent your opponent from playing > poke slowly as you see how many decks out there don't actually have strong enough single Normal Summons.

Sometimes you might have to think with your resources early, and that's the most interaction you'll have. After that it's either:

You pretty much auto-lose if you couldn't assemble your stuff.

You pretty much lock down your opponent and there's no playing around it.

 

It's like saying you are sad we can't adapt to Shock Master, which only locks 1 out of 3 kinds of cards.

[The Hounds Of Anubis]

What? Adapting to Shock Master makes you change your entire deck. Adapting to Herald makes you extend a couple of cards. Heck, the best turn to deal with a Herald is the turn immediately after they play it while they're down on cards.

[Zincoshine]

you're not dealing with a first turn Herald though. You're ending the duel if that happens.