Artifact Moralltach

[Goose]

It's not really a bad argument tbh. Like just because we have a hardon for banning only OP cards doesn't mean that's necessarily best. If the banlist is to be used to improve Yugioh as a game, hitting moralltech to keep artifacts as a deck alive is a valid move.

[Spinny]

guys if moralltach gets hit i want hands and traptrix hit too since they are all used together in H.A.T,It'd be fun to see hands disappear to semi-limit.

As far as ive seen so far i havent seen a way to recycle moralltach.

I agree that with this card sanctum becomes, destroy a monster and u gain a 2100 beater that can make Pleiades..... but this still requires setup (even if its not alot) and can only be used in the opponents turn.

I dont 100% think that it should get hit, and if it does and the hands and maybe T-myrmeoleo dont go to 2 its gonna be kinda annoying since they will have only targetted 1 of the archetypes in the combo, which is just something that bugs me personally.

[Blake]

It's not really a bad argument tbh. Like just because we have a hardon for banning only OP cards doesn't mean that's necessarily best. If the banlist is to be used to improve Yugioh as a game, hitting moralltech to keep artifacts as a deck alive is a valid move.

Artifacts aren't exactly a healthy design for the game, though, so it's really not.

Both sides have merits, but the "but it'd kill artifacts so hit moral" really doesn't.

[Goose]

Artifacts aren't bad for the game.  They're just bad.  Moralltech makes it splashable which is actually bad for the game.  We throw bad design around too much and almost no one ever bothers to explain why.  Artifacts make MST or other S/T removal more risky.  That's fine when the entire deck is artifacts because G2/G3 you side shit out and win.  When it's splashed into different decks, however, it makes S/T removal risky in any matchup ever.  That's when the game starts to actually be impacted and hurt.

[Blake]

Artifacts aren't bad for the game.  They're just bad.  Moralltech makes it splashable which is actually bad for the game.  We throw bad design around too much and almost no one ever bothers to explain why.  Artifacts make MST or other S/T removal more risky.  That's fine when the entire deck is artifacts because G2/G3 you side s*** out and win.  When it's splashed into different decks, however, it makes S/T removal risky in any matchup ever.  That's when the game starts to actually be impacted and hurt.

They're bad for the game in the same sense that Dark World are bad for the game. Yes, it's on a design level, but that's still unhealthy.

They're very much the same design as Dark Worlds, just with a semblance of "interaction", but that doesn't mean it's a healthy game design with how they were taken.w

[Greiga]

They're bad for the game in the same sense that Dark World are bad for the game. Yes, it's on a design level, but that's still unhealthy.

They're very much the same design as Dark Worlds, just with a semblance of "interaction", but that doesn't mean it's a healthy game design with how they were taken.w

 

I'm legitimately curious on how they have the same design as Dark Worlds and how their design is unhealthy.

[Goose]

Let's work to define this sense of "bad for the game" instead of just doing whatever the fuck we (you) usually do. It seems to me that bad for the game is something that "takes a mechanic of the game that is typically detrimental to the opponent and makes it beneficial to them".  y/n?

[Blake]

Let's work to define this sense of "bad for the game" instead of just doing whatever the f*** we (you) usually do. It seems to me that bad for the game is something that "takes a mechanic of the game that is typically detrimental to the opponent and makes it beneficial to them".  y/n?

That's not true.

The issue with artifacts is how they tackle it. They reward you for blowing yourself up (fine, see Scraps/Fire Kings overall), and they reward you even more for your opponent using destruction removal. Yeah, hitting the monsters actually matters, but you get rewarded far more than it's worth in design.

Caduseus is a major design offender, as well. "For every +1/+0 you get, get another bar this one." It's not relevant because, as stated, Pure Artifacts are not a good deck, but that doesn't mean they're a healthy design. They pretend to support player interaction, but even the slightest thought about the design shows they interact with the opponent very, very little. They encourage you to play mostly one-sided and just punish the opponent whenever they try to interact with you.

Punishing Blind MST is totally fine. Making a deck that punishes you for trying to get over your opp without jumping through holes is not. Even today, non-destuction removal isn't THAT common for face-down cards. It's fairly difficult to remove a field of them. And that's supposing they can't just combo start themselves as well, removing the issue of relying on the opponent. It's inconsistent, but it promotes either one side or the other to just overwhelm the gamestate and make an incredibly 1-sided game.

And then there's the fact that if you don't remove the backrow, it's likely they have real cards hiding within it as well, punishing you for not playing into them as well. So then that actually ends up pushing Blind MST back in (in design theory), which means playing into them anyways.

The reason they're compared to Dark Worlds (and were from the moment people started testing the pure build) is because they play basically the same, but with a wider and more useful range of cards that are dead against them. And with Sanctum/Ignition. They may not have Grapha, but it still feels very much like Dark World.

It's a deck that very much punishes you for trying to play the game with them, on multiple levels. If you have cards that interact with them, better count them dead unless you 100% know what you're going to shoot. That is not the sort of deck that "it dies if it loses that so nuuuu" comment.
EDIT: Aso, with the FK/Scrap comment, ignoring Onslaught and Factory, obviously. Those cards are absurd design.

[Goose]

So you literally just agreed with what I said after calling it not true. Okay Black. Okay. 

 

"It's a deck that very much punishes you for trying to play the game with them, on multiple levels."

 

Let's think about punishing interaction. What is it really?  Interaction by your definition seems to be playing cards that affect the opponents board. Punishing interaction is having that backfire on you. So how does it backfire then? By having the opponents card interact with your card in a beneficial way to them. Dark World, when discarded, respond to that card that discarded them to generate advantage. Artifacts, when destroyed on their opponents turn, respond to that destruction to generate advantage.  Fableds, when discarded, respond to that card that discarded them to generate advantage. Infernities, when your hand is empty, respond to that game state by generating advantage. Cyber Dragon, when your field is empty, responds to that game state to generate advantage. Yang Zing, when destroyed, respond to that destruction to generate advantage.  

 

The idea of punishing an opponent for making a move isn't something new to YGO and isn't something that hurts the game.  It generates complexity.  Something like MST is only interaction in the loosest sense of the word.  It's more than just playing with your own dick like Exodia, but it's still one sided.  I play MST and you lose a card.  MST really becomes interactive when you can chain your backrow or your backrow can benefit from being hit.  That way we are both playing cards and are both part of the play.  The same is true with Dark Worlds.  Normally a card like Drastic Drop Off isn't really interaction because it's just me playing a card that affects you, but when you can respond to it or when it causes a response from your card, we are really both playing the game.

 

So what's my point? Not sure. Probably something like Artifacts/Dark Worlds/Fableds/Yang Zing/Hands/FLIP effect monsters create actual meaningful interaction between players that is two sided.

[Blake]

So you literally just agreed with what I said after calling it not true. Okay Black. Okay. 

 

"It's a deck that very much punishes you for trying to play the game with them, on multiple levels."

 

Let's think about punishing interaction. What is it really?  Interaction by your definition seems to be playing cards that affect the opponents board. Punishing interaction is having that backfire on you. So how does it backfire then? By having the opponents card interact with your card in a beneficial way to them. Dark World, when discarded, respond to that card that discarded them to generate advantage. Artifacts, when destroyed on their opponents turn, respond to that destruction to generate advantage.  Fableds, when discarded, respond to that card that discarded them to generate advantage. Infernities, when your hand is empty, respond to that game state by generating advantage. Cyber Dragon, when your field is empty, responds to that game state to generate advantage. Yang Zing, when destroyed, respond to that destruction to generate advantage.  

 

The idea of punishing an opponent for making a move isn't something new to YGO and isn't something that hurts the game.  It generates complexity.  Something like MST is only interaction in the loosest sense of the word.  It's more than just playing with your own dick like Exodia, but it's still one sided.  I play MST and you lose a card.  MST really becomes interactive when you can chain your backrow or your backrow can benefit from being hit.  That way we are both playing cards and are both part of the play.  The same is true with Dark Worlds.  Normally a card like Drastic Drop Off isn't really interaction because it's just me playing a card that affects you, but when you can respond to it or when it causes a response from your card, we are really both playing the game.

 

So what's my point? Not sure. Probably something like Artifacts/Dark Worlds/Fableds/Yang Zing/Hands/FLIP effect monsters create actual meaningful interaction between players that is two sided.

Your point was incredibly surface level, and I went into why. It's not that they use a mechanic in a beneficial (as I mentioned Scraps/Fire Kings bar their stupid S/T), it's how they go about it.

 

But punishing blindshots and such are fine on a basic level. When your entire deck is one big "oh you tried to interact fuck you lol", that is not well designed. It's not like it only punishes blind shots, it punishes any shot you take unless you're absolutely certain of what you're going to be hitting, and if you can't tell that's just you stuck in trying. The entire deck makes you suffer for trying to play. This is never good, and it's why floodgates are bad. They punish you for playing much the same as artifacts, just on a much wider scale due to the fact they're one card that shuts down whatever mechanic.

 

Hands are incredibly restrictive. Should still be semi'd on a design basis, but not really comparable to Artifacts. Yang Zing's problem is, in fact, the card that SSs them from the deck, cause Supply Unit's actually incredibly poor in that deck, so you rarely ACTUALLY plus until you Synchro.

 

Fableds are horrible OTK design, that's not news. The fact that they use discarding to get there doesn't change that.

 

Yes, artifacts can add a layer to the game... but they don't. They just continue to punish blind shots (which already happens) and reward you more for the opponent not being able to discern your backrow. At least Dweller exists, but that's "a counter exists" argument, which hardly holds water. They add the same flavor in spades, which is a net change of nothing.

[Spinny]

 

 

"It's a deck that very much punishes you for trying to play the game with them, on multiple levels."

Im not joining in on your argument, just wanna give my Opinion on this comment k? (You seem to all be really pissy in here so im just gonna state my business first.)

 

I dont think its too punishing...

They mainly just have to combo their own cards, just in a different way, Sure if you just go for Blind mst's all over the place when they've set a massive backrow then its punishing but really they are pretty easy to work around.

They deplete their hand pretty often most the time aswell.