~British Soul~ Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 If there is 1 or more monster(s) on the field of the controller of this card, his/her opponent cannot place a monster on the field if his/her number of monsters would exceed the number of monsters that are on the field of this card's controller. The cards that are already on the field before this card's activation are unaffected by this effect. Here is an example of a card that had been seeing more play recently, and it's also a card I wouldn't mind seeing reprinted tbh, discuss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Dies to MST so it's bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinky Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Dies to MST so it's bad. Tool dies to MST too. Tool is bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miror B Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Tool dies to MST too. Tool is bad? My sarcasm Your head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinky Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 My sarcasm Your head Sarcasm + Internet = Does not mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 I heard this is a nice option in Hermits because Pillar's 2100 ass could be hard to run down with this and a backrow, but haven't tested it yet to see if this true or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goddamnit names are a pain Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Sarcasm + Internet = Does not mix. Or you don't know how to mix them properly >: D I was going to say you might as well Vanitys, but they are really completely different cards. Wouldn't be a bad reprint at all, but where would it get reprinted in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Wouldn't be a bad reprint at all, but where would it get reprinted in? BP4? I think I have a few of these lying around. Too bad they do nothing in the kinds of deck I build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultravires Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 Kaiser is a terrible card because it does not advance your win condition in any particular deck. It's a dead topdeck, bad to see when you're winning, worse when you're losing and provides absolutely zero utility. Decks that can take advantage of Kaiser like Bujins and NKs would rather see other cards. It may allow you to pick up undeserved wins, but that doesn't change the fact that it is objectively an awful card, both in design and usefulness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newhat Posted October 12, 2014 Report Share Posted October 12, 2014 It may allow you to pick up undeserved wins oh you It's a really ugly card because you can't get around it. No monster is immune to it. It allows you to control tempo as long as it's out and you can keep your monster alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
werewolfjedi Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 It may allow you to pick up undeserved wins, but that doesn't change the fact that it is objectively an awful card, both in design and usefulness. proper side decking is not a an undeserved win, and if I want to play a card that stops one turn swarming into XYZ and synchros because I only have one monster on the field, then I should consider this card, because it stops my opponent but does not hamper me as the player of the card. this doesn't stop everything and has a big target on it for destruction, but it's rightfully deserved because it's an effective lock-down tactic and this game has always been supportive of players that want to keep special summon swarming down to a minimum. it may not be fair since it lets them make something and then stop the opponent, but it's not like it leaves you incapable of playing monsters, and black hole and now raigeki opens the way through to make plays. this stops meta style extra deck playing, and I don't think that's a bad thing inherently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultravires Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 proper side decking is not a an undeserved win, and if I want to play a card that stops one turn swarming into XYZ and synchros because I only have one monster on the field, then I should consider this card, because it stops my opponent but does not hamper me as the player of the card. this doesn't stop everything and has a big target on it for destruction, but it's rightfully deserved because it's an effective lock-down tactic and this game has always been supportive of players that want to keep special summon swarming down to a minimum. it may not be fair since it lets them make something and then stop the opponent, but it's not like it leaves you incapable of playing monsters, and black hole and now raigeki opens the way through to make plays. this stops meta style extra deck playing, and I don't think that's a bad thing inherently. It's awful just like every other card that says you can't play YGO. It's also a garbage card because it is not particularly useful in progressing your win condition. The only two decks that can effectively take advantage of it are Bujins and NKs, and it's terrible in both; in Bujins because of the reasons I listed above coupled with it not getting to your busted cards fast enough, and in NKs because you never sit on King unless you're awful at this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
werewolfjedi Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 It's awful just like every other card that says you can't play YGO. It's also a garbage card because it is not particularly useful in progressing your win condition. The only two decks that can effectively take advantage of it are Bujins and NKs, and it's terrible in both; in Bujins because of the reasons I listed above coupled with it not getting to your busted cards fast enough, and in NKs because you never sit on King unless you're awful at this game. nothing in this game says I can't stop my opponent from doing anything. when has tournament level side decking ever been about fun? it's not fun, but it's not awful, and don't talk about progressing my win condition for my deck, because straight up stopping my opponent with 1 card in the opening turns means I don't have to worry about my opponent's win condition at all. which lets mine speed ahead. playing a wall in front of my opponent in a race may not be fun nor fair, but it's effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 nothing in this game says I can't stop my opponent from doing anything. when has tournament level side decking ever been about fun? it's not fun, but it's not awful, and don't talk about progressing my win condition for my deck, because straight up stopping my opponent with 1 card in the opening turns means I don't have to worry about my opponent's win condition at all. which lets mine speed ahead. playing a wall in front of my opponent in a race may not be fun nor fair, but it's effective. what does this prove about the design Are you stupid, or what? And this is never "proper side decking". It IS a bad card. It supports fledgling decks that don't have anything else to do by giving them a mediocre "lock", and it's bad in the deck by the time it has more support. It's a terribly designed card, it's not a good card, and it's all around detrimental to the game in every regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultravires Posted October 13, 2014 Report Share Posted October 13, 2014 nothing in this game says I can't stop my opponent from doing anything. when has tournament level side decking ever been about fun? it's not fun, but it's not awful, and don't talk about progressing my win condition for my deck, because straight up stopping my opponent with 1 card in the opening turns means I don't have to worry about my opponent's win condition at all. which lets mine speed ahead. playing a wall in front of my opponent in a race may not be fun nor fair, but it's effective. This has nothing to do with "tournament level side decking", I'm saying that it is terrible from a design standpoint. No other game has cost-less floodgates as powerful as ours. In actuality I'm not even talking about it being unfair though; the majority of my post was about how the card is awful outside of very specific tier 3 decks that, if played properly, do not even benefit from Kaiser at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newhat Posted October 15, 2014 Report Share Posted October 15, 2014 It's a dead topdeck, bad to see when you're winning, worse when you're losing and provides absolutely zero utility. It's a conditional floodgate, not an answer. It doesn't interrupt plays. It denies them. Not every defensive card has to be Vanity's Emptiness or Shadow-Imprisoning Mirror and negate something on activation. If your definition of "winning" is "wide swinging field", then yes, it would be bad. This has nothing to do with "tournament level side decking", I'm saying that it is terrible from a design standpoint. So it's a toxic card, not a weak one? ...the card is awful outside of very specific tier 3 decks that, if played properly, do not even benefit from Kaiser at all. Why is it a problem that Decks with no speed benefit from it much more than fast Decks? And if it ends up being effective in them why must it mean they're being played suboptimally? It's also a garbage card because it is not particularly useful in progressing your win condition. What does this mean? Vanity's Emptiness is a tempo killer but people run three of them. Granted it is chainable, but playing around it while you maintain board control is a common thing. The only two decks that can effectively take advantage of it are Bujins and NKs, and it's terrible in both; So they can get significant value out of it, but also can't get enough? Is it effective or terrible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted October 15, 2014 Report Share Posted October 15, 2014 It's a conditional floodgate, not an answer. It doesn't interrupt plays. It denies them. Not every defensive card has to be Vanity's Emptiness or Shadow-Imprisoning Mirror and negate something on activation. If your definition of "winning" is "wide swinging field", then yes, it would be bad. Well, they kinda do. The fact that those are chainable means that you can use them to cause you opponent to overextend into losing card advantage. That is why they are good. So it's a toxic card, not a weak one? Whynotboth.gif Why is it a problem that Decks with no speed benefit from it much more than fast Decks? And if it ends up being effective in them why must it mean they're being played suboptimally? Because the builds that don't run it perform better? Just because you can doesn't mean you should. What does this mean? Vanity's Emptiness is a tempo killer but people run three of them. Granted it is chainable, but playing around it while you maintain board control is a common thing. It. Is. Chainable. So they can get significant value out of it, but also can't get enough? Is it effective or terrible? Just because you can run it doesn't mean it is worth running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultravires Posted October 15, 2014 Report Share Posted October 15, 2014 It's a conditional floodgate, not an answer. It doesn't interrupt plays. It denies them. Not every defensive card has to be Vanity's Emptiness or Shadow-Imprisoning Mirror and negate something on activation. Responsiveness is superior. If your definition of "winning" is "wide swinging field", then yes, it would be bad. My definition of winning is winning, not putting a weak lock on the field. I like to play to win, not play to not lose. So it's a toxic card, not a weak one? Yes, but it's not that bad. From a design standpoint it is, but it's wholly an irrelevant card right now. Why is it a problem that Decks with no speed benefit from it much more than fast Decks? And if it ends up being effective in them why must it mean they're being played suboptimally? It isn't a problem. Slow decks are garbage now. I never said it was effective; I said it could only be effectively used by those decks. Bujins typically do not win by sitting on Yamato. They win by seeing Carnation and Charge to continuously blow out the opponent's plays. NKs do not win by putting R5 Arty on the field with 3-4 equips. They win by grinding the opponent and putting up power plays through Merlin and Medraut, as well as OTKing through Merlin. What does this mean? Vanity's Emptiness is a tempo killer but people run three of them. Granted it is chainable, but playing around it while you maintain board control is a common thing. Vanity's can be played around and is a responsive card in a meta that relies on Special Summon effects resolving. So they can get significant value out of it, but also can't get enough? Is it effective or terrible? You misunderstand what I'm saying. See above for what I meant by "effectively". They are the only decks that can effectively use the card. Evilswarm to an extent as well, but that's beside the point. The issue is that a consistent Bujin build will push for damage and advantage as often as possible instead of walling (see: Tsukucharge in the previous format), and an intelligent NK player who knows how the deck SHOULD be piloted to top tables will never leave only 1 Knight on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodfusion Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Chillax guys, it's just a card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goddamnit names are a pain Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 Chillax guys, it's just a card. Thank you for a post that does literally nothing! They know it's a card. They are all analyzing it and providing reasons for why they think it is good or bad. Vanities is far superior to this, and I'm pretty much just going to say "see reasons above". Basically, having presence with more than one monster is better than having presence…with just one monster. And the minute you have two monsters on the field, this card effectively becomes useless, a lot of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.