jabber2033 Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Discard 1 card; Fusion Summon 1 Fusion Monster from your Extra Deck, using monsters from either side of the field as Fusion Materials. Cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this card's activation. And this is now Forbidden. Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Griffin Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 I'm not opposed to this. It instantly won some matchups so hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 First thing that comes to mind is RIP Shaddolls and some other things that rely on this card. (Pretty sure they have other options besides this, though) But yeah, this thing can't be countered so if it goes off, you lose a few monsters + opponent gets some Fusion Monster to screw you with. Don't mind seeing it banned, considering that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 In theory, assuming that Fusions get better and more generic as a mechanic undergoing improvements, this becomes much more of a threat. There is a reason Synchros didn't have something like this going for them. Since the opponent's monster being removed from their advantage is in exchange for the discard, this card essentially is like a 1-material Fusion that is completely chainable and pretty much impossible to negate (yes Fabled, but come on). Although I am kinda sad that the Supreme King's legacy had to be hit :v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLG Klavier Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Quoting myself from banlist thread: I'd like to note that this is a perfect example of the beloved by TCG section "design vs impact" discussion, and an ultimate proof of how it should work. Super Poly was always pretty degenerate, but only deck that could favorably use it was HEROes, which weren't really that good, so it was fine, it gave a boost to a weak deck. Now that Shaddolls exist, and HEROes will get stronger, it was giving an unfair advantage to already strong decks, so it got banned. Perfectly sound logic, and shows how it should work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Was a really cool card, but it's getting more and more powerful as Konami tries to bring Fusions back in all the wrong ways. Not being counterable makes it some of the best removal around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~British Soul~ Posted December 17, 2014 Report Share Posted December 17, 2014 Between Shaddolls and HEROes, I thought this had to go eventually and I'm fine with that tbh. It was pretty good removal though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Βyakuya Posted December 18, 2014 Report Share Posted December 18, 2014 For Shaddolls, I rarely draw into this card anyway, but when I use it, the fact that it's a free removal option to mess a play and have zero chain options is utterly powerful. Like what sleepy said, combined with the growing genericness of Fusion Materials, the uprising of Fusions in the meta, and the stats of the card itself, it does verfiy a fact that this card can be banned. Won't be sure if Winda/Midrash and/or Construct/Nephilim can hold out on their own, but at least they were not hit and Shaddolls are still trolly but now under a good extent of control now that the opponent is competent with a monster that can run over them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bringerofcake Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Would this be less broken if you could chain to it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Would this be less broken if you could chain to it? Yes. Would it be more balanced? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Yes. Would it be more balanced? No. less broken by definition is more balanced unless the card is underpowered right now. let me show you with symbols: <----------------------------------------------------------------------------------> Useless Balanced Broken so is the card too weak right now? ALSO TEAM YCM THEORYCRAFT WHATEVER YOLO: Is banning this card a move that promotes interaction by removing a card to which nothing can be chained, or does it hurt interaction because this card itself interacts with the opponent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iCherries Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Would this be less broken if you could chain to it?You could chain Vanity to it so I guess so.I still wouldn't want it beyond limited even if you could chain to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VampireofDarkness Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Honestly, if Noden is coming in Return of the Bling, this had to happen (Aside from Blaze Fenix getting limited, which needs to happen already). This was a pretty stupid card and although for Heroes it was cute, it was just getting out of hand really quick. Now that there are some legit Fusions to work with this, I don't think this card should stay legal. No, Shaddolls won't be dead, no one should be assuming this, they just lost the thing that auto-forced them to be the best deck of the format two formats ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilfusion Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 Indeed. Scratch the modifier, then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Polo Posted December 19, 2014 Report Share Posted December 19, 2014 First thing that comes to mind is RIP Shaddolls and some other things that rely on this card. (Pretty sure they have other options besides this, though) But yeah, this thing can't be countered so if it goes off, you lose a few monsters + opponent gets some Fusion Monster to screw you with. Don't mind seeing it banned, considering that fact.Shaddols "rely" on this as much as qliphorths "rely" skill drain. The community immediately assumes they're completely necessary when they are just nice to have. (the example might not be perfect as skill drain is more integral in qliphs but you get the point) You R.I.P shaddolls when construct and winda get limited, not when super poly, a card that was at 1, gets banned, I mean, surely you know it wasn't that integral? (I know you did say they have other options, just felt a strange urge to note the above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SANDAA BORUTO Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You can hit ANY problem card in Shatrolls, like Construct, Winda, Shaddoll Fusion, Dragon, etc. And you ban THIS instead of hitting any of the above, when THIS was already at 1? I fail to understand the logic of Konami against Shaddolls. They only hit S-Poly when it comes to Shaddolls, but look at the OCG banlist - Look how hard Nekroz got hit. Konami sometimes twists my mind. It's unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted December 20, 2014 Report Share Posted December 20, 2014 You can hit ANY problem card in Shatrolls, like Construct, Winda, Shaddoll Fusion, Dragon, etc. And you ban THIS instead of hitting any of the above, when THIS was already at 1? I fail to understand the logic of Konami against Shaddolls. They only hit S-Poly when it comes to Shaddolls, but look at the OCG banlist - Look how hard Nekroz got hit. Konami sometimes twists my mind. It's unbelievable. Because this card works with more than just Shadolls. We have the boosting-up of HERO decks and Noden approaching to TCG so this card will become unstoppable generic removal that might get 1 or 2 monsters out of the way in a chainable manner, and leave you with a boss monster to boot. Shadolls is also not the indisputable deck of the format, we have Qli', Burning Abyss, Stellars, and other stuff giving them a fight, and soon to come Necloths, HERO, and slightly less hit Mermails coming over so we'll see how they'll hold up for TCG standards. As far as I've seen Necloths are stronger so I can see why they'd hit them first, even if you are not even talking about the same list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azuh Posted December 21, 2014 Report Share Posted December 21, 2014 Does anyone ever Noden with Super Poly? All I see is Instant Fusion abuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heraldry_lord Posted December 21, 2014 Report Share Posted December 21, 2014 Does anyone ever Noden with Super Poly? All I see is Instant Fusion abuse If Synchro and/or Xyz spam was more prevalent, Super Poly into Noden would probably show up more often. I remember when Super Poly was just that cool card from the GX anime that no-one but HEROs used (due to the Omni-HEROs), and even then, it was iffy on its usage due to the discard cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted December 21, 2014 Report Share Posted December 21, 2014 Someone I know once made a custom archetype around putting crazy dragons on either side of the field and fusing them with this card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted December 21, 2014 Report Share Posted December 21, 2014 I remember when Super Poly was just that cool card from the GX anime that no-one but HEROs used (due to the Omni-HEROs), and even then, it was iffy on its usage due to the discard cost.To be fair... Around that time, we only had like, what, Zero, Gaia, and Tornado?Meaning Super would only work against things that were dominantly WATER, EARTH, and WIND, respectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.