Because Yuma Might Potentially Use An Infernity Barrier [Written]

[Premier Alexander Romanov]

Onomatoparry
Trap/Counter
When a Spell/Trap Card, or monster effect, is activated while you control at least 2 monsters with different names, and all face-up monsters you control are "Zubaba", "Gagaga", "Gogogo", and/or "Dododo" monsters: Negate the activation, and if you do, destroy that card.

 

Discuss.

[Dad]

I like that you chose this sub-archetype(?).  It's not common (at least from what I've personally seen) and this, though situational, seems viable.  It's counterplay dedicated, but not broken because the requirements are very specific.  And the name kind of seals the deal for me.  I love it.

[Blake]

It's honestly pretty bad.

 

Like, don't get me wrong, the flavor is absolutely adorable... But when are you going to have this live?

 

9/10, it would only be live while you're making plays, not after, which leaves an incredibly narrow window for use, especially considering it has to be set a turn ahead.

 

An Infernity Barrier for Yuma is just bland design, despite the cute flavor, and it's just... not going to be a good card. If you lower the cost to just one of those, it's not truly fair.

 

You're not getting comments because it's an incredibly bland design posted by itself, and to change it would likely make the design worse than this borderline unplayable card.

 

This definitely is a Casual Design.

[VCR_CAT]

If there were more ED options for Gagaga/Gogogo/Whatever/Whatever that held enough field presence to warrant having two of them, then this field spell would be VERY good. Unfortunately, most Yuma.dek's will have either a bunch of generic Xyz monsters, or multiple Utopias and won't be able to make much use of this. HOWEVER, it would work pretty good in stopping cards before you summon such as Fiendish Chain, Vanity's Emptiness, Skill Drain, BTH, etc. So it's not COMPLETELY useless, but knowing the decks it could be a little better. Maybe include Utopia monsters in the effect somehow?

The flavor and idea are really good, though. I love that you went with the Onomata cards and it stays very true to a card designed for Yuma. Did a really good job of that, and the card functions pretty similarly to how an Onomata card would work.

[Blake]

If there were more ED options for Gagaga/Gogogo/Whatever/Whatever that held enough field presence to warrant having two of them, then this field spell would be VERY good. Unfortunately, most Yuma.dek's will have either a bunch of generic Xyz monsters, or multiple Utopias and won't be able to make much use of this. HOWEVER, it would work pretty good in stopping cards before you summon such as Fiendish Chain, Vanity's Emptiness, Skill Drain, BTH, etc. So it's not COMPLETELY useless, but knowing the decks it could be a little better. Maybe include Utopia monsters in the effect somehow?

The flavor and idea are really good, though. I love that you went with the Onomata cards and it stays very true to a card designed for Yuma. Did a really good job of that, and the card functions pretty similarly to how an Onomata card would work.

First off, it's not a field spell. It's a counter trap.

 

Secondly, it is completely useless. You have to control ONLY Go/Ga/Zu/Do monsters, you have to control 2+ of different names, and it has to be set a turn before. Its window of use is fucking tiny, and that makes it a dead draw that doesn't do near enough.

 

As for the cards you mentioned... MST/equivalent or Forbidden Lance are better against each of those and don't require a terribly narrow scenario.

 

Oh, and I orgot to mention; This can't hit a face-up Pendulum Scale or S/T, so that weakens it even more. It can't stop summons, and lord knows the monsters that make this live aren't large.

 

I reiterate. it is completely useless in a realistic scenario.

[Spinny]

I thought pretty much the same thing as black said when I saw this card.
To remedy the situation, I would make it work in the favour of the Change Tactics utopia deck making it go off if you control a face-up utopia monster with a utopia monster attached to it as an xyz material, furthermore, you could give it an effect to stop the destruction of a utopia xyz monster by banishing it from the graveyard. You would probably have to change the name to Xyz Parry or something with xyz in the name but it would be a far more useful card.

[VCR_CAT]

First off, it's not a field spell. It's a counter trap.

 

Secondly, it is completely useless. You have to control ONLY Go/Ga/Zu/Do monsters, you have to control 2+ of different names, and it has to be set a turn before. Its window of use is f***ing tiny, and that makes it a dead draw that doesn't do near enough.

 

As for the cards you mentioned... MST/equivalent or Forbidden Lance are better against each of those and don't require a terribly narrow scenario.

 

Oh, and I orgot to mention; This can't hit a face-up Pendulum Scale or S/T, so that weakens it even more. It can't stop summons, and lord knows the monsters that make this live aren't large.

 

I reiterate. it is completely useless in a realistic scenario.

You know what else isn't a field spell? http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Onomatopaira
I'd suggest actually looking up into things before immediately going into a hostile, argumentative state. I would also strongly suggest you offer actual constructive criticism instead of posting only to say "This is bad kthnxbai". If you don't have anything to add that would help improve it, I'm sure many people would appreciate it if you didn't post at all.

This is still a rather effective card against flood-gate situations (read that it includes monster effects as well) where MST and Lance would do nothing, or not as much as you would like. Examples being: Torrential Tribute, Yuki/Effect Veiler/Literally any hand-trap/literally any monster effect that your opponent would activate before you summon an Xyz. Now, having played Gagaga/Yuma decks, there actually ARE a lot of times where this would come into effect. Notice that when it says "Two different names" doesn't mean two different archetypes; Gagaga Sister and Magician do have, indeed, different names. It's a very common thing to see a lot of card effects used to stop you from even going into an Xyz monster, because that's what strategy is. It's usually a lot smarter to kill the materials instead of taking the chance that your opponent goes into something that can avoid the out you have planned and still cause damage (see: Exciton).

Now I'm not saying this card is amazing or even great, but it's far from unplayable and still has plenty of uses in a realistic scenario. A good modification would be to change the activation requirement regarding the names of the monsters; and maybe adding a different flare to the effect negation that gives it something more unique beyond a Ga/Go/Do/Zu Barrier card.

As for stopping summons and doing everything; that's generally a bad idea in the card since the card game doesn't need another Solemn Judgment. Having your counter-trap stopping anything you want is not good design. Focus instead on the niche strategy of the deck you're trying to support and you'll be golden.
 

[Blake]

You know what else isn't a field spell? http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Onomatopaira
I'd suggest actually looking up into things before immediately going into a hostile, argumentative state. I would also strongly suggest you offer actual constructive criticism instead of posting only to say "This is bad kthnxbai". If you don't have anything to add that would help improve it, I'm sure many people would appreciate it if you didn't post at all.

You said THIS field spell. You did not, in any way, imply Onomatopia was what you meant. Allow me to quote you.
"If there were more ED options for Gagaga/Gogogo/Whatever/Whatever that held enough field presence to warrant having two of them, then this field spell would be VERY good."

You did not mention Onomatopia, so it isn't natural to assume you meant it in any way, and it looks as if you misconstrued the card in the OP. That's your own poor wording.

I'm not being hostile or argumentative. I merely pointed out flaws with your argument. In the WATER Xyz thread I'll amit you could have said such... but not here. My reply is straight-up correction/debate, not argumentative.

The thing is, I already went over what was wrong with this design and how expanding on it is not a good idea. And please don't use the other thread as an excuse, as I laid out what was wrong with it, and even came back to help fix it.

In fact, in most scenarios, merely pointing out flaws with the card in a gamestate is better than 'fixing' it. Why? Because fixing it for them often doesn't encourage learning. It encourages a "fix this, kk" mindset, which is not healthy for the section. I did it with Ain because the idea was cute, but it fell in execution, so I wanted to give a better execution of such as an example to the kid.
 

This is still a rather effective card against flood-gate situations (read that it includes monster effects as well) where MST and Lance would do nothing, or not as much as you would like. Examples being: Torrential Tribute, Yuki/Effect Veiler/Literally any hand-trap/literally any monster effect that your opponent would activate before you summon an Xyz. Now, having played Gagaga/Yuma decks, there actually ARE a lot of times where this would come into effect. Notice that when it says "Two different names" doesn't mean two different archetypes; Gagaga Sister and Magician do have, indeed, different names. It's a very common thing to see a lot of card effects used to stop you from even going into an Xyz monster, because that's what strategy is. It's usually a lot smarter to kill the materials instead of taking the chance that your opponent goes into something that can avoid the out you have planned and still cause damage (see: Exciton).

Torrential is bad, Yuki/Veiler is better stopped by debunk/mind drain (y'know, a floodgate), and it requires you to have /only/ Yuma monsters. No Xyz, which means it's not live T1/2 (it's a trap) and you should have an Xyz after that. Any more, and you're already knocked down into a position where this won't help 9/10.

Sure, it's a single card that covers all of those, but... It is a trap with a more narrow window for those select uses. Which means it's a likely dead draw. If you're in a good position, it's dead. If you're in a bad position, it won't be enough.

I never even began to imply it required 2 different archetypes. Controlling 2+ of these with different names and no other monsters, aside from an early play where this isn't live due to being a trap, is not likely.

None of this has... changed anything. You just used wrongly haughty language, as if to mmake yourself seem more intelligent, but forgot to fill in the gaps with gamestate knowledge and actual arguments other than "but there's a 1/100000 chance". You even outright ignored important facts, such as the fact that it's a trap and the scenario you described is a T1/2 play optimally, which would mean wanting this card for suboptimal scenarios.
 

Now I'm not saying this card is amazing or even great, but it's far from unplayable and still has plenty of uses in a realistic scenario. A good modification would be to change the activation requirement regarding the names of the monsters; and maybe adding a different flare to the effect negation that gives it something more unique beyond a Ga/Go/Do/Zu Barrier card.

As for stopping summons and doing everything; that's generally a bad idea in the card since the card game doesn't need another Solemn Judgment. Having your counter-trap stopping anything you want is not good design. Focus instead on the niche strategy of the deck you're trying to support and you'll be golden.

I wasn't advocating stopping summons, I was just saying that it does not, in any way, reward you msot days, as it's easy to outplay if you do leave 2 monsters. Like, I admit, Gogogo Control could be cute... but this doesn't stop near enough. And that would still be worse than straight-up Xyz Spamming with Gogogo, given the fact that this is unsearchable and that would be a bootleg version of Yosenju. All of the others ones are fairly wimpy or hard to spit out, which means that they'll just get poked before the opponent plays.

As for the rest, bar my minor oversight, it is largely unplayable. Being a trap makes it lose hard, and it would be better as an archetypal Forbidden Lance/Infestation Pandemic/Void Seer. At least then it would be usable T1 and outplay the aforementioned hand traps effectively. As-is, as a barrier, it's a design that shouldn't be touched, and it just doesn't reward you enough despite the poor design avenue it takes. I'd have suggested stuff, but you should not tell someone to overhaul a card like that, unless it's 100% needed.

[VCR_CAT]

ah, I DID say "This field spell". Sorry, I wasn't aware I had typed that (I really should proof-read a little more), so I thought you were saying something different.

Also I did see you go back and offer something to help fix it; which is one reason why I just didn't say anything. But I do agree in that just giving the fixes alone aren't enough; but at the same time, just saying what's wrong with it and that it's bad isn't good enough either. In my opinion, it's better to offer more vague ideas and suggestions of ways that could make it better, and let the OP come up with the new effect by themselves. Nudge them in the right direction, but don't offer the fix on a silver platter. Anyways, that's kind of irrelevant right now and better left to another place to be discussed.
 

Also fair enough; I was only showing that the card isn't AS bad as you made it out to be (it looked like the post was a little exaggerated, but I'm not sure if that was intended or not).