ihop Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 So he made a banlist. This format is more or less in the state it will be at the end of it with no relevant stuff coming out, so I think it's fair to start predicting. Banned Denko Sekka Djinn Releaser of Rituals Royal Magical Library Nekroz of Trishula Raigeki Crush Card Virus Vanity's Emptiness Limited Mathematician El Shaddoll Construct Thousand-Eyes Restrict Tellarknight Ptolemaeus A Hero Lives Instant Fusion Mind Crush Mistake Stellarnova Alpha Semi-Limited Fire Formation - Tenki Compulsory Evacuation Device Unlimited Glow-Up Bulb Sinister Serpent It's possible that I forgot something important, but this is the main stuff. Can justify any choice if you ask, not gonna justify them all on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progenitor Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 Crush card does not need to be banned. It's good but it's not that relevant, especially with all the decks that can just plus off it anyway. Same thing with Trish. I'ts a pain in the Ass, but it's the only powerful removal the deck naturally has. Plus people only tend to run it at 1 or maybe 2. Something does have to be done about denko, but I think a ban might be a tad too harsh. I dunno. Maybe it would be best just to not even let it be a 1-of Does Ptolemaeus really need to go to 1? It's CB infinity that's the problem. I guess you are trying to make it so Infinity can only be made by decks like Chronomaly and CBD? Why does tenki need to be at 2? Literally nothing in the meta can run it except for Yosenju if you even consider that meta. Everything else I can agree with or am more or less indifferent too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted May 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 Crush card does not need to be banned. It's good but it's not that relevant, especially with all the decks that can just plus off it anyway. It's relevant enough and normally a blowout when it's flipped. Still not a fair card even with somewhat irrelevant balancing. There's not actually any decks that can plus off it except Shaddoll and Infernoid but you just don't side in Crush Card vs them. Same thing with Trish. I'ts a pain in the Ass, but it's the only powerful removal the deck naturally has. Plus people only tend to run it at 1 or maybe 2. What does people running it at small amounts have to do with it? When playing Nekroz you have to jump through hoops just to avoid getting Trished because if you're Trished you almost certainly lose. It's not a fair card by any means. Something does have to be done about denko, but I think a ban might be a tad too harsh. I dunno. Maybe it would be best just to not even let it be a 1-of I hate Denko Does Ptolemaeus really need to go to 1? It's CB infinity that's the problem. I guess you are trying to make it so Infinity can only be made by decks like Chronomaly and CBD? Infinity's a broken card but it doesn't exist. I hate the entire concept of Ptolemaius as it has no conditions on what rank 5 it can summon, limits card design and is just a slippery slope in general - this can be seen with Infinity. I hope Ptolemaius is banned eventually but this is a step. Why does tenki need to be at 2? Literally nothing in the meta can run it except for Yosenju if you even consider that meta. I don't like generic search cards (Rota should probably be limited, I forgot that) and it's actually relevant in Yosenju which is not a deck that should be around because it's a super-boring floodgate fest. Everything else I can agree with or am more or less indifferent too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not-so-Radiant Arin Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 It's good but it's not that relevant A card's relevance in the game should not be an indicator of it being banned or not. If a card is abusable or has a busted mechanic, like Card Crush, then it needs to be banned. Relevance in the metagame should have no impact as to the placement of a card on a list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progenitor Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 A card's relevance in the game should not be an indicator of it being banned or not. If a card is abusable or has a busted mechanic, like Card Crush, then it needs to be banned. Relevance in the metagame should have no impact as to the placement of a card on a list. Then allow me to rephrase: It's good but it's not as good. Crush card isn't that abuse able. Not any more that royal tribute, as they basically serve the same purpose now, except crush card doesn't even hit everything. If Royal Tribute is at 1 there is 0 excuse to put crush card to 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted May 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 Crush Card is relevant though. Strictly speaking Royal Tribute should be banned too but it isn't relevant in the slightest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zauls Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 I feel like something has to be done about Mind Crush too. To 1 maybe? Also Secret Village to 1 or something. EDIT: Oh, and the thread in Card discussion just reminded me, ban Royal Magical Library! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progenitor Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 Crush card is live about 75% more than Royal Tribute yes, but it's a bad royal tribute. There are still plenty of cards in almost every deck that crush card wont hit, and it even gives your opponent a chance to recover by Foolish Burial x3. There are so many decks that can plus off Crush card's 2nd eff that it can stay at 1, because royal tribute fucks you over and backwards, but in exchange it's decently hard to actually make it live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zauls Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 Crush card is live about 75% more than Royal Tribute yes, but it's a bad royal tribute. There are still plenty of cards in almost every deck that crush card wont hit, and it even gives your opponent a chance to recover by Foolish Burial x3. There are so many decks that can plus off Crush card's 2nd eff that it can stay at 1, because royal tribute f***s you over and backwards, but in exchange it's decently hard to actually make it live. There are so many decks that don't care about Denko Sekka. There are so many decks that don't care about Mistake. Doesn't mean they aren't good cards. Crush Card is a complete blowout against Nekroz, Yosenju and probably others and is also pretty good against Tellars. Cards that allow for a "flip this and win" situation aren't good for the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted May 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 I feel like something has to be done about Mind Crush too. To 1 maybe? Also Secret Village to 1 or something. EDIT: Oh, and the thread in Card discussion just reminded me, ban Royal Magical Library! Oh, yeah, Mind Crush is busted. Bowesy was talking about banning it actually just because it creates so many weird situations with people not knowing names of cards etc. Village is fine, it was only good this format because one deck relied completely on spells and there happened to be a good spellcaster deck (I hit it pretty hard). It's no worse than Spell Canceller or Naturia Beast. Library should be banned, yes. Crush card is live about 75% more than Royal Tribute yes, but it's a bad royal tribute. There are still plenty of cards in almost every deck that crush card wont hit, and it even gives your opponent a chance to recover by Foolish Burial x3. There are so many decks that can plus off Crush card's 2nd eff that it can stay at 1, because royal tribute fucks you over and backwards, but in exchange it's decently hard to actually make it live. There aren't, though. You're talking about Crush Card from a general standpoint rather than about its relevance to the current meta where it's a blowout against Sateller, Yosenju, Nekroz (although they are hit here) and especially Qliphort. The only relevant decks that benefit off the send effect/don't care in the first place are BA and Shaddoll which is a relatively small proportion of the metal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Progenitor Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 There are so many decks that don't care about Denko Sekka. There are so many decks that don't care about Mistake. Doesn't mean they aren't good cards. Crush Card is a complete blowout against Nekroz, Yosenju and probably others and is also pretty good against Tellars. Cards that allow for a "flip this and win" situation aren't good for the game. But it isn't a flip this and win card. That's what I've been trying to say. The downside of this card is that it can be a complete dud. It requires you to have a weak monster out. If that weak monster gets dealt with, you might be forced to use crush card. And if they have no monsters? It's completely useless. Yes on paper it's absolutely devastating, but when considering cards for ban you have to take a step back and consider the practicality of it. Look at nekroz, yeah it can hit a bunch of their monsters, but their key cards (Manju / Senju, Shurit, Clausolas, etc) are all not valid targets for crush card. Additionally, most decks have spells and traps to recover lost advantage. If you open with nothing but spells, what use is their crush card? Plus, if you get crush carded in Nekroz, it gives you a chance to dump Djinn in the grave, and then Whoops your opponent just essentially djinn locked themself. No it's not a bad card. In the right situation it can defiantly win games. But the key words there are "in the right situations" This card is situational. It's easily disrupted and at the same time is easily dead or useless in the wrong situations. You can't bad a card based on what it "could do". You have to ban a card based on what it does and to what consistency and degree it does it. There aren't, though. You're talking about Crush Card from a general standpoint rather than about its relevance to the current meta where it's a blowout against Sateller, Yosenju, Nekroz (although they are hit here) and especially Qliphort. The only relevant decks that benefit off the send effect/don't care in the first place are BA and Shaddoll which is a relatively small proportion of the metal I have only one thing to say: A card's relevance in the game should not be an indicator of it being banned or not. If a card is abusable or has a busted mechanic, like Card Crush, then it needs to be banned. Relevance in the metagame should have no impact as to the placement of a card on a list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zauls Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 Oh, yeah, Mind Crush is busted. Bowesy was talking about banning it actually just because it creates so many weird situations with people not knowing names of cards etc. Village is fine, it was only good this format because one deck relied completely on spells and there happened to be a good spellcaster deck (I hit it pretty hard). It's no worse than Spell Canceller or Naturia Beast. Library should be banned, yes. It is a good point about Mind Crush, but I thought that as long as you knew enough to be able to specify the card you want to be discarded, then you don't need the full name. It would be too much of a problem at European YCS events otherwise. You should know lol, remember when that guy asked you to say a card's name in German XD But yeah Bilbe once told me that you can just point at the card when its on the table right after being searched and that still works. There just needs to be an official statement and ruling on it, I think, rather than just outright banning it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blake Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 TBH, I'd rather see BTH move up than Compulse, but that's personal preference. To my knowlege, limiting Ptolemaus is redundant. Other than that and further idealistic things I would do (which obv don't apply), seems really solid as a list, tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted May 11, 2015 Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 TBH, I'd rather see BTH move up than Compulse, but that's personal preference.Obviously it's to Compulse the the Clown you just revived :Kappa: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted May 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2015 It is a good point about Mind Crush, but I thought that as long as you knew enough to be able to specify the card you want to be discarded, then you don't need the full name. It would be too much of a problem at European YCS events otherwise. You should know lol, remember when that guy asked you to say a card's name in German XD But yeah Bilbe once told me that you can just point at the card when its on the table right after being searched and that still works. There just needs to be an official statement and ruling on it, I think, rather than just outright banning it. Even that is undesirable and it's just so open and you never know. There's also an issue with irreparable game states created by people activating it with no cards in hand and opponents showing their hand. Those alone aren't reasons to hit it but it's a pretty amazing, versatile and borderline-broken card anyway and that doesn't help. TBH, I'd rather see BTH move up than Compulse, but that's personal preference. To my knowlege, limiting Ptolemaus is redundant. Other than that and further idealistic things I would do (which obv don't apply), seems really solid as a list, tbh. Bottomless is a far more powerful card, especially in certain formats, and imo should stay at 1. Ptolemaeus limit is really just a step towards banning it which isn't realistic so early on, but it also means that if Infinity is released there's only 1 to deal with which is slightly better than blowing a bunch of resources to get round one only for your opponent to Call Altair and make another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toffee. Posted May 12, 2015 Report Share Posted May 12, 2015 Bottomless is a far more powerful card, especially in certain formats, and imo should stay at 1.Bottomless at higher numbers would give people an excuse to play Traptrix again.... Not that it matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.