Lavalval Chain

[ems97]

 

2 Level 4 monsters
Once per turn: You can detach 1 Xyz Material from this card to activate 1 of these effects;
● Send 1 card from your Deck to the Graveyard.
● Choose 1 monster from your Deck and place it on top of your Deck.

 

Will the rumors of this card going to get banned will be true?

At one point this card needs to be banned because of obviously ClownBlade. But the other, is help maintain mill decks giving them an edge. Let's see if Minerva, Lightsworn Saint will be the new Chain?

[mido9]

Obligatory "it's fine, other cards are broken" post.

[Spinny]

Laval's can barely even make this..... Well, moreso now because soul charge and rekindling are at 1. Which is a shame because this card would've been fine if it wasn't generic.

[Slinky]

In all honesty, I don't find Clownblade to be truly dangerous. It's just a standard R4 deck that is moderately faster than others. Then again, I may not have been facing the right people.

 

Either way though, Lavalval Chain is something that does too much. It's too much of a play enabler to let hang around. A ban is well-deserved.

[Toffee.]

It's a Foolish Burial that's on legs/always on-hand.

Yet, for whatever funking reason, we still have it.

[Blake]

Obligatory "it's fine, other cards are broken" post.

except that logic doesn't hold when chain is consistently an issue

 

It's not banworthy just bcaus of ClownBlade-S, but if the format takes hits all around, it's about the only pre-emptive hit that works given product cycles and such.

[mido9]

except that logic doesn't hold when chain is consistently an issue

 

It's not banworthy just bcaus of ClownBlade-S, but if the format takes hits all around, it's about the only pre-emptive hit that works given product cycles and such.

Well I mean considering that like 90% of its loops are with blaze fenix/infernity archfiend and it wouldve had all of one loop without them I wouldnt say it's even the broken part there.

[VampireofDarkness]

except that logic doesn't hold when chain is consistently an issue

 

It's not banworthy just bcaus of ClownBlade-S, but if the format takes hits all around, it's about the only pre-emptive hit that works given product cycles and such.

I'm just wondering tho, if they plan to hit Clownblade in advance and kill the Deck, then what exactly from CORE will be the big go to cards? Igknights have proven to suck, Performages lost their best trick, and Red Eyes isn't good enough.

[Blake]

Well I mean considering that like 90% of its loops are with blaze fenix/infernity archfiend and it wouldve had all of one loop without them I wouldnt say it's even the broken part there.

Who said anything abou loops? Allow me to quote iHop on both Lavalval Chain at present and in general.

It's not as if Chain isn't ridiculous in Nekroz regardless of Djinn. You use it pretty often either to stack a Ju so you can guarantee a good play next turn or, even better, stack a Lancea and then draw it off Valk in order to tell your opponent "I've played Yugioh, now you can't play Yugioh next turn". Sure, that might be the problem of Valk (or even Lancea) but pretty much every use of Lavalval Chain can be blamed on something else because the card is entirely interactive with other cards, eventually you need to start looking at Chain itself and it's been the cause of so many ridiculous combos over its time that it can't really stay.

There is no way to keep defending this card. No matter how hard people try to, it is the problem card in most scenarios, with cards that aren't good without it. Thousand Blades is ass without Chain, Djinn is a game costing dead draw, Zombies have other cards to do the same job, 

 

You can't keep saying "it's the fault of the other cards" when Chain consistently sshows up again and again. It is the fault of Chain, because it's a foolish on demand. And hell, the stacking effect gets stronger with each new set released, so it's 2 strong effects.

 

I'm just wondering tho, if they plan to hit Clownblade in advance and kill the Deck, then what exactly from CORE will be the big go to cards? Igknights have proven to suck, Performages lost their best trick, and Red Eyes isn't good enough.

Igknights are a glass cannon deck more given to a TCG mindset than an OCG mindset. There is no other way to hit Clownblade (read: Star Seraph Scepter) pre-emptively, and if the rest of the format falls differing amounts, as per the rumored list (bar qli and rogues), then it makes sense to kill it now.

[Toffee.]

Clownblade won't exactly "die" if Chain is hit.

Just means that Deck has to, ironically, jump through hoops.

Which is funny cuz' it's appropriate for that theme

[SANDAA BORUTO]

Tricklown and Thousand Blades are perfectly fine... WITHOUT EACH OTHER. I'd ban either of those two instead of Chain. Since it was Tricklown who broke TB and not the other way around, Tricklown would be the one I'd ban if I had the choice. But this is a Lavalval Chain topic, so...

 

Any deck that can R4 and uses the grave should run Chain, and in multiples if they have the extra space for it.

[Blake]

Tricklown and Thousand Blades are perfectly fine... WITHOUT EACH OTHER. I'd ban either of those two instead of Chain. Since it was Tricklown who broke TB and not the other way around, Tricklown would be the one I'd ban if I had the choice. But this is a Lavalval Chain topic, so...

 

Any deck that can R4 and uses the grave should run Chain, and in multiples if they have the extra space for it.

Product Cycles. They won't ban cards that are still relatively new, and every last monster in the maindeck for clownblade falls within the TCG product cycle.

 

and tbh clownblade itself is fine, the problem is that star seraph scepter is actually an obscenely strong card, and that noden joins 1.5 months later

[mido9]

There is no way to keep defending this card. No matter how hard people try to, it is the problem card in most scenarios, with cards that aren't good without it. Thousand Blades is ass without Chain, Djinn is a game costing dead draw, Zombies have other cards to do the same job, 

 

You can't keep saying "it's the fault of the other cards" when Chain consistently shows up again and again. It is the fault of Chain, because it's a foolish on demand.

Well sure but most of these cards that are playable with lavalval are cards that /arguably/ shouldnt be usable at all. I mean, djinn's just waiting for any reasonable/semi consistent dump engine at all and it'd be a lockout card in any future ritual decks that can use it and it should probably never be usable in a top tier deck reasonably, trickclown's a (I suppose?) +1 just for getting it into the grave or just xyzing with it and the whole deck is tame without seraphs IMO anyway, and so on.

 

And sure, chain shows up often, it's just that it's generic enough for every deck with broken cards to be able to use it. Doesnt make it really the problem with each of those broken card interactions.

[ihop]

Well sure but most of these cards that are playable with lavalval are cards that /arguably/ shouldnt be usable at all. I mean, djinn's just waiting for any reasonable/semi consistent dump engine at all and it'd be a lockout card in any future ritual decks that can use it and it should probably never be usable in a top tier deck reasonably, trickclown's a (I suppose?) +1 just for getting it into the grave or just xyzing with it and the whole deck is tame without seraphs IMO anyway, and so on.

 

And sure, chain shows up often, it's just that it's generic enough for every deck with broken cards to be able to use it. Doesnt make it really the problem with each of those broken card interactions.

 

 

pretty much every use of Lavalval Chain can be blamed on something else because the card is entirely interactive with other cards, eventually you need to start looking at Chain itself and it's been the cause of so many ridiculous combos over its time that it can't really stay.

 

Djinn lock is just one specific use, there are so many different uses for Chain and each of them require Chain as the enabler. It's just too versatile a card.

[Blake]

Well sure but most of these cards that are playable with lavalval are cards that /arguably/ shouldnt be usable at all. I mean, djinn's just waiting for any reasonable/semi consistent dump engine at all and it'd be a lockout card in any future ritual decks that can use it and it should probably never be usable in a top tier deck reasonably, trickclown's a (I suppose?) +1 just for getting it into the grave or just xyzing with it and the whole deck is tame without seraphs IMO anyway, and so on.

 

And sure, chain shows up often, it's just that it's generic enough for every deck with broken cards to be able to use it. Doesnt make it really the problem with each of those broken card interactions.

And what have your proven? You've proven that cards are tame when Lavalval Chain doesn't give you stupid access to them.

 

Many of these so-called 'broken' cards aren't anything of the sort without Lavalval Chain. Tricklown (also, I said Thousand Blades for a reason) and Djinn are the 2 most obvious, but how on earth can you defend a card that's a generic mill while ignoring that it has even more on top of that?

 

People always try to defend Chain because it's the enabler instead of the enabled, but if it's not there to enable things... they're inconsistently enabled and, as such, aren't near as powerful.

 

You can't blame every card that exists because there's a more-or-less completely generic and piss-easy way to dump them. A lot of cards are not half as broken if Chain doesn't exist, and iHop showcased how its stack effect does a little too much in a deck even without Djinn.

 

You say it's the broken cards fault despite it being generic, but the thing is that CHAIN is the broken card. It breaks other cards, is generic, and far too versatile in what it does.

[mido9]

Many of these so-called 'broken' cards aren't anything of the sort without Lavalval Chain. Tricklown (also, I said Thousand Blades for a reason) and Djinn are the 2 most obvious, but how on earth can you defend a card that's a generic mill while ignoring that it has even more on top of that?

 

People always try to defend Chain because it's the enabler instead of the enabled, but if it's not there to enable things... they're inconsistently enabled and, as such, aren't near as powerful.

 

A lot of cards are not half as broken if Chain doesn't exist

Yeah but it's about whether these things should be enabled at all, by anything. Like, every power card is better when it's more consistent, but that doesnt make their own power when they get used. JD(just a random example) is unused because it's inconsistent, but you're not ever going to want it to BE reasonably consistent, but to a much lesser extent.

[Blake]

Yeah but it's about whether these things should be enabled at all, by anything. Like, every power card is better when it's more consistent, but that doesnt make their own power when they get used. JD(just a random example) is unused because it's inconsistent, but you're not ever going to want it to BE reasonably consistent.

... But not every card chain enables is a power card, so that comparison fails. In fact, it mostly enables goodstuff to be too powerful, as opposed to directly enabling power cards. But it DOES up their power level in addition to their consistency.

 

Another thing to note is the nature of these cards without Lavalval to enable them.

• Tricklown: Don't want it in hand, which is why you run 1-2, not more.
• Thousand Blades: The worst draw in the deck, unless you open it + kagetokage/assault, and even then it's not an optimal draw. I'd rather see Tricklown in that scenario. Run 1.
• Mezuki: Not the worst to draw, but still would rather Deck -> Grave it most days. One of the biggest offenders, despite total lack of relevance. And this is why you run 3.
• Djinn: A waste of a draw, you run 1 to avoid that.
• Scepter: Sure, you're generally fine with drawing it, but that requires finding 1+ copy of 3 total copies, and it can't be 'searched' by Chain. We have 6 CotH, and while there is an argument that 6 of that is too much, it's another deal altogether from this. Not to mention the fact that it will co-exist with Norden, and Norden is too strong in its own right, much less with Chain/Stick supporting it.
• Infernity: Not a healthy thing by any means, if you want to go there, but it would never have been a deck again if not for Lavalval Chain.

 

I name only relevant/to-be-relevant/no-longer-relevant things, but to serve a point. And I could go on, but I think these should suffice. And the single cards I named are largely poor cards to find in your hand, thus you want to just Deck -> Grave them instead of drawing them, which means you run fewer copies thanks to Lavalval. Without it, you're stuck between "well drawing this sucks" and "But I really need it..."

 

Lavalval means you don't have to run shitty random mill (Minerva in the OCG/future TCG) or cards like DWD or Hand Destruction to make it work. You have an ED option that alleviates running... "less than optimal" cards in order to make your deck work, which means you have both higher power AND consistency than you have otherwise.

 

Foolish Burial is a limited 'extra copy' of cards in your deck. Often times, it's a better extra copy, as it puts them straight into the grave instead of into your hand.

 

Lavalval Chain is 1-3 extra copies in the Extra Deck that are ready on demand and add stupid degrees of consistency to cards that range from bad to good, which makes them too good. It really is just a generic stratos, and it's why cards like Mathman and ArmaKnight are seen to be stupidly strong nowadays.

 

And this is all just the mill. The stack has a variety of problems that, as I said, constantly get stronger. You can't write the stack off as it is an option attached to another stupidly good option.

You can argue that's how the game shifted. Doesn't change that the shift has happened, and it's too late to reverse it.

 

You can argue consistency isn't bad. But when consistency also serves to increase power to the Nth degree, it most certainly is bad.

 

You can argue that it's the fault of the top decks. However, the interactions it provides to a deck like Nekroz take the deck from being one of the best decks to THE best deck, while the deck would lack a good passive R4 (TCG-side) without chain, meaning R4 becomes for answers instead of pushing them really far ahead.

 

Lavalval Chain has outlived its welcome.

[mido9]

... But not every card chain enables is a power card, so that comparison fails. In fact, it mostly enables goodstuff to be too powerful, as opposed to directly enabling power cards. But it DOES up their power level in addition to their consistency.

 

Without it, you're stuck between "well drawing this sucks" and "But I really need it..."

 

Lavalval means you don't have to run shitty random mill (Minerva in the OCG/future TCG) or cards like DWD or Hand Destruction to make it work. You have an ED option that alleviates running... "less than optimal" cards in order to make your deck work, which means you have both higher power AND consistency than you have otherwise.

 

Foolish Burial is a limited 'extra copy' of cards in your deck. Often times, it's a better extra copy, as it puts them straight into the grave instead of into your hand.

Well honestly(and im probably just dodging the consistency problem) lavalval chain puts an at least slight dampener on their advantage occasionally. I mean, lavalval chain himself is 1800 atk which leaves it open to just being free-traded off or just killed by battle for a +1 or something, and even in a usually normal scenario of summoning it for just one card/one of the xyz material replaces itself(ie halberd uses its effect -> you search something and xyz with it or you kagetokage a +1)  then it dies in battle you're going -1 to set something up. For things like mezuki, what wouldve been a +1 summon is now basically just cutting losses from lavalval's xyz + it dying itself. I think that's at least enough to say it's "just" consistency rather than "consistency that makes what you drop better by how it searches it". With stratos, the minion itself being there to xyz with on a +1 with bubbleman boosts the power of bubbleman

 

Other than that I dont think I have anything else to say.

[Blake]

Well honestly(and im probably just dodging the consistency problem) lavalval chain puts an at least slight dampener on their advantage occasionally. I mean, lavalval chain himself is 1800 atk which leaves it open to just being free-traded off or just killed by battle for a +1 or something, and even in a usually normal scenario of summoning it for just one card/one of the xyz material replaces itself(ie halberd uses its effect -> you search something and xyz with it or you kagetokage a +1)  then it dies in battle you're going -1 to set something up. For things like mezuki, what wouldve been a +1 summon is now basically just cutting losses from lavalval's xyz + it dying itself. I think that's at least enough to say it's "just" consistency rather than "consistency that makes what you drop better by how it searches it". With stratos, the minion itself being there to xyz with on a +1 with bubbleman boosts the power of bubbleman

 

Other than that I dont think I have anything else to say.

the thing is, resolving it once is enough.

 

Blade/Clown + Kage -> chain

Chain -> dump the other one

Get both back for -1000 LP

make another chain/an answer/etc.

If another Chain, either dump a Damajuggler/Scepter or stack a Scepter, barring other circumstances

 

You paid 2 cards and got a full +0 setup for, most likely, the entirety of the game. That's not a +0, and this play isn't absurdly powerful without Lavalval existing, you just get 1 Xyz on a -1 that may reimburse you later if you draw well enough. I guess you can make King Feral here, but that's a fairly average +0 play with no other options for the turn, which means you have to run Soul Charge, in theory... and that slows you down further and makes you Excitonable.

 

And see, you tackled Mezuki... in a vacuum. In actuality, that Mezuki will likely revive something on the spot. Blue-Blooded Oni takes... well, a side note first.

 

The idea of treating an Xyz monster as a neg if it dies after resolving is really foreign. It's technically sound, but in practice, resolving their effects is far more important than maintaining for a second usage. If you get a second, awesome, but one use is enough to get most decks rolling. You got setup... and then you win. That's how it works, unless your opp just overwhelms you that turn with having everything and a half.

 

But I digress. Blue-Blooded Oni automatically reimburses the "-1" that chain makes. It turns the second mat into another monster. Unizombie helps set this up, and if the Chain was made WITH a Unizombie, then that Chain is an advantage engine in its own right. If made whil you have a Zombie in grave and you have Zombie Master, it is advantage.

 

You can't seriously claim that the losses you incur from a Chain dying offset the speed it givs you. And you can't use the fact it's an 18/10 against it, either. Lavalval Chain is a spell card with the vulnerability of a monster, in exchange for being on demand. Sure, it helps OTK in decks like Infernity/Zombies, but it is, by and large, to be treated as a spell card that greatly advances your gamestate. Being able to mill IS consistency that makes your cards better, because the game has shifted in favor of such cards. Even non-grave cards.

 

Shaddolls are such cards. Chain just doesn't have an optimal attribute. If it was any other, bar WIND, that card would be the stones.

 

Tricklown/Thousand Blades are such cards.

 

Mezuki is such a card before its time.

 

We have up to 6 CotH, 1 Soul Charge, 1-3 Instant Fusion/Norden (O/TCG, and OCG finds more ways to play Norden), and 0-1 Monster Reborn (OCG). This means even cards that aren't grave-based get value out of Chain's mill. Scepter is the most notable. Sure, it requires outside cards, but... look at how many funking cards there are. Excluding superior themed revival cards.

 

And this is all about his mill in a sense that is, genuinely, pretty generic, and ignores other uses of cards like Djinn or Gem-Knight Fusion. He has a second effect that offers value that, again, steadily gets stronger with the gamestate.

 

He snowballs more and more with every passing set. I won't claim that there is any one reason to ban him... His entire existence is, and has been, banworthy. It was just blamed on the cards around it. The game has been grave based for ages, and it only continues to go that way in a lot of regards, and that is only 50% of this versatile "Spell Monster". As more draw effects exist, the stacking option becomes more powerful, and cards like Stick are WORTH stacking for your next Draw Phase.

 

It's simply a card that has been broken from inception, and it has merely chained together all of its crimes to become a monster that does absolutely way too much in the gamestate that has become of the game. It's not a crime to remove a card that adds far too much consistency AND power to decks, it slows the game down in a way that it really needs to be slowed down.