jabber2033 Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Easily the best Dragon in the game. Probably gonna get some hate for this, but I would like to see it go to 2 just for a format or two. I know it's an OTK machine and all, but Dragon-based decks are doing jack-sheet right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinky Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I'd be okay with it @2. It's still not going to do anything devastating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildflame Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I want this banned since 2012. By itself, one of the strongest legal cards around. It being at 2 would encourage OTKs with Gustav and other loops and shenanigans, so I doubt it will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(GigaDrillBreaker) Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Easily the best Dragon in the game. What was that you were saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabber2033 Posted July 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 What was that you were saying? Best LEGAL Dragon in the game. Happy now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinky Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Best LEGAL Dragon in the game. Happy now? No.Its legal in the OCG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorMiracle Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Darkness Metal Dragon I can see going at 2 but the way Dragons are going with new dragon support, many people could place this at 1 or 2. However, dragons could use the speed this guy can give for devastating combos. I, for one, know how powerful the card is through AI and player duels. Although, I don't understand why Chaos Dragon is banned somewhat. Other than using it as Draw engine burn, why is it banned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synchronized Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I'd like to see it go to 2, as well. I think it would be an interesting shake-up for the game, and with the Dragon Rulers banned, it's not nearly as bad as it would have been. I think it'll give Red-Eyes decks a significant boost if they choose to go that route. I'm not necessarily going to argue that it should go to 2, or even that it's not badly designed, but whatever. There's far worse things in the game. Let's put it to 2 for a format and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VCR_CAT Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 "But _______ isn't doing anything right now" is a pretty poor argument for getting something off the banlist. You can't just say "But Exodia isn't doing anything right now!" as an excuse to put all the pieces back to 3, or "But Wind-Ups aren't doing anything right now!" as an excuse to bring back "The Loop".You need to consider what the card would do AFTER it's given slack on the banlist rather than what its decks are doing NOW. So far as I can tell, this thing's going to be a huge pain in the butt if it's brought back, especially now that there's a faster searcher for him. The OTK's it's going to enable at 2 are going to be too much; I say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synchronized Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 "But _______ isn't doing anything right now" is a pretty poor argument for getting something off the banlist. You can't just say "But Exodia isn't doing anything right now!" as an excuse to put all the pieces back to 3, or "But Wind-Ups aren't doing anything right now!" as an excuse to bring back "The Loop". You need to consider what the card would do AFTER it's given slack on the banlist rather than what its decks are doing NOW. So far as I can tell, this thing's going to be a huge pain in the butt if it's brought back, especially now that there's a faster searcher for him. The OTK's it's going to enable at 2 are going to be too much; I say no. I would argue that many of the OTK's (while there's no denying it does enable OTK's) aren't even as strong as the simple OTK's Qli can pull off, or even Igknights, for that matter. Plus, Gorz is at 3 and there are plenty of other options to play against something that would be that strong. I just think the card could add a boost to Red-Eyes and I'm all for seeing more Decks in the upper-tiers. Would it do that? Not sure. But I don't think there's any harm in giving it a three-month run and seeing what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Please no.We don't need Dragon rushes to be stronger than they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen of the Abyss Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 This is one of those cards that could have been moved, but now it can't be moved. Yes you are right, Dragons are doing nothing. But they will be doing a small something soon. If we weren't getting CORE anytime soon, I would say go for it, but we are getting CORE, so unfortunately I would have to say no sir. Have a good day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBeartic Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 This card does too much, leave it at 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Fascist Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Please no.We don't need Dragon rushes to be stronger than they are. I didn't know Dragons were relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodrigo Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Me, Agro and Demmy would love this @2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonk Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I'm going postal if this card is moved up to semi-limited. For those of you who say that 'Dragons need it to be good again' and 'OTK Decks aren't like they are back in the day', do I need to remind you that Konami will always find a way to make Dragons borderline broken so that they are always relevant to the metagame? Always?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Dragons are so irrelevant right now that i forgot this card existed, and tbh, without dragon rulers, this wont do anything special. EDIT: Red-eyes also exist more now, however they havent been doing too much to my knowledge, correcct me if im wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Red Eyes was a gigantic flop. Chaos looks meh too. We're past the age of LPD into Redmd guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
玄魔の王 Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Red Eyes was a gigantic flop. Chaos looks meh too. We're past the age of LPD into Redmd guysImagine if Pulsar had stayed as an "if" effect. Pulsar as Synchro Material, revive REDMD, revive Pulsar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Pulsar should be an If effect. But it should have a hard OPT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Pulsar should be an If effect. But it should have a hard OPT Uh, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 Uh, no.Surely you can say more than 4 letters to as to why I am incorrect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expelsword Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I have memories of playing against reveal Chaos Dragons. I would prefer not to revisit them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 I have memories of playing against reveal Chaos Dragons. I would prefer not to revisit them.So a subjective reason instead of a objective reason? And a terrible reason at that. A IF LPD with a hard OPT clause means you cannot loop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted July 9, 2015 Report Share Posted July 9, 2015 An IF LPD would give it quite a lot more utility, but really, considering the things we have at the moment, if we take out the loops by giving it hard OPT, it'd be one hundred percent fine. Like, just compare it to most of the floaters we have at the moment. But really, on topic, I'd rather keep this at 1. Why throw a bone to a deck that won't do anything anyway, when the bone would just be problematic in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.