The "Broken OTK or Lock" Format

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So plenty of people throw shade at OCG for being a bit more liberal with their banlist. Gateway, Shockmaster, Chaos Emperor Dragon, Skill Drain @3, Reborn, HFD, etc.

 

This someone leads to the conception that TCG is the superior format. I'm not entirely sure it's even possible to compare the formats and establish a "better or worse", but 

 

http://i.imgur.com/XgjsBLQ.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/E9oLLJd.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/bJYAn9P.jpg

 

very indicative of a stale format right?

 

Are m&m's showing quite some presence? Sure. Are m&m half the price of building a BA deck? Yes. But let's ignore that for a second too.

 

This is a video of the match from one of the most recent duels.

 

The 3rd Hashimoto CS - Finals : scottish san (EMEm) vs Cristae san (Monarch) Part I

Team Tournament : The 3rd Hashimoto CS

Date : 22th September 2015

Place :Sagamihara, Kanagawa Prefecture, Chuo-ku, Japan

Participants : 162 persons (54 teams)

※ OCG October Limit Regulation

 

 

 

...now how many games did Shock Master steal? How many did Duster Steal? How many did Chaos Emperor Dragon steal @Dyson who claimed it was so broken

 

also notice how that match went on for a hour and 38 minutes? How many TCG duels go for that long? Hmm?

 

m&m format is the closest we've gotten to goat control in ages, ~27 cards that are fairly standard between players. The other 13 are up to you, those 13 help decide if you win or not.

 

I don't mind if people wanna be jackasses, but don't be ignorant ones.

[Blake]

Who wants a slow game?

 

I mean, there are people that do and I'm being hyperbolic, but this is actually a major edge YGO has.

 

YGO is fast and has a high power level. This is what makes it stand out against other card games, bar those made by Bushiroad. Even then, they have methods to slow you down, but YGO doesn't.

 

That's the draw of YGO.

 

1.5+ hours spent on one match isn't necesarily amazing. That sounds like it eats up too much time, honestly, and I don't particularly want that. It is subjective, though. 

 

Furthermore, TCG is currently the exact opposite of the OCG and is in a very good format, despite people always arguing what has happened to be something that would degrade the game.

 

2-3 top decks. 9~ other relevant decks, more to come.

 

The format, while clearly dominated by the best decks, has a lot of decks that can consistently compete. This is unlike the OCG, where random decks get played just because people like playing those decks, even if they really don't belong.

 

OCG "plays to win", and that's why pet decks like Raidraptor show up at times. Exceptions do exist.

 

TCG "plays not to lose", which is why the decks that show up in tournaments are more stabilized, though exceptions obviously exist.

 

I dislike the OCG's power level combined with the monotony. Especially given the mindset differences.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

OTK's and and FTK's make the game no better than solitaire, the slow game is ideal since it flushes out each player's techs and allows for a true superior variant to rise. It doesn't matter how cool your tech is if you never get to use it.  

 

Take scottish for example. He ran glow-up bulb in his main and didn't run the Utopia engine. What does this give him? A edge over the Monarch deck due to Nat beast and Trishula and a slight disadvantage to the BA match up due to less spells and fire lake. If this was a OTK format, those techs would never have gotten the chance to shine. 

 

YGO is fast and does have a incredibly high power level, but everything is relative. If almost all decks are at a power level, that becomes the new norm. People look at gateway hitting 2 and are like loops. Not really, it just helps bring them up to speed a little and maybe top once or twice (f***ing Nekroz after having 5 of their main deck cards limited, still top more than sams)

 

1.5 hours comes to show that luck has been reduced. Scottish out played the monarch player. He didn't top duster and win. Reborn certainly isn't a top deck an win. Shock master didn't seal the game. I like my opponent to win fair and square black, that's what 1.5 hour matches do, they truly show the skill

 

OCG is the exact same. 3 top decks, fairly equally matched, no strong outliers like Nekroz, give or take 4 decks that place in tier 2, and then the creative decks that people think up that still win. Like siding be damned, when chronofacts or chaos dopple can get to 1st place and best m&m's and BA. That deserves applause.

 

The latter part of your statement is a misconception. Deck aren't just played cause w.e.

 

Raid Raptors have the ability to use Gozen Match to deadly potential. Yang Zing have the potential to use Skill Drain. Infernoids can use Soul Drain. Need I go on? Everything has it's niches. When those decks top, it isn't because the player just played w/e. It's because the player took a deck they loved and build it to fight the meta game. How often do you see that in the TCG?

 

OCG plays to enjoy the game

 

TCG plays to win

[Blake]

OTK's and and FTK's make the game no better than solitaire, the slow game is ideal since it flushes out each player's techs and allows for a true superior variant to rise. It doesn't matter how cool your tech is if you never get to use it.

OTKs are fine if they take setup, and Nekroz/normally Shaddoll/etc. DO take setup. FTKs aren't even applicable.

 

Take scottish for example. He ran glow-up bulb in his main and didn't run the Utopia engine. What does this give him? A edge over the Monarch deck due to Nat beast and Trishula and a slight disadvantage to the BA match up due to less spells and fire lake. If this was a OTK format, those techs would never have gotten the chance to shine.

If Monarchs were a good deck, then yes that tech would have worked. Like, that point is "if it's an OTK format but a non-OTK deck is relevant"... Doesn't make sense, huh?

 

YGO is fast and does have a incredibly high power level, but everything is relative. If almost all decks are at a power level, that becomes the new norm. People look at gateway hitting 2 and are like loops. Not really, it just helps bring them up to speed a little and maybe top once or twice (funking Nekroz after having 5 of their main deck cards limited, still top more than sams)

the high power level is in reference to other card games

 

the power level tends to be higher than Magic/Hearthstone, for example, as its speed and lack of resource system lend itself to that.

 

1.5 hours comes to show that luck has been reduced. Scottish out played the monarch player. He didn't top duster and win. Reborn certainly isn't a top deck an win. Shock master didn't seal the game. I like my opponent to win fair and square black, that's what 1.5 hour matches do, the truly show the skill

Eeeeh? What?

 

That's not what it means at all. I can run Performapal post-Monkeyboard and open a stupidly strong hand almost every game. The sheer density of cards that enable plays keeps it from being as luck based as it could be.

 

And decks like Nekroz also aren't especially luck based.

 

Lower variance is a good thing, but games being long doesn't mean luck is lowered. They're completely unrelated, as is skill to the amount of time the game lasts.

 

OCG is the exact same. 3 top decks, fairly equally matched, no strong outliers like Nekroz, give or take 4 decks that place in tier 2, and then the creative decks that people think up that still win. Like siding be damned, when chronofacts or chaos dopple can get to 1st place and best m&m's and BA. That deserves applause.

No, it really doesn't. The fact that Doppel still shows up is just an example of poor deck choices and high luck, as that deck is far from consistent in any manner.

 

The latter part of your statement is a misconception. Deck aren't just played cause w.e.

 

Raid Raptors have the ability to use Gozen Match to deadly potential. Yang Zing have the potential to use Skill Drain. Infernoids can use Soul Drain. Need I go on? Everything has it's niches. When those decks top, it isn't because the player just played w/e. It's because the player took a deck they loved and build it to fight the meta game. How often do you see that in the TCG?

You didn't actually prove anything here.

 

Every deck has a niche. Having a niche doesn't mean it's a good pick, and it doesn't change that the OCG picks decks it likes and plays them, regardless of quality. RR is a bad deck, plain and simple, and gozen doesn't fix that. It's just an example of a luck based draw, which disproves earlier points as well.

 

Yang Zing is still a weaker Skill Drain deck than Qli, for example, as well. Sure, Wavering hurts Qli a fair bit, but that's a double edged sword that means Qli should show more consistently than YZ.

 

You even admitted that they choose decks they love to adapt... That's playing it just because.

 

And TCG does have it happen occasionally. Lots of players take lower decks to YCSs. They just don't do well because they cannot compete consistently. Oh no, morphtronics lost, how sad.

 

OCG plays to enjoy the game

 

TCG plays to win

yeah playing decks that rely on drawing into floodgates and decks that foxus on lots of locks is playing to enjoy the game

[ihop]

also notice how that match went on for a hour and 38 minutes? How many TCG duels go for that long? Hmm?

 

Maybe like, 20-30% of Nekroz mirrors?

 

edit: or they would if the end of time procedure didn't shut them down. And everyone hates having to go to time, so I'd say that an hour and a half game is in fact not good in the slightest,

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

OTKs are fine if they take setup, and Nekroz/normally Shaddoll/etc. DO take setup. FTKs aren't even applicable.

 

If Monarchs were a good deck, then yes that tech would have worked. Like, that point is "if it's an OTK format but a non-OTK deck is relevant"... Doesn't make sense, huh?

 

the high power level is in reference to other card games

 

the power level tends to be higher than Magic/Hearthstone, for example, as its speed and lack of resource system lend itself to that.

 

Eeeeh? What?

 

That's not what it means at all. I can run Performapal post-Monkeyboard and open a stupidly strong hand almost every game. The sheer density of cards that enable plays keeps it from being as luck based as it could be.

 

And decks like Nekroz also aren't especially luck based.

 

Lower variance is a good thing, but games being long doesn't mean luck is lowered. They're completely unrelated, as is skill to the amount of time the game lasts.

 

No, it really doesn't. The fact that Doppel still shows up is just an example of poor deck choices and high luck, as that deck is far from consistent in any manner.

 

You didn't actually prove anything here.

 

Every deck has a niche. Having a niche doesn't mean it's a good pick, and it doesn't change that the OCG picks decks it likes and plays them, regardless of quality. RR is a bad deck, plain and simple, and gozen doesn't fix that. It's just an example of a luck based draw, which disproves earlier points as well.

 

Yang Zing is still a weaker Skill Drain deck than Qli, for example, as well. Sure, Wavering hurts Qli a fair bit, but that's a double edged sword that means Qli should show more consistently than YZ.

 

You even admitted that they choose decks they love to adapt... That's playing it just because.

 

And TCG does have it happen occasionally. Lots of players take lower decks to YCSs. They just don't do well because they cannot compete consistently. Oh no, morphtronics lost, how sad.

 

yeah playing decks that rely on drawing into floodgates and decks that foxus on lots of locks is playing to enjoy the game

OTK's are NEVER fun. It doesn't matter how much you set up, finishing off your opponent in one turn is. Any deck can vomit damage and spew out an otk, a back and forth struggle to get game is what makes it entertaining to both players. Hell, that's why some people hate BLS in goat since you could often swing and ring for game. Goat Control is the standard of the ideal game that we should compare formats to. FTK was in response to certain users who thought putting something like gateway to 2 would open up those infinite burn loops >_>

 

Monarchs ARE a good deck, so is m&m. Which is why that tech helped him win quite a few duels along the way.

 

Comparing power levels to other games is a no win situation that will either make you feel falsely superior or falsely inferior. The only power level comparisons that should be made are 1) within a formats tier 1 (prevents tier 0 formats like July OCG) 2) Between high tier 2 and tier 1 (prevents Rulers syndrome of an isolated tier 1 3) Between the pinacle format (currently March Rulers or OCG Star Seraph Shaddolls) (keeps power creep in check) and finally comparison to a standard format where techs mattered (goat), anything outside these four really doesn't have much merit. Comparing TCG to OCG for example isn't a great idea. Comparing TCG to Rulers and OCG to rulers will tell you that OCG has power crept a lot more, but comparing OCG T1 to T2 shows that it's been an uniform shift up for example.

 

Well, for starters running Monkeyboard isn't even a guarantee since it detracts too much from the LV 4 nature of m&m's. Try the Dracoslayer Spell and Ruler to replace wavering Eyes. That aside, consistency should run eventually, even if you run Pot of Avarice or the such to prolong it, it WILL run out. At that point the aggregate of your tech's impacts is what decides the game. Your skill as a deck builder is what will win out in the end. What OCG did was allow for a larger variety of techs (Monster Reborn) but also brought the game up to the level where drawing Reborn wont end game (example). TCG keeps cutting itself down and down by going in the opposite direction. How is lower variance good? Please explain this to me. Luck and time don't directly correspond, I will give you that, creeping the decks up to be decent relative to the power cards reduces luck of hitting a jackpot.

 

Doppel wasn't luck. The kid engineered his deck to work around all three color and inherent summons to avoid the dominance of m&m's while building his synchro line up to deal with heros. That's just damn good deck building, and making top 8 wasn't luck. He streamlined his deck to have the answers. Did it have all the answers? No, that's why he only made, top 8, but it's commendable regardless. Floodgates are at higher levels OCG side, it's less of luck due to such. Is there still a certain element of luck? Yeh, if you want that gone, play Chess, but the current OCG format has one of the lowest levels of luck since Goat.

 

Are Yang Zing weaker than Qli with Skill Drain? Sure, notice why Qli top more than Yang Zing. The point there was to hit Qli's for that instead of robbing a weaker deck than Yang Zing of a card they rely on. With Scout at 2 and Saqlifice limit, do Yang Zing have potential, absolutely? Not sure why you think that RR are a trash deck. Being able to use Gozen gives them an advantage over the current top three. Can they use Gozen better than say Qli or Tellars? Nope. Hence why Tellars and Qli consume a larger proportion of the meta than they do. People like those decks, so they stream line them to beat the meta, does it always pan out? Nope, but that's the small portion of luck that remains in YGO.

 

Floodgates aren't bad at all for the game. Thousand Eyes Restrict was effectively a floodgate back then. Didn't ruin the format. What ruins floodgates is when one deck can use them with a significantly great advantage, like TeleDAD with Oppression or Yosenju with Vanity. Them adapting the decks, isn't playing it just cause, it's them seeing a potential idea and testing it out. Assuming OCG players truly only cared about decks they wanted to win, a lot fewer people would be playing m&m's and a lot more say blackwings. You don't see it, since the vast majority of player will play the best, deck, occasionally, an idea will pop up, like Gozen in RR, and someone will test it out and cut out a name for themselves.

 

Locks don't last. That's the thing with Shock or Djinn. They don't last. People look past the "lock nature" of them and rather see "Woah, Nekroz topped"

 

Something that doesn't last more than a turn or 2 really no business being called a lock.

 

We really don't have a time thing in OCG, smaller tournaments, more often, let them play out, so I wouldn't know about the negativity of time @Ihop

 

My point was basically to explain that OCG is not some OTK or Lock format as it may seem by just looking at a random deck list or the banlist

[Blake]

OTK's are NEVER fun. It doesn't matter how much you set up, finishing off your opponent in one turn is. Any deck can vomit damage and spew out an otk, a back and forth struggle to get game is what makes it entertaining to both players. Hell, that's why some people hate BLS in goat since you could often swing and ring for game. Goat Control is the standard of the ideal game that we should compare formats to. FTK was in response to certain users who thought putting something like gateway to 2 would open up those infinite burn loops >_>

I said fine. BLS is a 1-card OTK, and most decks have to take multiple turns of setup to pull off an OTK, which means it's likely NOT an OTK. Goat Control is not a golden standard, because it's basically a game that no longer exists, and working to make Goat Control again puts YGO in range of losing to HS/MTG.

 

Monarchs ARE a good deck, so is m&m. Which is why that tech helped him win quite a few duels along the way.

No. Do not argue semantics. You know full well what my point was, and you even ignored what your initial point was in order to argue semantics.

 

Comparing power levels to other games is a no win situation that will either make you feel falsely superior or falsely inferior. The only power level comparisons that should be made are 1) within a formats tier 1 (prevents tier 0 formats like July OCG) 2) Between high tier 2 and tier 1 (prevents Rulers syndrome of an isolated tier 1 3) Between the pinacle format (currently March Rulers or OCG Star Seraph Shaddolls) (keeps power creep in check) and finally comparison to a standard format where techs mattered (goat), anything outside these four really doesn't have much merit. Comparing TCG to OCG for example isn't a great idea. Comparing TCG to Rulers and OCG to rulers will tell you that OCG has power crept a lot more, but comparing OCG T1 to T2 shows that it's been an uniform shift up for example.

... what

 

You should definitely compare power levels between games. It's a major reasons that said games have draws over the other.

 

YGO is a high-power high-speed game, and that's a major part of its draw. You're not restricted at all, really, and you don't have to go slow unless it gives you an absurd advantage.

 

This is what sets it apart from other games. Being fast paced and overpowered is its selling point.

 

Well, for starters running Monkeyboard isn't even a guarantee since it detracts too much from the LV 4 nature of m&m's. Try the Dracoslayer Spell and Ruler to replace wavering Eyes. That aside, consistency should run eventually, even if you run Pot of Avarice or the such to prolong it, it WILL run out. At that point the aggregate of your tech's impacts is what decides the game. Your skill as a deck builder is what will win out in the end. What OCG did was allow for a larger variety of techs (Monster Reborn) but also brought the game up to the level where drawing Reborn wont end game (example). TCG keeps cutting itself down and down by going in the opposite direction. How is lower variance good? Please explain this to me. Luck and time don't directly correspond, I will give you that, creeping the decks up to be decent relative to the power cards reduces luck of hitting a jackpot.

Why did I say M&M? Can you not understand context?

 

I said Performapal. "Pure". 13-14 hands out of 15 are nut hands. This doesn't have to do with M&M, this has to do with Purepal, which is actually playable with Monkeyboard.

 

Skill as a deck builder is not the same as skill as a player. At all. There are multiple levels of skill that stack together, and you didn't prove that the more skilled player wins out.

 

lower variance means lower luck so i don't see what your problem is aside from opting not to use am educated vocabulary, especially in regards to card games. It has nothing to do with time, you're the one that implied they corresponded.

 

Doppel wasn't luck. The kid engineered his deck to work around all three color and inherent summons to avoid the dominance of m&m's while building his synchro line up to deal with heros. That's just damn good deck building, and making top 8 wasn't luck. He streamlined his deck to have the answers. Did it have all the answers? No, that's why he only made, top 8, but it's commendable regardless. Floodgates are at higher levels OCG side, it's less of luck due to such. Is there still a certain element of luck? Yeh, if you want that gone, play Chess, but the current OCG format has one of the lowest levels of luck since Goat.

The deck is inconsistent as balls, and does not have the deck space to consistently run backrow, enough monsters, and have a diverse enough extra deck.

 

You are really, really overglorifying intelligent deckbuilding. Yes, it's important, but a bad deck is a bad deck regardless of how well you build it. Good Player Bad Deck happens, but that's still not enough to justify it.

 

And can you tell me which tournament this was? Because it sounds like you're talking about one of the OCG's many pseudo-locals. In fact, that's an issue with using the variety of decks in the OCG as an issue, so I'll come back to this.

 

Did I ever argue floodgates aren't luck? I'm just saying that you attempted to demonize luck, but then praise decks for having niches based on drawing into cards. Sure, they're strong, but you're being inconsistent, and that's not enough to defend the decks.

 

Are Yang Zing weaker than Qli with Skill Drain? Sure, notice why Qli top more than Yang Zing. The point there was to hit Qli's for that instead of robbing a weaker deck than Yang Zing of a card they rely on. With Scout at 2 and Saqlifice limit, do Yang Zing have potential, absolutely? Not sure why you think that RR are a trash deck. Being able to use Gozen gives them an advantage over the current top three. Can they use Gozen better than say Qli or Tellars? Nope. Hence why Tellars and Qli consume a larger proportion of the meta than they do. People like those decks, so they stream line them to beat the meta, does it always pan out? Nope, but that's the small portion of luck that remains in YGO.

That's not how logic works.

 

You don't spare a broken card because it's abused by other cards. Yang Zing shouldn't have Mistake, Skill Drain, OR L1T. It just so happens that they do, and that Qli uses 2/3 of those better.

 

RR is a weak deck. Their niche is filled by better decks, their cards are too restricted to be used effectively in higher levels of play, they don't have enough good R4s to make, and they are mroe vulnerable to getting nuked than any deck except for D/D/D. They're a nuisance at best, they only see play because people adore Shun for some reason beyond my grasp.

 

If a deck is outclassed at what it does best, you don't play it. This is an example of the OCG playing decks just because. Argue against it all you like, but streamlining a bad deck isn't enough to matter. Especially when they likely don't top more than locals, ever. That is just a factor of the OCG's overly casual mindset on the whole showing.

 

Floodgates aren't bad at all for the game. Thousand Eyes Restrict was effectively a floodgate back then. Didn't ruin the format. What ruins floodgates is when one deck can use them with a significantly great advantage, like TeleDAD with Oppression or Yosenju with Vanity. Them adapting the decks, isn't playing it just cause, it's them seeing a potential idea and testing it out. Assuming OCG players truly only cared about decks they wanted to win, a lot fewer people would be playing m&m's and a lot more say blackwings. You don't see it, since the vast majority of player will play the best, deck, occasionally, an idea will pop up, like Gozen in RR, and someone will test it out and cut out a name for themselves.

you mean that card that got banned for being a negative influence on the game? I mean, it may not have been the biggest thing, but that point about TER in the past is weak as sheet.

 

Now see, here you go arguing semantics again, instead of supplying real points.

 

I'll digress to floodgates first. Cards like that will always find a decktype(s) to abuse them. IT's only a matter of time. And that design is poor. You should not be able to simply shut down X amount of the game for drawing a card while the opponent didn't draw removal. IT is an inherently bad concept in a game with no resource system.

 

"Play to win" applies to the mindset IN GAME. They play what they want, but they generally play with the mindset to win their own game as opposed to ruin the opponent's. The GUB example was a breath of fresh air in this regard, but this isn't the usual. At least, it never was before.

 

And then, again, you flip flop the next funking sentence.

 

wow you mean gozen in RR is innovative and not funking common sense? huh, what a shock

 

I mean really, you keep glorifying something funking obvious. That means a deck made metacalls. Whoopdedoo, doesn';t make it good. IT just shows someone saw some potential tech that other decks did, then threw it into their pet deck and took it to play. That does not make it a good or playable deck, and you really need to learn the difference.

 

TCG has examples, too. Like TeleGrandsoil or REDRUM Control. Doesn't mean they were good decks.

 

Locks don't last. That's the thing with Shock or Djinn. They don't last. People look past the "lock nature" of them and rather see "Woah, Nekroz topped"

 

Something that doesn't last more than a turn or 2 really no business being called a lock.

how does that mean the lock is a good thing for the game? That's just a lazy excuse.

 

And... It only lasts a turn or two? How does having a shot at amassing an advantag eover the opponent like that sound fair? Is cold wave fair? It's a "1-turn lock", too, and you say that shouldn't count.

 

We really don't have a time thing in OCG, smaller tournaments, more often, let them play out, so I wouldn't know about the negativity of time @Ihop

 

My point was basically to explain that OCG is not some OTK or Lock format as it may seem by just looking at a random deck list or the banlist

And here we go. I know it's addressed at Ihop, but the smaller tournaments thing is a big deal.

 

Given the smaller size, the true potential of decks is not as shown or refined. The process is shorter, so the chaff can make it through, as it's not as rough.

 

Winning a small OCG tournament or doing well in it doesn't mean a deck's good. It means someone picked up a deck they liked, threw in some metacalls, and played with it. But the size outweighs the success.

 

And you did a lot more than that. You tried to put the TCG down from the start, with the time comment. Then I didn't even come in here attcaking OCG at all, you just went for the TCG's jugular immediately in response, so the real problem shows here.

 

Oh, and I just have to say, can you funking stick to an argument?

 

You said you hated luck and prefer wins fair and square in your last post, but this post glorified luck as something that happpens. Make up your damn mind. You constantly sway on things you say, and then you try to play semantics or disregard context in order to bolster unrelated points, so as if to improve your chances of 'winning' the argument, regardless of sticking to a stance.

 

In doing so, your plan, whether you realize this or not, is to tear down the opponent by constantly having answers to their points, but you lack the consistency to work with it, and this is a common theme with you. All it does is make you desperate to be right.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Ok, so I have thought long and hard about what Black said and he has a point, I WAS arguing semantics and that deviated from my original purpose which wasn't to put down TCG. It was to address posts like this

 

"Have you seen the last Decklists in the OCG? It is worse than anything in the TCG. Yes, the TCG is also s*** but Shocklock + Rafflesia First Turn lock dominates this game now. 65% f***ing percent are the same Deck because it's waaaay more broken than anything else they have. It's a format that doesn't last longer than 3 turns. This is DEFINITELY NOT balanced"

 

or something like this 

 

"More Rank 4 Spam, more OTK, more effect negation, more lockdown. In short: More Rank 4 Spam."

 

Lets get to Goat Control. The speed of Goat will likely never be achieved in this game again, that's not the ideal about it, the ideal is tech choices tended to decide game because of the length of the game. The large amount of time spent flushed out the staples in essence left the game up to tech. Did exceptions exist? BLS Swing n' Ring? Yes, but by and large that didn't decide games on its own.

 

What else the time length says about OCG is that it's not an OTK format, the games grind back and fourth for quite some time. Like IHop noted, having round 8 in the YCS go till 5AM isn't ideal, which is why TCG has time instituted, OCG rounds aren't that long, usually 6-7 rounds of swiss cap it off so we don't have worry about that aspect of the matter. 

 

Same with locks, Dominion lock doesn't last, neither does Shock or Rafflesia or basically any other "floodgate"

 

I concede the next point to you again Black, you can compare to any game you want and that might be how sales flow, but the four comparisons I noted are the internal comparisons that decide game health relative to the past. I guess we've got different goals in what we're looking for (unless I misunderstood what you were saying)

 

Skill as a player in my eyes, is knowing your deck inside out, being able to plan turns ahead, and being able to recover/(plan) from/(for) the opponents pushes. This is where the skill as a deck builder and skill as a player coincided. You build your deck with a clear image of the top 4-5 decks, and build it so that those are the ones countered, pretty basic concept and not one much different than TCG or any other game I would assume. 

 

I also apologize about not realize you meant pure Performapals, you're right, I need to read better, and the concept of such a deck existing also never struck me. But I disagree that having constancy out of your ass will prolong games without skill, noting of course, you never quite drew that connection. Time alone does not reduce luck, since as you noted having enough play creating cards can extend the length of a duel to extraordinary levels. Having the power cards like Reborn, the Solemn, Pot of Avarice or Duster induce a certain element of luck in the game.

 

They are significantly stronger than your average run of the mill card, but yet they don't win games by themselves? Why, you have to plan for the unexpected in OCG and consider all possibility based on the underlying assumption that no matter what set up you have, it won't hold up. Now, this doesn't always happen, your set up can last, but assuming it won't forces players to plan ahead and not go all out OTK or just rely on a lock. This gets back to original point that describing OCG along those terms is inaccurate.

 

I'm fine with lower tier decks having those cards as long as they usually stay lower tier while having them. 3 Skill Drain or not, you don't see Yang Zing regularly beat m&m's. Now should skill Drain be hit, (cause of BA), yes why not. But back to your point about me flip-flopping my positional all the time, there's a certain conflicting nature about this game. I enjoy stability as much as the next person, (your variance point was spot on), but I also cannot help but marvel when a low tier deck is able to shake of the chains binding it and top. Is this partially based on luck? Absolutely, but that small amount of luck is what makes this game exciting. Too much of luck however turns the game towards a poor direction.

 

I was also incorrect about RR. It wasn't Gozen, Icarus attack was the card they were using. This was a mid July format, so pre-m&m, Monarchs, and BA, and at the height of the Hero, Nekroz, Atlantean, Magican Pendulum era. Icarus attack had the exceptionally good ability to break the Law-CDI lock, Djinn Lock, Pendulum Scales, or the Diva-Nept play. Not a lot of decks can utilize Icaras, so RR had it's 50 seconds of glory, nothing more nothing less. Not sure why I got so side tracked on my foodgate point, but RR was not supposed to be the culmination of said point.

 

I disagree with the play to win argument.

 

Glow-Up into Nat Beast is just one example

 

How about Setting Wavering eyes knowing you're opponent is playing the mirror?

 

Or using Solemn Judgement on a pendulum 5?

 

Or using 3 Horn of Heaven in BA? Or three skill Drain? M&m's and Monarchs both have biggger beaters than BA, you're playing Drain to stop them from winning. I don't think you can paint it all black (pardon me :3) or white here.

 

Locks being in the game are good in that they can hold the flood back. Special Summoning and the amount of effects that can be vomited out in a turn is sickeningly high. Now people might criticize OCG on letting the Djinn live. Let me explain.

 

Djinn @3 Unicore, Shuritt, Brio, Cycle and Prep @1 What does this do? You can lock sure, your lock won't last due to vast amount of main decked djinn out; that may not be the best term for it however, those cards are run regardless of Djinn, but they can out Djinn too is what I mean. Now hitting the main deck cards forces the opponent to choose from +'ing a lot or locking. So sure they opponent can lock, but in contrast to the situation you described, his ability to + is directly related and is usually compromised, unless ofc, the god hand, in which case YGO's luck nature wins out

 

They're not the small, usually I pull examples with 5-7 rounds of swiss, is that less than TCG, sure, but we have tournaments everyday. The person learns from yesterday and comes back today. What we don't have have in single tournaments (often since we do have YOT's that get into the 1000 player ranges, which BTW, in the last one, m&m's got 7/8 top 8 and Heroes 1/8, so OCG doesn't give a flying f*** if you wanna play your personal deck, if we have TCG scale events, the best deck will still top).

 

It wasn't my intention to rip TCG, regardless of how it may have come out, it was simply to show that OCG isn't quite the hellhole people like to paint it as. I guess my real stance is a little bit of luck in a game like YGO is what makes it exciting, but that luck should not be able to win you games by itself.

 

 

@Nai or someone else, if you could kill my post above this, I'd be very appreciative :3