Pantheism of the Monarchs

[heraldry_lord]

imo it's okay to predict something will/should get banned. I mean this is meant to discuss the card so if you think it won't/shouldn't get banned, instead of saying people shouldn't say it'll be banned, explain why you disagree. Kinda pointless to have a cycle of "Ban it" and "It's too early to say".

Though the "Ban it" side needs to give reasons too.

 

Uuuuuh, that's all.

 

It's difficult to say, because as powerful as Pantheism is, Monarchs still depend heavily on their board presence with Dominion, the Mega Monarchs/Fiends, and so on.  I figure Monarchs will be top-tier in the TCG, but is that really enough to call for an outright ban at this stage?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

It's a very strong card, no doubt, and the MVP in Monarchs, but what is with folks just freaking out about this stuff?

It's how TCG solves its problems. Do not question the sacred tradition that has kept this format running 

 

Cause you know, going from 3->1->0 would be unacceptable, everything needs to go 3->0

 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

overly emphatic tcg bashing

We agreed to stop this, let's not turn this into a dime-a-dozen argument over formats, please.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

We agreed to stop this, let's not turn this into a dime-a-dozen argument over formats, please.

*cough Ravine cough*

 

...Right, it ain't slander if it's true. The card doesn't even close to come to needing a ban. That's like banning Shaddoll Fusion to save Construct. If you want to put the deck down, limit Aither. You know. The card that makes Rank 8's, summons itself on the opponents turn, and makes Kuraz as good as it is. I regret posting that video now, it not representative of the meta. Is the card strong? Sure. Saying it's stonger than Allure or Banworthy is the same idiotic logic y'all cling to that got Ravine and Chain hanged

 

Now if you wanna talk chain. Blue Blood oni loop needs 3 to ftk. Star Seraph.dek that black made, relies on two of the worse designed card in recent history that need a hit over chain. Infernity are degen and not needing of a hit. Clown Blade is s***, that much worse when you actually draw Blades

 

Furthermore, "formats" has no meaning here. OCG is so far down the piss drain atm that it's not even worth talking about, doesn't change rat's ass with regards to how TCG players prefer to solve their problems. Stop creating diversions and putting words in my mouth to detract from a legitimate complaint  

[Blake]

Holy tucking sheet, can we just leave the chain argument be.

 

Chain has ALWAYS BEEN A PROBLEM CARD. Without Chain, Oni is balanced. It doesn't see play, but it is a fair card.

 

The stack effect was too strong in Nekroz, and was getting stronger in other places, in ADDITION to the mill, making it too versatile.

 

The fact that the TCG 3 -> 0'd it is because of the impact it had in Nekroz, the incoming Star Seraph Clownblade where it was the only card that COULD be hit (And even limited made T1 Lavalval + King Feral/hand/etc plays), which I am not the only person to make, just one of the first to figure out the combo worked as well as it did, and the constant FTKs associated, not to mention it is independent of its position in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FORMAT.

 

So shut the funk up about Lavalval Chain. It was a needed and sensible ban, just stick to OCG position, considering you barely play TCG and you want bullshit like Royal Oppression back.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Holy tucking s***, can we just leave the chain argument be.

 

Chain has ALWAYS BEEN A PROBLEM CARD. Without Chain, Oni is balanced. It doesn't see play, but it is a fair card.

 

The stack effect was too strong in Nekroz, and was getting stronger in other places, in ADDITION to the mill, making it too versatile.

 

The fact that the TCG 3 -> 0'd it is because of the impact it had in Nekroz, the incoming Star Seraph Clownblade where it was the only card that COULD be hit (And even limited made T1 Lavalval + King Feral/hand/etc plays), which I am not the only person to make, just one of the first to figure out the combo worked as well as it did, and the constant FTKs associated, not to mention it is independent of its position in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FORMAT.

 

So shut the f*** up about Lavalval Chain. It was a needed and sensible ban, just stick to OCG position, considering you barely play TCG and you want bullshit like Royal Oppression back.

 

Might as well bite I guess.

 

 

"Chain has ALWAYS BEEN A PROBLEM CARD."

 

Anyways, as for this argument: If you can't count to 4, you've got a problem and it's not Lavalval Chain.

 

4 is the exact number of decks I have been able to dig up where Chain could have even a slight competitive impact: OniZombie OTK, Norleras wipe, Infernities, and Fenix/Igknight FTK.

 

The first 2 are bad, like Flint Lock bad, Infernities got well-deserved hits on their own, and Fenix/Igknight FTK has hits that are well-deserved, that incidentally aren't Lavalval Chain (and while Noden still has to build up some history, Fenix has a well-known one).

Clownblade used to be an argument, but it literally doesn't need Chain anymore to be broken.

There are other weird loops, like the PsiBlocker loop, but these are on the level of Ojama OTK, Nurse Burn FTK, or Quillbolt CannonSoldier FTK, and are both not worth talking about nor worth using as a reason to put anything on the list - absolutely no impact in a competitive scene. 

 

Stacking in Nekroz? This would be putting the Ju's on top of your deck? Unless you are in the "Upstart+Chain is broken!" camp, this really isn't all the potent, never the less, TCG never even experimented with this card. Would it still be run in a Djinnless world (not that Djinn was the right hit)? Who the funk knows...not TCG players

 

 

So I will disagree with your argument that the card has always been a "problem"

 

So the Stratos vs Rota argument instead?

 

"Lavalval Chain was banned so that Konami would not have to ban millions of other cards in its place"

 

There are a couple different problems with this argument.

 

1. To date, there have only been 3 cards on the list that can arguably be said to be related to Lavalval Chain: Infernity Archfiend, Infernity Barrier, and Djinn Releaser of Rituals.

 

Before I get into this further, can we first acknowledge that each of these cards is powerful on their own merits? These are cards that either WOULD have been hit without Chain, or, if they were not, SHOULD be hit if you're the kind of person that thinks that "degeneracy"is a real argument (which I assume you are, because that's one of the reasons you think Chain should be banned).

Second, it is also worth noting that while Lavalval Chain CONTRIBUTED to their respective hits, the driving force behind each one was another entire deck that deserved (or in Nekroz's case, still deserves, since last I checked it was barely hit at all) a hit far more.

You could bring up the future cards argument, but I will address that separately.

 

This is an entirely different beast than Dragon Rulers, which got at least 4 cards I can name off the top of my head on the list, and a good deal more that I can't remember immediately--and for each of these cards, there is no question that Dragon Rulers were the reason they were put on the list (except Gold Sarc, I guess, where you can bring up the argument of Necroface).

 

2. While this is not necessarily an argument against Chain being broken, it is worth noting that Konami doesn't always hit the problem cardin the interaction. In fact, they frequently do their best to avoid doing so. The best example is, of course, the Dragon Rulers themselves,with Konami hitting MANY other cards in their place before deciding they had to go. But this extends elsewhere, such as with Blaze Fenix,which is (as far as I'm aware) essentially the sole reason Genex Birdman and Divine Wind occupy the spots on the list they do today.

 

Even if we were assuming Lavalval Chain WAS the problem card in any of its interactions, that doesn't necessarily correlate with a ban.

 

It is even possible to argue that Lavalval Chain was a victim of this effect, as the list barely hit the real problem deck (Nekroz) at all andinstead hit the Djinn lock, of which Lavalval Chain was a part.

 

3. One of the few decks you could actually argue Chain breaks is OniZombie, of which a key component (and the deck's main interaction with Chain) is Mezuki. It is worth remembering that Mezuki actually went UP the list while Chain existed, not the other way around. Not only have Chain's effects in terms of getting other cards on the list been minimal at best, one of the worst cards to have coexisting withChain actually got off the list.

 

Stratos Argument R2?

 

"These other cards aren't really broken. If we hit Lavalval Chain, we solve all these problems at once."

"These other cards aren't really broken. If we hit Stratos, we solve all these problems at once."

 

 

A close cousin of the Dragon Ruler effect. It's also wrong.

Mezuki is a problem card that could very easily end up back on the list again.

Blaze Fenix is literally only used for OTKs and FTKs.

Infernities were lock-looping before it was cool.

 

Norleras is like the epitome of shitty card design: A stupidly good effect that's only held back because of stupidly hard summoning conditions.

 

Trick Clown, and the other Performages, clearly have enough problems on their own merits that are very easily be observed.

As far as I'm aware there are no other broken interactions, but for any that do you noticed I forgot, look at it again and make sure that the actually broken card is Chain, before you decide that hitting consistency instead of the actual problems is how you solve problems.

 

Why is Stratos and Chain no comparable, why should Stratos being banned but chain not? Stratos was not banned for it's first effect, which is what ties it to ROTA and other card. It was banned for the second effect, one akin to heavy storm, what number is storm at? Oh right, 0.

 

Stacking is slow outside of a certain stick chair combination that is cancer by itself

 

 

 only card that COULD be hit

So shut the f*** up about Lavalval Chain. It was a needed and sensible ban, just stick to OCG position, considering you barely play TCG and you want bullshit like Royal Oppression back.

 

 

You must be something else if you can make Star Seraph Clown blade work with Limit chair, because in all the deck list I have seen, even with "glue" cards like Reborn, there have been 2 such decks in OCG. But by all means toute around the no other hits could have been made, cause you know, lets hit the card that helps many lower tier decks instead of hitting the degenerate + r4 engine that already torched the OCG.

 

Ignite Fenix?

 

Limit Fenix has been shown to work

 

What else? Infernity?....

 

This is not a problem with TCG, both sides are being f***ing cuddly with regards to the other side (OCG's reluctance to unban Goyo and MoF, and TCG's reluctance to admit that OCG can make good hits)

 

 

The only OCG position I agree with is the Marker theory, which really doesn't have much utility here, unless you want to claim that Lavaval Chain is the marker standard for grave reliant decks

 

We can debate Royal Oppression later, but I don't recall saying it should be unbanned in TCG (as the format is at the moment). Should both it and Vanity be at three in OCG? Yes, and I can and will defend that point later on.

 

Finally, Chain was just one of the many examples to my point of TCG's fetish for 3->0'ing cards

 

Dragon's Ravine should be an apt example too. I play enough TCG to know a idiotic hit when I see one. I don't dickroll every OCG decision, not sure why so many people feel the need to become Tewart's personal lawyer. But by all means, argue semantics and tie in unrelated affairs like Royal Oppression to try to weaken a valid point

[Lizardonx]

I think this just replaced spellbook of judgement as "overpowered plus spell card that would cause said deck to jump 3 tiers overnight."

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I think this just replaced spellbook of judgement as "overpowered plus spell card that would cause said deck to jump 3 tiers overnight."

Except for the simple fact that Old Monarch decks + Pan alone would not be anywhere near the power that they are now. Will it likely be the scapegoat that both OCG and TCG take to hit the deck? Likely, is it the sole or even the biggest problem in the deck? Not even close

 

This isn't comparable to SBJ since there are multiple players at work in this conundrum. If you wanted a comparison, it would be Diva +Nept +Dragoons making Atlanteans from being a Mermail jabroni to a tier 1 deck overnight.

 

Was Nept the sole problem? Clearly not

[Kaiji]

The card doesn't even exist yet and people are already talking about list position wtf

People are overreacting. Even with Pantheism, the deck bricks hard in OCG, it's much too reliant on Idea Knight resolving and they have to deal wit 4 copies of it with RoTA limited. They lose when you Veiler, Warnig, Judgement the Idea Knight.

 

The only reason to consider the deck is because of the Field Spell, it's T1 boards are weak otherwise and get decimated by EMem going second if the deck isn't already losing to itself.

 

Notice ar 3 gives the deck even more issues it can barely solve.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

People are overreacting. Even with Pantheism, the deck bricks hard in OCG, it's much too reliant on Idea Knight resolving and they have to deal wit 4 copies of it with RoTA limited. They lose when you Veiler, Warnig, Judgement the Idea Knight.

 

The only reason to consider the deck is because of the Field Spell, it's T1 boards are weak otherwise and get decimated by EMem going second if the deck isn't already losing to itself.

 

Notice ar 3 gives the deck even more issues it can barely solve.

This kid knows what he's talking about

 

EMEm　18

(アリアドネ入10 竜呼入5)- m&m's

 

10 Arinade version 5 Clash Dracoslayer version btw

彼岸　15 - BA

帝　6 - Monarchs 

(Ex15-2　Ex0-4)

各1

EM甲虫装機　シャドールHERO　カラクリ

クリフォート　影霊衣　結界像ビート

 

http://ygodr.blog.jp/archives/1043402052.html

 

Small tournament, post BOSH only, 45 players, but you can already see Monarchs slipping and BA rising. BA will be the top deck post BOSH. The field spell will be a b**** TCG side due to no duster, but that's only one more removal card. Three Twin Twister erodes the impact of Dominion anyway

 

Compare that to the pre-bosh

 

The 2nd Yu-Gi-Oh Kibi Dango CS

Date : 11th October 2015 (Pre-BOSH booster)

Place : Okayama, Okayama Prefecture, Kita-ku, Japan

Participants : 198 persons (66 teams)

 

55 - Monarch 

53 - EMEm 

29 - Burning Abyss 

14 - Infernoid 

8 - HERO 

6 - Nekroz 

4 - Qliphort 

2 - Deskbot 

2 - Ritual Breast 

2 - Majespecter 

2 - Cyber Galaxy 

2 - Mermail Atlantean 

19 - Others 

198 - Total 

 

The card is good, amazing even. It needs a limit since post m&m ba format, we don't want this to tier 1 left field like Heroes did post Shaddoll Massacre and Nekroz hit

[Toffee.]

Reqesting lock ::

[heraldry_lord]

Reqesting lock ::

 

Great. Another thread locked, because people on both sides refuse to find a middle ground or compromise.

[Lizardonx]

Except for the simple fact that Old Monarch decks + Pan alone would not be anywhere near the power that they are now. Will it likely be the scapegoat that both OCG and TCG take to hit the deck? Likely, is it the sole or even the biggest problem in the deck? Not even close

 

This isn't comparable to SBJ since there are multiple players at work in this conundrum. If you wanted a comparison, it would be Diva +Nept +Dragoons making Atlanteans from being a Mermail b**** to a tier 1 deck overnight.

 

Was Nept the sole problem? Clearly not

Well I meant this effect will probably do more to boost archetypes than something like SOJ.

 

Pandeity of the *insert archetype here*

Spell

Discard one *archetype* card, draw 2 cards. You can banish this card in the graveyard to select 3 *archetype* cards from your deck then your opponent adds on to your hand.

 

SOmething like this would benefit most decks moreso than SOJ's super rejuvination/lonefire effect.

[ihop]

Well I meant this effect will probably do more to boost archetypes than something like SOJ.

 

Pandeity of the *insert archetype here*

Spell

Discard one *archetype* card, draw 2 cards. You can banish this card in the graveyard to select 3 *archetype* cards from your deck then your opponent adds on to your hand.

 

SOmething like this would benefit most decks moreso than SOJ's super rejuvination/lonefire effect.

"During the End Phase: For every effect of a Nekroz/Shaddoll/Tellarknight/Qliphort/Burning Abyss card used this turn, add 1 x archetype card from your deck to your hand, then special summon 1 x archetype monster from your deck with a level equal to the amount of cards you added"

 

idts

[heraldry_lord]

"During the End Phase: For every effect of a Nekroz/Shaddoll/Tellarknight/Qliphort/Burning Abyss card used this turn, add 1 x archetype card from your deck to your hand, then special summon 1 x archetype monster from your deck with a level equal to the amount of cards you added"

 

idts

 

You're doing it wrong; it should Special Summon 1 [Type of archetype]-Type monster from the Deck.

[ihop]

oh guess it sucks then

[heraldry_lord]

oh guess it sucks then

 

It would be more flexible than just [insert archetype here]; Nekroz is an exception, since it has multiple Types.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

I mean. I don't get the issue with thinking it should go to 0 still. Like maybe they're wrong but they don't control Konami, it's just what they think. If you disagree just explain why, not result to petty insults. How can even now people not get that doesn't help anything?

 

I'm not even talking about the card itself with my points sorry, just had to throw that out there.

 

Anyway. It's not really a "dead" card because it's perfectly fine to have in the hand, since the requirement is really really easy to come by and once you do it's a pretty big boost. I guess it's a different game but I've never seen holding one card for the right moment as it being dead...It seems like a fairly one-sided card that can make one certain deck suddenly a lot stronger...From what I can tell. Don't mind me.

[heraldry_lord]

Anyway. It's not really a "dead" card because it's perfectly fine to have in the hand, since the requirement is really really easy to come by and once you do it's a pretty big boost. I guess it's a different game but I've never seen holding one card for the right moment as it being dead...It seems like a fairly one-sided card that can make one certain deck suddenly a lot stronger...From what I can tell. Don't mind me.

 

The card is never dead, unless you somehow open with 0 other Monarch Spells/Traps; the hand itself is dead if you don't open with Monarchs and Tribute fodder, and can't access either, even with Pantheism.

[Blake]

I had a big ass post addressed to darkness, then it somehow got deleted when I brb'd, so I'mma tl;dr.

 

 

 

First off, there are many more decks that chain has been part of.

Clownblade (which had far more TCG prospect than OCG, pre-DOCS), which utilized both stacking AND milling, in addition to being comprised entirely of cards too new to a product cycle to be hit, with the limit not being enough.

Nekroz

Volcanic was relevant, and is another example of the stacking power

Assorted FTKs. No, you cannot write them off as "but not good", because, eventually, it would get an FTK that's good.

 

You list 4 decks and claim that's all there is, and just refuse to acknowledge other decks of note. Then you're completely ignorant of why the stacking effect matters in Nekroz, while putting TCG players down for no funking reason.

 

You stack Jus OR side mosnters. Retaliating/Maxx, Veiler, Lancea, and so forth. And what else does this do? You summon Valk, you sack Valk and Chain, you draw your side card +1 more, then you search with your Ritual Spells from the grave. It's in no way comparable to Upstart+Chain.

 

The Stratos argument is just you, as usual, trying to divert an argument in order to bolster your own. Why you do this every time is beyond me.

 

The Dragon Ruler argument is just out of place. It's not comparable. The fact that Lavalval Chain makes tons of good cards even better... Doesn't mean it's not the problem.

 

This isn't a perfect funking world. You and Mido need to stop funking acting like decks that come around are going to be balanced. Lavalval Chain has the power to make or break a deck by being the enabler it needs. Without Chain, Infernity funking suck. Sure, the Igknightfernity deck is a thing, but it never showed much. It has tons of potential, but it's exactly the same boat as Chain. 

 

Chain increases the consistency and power of decks that can use it exponentially. And limiting it does not solve the problem, as many of those decks only need 1, though they'd want more for sure.

 

And the second half of the Ruler argument is also half-assed, considering you ignore product cycles. It has nothing to do with game health or anything, but cards are given lifespans. As long as they make money in some way, or their set is a certain amount of new, they live.

 

Dark Matter Dragon comes across very much planned, and given how Mythic Rulers were a thing, they planned to use it to milk the rulers one final bit before killing them. That's why they lasted so long. And even then, they got hit repeatedly WITHIN their product cycle, to calm them down a bit. Banned? No, they still made money, but semi'd and limited.

 

It was banned because limiting it does not eliminate it. You seem to ignore this fact, and choose to overlook it in order to advance your argument, but it doesn't work.

 

You know what else Chain actually breaks? Clownblade. When you can use Clownblade as  stupidly efficient R4 engine, there's an issue. Hell, it's efficient as hell without Chain in a number of places, OCG just wasn't as innovative with it. With it, it is an absurdly consistent engine, in addition to the assorted buffs the varying Clown engines offer.

 

And a card doesn't even have to "Break" a deck to be broken, anyways. Lavalval Chain is a generic pseudo-searcher for decks that can use it... but in a way that's better than that. Milling is far stronger in the decks that use it than a search. It's easy as piss to make, it can set you up for an entire game after 1-2 uses, and it puts you in an infinitely better position than the opponent. This has nothing to do with breaking a deck, this has to do with accelerating and empowering decks beyond what they should be. It didn't "break" Infernity, but damn if it didn't give it the power and consistency it needed.

 

That is as far as comparability to Stratos goes. One of these is an extremely consistent and generic searcher. The other is a maindeck monster you have to NS to make and only works in one deck.

 

A better comparison is Foolish Burial. It has to be drawn, it's not as versatile, and it's limited. Lavalval Chain is far more generic than Foolish ("but R4 only!" isn't a thing, most things can R4), far more efficient, and it's actually versatile.

 

You try to point out how cards it interacts with are unfair... That is funking Yu-Gi-Oh! you moron. Hell, that's funking card games. If everything is fair and fine, then the game is boring as sheet. And YGO uses the accelerated level of unfairness as its draw, as it enables you to play very strongly. It's not a problem with the game or anything, just how it is.

 

Lavalval Chain is the glue that ties unfair cards together. Seraphs and Clowns have nothing to do together without Chain, yet they're absurd together. Hell, the only deck that CAN use Seraphs is Shaddolls. They're not fair cards, but without being able to dump them/revive them or some new way to search them, they're clunky and more likely to COST games than win them, given how sheet a card Chair is.

 

And no, the clowns do not have problems on their own. At least, not Damage Juggler, Hat Tricker, and Trick Clown. Trick Clown is only broken while Chain exists (or Shaddoll Fusion, but different story altogether). It's just a good card without it. Same for Damage Juggler, and Hat Tricker is a little generic but not a problem card. Foolish in multiples would boost the deck, but that's still not as strong as even 1 Chain makes it.

 

And I forget where you said this, but Nekroz isn't a "problem deck". It's a fine deck to compete against. Sure, some people feel the format is boring with how stagnant it's become on the whole, but that doesn't mean Nekroz is a problem. It's the best deck, but it's hardly something that a myriad of other decks can't compete against, and this just seems to be something you cannot grasp, no matter how hard you try. Chain and Djinn were the major problems, and Trish is a jabroni, but it is not a problem on the whole.

 

To wrap this up:

You keep trying to argue with a subset of decks to make your point, but all it does is come across as a shallow attempt to bolster your point within your own area, instead of stepping onto the grand stage.

 

You need to stop funking bashing TCG. You're posting in a section for TCG, yet all you do is whine about it. Go post somewhere with OCG sections. I appreciate when you give valid insight, but you spend so much God damn time whining, it's impossible to take you seriously. And others here are guilty of similar... but guess what? They're also impossible to take seriously.

 

It wasn't a senseless ban, and I don't give a funk about Ravine. It was a completely sensible ban, as limiting it did almost nothing, and it was too good at what it did.

[Partangle the Candle Jangler]

Can this thread go back to talking about the card it's about and not whether banning different cards was good pls.

 

Personally never liked Monarchs because of just their older support that gives their monsters basically immunity to effects and Stormforth being the bane of my life. especially when used to bring out something like Vanity's/Majesty's Fiend. As such these new cards are not something I care for, and along with Majespecters lead me to just leave DNCG alone for a while. Being able to use both effects in the one turn making it a +1 at least in any situation is too much for a deck with the kind of support they already have to me.

[vla1ne]

monarchs have always had good monsters, but they simply never had anything to grant them real consistency (ok, frogs to an extent,) pantheism is like their first real day on their own. I want them to come over just so i can take my time building something that i'll enjoy playing. it (pantheism) might definitely be borked, but the archetype it's in helps it keep itself balanced, and pure monarchs gives me a reason to play a full on tribute deck.