Chaos Emperor Dragon (Newest Errata)

[Yuuji Kazami]

So I'm not as familiar on the effects of 3 copies in the OCG, but I know that on DN a lot of people are already griping about this card in the TCG, 1 copy or not. Basically, I guess the biggest question is should it come back? If yes, then should it be limited with this new errata?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So I'm not as familiar on the effects of 3 copies in the OCG, but I know that on DN a lot of people are already griping about this card in the TCG, 1 copy or not. Basically, I guess the biggest question is should it come back? If yes, then should it be limited with this new errata?

Citing DN isn't really helping your credibility. It was fine at 1, I don't think it's healthy at 3, but no deck has broken it at 3 yet...which is why it stays at three. Hoping Kozmo will put it in it's place

[Yuuji Kazami]

I personally believe that the DN community, atleast its senior players who I am on friendly terms with or am familiar with, are much more credible than whatever other source you can crank up. The majority of them are still griping about the card at 3, especially with the amount of support with Blue Eyes support and such that Konami is releasing. It's more or less the fact that Konami would break a good archetype just for the sake of boosting their meta sales. Then, the cycle repeats because a new meta would be released, and so on. 

 

Kozmos wouldn't put this card in it's place once Konami starts hitting it more and more. Who knows, we might be seeing a return of the Dragon Rulers in the TCG.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I personally believe that the DN community, atleast its senior players who I am on friendly terms with or am familiar with, are much more credible than whatever other source you can crank up. The majority of them are still griping about the card at 3, especially with the amount of support with Blue Eyes support and such that Konami is releasing. It's more or less the fact that Konami would break a good archetype just for the sake of boosting their meta sales. Then, the cycle repeats because a new meta would be released, and so on. 

 

Kozmos wouldn't put this card in it's place once Konami starts hitting it more and more. Who knows, we might be seeing a return of the Dragon Rulers in the TCG.

>Unamed, unvetted, DN players w/ Anecdotal evidence, who have likely never played with the card, cause lol TCG

 

vs 

 

>5 Formats worth of decklists, nats, & yot's to show it's negligent impact outside of a few decks

 

 

Huhn, seems like a tough choice, and secondly I'm defending it at 1, not 3 

 

As for the decks that can utilize this card.

 

Pure Blue Eyes don't have much use for it outside of lv8.

 

The card you're looking for is Arkbrave Dragon, since you can send Ark to the grave with Chaos Emperor, then proceed to summon a lv8 dragon in your opponent's sp to maintain field presence and "win" the top deck war.

 

That being said, Dragon Shrine top decks under CED similarly convert to field presence

 

This is all, of course ignoring, that BlueGrands can run up to 8 monster Reborns.

 

 

Something like that, flawed and not a perfect decklist, but illustrates the combo well enough

 

Dark Matter Rulers are gone and Rulers cannot return errataless with the new Felgrand support. It won't happen.

 

Shaddolls might not use much either, but it can save DMoC from the banish, so that's something. However this all hinges on construct's unban, and the last time Chaos Dolls were relevant was Jan 2015 OCG. A lot has changed

 

Deck number 4 is BA. This illustrates Black's point. It's a "free" 3k body with the potential to do more. The more in most cases tends to be its level as you might be able to see from here

 

 

The 5th deck is Kozmo, but you misunderstand the Kozmo point, resolving CED makes all the Kozmo's fizzle, based on TCG's usual plays, the Kozmo hits this round will be minor, and CED comes out in TCG in about 2.5 weeks.

 

In addition, Tin Can can insta set up CED dumbing down the mirrors even more (if that were a thing). 

 

Putting it to 3 isn't something anyone wants, and Kozmo or Felgrand will hopefully be the ones to show Konami that

 

Granted TCG hasn't even moved up CCV, so talking about three CED is a moot point that likely will never happen

 

I was referencing my hope, that Kozmo in OCG would get this card back to it's rightful place at 1

[Yuuji Kazami]

>Unamed, unvetted, DN players w/ Anecdotal evidence, who have likely never played with the card, cause lol TCG

 

vs 

 

>5 Formats worth of decklists, nats, & yot's to show it's negligent impact outside of a few decks

 

 

Huhn, seems like a tough choice, and secondly I'm defending it at 1, not 3 

 

As for the decks that can utilize this card.

 

Pure Blue Eyes don't have much use for it outside of lv8.

 

The card you're looking for is Arkbrave Dragon, since you can send Ark to the grave with Chaos Emperor, then proceed to summon a lv8 dragon in your opponent's sp to maintain field presence and "win" the top deck war.

 

That being said, Dragon Shrine top decks under CED similarly convert to field presence

 

This is all, of course ignoring, that BlueGrands can run up to 8 monster Reborns.

 

 

Something like that, flawed and not a perfect decklist, but illustrates the combo well enough

 

Dark Matter Rulers are gone and Rulers cannot return errataless with the new Felgrand support. It won't happen.

 

Shaddolls might not use much either, but it can save DMoC from the banish, so that's something. However this all hinges on construct's unban, and the last time Chaos Dolls were relevant was Jan 2015 OCG. A lot has changed

 

Deck number 4 is BA. This illustrates Black's point. It's a "free" 3k body with the potential to do more. The more in most cases tends to be its level as you might be able to see from here

 

 

The 5th deck is Kozmo, but you misunderstand the Kozmo point, resolving CED makes all the Kozmo's fizzle, based on TCG's usual plays, the Kozmo hits this round will be minor, and CED comes out in TCG in about 2.5 weeks.

 

In addition, Tin Can can insta set up CED dumbing down the mirrors even more (if that were a thing). 

 

Putting it to 3 isn't something anyone wants, and Kozmo or Felgrand will hopefully be the ones to show Konami that

 

Granted TCG hasn't even moved up CCV, so talking about three CED is a moot point that likely will never happen

 

I was referencing my hope, that Kozmo in OCG would get this card back to it's rightful place at 1

If you really want to challenge me on what I said, just go on DN and ask pretty much any Admin that's still there with their thoughts on the CED release in the TCG. Otherwise, go ask the highest rated players you can find, if they're still there.

 

As much as I like to continue debating on TCG vs OCG, I still like TCG better with their rulings. Besides, I live in fricken North America, and they sure as hell don't play OCG here.

[Blake]

Wait, the Admins?

 

Being an admin means you know rulings. It doesn't mean you're any sort of quality player, in the least, and I'd even wager that the majority of the admins are bad players, at best.

 

Furthermore, your entire point seems to be that you're willing to trust people with no/minimal experience with CED... vs. a format full of people that have had experience with it for ages?

 

The OCG has more experience with CED. The TCG has none. There will always be prejudice against CED given what it was, and I'm not exactly sure I want to see it back, but there is a difference between citing people with minimal info instead of those with a good amount. That's just an illogical thing to do.

[Yuuji Kazami]

Wait, the Admins?

 

Being an admin means you know rulings. It doesn't mean you're any sort of quality player, in the least, and I'd even wager that the majority of the admins are bad players, at best.

 

Furthermore, your entire point seems to be that you're willing to trust people with no/minimal experience with CED... vs. a format full of people that have had experience with it for ages?

 

The OCG has more experience with CED. The TCG has none. There will always be prejudice against CED given what it was, and I'm not exactly sure I want to see it back, but there is a difference between citing people with minimal info instead of those with a good amount. That's just an illogical thing to do.

My bad, the senior Admins*. Aside from the ruling, most of them have been playing the game longer than I have, and they are also somewhat familiar with the OCG as well. But even if I do start listing usernames, it's pointless unless you are all going to question them 1 at a time?

 

And no, I'm all for the card returning to the TCG with the new Errata, except being at only 1 copy. I'm not too sure by what you mean with "OCG has more experience with CED", because I'm pretty sure both formats have been playing the card well enough to know the combos to go with it. Granted, the OCG has a different list, but I'm pretty sure both formats have people who knows the card inside out. Maybe the OCG has more experience, but it wouldn't be a huge gap.

 

To state that the TCG has no experience with CED is completely incorrect.

[Blake]

My bad, the senior Admins*. Aside from the ruling, most of them have been playing the game longer than I have, and they are also somewhat familiar with the OCG.

 

And no, I'm all for the card returning to the TCG with the new Errata, except being at only 1 copy. I'm not too sure by what you mean with "OCG has more experience with CED", because I'm pretty sure both formats have been playing the card well enough to know the combos to go with it. Granted, the OCG has a different list, but I'm pretty sure both formats have people who knows the card inside out. Maybe the OCG has more experience, but it wouldn't be a huge gap.

 

To state that the TCG has no experience with CED is completely incorrect.

Playing a long time means... nothing at all. If time's a measure, then people who have been playing since day 1 must be the absolute best players. Some senior admins may be good, some may be bad, but their thoughts on YGO are in no waqy guaranteed to be on point.

 

how does the TCG have experience with CED

 

In its current state, there is none, and you cannot compare it to the old CED which was, effectively, a different card. It has not been lifted off the list. I did say minimal experience as an alternative, given that online exists, but... Online YGO doesn't prove anything. It's too vast and all-encompassing, so TCG players' experience with errata'd CED is likely very, very flawed.

 

Hell, TCG and OCG alike both were like OMG DARK CREATOR IN SHADDOLL!!!... and then that fell off VERY quickly in the TCG, despite the OCG doing it/online being rampant with it. It simply was not optimal, and it's very, very rare that online has a deck even close to optimized before it physically hits the shores, if EVER.

 

So players will either have no or minimal experience with CED in a form that matters, if at all.

[Yuuji Kazami]

Playing a long time means... nothing at all. If time's a measure, then people who have been playing since day 1 must be the absolute best players. Some senior admins may be good, some may be bad, but their thoughts on YGO are in no waqy guaranteed to be on point.

 

how does the TCG have experience with CED

 

In its current state, there is none, and you cannot compare it to the old CED which was, effectively, a different card. It has not been lifted off the list. I did say minimal experience as an alternative, given that online exists, but... Online YGO doesn't prove anything. It's too vast and all-encompassing, so TCG players' experience with errata'd CED is likely very, very flawed.

 

Hell, TCG and OCG alike both were like OMG DARK CREATOR IN SHADDOLL!!!... and then that fell off VERY quickly in the TCG, despite the OCG doing it/online being rampant with it. It simply was not optimal, and it's very, very rare that online has a deck even close to optimized before it physically hits the shores, if EVER.

 

So players will either have no or minimal experience with CED in a form that matters, if at all.

Again, it's only your opinion. I never said that they were the best players, just that they're really experienced. Also, maybe their thoughts are not guaranteed, but some of them had been judges at official tournaments, both TCG and OCG. 

 

Honestly, the old CED and the new one with the errata are not completely different. It's just your opinion because of the limitation that the errata has, which prevents you from activating effects after. Again, with your last opinion on Online YGO not proving anything... It's still your opinion. 

 

Yes, the decks are not optimized yet, but to say that a TCG player would have no decent experience with the new CED is still incorrect. After all, a deck is supposed to be made through trial and error, and who ever said a TCG player couldn't test in OCG?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Again, it's only your opinion. I never said that they were the best players, just that they're really experienced. Also, maybe their thoughts are not guaranteed, but some of them had been judges at official tournaments, both TCG and OCG. 

 

Honestly, the old CED and the new one with the errata are not completely different. It's just your opinion because of the limitation that the errata has, which prevents you from activating effects after. Again, with your last opinion on Online YGO not proving anything... It's still your opinion. 

 

Yes, the decks are not optimized yet, but to say that a TCG player would have no decent experience with the new CED is still incorrect. After all, a deck is supposed to be made through trial and error, and who ever said a TCG player couldn't test in OCG?

...Somehow I highly doubt anybody has judged at an OCG event...up till 2 days ago you didn't even know what OCG was, now you're suddenly friends with admins that judge OCG?

 

Give me a break

[Kaiji]

literally doesn't matter to me whether it goes to 3 or not, i dont think im afraid of any deck that plays eclipse wyvern or redmd anymore

[Yuuji Kazami]

...Somehow I highly doubt anybody has judged at an OCG event...up till 2 days ago you didn't even know what OCG was, now you're suddenly friends with admins that judge OCG?

 

Give me a break

I knew what OCG was. But you didn't understand what I had meant by OCG cards vs the OCG format. 

 

OCG cards pretty much includes the OCG format cards that are banned in the TCG, tbh. I had meant that I didn't need to use a card in the OCG format that is banned in the TCG format, as well as any cards that are already released in the OCG but not the TCG.

 

However, it looks like someone couldn't read.

[Slinky]

I'm scared as funk of REDMD tbh.

 

If only because Arkbrave and Felgrand are targets, and I have massive salt with those cards.

[Blake]

Again, it's only your opinion.

Hold up now- Do you even understand what an opinion is?

 

Firstly, "Again"? Where does that come into play, like, at all?

 

Secondly, you keep making "concrete" statements in this section which supercede opinion, but you feel you can throw the opinion card, the biggest copout of them all?

 

Finally, no, I did not state a single opinion. The OCG most definitely has more experience. The TCG has less/next to none. The admins on DN are not neccesarily good players, at least not because of their station. None of these are opinions. So please, if you're going to try and divert an argument, at least do it in a way that's consistent with how you present your own points.

 

I never said that they were the best players, just that they're really experienced. Also, maybe their thoughts are not guaranteed, but some of them had been judges at official tournaments, both TCG and OCG.

 They aren't even guaranteed to be experienced, at least not in the way that matters. They know rulings. That's it. That does not speak to experience as a player.

 

Furthermore... you keep making claims in these threads, but you have yet to back them up, or even to supply names. You just throw info out there to support your point... but where's your evidence? I'm not calling you a liar, so don't even try that point, but it is a very weak argument to claim something(s) without backing it up.

 

Honestly, the old CED and the new one with the errata are not completely different. It's just your opinion because of the limitation that the errata has, which prevents you from activating effects after. Again, with your last opinion on Online YGO not proving anything... It's still your opinion.

Oh, so this is where you want to use the word opinion... And it's completely wrong, wow.

 

They ARE completely different. One was a constant threat of boardwipe, the other requires giving up your entire turn to reduce both players to 0 advantage, meaning that, outside of a burn kill, you are in the statistically worse position. Arkbrave helps this, but that's a new card that is beside the point.

 

This is akin to a retrain, and it is completely different from a deckbuilding/theory/playing point of view, in every way. There's a reason it's at 3, despite being a completely banworthy card before.

 

Online TCG not proving anything is ALSO not an opinion. It's a proven occurence time and again. Do you need me to get the definition of opinion for you? Because if your only arguments consist of "my friend works at Nintendo" and "but opinions", your points are dead in the water.

 

Yes, the decks are not optimized yet, but to say that a TCG player would have no decent experience with the new CED is still incorrect. After all, a deck is supposed to be made through trial and error, and who ever said a TCG player couldn't test in OCG?

I never said a TCG player didn't. I even went out of my way to spell that out. Even at the end of my post, I said it was minimal or less, NOT none.

 

Even still, a TCG player does not have full understanding of the OCG format, and it, again, only realistically exists online. Meaning testing isn't as perfect as it could be, and the true information never comes out 100%.

 

A TCG player can surely play OCG, but they enter with a different mindset and a greatly limited knowledge of it/trends/etc. Even if you play OCG online, there is a very high chance you will never play "True" OCG, given how differently the players of the OCG approach the game from the TCG.

 

The TCG does not have true data on CED's impact. Even if they play the OCG, they don't see how CED has an impact on the TCG format in any way, whatsoever, if they even have enough info to piece together a stance on its list position. The TCG, at large, does NOT have experience with CED, especially not the true data required.

 

Can you believe that CED won't make a splash? Surely, but there is no concrete evidence towards that, nor is there evidence that it should stay banned in the TCG, regardless of whatever anecdotes you have gathered.

[Yuuji Kazami]

I'm scared as funk of REDMD tbh.

 

If only because Arkbrave and Felgrand are targets, and I have massive salt with those cards.

Yeah, a lot of people are mainly worried about the Arkbrave combo with CED. Also, if the Dragon Rulers ever come back limited, it'll bring even more salt.

 

To be honest, I'm more curious with seeing CED play in Infernoids. I'm almost certain it's possible, as long as you don't accidentally mill it. But Sync/Xyz a dark monster as banish fodder for CED, and the game is pretty much yours.

[Slinky]

I knew what OCG was. But you didn't understand what I had meant by OCG cards vs the OCG format. 

 

OCG cards pretty much includes the OCG format cards that are banned in the TCG, tbh. I had meant that I didn't need to use a card in the OCG format that is banned in the TCG format, as well as any cards that are already released in the OCG but not the TCG.

 

However, it looks like someone couldn't read.

 

DN in general is vastly inferior as a source. TCG/OCG is not a legalized format, and is restricted to online only, which is also why online experiences are all over the place. It's also why they don't matter at all. Because online people tend to not update their decks as time goes on.

 

As for the OCG having much more experience with the card is true, as they've been playing with it for over a year, and we don't even /have/.the errata yet. Yes the formats are different, but what is indicative of the OCG tends to be what is indicative of the TCG at a later date. TCG players look at the OCG as a resource and use the interactions there as extra info for their own decks, but that kind of info here is non-existant because CED has not become legal here.

 

Basically, in essence, we don't give a funk about online experience, or whatever some online person says. We care about irl experience from actual irl tournaments, where people are at least decent, and most decks are optimized.

[Yuuji Kazami]

Hold up now- Do you even understand what an opinion is?

 

Firstly, "Again"? Where does that come into play, like, at all?

 

Secondly, you keep making "concrete" statements in this section which supercede opinion, but you feel you can throw the opinion card, the biggest copout of them all?

 

Finally, no, I did not state a single opinion. The OCG most definitely has more experience. The TCG has less/next to none. The admins on DN are not neccesarily good players, at least not because of their station. None of these are opinions. So please, if you're going to try and divert an argument, at least do it in a way that's consistent with how you present your own points.

 

 They aren't even guaranteed to be experienced, at least not in the way that matters. They know rulings. That's it. That does not speak to experience as a player.

 

Furthermore... you keep making claims in these threads, but you have yet to back them up, or even to supply names. You just throw info out there to support your point... but where's your evidence? I'm not calling you a liar, so don't even try that point, but it is a very weak argument to claim something(s) without backing it up.

 

Oh, so this is where you want to use the word opinion... And it's completely wrong, wow.

 

They ARE completely different. One was a constant threat of boardwipe, the other requires giving up your entire turn to reduce both players to 0 advantage, meaning that, outside of a burn kill, you are in the statistically worse position. Arkbrave helps this, but that's a new card that is beside the point.

 

This is akin to a retrain, and it is completely different from a deckbuilding/theory/playing point of view, in every way. There's a reason it's at 3, despite being a completely banworthy card before.

 

Online TCG not proving anything is ALSO not an opinion. It's a proven occurence time and again. Do you need me to get the definition of opinion for you? Because if your only arguments consist of "my friend works at Nintendo" and "but opinions", your points are dead in the water.

 

I never said a TCG player didn't. I even went out of my way to spell that out. Even at the end of my post, I said it was minimal or less, NOT none.

 

Even still, a TCG player does not have full understanding of the OCG format, and it, again, only realistically exists online. Meaning testing isn't as perfect as it could be, and the true information never comes out 100%.

 

A TCG player can surely play OCG, but they enter with a different mindset and a greatly limited knowledge of it/trends/etc. Even if you play OCG online, there is a very high chance you will never play "True" OCG, given how differently the players of the OCG approach the game from the TCG.

 

The TCG does not have true data on CED's impact. Even if they play the OCG, they don't see how CED has an impact on the TCG format in any way, whatsoever, if they even have enough info to piece together a stance on its list position. The TCG, at large, does NOT have experience with CED, especially not the true data required.

 

Can you believe that CED won't make a splash? Surely, but there is no concrete evidence towards that, nor is there evidence that it should stay banned in the TCG, regardless of whatever anecdotes you have gathered.

Well, a lot of salt in multiple areas, I see. I don't know why you feel like you want to play Ace Attorney in trying to make me take back everything I say.

 

You literally rattled off your views like they're the absolute truth. They're not. I'm merely speaking through what I think, from my experience and from the experience from the people that I know. You're not wrong in most of the things you've been saying about the card, but you're not completely correct either. Also, what kind of evidence would you like? The kind like yours where you state something and that it has to be true?

 

To always says a Judge only knows the ruling is like saying they don't play the game at all; like they only study the rulebook. I merely grew up playing TCG, and I simply prefer the format as opposed to the OCG, since I live in North America. Plus, re-read what I had said before you start a spazfest.

 

"but to say that a TCG player would have no decent experience with the new CED is still incorrect."

 

Oh, look. What's that? And what did you say?

 

"So players will either have no or minimal experience with CED in a form that matters, if at all."

 

A TCG player can still have decent experience with the card, for God's sake. But aside from that, the point is that you can still test the TCG in OCG, not that you have to play like an OCG player. To test TCG cards out in an OCG format wouldn't create any incorrect error for the player. Sure, the feeling is different, but one doesn't have to know "true" OCG to test out TCG. They won't be playing OCG in a North America tournament.

 

Besides, I even stated that being at 1 copy should be fine (my opinion). It's still a good card, even with the Errata. Three copies is a little too much because it can still push down a lot of the decks we have today.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Holy sheet, what does "Test TCG in OCG" even mean. Like TCG cards under the OCG list? Sure, reverse DNCG exists, but you're better off testing TCG with 1 CED, cause that's a lot closer to what's going to happen. Introducing less variables makes for a more accurate conclusion mate. 

 

And you completely missed Black's point. Random ideas from nameless admins is inferior to 5 formats of information from OCG about CED post errata. I high lighted which 4 decks were good with it, and made a theory argument for a 5th. That's literally it. 

 

It does not funking matter what your or your friends think about it, because there's a format that half the world's players play out there that disagrees with you. CED is not broken at 1, and it's barely broken at 3. Are there some dumb combos like Scarm+Awakening into Harbinger Beatrice? Sure. Are Rulers doomed never to come back? Sure. But hardly any of that is CED's fault.

 

TCG players have 0 real exp with CED cause 1) 90% of them don't even play OCG online, maybe 9% do, and maybe 1% have played at an OCG event. Even that 1% can't fully understand OCG because if one event was a gold standard we'd all be playing Grandsoil Psy, which is why TCG players in general have no exp with CED, therefore, the best course of action is to look at the impact on the OCG and theory from there instead of anecdotal bs evidence.

 

Now Blacks gonna rip you a new one, so I'm gonna get popcorn and sit back for the reminder of this

 

PS: I'm amused you think TCG will be the one to unban rulers of all formats though...and infernoids would use CED why? PoC+Norleras is significantly easier for the deck to use mate

[Blake]

You literally rattled off your views like they're the absolute truth. They're not. I'm merely speaking through what I think, from my experience and from the experience from the people that I know. You're not wrong in most of the things you've been saying about the card, but you're not completely correct either. Also, what kind of evidence would you like? The kind like yours where you state something and that it has to be true?

No I didn't? I haven't stated anything like that. I stated that it is a different card for all intents and purpoces. That's it.

 

To always says a Judge only knows the ruling is like saying they don't play the game at all; like they only study the rulebook. I merely grew up playing TCG, and I simply prefer the format as opposed to the OCG, since I live in North America. Plus, re-read what I had said before you start a spazfest.

 I never said that. Not to quote you, but don't call someone out for not reading when you do this.

 

I never said they didn't play the game. I said that beign a Judge means nothing more than knowing rulings. That's all the TITLE means. I stated earlier that they could be good/bad/etc., but that the title means nothing.

 

"but to say that a TCG player would have no decent experience with the new CED is still incorrect."

 

Oh, look. What's that? And what did you say?

 

"So players will either have no or minimal experience with CED in a form that matters, if at all."

 

A TCG player can still have decent experience, for God's sake. But aside from that, the point is that you can still test the TCG in OCG, not that you have to play like an OCG player. To test TCG cards out in an OCG format wouldn't create any incorrect error for the player. Sure, the feeling is different, but one doesn't have to know "true" OCG to test out TCG. They won't be playing OCG in a North America tournament.

@Bold: Thank you for quoting that, yet continuing to actually omit it from your attempt at a point. I never said they couldn't. Try harder to divert points, please. Hyperbole isn't your strong suit.

 

Anecdotal evidence of a TCG player on the stance of a card that is in no way TCG legal... Isn't evidence. It doesn't matter if you play the OCG online, you aren't udnerstanding the card's impact in the OCG adequately, much less understanding a TCG impact. 

 

You cannot test CED in a TCG format, not even DNCG. Any sort of custom banlist, outside of something like lolARG, is not valid evidence at all, even less than playing TCG and claiming to understand how it impacts the TCG. Even ARG is pushing it, considering how they manipulate their format in order to move product.

 

So wit hany customized banlist thrown out as evidence, there is no way to see a true TCG impact of CED. However, an OCG player can very easily see the impact of CED on their format, and as such know what to do with it in their terms.

 

Regardless of opinions on the placement of CED in the TCG, there is no hard evidence, not even DNCG evidence, to have a perfect opinion one way or the other.

 

Besides, I even stated that being at 1 copy should be fine (my opinion). It's still a good card, even with the Errata. Three copies is a little too much because it can still push down a lot of the decks we have today.

... What does this have to do with your points to me?

 

I've said from my first post in this thread that I have no strong opinion on it, due to not having the neccesary experience to do so. And I haven't brought up the list attention at all, on a personal level. Only pointed out the flaws in your arguments, such as citing judges as if their opinions can 100% be accurate, that you feel TCG players you know are more knowledgable than the whole of a format's region, and so on.

[Yuuji Kazami]

Holy sheet, what does "Test TCG in OCG" even mean. Like TCG cards under the OCG list? Sure, reverse DNCG exists, but you're better off testing TCG with 1 CED

 

And you completely missed Black's point. Random ideas from nameless admins is inferior to 5 formats of information from OCG about CED post errata. I high lighted which 4 decks were good with it, and made a theory argument for a 5th. That's literally it. 

 

It does not funking matter what your or your friends think about it, because there's a format that half the world plays with out there that disagrees with you

TCG cards in the OCG format, because all TCG cards are legal in the OCG... Also, please stop causing a scene if you already know what I meant.

 

Forgot to mention about that part, because I was more focused on the salt. Also, they're not random ideas. I'm just merely stating what I had talked with about them in a convo and how they feel about the CED coming back to the TCG. Sure, the OCG played with it longer, but it's still incorrect to state that a TCG player would have no good experience with the post-errated CED

 

For your last statement, I feel like you completely missed my point. I only said that I believe it's better to keep it at 1 when it returns, and that the majority of the Admins agreed with me. So if the half of the other world disagrees with me... Okay? Just saying, Asia isn't half of the world, although there are some North American players who play only OCG.

 

I really can't see how you can get really angry over this. I'm merely stating what I believe, but you're taking this to something completely different.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

TCG cards in the OCG format, because all TCG cards are legal in the OCG... Also, please stop causing a scene if you already know what I meant.

 

Forgot to mention about that part, because I was more focused on the salt. Also, they're not random ideas. I'm just merely stating what I had talked with about them in a convo and how they feel about the CED coming back to the TCG. Sure, the OCG played with it longer, but it's still incorrect to state that a TCG player would have no good experience with the post-errated CED

 

For your last statement, I feel like you completely missed my point. I only said that I believe it's better to keep it at 1 when it returns, and that the majority of the Admins agreed with me. So if the half of the other world disagrees with me... Okay? Just saying, Asia isn't half of the world, although there are some North American players who play only OCG.

 

I really can't see how you can get really angry over this. I'm merely stating what I believe, but you're taking this to something completely different.

Kozmo?

 

It's not incorrect, because...newsflash, CED is BANNED in TCG. It doesn't even have a confirmed errata in TCG. TCG has NEVER played with CED. They have no exp.

 

You keep saying the majority of admins agree with you, care to validate that claim? The problem here is mate, you seem to think that your anecdotal (TBQH, I don't think we're even at that stage yet) evidence holds more water than 5 formats of actual gameplay

 

I'm not angry about that, I'm frustrated that you're unwilling to realize that simple fact...what does tick me off, is this topic is likely going to get locked.

 

Now, I personally think this card belongs at one, but I haven't physically played OCG in more than a year, so I can't make that call with the clarity that most OCG players can. I think Harbinger Beatrice is stupid to pull off as easily is it is to do. The format disagrees. And that's fine.

 

Your problem is not that you think CED should be ok at 1, it's the way you think your "evidence" is king

[Yuuji Kazami]

No I didn't? I haven't stated anything like that. I stated that it is a different card for all intents and purpoces. That's it.

 

 I never said that. Not to quote you, but don't call someone out for not reading when you do this.

 

I never said they didn't play the game. I said that beign a Judge means nothing more than knowing rulings. That's all the TITLE means. I stated earlier that they could be good/bad/etc., but that the title means nothing.

 

@Bold: Thank you for quoting that, yet continuing to actually omit it from your attempt at a point. I never said they couldn't. Try harder to divert points, please. Hyperbole isn't your strong suit.

 

Anecdotal evidence of a TCG player on the stance of a card that is in no way TCG legal... Isn't evidence. It doesn't matter if you play the OCG online, you aren't udnerstanding the card's impact in the OCG adequately, much less understanding a TCG impact. 

 

You cannot test CED in a TCG format, not even DNCG. Any sort of custom banlist, outside of something like lolARG, is not valid evidence at all, even less than playing TCG and claiming to understand how it impacts the TCG. Even ARG is pushing it, considering how they manipulate their format in order to move product.

 

So wit hany customized banlist thrown out as evidence, there is no way to see a true TCG impact of CED. However, an OCG player can very easily see the impact of CED on their format, and as such know what to do with it in their terms.

 

Regardless of opinions on the placement of CED in the TCG, there is no hard evidence, not even DNCG evidence, to have a perfect opinion one way or the other.

 

... What does this have to do with your points to me?

 

I've said from my first post in this thread that I have no strong opinion on it, due to not having the neccesary experience to do so. And I haven't brought up the list attention at all, on a personal level. Only pointed out the flaws in your arguments, such as citing judges as if their opinions can 100% be accurate, that you feel TCG players you know are more knowledgable than the whole of a format's region, and so on.

 

"Only pointing out the flaws" 

 

As for your previous statements, you've been pretty much stating that the TCG players with a newly errata'ed card would have no experience at all. Also, highlighting "If at all" proves nothing. It really doesn't.

 

Also, even if you have no strong opinion on it, I feel as if you're literally trying to contradict everything I say, just like Winter. Plus, even if you don't happen to know some of the Senior Admins from DN yourself, some of them have played the OCG and know the OCG rulings, but decided to stay with the TCG for whatever reason. 

 

Again, I'll just repeat the only thing I've been saying all this time. I believe CED should return to the TCG at 1, and that a decent amount of the Admins that I know on DN agree with me because of the new cards that have been released as of late. Anything else you want to continue to make a scene about?

[IQuitDolphin]

To accept the opinions of a group is fine...but where is their credibility? That they're senior admins? That they are high ranked on DN? I'm high ranked on DN, does that mean I'm good at theory? Does having good technical play translate to good theory? Senior admins know all the rulings, how does that prove they're good? They got a good understanding of obscure scenarios, OK, how about optimal card interactions when playing a game? I'm not going to belittle your group, but your "evidence" has a lot of holes since it's so vague to be solid. Unless you tell me your friend is Patrick Hoban, Alexander Lysgathe, or whatever, I could care less if their high-ranked because they can be easily a nobody like me.

 

Meanwhile, FIVE formats of actual theory and gameplay from HUNDREDS of people struggling to find the optimal build to WIN and MAKE MONEY is much more solid than some, arguably casual, group talking about cards and theories that give them no actual benefit.

 

 

---------

 

As for the statement that TCG players won't have knowledge of CED, that is a FACT. Unless TCG players decide to move over to OCG to test, which they won't, because most don't even know what the OCG IS, you're pulling exceptions as evidence that is hardly solid. And if you think my above statement is false, people actually do know what OCG is, fine, search for information on the OCG. You'd be hard-pressed to find anything remotely valuable compared to how much information you'll get for the TCG. Sure, your group knows what OCG is. That's called the exception. Ask most anyone else and they'll have little to no clue about it, let alone a OCG errata's potential impact on TCG.

[Yuuji Kazami]

Kozmo?

 

It's not incorrect, because...newsflash, CED is BANNED in TCG. It doesn't even have a confirmed errata in TCG. TCG has NEVER played with CED. They have no exp.

 

You keep saying the majority of admins agree with you, care to validate that claim? The problem here is mate, you seem to think that your anecdotal (TBQH, I don't think we're even at that stage yet) evidence holds more water than 5 formats of actual gameplay

 

I'm not angry about that, I'm frustrated that you're unwilling to realize that simple fact...what does tick me off, is this topic is likely going to get locked 

Yes, CED is still banned in the TCG. But to say that nobody can just have a copy and test it out in Traditional with the current cards is simply redundant. Now you're saying that TCG will have no exp with the card, because apparently no one can test it out.

 

Also, they only agree as an opinion, since I guess the memories of the original still haunts the majority of them. I'm actually not even certain of what I'm trying to prove, other than I'm stating opinions. Yes, OCG can have more experience with the card because of the different format and more cards to use from, I can agree with that. I'm just saying that a TCG player can still get decent experience from testing the card out, whether or not the card is actually released or not.

 

So... How do you want me to prove my claim? Actually, what claim am I making other than that I'm getting agreement from opinions? 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Yes, CED is still banned in the TCG. But to say that nobody can just have a copy and test it out in Traditional with the current cards is simply redundant. Now you're saying that TCG will have no exp with the card, because apparently no one can test it out.

 

Also, they only agree as an opinion, since I guess the memories of the original still haunts the majority of them. I'm actually not even certain of what I'm trying to prove, other than I'm stating opinions. Yes, OCG can have more experience with the card because of the different format and more cards to use from, I can agree with that. I'm just saying that a TCG player can still get decent experience from testing the card out, whether or not the card is actually released or not.

 

So... How do you want me to prove my claim? Actually, what claim am I making other than that I'm getting agreement from opinions? 

Congrats, you have now moved from no evidence to working on developing anecdotal evidence.

 

Anything you and your buddies come up with in Trad is still 99% likely to be less rigorous relative to 5 formats worth of Tournament level gameplay

 

Gonna be kinda mean here, the fact that you think that every TCG card is legal in OCG, and don't realize that Kozmo are not allowed for play in OCG, kinda makes me doubt you a bit

 

Being less rude, last format alone, OCG had over 3000 decklist from the top 8-16 range. That's one format. Are you really telling me you and your friends played tens of thousand of games to test CED's errata? Cause, it's really hard to put your word up to par with 5 formats testing even if that were the case