Your Personal Reboot Point

[Sleepy]

This is entirely hypothetical.

Assume the game for some weird out of the blue reason ended its support, and you were tasked with the job of re-building it all, potentially from scratch. It doesn't matter if you wanna make everything anew, import/reprint some of what existed in the previous (current) game. You have that freedom.

 

Tell us how you'd go about it. Here are some potential questions you can answer if you are not sure where to start or what to start with, but it is not necessary to address them in order or even on their entirety at all. Also, don't be limited by them.

 

[spoiler=spoiler]

Would you go back to full on vanilla to start with?

Would you try to keep everything as evenly balanced for the longest time possible as you could?

Would you accept the necessity of making things stronger over time?

Would you start off by not having certain Summon mechanics and other concepts exist?

If so, would you have X concepts schedule to never exist or would you for sure want said mechanic in at some point?

What would your intended power level, complexity level, and speed level for the game be?

Would you support something like a rotation concept or stick to the banlist?
What would be your stance on errata?

Would you have a fixed number of Types and Attributes?

Would you adopt tendencies and/or mechanics from other games? (like keyboards from MTG, Mulligan, etc).

Would you alter some of the inherent rules of the game and how/why? (Number of Tributes X Level(s) require naturally, different hand/field size, Normal Summon in DEF, hand,draw,deck sizes and things like that are some of the examples).

What things would you get rid of that you think on the long run would over-complicate the game for beginners, if any? (Deleting icons form Spell/Trap cards, damage step/calculation rulings, etc.)

Would you inherently alter any mechanics? (example: changing how Pendulums work).

 

 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

1) Would you go back to full on vanilla to start with?

 

Like early 2000s OCG's unreleased irrelevant 300ish Normal Monsters?

 

No. I would go back to a "standard" format that was pretty universally accepted as being "skillful" (what I would consider healthy) so Goat 2005 PreCRV, most likely. But February 2014 OCG ChronoRulers, January 2015 OCG ChaosDoll-Nekroz, and September 2009 TCG TeleDAD would be close picks.

 

From there I would add cards, and remove cards set by set to ideally create the most skillful format. Cards will need to be forbidden of course. But you could cheat and create a cube and just not have those forbidden cards be available to play

 

2) Would you try to keep everything as evenly balanced for the longest time possible as you could?

 

Yes

 

3) Would you accept the necessity of making things stronger over time?

 

Power-creep is not necessary for the games evolution if new archetypes maintained a similar level of power, but had a new gimmick to them. Say every deck was created with X level of power, hitting the older decks down, would lower them to X-Y level of power. If I wanted a Metagame between new deck A and old deck B, I would just hit decks C-E, and unhit B back to the standard value.

 

4) Would you start off by not having certain Summon mechanics and other concepts exist?

 

I struggle to understand why pendulums exist as they currently do. They promote and overly reckless and dangerous form of play that can only be balanced out by greatly relying on power-creep. XYZ, Syncs, Rituals, and Fusions are great

 

I dislike the concept of floodgates, so I try to endeavor to make them not needed. However this is easier said than done.

 

Missing the timing is something I've had problems with from the start, I've found that most cases of MTT problems can be eliminated with usage of a H-OPT ie. Lightpulsar Dragon. But this would need further investigating 

 

5) If so, would you have X concepts schedule to never exist or would you for sure want said mechanic in at some point?

 

As pendulums stand, I don't think they're as much a mechanic as an enabler for the other 4 types of play. Something rather drastic would need to be done such as limit the extra deck to 15, and any cards that would be send to the ED above 15 are banished instead

 

6) What would your intended power level, complexity level, and speed level for the game be?

 

Power Level I think would come down to a little weaker than the first round of Ruler hits, so Feb 2014 OCG level.

 

I think YGO is at very good level of complexity interaction wise. The rule changes on the EP kinda feel silly to me. So I would have Veiler and such work till the end Phase again. So maybe a little more complex

 

The game is too fast at the moment, it needs a drastic slow down, Feb 2014 OCG levels again

 

7) Would you support something like a rotation concept or stick to the banlist?

 

The way I have the banlists working, the game would have an X number of decks, and they would in some manner dip down and increase in relevance. So yes there would be a list, but it would function like set-rotation

8) What would be your stance on errata?

 

Ideally you shouldn't be banning cards to start. But we're not perfect and sometimes an errata might be needed to bring cards back in. Hopefully nothing on the scale of CED or SBJ will be made again, but if they are, erratas should be available to bring them back in. Sparing usage is the key.

 

9) Would you have a fixed number of Types and Attributes?

 

I think YGO has been very good about this, they've introduced one new Attribute (Divine) and 2 new Types (Psy and Wyrm) (???). Don't think Fixed is the right approach, but it should be control'd

 

10) Would you adopt tendencies and/or mechanics from other games? (like keyboards from MTG, Mulligan, etc)

 

Don't play too many other games, so I can't comment here. As for Mulligans. We have cards that do that, offering the player the inherent ability to do so bothers me /w combo decks and exodia type decks

 

11) Would you alter some of the inherent rules of the game and how/why? (Number of Tributes X Level(s) require naturally, different hand/field size, Normal Summon in DEF, hand,draw,deck sizes and things like that are some of the examples).

 

Yes, a couple of things there. 

 

1) Some Manner of SS limit, I was rather fond of the OG YGO's rule that Fusion Summoned monsters could not attack the turn they are summoned? Maybe apply that to all monster summoned for the ED? This might help balance out Pendulums

 

2) Deck size limit increased to 50. With 40 cards, you could conceivably run a 30 card deck based on Upstarts, Chick-Space, and Terraforming. It would greatly slow down the game to allow for longer games. Cards drawn would be the same.

 

3) Extra Deck to 15 and Card Zones to 6-7, with a larger deck, I think we can allow the opportunity for decks to expand past the rigid 5 card limits

What things would you get rid of that you think on the long run would over-complicate the game for beginners, if any? (Deleting icons form Spell/Trap cards, damage step/calculation rulings, etc.)

 

4) 8+ lv monsters need 3 tributes, cause screw that line of text on basically every 8+ monster

 

12) Would you inherently alter any mechanics? (example: changing how Pendulums work)

 

Three things.

 

1) Missing the Timing would ideally be gone

 

2) Any card sent to the extra that would exceed the 20 card limit would be removed from the game, (not banished, but removed as in you cannot used them again)

 

3) Cards can summon themselves by their own effects, ie. Stardust would be able to re-summon off it's own effect if summoned off Road, but you could not reborn said Stardust 

 

Thanx for making this topic sleepy, I've been thinking about it for a bit ^_^

[Zauls]

My personal ideal for the game would be something close to Quickdraw Plants around 2009-10 ish. Deck building took skill and could be much more personalised since Konami didn't essentially build the deck for you like they do with so many Archetypes. There was also much more skill in playing the game because of an emphasis of resource optimisation and conservation. Also there's the fact that the deck didn't just do one thing that you would aim for every game. There was a huge variety of plays and interactions between cards which made it far more interesting both to play and to watch.

 

Going back to something like that would mean getting rid of Pendulums for good. Synchros are the best mechanic Konami has ever released and I don't have a problem with Xyzs. As long as you keep the power level from getting too high and don't make it possible to flood the field with either Synchros or Xyzs, both mechanics are fine. I'd focus much more on Syncrhos though because they require more thought in deck building and are less generic. Pendulums are ridiculously overcomplicated and make the game inaccessible to new players and they're inherently imbalanced.

[VCR_CAT]

Ultimately, this wouldn't be YGO in the end and there's only like a few other changes (such as ED monster types) that could be changed to just make this my own thing to begin with, but here goes.

 

Would you go back to full on vanilla to start with?

[spoiler=Answer]

Honestly, probably not. I definitely would start the game in a more simplified state, assuming everyone would be new to it, so pretty much I would only start with like two special Summoning methods beyond Normal/Special. I DEFINITELY wouldn't get things back to Vanilla Beatdown, though. I can't say I have a format in mind that I would make the game like, but think of it like something similar to the early days of only Fusion and Ritual, but with a lot of the design philosophies of today (just without, y'know, the bad ones). Of course, cards and summoning mechanics would be added from there; but I would start it simple enough at around the power level that would be both decently paced and fun.

 

 

 

Would you try to keep everything as evenly balanced for the longest time possible as you could?

[spoiler=Answer]

Well, define "balanced". For sure I would avoid runaway Tier 1's or Tier 0's; but I would keep a controlled metagame on top of a good variety of decently functional/viable decks for the more casual players. The metagame would probably look at like 3 top decks or something, but the bigger mission would be to avoid run-away top-dog decks.

 

 

 

Would you accept the necessity of making things stronger over time?

[spoiler=Answer]

Powercreep is kind of inevitable; but I would do my best to keep it controlled and slow to avoid drastic jumps.

 

Would you start off by not having certain Summon mechanics and other concepts exist?

[spoiler=Answer]

See above. I would start it off intentionally more simple in terms of what summoning mechanics are available, and add more as the game goes on.

 

If so, would you have X concepts schedule to never exist or would you for sure want said mechanic in at some point?

[spoiler=Answer]

At some point, all mechanics would be in.

 

What would your intended power level, complexity level, and speed level for the game be?

[spoiler=Answer]

See above. I'd work towards something relatively like today; but I would make sure to have a solid stance of avoiding floodgates entirely, and focus on ensuring that bosses will all have the proper effort needed for their appropriate summons according to what they bring to the field. Removals, and plusses would be pretty controlled as well. Think like today's game, but a little more conservative in some aspects, but I would still want that ham in there.

 

Would you support something like a rotation concept or stick to the banlist?

[spoiler=Answer]

If I'm designing the game, my primary intention would be that there would be no need for a banlist at all. With that said, it might be set rotation unless something cropped up and a banlist would be needed. Honestly, I didn't really consider either that much; I would try and keep a banlist from being necessary, but probably wouldn't do set rotation and just release cards on a regular basis.

 

What would be your stance on errata?

[spoiler=Answer]

Do it right the first time so it doesn't need to be fixed.

 

Would you have a fixed number of Types and Attributes?

[spoiler=Answer]

Attributes would be very fixed, and I definitely would do some redefining on types to both make the list of types fewer and to simplify the game more. More types might be released as the game went on, but I would want it to remain more simple.

 

Would you adopt tendencies and/or mechanics from other games? (like keyboards from MTG, Mulligan, etc).

[spoiler=Answer]

Believe it or not, I've been toying with a Base Building mechanic similar to that of the game Boss Monster, which isn't even a CCG to begin with. Instead of continuous spells/traps, or even field spells, players would build fortresses using specific cards and would be able to build more powerful types on top of existing types. Kind of a very under-developed idea, so it would take a lot of refining, especially if I wanted the system to both be simple and co-exist with Spells/Traps. Spells and traps would probably be overhauled to be more simple and more intuitive at the same time.

 

Mulligan for sure, though.

 

Would you alter some of the inherent rules of the game and how/why? (Number of Tributes X Level(s) require naturally, different hand/field size, Normal Summon in DEF, hand,draw,deck sizes and things like that are some of the examples).

[spoiler=Answer]

The tribute system would be one that I would rework entirely, and maybe implement a simple cost system, but keep it closer to YGO I'd probably make these changes:

• Optional mulligan for up to 3 cards once on your opening hand
• Rework tribute system. 0 Tributes for levels 1-4; 1 Tribute for levels 5-6; 2 Tributes for level 7-8; 3 Tributes for level 9-10. Levels 11 and 12 would not be ones you can not Normal Summon.
• Possibility of adding in Stronghold Cards. Stronghold cards would go in the S/T zones; Field Spell zone would be removed. Pendulum Zones would be added eventually. There would be three kinds of Stronghold cards: - Outposts (Both players would build 1 at the start of the duel from their deck. Besides this, they are treated as regular Stronghold cards); Stronghold cards as a tier 1 structure. A Stronghold can be placed overtop of any structure, and if it's destroyed the structure underneath is treated as the active card instead. Fortresses would act as a tier-2 structure that you would need to build overtop a Stronghold or tier 1 structure with a matching trait (kind of like Attribute I guess); if a Fortress is destroyed, all Structure cards underneath it are destroyed as well.
• a Build Phase would be implemented instead of the Standby Phase (Standby effects would happen at the start or the end of the Build Phase). BOTH PLAYERS can set 1 Structure card on their field (if they have any) in what I call the Planning Step, and at the Reveal Step the turn player will flip their's face-up first, then the opposing player. Again; both players start with 1 Outpost at the start of a duel.
• Rituals would be reworked so that the mechanic works better on its own, and is more defined as its own thing. My idea is that Ritual Monsters are eschewed, but Ritual Spells can summon different kinds of monsters from different places with varying costs, but always requiring at least one monster tributed. The power/impact of this would be scaled and balanced as more testing and work would be put into it.

 

 

 

 

What things would you get rid of that you think on the long run would over-complicate the game for beginners, if any? (Deleting icons form Spell/Trap cards, damage step/calculation rulings, etc.)

[spoiler=Answer]

The Spell-Speed system as well as the icons on the card types I would remove. Timing would be simplified to be made easier to understand and more intuitive. The main idea is that I would want the game to be simple and solid so that all you would need to do to understand what is going on is to read the cards; that any extra ruling knowledge would not be necessary. This would be difficult, but I think it's possible.

 

Would you inherently alter any mechanics? (example: changing how Pendulums work).

[spoiler=Answer]

See above. Beyond Rituals, there isn't much I would change.

[Tinkerer]

^ +1 just because Boss Monster.

 

I have stuff, but it's late here. I'll edit this post with my thoughts at a later time.

[Sleepy]

I'll try to answer my own questions of the OP as well:

 

Would you go back to full on vanilla to start with?

Definitely not. In fact, I don't think vanillas are a useless concept, but I'd only make a handful of them (around 3 - 6) and give them perks in the form of what their stats and whatnot get support from. After that, I'd only add them on a case by case basis if the game would like to have a certain combination of something.

 

Would you try to keep everything as evenly balanced for the longest time possible as you could?

Yes whatever the established initial level of the game ends up being, I'd try to hold it up as much as I can. I don't believe any designers would be capable of innovating on effects eternally without having to up the game a bit at some point, and using a banlist to create an incentive for interest in the newest product is bound to either overpopulate said list or often back-fire and re-sparkle interest in something older that might just have been unbanned after X time, so I'm not too keen on that idea personally. However, I would try to keep it from inflation of power as much as possible.... I know Konami doesn't really do this IRL, they might sometimes but pretty much it is tradition at this point that after a new anime series starts, they up the power a ton and have never backed down.

 

Would you accept the necessity of making things stronger over time?

See above. I'm at least confident that the "up" should also be as slight as possible. Also, I'd sure try to go against this seemingly unavoidable issue, but one has to recognize that it IS pretty hard of a feat.

 

Would you start off by not having certain Summon mechanics and other concepts exist?

To be honest, I'd focus the product around different mechanics slowly re-introduced over time. For example: Main sets for regular Main Deck needs and others the size of good old Duelist Packs or Turbo Packs for certain mechanics, and those could even dub as reprint boosters for some cards from a business standpoint.

Nowadays there are enough mechanics in the game that I think it'd be overwhelming for a newcomer to have all the complexity of nowadays forced into them from the very start. IRL you can't really not see something like a Dracopals build playing with mostly all mechanics and spell speeds in the game in a single turn.

 

If so, would you have X concepts schedule to never exist or would you for sure want said mechanic in at some point?

See above~

 

What would your intended power level, complexity level, and speed level for the game be?

Not as simple as vanilla monster mash, but something like a weaker Goat Control would be the complexity level. Power-wise, the GX era plays are easy enough to grasp. Both example are imperfect though, because GX era plays required plot-fixing advantage-gaining cards to be around like Graceful Charity, Pot of Greed, Mirage of Nightmare, etc. and Goat Control had 75% cards that were ban-worthy on their own right each representing the best of its kind (example: Pot of Greed is best draw, Delinquent Duo is best discard, etc.)

I also loved the Synchro era and the increase on tool-boxing from the Extra Deck, but one has to remember they also originally came with an overall boost in power for the whole game pushing them, just like any newer mechanic after that, so at the very least, I'll try to not have them outshine Tributes, and to avoid the issue IRL has where pretty much only Monarchs are Tribute-worthy for the most part.

Boss monsters with proper investment are a fun focus I really enjoyed back in the day with Grapha and Agents, so I'd be aiming for that kind of mindset to be a thing.

 

Would you support something like a rotation concept or stick to the banlist?

To be honest, I'm not opposed to a rotation concept, and that would help promote natural reprints of relevant cards, an overall power stable and in check, and overall prices to not skyrocket as much. However, to start with of course I'd avoid needing any sort of lists and whatnot, but after enough of the game has been established, would be the best time to really decide on those sorts of things.

What would be your stance on errata?

Konami either was pioneering the effects and so some broken cards had to eventually happen, OR they made cards purposely dumb (Spellbook of Judgment). Luckily, we have enough of a basis by how the game has already done those things, so we'd have a much better time avoiding this successfully. I don't think making erratas would even be needed if things are done right.

 

Would you have a fixed number of Types and Attributes?

Thunder has always been a very hard Type to put monsters in, and would fit better as an Attribute, and some Types are somewhat un-needed (Wyrm and Dragon; Fish, Sea Serpent, and Aqua; Pyro when there's already a FIRE, and MTG just calls them "Elemental" and cover other pure-energy-like beings; there obviously is a lack of certain types because Hungry Burger or Messengelato shouldn't be Warrior-Types, but food and non-RPG roll humans don't have anywhere else to go; etc.)

So there would be changes. I'd try to slowly introduce them with enough members to give them distinguishable features from one another as opposed to how LOB made a bunch of vanillas and all got the same clone of a field spell and equip spell.

 

Would you adopt tendencies and/or mechanics from other games? (like keywords from MTG, Mulligan, etc).

I don't see a problem with keywords. It'd shorten text and could even simplify the understanding of a card's functions despite it looking like it'd do otherwise to some. We obviously wouldn't go overboard to the point of making it too hard, but it is an idea with potential I personally like.

Mulligan doesn't seem to have much of a place though considering we don't have a resource system that would further damage consistency like other games do, but I'd at least test it out pre-release and see what we get.

 

Would you alter some of the inherent rules of the game and how/why? (Number of Tributes X Level(s) require naturally, different hand/field size, Normal Summon in DEF, hand/draw/deck sizes and things like that are some of the examples).

Level 10+ needs to naturally need 3 Tributes. That extra line on the few non-Special Summon ones is just doing it the hard way and auto-reducing your own text box to work with. It's silly. Other than that I don't think we are in need of anything important here. Clearly 40-card minimum deck size isn't an inherent issue because the game keeps implementing consistency enablers and speeding effects like Chicken Game, Upstart Goblin, RotA and a mountain of others. Keeping those in check should be enough.....

 

What things would you get rid of that you think on the long run would over-complicate the game for beginners, if any? (Deleting icons form Spell/Trap cards, damage step/calculation rulings, etc.)

Would you inherently alter any mechanics? (example: changing how Pendulums work).

I'm just gonna combine the last two.

I think Pendulums are the only mechanic that cannot function in a balanced way regardless of the era. Every other mechanic (Ritual, Fusion, Synchro, Xyz) follows an "investment > monster" pattern that is pretty much timeless and can always be adjusted to the era, but Pendulums are about swarming and are pretty much immortal. They offer a chance to OTK mid to late game with their build-up or the failure of having their scales popped. I don't know how exactly, but I'd definitely change something about them when I DO introduce them.

 

Their concept is fine nowadays IRL because the game can make up for it, and when they do break the game it is usually thanks to the support effects they get (floaters, 1 card Scales, super fast searchers, etc). The concept itself is even a little slow for nowadays as demonstrated by vanilla pendulums, but as a pure concept in a re-starting game they are not a good idea as is.

 

That said, I wouldn't eliminate them, because there is something they have a ton of potential for. You see, their Pendulum Effect box basically makes them better overall than Continuous or Field Spells. They have a limited number of Zones to be Scales and have said effect, but are able to get support based on the monster stats they carry. They have so much more interesting potential that I would simply have them replace Field and Continuous until the game somehow asks for those to exist, if that were to happen.

 

I also would not make Counter Traps at least for the first few sets and see if the concept of Spell Speed 3 is unavoidably needed or not.

Ritual Spells are flavorful, but I think they are the most hindering part of Ritual Monsters. If they just replace that with more varied support effects that Summons them much like how Fusions have done over the years then that would be enough to release some of the strain in deck dedication they demand to be used.

 

I'm not sure on the issues of missing the timing or damage step shenanigans, but I also think it shouldn't be up to me to decide on the spot since this is a complex matter, though if it hasn't been made very clear, one of the goals is to ease up on the complexity of the game, so I'm leaning towards trying to experiment without them first.... but I can't help but think they do have a reason to exist that the developers must have found.....

 

 

I have about a dozen ways I could change pendulums but I think they almost deserve their own thread.....just I wonder how much interest that thread would produce.

[Blake]

My personal ideal for the game would be something close to Quickdraw Plants around 2009-10 ish. Deck building took skill and could be much more personalised since Konami didn't essentially build the deck for you like they do with so many Archetypes. There was also much more skill in playing the game because of an emphasis of resource optimisation and conservation. Also there's the fact that the deck didn't just do one thing that you would aim for every game. There was a huge variety of plays and interactions between cards which made it far more interesting both to play and to watch.

 

Going back to something like that would mean getting rid of Pendulums for good. Synchros are the best mechanic Konami has ever released and I don't have a problem with Xyzs. As long as you keep the power level from getting too high and don't make it possible to flood the field with either Synchros or Xyzs, both mechanics are fine. I'd focus much more on Syncrhos though because they require more thought in deck building and are less generic. Pendulums are ridiculously overcomplicated and make the game inaccessible to new players and they're inherently imbalanced.

I read this twice, just to make sure I agreed with everything... Except one point, and one kinda nitpick?

 

The deckbuilding thing is one. While some decks certainly are built by Konami (Kozmo, Monarch, though even that's somewhat evolved), even decks like Performapal variants requrie you to put a good amount of thoughts into your non-core choices. Sure, there is that core, and things like Dracopals have a much larger core, but the point remains. Things like the Performages encouraged trying to find out what they best supported, and the answers seemed to be Star Seraphs or Lightsworn. At least, before we got Plushfire, but LS remained even with it.

 

The game stiill has a fair amount of decks that encourage you to find what works on your own. Hell, Pepe/Pedra is the biggest monstrosity, from KoJ's POV, and they actively apologized for it happening. They had no intent of the deck existing, nor a clue, so it would seem.

 

There are and will be "build out of the box", but it's horribly unfair to imply that's the vast majority. YGO is still a game where good tech choices can make all the difference, and while less personalized than Quickdraw/Plants in a lot of cases, it still takes a fair bit of understanding how to make the work. Hell, Shaddolls were an example of that. You had a core, but there were millions of ways to build that deck, and each player did it differently. Sure, it's larger than the plant core, and maybe the synchron core, but that still encouraged quality deckbuilding.

 

As for the nitpick... You can't really have Synchros existing in the optimized manner alongside Xyz, unless the Xyz are really poor. Synchrocentric only existed because it had, effectively, NO competition. But filling your ED up with cards of all different levels for the sake of "in case" or "options" isn't something that ages well, even if they dialed back on everything else. Each generic Xyz hurts this further, so they can't really co-exist. Even weak Xyz Centric can outdo average Synchrocentric, simply because of how well the Xyz Centric ED flows together.

 

I loved Synchrocentric, as well, but it does not age well when exposed to other ED prescences, not in the least.

[vla1ne]

 

 

I loved Synchrocentric, as well, but it does not age well when exposed to other ED prescences, not in the least.

to somewhat remedy this if we're changing the rules, why not increase the ED size to 20? while it would do quite a bit for Xyz, it would be a far larger boon to synchrocentric decks than it would to any other variant. as things are now, XYZ already fit everything they need into the extra deck, and it's somewhat rare that fusions ever fill up the extra even if you're using fusion decks simply because of how they function, even fluffals and shadolls had room to fit in other types of monsters, the only ED type that could get a truly massive boost from this would be synchros because the limit to how and what you can ladder with would be far higher. Xyz, for the most part always have what they need packed within 2-3 levels, synchrocentric are the only ED type that (optimally) access every level within the ED.

[Zauls]

to somewhat remedy this if we're changing the rules, why not increase the ED size to 20? while it would do quite a bit for Xyz, it would be a far larger boon to synchrocentric decks than it would to any other variant. as things are now, XYZ already fit everything they need into the extra deck, and it's somewhat rare that fusions ever fill up the extra even if you're using fusion decks simply because of how they function, even fluffals and shadolls had room to fit in other types of monsters, the only ED type that could get a truly massive boost from this would be synchros because the limit to how and what you can ladder with would be far higher. Xyz, for the most part always have what they need packed within 2-3 levels, synchrocentric are the only ED type that (optimally) access every level within the ED.

 

I was thinking about arguing this point, but just straight up increasing the ED limit takes some of the skill out of building. With 20 ED monsters, you'll have an answer to pretty much every situation, whereas with 15 you'll have to know what common threats there are and build accordingly, so there's more of a decision-making process. 

 

I think a reasonable idea would be to increase the limit to 20, but only allow a maximum of 15 of one type of ED monster. This keeps the decision-making element of building the ED while keeping it fair for both Synchro and Xyz-based decks.

[vla1ne]

I was thinking about arguing this point, but just straight up increasing the ED limit takes some of the skill out of building. With 20 ED monsters, you'll have an answer to pretty much every situation, whereas with 15 you'll have to know what common threats there are and build accordingly, so there's more of a decision-making process. 

 

I think a reasonable idea would be to increase the limit to 20, but only allow a maximum of 15 of one type of ED monster. This keeps the decision-making element of building the ED while keeping it fair for both Synchro and Xyz-based decks.

while it does increase answers, as it stands, due to how they work, Xyz and fusion can already fit practically everything they would need into the ED while synchro has to leave out options. it's one of those things that while it could decrease skill, would also even the field. put another way, synchros, by their very mechanic lose out to the 15 card ED simply because you've got to neglect a lot more cards than either fusion or Xyz. you'd get more answers to fit in, but at the same time, synchros would no longer have to neglect ED cards, fusions rarely hit 15 on their own as is, and as i stated already, Xyz usually have only 2-3 ranks to work within, so they can often fit many more, if not all of their answers already into the ED. 

[Blake]

Xyz really can't fit everything into 15. And in the case of Shaddolls, they really couldn't either. 5 more Xyz gives you access to 3-Mats, tech rank 4s, and so on that otherwise don't make the cut.

 

Even with a limit on each type, it gives way too much. Dracopal can then run 2-3 Fusions, 10-13 Xyz, and still have room for 5~ Synchros, as opposed to 2-3, which gives a lot more incentive to Nobledragon, because Meteorburst is actually absurd.

 

And you donor fix Synchrocentric by raising the roof. At all. 20 slots (or 15+5) STILL isn't enough to have every level and situation you need covered. Synchrocentric simply needs to evolve.

 

Shiranui is an example of this. Space is tight like an Xyz Centric deck, but it works because you focus on even levels. 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, with the latter three being ED monsters. You will have space for a few R4s to boot.