Ryusei the Morning Star Posted March 31, 2016 Report Share Posted March 31, 2016 Banned: Performapal MonkeyboardPerformage PlushfirePerformage Damagejuggler Wind-Up Hunter Elder God NordenRaigekiLife Equalizer Limited: Luster Pendulum, the DracoslayerPerformapal Skullcrobat JokerPerformapal Pendulum WizardDark Magician of ChaosKozmo Dark DestroyerShurit, Strategist of the NekrozIgnister Prominance, the Blasting DracoslayerThousand Eyes RestrictEvilswarm Exciton KnightWind-Up Carrier ZenmaityClash of the DracorivalsDominion of the True MonarchEmergency TeleportPendulum CallPantheism of the MonarchsSuper PolymerizationSuper RejuvinationWavering EyesSolemn Strike Semi Limited: Inzektor HornetRescue RabbitWind-Up MagicianBottomless Trap HoleCompulsory Evacuation DeviceTorrential Tribute Unlimited: Apoqliphort TowersCard TrooperHonestNeo-Spacian Grand MoleTragoediaRitual Beast Ulti-CannahawkAdvanced Ritual ArtDragon's Ravine Might as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
En. Posted March 31, 2016 Report Share Posted March 31, 2016 lmao no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted March 31, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2016 lmao no.I was waiting for it :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted March 31, 2016 Report Share Posted March 31, 2016 Lots of stuff can be commented on as with any list but I would just like to say, I think Super Rejuv, while obviously not as busted as it was when banned and wont be for the forseeable future, should not be legal at any number, for the simple reason that its existence limits design space for future dragons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted March 31, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2016 Lots of stuff can be commented on as with any list but I would just like to say, I think Super Rejuv, while obviously not as busted as it was when banned and wont be for the forseeable future, should not be legal at any number, for the simple reason that its existence limits design space for future dragons. I mean, it's at 2 in OCG Blue Eyes can drop 2-4 discards a turn Nobody plays Rejuv still... Can't argue with evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted April 1, 2016 Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 I mean, it's at 2 in OCG Blue Eyes can drop 2-4 discards a turn Nobody plays Rejuv still... Can't argue with evidenceDid I f***in' say it was busted right now? Did I not say it ISNT right now? Read, Winter, you're better than this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted April 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 Did I f***in' say it was busted right now? Did I not say it ISNT right now? Read, Winter, you're better than this.Well I mean this is pretty much as discard/tribute heavy as we've gotten since rulers and if it's still not good, it's never gonna be. Drawing in the EP is frankly slow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VCR_CAT Posted April 1, 2016 Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 Honestly, any smart moves on this list are held back drastically by a clear and obvious bias towards decks you want to come back; whether or not the plays enabled by such cards coming back are actually healthy for this game or not (Wind-Ups, Inzektors, etc.) Not to mention the obvious unbans on cards for reasons that I can only assume are your usual "I mean, might as well make the list smaller, right?" reasons. Too much of this list is so clearly catered to your own tastes that I can tell not much of it is in consideration of what's actually going to be healthy for the game, and what's going to benefit everyone as a whole. A banlist is to make the game a healthy environment for as many people as possible; not just yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted April 1, 2016 Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 Well I mean this is pretty much as discard/tribute heavy as we've gotten since rulers and if it's still not good, it's never gonna be. Drawing in the EP is frankly slowAs discard/tribute heavy? Debatable. Slow? depends on what's using it. Blurry-Eyes and Felgrands dont inherently need or specifically want to draw as much as they're discarding. A lot of their advantage is in their graveyard, so of course they wouldn't necessarily rely on Super Rejuv nor break it. Assuming something as generic and utility as this will never be good, however, is poor judgement, particularly if it clearly has been good in the past. No, it is very clear that it isn't nearly as good now as it was when it got hit, my point isnt that it will become good with age, my point is that there's nothing preventing Konami from printing dragons that do exactly what Super Rejuv is telling them to do and do it very well, that would want to be able to draw in the EP. If they do, and Rejuv is legal, that does one of two things. A: because it is legal, this is limiting the design space, and they will either need to make these dragons worse to compensate, which will not make people want to play them, or scrap the idea entirely which they shouldn't have to do because 1 card is legal. B: they will let them abuse the card and become so powerful something gets hit. A was my initial point and why I think they won't do it, B is worst-case because it makes a portion of the playerbase unhappy because Konami didn't care that their new cards abused something that should have been banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted April 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 A lot of cards would be hypothetical if you're saying something or the other could break them. Blue and Grands don't want to draw? (Disgaree cause of Maxx and Veiler being ran in multiples in the deck), but ok Amorphage really need fully operational scales, they have the potential to lock down like nobody's business yet w/ Rejuv are still mediocre. The baby rulers were degenerate, there's a reason why Rejuv was meh even with the bigs after the chibis got banned Half the list I suggested is bad if we're going off some hypothetical future design Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted April 1, 2016 Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 A lot of cards would be hypothetical if you're saying something or the other could break them. Blue and Grands don't want to draw? (Disgaree cause of Maxx and Veiler being ran in multiples in the deck), but ok Amorphage really need fully operational scales, they have the potential to lock down like nobody's business yet w/ Rejuv are still mediocre. The baby rulers were degenerate, there's a reason why Rejuv was meh even with the bigs after the chibis got banned Half the list I suggested is bad if we're going off some hypothetical future designI'm not talking specifically "If they print a card that does X, Y card will break that card" I'm saying if they want to expand on a mechanic, they would need to think about this card so they don't have to ban it again or something else, and they shouldn't have to do that. Did not say they don't want to draw. They dont specifically want to draw. Generally, they specifically want to put stuff in the Graveyard so they can field them. Obviously they like to draw because they need consistency getting the cards that let them do that, but they dont need to draw to perform their main mechanics. Again bringing up current archetypes which is not involved in the point I'm trying to make at all, and is in fact explicitly not important for the point. You can call Rejuv meh in that time all you like, it got banned because it was significantly more than meh. Here are the removals from the banned portion of the F&L list you proposed: Dark Magician of ChaosShurit, Strategist of the NekrozThousand Eyes RestrictEvilswarm Exciton KnightWind-Up Carrier ZenmaitySuper PolymerizationApoqliphort Towers Note that that isnt even a quarter of your list but sure. DMoC is errata'd but basically just limits the design space from spells that are inherently too strong. They already try to avoid making spells like that. Shurit limits them from making more Nekroz search cards, which I dont imagine they were going to do at any point anyway. TER limits them from making single cards that will create an unbreakable lock with him. There's lots of monsters they already need to avoid doing that with. The only thing they would need to watch out for with Exciton being legal is making archetypes that intentionally dont have field or hand advantage or can make it small temporarily. OK, that's a fair limit to have as there's other legal cards that could abuse that to, though maybe not nearly as effectively. Zenmaity limits them from making any wind-ups that could loop with it like last time. Very small limit, not a problem. Super Poly would limit them from making Fusions that are too strong that have generic or semi-generic materials. I think that's a fair limit to have anyway. Towers limits them from giving Qlis a better/unfixed Scout/Saq or just kind of more support in general that does what they are already doing better, which they again, probably weren't doing anyway. Dragons that want to Tribute and/or discard is kind of the definition of dragons in yugioh. To expect them to not make more dragons that do this or would benefit from the plethora of cards that would aid them in doing this is irrational and unreasonable. They shouldn't have to make, not even a future archetype, just future members of a monster type, that are scaled down from their intentions because of the legality of a card that would give them card advantage for doing what dragons do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted April 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 I'm not talking specifically "If they print a card that does X, Y card will break that card" I'm saying if they want to expand on a mechanic, they would need to think about this card so they don't have to ban it again or something else, and they shouldn't have to do that. Did not say they don't want to draw. They dont specifically want to draw. Generally, they specifically want to put stuff in the Graveyard so they can field them. Obviously they like to draw because they need consistency getting the cards that let them do that, but they dont need to draw to perform their main mechanics. Again bringing up current archetypes which is not involved in the point I'm trying to make at all, and is in fact explicitly not important for the point. You can call Rejuv meh in that time all you like, it got banned because it was significantly more than meh. Here are the removals from the banned portion of the F&L list you proposed: Dark Magician of ChaosShurit, Strategist of the NekrozThousand Eyes RestrictEvilswarm Exciton KnightWind-Up Carrier ZenmaitySuper PolymerizationApoqliphort Towers Note that that isnt even a quarter of your list but sure. DMoC is errata'd but basically just limits the design space from spells that are inherently too strong. They already try to avoid making spells like that. Shurit limits them from making more Nekroz search cards, which I dont imagine they were going to do at any point anyway. TER limits them from making single cards that will create an unbreakable lock with him. There's lots of monsters they already need to avoid doing that with. The only thing they would need to watch out for with Exciton being legal is making archetypes that intentionally dont have field or hand advantage or can make it small temporarily. OK, that's a fair limit to have as there's other legal cards that could abuse that to, though maybe not nearly as effectively. Zenmaity limits them from making any wind-ups that could loop with it like last time. Very small limit, not a problem. Super Poly would limit them from making Fusions that are too strong that have generic or semi-generic materials. I think that's a fair limit to have anyway. Towers limits them from giving Qlis a better/unfixed Scout/Saq or just kind of more support in general that does what they are already doing better, which they again, probably weren't doing anyway. Dragons that want to Tribute and/or discard is kind of the definition of dragons in yugioh. To expect them to not make more dragons that do this or would benefit from the plethora of cards that would aid them in doing this is irrational and unreasonable. They shouldn't have to make, not even a future archetype, just future members of a monster type, that are scaled down from their intentions because of the legality of a card that would give them card advantage for doing what dragons do.Hmm, valid points, but lets look at rejuv, inherent -1, that pays for itself with each additional discard or tribute yes? So you would need to activate atleast 2 +0 discards/tributes to advance the state Most decks can't do that, and outside of rulers, most never could. Which is why OCG limited this card instead of banning it. TCG's banning of it was a knee jerk RXN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted April 1, 2016 Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 Hmm, valid points, but lets look at rejuv, inherent -1, that pays for itself with each additional discard or tribute yes? So you would need to activate atleast 2 +0 discards/tributes to advance the state Most decks can't do that, and outside of rulers, most never could. Which is why OCG limited this card instead of banning it. TCG's banning of it was a knee jerk RXNYou're probably right that most never could. That doesn't mean it should be there to keep Konami from printing more good dragons for fear that too many will warrant the card to be hit again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted April 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 You're probably right that most never could. That doesn't mean it should be there to keep Konami from printing more good dragons for fear that too many will warrant the card to be hit again.Well seeing that Dragons are so grave reliant, having +1 and +0 grave set up cards really isn't healthy. Rejuv keeping things like that out of the game is honestly GOOD for the balance of Dragons. If you want proof that cards like that are limit worthy in their own regard, look no further than Awakening of the True Dragons, +0 search Spell, with Dragon Discard cost and it's defining a metagame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted April 1, 2016 Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 Well seeing that Dragons are so grave reliant, having +1 and +0 grave set up cards really isn't healthy. Rejuv keeping things like that out of the game is honestly GOOD for the balance of Dragons. If you want proof that cards like that are limit worthy in their own regard, look no further than Awakening of the True Dragons, +0 search Spell, with Dragon Discard cost and it's defining a metagameIt doesnt provide balanced dragons though, my point is it will provide UNDERbalanced dragons because they need to be weaker and bend around the legality of this card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted April 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2016 It doesnt provide balanced dragons though, my point is it will provide UNDERbalanced dragons because they need to be weaker and bend around the legality of this card.Rejuv+Dragons should equal the way Dragons would have been designed considering rejuv was banned at best case they're both equal. Rejuv (if you are correct) stops +0/1 discards benefiting dragons. That's a damn good thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.