Jump to content

A Super-Hypothetical Fan-Driven Yugioh Reboot and Interest Check


Recommended Posts

I kinda like the idea of keeping Pendulum scales low in most cases, and having the bosses of Pendulum decks be Tribute monsters with some form of recovery. The Level 8 D/D/D Doom King Armageddon I think can Banish monsters from the Grave to Special Summon himself to make up for the fact that he's out of the normal scales you run in that deck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Hmmm maybe random question but, what do you think about Monarchs?
This might be a bit of a hot take buuuuuuut well.... hummm
Can we avoid them?

They are pretty obsolete nowadays but if we speak anywhere from 2011 backwards, they are peak performance incarnate in how effective they are. Nobody cared that Summoned Skull and a couple others had more ATK, and stuff like Airknight Parshath lost a bit of favor in Goat Format's present day versions compared to something like even Raiza. Pretty much once you make Monarchs, you end up having to 1-up them or mimic them, and this hypothetical format Is actually making them stronger through a Double Summon built into the rules.

To not outclass any card design that's not strictly advantage generators on the spot, we'd probably have to make like, similar stuff that was Level 7+ while keeping the stats low and even giving them some cost like a discard or whatnot to make up and not make players go "monarchs or no Tributes are worth it" like the IRL game seemed to be for a while.

I wanna hear thoughts on this though.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to get a decent number of people on board before I actually start making anything, and I want everyone to agree on the speed of the format before I make any major decisions. so real quick, anyone who's down to help make this a thing, please react to this message so I have a head-count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Libracor said:

I kinda like the idea of keeping Pendulum scales low in most cases, and having the bosses of Pendulum decks be Tribute monsters with some form of recovery. The Level 8 D/D/D Doom King Armageddon I think can Banish monsters from the Grave to Special Summon himself to make up for the fact that he's out of the normal scales you run in that deck.

The D/D/D that can summon itself for a banish 2 is Chaos King, not Doom King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Libracor said:

There was a concept I had thought of a few weeks ago, but I wasn't sure if it was a good idea. For the sake of putting it on the table, here it is:

Pendulum Summon is no longer OPT, HOWEVER any given monster can be Pendulum Summoned only once per turn. 

The idea here is you can Pendulum out a monster, and then either move it off the Extra Zone or use it as a mat to free up the space.

 

I really don't think this is a great solution, but it's the only 'tweak' I can really think of.

A similar idea to throw out that I also don't like is you can only use one set scale of Pend monsters OPT to Pend summon again you have to reset the scale with 2 different pend monsters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 haven't been talking much because I am very much biased about pend in general, but maybe this option to make it a bit less restrained is to make the scales work like a field zone if they are seperated. As in you can destroy one in the pend zone to place another. I know this might have potential for broken synergies (looking at youu d/d/d and z-arc turbo) but maybe if we make it that if they are replaced they are sent to the gy unstead of extra deck that would lower the options alot right? Like place a useless scale monster just for its effect in the zone, replace it, and insteadof summoning it back when replaced, it is sent to the GY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd recommend a couple things here:

FIRST: I think Pendulums and other advanced mechanics should not really be the very starting point here. Rather something basic and straightforward, and from there the advanced mechanics would know what niches to fill or things to counter or support.

SECOND: It is better in my opinion to start even with few people. I have the hunch some people out there wouldn't join without some groundwork established. It is easier to edit work that already exists than to ask somebody to create something new after all. Right now the ones that would join with a blank slate probably already have. Make sure you take advantage of this by building towards the kind of gameplay you want most. Those that joined on a blank slate period of the project are probably interested regardless so you work with that flexibility. If just about enough for a playable/functional base is completed, you'll have achieved more than most stuff like this project that I've seen. With some way to showcase what makes that base fun, and I think that'd be the start of the ball running. I kind of don't want the thread to fade into inactivity while we wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. I think we're ready to start on actually making cards soon. We're all pretty much good with a slower, less special-summon heavy format yeah? I can start compiling a design document detailing the type of power level we should be working towards, and then I'll make a list of real cards to bring in as S/T staples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zefra Zamazenta said:

Why is everyone talking about your Fan format!

It isn't "his fan format". The format is not a thing yet. Everybody interested in joining in will have a hand at it, being a community driven project and all. He consulted other members about where to post the thread and it hasn't been moved so I guess it isn't on anyone's way here xD

You are still on time to join and make it also partially YOUR format. Although knowing you, I have the feel that the power level most people are agreeing to is not up your alley. Still, I think this is gonna be fun.

 

On another note this time towards the thread itself. In my statuses I recently mentioned uploading a custom archetype to DuelingBook, and let me tell you, the custom choices for DB are actually kinda bad.... you can' make custom attributes in any card maker out there but DB's type/subtype brakets are tight and don't even get "Tuner" in the right order. I wish it was at least as versatile as this site's Beta card maker. Customizarions are not gonna be easy to implement if we are going for intent to play. I have no solution right now but just wanted to at least bring this up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I thought I had mentioned earlier. I have someone who can make custom Attribute icons, so what we can do is make the cards on the Beta maker, export the images, and then manually replace the icons in photoshop. It won't be too much work since we're starting small and not all the new cards will have the new attributes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the double post, but all that's needed to be said has been said I think. I'll do a quick write-up of all the rule changes and design philosophies we want. I can ignore the extra deck mechanics for this initial proof-of-concept set if y'all would like. I'd like to add Gemini, just to see how it works with the new Tribute Summon rules, but things like Spirit, Union, etc., I'll leave off the table until later. For this first set, we'll make two 40-card decks containing only new cards and some very basic Spell/Trap cards like Monster Reincarnation and MST.

For the decks in this v 0.1 set, I'd like both to have monsters from three Attributes and a variety of Types. Both decks will feature monster levels up to 8, and no high-level monsters that can cheat themselves out just yet.

 

What I need from y'all:

What Attributes should we have in each deck?

What kinds of Spell/Trap support should we add? (I'm only good at writing monsters)

The cover card and Ace monster of the first deck I've already decided will be Javamancer (like a coffee wizard) and will be WATER Spellcaster, but her effect will be generic support. What should the opposing Ace monster be?

Did we decide on whether or not we wanted to experiment with multiple type tags? If yes, then I'll make a small number of low-level monsters in one of the decks have multiple types. If we haven't decided yet, I can shelve it for now.

 

What I can handle:

I'll get set on making a design document detailing the power level that a given card can expect to have. In terms of generating advantage, I think it's safe to say that most cards should be -1 or +0, and a rare few will be allowed to be +1, but absolutely no +2 cards yet, so keep that stuff in mind. Non-destruction removal will likewise not be a big part of this set.

 

Is there anything important I haven't mentioned yet that needs to be addressed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah that reminds me. We now have lost a certain protocol the IRL game has regarding modifying Types/Attributes. No biggie, it just means being able to have 2+ of them at a time by the very nature of the format gives us more freedom to choose between:
-Is your effect just adding +1 Type without erasing any of the ones the card already had?
-Is your effect replacing all Types for the new one?
-Is your effect selecting 1 specific printed card on the card to kick out of existence in favor of a new one?

Along with effects that can be made to simply delete traits, like "monsters must choose 1 Type and they no longer are treated as the other Type(s) while face-up".... 
^Just throwing this out there. IRL you know how changing a Type by default just overwrites the old ones..... Sometimes it is kinda dull so I appreciate the choices.

- - - -

In favor of experimenting with any new Type/Attributes that have been decided on.
Nature, ICE, LIGHTNING, etc....
Can you list them all one more time though? between the posts made I kinda lost track of the list of additions a little. Just the short list to help get what we are working with. 
If we can test custom Types/Attributes in some platform online, I'm all in favor of starting off with the customs. 
If we can only immediately test IRL Types/Attributes, then we'll have to split them 3 and 3 for this project.

I propose LIGHT and DARK to definitely avoid being in the same deck. Whatever you do, let's start off avoiding Chaos for now... just for the sake of getting a more refreshing feel in what we might cook.

I think hmmm
FIRE + EARTH + LIGHT
vs
WATER + WIND + DARK

^The suggestion has no particular reasons. I just thought to throw a combination out there in case it becomes a point of getting stuck thinking about it xD

Oh, and YES for adding tags. Whichever tags we can think of, the sooner we start taking advantage of their existence and finding new ones if needed, normalizing them, the better IMO.
- - - - - 

Regarding the idea for an opposing Ace: Well OBVIOUSLY Tea vs Coffee is the answer. xP
Since you seem to be going for a female magician, I'd probably opt for something more animalistic. Dragon, Plant, Beast, Reptile.... still thinking about it. Maybe a magical fancy jug and I can make use of some custom typing.....

Do you have an idea of the kind of effect you'll want her to have? 
Do you have an artwork or an idea for an artwork regarding your Ace?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Sleepy said:

Ah that reminds me. We now have lost a certain protocol the IRL game has regarding modifying Types/Attributes. No biggie, it just means being able to have 2+ of them at a time by the very nature of the format gives us more freedom to choose between:
-Is your effect just adding +1 Type without erasing any of the ones the card already had?
-Is your effect replacing all Types for the new one?
-Is your effect selecting 1 specific printed card on the card to kick out of existence in favor of a new one?

Along with effects that can be made to simply delete traits, like "monsters must choose 1 Type and they no longer are treated as the other Type(s) while face-up".... 
^Just throwing this out there. IRL you know how changing a Type by default just overwrites the old ones..... Sometimes it is kinda dull so I appreciate the choices.

- - - -

In favor of experimenting with any new Type/Attributes that have been decided on.
Nature, ICE, LIGHTNING, etc....
Can you list them all one more time though? between the posts made I kinda lost track of the list of additions a little. Just the short list to help get what we are working with. 
If we can test custom Types/Attributes in some platform online, I'm all in favor of starting off with the customs. 
If we can only immediately test IRL Types/Attributes, then we'll have to split them 3 and 3 for this project.

I propose LIGHT and DARK to definitely avoid being in the same deck. Whatever you do, let's start off avoiding Chaos for now... just for the sake of getting a more refreshing feel in what we might cook.

I think hmmm
FIRE + EARTH + LIGHT
vs
WATER + WIND + DARK

^The suggestion has no particular reasons. I just thought to throw a combination out there in case it becomes a point of getting stuck thinking about it xD

Oh, and YES for adding tags. Whichever tags we can think of, the sooner we start taking advantage of their existence and finding new ones if needed, normalizing them, the better IMO.
- - - - - 

Regarding the idea for an opposing Ace: Well OBVIOUSLY Tea vs Coffee is the answer. xP
Since you seem to be going for a female magician, I'd probably opt for something more animalistic. Dragon, Plant, Beast, Reptile.... still thinking about it. Maybe a magical fancy jug and I can make use of some custom typing.....

Do you have an idea of the kind of effect you'll want her to have? 
Do you have an artwork or an idea for an artwork regarding your Ace?
 

Yeah I definitly agree to stay away from chaos. We don't want to cause chaos. Anyways yeah I agree with maybe making certain attributes associated with some more than others, like if we make a multi-attribute deck, we choose a certain group together and another together. That doesn't mean we won't have cross-decks, just to make it more interesting.

As for another thing i think we should address here is that we shouldnt over support dragon and magician types because of the anime, we all know we dont need more dragon cards (well i want more, but im biased so ill shut up). We should keep it balanced, but it's inevitable to have some types with more support in others. Let's just not get carried away. As for the starter decks a tea vs coffee idea would be cool. Again going for a magician ace, means there has to be a dragon ace, so maybe a tea dragon. Would be fun. I'm not the best at photoshop, and don't have a computer that can handle photoshop well anyways, so ill be helping more on the effect side. I can still look for some art on devianart tho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sleepy said:

On another note this time towards the thread itself. In my statuses I recently mentioned uploading a custom archetype to DuelingBook, and let me tell you, the custom choices for DB are actually kinda bad.... you can' make custom attributes in any card maker out there but DB's type/subtype brakets are tight and don't even get "Tuner" in the right order. I wish it was at least as versatile as this site's Beta card maker. Customizarions are not gonna be easy to implement if we are going for intent to play. I have no solution right now but just wanted to at least bring this up

Oh yeah as for the custom on DB. Yeah its not good, they dont want people to make whatever they want because they do have a format where you can use custom cards. So maybe lets keep it from DB for now, until maybe they update the card maker (or and im dreaming here. A collab between ycm and DB to add this card maker there and maybe the new format aswell)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have written 2 monsters for this set so far:

Javamancer 

WATER Level 7

Spellcaster/Effect

2300/1400

[Ignition]: Once per turn, while you control this Tribute Summoned monster, you can Target 1 Level 6 or lower monster you control: That monster can attack twice per Battle Phase this turn.

 

Gachapon Fairy

Aether Level 2

Fairy/Effect

1000/1000

[Trigger]: When this monster is Normal Summoned, you can Discard 1 card: excavate the top 10 cards of your Deck and Special Summon 1 Level 5 or Higher monster that was excavated this way, then Shuffle your Deck. If you did not excavate a Level 5 or Higher monster, Draw 1 card.

 

If we're doing coffee and tea, how about Matcha Dragon for the opposing side? We could make it EARTH or FOREST.

The official list of Attributes are as follows:

LIGHT DARK FIRE WATER WIND EARTH AETHER LIGHTNING FOREST ICE

Personally, I'd like to try

WATER AETHER FIRE

FOREST WIND EARTH

I've added no new Types as of yet, and renamed Cyberse to Data and Galaxy (the new one that Go Rush is adding) to Cosmic. If anyone has new Type suggestions now's the time, but I think the ones we have covers most of the bases already.

 

Card Art is the last thing on my mind right now. I'm no artist, I'm a design guy. I'm more than capable of testing with no art or stock images for placeholders for now.

 

If anyone here knows how to use TableTop Simulator, we can try making something extremely simple there and just like upload the card images without adding any sort of functionality. It won't be pretty, but it should work. Otherwise we can do something crude like adding [L] or something into a card name to denote that it has one of the four new attributes.

 

Last night I wrote a super basic write-up for balancing cards in this format, and I guarantee there's stuff I didn't think of. I'm not an expert at this, so any insight y'all can share would greatly help.

 

Cards will be scored on the basis of Advantage Per Turn (APT) to determine balance. Most cards in this format must be +0 or -1. Monsters should never be +2.

 

APT is calculable as:

How many cards this card gives access to + the number of cards it takes away from the opponent - the number of cards needed to use

 

For example, a Level 7 monster that gets an effect to draw two cards if it is Tribute Summoned but has no effects if Special Summoned has APT of 0.

 

Effects that are not HOPT must be +0 at maximum. Paying LP does not reduce APT. Effects that can be used multiple times per turn and also generate advantage are a one-way-ticket to broken formats.

 

Monsters:

 

For every 400 ATK or  450 DEF, whichever is higher, add a level. 

 

Subtract a level if:

The monster has a negative effect

It is a Normal Monster whose ATK is lower than its DEF by at least 800

It has an effect that only goes off on its Normal Summon

 

Add a level if:

The monster has a positive effect

Its APT is +1

 

A monster absolutely cannot grant card advantage from an effect on Special Summon. Normal Summon is fine, but not Special.

Monsters that can Special Summon themselves must do so in a way that is one or more of the following:

Hard Once Per Turn (HOPT)

-1 on the summon

Activates a negative effect


 

Special Summons of high-level monsters should be less common than that of low-level monsters. Monsters level 5 and up should have effects that benefit the player when they are successfully Tribute Summoned, not Special Summoned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Libracor said:

I have written 2 monsters for this set so far:

Javamancer 

WATER Level 7

Spellcaster/Effect

2300/1400

[Ignition]: Once per turn, while you control this Tribute Summoned monster, you can Target 1 Level 6 or lower monster you control: That monster can attack twice per Battle Phase this turn.

 

Gachapon Fairy

Aether Level 2

Fairy/Effect

1000/1000

[Trigger]: When this monster is Normal Summoned, you can Discard 1 card: excavate the top 10 cards of your Deck and Special Summon 1 Level 5 or Higher monster that was excavated this way, then Shuffle your Deck. If you did not excavate a Level 5 or Higher monster, Draw 1 card.

 

If we're doing coffee and tea, how about Matcha Dragon for the opposing side? We could make it EARTH or FOREST.

The official list of Attributes are as follows:

LIGHT DARK FIRE WATER WIND EARTH AETHER LIGHTNING FOREST ICE

Personally, I'd like to try

WATER AETHER FIRE

FOREST WIND EARTH

I've added no new Types as of yet, and renamed Cyberse to Data and Galaxy (the new one that Go Rush is adding) to Cosmic. If anyone has new Type suggestions now's the time, but I think the ones we have covers most of the bases already.

 

Card Art is the last thing on my mind right now. I'm no artist, I'm a design guy. I'm more than capable of testing with no art or stock images for placeholders for now.

 

If anyone here knows how to use TableTop Simulator, we can try making something extremely simple there and just like upload the card images without adding any sort of functionality. It won't be pretty, but it should work. Otherwise we can do something crude like adding [L] or something into a card name to denote that it has one of the four new attributes.

 

Last night I wrote a super basic write-up for balancing cards in this format, and I guarantee there's stuff I didn't think of. I'm not an expert at this, so any insight y'all can share would greatly help.

 

Cards will be scored on the basis of Advantage Per Turn (APT) to determine balance. Most cards in this format must be +0 or -1. Monsters should never be +2.

 

APT is calculable as:

How many cards this card gives access to + the number of cards it takes away from the opponent - the number of cards needed to use

 

For example, a Level 7 monster that gets an effect to draw two cards if it is Tribute Summoned but has no effects if Special Summoned has APT of 0.

 

Effects that are not HOPT must be +0 at maximum. Paying LP does not reduce APT. Effects that can be used multiple times per turn and also generate advantage are a one-way-ticket to broken formats.

 

Monsters:

 

For every 400 ATK or  450 DEF, whichever is higher, add a level. 

 

Subtract a level if:

The monster has a negative effect

It is a Normal Monster whose ATK is lower than its DEF by at least 800

It has an effect that only goes off on its Normal Summon

 

Add a level if:

The monster has a positive effect

Its APT is +1

 

A monster absolutely cannot grant card advantage from an effect on Special Summon. Normal Summon is fine, but not Special.

Monsters that can Special Summon themselves must do so in a way that is one or more of the following:

Hard Once Per Turn (HOPT)

-1 on the summon

Activates a negative effect


 

Special Summons of high-level monsters should be less common than that of low-level monsters. Monsters level 5 and up should have effects that benefit the player when they are successfully Tribute Summoned, not Special Summoned.

I'd say you pretty much covered the basics. As for the cards, I like that you took a page out of vanguard's book (if it was on purpose) but ignition is not really understandable. Ignition is like you can activate it or what exactly? As for table top simulator. I might aswell learn it now because I was planning to learn it at some point for DnD. So ill try something basic there and then report back on what I can do. As for the rules, i like the thinking, so the baseline is how many levels before we add/subtract? level 0 and add from then? Thats an interesting idea. Oncewe make more cards, ill collect them and try to make something on tabletop simulator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More or less just an idea to keep the levels of our monsters consistent with the ideology of the time, how back in the day they represented power level rather than just being a rersource,\

 

Also, never played vanguard; Ignition is an actual term in Yugioh for a Spell Speed 1 effect, it just hasn't appeared on cards before. I think we should have the Spell Speed listed on an effect somehow too but I'm not sure how.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is spell speed stating even necessary? Effects usually are slow, or they say (Quick Effect), or are Counter Traps (which are the only way of having the uncommon SS3).
There's a few exceptions like Traps never saying (Quick Effect) because the game rules that Traps are inherently quick as cards anyways..... so a wording that made that specific detail a little easier to grasp for newbies would be nice maybe......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sleepy said:

Is spell speed stating even necessary? Effects usually are slow, or they say (Quick Effect), or are Counter Traps (which are the only way of having the uncommon SS3).
There's a few exceptions like Traps never saying (Quick Effect) because the game rules that Traps are inherently quick as cards anyways..... so a wording that made that specific detail a little easier to grasp for newbies would be nice maybe......

Maybe having different tags that inherintly have a certain spell speed? Like in MTG, sorcery is spell speed 1, and instant is spell speed 2. You could then give a tag to the effect that defines spell speed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just plugging in numbers in the graph earlier and I think a blanket interval for all Levels gets a little out of hand on higher Levels. Level 7 can technically go 2800 (400×) to 3150 (450×) and be deemed Level 6 if vanilla. I think it is gonna have a bunch of exceptions that feel right but don't quite follow the guide.

I was thinking maybe if we decreased the stat growth rate every time the table reaches a +1 Tribute Summon. Then make that the vanilla ATK threshold, while for effect we simply go -200 on the final number. Example:

Level 1  >  500 (Normal) / 300 (Effect).

Level 2 > 1000 (Normal) / 800 (Effect).

Level 3 > 1500 (Normal) / 1300 (Effect).

Level 4 > 2000 (Normal) / 1800 (Effect).

Level 5 > 2300 (Normal) / 2100 (Effect).

Level 6 > 2600 (Normal) / 2400 (Effect).

Level 7 > 2800 (Normal) / 2600 (Effect).

Level 8 > 3000 (Normal) / 2800 (Effect).

^ Levels 1 - 4 = 500x. Levels 5 and 6 = 300x built on top of the 1-4 max. Levels 7 and 8 = 200x built on top of the previous max. This does not include DEF, but what do you think? Too convoluted/complicated?

I was mainly thinking that Javamancer's stats are a little on the low end aren't they? ^^"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...