CrabHelmet Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 No image for you. If you don't know what it is by now, you aren't qualified to discuss it. Let me ask you chaps something: 3 or 0? Give reasoning. If you're not going to give reasoning, don't post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
「tea.leaf」 Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 Three. I like three, and that's a perfectly good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Csent Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 It should be zero. The ability to take any monster your opponent has, attack, then dump for one of many tribute requirements (Stardust Dragon, a Monarch, etc.). Heck, take DAD, empty your graveyard, attack, then have it kill itself. All for a mere 800 LP. Doing that ONCE is nasty, but THRICE (I checked; it's a real word)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fh-Fh Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 0. Its Change of Heart with a cost. In this meta, with synchros, it is as simple as E-Tele, Brain, Synchro. The card also has no limitations, aside from the returning to the opponents side of the field. Also with signifigant game-maker/breakers (JD, DAD) the tables can turn very quickly with just a lucky draw. No skill involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycho Shocker Android Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 0 You are paying 800 LP to get a face up monster who can usually inflict more damage that this by attacking. You are free to do what you what with the monster : attack, tribute it for a summon, you can use it's effect if it has one, syncro summon, etc. If you do the math you are getting +1 for a whole turn and -1 for the rest of the duel if you do nothing (but seriously it's not going to happen). Your opponent is likely going to lose some advantage because of this card. It's also a very good game ender. Late game both players have low resources (often top decking with low LP) usually having only one monster on the field. This card can take this monster for a clean shot at your opponent LP for game. It's good for OTKs. Stealing your opponent monster can increase the amount of damage you can inflict in a turn dramatically because it gives you an attacker while taking away a defender. Let's say you steal an 1800 atk monsters it gives you the potential of doing a bonus 3600 dmg. (1800 for the monster you steal and 1800 for the dmg it can't block) It doesn't take much skill to use either. Your opponent has a face up monster and you can do something good with it, play brain control. Maybe with more restriction on what you can do with the monster or a higher cost this card would have been more balanced. Just look at Mind Control and Soul Exchange. This card should be with change of heart and snatch steal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonisanoob Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 neither its fine at 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 3, if it does ya kindly. I figure that a card that depends on the opponent always playing face-up monsters is okay in a format where Setting is viable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuki ni Mau Majin Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 0 It's like this: an 800 LP cost to gain control of a monster your opponent controls, can not only give you the upper hand, but can turn the tables entirely. Other than having to return the monster to your opponent, though you'd most likely tribute it, this card has no real cost that makes it balanced enough to be at three, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PikaPerson01 Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 Always reminded me of the Premature Burial vs Monster Reborn debate, where in the end we decided both were broken. No cost revival versus low cost revival. Ultimately, unless your opponent had a response, it was broken and such. It's always been my opinion to have it at 0, and if we proceed with the "Oh, but you can still set!" argument, then you give up the argument that Snatch Steal is broken, because you can set in the same situation. It causes you to perform a move you otherwise wouldn't do, and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skuldur Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 0 800 LP aren't much and being able to snatch your opponent's DAD/JD etc. is good and can turn the tables or even win you the duel. Also with Synchros in the game now you can just use B-Con, steal a monster attack and then Synchro Summon Stardust Dragon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zelda_tp_fan Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 You shouldn't be able to easily synchro summon without running tuners Thats one of my rules. 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Csent Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 3' date=' if it does ya kindly. I figure that a card that depends on the opponent always playing face-up monsters is okay in a format where Setting is viable.[/quote'] Do you set your DAD or Judgment Dragon? I have not figured out how to manipulate their summon conditions yet . . . please tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabHelmet Posted October 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 This board actually did better than I expected. Only one person was daft enough to say "1". Then again, a variety of other people were daft in a variety of other ways. Keep posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 0. It is a skill less card that has the ability to open your opponent up for an attack and then be able to use their monster as a tribute or for a synchro summon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skarlet Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 It's fine at 1, mainly becuse it's a weakend change of heart, I find it quite balanced, and IF it worries people that badly there are lots of options they have. This is the advantage of my Horus deck folks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Csent Posted October 24, 2008 Report Share Posted October 24, 2008 It's fine at 1' date=' mainly becuse it's a weakend change of heart[/b'], I find it quite balanced, and IF it worries people that badly there are lots of options they have. This is the advantage of my Horus deck folks I believe Crab Helmet touched on a variation of this concept before. I'll paraphrase him: just because a card is a weaker version of a banned card does not save it from banishment. Crab, if you would like to explain it further again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Roxas Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 Change of Heart was banned, the only difference between that and Brain Control is that you have to pay 800 Life Points. Oh noez, I haz to pae ate-honderd leif poyntz! Dis crad sux! Honestly, just ban it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenzoTheHarpist Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 Stays at one. It is broken but encourages good play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 Stays at one. It is broken but encourages good play.How? If your opponent has a face up monster on the field and you have +900 Life Points when you top deck this you can just activate it and reap the benefits. All that is is a mindless play, not a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenzoTheHarpist Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 It encourages good play by punishing players who rely on single unprotected monster cards, and makes cards like Botanical Lion more playable, justifying their existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes96 Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 1 Because it is strong and has saved me before.not 3 because 3x800=2400 lifepoints paid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenzoTheHarpist Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 1 Because it is strong and has saved me before. Hey you know Raigeki has saved me a lot so that should be at one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 It encourages good play by punishing players who rely on single unprotected monster cards' date=' and makes cards like Botanical Lion more playable, justifying their existence.[/quote']Their are times when having 1 unprotected monster is almost unavoidable, like in the early game. If you summon a monster turn one only to have your opponent take it and use it against you, you are unfairly being punished for doing something that is next to unavoidable. Bad reason to keep a card around. Also Mind Control and Enemy Controller still exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skarlet Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 Change of Heart was banned' date=' the only difference between that and Brain Control is that you have to pay 800 Life Points. Oh noez, I haz to pae ate-honderd leif poyntz! Dis crad sux! Honestly, just ban it.[/quote'] WRONG change could control facedowns, and potentialy prevent harmul flip effects, and even turn them on your opponent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted October 25, 2008 Report Share Posted October 25, 2008 Change of Heart was banned' date=' the only difference between that and Brain Control is that you have to pay 800 Life Points. Oh noez, I haz to pae ate-honderd leif poyntz! Dis crad sux! Honestly, just ban it.[/quote'] WRONG change could control facedowns, and potentialy prevent harmul flip effects, and even turn them on your opponentWRONG, you can't change the monster battle position when you take control of it. Also lol flip effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.