[2DISC] Chimeratech Fortress Dragon and Silent Strider

[Chevalier]

Yeap.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Chimeratech Fortress Dragon is obviously a bannable card.

 

Pretty much makes machines unplayable' date=' while adding nothing to the game.

[/quote']

 

Because all Machine Decks always have a CyDra out right? Fortress was made back when Cyber Dragon was ruling the game, so Konami tried to stop it with a few cards, first one being Cyber Dinosaur, which had no impact whatsoever, then they overkilled it with this. Only now do we get Chimeratech Fortress.

 

Another thing, this card works FOR machines, not just against it, this card being released is really no big loss for Machines, especially since CyDra's limited and Machines have a wide array of archetypes.

 

 

Mindless Sheep? Pfft. I'm good Ygoz' date=' you know that?

There's no doubt in my mind I could beat Crab in a duel in Ygo.

I sigged that because, plain and simple, people, like you, need to hear it and you got owned.

kthnxbai

[/quote']

 

Because apparently when I post, anything that doesn't pertain to you is tl;dr, so when I make a perfectly fair argument it's tl;dr, but whenever Crab flaunts his intelligence by saying what happens today's duels should by no means whatsoever affect banlist decisions, I "heard it and got owned".

 

What do you mean "people like me"? People who disagree with your leader rite? =/

[Chevalier]

People like you = Bad Ygoz

Why I didn't say anything about Crab's post = He's right. I've argued w/ on like 3 threads, so now. Leader? Lolno

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

And I'm "bad ygoz" because...?

[Chevalier]

Cards that're "too good" are cards that need little to no skill to majorly affect the duel.

 

This.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Cards that're "too good" are cards that need little to no skill to majorly affect the duel.

 

This.

 

Care to explain what's so wrong about it?

[Chevalier]

If cards that were good, I.E. cards in TeleDAD, took no skill. We wouldn't see only seasoned veterans of the game winning. We would see little Johnny, whose parents bought him the "bestest" Ygo deck money can buy for their little angel's b-day, winning every Jump.

No, TeleDAD takes skill. If you're too ignorant to realize that, please quit the game.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

 

too good

 

I never said good, I said too good, meaning banworthy. If you're too ignorant to read things, please quit the game.

[Chevalier]

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

All cards have a default position of 3' date=' and are placed on the list only when it can be logically shown that keeping them at 3 would damage the game. Each card needs to be dealt with separately; there is no specific formula that you can plug in to determine where a card belongs. Most of the reasoning behind each ban/limit is covered by the categories listed below. However, note that these categories were created to reflect the general trends in the logic used; the logic used was not determined by the categories. (The only possible exception here is Category X, which is purely theoretical because there aren't actually any cards in the card pool that fall under it.)

 

PROHIBITED

 

Category 1) The card gives too large a reward too easily for too small a cost. Most of these cards are splashable, but not all; a theme support card that lets you draw 7 cards for no real cost would be banworthy under this, despite not being splashable. Example: Raigeki.

 

Category 2) The card enables one or more OTK's and/or FTK's to be accomplished easily. Often, these cards are used solely for the purpose of OTK's and/or FTK's. Example: Magical Explosion.

 

Category 3) The card invalidates a basic mechanical part of the game by effectively preventing it from ever being used with any merit; a good game does not turn its back on its basic mechanics. Example: Nobleman of Crossout (invalidates Flips).

 

Category 4) Similar to number 3, the card invalidates a certain playstyle that would otherwise contribute to the game. Example: Cyber Dragon (invalidates Stall).

 

Category 5) The underlying idea of the card's effect is, as a matter of principle, completely unacceptable in any form. Example: Victory Dragon.

 

LIMITED

 

Category A) The card cannot remain at 3 due to one or more of the banning conditions (probably Condition 1) but provides some benefit to the game at 1 that allows it to remain. Example: Mirror Force.

 

Category B) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with another copy of itself; at 1, however, it cannot interact with itself, and thus can remain legal. Example: Night Assailant.

 

Category C) The card cannot remain at 3 for purely mechanical reasons that make multiple copies of it impossible; however, it can remain at 1, where there are no other copies with which to conflict. Example: Twin-Headed Behemoth.

 

SEMI-LIMITED

 

Category X) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with two other copies of itself; at 2, however, it cannot interact with two other copies of itself, and thus can remain Semi-Limited. Example: [none available']

 

Again, these classifications reflect the logic, and not the other way around; furthermore, each card is an individual case, so even if a card might seem to fall into a category, it might not belong in that place on the list - or even on the list at all. They're simply there to describe trends in logic, not set concrete policy. Category C is an example of this, since it was created specifically to reflect the treatment of one specific card, and applies to no other cards in the card pool; it was not decided on in advance and then used to determine the fate of Twin-Headed Behemoth.

 

Because each card is handled individually, it is impossible to give an accurate summary of the reasoning involved without delving into each individual card on (or not on) the list. The above categories are the best I could do to give a general idea of what the logic typically involved.

 

This is the reasoning for a good ban list. This was posted a while back.

 

For the ban category, Chimeratech Fortress Dragon falls under more than one of those categories. It cannot be Limited because it doesnt offer any benefits for the game at 1.

 

Dark Armed Dragon falls under more than 1 ban categories and doesnt provide benefits for the game at 1.

 

Konami cant make good ban lists for crap so you Chevalier may be right about the fact that DAD/JD and Gyzarus may never be banned. CCV hasnt been banned and it has been around for a very long time.

 

Now stop arguing and STFU.

[Chevalier]

Cavalier?

Chevalier

:"(

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

Cavalier?

Chevalier

:"(

 

Fix'd.

[Chevalier]

Woot. Topic should prob be locked.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

 

Nonsense. The gods of every format always are either banned or made useless eventually like Cyber-Stein, the Envoys or Demise.

[Megaworm]

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

 

Nonsense. The gods of every format always are either banned or made useless eventually like Cyber-Stein' date=' the Envoys or Demise.

[/quote']

Cyber-Stein is the only useless one there. Envoys and Demise still have runnability and don't have a painfully self-destroying and an unresourceful effect. Field Nukage, Hand Nukage, Gravefilling, Dual-Attacking and Caiusage(remove regardless of positions, albeit BLS's effect doesn't target spells/traps) are very playable and useful. Banned, yes, but that's why we have Traditional format.

[Flame Dragon]

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

 

Nonsense. The gods of every format always are either banned or made useless eventually like Cyber-Stein' date=' the Envoys or Demise.

[/quote']

Cyber-Stein is the only useless one there. Envoys and Demise still have runnability and don't have a painfully self-destroying and an unresourceful effect. Field Nukage, Hand Nukage, Gravefilling, Dual-Attacking and Caiusage(remove regardless of positions, albeit BLS's effect doesn't target spells/traps) are very playable and useful. Banned, yes, but that's why we have Traditional format.

Stein is useless? :lol:. Also since when did we care about Traditional format?

 

You win their based on a coin flip, so it is pointless.

 

on topic

As said CFD kills machines and gives nothing to the game, so should be banned.

 

You did you even bring up Silent Strider?

[GenzoTheHarpist]

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

 

Nonsense. The gods of every format always are either banned or made useless eventually like Cyber-Stein' date=' the Envoys or Demise.

[/quote']

Cyber-Stein is the only useless one there. Envoys and Demise still have runnability and don't have a painfully self-destroying and an unresourceful effect. Field Nukage, Hand Nukage, Gravefilling, Dual-Attacking and Caiusage(remove regardless of positions, albeit BLS's effect doesn't target spells/traps) are very playable and useful. Banned, yes, but that's why we have Traditional format.

Cyber Stein has a completely overpowered and not even slightly useless effect. He and the Envoys were my examples of banned cards. Demise is a card that, while not banned itself, was made almost useless by the banning or limiting of many cards that made it viable.

 

The fact that you think Cyber Stein is unplayable (even when not banned) just shows that you're at too low of a level for me to be trying to argue with you.

[CrabHelmet]

I've given you what I have to say. If you disagree' date=' I'm fine with that. But I'd be grateful if you'd stop abusing the fact that people look up to you to make others who disagree with you into "simple-minded fools."

[/quote']

 

Ah, but the underlying problem is that you have proven that your mind is too simple.

 

When I said that the current format was not the proper basis for a banlist, you automatically jumped to a throw-darts-at-the-wall model with 3 DAD and 0 REBD. This implies one of two things:

 

1) Your mind is too limited to even conceive of the possibility of any logical basis for a banlist other than the current format.

 

2) You realized that other possibilities for the basis of a banlist exist, and deliberately and consciously chose to construct a Straw Man.

 

In case #1, the problem is that your mind is too simple due to lack of imagination; in case #2, the problem is that your mind is too simple due to lack of logic (Straw Man, as I'm sure you know, is a basic logical fallacy). In either case, you are simple-minded.

 

QED.

 

No' date=' the TCG section's got a lot going for it, like good ygoz, but mindless sheep following their leader simply because they have no idea what to think and because they need someone to tell them what to think, which is why you agree every time and constantly sig their quotes and suck up to them, you want to be in the leader's good sheep book so that you won't be made into a fool by the masses of other "leader's sheep".

 

"Oh grate leeder gimmee quotes 4 my siggy pl0x" is not showing independent thinking, it is showing sheep-ism. If you can't think for yourself and merely reiterate what your leader throws at you, you are not helping anyone, you are being a Sarah Palin.

[/quote']

 

Indeed, rampant use of ipse dixitism is a serious problem with the TCG forum. That's why I deliberately troll every once in a while.

 

However, Chevalier spends most of his time arguing against me. >_>

 

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

 

It is possible that Konami will pull a Black Luster Soldier here - you know, keep the ridiculously broken card around for two years before finally killing it. >_>

[Chevalier]

Most of the time, if it makes Konami money, it stays.

[SliferMigi]

How does it make money for them?

Unless people spend hundreds of £'s/$'s on Phantom Darkness packs?

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Silent Strider is a quick level 5 Synchro.

 

Fortress is a quick win if your opponent happens to use machines. And workable in its own deck with DNA surgery.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

DAD will never banned. Nor will JD. Or Gyzarus.

Understand that please.

 

Again' date=' you fail to see the point. You're actually avoiding the point by completely changing the subject.[

 

You think that I think that the only cards that're worth playing are cards that take no skill and have a huge impact in your favor.

 

What I said was that the only cards worth [i']BANNING[/i] are cards that're worth playing and have a huge impact in your favor.

 

Once you realized this, you just threw 3 banworthy cards at me and told me they'd never be banned. That may be so (although I doubt all 3 won't be touched), but Konami being stupid doesn't make banworthy cards any less banworthy.

 

 

All cards have a default position of 3' date=' and are placed on the list only when it can be logically shown that keeping them at 3 would damage the game.

 

[b']This is where you people tell me why keeping Chimeratech Fortress Dragon at 3 would damage the game.[/b]

 

Each card needs to be dealt with separately; there is no specific formula that you can plug in to determine where a card belongs. Most of the reasoning behind each ban/limit is covered by the categories listed below. However, note that these categories were created to reflect the general trends in the logic used; the logic used was not determined by the categories. (The only possible exception here is Category X, which is purely theoretical because there aren't actually any cards in the card pool that fall under it.)

 

PROHIBITED

 

Category 1) The card gives too large a reward too easily for too small a cost. Most of these cards are splashable, but not all; a theme support card that lets you draw 7 cards for no real cost would be banworthy under this, despite not being splashable. Example: Raigeki.

 

Agreed, although you'll have to think twice before you place something in this category.

 

Category 2) The card enables one or more OTK's and/or FTK's to be accomplished easily. Often, these cards are used solely for the purpose of OTK's and/or FTK's. Example: Magical Explosion.

 

This one I'm not so sure about, OTKs aren't by any means easy to pull off, especially when you're keeping cards that can easily stomp OTKs (ie. Solemn) at 3. Also, with OTK decks, once they lose a step in the OTK sequence, it can prove quite difficult to come back.

 

Category 3) The card invalidates a basic mechanical part of the game by effectively preventing it from ever being used with any merit; a good game does not turn its back on its basic mechanics. Example: Nobleman of Crossout (invalidates Flips).

 

I don't think this category would constitute a card as banworthy in most cases, if people can only run 1 NoC, it isn't going to abolish any chances that anyone'll have to use cards with Flip effects, especially if they're flip effect cards don't all use the same name.

 

Category 4) Similar to number 3, the card invalidates a certain playstyle that would otherwise contribute to the game. Example: Cyber Dragon (invalidates Stall).

 

Explain to me how Cyber Dragon COMPLETELY erases Stall Decks from the face of the earth.

 

Category 5) The underlying idea of the card's effect is, as a matter of principle, completely unacceptable in any form. Example: Victory Dragon.

 

I disagree with this category. Define completely unacceptable in any form. And Victory Dragon isn't all that banworthy due to the fact that it requires 3 Tributes of a specific type, you MUST win the Duel with it, which isn't going to be easy considering what you had to go through to Summon it, AND it only has 2400 ATK, which for 3 Tributes is ridiculous.

 

LIMITED

 

Category A) The card cannot remain at 3 due to one or more of the banning conditions (probably Condition 1) but provides some benefit to the game at 1 that allows it to remain. Example: Mirror Force.

 

Seems fair, but first off, what do you mean by "provides some benefit to the game at 1 and how does Mirror Force do this?

 

Category B) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with another copy of itself; at 1, however, it cannot interact with itself, and thus can remain legal. Example: Night Assailant.

 

What you consider an unacceptable interaction here is huge. You must be sure it's unacceptable, you'll wreck the card if you limit it due to this card, so you have to be 100% sure of its unacceptibility.

 

Category C) The card cannot remain at 3 for purely mechanical reasons that make multiple copies of it impossible; however, it can remain at 1, where there are no other copies with which to conflict. Example: Twin-Headed Behemoth.

 

I disagree. A ruling for cards like Twin-Headed Behemoth should be given. ie: The second Behemoth can/can't use the effect if a first Behemoth already has. But Limiting due to a lack of there being a ruling is stupid, and should be remedied by a ruling being given, not by Limiting it.

 

SEMI-LIMITED

 

Category X) The card cannot remain at 3 due to an unacceptable interaction with two other copies of itself; at 2, however, it cannot interact with two other copies of itself, and thus can remain Semi-Limited. Example: [none available]

 

This isn't the only possible reason for a card to be Semi-Limited. There's a big difference between 100% and 33%, and to say that nothing can be in between that gap isn't something I'd agree on.

 

Again, these classifications reflect the logic, and not the other way around; furthermore, each card is an individual case, so even if a card might seem to fall into a category, it might not belong in that place on the list - or even on the list at all. They're simply there to describe trends in logic, not set concrete policy. Category C is an example of this, since it was created specifically to reflect the treatment of one specific card, and applies to no other cards in the card pool; it was not decided on in advance and then used to determine the fate of Twin-Headed Behemoth.

 

Because each card is handled individually, it is impossible to give an accurate summary of the reasoning involved without delving into each individual card on (or not on) the list. The above categories are the best I could do to give a general idea of what the logic typically involved.

 

This is the reasoning for a good ban list. This was posted a while back.

 

There are some elements of it I'd disagree with, but it isn't a a bad evaluation.

 

For the ban category, Chimeratech Fortress Dragon falls under more than one of those categories. It cannot be Limited because it doesnt offer any benefits for the game at 1.

 

Lessee. Is it a splashable card with a large reward for too small a cost? No, it is extra tech against 1 of the 21 types, and even then it can only work with a specific Limited monster in that type, so no. It'll hardly ever see the field, it won't completely erase any type of Machine Deck from the face of the Earth, because many of those Decks won't even run CyDra, and if they do their Deck still won't be crushed 100% of the time as a direct result of Chimera Fortress. Is it a card that can easily OTK? It's possible for this card to OTK under rash circumstances, but easily? No. Does it invalidate a mechanic or style of play? No. Is it's effect completely unacceptable? No. So to say Chimera Fortress falls into more than 1 category is downright incorrect.

 

Dark Armed Dragon falls under more than 1 ban categories and doesnt provide benefits for the game at 1.

 

Most of those categories shouldn't be instant ban reasons, and with Dimension Fusion out of the picture I'm only seeing 1 category I'd place DAD in, that is of course not the only reason why it should be banned however.

 

Konami cant make good ban lists for crap so you Chevalier may be right about the fact that DAD/JD and Gyzarus may never be banned. CCV hasnt been banned and it has been around for a very long time.

 

We don't know what the future holds bra.

 

Now stop arguing and STFU.

 

I could say the same for you, but I won't. I don't think that a banlist's construction should have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING with the evaluation of today's duels, this doesn't automatically categorize me as a simple-minded fool. I think that basing every banlist decision solely on this evaluation is being a simple-minded fool. Look at it from more than 1 angle bra.

 

[Guest Supreme Gamesmaster]

I lol at the above post, because it says Victory Dragon should be legal, under Japanese forfeit conditions.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

I lol at the above post, because it says Victory Dragon should be illegal, when it's a 3-Dragon Trib 2.4k ATK monster which you're supposed to use to reduce your opponent's LP to 0 with even after throwing yourself so far behind w/it by Summoning it in the first place when it's ridiculously easy for your opponent to kill, leaving you even more behind.

[Chevalier]

You think that I think that the only cards that're worth playing are cards that take no skill and have a huge impact in your favor.

 

Failure in the purest form.

 

How does it make money for them?

Unless people spend hundreds of £'s/$'s on Phantom Darkness packs?

 

Since the release of DAD, interest and sales in Ygo have risen to at least double what they were before. Since Synchros hit the shelves and TeleDAD was made, Ygo has been at an all time high. Konamim ban or take away cards that brought that interest? Doubtful.