[DISC] Judgment Dragon [LS]

[Guest Star]

 

Some people think this card should be banned because, clearly, it's overpowered.

 

Some others, however, think that because it is theme-based, it shouldn't be banned.

 

In my opinion, the fact that it is theme-based isn't enough to keep it from being banworthy. Being able to be easily Summoned and clear the field for a small cost isn't something that will help the game.

 

Ban this.

[BulletMan]

Id say limited. maybe banned.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

I haven't actually heard anyone who thought being theme-specific was enough to not ban this card.

[Skarlet]

anyone can tech a few different LS for speed, making this playable aswell, and when you can splash a field nuke you know it's too much

[CrabHelmet]

I haven't actually heard anyone who thought being theme-specific was enough to not ban this card.

 

Tabris thinks that, along with everyone else from Pojo.

 

Then again, last time I was on Pojo, The Quiff was addressing the Beckoning Light = 3 JDragon = OTK problem by proposing that Beckoning Light be banned. >_>

[Chevalier]

If you're going to do something leave it at one. It makes LS good. No need to be banned.

inb4 he says you can use MRein and BL to get JD back as a reason to ban it.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

If an archetype needs a broken card to live it deserves to die. Ban.

[Tabris]

I haven't actually heard anyone who thought being theme-specific was enough to not ban this card.

 

Then you'll hear it from me: JD is not banworthy, despite its design, because it's themed. The amount of deck dedication and the inherent instability of its archetype are enough to balance a seemingly banworthy card.

[Mr. Judgment Dragon]

This card is overpowered. Even though it is Archetype specific, that doesnt keep it from being banned. Ban it. I have a feeling even at 1 this would be bad for the game. Summon even 1 of these and the game is turned into your favor.

 

I haven't actually heard anyone who thought being theme-specific was enough to not ban this card.

 

Then you'll hear it from me: JD is not banworthy' date=' despite its design, because it's themed. The amount of deck dedication and the inherent instability of its archetype are enough to balance a seemingly banworthy card.

[/quote']

 

If you have used a good LS Deck you would know how broken this card is.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

I haven't actually heard anyone who thought being theme-specific was enough to not ban this card.

 

Then you'll hear it from me: JD is not banworthy' date=' despite its design, because it's themed. The amount of deck dedication and the inherent instability of its archetype are enough to balance a seemingly banworthy card.

[/quote']

 

What would the effect of a theme specific card be for it to still be banworthy?

[Guest Star]

If you're going to do something leave it at one. It makes LS good. No need to be banned.

inb4 he says you can use MRein and BL to get JD back as a reason to ban it.

 

Explain why it is good for the game at 1, but not good for the game at 3, 2, and 0.

[Guest PikaPerson01]

Oh! Tabris is a joke account? And here I was ready to tear him a new one on the Brain Control topic. =D

 

On-topic: Clearly a bannable card. As someone already so eloquently put it, if an archetype needs a broken card to live it deserves to die.

[Tabris]

To Genzo:

 

It all depends on the archetype. If the archetype is inherently unstable in some way (due to its fiddlin' a mechanic that... you know the drill), as well as a ludicrous amount of deck dedication, then theoretically, you can have the most stupendous effects imaginable.

 

To JD:

 

I've read Salinger in mine 3-0 list, JD, and I must say that Lightsworns function better - indeed, reach Tier 1 - without Salinger. But that's beside the point.

 

You can't just splash 6-8 LS and a copy of JD and expect to win, not when you factor in the millin' tendency of the Lightsworns. To mine testin', I mained at least 20 LS for JD to function effectively.

 

More on such later.

---

Oh! Tabris is a joke account? And here I was ready to tear him a new one on the Brain Control topic. =D

 

On-topic: Clearly a bannable card. As someone already so eloquently put it' date=' if an archetype needs a broken card to live it deserves to die.

[/quote']

 

First off, The Will isn't a joke account. I merely have different opinions from the rest of the forums, as is evident.

 

Second, Lightsworns without Judgment Dragon function well. REAL well. Mine testin', in fact, has LS without JD on Tier 1.

[CrabHelmet]

I seem to remember one of Nuuuuf's arguments in favour of keeping this around was that, without it, Lightlords stop being a cohesive theme and just end up being used as splashables. Nobody has used that argument here yet (or at least hadn't when I started typing this), but it's a terrible argument so I'm sure one of you dolts will use it eventually if left alone, so I'm going to address it anyhow, and if you don't like that you can squeeze your eyelids shut and pretend I'm ranting about Mechanical Snail or whatever else you idiots think is funny nowadays.

 

Fortunately, there are three very easy counterarguments to this argument - in fact, these counterarguments can each be stated in a single word, so even the more illiterate of YCM users should be able to read them.

 

1) No.

 

Alternative word: False.

 

Alternative word: Wrong.

 

Alternative word: No, and you're a moron.

 

Removing Judgment Dragoon would certainly alter the build of a dedicated Lightlord deck - for example, Lightlord decks would be less likely to run laundry lists of single copies of their weaker cards, like Jain and Ehren, and we'd certainly see less Monster Reincarnation and Beckoning Light. However, to say that Judgment Dragoon is the only thing holding the theme together is preposterous.

 

Without the theme, Lumina, Celestia, Wulf, and Garoth all stop working properly. Sure, you can use Lumina along with one other Lightlord like Lyla, but that doesn't have quite the same versatility (and people are going to use that pair in some Spellcaster decks whether or not Judgment Dragoon is legal). Sure, you can use Foolish Burial on Wulf, but without support like Lumina, Solar Exchange, and an entire deck full of monsters with mill effects, he ends up being horribly inconsistent and just produces dead hands. Sure, Garoth is still a Level 4 LIGHT Warrior beatstick, so he can still be thrown into Little City builds that aren't satisfied with Neos Alius and Raioh, but at this point you're pretty much just grasping at straws. And as for Celestia - no. That generic super-Monarch isn't going to be splashed around no matter how you slice it.

 

Now, let me remind you that Celestia, Lumina, and Wulf are three of the best Lightlords in the game, and are certainly the three most likely to be maxed in a Lightlord deck - and, well, Garoth's a pretty cool guy too. And none of them can really be used effectively except in what can only be described as a dedicated Lightlord deck. Throw in Solar Exchange, and perhaps speculate that their themed version of Call of the Haunted becomes more attractive with the format slowed down, ridiculous field-wiping eliminated, and generic recursion banned, then remember that their mill still works with other cards that rely on the graveyard and that they all benefit from Honest (who couldn't be splashed along with them except into a dedicated LIGHT deck), and the Lightlord theme isn't going to be dying from Judgment Dragoon's absence anytime soon.

 

2) Good.

 

Recall that there are two factors that influence the outcome of a duel - Luck and Skill. No, stop reaching for your keyboards; I do not want to hear your oh-so-clever-and-original explanation of how Money is also important. You can either ignore Money, as I do, or you can say that Money is split between Luck and Skill (though it leans more heavily to the Luck side, to be sure), since those are the two factors that will determine how much Money is available and how well it can be used. Either way, Money is not a factor here, and whatever influence it may have on Luck and Skill is going to be ignored.

 

Now, since Luck and Skill are the only factors involved in deciding who wins a duel, they are playing a zero-sum game with each other - the more influential Luck is, the lest influential Skill is, and vice-versa. The banlist's duty is to maximize the impact of Skill while minimizing the impact of Luck, thus allowing the most skilled players to win the most duels the most often.

 

Now, I hate to break it to you guys, but Lightlords are Luck incarnate. The thing about random mill is that, as the name implies, it's random, and the entire bloody theme is based solely on the principle of having enough random mill to cause Card Trooper to become a depressed outcast from society. The Luck factor is huge, especially with cards like Wulf running around - a Lightlord deck's performance is heavily weighed upon by which cards it happens to draw and which cards it happens to mill.

 

Sure, inconsistency isn't a crime, but even then, Lightlord decks practically play themselves, to the point where they're infinitely more straightforward to play than even dark.dek has ever been at any time between PTDN was released and I started typing this sentence. Because of this, a Lightlord deck's performance is decided infinitely more by Luck than by Skill.

 

My point? Even if the loss of Judgment Dragoon were to somehow magically kill Lightlord decks (it wouldn't), that wouldn't be a problem; rather, it would just be a small added bonus, like that gift that they throw into cereal boxes at the bottom, except with less plastic and more cardboard.

 

3) Irrelevant.

 

I'm not going to go into much detail here. All I'm going to say is that the day I keep a broken card legal purely because I want its deck to remain powerful is the day I surgically extract my own bones and beat myself over the head with them until I bleed to death.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

To Genzo:

 

It all depends on the archetype. If the archetype is inherently unstable in some way (due to its fiddlin' a mechanic that... you know the drill)' date=' as well as a ludicrous amount of deck dedication, then theoretically, you can have the most stupendous effects imaginable.

[/quote']

For Lightsworns then. What effect would JD need to be banworthy in your opinion.

[CrabHelmet]

Additional comments:

 

Chevalier was kind enough to make an idiot of himself by bringing up the "It makes LS good" argument while I was typing. I knew someone on YCM would be stupid enough to bring that up.

 

Point #2 actually ties into the whole using-an-unstable-archetype-is-a-cost thing. The ridiculous Luck factor involved in Lightlords means that Judgment Dragoon literally has no function whatsoever other than to jump out nuke the field, and win the game through the power of sheer Luck. Rather than "balancing" it, the fact that its deck takes fundamentally minimal skill to play just makes Judgment Dragoon's power even more ridiculous - it's not even rewarding the use of cards that take more than three brain cells to run.

 

By the way, the whole "the dedication balances it" versus "the dedication doesn't balance it" argument has always resulted in nothing more than a pantomime-esque scene of users shouting poorly veiled variations of "Does not!" and "Does too!", since both sides have traditionally refused to post substantial arguments as to whether the dedication required is sufficient to balance this card.

[The Crimson King]

How does being dedicated to a specific type automatically make a card unbanworthy? If you actually played against a LS deck, you would see that this is one card that almost rivals DAD in effect alone. And after JD clears your field and attacks you for game try telling yourself it's not banworthy.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

He should be revamped. The number of LS required to be in the grave could be precise, and if that amount wasn't in the grave he was destroyed. If his attacked was lowered could be another option, but that would barely do anything. If he blew himself up that would help, or the amount of life points paid was a lot higher.

[The Crimson King]

He should be revamped. The number of LS required to be in the grave could be precise' date=' and if that amount wasn't in the grave he was destroyed. If his attacked was lowered could be another option, but that would barely do anything. If he blew himself up that would help, or the amount of life points paid was a lot higher.

[/quote']In other words a lot of factors would have to be changed in order to make this card semi balanced.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

No. One concrete change or a lot of tiny ones would make it balanced.

[Azuh]

If this card gets banned. Celestia will take its place

 

It still can win games

[Colonel]

I haven't actually heard anyone who thought being theme-specific was enough to not ban this card.

 

Then you'll hear it from me: JD is not banworthy' date=' despite its design, because it's themed. The amount of deck dedication and the inherent instability of its archetype are enough to balance a seemingly banworthy card.

[/quote']

 

You could always use POC. Then again, that is also banworthy.

[tonisanoob]

too broken should be banned as of now, more broken than dad thats for sure