~ Chidori-Kun Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 Well actually are any of the monarchs gonna change places. i run monarch control and i need to revise norw if i have to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Definitely Not XxHEXSORxX Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 E) None of the above.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PikaPerson01 Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 Definitely not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HORUS Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bfmvrocks Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 Highly Doubt it, their effects only activate when Tribute Summoned, resulting in only using it once while it's on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonisanoob Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 to be peffectly honest i reckon they will and we are all in denial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iAmNateXero Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 No, monarchs wont ever be banned. Their effects are triggers, not multi trigered or continuos. After the initial use, its usualy over with. What may be limited is the means of how it gets summoned. I.E. Treeborn frog was an example. It was at three at one point, than was limited very fast. Malicious, and of course marsh and spirit reaper. Honestly i wouldn't be shocked to find out Cydra will be limited two 2, also i wouldn't be surprised if Evil prodegy gets limited to 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belgian Blue Posted February 6, 2008 Report Share Posted February 6, 2008 No, but froggy is long overdue ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Limited. Why? Due to release of that moarch deck... I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoolMeNever Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Limited. Why? Due to release of that moarch deck... I think I'm pretty sure Raiza isn't even going to be in the Monarch deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sander Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 1 word: NO! Monarch will never, I repeat never be limited, banned or semi-limited Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EHERO Andrew Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 they probably would if raiza is going to be in that monarch structure deck. Hopefully they don't put raiza in it. Then everyone will have raiza and its value will totally drown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Supreme Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Raiza will be in it and he will not be limted, semi, or banned, monarchs will always be unlimited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Static Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Lol. The only reason I play yugioh is because of Raiza. It won't happen. I don't even need an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b7hamma Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Because you play a card it justifies it's unlimited status? Damn, and to think I used to play Tsuk, I should've got that memo sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Static Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Because you play a card it justifies it's unlimited status? Damn' date=' and to think I used to play Tsuk, I should've got that memo sooner.[/quote'] Damn straight it does, but thats was not the point. I meant to imply that I use it. OH, and it seems obvious why it should not be banned. It is not an unfair card, plus the ban list should only exist to remove OTK's, and to remove playability gaps between decks that are just too good (and monarch's isn't close to "too good"). It should not be used to limit cards so that bad deck themes can seek play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dark One Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Because you play a card it justifies it's unlimited status? Damn' date=' and to think I used to play Tsuk, I should've got that memo sooner.[/quote'] Damn straight it does, but thats was not the point. I meant to imply that I use it. OH, and it seems obvious why it should not be banned. It is not an unfair card, plus the ban list should only exist to remove OTK's, and to remove playability gaps between decks that are just too good (and monarch's isn't close to "too good"). It should not be used to limit cards so that bad deck themes can seek play. Why not? While I agree that UDE should avoid messing too much with the natural evolution of the game, but I feel that the meta needs a major slow down. Of course none of the Monarchs would be banned, but I could see Raiza and Caius at 2. And treeborn could possibly be banned, though I doubt it, it is easily countered IF you draw into a DD Crow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Slime Lord Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 It should not be used to limit cards so that bad deck themes can seek play. I agree 100%. And no, Raiza won't be banned, limited, or semi-limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EliminateHRN Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Yeah like everybody else siad NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b7hamma Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Everybody said no but very FEW of those actually gave reasons to back up their statements. This is not a poll, it's a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Supreme Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 ^Okaiez i will state my reasons, well first their effects only activate when they are summoned to the field and you lose a monster, their DEF is low, and they dont have 'actual' supports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Yeah, no Monarch is going to be touched. Being good isn't a good enough reason to hit the list, it's when the card begins to be abused. Like Prem or DMoC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HORUS Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 If Raiza was banned, Monarch decks would be over. sure, they did that to chaos decks, but they were just REALLY good. monarch decks arent THAT good, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azuh Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 at worst, if Konami is just being toolish... they will semi it but i dont think it will even touch the list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b7hamma Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 If Raiza was banned' date=' Monarch decks would be over.[/quote'] Fact : Monarch decks existed before Raiza was released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.