TIV vs Snipe: A Followup Discussion

[The Dark One]

But they like the field even more, and they are extremely thematic. However, that is a good point, the Graveyard isn't as bad of a place for them to be as for some other deck types. And Vampire Lord screws TIV over.

[Orochi]

but having TIV is advantage for zombies, ain't it??

 

TIV was banned when konami released the SD series, to give a shot to tematic decks, so i don't think that TIV will be back so soon...

[Guest Chaos Pudding]

Really, the only type-theme decks you are likely to see are Zombie and (very few) Machine. They both benefit from dumping to the Graveyard. So I really don't see the problem with TIV coming back.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

If it is brought back' date=' it would kill any chances Zombies had of recovering their fame and glory. [/quote']

 

I thought Zombies liked the Graveyard.

It doesn't matter if they can be re-summoned, because that just means you waste the cards you used to re-summon them. You can't honestly say you're not going to be mad if your 4 zombies get blown up by 1 of your opponent's cards, and then it takes up your entire hand to summon them all back up.

[The Slime Lord]

I don't know what I would say. At the most, I'd probably be slightly annoyed, but I don't even run Zombies. :P

[The Dark One]

But the point is, Zombies aren't in need of more things that will hold them back. They're fighting to get stronger again, with new cards like Vampire's Curse, but with TIV, we'd just be pushing them farther away from Tier 1 status. There is no need to hurt a borderline competitive deck type for very little reason. There is reason to get rid of Snipe Hunter, but whatever reasons there are for bringing back TIV aren't going to be strong enough to make it worth the elimination of a deck type from the metagame.

[Bfmvrocks]

Tribe should stay banned. That's the card I see in almost every single Traditional Deck. It destroys your monsters with a single blow. All you have to do is discard 1 card, which in some cases could possibly help you as well. I enjoyed using Tribe while it was limited, but now it's getting too crazy.

 

Snipe Hunter is perfectly fine. Yeah you can destroy any card, but that's only 1 card. And you have to roll a die, doesn't always get what you want.

[Static]

Snipe will be banned in the next banlist. And TIV will likely be back' date=' but knowing Upperdeck, they'll likely act stupid and won't do that.

 

Snipe's destined for ban for the following reasons.

 

-Can destroy anything he wants.

-[b']SEARCHABLE. Through both Sangan and Tomato, among others.[/b]

-DARK attribute. With all the dark support, that guy just got from strong to GODLIKE.

 

TIV will be back for the following.

 

-Can only destroy monsters, and not all typings can be destroyed through one discard.

-NOT searchable in the current meta.(1600 ATK makes him actually worse)

 

And to those who tell me: "But Snipe has a dice effect that is random." Your point is useless and won't matter. 2/3 chances is still too much, whether you like it or not. Sad but true.

 

The bolded part is what makes Snipe hunter comparable to TIV.

 

Personally, I don't think either should be banned, because the way I see it, the more Decent cards we ban, the more into themes our decks have to revolve around, and I hate the themes. Though I understand having both limited to 1 at the same time is sort of ridiculous, having both banned sort of seems like a loss of a good staplelike card, and I don't like to lose my staples, because then I have to stick a nobleman or something like that in my deck :/.

[The Dark One]

While I agree with your view on Tribe. I find your views on Snipe Hunter to be foolish. It can be ridiculous. It can wipe out your opponent's whole field! How fair is that?

[Bfmvrocks]

You lose hand advantage, the die isn't always on your side, and once again, you lose your valuable HAND ADVANTAGE.

 

I've played with Snipe and rolled the following in order, with 6 cards in my hand: 6,6,1,6,1,1. How unlucky and a waste of cards is that?

 

Whoever gets rid of their whole hand for Snipe, is idiotic, unless they win the duel from it.

[Static]

While I agree with your view on Tribe. I find your views on Snipe Hunter to be foolish. It can be ridiculous. It can wipe out your opponent's whole field! How fair is that?

 

You don't know the 4-6 dice (clarification: 4 to 6 different "dices" that me and my friends use) that I do, that I have seen 5 times in a row, rolling all 6's and 1's. My friend only needed to destroy one card to win. Mirror Force was what he failed to kill, and it cost him a match.

 

As well, I've seen my friends run through Shells, rolling 6,6,1, and failing to kill my face downs. The dice roll does make the difference, its not a guarantee, and though it is statistically 2/3 chance, it estimates, at least between me and friends to be about 40-55% effective.

 

Thats why I do not think it is as unfair as you do.

[Bfmvrocks]

Snipe Hunter is all about chance, unlike Tribe. Tribe stays banned, Snipe stays limited, maybe even swap to Semi-Limited. It's not that good.

[Gravitize Me Cap'n!]

The sole fact that you're willing to use his effect means hand advantage was not important to you at that stage of the game as much as field advantage was.

 

Using past unlucky experiences as a basis of argument is fail.

 

Exactly; any idiot can clear a well-setup field in a matter of seconds.

 

You can't honestly say you're not going to be mad if your 4 zombies get blown up by 1 of your opponent's cards, and then it takes up your entire hand to summon them all back up.

 

Overcommittment should be punished. If you have 4 Zombies on the field without resources to mount a second attack, you better damn well be attacking for game.

[Static]

Snipe Hunter is all about chance' date=' unlike Tribe. Tribe stays banned, Snipe stays limited, maybe even swap to Semi-Limited. It's not that good.

[/quote']

 

that is a false statement. It is very good. It is so good, that it is the only card in my deck I spent 30 minutes on to color in, and make it look really nice. (despite how bad my green sharpie was).

 

Searchable, can strike the field clean, can GG, can do more than Raiza.

 

It is a very good card, but we need a single card like it (TIV/Snipe) to be limited, so that we have that staple type to deck.

[Bfmvrocks]

GMC, You should just stop there.

How is using past unlucky experience not apart of this argument?

Are we not talking about Snipe Hunter?

Who's effect says you roll a die, how is being unlucky not count?

Call us idiots, when you're just the same person as Crab Helmet, PikePerson1, etc.

I can tell by your arguments.

Not everyone uses correct punctuation/grammar like you think.

Every new member who joins and argue's 24/7 is you.

Since that's basically all you have been doing.

I'm not as stupid as it seems.

[Static]

The sole fact that you're willing to use his effect means hand advantage was not important to you at that stage of the game as much as field advantage was.

 

Using past unlucky experiences as a basis of argument is fail.

 

Exactly; any idiot can clear a well-setup field in a matter of seconds.

 

You can't honestly say you're not going to be mad if your 4 zombies get blown up by 1 of your opponent's cards' date=' and then it takes up your entire hand to summon them all back up. [/quote']

 

Overcommittment should be punished. If you have 4 Zombies on the field without resources to mount a second attack, you better damn well be attacking for game.

 

Regardless, under the NORMAL statistics, it costs you more cards that it destroys, plus Snipe being a -1 in itself when it dies next turn, or gets spinned by PWWB, or torrential'd right after blowing the first card.

 

I think it doesn't matter what I use for the basis of my argument, I can still make my point just the same, and time and time again will prove this. I thank you for asking (ok, implying mine was bad, which made) me (want) to make a better point though, I got sloppy.

[HORUS]

Snipe Hunter is all about chance' date=' unlike Tribe. Tribe stays banned, Snipe stays limited, maybe even swap to Semi-Limited. It's not that good.

[/quote']

 

that is a false statement. It is very good. It is so good, that it is the only card in my deck I spent 30 minutes on to color in, and make it look really nice. (despite how bad my green sharpie was).

 

 

 

hah, i did that with my Dust Tornados.

 

SNIPEFACE IS WAY TOO GOOD TO BE SEMI'D!!!!!!!!!!!1!@

[Gravitize Me Cap'n!]

1. Doesn't get more biased than "personal grudge".

2. Yes.

3. Then does being lucky count?

4. Wait what?

5. Good for you?

6. Ok?

7. Thanks, I am awesome.

8. Ok...

9. This post sure isn't helping your case.

 

Regardless, under the NORMAL statistics, it costs you more cards that it destroys, plus Snipe being a -1 in itself when it dies next turn, or gets spinned by PWWB, or torrential'd right after blowing the first card.

 

Again, the only reason you'd be using his effect is if you acknowledge that the card you discard is worth less than the target, that is, unless you voluntarily make bad trades.

 

Few people PWWB Snipe.

 

Every card starts off a -1.

[Static]

Snipe Hunter is all about chance' date=' unlike Tribe. Tribe stays banned, Snipe stays limited, maybe even swap to Semi-Limited. It's not that good.

[/quote']

 

that is a false statement. It is very good. It is so good, that it is the only card in my deck I spent 30 minutes on to color in, and make it look really nice. (despite how bad my green sharpie was).

 

 

 

hah, i did that with my Dust Tornados.

 

SNIPEFACE IS WAY TOO GOOD TO BE SEMI'D!!!!!!!!!!!1!@

 

Snipe requires being in my deck, legally. As does Crush card and Gold Sarchopagus, but I have better things to save money for.

[Gravitize Me Cap'n!]

I think it doesn't matter what I use for the basis of my argument, I can still make my point just the same, and time and time again will prove this. I thank you for asking (ok, implying mine was bad, which made) me (want) to make a better point though, I got sloppy.

 

Well my statement was directed at you, since I posted before you made that point, but I guess it applies. Point is, your unluck experiences are more likely than not offset by your lucky experiences, but you just don't remember those vividly. Basic high school Statistics (with a bit of Psychology 101 for the latter) would tell you that.

[FallenLight]

GMC' date=' You should just stop there.

How is using past unlucky experience not apart of this argument?

Are we not talking about Snipe Hunter?

Who's effect says you roll a die, how is being unlucky not count?

Call us idiots, when you're just the same person as Crab Helmet, PikePerson1, etc.

I can tell by your arguments.

Not everyone uses correct punctuation/grammar like you think.

Every new member who joins and argue's 24/7 is you.

Since that's basically all you have been doing.

[b']I'm not as stupid as it seems.[/b]

 

Past experience is a horrible way to argue; it brings in far too many variables into the discussion.

 

Yes. So?

 

I can't understand your next statement.

 

Oh, please, do some RESEARCH. Should you stumble upon a certain place of which I shall not disclose, you will find that each and every one of them are different people. They have the same points of view and arguments simply because it is the norm where they come from.

 

See above.

 

How would you know what someone thinks? Please, do enlighten me.

 

See above the previous answer.

 

Because you're x means you're y is a disgusting argument that has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

 

Absolutely correct. You are, in fact, more stupid than it seems. I can't fathom as to how this is possible, but you've managed it.