Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 Much like I mentioned in the DP Support thread, considering there's a good amount of discussion as to whether or not DP should be given Pendulums to keep up with the current game, we'll put this to a democratic vote. Members who are familiar with how DP works are eligible to vote. It's a simple yes/no question; state your reasons for support/non-support and that's it. Also remember to keep things civil regarding potential impact and differing opinions; this should hopefully be common sense by now. I'll leave this thread open for a week; will end on January 5th, 2015 @ 6:00 pm HST (It will autolock when deadline comes) -------------- If you want a say in the future of how DP will operate, speak now while you have the chance. A good saying from here in Hawaiʻi: no vote, no grumble. (If you didn't bother to say something here, then don't complain about it when stuff ends) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VampireofDarkness Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I very much support the idea of Pendulums in Duel Portal! Although it may be new and unwary by some, I think it would open up a lot of very interesting doors and fun opportunities! Either way, Duel Portal is a card making tool, in which it should follow up with by incorporating the latest mechanics and functions! As I started out with before, a very big yes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love of Ghibli Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I just remember the vast amount of hatred Xyz received when they first came out. And the world seems to have moved on from that stand point. I feel we can do the same with Pendulums given time. So clearly its a yes from me as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted December 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 Much like I said earlier in the thread, I'm voting yes on this also. Even if Pendulums are capable of being spammy, exemplified by Qlips and other crap, and various other things, there is a reason why this forum (and CC exists). If they are going to be a potential spammer, then they can be discussed and fixed before being submitted. How else will you know how potent your cards are, if you don't test them. Yes, DevPro is an option, but show of hands, who in this section is adept at Lua coding and can program everything needed? There's no need for you all to be punished, just because Konami decided to make Qlips, etc. and they end up shitting on the gamestate. So in closing, provided whatever Pendulums (or post-ZEXAL things) go onto DP are designed well enough so they don't screw games up, I'm all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGATHODAIMON BANGTAIL COW Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 Well, they exist in the real game, so it would only be right to allow them in here. If a Pendulum-based archetype here becomes top notch and completely bonkers, it would be the absolute same as if someone made a really broken archetype that utilized Continuous Traps or Xyzs. Though, I don't mind waiting on this to be implemented, given there's still issues about going first, the face-down bug, and maybe a problem with Xyz Materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darj Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I vote for "Yes", as long as players don't show up with Pendulum Decks as crazy as Qliphorts. To be fair, personally I didn't hate Xyzs since they were more or less like Synchros, something I was already familar with. I can't say the same on Pendulums, because of their abusable mechanics. Anyways, to continue the discussion on Pendulums from the other thread: Rather than that, I think making the setup to gain more mileage from pendulum summoning harder would be a better idea. Pendulums are inherently a high-risk mechanic that requires proper investment, that unlike the other mechanics, you will need to maintain. Losing scales -hurts-, and even if they go to the extra as more fodders, you'll still need to invest on more cards to make a mileage out of them. Limiting them to only be able to get a +1 every turn felt like it's way too limiting with the inherent risks on this. The problem with the "high-risk, high-reward" formula is that it is, well, risky and unreliable: If the scales don't pay themselves off, then you won't be able to maintain card advantage early game, and you will be punished harder if fail at setting both scales up. But when each scale generates a card (a pop, a search, even a card draw if you want to be bland), the risk and punishment are diminished. However, if the risk is lowered, the reward should be lowered accordingly. At least that's the direction I would take if I ever make a Pendulum-based archetype/Deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I vote for "Yes", as long as players don't show up with Pendulum Decks as crazy as Qliphorts. To be fair, personally I didn't hate Xyzs since they were more or less like Synchros, something I was already familar with. I can't say the same on Pendulums, because of their abusable mechanics. Anyways, to continue the discussion on Pendulums from the other thread: The problem with the "high-risk, high-reward" formula is that it is, well, risky and unreliable: If the scales don't pay themselves off, then you won't be able to maintain card advantage early game, and you will be punished harder if fail at setting both scales up. But when each scale generates a card (a pop, a search, even a card draw if you want to be bland), the risk and punishment are diminished. However, if the risk is lowered, the reward should be lowered accordingly. At least that's the direction I would take if I ever make a Pendulum-based archetype/Deck. Ah, it seems that I've misinterpreted what you've said. So just disregard my previous comment. But, regarding to this, don't forget that by doing that, you're basically covering risk with rewards. Making the pendulum's activation a +0 effectively removes a lot of the risk, while rewarding you just for playing the mechanic. A safer method would be floating effect or some sort, which is actually a risk-removal mechanic that doesn't actively rewards you instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darj Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 But, regarding to this, don't forget that by doing that, you're basically covering risk with rewards. Making the pendulum's activation a +0 effectively removes a lot of the risk, while rewarding you just for playing the mechanic. A safer method would be floating effect or some sort, which is actually a risk-removal mechanic that doesn't actively rewards you instead. I agree. You may be on to something. Floating scales would be more passive, wouldn't punish the opponent for not "catching" the scale on activation with MST/backrow removal (e.g. like when you pop Tenki on activation; otherwise you would gain a card from the scale, and an indirect +1 for forcing the opponent on spending resources to destroy it), while discouraging the opponent from destroying them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VampireofDarkness Posted December 30, 2014 Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 I agree. You may be on to something. Floating scales would be more passive, wouldn't punish the opponent for not "catching" the scale on activation with MST/backrow removal (e.g. like when you pop Tenki on activation; otherwise you would gain a card from the scale, and an indirect +1 for forcing the opponent on spending resources to destroy it), while discouraging the opponent from destroying them. That actually seems fun. It eliminates the "Dammit, what do I do now?" factor Qlis get when Tool blows up and they have no access to another, and it also makes for some fun plays and tricks. Maybe then give some Synchro or Xyz shenanigans, but limit the grounds, and you got something going. What to make the actual archetype focused on tho is the thing...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted December 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2014 Indeed, as some Archetypes could benefit from having Pendulums and others can probably hold their own without needing to resort to it so often. However, as noted, it really depends on what the Archetype in question needs, based on what's available now. That being said, all of you are fine with the idea of DP getting Pendulums, assuming we do our best to not make them spam like Qlips do when uploading. (I've only played Qlips once on YGOPro, and yeah once Tool goes, you're almost screwed. Of course, this was in a mirror match so...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted January 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 A day late, but suppose a definitive opinion is clear in Pendulums being added, and it's a clear for them. For those of you who didn't vote + are against their addition, it's too late for you to say anything. You were given a week to voice your opinion; why didn't you use it? ----- We'll let seatteite know that people want this added, but remember that the responsibility falls on you to design them properly so we don't get a Qlip/Shaddoll gamestate on DP. So yeah, best if you post your stuff in here for reviews/stuff before adding. If you all want your threads in Advanced/Casual to be moved here, PM either myself or Nai. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.