Future Fusion [Errata]

[Spinny]

I didn't say his errata with respect to TEW's disagreements, I was speaking solely with reference to the errata in the OP, which would not enable either of the plays you suggested and lead me to make the comment about there being none worth it.

Oh come on, that's just an excuse for not admitting that he actually agrees with one of your points :p

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Oh come on, that's just an excuse for not admitting that he actually agrees with of your points :p

I agree with his point that restricting it to 3 mills AFTER 2 turns is overkill, and it would be a good solid card if it was just after 2 turns

 

But then I look at sinister, and you know Konami will slap it with both. There's what I want, and what Konami will do, which tend to be different things

[ENMaker]

They could just make a new card with this effect allowing unlimited materials and call it Time-Lapse Fusion or something. That's the way to go rather than an errata that changes the usability and function of the card.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

They could just make a new card with this effect allowing unlimited materials and call it Time-Lapse Fusion or something. That's the way to go rather than an errata that changes the usability and function of the card.

What function? Creating one card ftk's in Trad? This card being banned does LITERALLY jack sheet in improving the game, An errata'ed version would atleast remove a card from the list. 

 

FuFu is one of those cards that will never come off the list, you might as well fix it

[Spinny]

What function? Creating one card ftk's in Trad? This card being banned does LITERALLY jack sheet in improving the game, An errata'ed version would atleast remove a card from the list. 

 

FuFu is one of those cards that will never come off the list, you might as well fix it

Stop talking about trad cus people just use it is as Roleplay.format, I'm not even joking.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Stop talking about trad cus people just use it is as Roleplay.format, I'm not even joking.

It being banned does nothing good for the game in either format. It being errata'ed make some dragon deck and infernoids more playable. Hell it would be genuinely good in Inferoids because the Lilith-Exterio lock would have some worth then.

 

1) Doesn't harm the game

2) Helps boost certain decks to a higher tier

3) Removes a card off the list

4) works with the original vision of the card (fusion summoning)

5) Can safely go to 3 (idk if this is a realistic criteria since Ring of Destruction likely wont ever go to three)

 

ei. An errata

[ENMaker]

What function? Creating one card ftk's in Trad? This card being banned does LITERALLY jack s*** in improving the game, An errata'ed version would atleast remove a card from the list. 

 

FuFu is one of those cards that will never come off the list, you might as well fix it

 

Traditional has Pot of Greed, Monster Reborn, HFD, Painful Choice, Makyura, Last Turn and plenty more, whatever the hell is happening in it couldn't have less relevance. It being banned prevents dumping half the deck turn 1 which is an improvement over being able to do that.

 

I'm against completely changing effects with erratas solely to get them off the banlist for the sake of it and will always be. If this approach becomes widely done then we'll end up with watered-down legal cards and a banlist full of other cards whose relative power was increased by this.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Traditional has Pot of Greed, Monster Reborn, HFD, Painful Choice, Makyura, Last Turn and plenty more, whatever the hell is happening in it couldn't have less relevance. It being banned prevents dumping half the deck turn 1 which is an improvement over being able to do that.

 

I'm against completely changing effects with erratas solely to get them off the banlist for the sake of it and will always be. If this approach becomes widely done then we'll end up with watered-down legal cards and a banlist full of other cards whose relative power was increased by this.

It won't just get them off the list though. Decks can use it. Like if you suggested the Crush Card errata a while back everyone would have the same reluctance, it's still a good card and sees play in the side though. 

 

What they did to sinister isn't fair, but letting it mill as many as you want post 2 turns wouldn't be turning it into a sinister

 

(and hell even sinister saw play in OCG since you can now Justify Mask Change second and the Water Doll)

[Spinny]

It being banned does nothing good for the game in either format. It being errata'ed make some dragon deck and infernoids more playable. Hell it would be genuinely good in Inferoids because the Lilith-Exterio lock would have some worth then.

 

1) Doesn't harm the game

2) Helps boost certain decks to a higher tier

3) Removes a card off the list

4) works with the original vision of the card (fusion summoning)

5) Can safely go to 3 (idk if this is a realistic criteria since Ring of Destruction likely wont ever go to three)

 

ei. An errata

It really degrades your argument, talking about trad, end of discussion.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

It really degrades your argument, talking about trad, end of discussion.

Fair, but the other points should stand

[Spinny]

Fair, but the other points should stand

Yeah, the other points are ok but when you mention trad it goes a bit irrelevant.

[VCR_CAT]

Getting a card errata'd just because you want it off the list is honestly a very poor reason in and of itself in my opinion. Of course it really depends on the card, but especially with the case of FuFu and a lot of other cards all you get is a smaller list, and I'll explain why.

 

The base idea of FuFu itself is not simply balancable. Yes, you can change the effect to make it fair, but you can't do that and make it good at the same time. Delaying the Foolish effect with the summon honestly makes it a very poor card that would never see competitive play. It's incredibly fragile and because practically every meta-relevant deck has easy, consistent access to cheap removal, this card just because an easy way to -1 yourself for no benefit.

 

At the end of the day, FuFu's base design of delayed fusion from the deck is not one that you can easily just make balanced and fair; there are some card ideas that you just can't do. Another example would be Pot of Greed where you can't simply just errata the card to remove the reason the card was banned while at the same time keeping it playable. The base design is just poor.

 

So then it stays on the list. Big whoop. The banlist was made primarily for competitive play (hence "advanced" format), and has no reason or obligation to ever appeal to casual players. The list can be as big or small as it wants and there's no consequence to that besides what is or is not on the list. So a card stays on the list; that doesn't matter unless there's no good reason for it to be on the list anymore. But making an errata on a card just because you want the list to be smaller is a poor motivation that, ultimately, does not matter.

 

You can argue to me that this version of the card could be fun in casual scenarios. I'm sure it would be. But the list isn't for casual play; nor will it ever be. If you want to play with this card in a casual scenario with your friends; go for it. Nobody's stopping you, not even the banlist.

 

 

You can argue to me that "it being banned does nothing good for either format"; but let's look at this way: It being banned in its current state is a good thing because the base design of the card is bonkers and breaks too many things. On the flipside, making an errata on this card such as the one posted in this thread doesn't benefit the meta game in any way because the card has no viable usage in any meta decks, even the ones that can use it (see reasoning above). On the casual side, unbanning this card has no benefit either because the casual players can already play with it if they want. Casual players don't need to abide by any banlist; they can play what they want when they want. They can play full-on goat-format if they want for pete's sake; the modern rules or banlist aren't stopping them from doing that.

 

At the end of the day, this card remaining ban is no detriment to any format, and neutering it just so it gets off the list benefits nobody. Cards being on the banlist alone is not a bad thing; it depends on the card and its reason for staying there. But if the card deserves to be on the list and is on the list, that's not a bad thing.

[Dragulas]

 

You can argue to me that this version of the card could be fun in casual scenarios. I'm sure it would be. But the list isn't for casual play; nor will it ever be. If you want to play with this card in a casual scenario with your friends; go for it. Nobody's stopping you, not even the banlist.

 

Yo do have a point there but even if you have friends that play the game, i really doubt enough friends someone can have would be willing to not follow the banlist, its not imposible, but what is the point if everyone else does

 

 

Also i took out the 3 materials restriction (not that somebdy cares though), if it goes off well you deserve to lose.

 

There are some cards that will never see the light of day becase of how they were designed. Unfortunately Konami would prefer to make an errata on a broken card or make an unplayable version of it (Envoys-Sky Scourge) rather than make a good replacement (in most of cases) because if they do and the new card is indeed good enough to impact the meta we will have to deal with it for at least 1 format at 3 until they decide if they did well or not. But since they now give us the banlist when ever they want they should try to make decent versions of the cards and if it really needs it then hit it. With TCG Konami's politics with the banlist erratas are no longer needed, but they are errated in the OCG first though, so unless OCG adopts the same politcis (please no), erratas will still continue

 

Im not a fan o erratas either but if this card comes out without it, it will give infernoids an unfair advantage, yet again, against pepe i would like to see that. And older decks will become playable to a certan degree, and konami doesnt like that either. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Yo do have a point there but even if you have friends that play the game, i really doubt enough friends someone can have would be willing to not follow the banlist, its not imposible, but what is the point if everyone else does

 

 

Also i took out the 3 materials restriction (not that somebdy cares though), if it goes off well you deserve to lose.

 

There are some cards that will never see the light of day becase of how they were designed. Unfortunately Konami would prefer to make an errata on a broken card or make an unplayable version of it (Envoys-Sky Scourge) rather than make a good replacement (in most of cases) because if they do and the new card is indeed good enough to impact the meta we will have to deal with it for at least 1 format at 3 until they decide if they did well or not. But since they now give us the banlist when ever they want they should try to make decent versions of the cards and if it really needs it then hit it. With TCG Konami's politics with the banlist erratas are no longer needed, but they are errated in the OCG first though, so unless OCG adopts the same politcis (please no), erratas will still continue

 

Im not a fan o erratas either but if this card comes out without it, it will give infernoids an unfair advantage, yet again, against pepe i would like to see that. And older decks will become playable to a certan degree, and konami doesnt like that either. 

OCG hasn't errataed a card in Two formats, and god knows where they can fit on in this Jan list

 

But it prolly wont be FuFu

[Timeline15]

hmm, errata seems reasonable enough, definitely not what it used to be, but then that's the point. You still get the fusion, you just don't get to fill your grave instantly. anything that tries to prevent otks is good in my book. Just a matter of making sure you're able to protect the card while it's out. Might actually force people to slow down a bit.

[Lizardonx]

WHy not just change it to only be able to send named materials?

 

Like how fusion conscription can get odd eyes off rune eyes but not any spellcaster.

[Dragulas]

WHy not just change it to only be able to send named materials?

 

Like how fusion conscription can get odd eyes off rune eyes but not any spellcaster.

The current fusion monsters use only 1 or none named materials at all, the card will become useless then, unless you are playing with a yugi or kaiba deck (just an example)

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Just rule it to send only listed material. It was created to be Cydra support, make it so

[goodfusion]

I'll admit, using named materials only would be pretty fun in something like roids or Elemental HEROs, but I would still be very much against the idea of it, because it still has very easy potential to break a future archetype/deck, meaning it either restricts card design or just finds itself on the banlist again, making the errata pointless.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'll admit, using named materials only would be pretty fun in something like roids or Elemental HEROs, but I would still be very much against the idea of it, because it still has very easy potential to break a future archetype/deck, meaning it either restricts card design or just finds itself on the banlist again, making the errata pointless.

It's really hard to break a deck like that if it specifically names the card.

 

Now Kozmo getting a Fusion? Maybe, but I doubt it would be all that