Yu Gi Oh with Life Points for Monsters

[sdkinslayer]

Life Points instead of DEF Points.

 

Why i want have Life Points for Monsters? Because i want to give you more variance into the game. If you create a monster card you can use effects like as follow:

 

Events
When summoned
When spell or trap card is activated
When destroyed by battel or effect
When inflict damage destoyed a monster
When draw a card
During any phase

Effects
summon
destroy
draw or take a card
discard
banish for time
change attack/defpoints or battle position
any life points changes
change control
increase attack/def
negate effekt

Locks
cant summon
cant play traps or spells
cant attack
cant be destroyed
change attack target
change effects

Deck
mill
return to deck
 

As you can see you have only a limited choice. Of course you can mix these effects a bit what gives you more variability.

 

After that you can only change the ATK and DEF points.

Because only one of them is interessting, depending on which of them you give a greater number, you can only make 1 decision here and the most time its ATK of course, because otherwise the game would be boring, because noone could kill a monster.

 

But if DEF Points would be Life Points instead, then both stats are interessting, everytime. You can make your monster pretty different, just by changing this both stats, instead just to make it more or less powerfull by pushing ATK or DEF. Just to give you a example, you could set it like this:

 

1: 2000 ATK 1000 DEF

2: 1800 ATK 1200 DEF

3: 1500 ATK 1500 DEF

4: 1200 ATK 1800 DEF

5: 1000 ATK 2000 DEF

 

Note: you always change the style of your monster, sometimes its tanky, sometimes its offensiv and you can have a balanced stat also.

 

Furthermore i want this changes:

 

Unlimited card zones,

 

you should be albe to summon as much as monsters you want and place as much as Spells and Traps you want, because there is no reason why it shouldnt possible. It just give the game a handycap for no reason. Of course some cards need changes but nothing will have a problem with it, after the fixes. It dont happens often that all slots are occupied but each time it happens, there is no reason why it shouldnt work and it just handycap the game. If you lose a game it should be decided by decisions or monsters and not by a occupied card zones.

 

We could add phrases to Rekindling for example, like "you can only summon monsters up to 5". I dont know Pendulum, maybe they need their own rules? Many decks have no prolems with limited card zones but some cards and themes have it. Fables, Scapegoat, Crystal Beast are some good examples i know. Imagine that you summoned a treebornfrog to your side and place scapegoat as a defence after that, your opponent want to destroy your set card, you need to activate scapegoat and you are locked. Why you should get loocked here? You just played 2 cards. Same thing with  dragon ice and scape goat. You play fabled, you are happy because you opponent special summon a monster, so you discard any fabled and summon dragon ice, after that you activate scapegoat, locked, but why? Its because the rules are sensles and hit especially the weaker and old cards. Like the time missing rule, which destroy Fortune Lady Light for no reason. It also happens that you just summoned to much with falbed but there is no way to summon more, even you really need that, because you can have a lot of monsters but no field advantage with fabled. A other theme is crystal beast. Of course the crystal beast could also need some phrase fixes with unlimited card zones but after that everything works better. It looks like you never played them, because you get always trouble with the slot space with them. But why? They have no advantage with their effects to get into the spell and trap slots, its just how they work. Why it should get handycaped by limited card zones? You often cant play your spells and traps you really need although you just play their effects. I want, that themes can be made, they count on many weak monsters but this way it isnt possible.

 

 

Unlimited extra deck.

 

Of course in the original game you have now a problem with it, because you could add 1 billion different XYZ Monsters. But ignore them. Ignore the original game of Konami at this point and just think about your own created cards. Does it ever happened to you, that you had a very complex deck with many different extra deck monsters? In many themes you can ignore the limited extra deck size but in some themes you need a lot more cards or you cant play it. So why we need this limit for extra decks? Just for the XYZ Monsters of Konami. We need to make all XYZ monsters theme bounded. Then you cant have a huge number of XYZ monsters to play.

 

Maybe you should play fabled, then you will see how sensles this handycap is. Of course you can add the monsters multiple times into your extra deck you summon more often with fabled, like Unicore, or Ragin. But it will happens, that you need more than 1 Level 6, 7, 8 or 10. Then you are just /$§=! for no reason, because you build everything right, but the random decided what you need to summon. You have never the control in a fabled deck what you summon at next. So sometimes you need 3 times rosedragon or whatever. And if you are really crazy you can also play instant fusion with them, then you are totally $§/=?§. Because you need around 5 Fusion monsters in your extra deck also. I say this, because instant fusion would work great with fabled, because they have usually always a tuner ready for synchro and need some big normal monster.

 

 

45 minimum deck size.

 

I want to increase the minimum number of cards you need to have in your Deck. Its simple why, because i want to increase the variability of the game. With 40 cards you have 13 cards x 3 +1. I want have 15 different cards x 3 exceptions are limitations of banlists. Usually each deck got his main combinations. This way each deck can still play his central part and still have some more other cards next to it, to make the game more various and interessting.

 

There was a time in Yu-Gi-Oh you usually always played with 40 cards and each card 3 times, because its the most effectiv way. Thaths why i think larger number of cards you need to have in your Deck would increase the variability, because you need more diffrent cards in your Deck. Till now this rule changed all my selfmade decks and forced me to make new ways to play my theme.

 

 

Multiple Field spell cards

 

at once a player can control. I think it could make the game more fun to control different Field Spells at once, but you should not be abte to activate the same Field spell 2 times just Field Spells with different names. Field Spell cards should have a kind of special effects, effects you usually only should have 1 time and maybe this effect works for both players. Im imagine a Yu-Gi-Oh, which allows you to combine themes effectiv. In this case 2 different field spell cards would be a nice thing.

 

 

Out of Combat mode instead of Defense Position.

 

Now i think the best solution would be to completly change the Defense Position mode to a Out of Combat mode, which makes your monster unattackable. It cant use effects and it cant attack. This way you can be in disadvantage and still save your monsters. With this change tribute monsters could have their comeback to the game. You woulndt be forced to special summon all monsters in 1 turn just to bring out a tribute Monster and you dont must be in advantage. Furthermore you would only get damage by direkt attacks, exceptions are card effects.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

What is it about monsters having hearthstone-esque health points that makes the game better? Explain your points with reasoning and evidence, rather than insulting the intelligence of those who disagree, and you are more likely to get support.

[ENMaker]

You're a persistent master trole at the very least. If you've got nothing else going for you you've got that. I really don't have anything to say because you're just rehashing various ideas that have been shot down repeatedly and thoroughly but which you apparently think can be validated by simply posting them again unchanged and telling everyone they're an idiot.

 

Ah funk it I'll go through it all anyway. I didn't intend for this to happen but once I started I couldn't stop.

 

>Unlimited card zones.

Elohelno. Pendulum 26/Rekindling for 43/generally combo-ing into fields of a million cards. Aside from the absolute impracticality of it in terms of both real-life and online or whatever play, (game mats no longer serve any function, simply formatting a field becomes an issue because it'll become wider or narrower dependant on how much is put down, how do you even define where pendulum zones are since one side of the field is going to edged out the whole time and so on) it's just a blatantly poor idea. 5 zones creates something of a limitation on what you can do. There's more than enough space to make ridiculous plays as is, just think of what you're suggesting for a minute.

 

Infernity, for an immediately obvious example, used to Dire Wolf their own cards to make space for more summoning. If they didn't have to deal with this limitation by game mechanics it'd just go mental. My initial statement about pendulum summoning, while exaggerated to a degree, still stands. If you get to latter (or honestly even mid, in a lot of cases) stages of a game with a pendulum deck, you may well have 15+ cards in the extra deck. Pend for 5 is already a strong basis for a play, pend for 15 is beyond stupid. I'm really baffled how anyone could think unlimited card zones would be anything but a terrible idea, but especially with pendulum summoning existing. What. Egh,

 

As another late in the day thought, sheet like Galaxy Tomahawk and the Hippo Carnival spell that summon "as many as possible" now give you literally over 46 trillion tokens and Amazoness Archer + anything like that = gg. So now the banlist has to be completely rethought too, in order to combat these interactions. Simply activating Galaxy Tomahawk's effect becomes ridiculous because you're summoning tokens forever. Would it now become illegal to do? funk it who knows, let's just implement this sheet anyway.

 

>Unlimited extra deck.

While it provides a solid kek as a suggestion it's a terrible idea, arguably worse than the first one.

 

I wouldn't necessarily hate it going to 20 or something, but the point of a limitation is that you have to actually think about what's the most broadly applicable and useful for your deck, not just "oh I could conceivably make these 462 cards so I'll tech them all". I mean, synchro decks. I'd love an unlimited extra deck in Quasar, but because I have a basic understanding of the game I realise that it's not something that can ever happen. With 15 you try to toolbox as best you can and/or have some kind of out to various things while not losing things you require for your own strategies, or simply devote it all to a strategy and hope you don't get funked before you pull it off. Unlimited extra deck totally removes that element of the game because everyone will just run a 300 card extra with every conceivable card they could possibly make as far as finances allow in real life, and without that limitation in any other form of play everything else becomes insanity.

 

>45 minimum size.

You can't be serious with this, if you are you're actually more stupid than I would have imagined. 40 cards is not 13 3-ofs and 1 extra card. I've literally never seen a deck built that way. If you really want to build the world's most linear deck with 15 3-ofs, you can do it right now. 40 is a minimum not a maximum. If anything I'd like the max to go back to 80 just because, but increasing the minimum size because you apparently do not understand how a minimum size requirement works is beyond retarded.

 

>NS in defence.

It nullifies the drawback of weak searchers, for one. You NS Manju and get the search, then it gets beaten over and you take some damage. Now in the same situation where you NS it in defence, it gets swung over and that's all. It's already a tiny enough downside and you want it removed, and that's just the one very basic and simple example of how this system would not work. Floodgate monsters like Jowgen with tiny attack now have no drawback because you just put them in defence. Another absolute baseline example but still. Anything that needs to be NS'd to do a thing but is weak now loses that inherent pseudo-drawback.

 

>Multiple field spells.

It doesn't conceptually make sense to have one field contain 2 distinct but overlapping environments and would be a pointless change. Pseudo Space also overrides the theoretical no 2 of the same card rule but who even cares at this point, I'm not going to think about it too much anymore. Just imagine Igknight FTK or some other stupid Blaze Fenix FTK being able to congruently use Black Garden and Fusion Gate with unlimited monster zones.

 

>Whatever the funk that last thing is.

There are cards that can manipulate attack targets and sheet, you want it to be a game mechanic for some reason. That's just not going to happen and it makes monsters in defence position essentially invulnerable to attack because every attack position monster becomes a Hope Harbinger. Basically all there is to this one. It makes the ability to even select attack targets redundant since you can just switch it anyway. A thoroughly bad bad not good idea.

 

Well there's my time completely wasted on this because you are obviously a troll but nyeh. I'm just another person using words but saying nothing anyway.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

of course he keeps saying the same thing. Nobody has actually attempted to have a discussion, rather just saying "nope nope nope you're wrong". His condescending attitude is certainly unacceptable, but having the whole forum gang up on him like this really isn't fair.

[вєgσттєη ιηѕαηιту]

of course he keeps saying the same thing. Nobody has actually attempted to have a discussion, rather just saying "nope nope nope you're wrong". His condescending attitude is certainly unacceptable, but having the whole forum gang up on him like this really isn't fair.

People have tried having conversations with him. This is his 4th thread saying the exact same thing and every time someone debates his points he calls them stupid or sick and then claims they are "talking but not saying anything".

[ENMaker]

of course he keeps saying the same thing. Nobody has actually attempted to have a discussion, rather just saying "nope nope nope you're wrong". His condescending attitude is certainly unacceptable, but having the whole forum gang up on him like this really isn't fair.

Oh funk off. People aren't ganging up on him and there's been numerous perfectly valid criticisms made and points raised. Dova, Gadjiltron, and Soulflare or whatever the name is in the last thread are examples. He responds by and large by simply waving it away, repeating himself, and calling people idiots.

 

Did I not address every point? I gave examples of why certain things cannot and should not be implemented. I explained my reasons for disagreeing largely in a balanced way apart from calling him stupid at one point, but that's because at this 3rd thread I'm convinced he's just a troll.

 

He is the one who won't "have a discussion", because he believes his ideas infallible by mere virtue of them being his as opposed to that of Konami who are bad for being a company that wants to make money and are destroying the game apparently. If you want a discussion go ahead and defend his position rather than just saying to leave him alone because the majority do not agree. If you post objectively questionable at best suggestions in a serious section people will take it seriously and respond in kind, just because a lot of people disagree with this sheet doesnt mean they're ganging up and not actually arguing back.

[IQuitDolphin]

Enguin, you did waste your time, because you addressed NONE of his arguments because you didn't read his points completely and you should feel sad.

 

Also, stop using big words and long sentences, he's obviously a 10-year old and doesn't know what you are even saying.

 

No long paragraphs either. We know you're smart pal, he's not.

 

 

Work in Progress

----

You are saying this original game sucks, so you want to make it better? OK, let me keep it simple and tell you what's wrong with your suggestions.

 

 

#0- Life Points as DEF

 

"most time its ATK of course, because otherwise the game would be boring, because noone could kill a monster."

You ever hear of Dark Hole? Raigeki? Lightning Vortex? Castel? Honor ARK? Smashing Ground? Fissure?

ATK and DEF aren't god, you can kill any monster easily if you know what you're doing. Above cards don't care about ATK or DEF.

 

"But if DEF Points would be Life Points instead, then both stats are interessting, everytime. You can make your monster pretty different, just by changing this both stats, instead just to make it more or less powerfull by pushing ATK or DEF."

 

 

#1- Unlimited card zones

 

"Of course some cards need changes but nothing will have a problem with it, after the fixes."

Good luck, you know how many good cards there are that can abuse infinite zones? More than you can count. You want to fix 2,000+ cards? Good luck, we are not helping, because we don't get anything from helping you. I won't spend months "fixing" cards for you so I can play the same game with stupid changes. You do fix them? OK, what do they do now? Something COMPLETELY different from what they used to do. Good job, I might as well play a different game.

 

"If you lose a game it should be decided by decisions or monsters and not by a occupied card zone."

If you have 5 monsters you should be winning.

If you have 5 set traps you aren't going to lose.

[~British Soul~]

It'll probs be a matter of time before this thread gets locked too anyway.

 

 

 

Stop using big words, he's obviously a 10-year old and doesn't know what you are even saying.

Sounds 'bout right.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Question for OP:

With your proposed changes, how would monsters with 0 def be treated? Would they just automatically be destroyed? When making variations upon the standard rules, you need to take into account the unintended consequences of said changes.

[Dova]

Alright, sdkinslayer. You seem to brush off crisicm of your ideas without even reading the whole thing. Why don't you try to respond to Enguin by actually talking about each of his points, and not being reduced to name calling? Some people have said when you resort to insults you have lost the argument, so why don't you try win the argument? Although your suggestions are strange, because you do provide some reasoning, we have to argue with something in order to disagree, and maybe if you argued back rather that just shove away discussion, we might be able to take you seriously.

 

EDIT: Eh, Dolphin, he means this:

 

Player A Controls a 1000/400 monster and Player B controls a 500/1400 monster. Player B attacks Player A's monster. Both deal damage to each other, and this is signified by them having their own LP: DEF. The result of the battle will have Player A have no monster because his DEF was reduced to 0 or below, whereas Player B will have a 500/400 monster, as you take away the damage from Player A's monster's ATK from his DEF.

 

It's a concept from Magic and other games, and while it may be an interesting one, it doesn't really fit YGO.

[IQuitDolphin]

Right, can I refute that then?

[Dova]

Yeah, of course. Mechanics don't always work when transferred into different systems.

[Just Crouton]

Too big of a change when the rules could be changed to get rid of defense mode and just make it so a monster being attacked applies its DEF instead of ATK like Buddyfight.

[sdkinslayer]

 

What is it about monsters having hearthstone-esque health points that makes the game better? Explain your points with reasoning and evidence, rather than insulting the intelligence of those who disagree, and you are more likely to get support.

 

You missunderstood what i wrote in the tabletop thread. Do you know why rasisst exist? Because the humans have warior genes and if the guys who have this genes dont have a peaceful childhood, they will be rassists. Just to note that, tastes are not incontrovertible and to show you, its a sickness. Furthermore there are people who like happy tree friends, beowolf and saw and of course its not normal to like that, its a kind of sickness to like that, because the tenor of them is only violence. Other films have also a lot violence but they are still pretty ok, because the tenor isnt only violence but i would cut some brutal scenes. If tastes like that exist, of course there are also other tastes which are strange. Just other types of strange/sickness tastes but the same way how that happens. Intelligence, genes, childhood always decide it.

 

The human is the most intelligence animal of the world but who said, they are healthy?

 

 

Alright, sdkinslayer. You seem to brush off crisicm of your ideas without even reading the whole thing. Why don't you try to respond to Enguin by actually talking about each of his points, and not being reduced to name calling? Some people have said when you resort to insults you have lost the argument, so why don't you try win the argument? Although your suggestions are strange, because you do provide some reasoning, we have to argue with something in order to disagree, and maybe if you argued back rather that just shove away discussion, we might be able to take you seriously.

 

EDIT: Eh, Dolphin, he means this:

 

Player A Controls a 1000/400 monster and Player B controls a 500/1400 monster. Player B attacks Player A's monster. Both deal damage to each other, and this is signified by them having their own LP: DEF. The result of the battle will have Player A have no monster because his DEF was reduced to 0 or below, whereas Player B will have a 500/400 monster, as you take away the damage from Player A's monster's ATK from his DEF.

 

It's a concept from Magic and other games, and while it may be an interesting one, it doesn't really fit YGO.

 

Just forget the other trading card games, if magic wouldnt exist i would have the same solution.

 

The problem is, its not a math function, so i cant give you a result. I only can give you the advice to try it. I also did and i dont want to play it without this anylonger.

 

There was a other situation like this some years ago. I told a community, that their shuffler dont works, all flamed me especially one of the moderators. 1 year later i opened the forum there again and noone doubt it anylonger, that the shuffler didnt work correct, they even had a thread for this. I wished all of my answears would arrive like that but sometimes noone will hear.

 

 

You're a persistent master trole at the very least. If you've got nothing else going for you you've got that. I really don't have anything to say because you're just rehashing various ideas that have been shot down repeatedly and thoroughly but which you apparently think can be validated by simply posting them again unchanged and telling everyone they're an idiot.

 

Ah f*** it I'll go through it all anyway. I didn't intend for this to happen but once I started I couldn't stop.

 

>Unlimited card zones.

Elohelno. Pendulum 26/Rekindling for 43/generally combo-ing into fields of a million cards. Aside from the absolute impracticality of it in terms of both real-life and online or whatever play, (game mats no longer serve any function, simply formatting a field becomes an issue because it'll become wider or narrower dependant on how much is put down, how do you even define where pendulum zones are since one side of the field is going to edged out the whole time and so on) it's just a blatantly poor idea. 5 zones creates something of a limitation on what you can do. There's more than enough space to make ridiculous plays as is, just think of what you're suggesting for a minute.

 

Infernity, for an immediately obvious example, used to Dire Wolf their own cards to make space for more summoning. If they didn't have to deal with this limitation by game mechanics it'd just go mental. My initial statement about pendulum summoning, while exaggerated to a degree, still stands. If you get to latter (or honestly even mid, in a lot of cases) stages of a game with a pendulum deck, you may well have 15+ cards in the extra deck. Pend for 5 is already a strong basis for a play, pend for 15 is beyond stupid. I'm really baffled how anyone could think unlimited card zones would be anything but a terrible idea, but especially with pendulum summoning existing. What. Egh,

 

As another late in the day thought, s*** like Galaxy Tomahawk and the Hippo Carnival spell that summon "as many as possible" now give you literally over 46 trillion tokens and Amazoness Archer + anything like that = gg. So now the banlist has to be completely rethought too, in order to combat these interactions. Simply activating Galaxy Tomahawk's effect becomes ridiculous because you're summoning tokens forever. Would it now become illegal to do? f*** it who knows, let's just implement this s*** anyway.

 

>Unlimited extra deck.

While it provides a solid kek as a suggestion it's a terrible idea, arguably worse than the first one.

 

I wouldn't necessarily hate it going to 20 or something, but the point of a limitation is that you have to actually think about what's the most broadly applicable and useful for your deck, not just "oh I could conceivably make these 462 cards so I'll tech them all". I mean, synchro decks. I'd love an unlimited extra deck in Quasar, but because I have a basic understanding of the game I realise that it's not something that can ever happen. With 15 you try to toolbox as best you can and/or have some kind of out to various things while not losing things you require for your own strategies, or simply devote it all to a strategy and hope you don't get f***ed before you pull it off. Unlimited extra deck totally removes that element of the game because everyone will just run a 300 card extra with every conceivable card they could possibly make as far as finances allow in real life, and without that limitation in any other form of play everything else becomes insanity.

 

>45 minimum size.

You can't be serious with this, if you are you're actually more stupid than I would have imagined. 40 cards is not 13 3-ofs and 1 extra card. I've literally never seen a deck built that way. If you really want to build the world's most linear deck with 15 3-ofs, you can do it right now. 40 is a minimum not a maximum. If anything I'd like the max to go back to 80 just because, but increasing the minimum size because you apparently do not understand how a minimum size requirement works is beyond retarded.

 

>NS in defence.

It nullifies the drawback of weak searchers, for one. You NS Manju and get the search, then it gets beaten over and you take some damage. Now in the same situation where you NS it in defence, it gets swung over and that's all. It's already a tiny enough downside and you want it removed, and that's just the one very basic and simple example of how this system would not work. Floodgate monsters like Jowgen with tiny attack now have no drawback because you just put them in defence. Another absolute baseline example but still. Anything that needs to be NS'd to do a thing but is weak now loses that inherent pseudo-drawback.

 

>Multiple field spells.

It doesn't conceptually make sense to have one field contain 2 distinct but overlapping environments and would be a pointless change. Pseudo Space also overrides the theoretical no 2 of the same card rule but who even cares at this point, I'm not going to think about it too much anymore. Just imagine Igknight FTK or some other stupid Blaze Fenix FTK being able to congruently use Black Garden and Fusion Gate with unlimited monster zones.

 

>Whatever the f*** that last thing is.

There are cards that can manipulate attack targets and s***, you want it to be a game mechanic for some reason. That's just not going to happen and it makes monsters in defence position essentially invulnerable to attack because every attack position monster becomes a Hope Harbinger. Basically all there is to this one. It makes the ability to even select attack targets redundant since you can just switch it anyway. A thoroughly bad bad not good idea.

 

Well there's my time completely wasted on this because you are obviously a troll but nyeh. I'm just another person using words but saying nothing anyway.

Unlimited card zones. As i said, we need to change some effects, but it will be no problem after the fixes. Rekindling for example, you can just add the phrase up to 5 monsters or like that. Pendulum? Till now i didnt play with them. So maybe they need a special rule, i dont know. I want to give you some examples what i mean. Like i said it dont happens often but it happens, that you have not enough zones. Many decks have no prolems with it but some cards and themes have it. Fables, Scapegoat, Crystal Beast are some good examples i know. Imagine that you summoned a treebornfrog to your side and place scapegoat as a defence after that, your opponent want to destroy your set card, you need to activate scapegoat and you are locked. Why you should loocked here? You just played 2 cards. Same thing with dragon ice and scape goat. You play fabled, you are happy because you opponent special summon a monster, so you discard any fabled and summon dragon ice, after that you activate scapegoat, locked, but why? Its because the rules are sensles and especially the weaker and old cards are hitted by this crap rules. Like the time missing rule, which destroy Fortune Lady Light for no reason. It also happens that you just summoned to much with falbed but there is no way to summon more, even you really need that, because you can have a lot of monsters but no field advantage with fabled. A other theme is crystal beast. Of course the crystal beast could also need some phrase fixes with unlimited card zones but after that everything works better. It looks like you never played them, because you get always trouble with the slot space with them. But why? They have no advantage with their effects to get into the spell and trap slots, its just how they work. Why it should get handycaped by limited card zones? You often cant play your spells and traps you really need although you just play their effects. And of course there are more examples. Cards and themes which get a disadvantage without any reason.

 

Unlimited extra deck. Like i already said. We have to change the xyz monsters by konami anyway. Then the most themes will not have the big choice in the extra deck. Maybe you should play fabled, then you will see how sensles this handycap is. Of course you can add the monsters multieple times you summon more often with fabled, like Unicore, or Ragin. But it will happens, that you need more than 1 Level 6, 7, 8 or 10. Then you are just /$§=! for no reason, because you build everything right, but the random decided what you need to summon. You have never the control in a fabled deck what you summon at next. So sometimes you need 3 times rose dragon or whatever. And if you are really crazy you can also play instant fusion with them, then you are totally $§/=?§. Because you need around 5 Fusion monsters in your extra deck also. I say this, because instant fusion would work great with fabled, because they have usually always a tuner ready for synchro and need some big normal monster. XYZ need to be theme bounded. So your Dire Wolf should only be summoned by Infernity monsters. At this way you can make their own XYZ without to have 1 billion choices to summon.

 

45 minimum size. In the not total overpowered themes, you usually always played with 40 cards, because its the most effectiv way. And usually you always play cards 3 times. Exceptions are lmiitations by the banlist. I could give you a extreme example. If you would create Yu-Gi-Oh as developer and you would make the minimum deck size to 9, then the game wouldnt really various, because you would only add 3 different cards to the deck. Just imagine that, 3 different cards in a whole deck. If you make the minimum deck size to 80, then you would have 27 different cards. But in this case you need to make each theme pretty similar cards, because you only have a limited number of effects in Yu-Gi-Oh. And they still need to work together, they would have a pretty far combination. For example, you would have a 80 cards deck with fortune lady cards and you still benefit on fortune lady light, then you need many fortune ladys with their effect, to resolve his effect by moving from the field by a card effect. And you would need many remove card effects for your monsters. Fabled usually try only to play cards which are able to discard or are able to use effects by getting discarded. You would need at least 25 cards like fortune lady light or something what can remove it or you have troubles to use them. If you increase the minimum deck size from 40 to 45 you only increse the variability of the game, by having 1,7 other cards per deck, what alreay makes a big difference. You dont need to make the themes to similar with just 15 cards per theme. And you can still have a central combination in your deck.

 

Face up defense should be combined with face down defense. I want to have both in the game, so your example with the searchers cant be right.

 

Multieple Field Spells at once (with different names). I dont see where is the problem, with your called examples. It should be a problem. Im more interessted on the good things. You could make a Yu-Gi-Oh, which allows you to combine themes effectiv. In this case 2 different field spell cards would be nice.

 

Im still thinking about the defense technic. Maybe i need to leave it. But anyhow i always think, there should be something with the positions. More than just not to get damage or not to be able to attack. But i also dont find the perfect solution.

 

 

Enguin, you did waste your time, because you addressed NONE of his arguments because you didn't read his points completely and you should feel sad.

 

Also, stop using big words and long sentences, he's obviously a 10-year old and doesn't know what you are even saying.

 

No long paragraphs either. We know you're smart pal, he's not.

 

 

Work in Progress

----

You are saying this original game sucks, so you want to make it better? OK, let me keep it simple and tell you what's wrong with your suggestions.

 

 

#0- Life Points as DEF

 

"most time its ATK of course, because otherwise the game would be boring, because noone could kill a monster."

You ever hear of Dark Hole? Raigeki? Lightning Vortex? Castel? Honor ARK? Smashing Ground? Fissure?

ATK and DEF aren't god, you can kill any monster easily if you know what you're doing. Above cards don't care about ATK or DEF.

 

"But if DEF Points would be Life Points instead, then both stats are interessting, everytime. You can make your monster pretty different, just by changing this both stats, instead just to make it more or less powerfull by pushing ATK or DEF."

 

 

#1- Unlimited card zones

 

"Of course some cards need changes but nothing will have a problem with it, after the fixes."

Good luck, you know how many good cards there are that can abuse infinite zones? More than you can count. You want to fix 2,000+ cards? Good luck, we are not helping, because we don't get anything from helping you. I won't spend months "fixing" cards for you so I can play the same game with stupid changes. You do fix them? OK, what do they do now? Something COMPLETELY different from what they used to do. Good job, I might as well play a different game.

 

"If you lose a game it should be decided by decisions or monsters and not by a occupied card zone."

If you have 5 monsters you should be winning.

If you have 5 set traps you aren't going to lose.

No idea what you wanna say with your examples, Raigeki, Lightning Vortex and so on. The Life Point change has nothing to do with these cards.

 

It doenst matter how many cards konami made, we just talk about the better solution. These cards would get a fix, which wouldnt make them work worse.

 

Looks like you never played Crystal Beast, Fabled or Scapegoat. Otherwise you couldnt say that you have won with 5 monsters.

[AGATHODAIMON BANGTAIL COW]

I'm going to look at these in a perspective of you trying to make a completely new Yugioh-like card game rather than Yugioh adopting these from out of the blue, because everyone, their mothers, second cousins, and dogs have all talked about that.

 

Monsters with health: Perfectly feasible. Yugioh is one of the few card games that I can think of that don't give health to their monsters. It isn't a bad thing that they chose to do this; the only thing they're really missing out on is healing monsters/granting them health and damage abilities that may or may not kill the monsters. Instead, these kill effects are a lot more simpler. They just flat-out kill the monster, unless something specifically stops it. None of this "would kill a 1-HP mook, but the boss is fine" stuff.

 

Choosing ATK/DEF: This cuts down on design space. The best monsters, disregarding effects, will always be the monsters with the highest sum of ATK/DEF. If you have an offensive monster with 1800 ATK and 1700 DEF, and a defensive monster with 500 ATK and 2000 DEF, the offensive monster is simply better. It's better at attacking than the defensive monster, it's better at defending than the defensive monster, and there's no reason whatsoever to pick that defensive monster instead of the offensive monster. With static stats, that offensive monster is not a better defender than the defensive monster, and that defensive monster is playable. It's also redundant that the either monster has a predetermined ATK and DEF score if you can just change them anyway. Why does the offensive monster have 1800 ATK and 1700 DEF when you can go anywhere from 3400/100 to 0/3500?

 

Unlimited Zones: By the very nature of Yugioh itself, a lack of zones is going to present a problem where the number of cards on your field can spiral out of control very quickly. And with the high-speed aggressive play that the more successful Decks see, it will only lead to even more OTKs and unwinnable situations. It isn't something you can fix just by doing something about all the "Summon as many as possible/any number of" effects and Pendulums. But, to be fair, this seems to not be that big of an issue in Magic the Gathering. I don't really play that game, so I can't say for sure why it isn't. But if I were to guess, it's probably due to the resource system it has, and certain cards that would wreck a player trying to swarm so badly. If you really want to make an unlimited number of zones, just be warned that it can (and given you're wanting to change Yugioh rather than make a new card game, will) go horribly wrong. You're going to also need to give everyone options for dealing with huge swarms of monsters.

 

45 Card Minimum: Actually, most Decks don't run 3-ofs of 13 cards and 1 other random card in Yugioh. There are LOTS of cards that you're going to like to run in your Deck, but will draw into at the wrong times if you run them at 3 copies. Kozmo players might not want a third Sliprider, definitely won't want multiple DOG Fighters, and so on. Decks also want to run more than one Limited Card a lot of times. You will oftentimes see many people running both Solemn Warning, Torrential Tribute, Raigeki, Soul Charge, etc. even though that means they can't run 13 cards at 3 anymore. Anyways, onto the idea of having a 45 card minimum. The optimal minimum Deck size varies between card games. In Magic, it's higher than Yugioh. Hearthstone has an even smaller Deck size (and in fact, can only run 30 cards). You'll probably want to make it higher than 45 though, if you want to reduce the consistency Decks have. MORE VARIANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Normal Summon in face-up Defense: Again, perfectly feasible in a different card game. In Yugioh, this would just boost monsters that have effects that activate upon their Normal Summon, and coupled with your idea to make monsters in Defense able to help other monsters in battle, it'd make these monsters ridiculously strong unless properly controlled. Like Manju in the above example: You don't need to worry about battle damage any more. If you have another monster, Manju can go to its aid, and because it has 1400 ATK, the combined efforts of Manju and your other monster makes it very likely that you're winning that battle. Personally, any monster that can give you a card and then later win a battle for another of your monsters (or at least dissuade battle altogether) would be pretty broken. You're going to want to watch out for these interactions.

 

Multiple Field Spells: The only thing different between Field Spells and Continuous Spells is that you can only have one Field Spell. Oh, there's also some things like Terraforming and whatnot. Just get rid of Field Spells altogether and make them all Continuous Spells if you want to implement this idea.

 

Ganging Up on Monsters Because They're In Defense: Pretty risky. How would damage work if multiple monsters you control are in the battle? This is a pretty tough question even to figure out a logical answer for. If the defender gets to distribute the damage, then you can pair a glass cannon with a wall and not have to worry about it dying in the opponent's turn. If you divide it equally, you're going to have to end up with some weird DEF scores. I don't know if you're going to use scores like 1450 or 350, but even if you do, they'll get divided into other numbers like 725 and 175, and that's just going to be really weird since monsters usually don't have stats that end with a 5. Also, a swarm of monsters in defense is going to make it impossible for the other player to win any battles without significant losses, so, again, you're going to need to implement some cards that control swarms.

[sdkinslayer]

I'm going to look at these in a perspective of you trying to make a completely new Yugioh-like card game rather than Yugioh adopting these from out of the blue, because everyone, their mothers, second cousins, and dogs have all talked about that.

 

Monsters with health: Perfectly feasible. Yugioh is one of the few card games that I can think of that don't give health to their monsters. It isn't a bad thing that they chose to do this; the only thing they're really missing out on is healing monsters/granting them health and damage abilities that may or may not kill the monsters. Instead, these kill effects are a lot more simpler. They just flat-out kill the monster, unless something specifically stops it. None of this "would kill a 1-HP mook, but the boss is fine" stuff.

 

Choosing ATK/DEF: This cuts down on design space. The best monsters, disregarding effects, will always be the monsters with the highest sum of ATK/DEF. If you have an offensive monster with 1800 ATK and 1700 DEF, and a defensive monster with 500 ATK and 2000 DEF, the offensive monster is simply better. It's better at attacking than the defensive monster, it's better at defending than the defensive monster, and there's no reason whatsoever to pick that defensive monster instead of the offensive monster. With static stats, that offensive monster is not a better defender than the defensive monster, and that defensive monster is playable. It's also redundant that the either monster has a predetermined ATK and DEF score if you can just change them anyway. Why does the offensive monster have 1800 ATK and 1700 DEF when you can go anywhere from 3400/100 to 0/3500?

 

Unlimited Zones: By the very nature of Yugioh itself, a lack of zones is going to present a problem where the number of cards on your field can spiral out of control very quickly. And with the high-speed aggressive play that the more successful Decks see, it will only lead to even more OTKs and unwinnable situations. It isn't something you can fix just by doing something about all the "Summon as many as possible/any number of" effects and Pendulums. But, to be fair, this seems to not be that big of an issue in Magic the Gathering. I don't really play that game, so I can't say for sure why it isn't. But if I were to guess, it's probably due to the resource system it has, and certain cards that would wreck a player trying to swarm so badly. If you really want to make an unlimited number of zones, just be warned that it can (and given you're wanting to change Yugioh rather than make a new card game, will) go horribly wrong. You're going to also need to give everyone options for dealing with huge swarms of monsters.

 

45 Card Minimum: Actually, most Decks don't run 3-ofs of 13 cards and 1 other random card in Yugioh. There are LOTS of cards that you're going to like to run in your Deck, but will draw into at the wrong times if you run them at 3 copies. Kozmo players might not want a third Sliprider, definitely won't want multiple DOG Fighters, and so on. Decks also want to run more than one Limited Card a lot of times. You will oftentimes see many people running both Solemn Warning, Torrential Tribute, Raigeki, Soul Charge, etc. even though that means they can't run 13 cards at 3 anymore. Anyways, onto the idea of having a 45 card minimum. The optimal minimum Deck size varies between card games. In Magic, it's higher than Yugioh. Hearthstone has an even smaller Deck size (and in fact, can only run 30 cards). You'll probably want to make it higher than 45 though, if you want to reduce the consistency Decks have. MORE VARIANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Normal Summon in face-up Defense: Again, perfectly feasible in a different card game. In Yugioh, this would just boost monsters that have effects that activate upon their Normal Summon, and coupled with your idea to make monsters in Defense able to help other monsters in battle, it'd make these monsters ridiculously strong unless properly controlled. Like Manju in the above example: You don't need to worry about battle damage any more. If you have another monster, Manju can go to its aid, and because it has 1400 ATK, the combined efforts of Manju and your other monster makes it very likely that you're winning that battle. Personally, any monster that can give you a card and then later win a battle for another of your monsters (or at least dissuade battle altogether) would be pretty broken. You're going to want to watch out for these interactions.

 

Multiple Field Spells: The only thing different between Field Spells and Continuous Spells is that you can only have one Field Spell. Oh, there's also some things like Terraforming and whatnot. Just get rid of Field Spells altogether and make them all Continuous Spells if you want to implement this idea.

 

Ganging Up on Monsters Because They're In Defense: Pretty risky. How would damage work if multiple monsters you control are in the battle? This is a pretty tough question even to figure out a logical answer for. If the defender gets to distribute the damage, then you can pair a glass cannon with a wall and not have to worry about it dying in the opponent's turn. If you divide it equally, you're going to have to end up with some weird DEF scores. I don't know if you're going to use scores like 1450 or 350, but even if you do, they'll get divided into other numbers like 725 and 175, and that's just going to be really weird since monsters usually don't have stats that end with a 5. Also, a swarm of monsters in defense is going to make it impossible for the other player to win any battles without significant losses, so, again, you're going to need to implement some cards that control swarms.

 

Of course we need to rebalance the game, if we make the DEF Points to Life Points. And there is no problem to add them to Yu-Gi-Oh playstyle. This game already include some cards, which reduce the DEF, instead to destroy the monster. We can go further with this.

 

Of course i know that, the ATK and DEF of the currently game is not completly worthless, you can still place monsters on both kinds postions and use their points. But usually you only put your monsters in defense if they have low ATK OR you have lost the field advantage and have to place all to defense. So only the highest state of both is interessting.

 

Unlimited Zones. No idea what Pendulums does, usually i dont play them, maybe they need a special rule. You are afraid of that the field could be more swarmed than before. Hm, do you really think that they could play more monsters than? I want this for themes which play many weak monsters at once. If there are really some themes which can summon 6 and more strong monsters in 1 turn, then they are just overpowered and it has nothing to do with this rule.

 

45 Card Minium. Yes it would give the game MORE VARIANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are completly wrong, except it has to do that i dont know the most new themes (decks), the most decks since i play this game play always 3 times the same card, exceptions are limitations of course. I already tryed to exlplain a post before what changes like this would do.

 

Normal Summon in face-up Defense. Whatever, i want to make the defense position to a out of combat mode now. I think this would be the solution. By the way i want to remove the damage by battle with monsters anyway, exception are card effects.

 

Multieple Field Spells. No there is 1 more thing to the Field spells. They should have a kind of special effects, effects you usually only should have 1 time and maybe for both players.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

I'm not sure what the point of these threads is at this point, since you refuse to even marginally accept the viewpoints of others. What do you expect of us? That we will all quit the game we enjoy and play yours instead because you say humanity is sick?

[Bellringer Angel]

To be honest, your idea is sheet.

 

Pretty much everyone have already stated the reasons I want to say, so I have (almost) nothing to say here.

 

(Also, your extremely high amount of spelling mistakes prove that you didn't think about this as seriously as you should.)

[AGATHODAIMON BANGTAIL COW]

Of course we need to rebalance the game, if we make the DEF Points to Life Points. And there is no problem to add them to Yu-Gi-Oh playstyle. This game already include some cards, which reduce the DEF, instead to destroy the monster. We can go further with this.

Having no problem being added and needing to rebalance the game to be added are kinda the opposite of one another, you know.

Of course i know that, the ATK and DEF of the currently game is not completly worthless, you can still place monsters on both kinds postions and use their points. But usually you only put your monsters in defense if they have low ATK OR you have lost the field advantage and have to place all to defense. So only the highest state of both is interessting.

What in my post are you addressing here? I never said that one of the stats on monsters was completely worthless. If you're replying to the paragraph I think you're replying to, then I was talking about how monsters with a respectable amount in both stats would be the best at attacking and defending, and anything with a worse sum of ATK and DEF would be completely worse (with the exception of effects).

Unlimited Zones. No idea what Pendulums does, usually i dont play them, maybe they need a special rule. You are afraid of that the field could be more swarmed than before. Hm, do you really think that they could play more monsters than? I want this for themes which play many weak monsters at once. If there are really some themes which can summon 6 and more strong monsters in 1 turn, then they are just overpowered and it has nothing to do with this rule.

Pendulum Summoning.

 

Basically: Put two Pendulum Monsters in your 2 Pendulum Scales, and once per turn you can Special Summon any number of monsters from your hand or face-up monsters in your Extra Deck whose Levels are between the scales of the Pendulum Monsters in your Pendulum Scales. They swarm a lot.

 

And "they're just overpowered, it has nothing to do with this rule": Which is why I was talking as if you're just remaking the game entirely. There are a lot of ways to get tons of monsters out onto the field, and not all of them are even overpowered. It will be easier for you to make a new Yugioh-like game with a brand new cardpool than to go around fixing everything. There's that many things you're going to want fixed.

45 Card Minium. Yes it would give the game MORE VARIANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are completly wrong, except it has to do that i dont know the most new themes (decks), the most decks since i play this game play always 3 times the same card, exceptions are limitations of course. I already tryed to exlplain a post before what changes like this would do.

 Then you're playing against idiots, to put it bluntly. If you pay attention to the major duel tournaments that occur, you'll see that "13 cards all at 3 + 1 other card" isn't how the competitive players are going to run their Decks. I also don't think you even understood what I meant about you raising the minimum card limit anyways. I said you're going to need to make it even higher than 45. For the sake of variety, an extra 5 cards isn't going to make much of a difference. 10? 20? Now you're talking.

Normal Summon in face-up Defense. Whatever, i want to make the defense position to a out of combat mode now. I think this would be the solution. By the way i want to remove the damage by battle with monsters anyway, exception are card effects.

 Oh ok. You have a plot of land you want to sell me?

 

So, does this take us back to where monsters with the better ATK and/or DEF or whatever simply destroy the other monster (if it's in Attack Position)? Or do monsters survive all battles now and battling is pointless?

 

Also, a "no combat ever" mode is going to restrict design space as well. If you have a monster that does something beneficial and doesn't need to battle to do so, having it virtually unkillable by your opponent is going to lead to a problem. Maybe not as much of a problem if you keep the overabundance of removal effects that Yugioh currently has, but it's still something you should keep in mind.

Multieple Field Spells. No there is 1 more thing to the Field spells. They should have a kind of special effects, effects you usually only should have 1 time and maybe for both players.

And what exactly is preventing you from making them all Continuous Spells that do the same exact thing? Continuous Spells can have special effects; Continuous Spells can affect both players.

[IQuitDolphin]

No idea what you wanna say with your examples, Raigeki, Lightning Vortex and so on. The Life Point change has nothing to do with these cards.

 

It doenst matter how many cards konami made, we just talk about the better solution. These cards would get a fix, which wouldnt make them work worse. 

 

Looks like you never played Crystal Beast, Fabled or Scapegoat. Otherwise you couldnt say that you have won with 5 monsters.

 

1. No comment.

 

2. "it doesn't matter how many cards konami made, we just talk about the better solution". These cards would get a fix, which wouldnt make them work worse

ONE: So you are saying that the cards just fix themselves? So let's just ignore how many cards Konami has made and just say "imagine if all were fixed"? Stop bullshitting yourself, nobody cares until you actually do it. And like I said, good luck doing that. And who's going to fix them? You? To how you want them to be? OK, so it's YOUR game, nobody wants to play a game where they can't have a say when they think something is bad.

TWO: Crystal Beast never summons more than 5 monsters. You're an idiot if you think they can summon that many. Only idiot Fabled players need more than 5 zones. Scapegoat sucks.

 

I would not play this game because

 

1) You don't know how to play Yu-Gi-Oh enough to fix it.

2) You don't know anything about our current game. You don't know what Pendulums are? That already tells me how little you know about our game. You use Crystal Beast as an example? This isn't GX era pal, use more recent examples.

3) You don't know how to write right.

[sdkinslayer]

 

Having no problem being added and needing to rebalance the game to be added are kinda the opposite of one another, you know.

 

What in my post are you addressing here? I never said that one of the stats on monsters was completely worthless. If you're replying to the paragraph I think you're replying to, then I was talking about how monsters with a respectable amount in both stats would be the best at attacking and defending, and anything with a worse sum of ATK and DEF would be completely worse (with the exception of effects).

 

Pendulum Summoning.

 

Basically: Put two Pendulum Monsters in your 2 Pendulum Scales, and once per turn you can Special Summon any number of monsters from your hand or face-up monsters in your Extra Deck whose Levels are between the scales of the Pendulum Monsters in your Pendulum Scales. They swarm a lot.

 

And "they're just overpowered, it has nothing to do with this rule": Which is why I was talking as if you're just remaking the game entirely. There are a lot of ways to get tons of monsters out onto the field, and not all of them are even overpowered. It will be easier for you to make a new Yugioh-like game with a brand new cardpool than to go around fixing everything. There's that many things you're going to want fixed.

 

Then you're playing against idiots, to put it bluntly. If you pay attention to the major duel tournaments that occur, you'll see that "13 cards all at 3 + 1 other card" isn't how the competitive players are going to run their Decks. I also don't think you even understood what I meant about you raising the minimum card limit anyways. I said you're going to need to make it even higher than 45. For the sake of variety, an extra 5 cards isn't going to make much of a difference. 10? 20? Now you're talking.

 

Oh ok. You have a plot of land you want to sell me?

 

So, does this take us back to where monsters with the better ATK and/or DEF or whatever simply destroy the other monster (if it's in Attack Position)? Or do monsters survive all battles now and battling is pointless?

 

Also, a "no combat ever" mode is going to restrict design space as well. If you have a monster that does something beneficial and doesn't need to battle to do so, having it virtually unkillable by your opponent is going to lead to a problem. Maybe not as much of a problem if you keep the overabundance of removal effects that Yugioh currently has, but it's still something you should keep in mind.

 

And what exactly is preventing you from making them all Continuous Spells that do the same exact thing? Continuous Spells can have special effects; Continuous Spells can affect both players.

It seems you think different, did you realize that the game balance of crap? It needs to rebalanced anyway. It doenst matter how much time it cost.

 

There was a time, it was normal to play 3 times the same card, a long time. I need a look to the newest themes and decks why it changed. I dont know why but even all of my own mades works so, whats so different on the new konami themes?

 

And i dont want have to many cards in a deck, thats why only 5 more till now. If you add to much you cant have a central combination except with many strong searchers. And i also dont want to have the themes to similar, what happens if you need to many different cards.

 

If your monsters are in out of combat mode, your opponent can fist your Life Points, i thought you think its such a big problem, if a battle between monsters does no damage, why a direct attack which does a lot more damage is a smaller problem at once?

 

Of course Coninuous Spells are pretty similar to Field Spells but they are still not the same. Maybe i need examples to show you what i mean. But there are effects you want to give your theme just 1 time not additional. Maybe Geartown could be an example, you could have made it, that you can summon a golem easier but it should be possible to get it out for no tribute. Mabye an Fieldspell with a pretty high state boost could be an example also, because 2 times would be fair; maybe you made the monsters in this theme weaker, that this 1 Field Spell card can changes it.

 

 

1. No comment.

 

2. "it doesn't matter how many cards konami made, we just talk about the better solution". These cards would get a fix, which wouldnt make them work worse

ONE: So you are saying that the cards just fix themselves? So let's just ignore how many cards Konami has made and just say "imagine if all were fixed"? Stop bullshitting yourself, nobody cares until you actually do it. And like I said, good luck doing that. And who's going to fix them? You? To how you want them to be? OK, so it's YOUR game, nobody wants to play a game where they can't have a say when they think something is bad.

TWO: Crystal Beast never summons more than 5 monsters. You're an idiot if you think they can summon that many. Only idiot Fabled players need more than 5 zones. Scapegoat sucks.

 

I would not play this game because

 

1) You don't know how to play Yu-Gi-Oh enough to fix it.

2) You don't know anything about our current game. You don't know what Pendulums are? That already tells me how little you know about our game. You use Crystal Beast as an example? This isn't GX era pal, use more recent examples.

3) You don't know how to write right.

To One. I dont know what do you want from me. We are talking about how the game should be.

 

To Two. Crystal Beasts going to be Spell cards after they get destroyed, so it happens very often, that you cant play a Trap or Spell card anymore, because to many slots are occupied. And dont forget, it was just an example.

 

I dont care about the actual crap of konami, because the game get overpowered since the time of XYZ has begun.

 

Thanks to the schools i (we) have some leaks in our knowledge. I try to change that by talking with the politician. After that i will try to end the global economy war.

 

To be honest, your idea is s***.

 

Pretty much everyone have already stated the reasons I want to say, so I have (almost) nothing to say here.

 

(Also, your extremely high amount of spelling mistakes prove that you didn't think about this as seriously as you should.)

Why you write then, just to flame me? Nice idea.

[~British Soul~]

^ at least his idea is better than yours. ::

[sdkinslayer]

I'm not sure what the point of these threads is at this point, since you refuse to even marginally accept the viewpoints of others. What do you expect of us? That we will all quit the game we enjoy and play yours instead because you say humanity is sick?

I said that the humans got troubles. I even try to change that, by changing the world with my policial work. Really i wished it would be different. And i cant say something different than the truth and anyhow asked that, so i told it.

 

I have only 1 chance to get what i want, by talking with you. And i dont force anyone here, i just talking with you, you could even ignore it. Others also talked about differents way to play this game.

[AGATHODAIMON BANGTAIL COW]

It seems you think different, did you realize that the game balance of crap? It needs to rebalanced anyway. It doenst matter how much time it cost.

 I'm not thinking differently. I've known for quite a while the game's balance isn't to my tastes. That said, it's still fun at times. Your set of rule changes and such aren't the only way to rebalance the game, and in fact, I'm completely unsure if they would even work. Fixing everything so that your rules wouldn't end up breaking anything is going to take too much time. In fact, the game could, in theory, be rebalanced without changing, adding, or removing any rules.

There was a time, it was normal to play 3 times the same card, a long time. I need a look to the newest themes and decks why it changed. I dont know why but even all of my own mades works so, whats so different on the new konami themes?

 It isn't always a bad idea to run a card at 3. It also wasn't always a great idea to run as many cards as possible at 3 way back then.

 

A reason some cards aren't being run at 3 even though they look like they should be 3-ofs would be because of the immense amount of searching power the newest stuff has gotten lately. They are also not completely essential to the primary strategy, though they're still really nice to have if you do have them.

And i dont want have to many cards in a deck, thats why only 5 more till now. If you add to much you cant have a central combination except with many strong searchers. And i also dont want to have the themes to similar, what happens if you need to many different cards.

 But if you want more variety, why would you want to promote that Decks should be using a central strategy? It isn't variance if the Deck uses the same combo to establish a game-winning position 80% of the time.

If your monsters are in out of combat mode, your opponent can fist your Life Points, i thought you think its such a big problem, if a battle between monsters does no damage, why a direct attack which does a lot more damage is a smaller problem at once?

 Taking direct damage to save your own monster from being destroyed by battle isn't always a bad idea. In fact, there's this card, which lets you do that. Of course, that card specifically isn't ran, but if a monster is going to win you the game next turn, wouldn't you take a direct attack if it meant keeping that monster alive?

Of course Coninuous Spells are pretty similar to Field Spells but they are still not the same. Maybe i need examples to show you what i mean. But there are effects you want to give your theme just 1 time not additional. Maybe Geartown could be an example, you could have made it, that you can summon a golem easier but it should be possible to get it out for no tribute. Mabye an Fieldspell with a pretty high state boost could be an example also, because 2 times would be fair; maybe you made the monsters in this theme weaker, that this 1 Field Spell card can changes it.

But what if Geartown was a Continuous Spell instead? It would still work just as well (well, minus Terraforming). The one thing that set Field Spells apart from Continuous Spells is that you could only have one of them on the field. If there is no limit on the number of Field Spells you can have, as well as no limit on the number of Spell and Trap Cards you can have, then why are Field Spells and Continuous Spells still different? With every answer you've given, you still haven't explained why all those Field Spells cannot possibly become Continuous Spells. Continuous Spells can work just one time, and not provide additional benefits (also, so can Normal Spells, though those don't stay on the field). Continuous Spells can give a large stat boost. What are Field Spells supposed to do that Continuous Spells cannot possibly accomplish?

[IQuitDolphin]

 To One. I dont know what do you want from me. We are talking about how the game should be.

 

To Two. Crystal Beasts going to be Spell cards after they get destroyed, so it happens very often, that you cant play a Trap or Spell card anymore, because to many slots are occupied. And dont forget, it was just an example.

 

I dont care about the actual crap of konami, because the game get overpowered since the time of XYZ has begun.

 

Thanks to the schools i (we) have some leaks in our knowledge. I try to change that by talking with the politician. After that i will try to end the global economy war.

Why you write then, just to flame me? Nice idea.

 

1) How the game should be? So how you want it to be?

2) Only idiots want to constantly put Crystal Beasts in Spell and Trap zones. It's optional you know.

3) ....So you want to play Yugioh...without any yugioh cards made by "crap of konami"....logic.

4) LOL, go funking take your politics somewhere else.

 

How about instead of posting fake sheet like "I want to make Yugioh better", just funking say that this isn't YGO, this isn't the same cards, and that you want different rules. Because THAT is what you are saying, not fixing anything.