Deck play styles regarding Custom Archetypes

[KH911]

On 4/24/2023 at 5:21 AM, Surge77754 said:

The design space of ANY custom archetype is affected by the locks put on the archetype and the mechanics put on said archetype.  A archetype that isn't locked may run the risk of having a wide design space, hence the difficulty of balancing the deck is very high, because adding 1 card to the archetype may run the risk of breaking the yugioh game as a whole. This is often the case when an archetype is generic, or when the archetype is an engine meant to supplement existing TCG archetypes. 

 

This seems to be the biggest problem with Konami's modern designs. They tend to make very powerful cards like Baronne, Zeus, Accesscode generic, without locking archetypes into their respective type/archetypes, so every deck brings out the same boss monsters. As a result, any somewhat interesting deck loses its flavor and turns into the same boring generic boss monster turbo.

[WhiteThunder777]

3 hours ago, KH911 said:

This seems to be the biggest problem with Konami's modern designs. They tend to make very powerful cards like Baronne, Zeus, Accesscode generic, without locking archetypes into their respective type/archetypes, so every deck brings out the same boss monsters. As a result, any somewhat interesting deck loses its flavor and turns into the same boring generic boss monster turbo.

The way to archetype lock your monsters would be "You cannot Special Summon monsters, except "X" monsters, the turn you Summoned this card." where X is the name of your archetype in question.  The way that you lock is very important as well.  

Let's say the archetype name was Flashstrike (which is a Synchro Union archetype), you would write the lock as follows. You cannot Special Summon monsters, except "Flashstrike" monsters, the turn you Summoned this card.   

You could also make locks that restrict to some other stuff but be careful.  Here are some cases.

• Locking it to FIRE Warrior enables Infernoble Knights. 
• Locking it to Warrior Union monsters is very good because there are ONLY 3 Warrior Union monsters in the game and they aren't very good. 

And also, another thing, bringing out the same boss monster over and over again causes the card in question to lose its design.  For example, Accesscode was originally meant to be part of the Code Talker archetype, but Konami chose to make it generic, which caused the card have a wide design space.  

If you lock your cards in your archetype to the archetype itself, this narrows down the design space.  With a narrow design space, you can freely explore the potential of your archetype rather than focus on making a very specific endboard.  

If you don't lock your cards in your custom archetype correctly, your archetype will run the risk of becoming an engine that will have a wide design space.  With a wide design space, adding 1 card can break the archetype itself.  But if you lock the cards into the archetype itself, then the design space is very narrow, allowing you to design cards freely.

With a narrow design space, cards become much easier to balance.

And you make a very good point, @KH911.  

[WhiteThunder777]

And here's another thing if every card in a custom archetype add and more adds, it becomes repetitive in the long run to the point where it becomes boring.  Not even Ritual based decks would stoop this low because every Ritual deck is different.  Mikanko is Ritual OTK, hence it allows Kanjis in its build.  

And one more thing, if an end board for any archetype is putting negates, it is repetitive and boring in the long run.  Every archetype so far has a way to put a negate as its endboard.  Plus negates make it less fun for the opponent to play against in the long run.