The end is here

[samer_13]

So Long i skipped the entire thing, but yeah DMoC deserves to be banned with Destiny Disk Commander, and Premature burial does deserve the ban hammer for obvius reasons. Cydra is o.k. being limited. Normally i would say more but my computer keeps on freezing, but you guys know the rest.

[CrabHelmet]

CyDra At One Is Gay

 

No' date=' it is not gay. It is good. Because CyDra's gonna also help Synchros which will increase the number of idiots like Star whining about it.

[/quote']

 

Cyber Dragon's use with Synchro's is the least of its problems, but yes, reducing the number of copies in which Cyber Dragon can be used is good.

 

]

 

Yeah' date=' it should be at 0.

 

It's good that Premature was banned before Monster Reborn (although both should be banned).

[/quote']

 

No, they shouldn't be banned. And it shouldn't be at 0. There must be good cards to help and support, and there must be staples, or all decks will become stupid and puny made "for fun". Live up to the Meta.

 

The game has no need for the cheap generic recursion that Monster Reborn, Premature Burial, and Call of the Haunted offer. Their presence reduces the impact of skill on the game, and therefore the banlist needs to remove them.

 

To say that the game needs staples in order to make every deck stronger is false, as removing the staples from the game reduces all decks equally. If all three of the generic recursion cards (Prem, MR, and Call) were all banned, the game would not dissolve into a bunch of five-year olds running Toon decks.

 

Besides' date=' if you really hate CyDra to 0-it then can I understand why is your so-called signature has pictures of the Cybernetic archetype? Because seriously if you use that archetype without CyDra, you can go rape a goat.

[/quote']

 

First of all, some people are not so greedy that they would wish for the game to be harmed by an inferior banlist in order to improve their own deck - a decktype that isn't competitive anyhow.

 

Second of all, the monsters in his signature are Cyber Valley and Cyber Ouroboros, neither of which requires Cyber Dragon in any way.

 

Third of all, the conclusion that Cyber Dragon needs to be banned for the good of the game does not stem from "hate".

 

What's the point of Breaker if there's no Premie?!

 

Existence of spell cards. MR? Allure? Vortex

 

I believe you're confusing Breaker the Magical Warrior with Magician of Faith. Breaker destroys Spells and Traps on the field rather than retrieving Spells from the graveyard' date=' and therefore he has no connection whatsoever to Monster Reborn, Allure of Darkness (well, he's DARK, so he is Allure food, but whatever), and Lightning Vortex.

 

]

Considering that GBs are stilll untouched' date=' methinks this list needs a rewrite. Both LS and DaD were affected, so why shouldn't GB be? Anything but Gyzarus @ 2.

[/quote']

 

They shouldn't be touched because that wouldn't do any change.

 

By simple logic of cause and effect, touching Gladiator Beasts would, by definition, do something.

 

And Gyzarus @ 2 is one more stupid thing for them to do. It's a fusion after all.

 

That's why he said that anything BUT Gyzarus @ 2 would be fine. It is a form of humour.

 

]

Cyber Dragon should be banned as well as the Cyber Dragon fusions.

 

As should be your existence or maybe just the fact that you play YGO and make crappy GFX.

 

At the end of your post' date=' you declare that this is simply debate; however, in most debates, [i']argumentum ad hominem[/i] is not seen as a strong argument style.

 

]

Is that supposed to be sarcasm?

 

No' date=' but you'd deserve sarcasm if you knew what it means. Stop your stupidity.

[/quote']

 

More argumentum ad hominem.

 

]

Lol.

 

Tricky is a -1.

 

Cyber Dragon is a 2100 attack monster that can be Special Summon for no cost.

 

Tricky might be a -1' date=' but CyDra needs +1 for your opponent to summon,

[/quote']

 

Cydra does not require a +1 for your opponent; it requires your opponent to control a monster, but does not generate any advantage for your opponent. Advantage notation doesn't work the way you seem to think it does.

 

to maybe increase your field advantage.

 

By definition' date=' transferring a card from your hand to your field increases your field advantage.

 

Both can be the same valued, depending on your hand and field.

 

Cyber Dragon is a +0; The Tricky is a -1. They are not equal in value.

 

Again' date=' stop your stupidity before I kill somebody tonight.

[/quote']

 

Murder is frowned upon in most debates.

 

Limited

Breaker the Magical Warrior- Im fine with this. Really i dont believe this will see much play

Cyber Dragon- Good for obvious reasons but should be banned

Monster Gate- I really dont understand this

Reasoning- I really dont understand this

 

CyDra shouldn't be banned' date=' after all just 1 might be more of "OMG I TOPDECKED".

[/quote']

 

The banlist's purpose is to increase the impact of skill on the game and decrease the impact of luck. Shifting emphasis toward topdecking does the reverse.

 

Breaker will see much play' date=' there are other spells in the game than Prem. Get over it.

[/quote']

 

Yes, Breaker will see much play, but again, I don't think you have Breaker's effect right.

 

Monster Gate and Reasoning = Hello Synchro Support. Hello Tuners. Hello D-Heroes. Hello Neos.

 

God forbid we actually have some form of support for something.

 

Chain Strike: Chain Strike fires for a new Pre-Meta. Just chain it and boom 800 damage.

 

Ookazi hasn't done a whole lot in any recent meta.

 

Nobleman: Not really... Semi-Limiting it is the best choice.

 

Care to explain why 2 is magically the perfect number?

 

Phantom of Chaos: Go rape a goat. You say something about this and not Prisma? -.-

 

There's nothing wrong with Prisma; there's something very wrong with PoC.

 

But the real question is why the only argument style you seem versed in is ad hominem.

 

Cat: OMFG. Cat is like' date=' good for 2 reasons now. All Beast fusions, synchros and field advantage are for it now. Plus, we aren't too far from coming of Airbellum. Plus, Cat can help big time in Chaos Neos.

[/quote']

 

Cat is excellent in Synchros, but why do you seem to think that Neos decks are a problem that the banlist needs to fix?

 

But' date=' ROTA is a key card, because every deck that runs Prisma/Stratos (including GB) uses it.

[/quote']

 

You're caving in to Konami logic: that if a card is used, there must be something wrong with it.

 

There's nothing unbalanced about ROTA.

 

They just put Malicious at 3' date=' and left Instant Fusion at 3.

 

Your theory fails.

[/quote']

 

So does yours. Because without Commander now, wants for someone to use D. Draw in a meta have decreased.

 

I never mentioned Destiny Draw.

 

I was responding to a post that claimed that Cydra was Limtied because it worked well with Synchros, and I was pointing out that the banlist leaves two cards of comparable use untouched, thus refuting that assertion.

 

What else...

I'm confused' date=' since when were Monster Gate and Reasoning a significant problem to the point where they should both be limited?

[/quote']

 

Monster Gate and Reasoning aren't significant to much of you YCMers. But come to the fact, they can cost crisis, and increasingly after Synchros have come.

 

"they can cost crisis"? Your words aren't coming out coherently.

 

But the "you YCMers" phase is interesting. You from TCGPlayer?

 

personally i wouldnt even deck cydra in a synchro deck :S

 

You wouldn't' date=' you shouldn't. You shouldn't even play the game.

[/quote']

 

Ad hominem.

 

]

Overload Fusion needs to stay at 1 because of Labyrinth Tank.

 

That thing has 2400 ATK!

 

You're provoking me to kill someone tonight.

 

Tell me' date=' do you have no concept of sarcasm or humour? First you take Gyzarus @ 2 seriously, and now Labyrinth Tank.

 

]

Shouldn't Cyber Dragon' date=' Cyber Twin Dragon, Cyber End Dragon, Chimeratech Fortress Dragon, and Chimeratech Overdragon be banned so we can have 3 Future Fusion and 3 Overload Fusion?

[/quote']

 

Stop. Stop. STOP LIVING. STOP PLAYING. Rape a goat. That thing, don't stop in it.

 

Star is correct in this matter.

 

The only reason that Future Fusion and Overload Fusion are Limited is because they work with Chimeratech Overdragon, a card whose sole purpose is to OTK. By banning Chimeratech Overdragon, the problem card, we can put Future Fusion and Overload Fusion back to 3 where they belong. The former helps all Fusion decks, and the latter helps Cyberdarks and Gatling Dragon - and theoretically even Labyrinth Tank, though I somehow doubt that it will see much play.

 

Now, consider Metamorphosis. Why was it banned? Because it got out Thousand-Eyes Restrict and Cyber Twin Dragon too easily, the former for Goat Control and the later for Demise OTK. With the exception of those two cards and Cyber End Dragon - due to a variety of easily-summoned Level 10 monsters now available, such as Yubel and Metal Reflect Slime, Cyber End Dragon becomes a problem now - there is nothing harmful about Metamorphosis. Thus, by banning Cyber Twin Dragon and Cyber End Dragon, we can have Metamorphosis back at 3. Now, whereas Cyber Twin Dragon (2800 ATK double attacker) and Cyber End Dragon (4000 ATK tramples) serve no purpose beyond mindlessly inflicting large amounts of damage, Metamorphosis serves a wide variety of other purposes. Furthermore, while many of the Fusion Monsters that work with Metamorphosis are completely unplayable, legalizing Metamorphosis would enable them to become playable again. A card rendered unplayable due to underpowering has little distinction from a card rendered unplayable due to banning, so this would actually increase the number of cards available in the effective card pool.

 

This is a seriously lol list. CCV is still legal. Gyzarus is still legal. DAD was only semi-ed' date=' yet they go and ban DMoC? I'm not saying hat he doesn't deserve to be banned, he certainly does, it's just funny that he gets hit before these other cards that are so much more broken.

[/quote']

 

You are a lol person. CCV was always legal and yet you complain about it NOW.

 

CCV has always been complained about and has never been good for the game. CCV is complained about now because "now" is a subset of "always".

 

Gyzarus isn't like going to be changing anything if it was Semi'd.

 

The Dark One complained that Gyzarus is legal' date=' which means that he wants it banned. Last time I checked, Semi-Limited cards are legal.

 

DAD and JD being Semi'd isn't much' date=' but at least it's a step in the right direction. With Reasoning and Gate Limited, Chimeratech is now pretty much dead.

[/quote']

 

Also SS, Neos and Dasher, and Synchro-was-gonna-be-Gate-meta.

 

What makes you so worried about Neos and Dasher? Based on your response to my Instant Fusion and Malicious comment, you seem to think that Destiny Draw, and with it all Destiny Heroes, are worthless without Disk Commander, so suddenly bringing up Dasher as a problem seems rather self-contradictory.

 

Konami needs to get their head out of their ass.

 

This just makes me ****ING RAGE.

 

YOU need to. They have actually tried their best and made the best actions to serve both the OCG and TCG right. You should really stop complaining over everything such a huge company does about CCG banlists.

 

Pretending that the banlist is good won't magically make the banlist better.

 

The list isn't as bad as most people think. It's actually a pretty good attempt from Konami to equalize between the TCG and the OCG' date=' and the list will still make people use Metas and unuse some. It's like all of the lists, and all people will adjust to it. Advice next time, don't whine and b**** about something that cannot be changed and that is repeated.

[/quote']

 

In addition to argumentum ad hominem, you don't seem to be in the habit of backing up your statements. This is a perfect example; you declare the banlist to be good, then give no reason why you think it's good.

 

Also, saying it's like all the lists doesn't mean a whole lot Konami's lists have always been bad.

 

Stop playing IRL more than trying OCG and DMU and etc' date=' that will make you understand the game and a lot and find out the hidden positives instead of burying your head in the sands of TCG and buying CCG pieces of paper for hundreds of bucks.

[/quote']

 

I don't play in real life at all; I only play on YVD.

 

Making decks outside of the Meta atmosphere is good' date=' but stop the ideas that make you believe Meta is harsh and ruins the game, and that good, helpful cards should be banned or exterminated. No, in fact, a lot of players will really know that it's good to exist and will always exist after they try playing professionally and use their minds in the game.

[/quote']

 

Nobody ever said that the meta is harsh or ruins the game; you seem to be transitioning from argumentum ad hominem to "Straw Man" here.

 

Also, just because a card is helpful and splashable (like Monster Reborn, for example) does not mean it should remain legal. Ring of Destruction and Dark Hole are also helpful and splashable, remember.

 

• Kill Star and his moderator status for the forum's good. He seems unintelligent' date=' and not professional enough in YGO to be a mod of its unofficial forums, and his GFX pretty much sucks for a GFX mod, or in fact, for a GFX artist in general.
  [*']Sorry to quote people harshly, and you know debate is debate, but don't take things aggressively.
  

 

The inherent self-contradiction here is hilarious. You make a completely off-topic comment dedicated solely to mindlessly flaming one of the members, and immediately thereafter you claim that your purpose is purely to engage in polite, rational debate.

 

You didn't come here to debate. Debates consist of arguments and evidence that support one another. Your general argument style seems to be to tell people to "rape a goat" - not exactly the pinnacle of rational discourse. You came here because you want to insult people, [star] in particular, under the thin veil of a "debate".

[tonisanoob]

OMFG

 

CRAB

 

PLEASE

 

HAVE

 

SECKS

 

WITH

 

ME

 

i think the words he is most likley lookign for is "i just got raped by a goat"

[Emperor Godbot]

I believe you're confusing Breaker the Magical Warrior with Magician of Faith. Breaker destroys Spells and Traps on the field rather than retrieving Spells from the graveyard' date=' and therefore he has no connection whatsoever to Monster Reborn, Allure of Darkness (well, he's DARK, so he is Allure food, but whatever), and Lightning Vortex.

[/quote']

 

Indeed I was confusing MoF with Breaker, sorry for the mistake. But I think it's still as effective as MST and even better.

 

By simple logic of cause and effect' date=' touching Gladiator Beasts would, by definition, do something.

[/quote']

 

A figure of speech. Since Prisma and KotS exist, Gyzarus summon and such won't be affected that much. If they'd put Bestiari @ 2, we can Test Tiger it/Prisma MR it or anything. And that'd work.

 

At the end of your post' date=' you declare that this is simply debate; however, in most debates, argumentum ad hominem is not seen as a strong argument style.

[/quote']

 

Whatever. I apologized for being harsh in my quotes and you did actually witness me doing that, and that I just wanted people to not reply to me aggressively after I apologized. And I won't repeat.

 

The banlist's purpose is to increase the impact of skill on the game and decrease the impact of luck. Shifting emphasis toward topdecking does the reverse.

 

Uh-huh. I meant by "OMG I TOPDECKED" is that it'll be a hard card to get which will' date=' yes, make the use of it less because it'd help in increasing the impact on skill.

 

Yes, Breaker will see much play, but again, I don't think you have Breaker's effect right.

 

And again, I remind you I have mixed between its effect and MoF's when they were released together in a former banlist.

 

Ookazi hasn't done a whole lot in any recent meta.

 

Let's see here. I have some nice combo to do here' date=' but I bet this nice combo and my message I said aren't the main reason which I don't know of. Chain to opponent card: MST -> Jar of Greed -> Chain Detonation -> Chain Strike -> Summon Winged Kuriboh LV9

 

I use that combo a lot and it helps me win a lot. Ookazi stuff, I just gave you an example that Chain Link 3 of this card can do better than Meteor or Tremendous, which is why it's Semi'd.

 

Care to explain why 2 is magically the perfect number?

 

Nobleman at 3:

 

-No one's gonna use it at 3

-If someone does, it'd be broken because he'd RFP (and not destroy like Granmarg) f/d monsters (useful combo with Book of Moon) and all names with the same name. Imagine: Book of Moon a DAD, Nobleman it, bye all DADs. Hardcore. You'd ask why not use the same combo when it's limited, and I'll answer. Because drawing chances of it will decrease.

 

Nobleman at 1:

 

-Once when it was a staple, stapleness of it decreased because a spell card at 1 might be a hard one to get.

-With its good-combo'd effect and such, it'd be a waste of time to put it and then get it at the wrong time.

 

Nobleman at 2:

 

-Can be in a combo and can be good alone, because it's useful but better with combos.

 

but why do you seem to think that Neos decks are a problem that the banlist needs to fix?

 

Just an example. I try to cover all the good uses I can think of in 5 seconds.

 

You're caving in to Konami logic: that if a card is used' date=' there must be something wrong with it.

 

There's nothing unbalanced about ROTA.

[/quote']

 

Did I say the word 'unbalanced'? No. I meant by that, and if you read what I quoted to that you'd get it, is that JoC said it won't get much use when it would, especially for E-Hero and D-Hero decks, and getting Malicious/Stratos/Prisma.

 

"they can cost crisis"? Your words aren't coming out coherently.

 

You know what I meant.

 

But the "you YCMers" phase is interesting. You from TCGPlayer?

 

Not really. I'm from DMU and some other OCG/TCG combined communities.

 

Tell me' date=' do you have no concept of sarcasm or humour? First you take Gyzarus @ 2 seriously, and now Labyrinth Tank.

[/quote']

 

Clearly, the Tank thing is off-topic. Why not delete this post for someone else thinking Star's serious? Because, after seeing some of his posts, I can't really know what's humor and what's truth. >_>

 

Star is correct in this matter.

 

The only reason that Future Fusion and Overload Fusion are Limited is because they work with Chimeratech Overdragon' date=' a card whose sole purpose is to OTK. By banning Chimeratech Overdragon, the problem card, we can put Future Fusion and Overload Fusion back to 3 where they belong. The former helps all Fusion decks, and the latter helps Cyberdarks and Gatling Dragon - and theoretically even Labyrinth Tank, though I somehow doubt that it will see much play.

 

Now, consider Metamorphosis. Why was it banned? Because it got out Thousand-Eyes Restrict and Cyber Twin Dragon too easily, the former for Goat Control and the later for Demise OTK. With the exception of those two cards and Cyber End Dragon - due to a variety of easily-summoned Level 10 monsters now available, such as Yubel and Metal Reflect Slime, Cyber End Dragon becomes a problem now - there is nothing harmful about Metamorphosis. Thus, by banning Cyber Twin Dragon and Cyber End Dragon, we can have Metamorphosis back at 3. Now, whereas Cyber Twin Dragon (2800 ATK double attacker) and Cyber End Dragon (4000 ATK tramples) serve no purpose beyond mindlessly inflicting large amounts of damage, Metamorphosis serves a wide variety of other purposes. Furthermore, while many of the Fusion Monsters that work with Metamorphosis are completely unplayable, legalizing Metamorphosis would enable them to become playable again. A card rendered unplayable due to underpowering has little distinction from a card rendered unplayable due to banning, so this would actually increase the number of cards available in the effective card pool.

[/quote']

 

Thank you for explaining.

 

CCV has always been complained about and has never been good for the game. CCV is complained about now because "now" is a subset of "always".

 

I dislike CCV as much as all of you. But to discuss it now like always is becoming boring because Konami aren't doing anything about it.

 

The Dark One complained that Gyzarus is legal' date=' which means that he wants it banned. Last time I checked, Semi-Limited cards are legal.

[/quote']

 

I thought that he meant 'Unlimited' by 'Legal'.

 

so suddenly bringing up Dasher as a problem seems rather self-contradictory.

 

I did not say D-Heroes were worthless without D-Draw + Disk Commander. When I said that stuff' date=' I meant Malicious's chances of going to grave have decreased because people use Disk Commander more. So, basically, Dasher is a problem.

 

Pretending that the banlist is good won't magically make the banlist better.

 

It's a good banlist, comparing to the others. I bet SOME other banlists were horrible comparing to this one. Besides, why would I pretend? Come to the fact, most YGO players protest against banlists for every little notch. However, this time I applaused Konami for their hard attempt to make it fair between OCG, TCG and banned/limited cards, for some cards to be allowed to be played again like Breaker and MR.

 

I don't play in real life at all; I only play on YVD.

 

I was not just talking to you' date=' ya know.

 

This is a perfect example; you declare the banlist to be good, then give no reason why you think it's good.

 

Seeing the meta of OCG, Konami served it completely right, and for TCG, well, return of Malicious and some other releases were good for it, too. That what makes me think that they did equalize well about it.

 

Nobody ever said that the meta is harsh or ruins the game; you seem to be transitioning from argumentum ad hominem to "Straw Man" here.

 

Some people want CyDra @ 0' date=' e.g. Star. I don't see CyDra as a major broken card as some other cards, like CCV that you were talking about earlier.

 

Also, just because a card is helpful and splashable (like Monster Reborn, for example) does not mean it should remain legal. Ring of Destruction and Dark Hole are also helpful and splashable, remember.

 

Some cards are completely broken, some are "just for good help". Raigeki and Vortex differ, because Vortex requires face-ups and a discard, in opposite to the destroy-em-all Raigeki, which makes Vortex good help but at the same time limited and not touched.

 

The inherent self-contradiction here is hilarious. You make a completely off-topic comment dedicated solely to mindlessly flaming one of the members' date=' and immediately thereafter you claim that your purpose is purely to engage in polite, rational debate.

[/quote']

 

The fact that Star is not good for GFX mod, well, is a fact. I just wanted to note that in part of my whole on-topic reply, something off-topic. Would've an "OFF-TOPIC:" made a big change or something? >_>

 

I just wanted to advise, and the "Kill Star" stuff is just me using a figure of speech to lower him a bit down from his status and such. Besides, why mark just this point of list off-topic and not mark Star's Tank one off-topic post that is completely meaningless and partly against Leaf's rules? Because he's a GFX mod having weak skills of GFX. And that's why, he should be talked to.

 

Then comes you telling me that I have self-contradictory here. It's like that, but I put the apology after that point because I wanted to clear off what I did and just say, like, "got it out of my gear and it's over", to just debate about the game here and not the comments I did. For the "rape a goat" stuff, sorry again. And yes, sorry for the third time, for me including harsh comments. Got the message now?

 

You didn't come here to debate. Debates consist of arguments and evidence that support one another. Your general argument style seems to be to tell people to "rape a goat" - not exactly the pinnacle of rational discourse.

 

I debated 10 times more than my comments. How come haven't I come here to debate? Is there something wrong in replying to people about their mistakes and agreeing and disagreeing in debates? And for the fourth time' date=' sorry for the comments?

 

You came here because you want to insult people, [star] in particular, under the thin veil of a "debate".

 

Excuse me, but that is disrespect. I'm not some guy who comes to insult people. If I was to insult people, I'd have gone to a chat room. Stop taking things aggressively, once again I say, sorry.

 

.....

And the debate continues.

[CrabHelmet]

I believe you're confusing Breaker the Magical Warrior with Magician of Faith. Breaker destroys Spells and Traps on the field rather than retrieving Spells from the graveyard' date=' and therefore he has no connection whatsoever to Monster Reborn, Allure of Darkness (well, he's DARK, so he is Allure food, but whatever), and Lightning Vortex.

[/quote']

 

Indeed I was confusing MoF with Breaker, sorry for the mistake. But I think it's still as effective as MST and even better.

 

Oh, yes, indeed. Although he lacks the ability to prenegate traps, he has the advantage of being able to attack and thus either destroy an opponent's monsters (+1; 1600 ATK runs over most Level 4 or below monsters) or swing for 1/5th of initial LP. The majority of decks would instantly run him, especially with Solemn remaining popular, Zombies gaining strength (especially with Zombie Carrier), and Royal Oppression sometimes popping up in an attempt to withstand everything.

 

By simple logic of cause and effect' date=' touching Gladiator Beasts would, by definition, do something.

[/quote']

 

A figure of speech. Since Prisma and KotS exist, Gyzarus summon and such won't be affected that much. If they'd put Bestiari @ 2, we can Test Tiger it/Prisma MR it or anything. And that'd work.

 

King of the Swamp and other Fusion Substitute Monsters cannot be used to summon Gladiator Beast Gyzarus. Prisma only works because its name changes.

 

Reducing Bestiari to 2 wouldn't have any significant impact on Gladiator Beasts at all. Reducing it to 1 would make the Prisma/Tiger combo vulnerable to D.D. Crow in a way that would stop Gyzarus permanently (barring Burial from a Different Dimension), but here we encounter a more fundamental problem, which is that Bestiari himself is not a problem.

 

Bestiari is essentially a 1500 themed Breaker - not a bad card by any means, but not overpowered or bad for the game either. If there is any problem at all with Gladiator Beasts, it lies in Gyzarus - an easily-summoned double Monarch that transforms into Heraklinos later in the turn. Therefore, if Gladiator Beasts were to be given any banlist treatment, the only sensible solution would be to ban Gyzarus; if a problem exists, remove the problem instead of chipping away at its support. This change would not kill Gladiator Beasts - they had an SJC under their belts before Gyzarus was released, and that was without Chariot - but would remove the part of the deck that damages the game.

 

The banlist's purpose is to increase the impact of skill on the game and decrease the impact of luck. Shifting emphasis toward topdecking does the reverse.

 

Uh-huh. I meant by "OMG I TOPDECKED" is that it'll be a hard card to get which will' date=' yes, make the use of it less because it'd help in increasing the impact on skill.

[/quote']

 

A problem that occurs less often than it used to occur still occurs, and thus continues to be a problem.

 

Limiting is overrated, and Semi-Limiting is even more overrated. If a card damages the game, then ban it; if a card doesn't damage the game, keep it at 3. There are several exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, most cards in the game are 3-or-0 cards.

 

Cyber Dragon had a significant problem before Synchros came along in that it strongly biases the metagame toward a particular style of play - in this case, aggro. As long as Cyber Dragon remains around, defensive play is not viable. Not to mention that it also functions as monster removal (2100 ATK runs over most Level 4 or below monsters), tribute fodder, and a 1/4th LP swinger. It needs to be completely banned.

 

Ookazi hasn't done a whole lot in any recent meta.

 

Let's see here. I have some nice combo to do here' date=' but I bet this nice combo and my message I said aren't the main reason which I don't know of. Chain to opponent card: MST -> Jar of Greed -> Chain Detonation -> Chain Strike -> Summon Winged Kuriboh LV9

 

I use that combo a lot and it helps me win a lot. Ookazi stuff, I just gave you an example that Chain Link 3 of this card can do better than Meteor or Tremendous, which is why it's Semi'd.

[/quote']

 

I'm not dissing Chain Burn; indeed, I think that 3 Chain Strike would not be good for the game. I'm just saying that the easy 800 damage is the least of its power.

 

Care to explain why 2 is magically the perfect number?

 

Nobleman at 3:

 

-No one's gonna use it at 3

-If someone does' date=' it'd be broken because he'd RFP (and not destroy like Granmarg) f/d monsters (useful combo with Book of Moon) and all names with the same name. Imagine: Book of Moon a DAD, Nobleman it, bye all DADs. Hardcore. You'd ask why not use the same combo when it's limited, and I'll answer. Because drawing chances of it will decrease.

 

Nobleman at 1:

 

-Once when it was a staple, stapleness of it decreased because a spell card at 1 might be a hard one to get.

-With its good-combo'd effect and such, it'd be a waste of time to put it and then get it at the wrong time.

 

Nobleman at 2:

 

-Can be in a combo and can be good alone, because it's useful but better with combos.

[/quote']

 

Nobleman of Crossout will only remove the other copies of the removed monster from the deck if the monster in question was a Flip Effect Monster; therefore, only the Dark Armed Dragon on the field would get removed from play, not the second DAD in the deck.

 

I consider Nobleman to be one of the 3-or-0 cards; either its effect is acceptable, in which case we can allow it at 3, or its effect is not acceptable, in which case we ban it. The problem with Nobleman of Crossout is that, as long as it's around, Flip Effect Monsters cannot be viable - and they're handicapped enough already by their low speed - and a proper game does not turn its back on its basic game mechanics. (Plus, there's still Shield Crush, so banning Nobleman doesn't make flips/defense uncounterable.)

 

but why do you seem to think that Neos decks are a problem that the banlist needs to fix?

 

Just an example. I try to cover all the good uses I can think of in 5 seconds.

 

Ah' date=' I see.

 

But remember that a card can have good uses without being worthy of banlist attention. How "good" or "useful" a card is varies depending on the metagame, but short of some new combo or conflict popping up, how banworthy a card is tends to remain constant. For example, DAD would be banworthy in any meta, while BEWD would be fine in any meta.

 

You're caving in to Konami logic: that if a card is used' date=' there must be something wrong with it.

 

There's nothing unbalanced about ROTA.

[/quote']

 

Did I say the word 'unbalanced'? No. I meant by that, and if you read what I quoted to that you'd get it, is that JoC said it won't get much use when it would, especially for E-Hero and D-Hero decks, and getting Malicious/Stratos/Prisma.

 

My apologies; I misinterpreted your post and thought you were saying that ROTA should have stayed at 2.

 

"they can cost crisis"? Your words aren't coming out coherently.

 

You know what I meant.

 

Sorry' date=' I don't.

 

But the "you YCMers" phase is interesting. You from TCGPlayer?

 

Not really. I'm from DMU and some other OCG/TCG combined communities.

 

Ah. I just saw the goat attitude and got reminded of TCGPlayer. >_>

 

CCV has always been complained about and has never been good for the game. CCV is complained about now because "now" is a subset of "always".

 

I dislike CCV as much as all of you. But to discuss it now like always is becoming boring because Konami aren't doing anything about it.

 

And that's one of the reasons that Konami tends to make bad lists - it doesn't remove cards that need to be removed.

 

The Dark One complained that Gyzarus is legal' date=' which means that he wants it banned. Last time I checked, Semi-Limited cards are legal.

[/quote']

 

I thought that he meant 'Unlimited' by 'Legal'.

 

Ah, I see. Nope, he meant "not banned".

 

However, Gyzarus doesn't have any reason to be at 1 or 2, making it a 3-or-0 card, and so "unlimited" and "legal" could be used interchangeably with regard to him if it was understood that 1 and 2 were not worthy of consideration.

 

so suddenly bringing up Dasher as a problem seems rather self-contradictory.

 

I did not say D-Heroes were worthless without D-Draw + Disk Commander. When I said that stuff' date=' I meant Malicious's chances of going to grave have decreased because people use Disk Commander more. So, basically, Dasher is a problem.

[/quote']

 

So, how is Dasher a problem?

 

Pretending that the banlist is good won't magically make the banlist better.

 

It's a good banlist' date=' comparing to the others. I bet SOME other banlists were horrible comparing to this one.

[/quote']

 

Good point. I mean, they kept Black Luster Soldier legal for two whole years, didn't they?

 

Besides' date=' why would I pretend? Come to the fact, most YGO players protest against banlists for every little notch. However, this time I applaused Konami for their hard attempt to make it fair between OCG, TCG and banned/limited cards, for some cards to be allowed to be played again like Breaker and MR.

[/quote']

 

It actually isn't all that bad compared to their other lists - the majority of the changes were at least steps in the right direction - but, unfortunately, the two examples that you've brought up are two of the points on the list with which I disagree. The game doesn't need a skill-less topdeck like Monster Reborn that instantly gets thrown into every deck and provides a sizable advantage whenever it is drawn, and Breaker is not only an exceptional card - free destruction, high ATK for a Level 4, DARK, and highly splashable - but also poses a problem to the game by precluding the viability of non-chainable spells and traps (a problem that MST does not cause due to its ability to prenegate - I'd like to see MST go to 3).

 

However, Konami probably won't ever stop spinning Breaker around the revolving door every six months, and is unlikely to ban all three of the generic revival cards - and, thanks to cards like Brionac, Monster Reborn is no longer the most broken of the three.

 

Nobody ever said that the meta is harsh or ruins the game; you seem to be transitioning from argumentum ad hominem to "Straw Man" here.

 

Some people want CyDra @ 0' date=' e.g. Star.

[/quote']

 

Me too.

 

I don't see CyDra as a major broken card as some other cards' date=' like CCV that you were talking about earlier.

[/quote']

 

Cyber Dragon's probably less of a problem than CCV, but then again, Dark Hole is less of a problem than Raigeki.

 

Cyber Dragon is unlike most banworthy cards in that it is banworthy neither because it gives too great a reward for too small an investment (Raigeki) nor because it is involved in an easy OTK (Butterfly Dagger - Elma). Rather, it imposes too great a bias on the metagame by emphasizing aggro greatly at the expense of stall, since any defending monster is more than nullified by a Cyber Dragon popping out.

 

Also' date=' just because a card is helpful and splashable (like Monster Reborn, for example) does not mean it should remain legal. Ring of Destruction and Dark Hole are also helpful and splashable, remember.

[/quote']

 

Some cards are completely broken, some are "just for good help". Raigeki and Vortex differ, because Vortex requires face-ups and a discard, in opposite to the destroy-em-all Raigeki, which makes Vortex good help but at the same time limited and not touched.

 

True, but remember why Vortex is more balanced than Raigeki. Its discard cost means that it does not automatically pay for itself; its face-ups only condition means that it does not suit any situation that involves monsters; and it punishes aggressive overextension without punishing the simple use of monsters.

 

Monster Reborn can be used at virtually any time (if it's the first turn of the duel, then you can afford to keep it in your hand for one more turn until the graves fill), always pays for itself (and more, assuming the monster you snag has a half-decent effect or can run over an opponent's monster), can suit any situation (since you can take any monster from any graveyard in either battle position), and has no additional cost (card effects like Tyrant Dragon notwithstanding). Unless you run HOTU-Exodia, there's no reason not to throw it into virtually every deck you build. If one player is lucky enough to draw Monster Reborn and the other player is not, then the unlucky player falls behind significantly for no reason other than luck - and the banlist's goal is to emphasize skill at the expense of luck.

 

We have balanced recursion in the game. We have advantage-costing recursion like Shallow Grave, critter recursion like Limit Reverse, low-level recursion like Angel Lift (or whatever it's called in the TCG), vanilla recursion like Birthright, fusion recursion like Re-Fusion, Synchro recursion like that one card whose name I can't remember, and even themed recursion like Fear Monger and Glorious Illusion. We don't need Monster Reborn's lucksack recursion.

 

On the subject of recursion and the banlist, though, I'd like to have seen Magician of Faith come back instead of Breaker. The costless spell revival seems like a lot, but then you need to consider that it comes at the cost of speed. In any meta, no matter how fast or slow, speed is important, and in a fast one like this with so many field-nukers, speed becomes even more important; a Flip Effect Monster doesn't have an especially high chance of being able to use its effect nowadays. Unlike DMoC, MoF is slow, is not DARK, doesn't work with Trade-In, doesn't have a wide variety of OTK's, can't be recycled easily, and can't attack and kill virtually everything in the game. There are ways to speed her up, like Book of Taiyou (why isn't it called Book of Sun in the TCG?), or to re-use her, like Book of Moon, or to search her, like Apprentice Magician, but not in any way that would allow her to be abused.

[Synchronized]

Emperor Godbot, you're insulting the wrong person.

 

See, I'm one of YCM's worst duelists.

 

You saying that I'm not good at the game doesn't really say anything for the YCM forum because I'm nowhere near as good as JesusofChaos, Crab Helmet, Cheese Pirate, and a lot of other members on the YCM forum.

 

The Labyrinth Tank thing was obviously a joke.

 

I have been a moderator longer than any active moderator on YCM, and you think I should be demoted? You don't need to be good at Graphic Design to be a good Graphic Design Moderator. I know how to enforce the rules, and that is what matters when it comes to being a moderator.

 

I post in TCG Discussion because I like to give my opinions on cards. Just because I give my opinion on a card doesn't mean I'm right.

 

You're A DMU player? There's a DMU player that doesn't think Judgment Dragon should be banned. That explains why a lot of DMU's duelists aren't very good.

 

I don't like the Meta because it's boring. I prefer to make creative Decks and have fun dueling. You shouldn't take the game so seriously.

 

I didn't even read all of the stuff that you said because I didn't feel like reading a long paragraph of information that was probably wrong.

 

You could learn a thing or two from Crab Helmet.

[The Dark One]

' pid='1044751' dateline='1220065302']

Emperor Godbot' date=' you're insulting the wrong person.

 

See, I'm one of YCM's worst duelists.

 

You saying that I'm not good at the game doesn't really say anything for the YCM forum because I'm nowhere near as good as JesusofChaos, Crab Helmet, Cheese Pirate, and a lot of other members on the YCM forum.

 

The Labyrinth Tank thing was obviously a joke.

 

I have been a moderator longer than any active moderator on YCM, and you think I should be demoted? You don't need to be good at Graphic Design to be a good Graphic Design Moderator. I know how to enforce the rules, and that is what matters when it comes to being a moderator.

 

I post in TCG Discussion because I like to give my opinions on cards. Just because I give my opinion on a card doesn't mean I'm right.

 

You're A DMU player? There's a DMU player that doesn't think Judgment Dragon should be banned. That explains why a lot of DMU's duelists aren't very good.

 

I don't like the Meta because it's boring. I prefer to make creative Decks and have fun dueling. You shouldn't take the game so seriously.

 

I didn't even read all of the stuff that you said because I didn't feel like reading a long paragraph of information that was probably wrong.

 

You could learn a thing or two from Crab Helmet.

[/quote']

 

You didn't mention me? :(

[Synchronized]

' pid='1044751' dateline='1220065302']

Emperor Godbot' date=' you're insulting the wrong person.

 

See, I'm one of YCM's worst duelists.

 

You saying that I'm not good at the game doesn't really say anything for the YCM forum because I'm nowhere near as good as JesusofChaos, Crab Helmet, Cheese Pirate, and a lot of other members on the YCM forum.

 

The Labyrinth Tank thing was obviously a joke.

 

I have been a moderator longer than any active moderator on YCM, and you think I should be demoted? You don't need to be good at Graphic Design to be a good Graphic Design Moderator. I know how to enforce the rules, and that is what matters when it comes to being a moderator.

 

I post in TCG Discussion because I like to give my opinions on cards. Just because I give my opinion on a card doesn't mean I'm right.

 

You're A DMU player? There's a DMU player that doesn't think Judgment Dragon should be banned. That explains why a lot of DMU's duelists aren't very good.

 

I don't like the Meta because it's boring. I prefer to make creative Decks and have fun dueling. You shouldn't take the game so seriously.

 

I didn't even read all of the stuff that you said because I didn't feel like reading a long paragraph of information that was probably wrong.

 

You could learn a thing or two from Crab Helmet.

[/quote']

 

You didn't mention me? :(

 

If it matters, I have a great amount of respect for you because you are have a lot of knowledge about the card game and you are very nice and helpful to people.

[Indestructible Chaoserver]

Too bad glad beasts weren't hurt but oh well. Cydra to one is silly.

[Tabris]

Crappy list is still crappy.

[Emperor Godbot]

[spoiler=Off-Topic Reply to Star]

See' date=' I'm one of YCM's worst duelists.

[/quote']

 

And you must also know that this is a Yugioh forum, and weak YGO players shouldn't get promoted to moderation just because they can enforce rules. But, since you're a GFX mod, I'll just ignore this thing I said.

 

The Labyrinth Tank thing was obviously a joke.

 

And an off-topic post' date=' that seeminlgy you weren't talked to about, while one off-topic point of the points of my long discussion just about the list and the opinions about it is being complained about.

 

I have been a moderator longer than any active moderator on YCM, and you think I should be demoted?

 

Long terms in moderation doesn't mean you're a good moderator or something, if it's still being debated that it's a mistake. It's like CCV.

 

You don't need to be good at Graphic Design to be a good Graphic Design Moderator.

 

YES YOU NEED TO. Because a moderator's duty is to also help people and assist them' date=' and make him/herself a role model in Graphics for everyone to become like him/her. But, if the GFX mod isn't good himself, what would really encourage the members into that subject? It will only produce bad GFX and even lower than the level of that mod.

 

I know how to enforce the rules, and that is what matters when it comes to being a moderator.

 

I also know how to enforce the rules. I bet 50% of members on this forum know how to enforce rules, it's not a special thing to do nor a talent or the only duty of a moderator. When will you guys realize that a forum isn't just about hierarchy and limited discussion? I see no reason for you, being the holy better one than the others, who maybe 30% of them know how to enforce them even better than you, to get moderation status at a forum discussing something you're not good at. It just makes the forum worse, and for a large forum with a large team like this, I wonder how YCMaker didn't demote you yet.

 

I post in TCG Discussion because I like to give my opinions on cards. Just because I give my opinion on a card doesn't mean I'm right.

 

When you give your opinions' date=' and get faced by another debater, don't act like a child. It makes everyone laugh at you. No one in this debate is fully right or fully wrong. Me and Crab Helmet both had our mistakes, and we both apologized about our wrong points, and for me, the bad comments. So, basically, saying that I shouldn't reply to you and debate you (OK, I was harsh) because you aren't always right is a weak way to gain pity from people.

 

You're A DMU player? There's a DMU player that doesn't think Judgment Dragon should be banned. That explains why a lot of DMU's duelists aren't very good.

 

If I were to do the same, and make you as an example of YCM's duelist level, that'd hurt YCMers, because no one person describes the whole forum out of his mistakes. Another democracy lesson you YCMers should know. You should have the opinions of everyone combined, and know that no one person or no individual created what you're on alone. Everyone contributed as it seems, so stop being slaves to everyone who makes good things to you, and think that all communities work that way. Two of the admins of DMU, namely Soul and Harvey Dent, do actually argue sometimes about the game and have different opinions, so does the owner and every player, and they usually debate the TCG in a way better way that actually provides us with good combos, decks and strategies.

 

I don't like the Meta because it's boring. I prefer to make creative Decks and have fun dueling. You shouldn't take the game so seriously.

 

It's your choice to like the Meta or not' date=' and I can't control that choice of yours. However, when you're in one of YGO's TCG forums, you shouldn't discuss the game in general and the Meta and especially the banlists just because of your sole opinion that Meta is boring and shouldn't exist. FYI, it will always exist. And I'm not taking things seriously, nor prohibiting your holy fun in dueling. I do have fun when I win, and see that my strategies that I use my mind in them are actually working out and getting me applauds. That's the real fun: Using mind and skill, and living up to the Meta.

 

I didn't even read all of the stuff that you said because I didn't feel like reading a long paragraph of information that was probably wrong.

 

You should not debate me if you haven't read what I said. That makes you more of an ignorant, arrogant and disrespectful person. When Crab Helmet read my ROTA comment wrong, he apologized. If you have any sort of debating and good manners, you should apologize for your ignorance to my comments and replying to me without having something to reply to. I don't care about your apology because replying to something you haven't seen is just plainly stupid.

 

You could learn a thing or two from Crab Helmet.

 

I can learn a ton from this great moderator you have. He calmed down my bad comments' date=' the bad thing about my debate, and he is one of the best YGO players I've ever met.

 

 

 

King of the Swamp and other Fusion Substitute Monsters cannot be used to summon Gladiator Beast Gyzarus. Prisma only works because its name changes.

 

Right, I actually knew that, but forgot. Thanks for reminding me. :) I'm a kind-of rushy player and debater.

 

If there is any problem at all with Gladiator Beasts' date=' it lies in Gyzarus

[/quote']

 

You're right there. And yes, like you said and I didn't quote, Gyzarus's a 3-or-0 card.

 

This change would not kill Gladiator Beasts - they had an SJC under their belts before Gyzarus was released' date=' and that was without Chariot - but would remove the part of the deck that damages the game.

[/quote']

 

Gladiator Beasts without Gyzarus aren't that bad, but also aren't that good. Yes, they do have effective monsters, and nice effects, but it was Gyzarus the card to make them popular and more used. GB might be raised up from its former "Just for fun deck" if Gyzarus was gone, but it won't have the status it has now. And that's not a bad thing.

 

If a card damages the game' date=' then ban it; if a card doesn't damage the game, keep it at 3. There are several exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, most cards in the game are 3-or-0 cards.

[/quote']

 

Limiting and Semi-Limiting is important. Cards like DAD are maybe 3-or-0, but cards like Allure aren't, for example. Allure is best at Semi-Limitation, because the opponent wouldn't have too much draw power in a deck that already promotes broken cards like DAD and Shadowpriestess Burn.

 

Cyber Dragon had a significant problem before Synchros came along in that it strongly biases the metagame toward a particular style of play - in this case' date=' aggro. As long as Cyber Dragon remains around, defensive play is not viable. Not to mention that it also functions as monster removal (2100 ATK runs over most Level 4 or below monsters), tribute fodder, and a 1/4th LP swinger. It needs to be completely banned.

[/quote']

 

Indeed, CyDra is a problem for the TCG. I think it's good Konami Limited it because as a significant anime card and with large popularity, Kazuki and creators of anime do actually plead to Konami and the TCG companies that run YGO to keep some of the significant cards in order for people to keep remembering the anime. Besides the artists being pleased off that, it also brings good commercial use to the show. So, basically, if Konami wasn't going to limit CyDra, or show some enforcement to the artists, CyDra could've still stayed @2 or @3.

 

I consider Nobleman to be one of the 3-or-0 cards; either its effect is acceptable' date=' in which case we can allow it at 3, or its effect is not acceptable, in which case we ban it.

[/quote']

 

Wrong. If it was banned, that'd be just too over the top. Nobleman as a card, is a way good card to counter Flip effect monsters and particularly any face-down monster, but it doesn't deserve a ban. It doesn't also need to be at 3 so that Flip effect monsters will be 90% not used anymore, because the player knows the opponent's got him a Nobleman somewhere. Flip-Up decks, which I consider good, died because of the existence of Nobleman, Granmarg and Shield Crush, but Nobleman still is the best one between the three and thus should be semi-limited for, well, not meaning the meme but "great justice". xD

 

But remember that a card can have good uses without being worthy of banlist attention. How "good" or "useful" a card is varies depending on the metagame' date=' but short of some new combo or conflict popping up, how banworthy a card is tends to remain constant. For example, DAD would be banworthy in any meta, while BEWD would be fine in any meta.

[/quote']

 

When I state many good uses, and remember I only let myself have 5 seconds for all the good uses I can think of, that means that this card has global uses for a number of themes.

 

And that's one of the reasons that Konami tends to make bad lists - it doesn't remove cards that need to be removed.

 

It's been already debated 4-5 times before in 4-5 former banlists that CCV should be exterminated off. Yet' date=' there was no response. I'm most likely telling players to just "lose hope, don't use it, and get over it". If we'd make some kind of player retraction against CCV, maybe Konami will hear, but individual complaints won't be really that effective.

 

So, how is Dasher a problem?

 

Let's just state it as a good card, not a problem like I previously said. With Gate/Reasoning, you can get to summon it because the opponent would most likely declare a common level: 4. Woohoo. Special Summoned Dasher, a 2100/1000 monster, similar to CyDra (without the 600 additional DEF). Now, you can just sack off any monster on your field and let Dasher be powerful more than BEWD (reminds me of Obelisk), then you can strike. If your Dasher was countered and destroyed, or attacked and destroyed by its asking-for-it effect, you can Special Summon any monster you get to draw with its effect, just once. With Gate/Reasoning and this monster, tributes are no longer needed for strong tribute monsters such as BEWD, Neos and other.

 

Without its summon by Gate/Reasoning, there are many other ways that are less useful than these two. Thus, to bring back the idea of that Tribute Monsters do actually need tributes, these cards were limited for players to actually pay some costs.

 

However' date=' Konami probably won't ever stop spinning Breaker around the revolving door every six months

[/quote']

 

They won't. At the requests of Kazuki and other artists, broken cards and significant good cards (Ya know Yugi beat Weevil with Breaker! =O) will remain swinging around the revolving door at the request of these artists who don't give a damn about what's going on in the game.

 

On the subject of recursion and the banlist' date=' though, I'd like to have seen Magician of Faith come back instead of Breaker. The costless spell revival seems like a lot, but then you need to consider that it comes at the cost of speed. In any meta, no matter how fast or slow, speed is important, and in a fast one like this with so many field-nukers, speed becomes even more important; a Flip Effect Monster doesn't have an especially high chance of being able to use its effect nowadays. Unlike DMoC, MoF is slow, is not DARK, doesn't work with Trade-In, doesn't have a wide variety of OTK's, can't be recycled easily, and can't attack and kill virtually everything in the game. There are ways to speed her up, like Book of Taiyou (why isn't it called Book of Sun in the TCG?), or to re-use her, like Book of Moon, or to search her, like Apprentice Magician, but not in any way that would allow her to be abused.

[/quote']

 

You're right about MoF. It would've been way better to return her back instead of Breaker. It's a useful, nice card and it's actually fair. And it being at Limited is just the best choice.

 

-----

 

More Personal Comments:

 

• OFF-TOPIC: Democracy is good for the forums. And so is intelligence and forum socialism. I suggest you stop the hierarchy and slavery concept of this forum, and worshipping YCMaker as I've seen in some threads. On other sites I know, the admin is one of our friends and talks with us constantly. That's how it should be here.
  
• Crab Helmet is a good Yugioh moderator, and he has discussed the banlist well, so if you support my opinions here in this topic, support his too.
  
• Yu-Gi-Oh! will always have Meta and there'll be always complaints and controversy about it. Thus, it's useless to say that the Meta is boring here, I consider it spam.
  

 

 

Sincerely,

A YGO Player

[「tea.leaf」]

[*]OFF-TOPIC: Democracy is good for the forums. And so is intelligence and forum socialism. I suggest you stop the hierarchy and slavery concept of this forum' date=' and worshipping YCMaker as I've seen in some threads. On other sites I know, the admin is one of our friends and talks with us constantly. That's how it should be here.[/quote']

 

Democracy would give you a forum with an incompetent Staff Team, whose only credential is popularity.

 

[*]Crab Helmet is a good Yugioh moderator' date=' and he has discussed the banlist well, so if you support my opinions here in this topic, support his too.[/quote']

 

Excuse me, but I have a brain, and I like using it formulate my own thoughts before mindlessly agreeing.

[Emperor Godbot]

[*]OFF-TOPIC: Democracy is good for the forums. And so is intelligence and forum socialism. I suggest you stop the hierarchy and slavery concept of this forum' date=' and worshipping YCMaker as I've seen in some threads. On other sites I know, the admin is one of our friends and talks with us constantly. That's how it should be here.[/quote']

 

Democracy would give you a forum with an incompetent Staff Team, whose only credential is popularity.

 

[*]Crab Helmet is a good Yugioh moderator' date=' and he has discussed the banlist well, so if you support my opinions here in this topic, support his too.[/quote']

 

Excuse me, but I have a brain, and I like using it formulate my own thoughts before mindlessly agreeing.

 

Democracy does help. And when I said "if you support me", that means I'm only talking to people who support me. Stop acting aggressively to me for no goddamn reason.

[CrabHelmet]

This change would not kill Gladiator Beasts - they had an SJC under their belts before Gyzarus was released' date=' and that was without Chariot - but would remove the part of the deck that damages the game.

[/quote']

 

Gladiator Beasts without Gyzarus aren't that bad, but also aren't that good. Yes, they do have effective monsters, and nice effects, but it was Gyzarus the card to make them popular and more used. GB might be raised up from its former "Just for fun deck" if Gyzarus was gone, but it won't have the status it has now. And that's not a bad thing.

 

The problem is that Konami keeps creating cards like Gyzarus, Judgment Dragoon, and DAD. It seems to think that every theme now has the right to have a field-nuking god in its deck. >_<

 

If a card damages the game' date=' then ban it; if a card doesn't damage the game, keep it at 3. There are several exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, most cards in the game are 3-or-0 cards.

[/quote']

 

Limiting and Semi-Limiting is important. Cards like DAD are maybe 3-or-0, but cards like Allure aren't, for example. Allure is best at Semi-Limitation, because the opponent wouldn't have too much draw power in a deck that already promotes broken cards like DAD and Shadowpriestess Burn.

 

Since DAD should be banned anyhow (for obvious reasons), Allure's involvement with DAD isn't a real issue. As with Shadowpriestess Burn, isn't that the one that does a lot of damage by turning Dimension Fusion and RFTDD into 4000 damage? With them banned, it's not so big an issue.

 

Allure does have one of the most heavily debated statuses right now. Most people want it back at 3 with the broken elements of the DAD deck (like DAD, DMoC, Disk, Dimension Fusion, RFTDD, and Darklord Zerato), but some want it banned - and, as in the case with Cyber Dragon, it's not because it promotes OTK's or provides too great a reward for too small an investment but rather because of its influence on the format:

 

There's nothing whatsoever about Allure that is overpowered. However' date=' the problem is its influence on the format: it incites speed.

 

Note that, unlike Trade-In, whose use comes at the cost of an unusual deck balance (running larger numbers of Level 8 monsters than one otherwise would is mandatory), and Destiny Draw, which forces the use of a specific theme (and without Disk, the Perfect Circle engine is dead), Allure doesn't have a real drawback; it simply requires you to run DARKs. DARKs are not a specific theme; they are an extremely broad range of monsters containing a large proportion of the best and most splashable monsters in the game - even if we ignore bannable monsters like DMoC, Sangan, DAD, Darklord Zerato, Snipe Hunter, Disk Commander, and so on, we still have Jinzo, Spirit Reaper, Caius, D.D. Survivor, and so on and so forth. DARK has always been the best attribute. It doesn't come at the cost of an unusual deck balance, since DARKs, unlike Level 8's, don't have problems with easy summoning, and most decks already run DARKs.

 

Because of this, Allure can do - and has done - something that the other Discard 1 Draw 2 cards cannot do. Specifically, its presence causes the entire format's speed to increase. It makes the entire game faster, and thus all decks, if they want to survive, must similarly become faster. I don't just mean slightly faster; I think we all remember the post-PTDN state of the TCG. Robbed of the easy methods of OTK, it would not be quite so fast, but the speed boost would still be easily noticeable. (For contrast, observe the post-PTDN state of the OCG, where, without Allure, the format never became turbocharged.)

 

Now, observe that the fastest formats are bad for the game. They depend on godhands and don't give players a chance to show any skill, since the duel ends after the first few turns.

 

Allure is in no way overpowered. However, its presence still has a negative influence on the game, and that's why it should go.

 

The question has been raised as to whether Allure of Darkness would need to be banned if we had Allure of Lightness, Allure of Waterness, and so on for the other attributes. In actual fact, this is an even less ambiguous case than the one that actually faces us. The presence of all of these Allures ensures that essentially every deck gets a speed boost. That would be far more of a mindless increase in format speed than the mere presence of Allure of Darkness would be; instead of many, many decks getting speed boosts and the others being forced to try to keep up, every single deck in the game gets a speed boost. In this case, all or most of the Allures would be banned; perhaps one or two for weaker attributes, such as Allure of Windness or Allure of Waterness, would remain, as such attributes have significantly fewer top splashable monsters and therefore using them would, as with Trade-In, put a balancing strain on the deck.

[/quote']

 

I quote myself because I'm too lazy to type up the argument again. >_>

 

Cyber Dragon had a significant problem before Synchros came along in that it strongly biases the metagame toward a particular style of play - in this case' date=' aggro. As long as Cyber Dragon remains around, defensive play is not viable. Not to mention that it also functions as monster removal (2100 ATK runs over most Level 4 or below monsters), tribute fodder, and a 1/4th LP swinger. It needs to be completely banned.

[/quote']

 

Indeed, CyDra is a problem for the TCG. I think it's good Konami Limited it because as a significant anime card and with large popularity, Kazuki and creators of anime do actually plead to Konami and the TCG companies that run YGO to keep some of the significant cards in order for people to keep remembering the anime. Besides the artists being pleased off that, it also brings good commercial use to the show. So, basically, if Konami wasn't going to limit CyDra, or show some enforcement to the artists, CyDra could've still stayed @2 or @3.

 

Perhaps, with GX finished both in OCGLand and TCGLand (IIRC, 4Kids isn't going to dub the last season), Konami will be able to let go of its GX cards. It's already managed to get rid of Destiny Hero - Disk Commander, although admittedly Disk wasn't featured nearly as prominently as Cydra.

 

It's just unfortunate that most of the Cyber Dragon family is banworthy - particularly because they're each banworthy for a different reason.

 

Also, note that, even though I basically want to see the Cyber Dragon family murdered, my favourite deck that I use has always been Red-Eyes Chimeratech (which, unfortunately, I'll need to abandon in September).

 

I consider Nobleman to be one of the 3-or-0 cards; either its effect is acceptable' date=' in which case we can allow it at 3, or its effect is not acceptable, in which case we ban it.

[/quote']

 

Wrong. If it was banned, that'd be just too over the top. Nobleman as a card, is a way good card to counter Flip effect monsters and particularly any face-down monster, but it doesn't deserve a ban. It doesn't also need to be at 3 so that Flip effect monsters will be 90% not used anymore, because the player knows the opponent's got him a Nobleman somewhere. Flip-Up decks, which I consider good, died because of the existence of Nobleman, Granmarg and Shield Crush, but Nobleman still is the best one between the three and thus should be semi-limited for, well, not meaning the meme but "great justice". xD

 

The underlying weakness in Flip Effect Monsters is that they are slow and counterable. They'll always have that weakness; there's nothing that can be done about that. It's not just Nobleman, Shield Crush, and Granmarg that can handle Flips, but also the three best Monarchs (Raiza, Caius, and Kuraz) and the worst Monarch (Zaborg). Each competitive deck has a built-in way to take care of a face-down Flip on the field.

 

Nobleman would be fine if it didn't pull more copies from hand/deck. But because it does, its very existence means that a single copy of it can screw over an entire deck, depending on the circumstances.

 

Since we're on the subject of Flip Effect Monsters, however, I'd just like to say that Morphing Jar should be banned. Just look at the part where it says FLIP: Draw 5 cards. That should be reason enough.

 

But remember that a card can have good uses without being worthy of banlist attention. How "good" or "useful" a card is varies depending on the metagame' date=' but short of some new combo or conflict popping up, how banworthy a card is tends to remain constant. For example, DAD would be banworthy in any meta, while BEWD would be fine in any meta.

[/quote']

 

When I state many good uses, and remember I only let myself have 5 seconds for all the good uses I can think of, that means that this card has global uses for a number of themes.

 

But note that a card with a wide variety of uses (Magician of Faith) can be perfectly fine, while a card with only one real use (Judgment Dragoon) can be banworthy.

 

And that's one of the reasons that Konami tends to make bad lists - it doesn't remove cards that need to be removed.

 

It's been already debated 4-5 times before in 4-5 former banlists that CCV should be exterminated off. Yet' date=' there was no response. I'm most likely telling players to just "lose hope, don't use it, and get over it". If we'd make some kind of player retraction against CCV, maybe Konami will hear, but individual complaints won't be really that effective.

[/quote']

 

Not that Konami will listen to this either, but DDV and EEV should be banned too.

 

So' date=' how is Dasher a problem?

[/quote']

 

Let's just state it as a good card, not a problem like I previously said. With Gate/Reasoning, you can get to summon it because the opponent would most likely declare a common level: 4. Woohoo. Special Summoned Dasher, a 2100/1000 monster, similar to CyDra (without the 600 additional DEF). Now, you can just sack off any monster on your field and let Dasher be powerful more than BEWD (reminds me of Obelisk), then you can strike. If your Dasher was countered and destroyed, or attacked and destroyed by its asking-for-it effect, you can Special Summon any monster you get to draw with its effect, just once. With Gate/Reasoning and this monster, tributes are no longer needed for strong tribute monsters such as BEWD, Neos and other.

 

Without its summon by Gate/Reasoning, there are many other ways that are less useful than these two. Thus, to bring back the idea of that Tribute Monsters do actually need tributes, these cards were limited for players to actually pay some costs.

 

Giant vanilla's haven't been tribute summoned for a long time, with Ancient Rules, Birthright, and O - Oversoul available. But Dasher works with non-vanillas, so that's irrelevant, and you were just giving examples anyhow.

 

At this point, I don't see the Special Summon from the hand as a serious problem.

 

However' date=' Konami probably won't ever stop spinning Breaker around the revolving door every six months

[/quote']

 

They won't. At the requests of Kazuki and other artists, broken cards and significant good cards (Ya know Yugi beat Weevil with Breaker! =O) will remain swinging around the revolving door at the request of these artists who don't give a damn about what's going on in the game.

 

DUROH! MONSTA KADO!

 

On the subject of recursion and the banlist' date=' though, I'd like to have seen Magician of Faith come back instead of Breaker. The costless spell revival seems like a lot, but then you need to consider that it comes at the cost of speed. In any meta, no matter how fast or slow, speed is important, and in a fast one like this with so many field-nukers, speed becomes even more important; a Flip Effect Monster doesn't have an especially high chance of being able to use its effect nowadays. Unlike DMoC, MoF is slow, is not DARK, doesn't work with Trade-In, doesn't have a wide variety of OTK's, can't be recycled easily, and can't attack and kill virtually everything in the game. There are ways to speed her up, like Book of Taiyou (why isn't it called Book of Sun in the TCG?), or to re-use her, like Book of Moon, or to search her, like Apprentice Magician, but not in any way that would allow her to be abused.

[/quote']

 

You're right about MoF. It would've been way better to return her back instead of Breaker. It's a useful, nice card and it's actually fair. And it being at Limited is just the best choice.

 

I wouldn't say that Limited is the best choice, but it's the best that Konami is likely to give us any time soon.

 

I would say that the best choice is 3. I have never heard or concocted a convincing argument that Magician of Faith belongs at less than 3. And note that, since I see Magician of Faith as being a 3-or-0 card and see no reason for it to be banned, 3 seems to be the logical choice.

 

(I know I use "3-or-0" a lot, but that's because most cards are 3-or-0. The cards in the current card pool that belong at 1 can essentially be divided into three categories - the Heavy Storm category, the Night Assailant category, and the Twin-Headed Behemoth category - depending on why they belong at 1. When it comes to Semi-Limiting, there is a theoretical Thunder Dragon category; however, I know of no cards in our current card pool that need Semi-Limiting.)

 

OFF-TOPIC: Democracy is good for the forums. And so is intelligence and forum socialism. I suggest you stop the hierarchy and slavery concept of this forum' date=' and worshipping YCMaker as I've seen in some threads. On other sites I know, the admin is one of our friends and talks with us constantly. That's how it should be here.

[/quote']

 

YCMaker doesn't really run things around here; he hosts the site and updates the card maker, but he rarely does things regarding the forums. Forum rules and policy are largely determined by the moderators (which resulted in a small conflict here; Tea Leaf and I are the two forum mods, but have opposing moderation styles). Even the appointment of new moderators or promotion of moderators to Super Moderators is essentially decided by group decision of the existing moderators, and then someone just goes and tells YCMaker who we want moved where.

 

Crab Helmet is a good Yugioh moderator' date=' and he has discussed the banlist well, so if you support my opinions here in this topic, support his too.

[/quote']

 

This board has too many sheep already without being told to be sheep. >_>

 

Yu-Gi-Oh! will always have Meta and there'll be always complaints and controversy about it. Thus' date=' it's useless to say that the Meta is boring here, I consider it spam.

[/quote']

 

(Interestingly, some argue that a meta with only one or two top-tier decks is optimal, despite being boring, as additional top-tier decks would turn it into a game of Rock-Paper-Scissors.)

 

But one meta can be better than another, depending on the banlist. The outcome of a match is determined by two factors:

 

1) Skill

2) Luck

 

Here, "Skill" includes deck construction, playing ability, and side-decking.

 

The goal of the banlist is to ensure that Skill has the most effect on the outcome of any given match, and that Luck has the least effect. Thus, the best banlist is the one under which Skill matters most and Luck matters least. The "best" meta is simply whatever meta exists under such a list.

 

In other news, ban Royal Impregnable Fortress.

[Phantom Roxas]

*Watches debate while eating popcorn*

[.:pyramid:.]

*watches debate and yu-gi-oh 5d's*

 

~ back to topic ~

 

this is why we need a different banlist from the ocg, because ude see solving ocg problems as sorting out tgc problems in the future when we get some more of the ocg cards XD

[「tea.leaf」]

[*]OFF-TOPIC: Democracy is good for the forums. And so is intelligence and forum socialism. I suggest you stop the hierarchy and slavery concept of this forum' date=' and worshipping YCMaker as I've seen in some threads. On other sites I know, the admin is one of our friends and talks with us constantly. That's how it should be here.[/quote']

 

Democracy would give you a forum with an incompetent Staff Team, whose only credential is popularity.

 

Democracy does help.

 

In what way? How does a democratic system of ruling help at all?

[Static]

DUROH! MONSTA KADO!

 

+1 for lulz.

 

Damn, can't give out any more ratings :/

[Phantom Roxas]

In other news' date=' ban Royal Impregnable Fortress.

[/quote']

 

Why ban it? It's the best thing to stop Dark Armed Dragon Decks.

[Red Ryu]

Perhaps' date=' with GX finished both in OCGLand and TCGLand (IIRC, [b']4Kids isn't going to dub the last season[/b])

 

Not quite,

 

They aren't dubbing the last season atm, because the dub staff is putting all of it's attention on 5D's. From what Janime forums are telling me, 4kids isn't going to stop dubbing and ignore the series moving on to 5D's. They're just getting ready for 5D's putting GX on hold.

 

In other news' date=' ban Royal Impregnable Fortress.

[/quote']

 

Why ban it? It's the best thing to stop Dark Armed Dragon Decks.

 

It creates infinite loops which lead to OTK/FTKs.

[CrabHelmet]

In other news' date=' ban Royal Impregnable Fortress.

[/quote']

 

Why ban it? It's the best thing to stop Dark Armed Dragon Decks.

 

I've got an even better idea for stopping Dark Armed Dragon decks. It's a cunning plan that requires a great shift in general game strategy, but it is truly brilliant in its simplicity of execution. I call it "banning Dark Armed Dragon". I don't have time to explain the details, however.

[Darkerai]

You know at first I was confused as to why they did nothing to GB but then I relised that 1. We still have 3x deck lockdown to defend against it and 2. it will be really cheap once their $400 win condition is released as a promo...so either side deck for them or build their cheep as free deck.

[The Dark One]

Glads are easy to beat. The problem is an anti-meta deck devoted to beating Glads will be quickly slaughtered by the DAD and Lightsworn decks at tier 1.5. That's why Glads are good, because they happen to be good against the other big decks, and any of the deck designs which could defeat them are then beaten up by the Dragons.

 

We don't need Impregnable Fortress OR Deck Lockdown to hit Glads, but we do need Gyzarus banned, not to balance the deck, though it most likely would, but because the card is simply broken.

[Darkerai]

Glads are easy to beat. The problem is an anti-meta deck devoted to beating Glads will be quickly slaughtered by the DAD and Lightsworn decks at tier 1.5. That's why Glads are good' date=' because they happen to be good against the other big decks, and any of the deck designs which could defeat them are then beaten up by the Dragons.

 

We don't need Impregnable Fortress OR Deck Lockdown to hit Glads, but we do need Gyzarus banned, not to balance the deck, though it most likely would, but because the card is simply broken.

[/quote']

 

Just because a deck can beat Glads does nott mean it has to be devoted to the purpose. You can just make a macro deck to take care of DAD and Judgment then add the Glad kill cards to the side deck.

*lets go of Staples easy button*

[Phantom Roxas]

In other news' date=' ban Royal Impregnable Fortress.

[/quote']

 

Why ban it? It's the best thing to stop Dark Armed Dragon Decks.

 

I've got an even better idea for stopping Dark Armed Dragon decks. It's a cunning plan that requires a great shift in general game strategy, but it is truly brilliant in its simplicity of execution. I call it "banning Dark Armed Dragon". I don't have time to explain the details, however.

 

But until that day comes, RIF should remain legal.