Jump to content

Counterability [DISC]


Recommended Posts

If a card's effect enables more cards to counter it(ig. Spirit Reaper)' date=' it works towards making it more balanced.

[/quote']

 

You picked, like, the worst example ever.

 

Use Magic Drain instead.

Spirit Reaper's effect only does very well in the current meta. And the meta effects a card's playability, while the card game in general effects a card's balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a card's effect enables more cards to counter it(ig. Spirit Reaper)' date=' it works towards making it more balanced.

[/quote']

 

You picked, like, the worst example ever.

 

Use Magic Drain instead.

Spirit Reaper's effect only does very well in the current meta. And the meta effects a card's playability, while the card game in general effects a card's balance.

 

The vast majority of targeting effects don't allow the target to remain face-up on the field, even under an improved banlist. Of the ones that do, many - Soul Exchange, Mind Control, Mark of the Rose, and so on - turn a perceived negative into a positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a card's effect enables more cards to counter it(ig. Spirit Reaper)' date=' it works towards making it more balanced.

[/quote']

 

You picked, like, the worst example ever.

 

Use Magic Drain instead.

Spirit Reaper's effect only does very well in the current meta. And the meta effects a card's playability, while the card game in general effects a card's balance.

 

The vast majority of targeting effects don't allow the target to remain face-up on the field, even under an improved banlist. Of the ones that do, many - Soul Exchange, Mind Control, Mark of the Rose, and so on - turn a perceived negative into a positive.

 

That is only true for the current meta. There are a lot of cards that would destroy Spirit Reaper via his own effect, but not a lot are used in this meta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a card's effect enables more cards to counter it(ig. Spirit Reaper)' date=' it works towards making it more balanced.

[/quote']

 

You picked, like, the worst example ever.

 

Use Magic Drain instead.

Spirit Reaper's effect only does very well in the current meta. And the meta effects a card's playability, while the card game in general effects a card's balance.

 

The vast majority of targeting effects don't allow the target to remain face-up on the field, even under an improved banlist. Of the ones that do, many - Soul Exchange, Mind Control, Mark of the Rose, and so on - turn a perceived negative into a positive.

 

That is only true for the current meta. There are a lot of cards that would destroy Spirit Reaper via his own effect, but not a lot are used in this meta.

 

By its very nature, removal has always been and will always be one of the most powerful effects available - and control-swapping is one of the only effects that is even stronger. This goes well beyond the current meta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

although, just because there exists card(s) to counter, does not necessarily make it more balanced.

not everyone runs a targeting card of any kind to stop spirit reaper.

thus its balance alters from game to game.

 

if a card is, in itself, overpowered, than it doesnt matter how much counterability it has, there needs to be limitations on its usage. a card's balance cannot rest in its ability to be countered alone. this is partially why spirit reaper is limited, to balance it further.

 

balance implies a close ratio of strengths to weaknesses.

in the example of dad, its strengths would include being a dark, being lvl 7 which means you can tune with it, having a special summon clause, having 28 attack, looking cool, and having a powerful effect.

its weaknesses would include being lvl 7 (which just misses the tradein mark), being a dragon which earns it minimal support, having an annoying special summon requirement, and having a cost which requires removal.

 

now, a good player will be able to turn some of these weaknesses into strengths, but thats another story.

 

a card becomes unbalanced when its strengths far outweigh its weaknesses.

counterability is a part of a card's weakness. but it is a very variable part. dad can easily be stopped by oppression, solemn, wrath, hell you can even stop it cold with big burn. but that doesnt directly say anything about the balance of dad.

 

there is a definite relationship between balance and counterability, however it is not easily measurable.

how much counterability plays into balance depends on how many cards can stop a given card, how easy they are to use, how prolific they are in the current meta, etc. but an overpowered card is still overpowered.

thrown into this meta, chaos emperor dragon is about as vulnerable as dad is, but that doesnt make him balanced because his effects still far overpower dad, and the cost is negligible.

 

 

to put it simply, counterability plays into balance, but is not synonymous or a measurable part of balance. if a card is overpowered enough, it doesnt really matter how much counterability there is to it.

 

/topic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

counterability =/= balance

 

 

remember that CED can be solemned...

 

However, if, for example, there was a card that read:

 

Special Summon 3 Synchro Monsters from your Extra deck ignoring summoning conditions. If your opponent has any monsters in his or her deck, hand, graveyard, RFP pile, field, Extra Deck, or side deck, this effect is not applied and your opponent Special Summons 3 Synchro Monsters from his or her extra deck ignoring summoning conditions.

 

Would it be balanced? It's certainly very counterable, to the point where it is obviously terrible. However, is it the nature of the effect that, even if somehow the conditions were met, the effect should not exist within the game?

 

I think this is the question that must be asked when considering the balance of a highly counterable card. Some can be offset by their counters, while others cannot.

 

Of course, the numerity of counters is relevant too. Saying "I can Solemn CED" is stupid, while saying "I have a monster in my deck" in the above example is perhaps less so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think counterabilty should be defined a bit more loosely myself.

 

yes, solemn is a counter, no argument there, but what about cards such as book of moon, shrink, and bottomless? should they be included in here as well?

 

just a thought on that.

 

on topic: I feel that counterabilty only should matter if the card itself is meant to stay around. the overall effect to the game is vastly different if you counter secret village than if you counter heavy storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a card's effect enables more cards to counter it(ig. Spirit Reaper)' date=' it works towards making it more balanced.

[/quote']

 

You picked, like, the worst example ever.

 

Use Magic Drain instead.

Spirit Reaper's effect only does very well in the current meta. And the meta effects a card's playability, while the card game in general effects a card's balance.

 

The vast majority of targeting effects don't allow the target to remain face-up on the field, even under an improved banlist. Of the ones that do, many - Soul Exchange, Mind Control, Mark of the Rose, and so on - turn a perceived negative into a positive.

 

That is only true for the current meta. There are a lot of cards that would destroy Spirit Reaper via his own effect, but not a lot are used in this meta.

 

By its very nature, removal has always been and will always be one of the most powerful effects available - and control-swapping is one of the only effects that is even stronger. This goes well beyond the current meta.

Control goes a step down and becomes destruction. Destruction remains where it is. Everything else goes a step up and becomes destruction. Seeing as there are more cards increasing in value than there are decreasing, I believe his effect attributes to balancing him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a card's effect enables more cards to counter it(ig. Spirit Reaper)' date=' it works towards making it more balanced.

[/quote']

 

You picked, like, the worst example ever.

 

Use Magic Drain instead.

Spirit Reaper's effect only does very well in the current meta. And the meta effects a card's playability, while the card game in general effects a card's balance.

 

The vast majority of targeting effects don't allow the target to remain face-up on the field, even under an improved banlist. Of the ones that do, many - Soul Exchange, Mind Control, Mark of the Rose, and so on - turn a perceived negative into a positive.

 

That is only true for the current meta. There are a lot of cards that would destroy Spirit Reaper via his own effect, but not a lot are used in this meta.

 

By its very nature, removal has always been and will always be one of the most powerful effects available - and control-swapping is one of the only effects that is even stronger. This goes well beyond the current meta.

Control goes a step down and becomes destruction. Destruction remains where it is. Everything else goes a step up and becomes destruction. Seeing as there are more cards increasing in value than there are decreasing, I believe his effect attributes to balancing him.

 

However, the cards increasing in value also happen to be the ones least worth using in the first place.

 

Spirit Reaper is what is known in game theory as a minimax strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the dark one: please learn2read...

 

 

what did i said' date=' huh??

[/quote']

 

I'm sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear.

 

While Counterability does not inherently create balance, it does, on some level, contribute to the balancing of a card.

 

The example I gave was not meant to be a "properly balanced card", but a card that, like CED, has an unacceptable effect, but with built-in counterability so strong that it is unplayable.

 

Basically, I was proving that counterability does, at least, have an impact upon the worth of a card. When used in less extreme situations, I believe that increasing a card's counterability has a direct impact upon the balance of that card.

 

Built-in protection is an example of this. Field Spells like Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins or even Secret Village are going to be better than other field Spells because they are less vulnerable to destruction.

 

So all I'm saying is that it would seem fair to say that the numerity of counters DOES have a relationship with the balance of a card, though having numerous counters does not necessarily make a card balanced. (As I was attempting to prove in my original example card.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...