Author Topic: Type Ban (it doesn't get any more simpler in the title) (Read 8448 times)

SomeKittens · « **Reply #25 on:** July 02, 2010, 09:00:52 PM »

Because it's an insignificant uncommon?

Master KChief · « **Reply #26 on:** July 02, 2010, 09:05:51 PM »

Quote from: KoalaKingofFortressAlstad on June 30, 2010, 12:22:54 PM

if we are banning cards ANB should be banned in multi, but really we shouldn't ban cards since we are basically the only CCG that hasn't banned cards before so if we want to keep that title we'd better not.

so, the reason we're not banning cards is because of a silly 'title'? sorry, but thats a lame excuse to keep the game in the unhealthy state that it is. also, there were/still are many, many, many ccg's that have not banned cards. for instance, star wars ccg never had any banned cards. also, yugioh traditional format currently still has no banned cards.

SomeKittens · « **Reply #27 on:** July 02, 2010, 09:11:47 PM »

Rather, I think we're not banning cards because we don't need to, as REG Errata/Play-as takes care of any op'd combos us players come up with

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #28 on:** July 02, 2010, 09:13:34 PM »

False. TGT is still around.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #29 on:** July 03, 2010, 12:35:42 AM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 02, 2010, 09:05:51 PM

Quote from: KoalaKingofFortressAlstad on June 30, 2010, 12:22:54 PM
if we are banning cards ANB should be banned in multi, but really we shouldn't ban cards since we are basically the only CCG that hasn't banned cards before so if we want to keep that title we'd better not.

so, the reason we're not banning cards is because of a silly 'title'? sorry, but thats a lame excuse to keep the game in the unhealthy state that it is. also, there were/still are many, many, many ccg's that have not banned cards. for instance, star wars ccg never had any banned cards. also, yugioh traditional format currently still has no banned cards.

Honestly when it comes to banned cards, we should NEVER look to yugioh. Its the only game I know where the game can end before the beginning and they refuse to ban those cards. Instead they leave exodia and his pieces legal and ban anything that helps exodia out. Half the ban list is because of exodia in that game.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #30 on:** July 03, 2010, 01:39:34 AM »

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 03, 2010, 12:35:42 AM

Instead they leave exodia and his pieces legal and ban anything that helps exodia out. Half the ban list is because of exodia in that game.

That is not true, many of the cards that are banned may help exodia, BUT they help almost any other deck. The main reason for banning cards in yugioh is to keep the game balanced, and I've played the game for years and I have to say its more fun to play my advanced format (where the cards are banned) because you don't have all those OPed cards that are super easy to use.

And Exodia doesn't need to be banned because its a viable strategy and most players don't play exodia because it loses more than it wins and isn't reliable.

sepjazzwarrior · « **Reply #31 on:** July 03, 2010, 02:22:51 AM »

what about no ultra rares as a category? ive made decks like that to play younger players and its pretty fun to use those less used cards that get bumped out of decks to make room for the standards

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #32 on:** July 03, 2010, 02:45:30 AM »

Quote from: ChristianSoldier on July 03, 2010, 01:39:34 AM

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 03, 2010, 12:35:42 AM
Instead they leave exodia and his pieces legal and ban anything that helps exodia out. Half the ban list is because of exodia in that game.

That is not true, many of the cards that are banned may help exodia, BUT they help almost any other deck. The main reason for banning cards in yugioh is to keep the game balanced, and I've played the game for years and I have to say its more fun to play my advanced format (where the cards are banned) because you don't have all those OPed cards that are super easy to use.

And Exodia doesn't need to be banned because its a viable strategy and most players don't play exodia because it loses more than it wins and isn't reliable.

Oh, agreed, some are banned for sheer over powered-ness (Tribe infecting Virus) but some seem to have no reason other than exodia (Mystic Wok/Witch of the black forrest). I've played since the beginning but quit for a while cuz the ban list changed too frequently for me to keep my deck working. Also, some cards are banned on the fact it they simply cause issues, so instead of fixing the gaping hole of a flaw in the rules, the card is banned (Victory Dragon).

Master KChief · « **Reply #33 on:** July 03, 2010, 03:04:27 AM »

...what? wotbf only helps out exodia? seriously, that card could fetch 90% of the best cards in the game...it definately helped out alot more than just exodia. even way more powerful than sangan.

victory dragon is so ridiculous it shouldnt have even been made in the first place. and when i say ridiculous, i mean just over the top dumb. first of all, it cant be special summoned. 2nd, it requires 3 dragon tributes. third, its absolutely useless in the third round or the 2nd round if you won the first round. and fourth, you have to reduce them to EXACTLY 0 points...nothing over. its just too stupid to use competitively, but i imagine konami banned it for the very very very VERY small unfair chance that it could possibly win an entire match.

overall, i would have to say yugiohs advanced format is by far one of the best. they know how to put a lid on overpowered broken cards by banning, restricting, or semi-restricting them, and its helping foster a healthy environment. seriously, who wants to see OTK's with chaos emperor dragon and triple dmoc's, or yata lockouts *cough cough, looking at you sin in the camp*?

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #34 on:** July 03, 2010, 03:32:16 AM »

Wotbf was a bad example I'll admit but I really fail to see how she is somehow better than sangan. I can get 4k defense with Sangan(Exod) or 3k (Lab wall).

V Dragon was banned because people were forfeiting off of their turn when it got summoned. Leading to a lot of issues since people would slot it into their deck and suddenly their opp forfeited off turn (Not legal in the US. Is legal in Japan last I knew). So instead of just add the rule of you can't forfeit off turn, they banned a card. Also there are other cards with Identical abilities (just diff cards needed to summon them) that are NOT banned due to them being "harder to summon".

And even WITH their banns "One shot" shut down decks still exist. I am not trying to harp on yugioh, just in my experience their banning doesn't do enough against the insta-win decks (exodia, Frog Cannon (Special summon out all your frogs with Substitoad(D/c 1 mon to SS a frog from deck) and end with Roanintoadin (Remove 1 frog from grave to SS this card from the grave) in the grave). At this point you have 20+ frogs in your grave. Activate Mass driver. Discard Roanintoadin. Resummon him from the grave with his ability. Spam for over 10k damage.) This can be done turn ONE. Ojamas can seal all your mon spaces turn one. Though Ojamas don't shut down your magic/traps it isn't hard to shut them down.

I like to have fun (Has a No Monster deck). If you can win the game before I even start my first turn that is NOT fun.

Master KChief · « **Reply #35 on:** July 03, 2010, 04:11:25 AM »

agreed, which is why some bans are necessary. OTK combos like the ones you describe are prevalent once discovered, but get shot down quickly by konami after the next round of bannings/restrictions. the reason it seems like a long time/they're not doing anything at all is because i believe they only have 1 or 2 rounds of bannigs/restrictions a year. which i think is a fair thing to do: if you think of some supercool awesomely powerful combo, you should have the right to use it in tournaments for awhile. i used to run the 3x dark magician of chaos/monster reborn OTK back in the day, and i enjoyed it before it was shot down. and that is exactly why banning is necessary: is it more healthy to have overpowerd/broken cards banned/restricted every so often or have nothing done at all?

Master_Chi · « **Reply #36 on:** July 03, 2010, 02:12:12 PM »

Quote from: Lamborghini_diablo on March 17, 2010, 01:47:28 PM

This gave me an idea that could be fun...

Instead of banning cards, I'd like to see a game type where Cannot be Interrupted/Prevented/Negated do nothing. To counter this, FBTN heroes would lose their abilities as well.

It'd be interesting to see how much different the game is when everything becomes negatable...

FBTN = FTW. SA-less characters would be great. No definitions to argue about, just the clear-cut "My number is bigger".

Quote from: Minister Polarius on July 02, 2010, 09:13:34 PM

False. TGT is still around.

Agreed.
Buckler should be banned too, that card is just used way too much and nothing can beat it....

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #37 on:** July 03, 2010, 02:42:47 PM »

Well of course on buckler. Can you imagine Peter's Mother in law + buckler? *shudder*

Quote from: Master KChief on July 03, 2010, 04:11:25 AM

agreed, which is why some bans are necessary. OTK combos like the ones you describe are prevalent once discovered, but get shot down quickly by konami after the next round of bannings/restrictions. the reason it seems like a long time/they're not doing anything at all is because i believe they only have 1 or 2 rounds of bannigs/restrictions a year. which i think is a fair thing to do: if you think of some supercool awesomely powerful combo, you should have the right to use it in tournaments for awhile. i used to run the 3x dark magician of chaos/monster reborn OTK back in the day, and i enjoyed it before it was shot down. and that is exactly why banning is necessary: is it more healthy to have overpowerd/broken cards banned/restricted every so often or have nothing done at all?

Or to fix the flawed rules?

Master_Chi · « **Reply #38 on:** July 03, 2010, 03:01:48 PM »

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 03, 2010, 02:42:47 PM

Well of course on buckler. Can you imagine Peter's Mother in law + buckler? *shudder*
Quote from: Master KChief on July 03, 2010, 04:11:25 AM
agreed, which is why some bans are necessary. OTK combos like the ones you describe are prevalent once discovered, but get shot down quickly by konami after the next round of bannings/restrictions. the reason it seems like a long time/they're not doing anything at all is because i believe they only have 1 or 2 rounds of bannigs/restrictions a year. which i think is a fair thing to do: if you think of some supercool awesomely powerful combo, you should have the right to use it in tournaments for awhile. i used to run the 3x dark magician of chaos/monster reborn OTK back in the day, and i enjoyed it before it was shot down. and that is exactly why banning is necessary: is it more healthy to have overpowerd/broken cards banned/restricted every so often or have nothing done at all?

Doubly agreed. Buckler + Pete's M-i-L would be an unstoppable powerhouse.
Or to fix the flawed rules?

metalpsalm · « **Reply #39 on:** July 03, 2010, 03:50:07 PM »

and, again I say, banning cards is just silly

Captain Falcon · « **Reply #40 on:** July 03, 2010, 03:50:16 PM »

Quote from: Ring Wraith on March 17, 2010, 03:53:11 PM

Quote from: Master KChief on March 17, 2010, 03:51:35 PM
why archers?
I guess the draw + next would be the better thing to ban. I'm so sick of them in T2...

Just play with consuming fire

Master KChief · « **Reply #41 on:** July 03, 2010, 04:56:26 PM »

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 03, 2010, 02:42:47 PM

Well of course on buckler. Can you imagine Peter's Mother in law + buckler? *shudder*
Quote from: Master KChief on July 03, 2010, 04:11:25 AM
agreed, which is why some bans are necessary. OTK combos like the ones you describe are prevalent once discovered, but get shot down quickly by konami after the next round of bannings/restrictions. the reason it seems like a long time/they're not doing anything at all is because i believe they only have 1 or 2 rounds of bannigs/restrictions a year. which i think is a fair thing to do: if you think of some supercool awesomely powerful combo, you should have the right to use it in tournaments for awhile. i used to run the 3x dark magician of chaos/monster reborn OTK back in the day, and i enjoyed it before it was shot down. and that is exactly why banning is necessary: is it more healthy to have overpowerd/broken cards banned/restricted every so often or have nothing done at all?
Or to fix the flawed rules?

there is nothing flawed in the rules about what dominants are in nature and how they are played.

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #42 on:** July 03, 2010, 07:32:50 PM »

I would have no problem with some bans in Redemption, but I also think the have done a good job of balancing the game without banning, redemption doesn't have any consistent one turn wins (I can only think of one way to do it and its so unreasonably complicated and is very luck based its basically unusable) but for a game like yugioh, one turn wins are ok, depending on how they work, especially since you have to win twice for each opponent (best 2 out of 3) so you can side board a few cards around to counter decks, and in yugioh almost everything is negatable.

And to the argument about why certain cards in yugioh were banned, Victory Dragon was a problem because its just stupid to have a card affect more than one game. And Witch of the Black Forest can get out loads of powerhouse high levels that people base decks around, sure you can get some beefy defenses out with sangan, but witch can get WAY more monsters that are way more powerful than what sangan can get.

And Exodia isn't a problem in yugioh, yes someone COULD get it on their first 5 cards, but the chance of that happening not once but twice in a match is ridiculous, in fact the only way exodia decks win consistently is with draw loops, which can easily be stopped with commonly used cards.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #43 on:** July 03, 2010, 11:38:46 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on July 03, 2010, 04:56:26 PM

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 03, 2010, 02:42:47 PM
Well of course on buckler. Can you imagine Peter's Mother in law + buckler? *shudder*
Quote from: Master KChief on July 03, 2010, 04:11:25 AM
agreed, which is why some bans are necessary. OTK combos like the ones you describe are prevalent once discovered, but get shot down quickly by konami after the next round of bannings/restrictions. the reason it seems like a long time/they're not doing anything at all is because i believe they only have 1 or 2 rounds of bannigs/restrictions a year. which i think is a fair thing to do: if you think of some supercool awesomely powerful combo, you should have the right to use it in tournaments for awhile. i used to run the 3x dark magician of chaos/monster reborn OTK back in the day, and i enjoyed it before it was shot down. and that is exactly why banning is necessary: is it more healthy to have overpowerd/broken cards banned/restricted every so often or have nothing done at all?
Or to fix the flawed rules?

there is nothing flawed in the rules about what dominants are in nature and how they are played.

Don't get me on that. Doms need serious rule fixing.

Master KChief · « **Reply #44 on:** July 04, 2010, 08:32:26 AM »

christiansoldier brings up a great point. yugioh is a somewhat different animal because it is best 2 of 3 and does allow a sideboard...a mechanic that does greatly improve a ccg. if only redemption were as fast paced as yugioh or mtg to allow best 2 of 3 and a sideboard...

Quote from: TheKarazyvicePresidentRR on July 03, 2010, 11:38:46 PM

Don't get me on that. Doms need serious rule fixing.

ah, i thought by 'flawed' you meant indiscrepencies in the rules. in that case, then yes, i do agree with you, some of the rules do need to be fixed to make some mechanics less exploited and abused.

News:

Author Topic: Type Ban (it doesn't get any more simpler in the title) (Read 8448 times)