How to really change Yu-Gi-Oh game play for fair play and fair duel!

[chaosruler]

Alright, this topic seems to be going nowhere but to flame wars. And that I will not allow. I'm sorry, but this topic, although recently posted to, is dead.

*LOCKS*

-chaosruler

 

[cameron2010]

I don't think these rules would be at all that effective IMO. If you restrict the players too much then they won't stick with the game.

That's like saying you can only eat one specific meal a year and then have other meals banned from your diet because they either taste too good or are too bad for you to eat. It isn't practical to see UDE/Konami issue these kinds of rule changes.

Since the game was designed to play fast, it should remain that way. Gameplay still is fast enough with the new ban list. Plenty of skill left in the game. Banning cards like Raigeki and Harpie's Feather Duster were correct moves to make. Banning cards like the Envoys, Mirror Force, Delinquent Duo, etc. are more correct actions.

The message I got from this article was, "Continue to use the same cards and pretty much everything will be banned." and I know this wasn't the goal you're trying to show.

I'm pretty sure we can all agree that no one will be happy until a large portion of cards are banned, limited, semi-limited, etc.

I could name quite a few that could see a position on the ban list. I'll just name 'some' of them.

Royal Decree
Jinzo
Dark Hole
Confiscation
Torrential Tribute
Snatch Steal
Heavy Storm
Cyber Jar
Morphing Jar
Call of the Haunted

I could name several cards that I've tested personally and found to be rather interesting selections based off the results.

Bait Doll
Double Spell
Magic Drain
Ante
Question
Wall of Revealing Light (Not in a Last Turn or Stall)
Megamorph
Nobleman of Extermination
Different Dimension Capsule
Needle Ceiling

So it isn't a matter of banning cards that are used extensively, but rather make more original cards or strategical concepts for cards to be used for.

Such as one of the EEN cards called Thunder of Dark Realm. This card can be a very powerful card outside of a Dark Realm deck. You destroy a face down card and discard a card from your hand afterwards. This can be a very powerful asset to use with a deck that uses another EEN card called Jar of Avarice.

The ban list changes because people don't ever use fresh ideas. They copy whoever wins a major event and make their own watered down version that ultimately turns into a CC (Cookie Cutter) deck. This irrates people to no end. The lists are the problem really, it's the players! Use your own ideas, master them, test them, and abuse your own ideas and tactics!

I've already got a three page article in MS Word typed up about this. Only reason it isn't posted is because it isn't meant for little kids to read. -_- I clearly express my hate towards individual people. Oh yeah, the US Champion quit because of the ban list. I cover that in my article too.

Personally, I agree with your list with the exception that Call of the Haunted should not be banned, and Sangan should have stayed on the ban list. Witch and Sangan are pretty much like Jar of Greed draw effects, with the exception of gaining a monster intstead of spell or trap from your deck. Sangan is really like playing a Witch the only difference it is getting a card with an attack of 1500 or less. A good subsitute would be Different Dimension Capsule. Also the game will still remain fast as long as players are allowed to play multiple copies of the same spell or trap that is affliated with a monster type such as Reinforcement of the Army, Limiter Removal, or those cards that are affliated with a monster sub-type such as Toons, affliated with a special group of Monsters such as the Dark Scorpions. Other cards that would unrestricted would be cards that work in accordance to multiple copies per deck such as Good Goblin Housekeeping (which also needs three to work).

Also the only continuous effect monsters (cannot be chained to) that I would not restrict to one per deck, would be cards like Cyber Dragon, and the LV monsters. As a matter of fact they are the only one.

This new things should prevent banning or limiting that is not necessary. That way there would not be much of threat if a player plays three Enemy Controllers. Also it would save players money, and dissapointment when they find out a card is restricted.

Then an equilibrium will finally be reached!

 

[The Advocate]

Some very good ideas and suggestions but I believe the banned lists came out to promote more buzz around future boosters regardless of what anyone says. How much the other reasons also played into it are arguable but the $$ reasons and life of the game are first. The best way to change the game would be to limit the number of promos, super rares, ultra rares, rares and commons allowed in any one deck. Of course erratas should be used prior to banning a card (ie change of heart, pay 1,000 and skip your next draw phase...). In addition to the limits on rarities we could also add LV limits and type limits on the spell/traps. Then limit each card to one per deck. We want more use of the cards that exist and UDE/Konami can help by not printing useless cards that we use at Toilet Paper (can you say Skull Servant or D. Human); then for the coup de grace, we can add requirements or limits (either one) for certain sets (ie, no more than 8 cards can be from Flaming Eternity, you must have at least 2 cards from Metal Raiders). Force duelists to rely on 40 different cards and booster sales will remain high.

Thoughts?

 

[cameron2010]

Some very good ideas and suggestions but I believe the banned lists came out to promote more buzz around future boosters regardless of what anyone says. How much the other reasons also played into it are arguable but the $$ reasons and life of the game are first. The best way to change the game would be to limit the number of promos, super rares, ultra rares, rares and commons allowed in any one deck. Of course erratas should be used prior to banning a card (ie change of heart, pay 1,000 and skip your next draw phase...). In addition to the limits on rarities we could also add LV limits and type limits on the spell/traps. Then limit each card to one per deck. We want more use of the cards that exist and UDE/Konami can help by not printing useless cards that we use at Toilet Paper (can you say Skull Servant or D. Human); then for the coup de grace, we can add requirements or limits (either one) for certain sets (ie, no more than 8 cards can be from Flaming Eternity, you must have at least 2 cards from Metal Raiders). Force duelists to rely on 40 different cards and booster sales will remain high.

Thoughts?

I agree with some of your thoughts. Yugioh is all about the money. There is no such thing as a useless card. Some Shonen Jump winners have shown that originality in Yugioh still exists. There is no need to limit promos, since the Limited List does the job for us. If Konami/UDE had a more proactive apporach into predicting certain scenarios (Which is quite simple.) then, this there would be no discussion. A typical example is the banning of Snatch Steal, which was long overdue.

The thing that irritates me is that cards that should have stayed on the Limited List were unrestricted. A typical example is Lightning Vortex. Now let's see most monsters in Yugioh are usually face-up, and some may disagree with me but this is just another Raigeki. It is far better to restrict or eliminate cards that allow easy access of resources, such as Pot of Greed, Sangan, and mass removal Lightning Vortex, and to keep cards that were banned or restricted to stay that way, with no possible way of changing it.

Most of the banned cards had allowed easy access of resources of cards such as Pot of Greed and massive removal such as Harpies F.D. and Dark Hole.

Konami was partially novice when some of the cards from the first set were printed with incredibly broken abilities. In addition Konami has printed more cards with great abilities, but put more emphasize more consequences with these cards.

Also in some cases you will never be able to satisfy everyone in Yugioh. There will be some people who whine and don't full responsiblity for their loss, and look for alternatives to winning. Some of these gamers who don't responsiblity by calling a deck and CC deck. Which in my opinion does not exist. And there will be others who look for alternatives to victory, and take responsiblity for there loss. The real question where is the line drawn?