You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
timing w/sak
- Thread starter SS64
- Start date
John Danker
Administrator
DaGuyWitBluGlasses said:Because there are cards that cannot be activated in a responsive window, there has to be the ability to leave that response window.
There is an ability to leave the response window...both players agree to move on to the damage step.
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
John Danker said:There is an ability to leave the response window...both players agree to move on to the damage step.
So then, once a summon is performed, you can't activate a normal spell card in the main phase because once you agree to pass you'll have to move on to the Battle Phase or End Phase?
John Danker
Administrator
Was the thread not looking at the response to an attack? I don't remember the topic of the thread being about main phase 1....again I must have missed the intent of the thread.
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
John Danker said:Was the thread not looking at the response to an attack? I don't remember the topic of the thread being about main phase 1....again I must have missed the intent of the thread.
Why should the battle step work differently than the Main Phase, though?
Never use more entities than necessary.... (Occam's Razor)
We have a clear understanding of how things work in every other phase of game play, and that explanation should be applied to the others in the absence of contradiction.
Like i said previously, as soon as the one manual chain rule was eliminated, we lost any reason to assume that the battle step works differently, so lwe need to apply the rules that work elsewhere to the battle step.
John Danker
Administrator
What I'd like to quote here....I don't think it wise to nor do I have the rights to....so I'm going to pull myself from the current thread's discussion. Enjoy all.
John, sorry but I will insist a bit more.
I was thinking about this whole "response window" that some people (like me) believe is ended when both players pass. The analogy with the main phase is inevitable, and I may be missing something or even using a bad example, but I will try to explain:
TP is in his main phase. He has one Breaker in atk position, and Blade Knight and Book of Moon in hand.
NTP has only Mobius the Frost Monarch face-up and a set Bottomless Trap Hole (his hand is irrelevant for this example). He has 2000 lp.
TP summons Blade Knight and pass. As NTP Mobius is stronger than Blade and Breaker, he decides to save his Bottomless since TP has still 8000 lp- he pass. Then after this summon, TP activates Book of Moon, targeting Mobius. NTP realizes he will lose, because now Breaker could destroy the Monarch and Blade (currently 2000 atacker) could finish the job. But wait, he thinks- since Book of Moon has not resolved yet and the last thing to occour was the summon, now I can still activate BTH.
Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't that be illegal activation? And isn't that case very similar to the situation in the battle step with attack declaration and both passing and only in the non- responsive window TP activating EC?
Well, I'm just trying to understand...
I was thinking about this whole "response window" that some people (like me) believe is ended when both players pass. The analogy with the main phase is inevitable, and I may be missing something or even using a bad example, but I will try to explain:
TP is in his main phase. He has one Breaker in atk position, and Blade Knight and Book of Moon in hand.
NTP has only Mobius the Frost Monarch face-up and a set Bottomless Trap Hole (his hand is irrelevant for this example). He has 2000 lp.
TP summons Blade Knight and pass. As NTP Mobius is stronger than Blade and Breaker, he decides to save his Bottomless since TP has still 8000 lp- he pass. Then after this summon, TP activates Book of Moon, targeting Mobius. NTP realizes he will lose, because now Breaker could destroy the Monarch and Blade (currently 2000 atacker) could finish the job. But wait, he thinks- since Book of Moon has not resolved yet and the last thing to occour was the summon, now I can still activate BTH.
Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't that be illegal activation? And isn't that case very similar to the situation in the battle step with attack declaration and both passing and only in the non- responsive window TP activating EC?
Well, I'm just trying to understand...
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
If it were Block Attack instead, then obviously it would be an illegal activation of Bottomless Trap Hole.
I don't see how a quick-play spell card in Book of Moon could not be activated in the same timing (or lack thereof) as Block Attack.
I don't see how a quick-play spell card in Book of Moon could not be activated in the same timing (or lack thereof) as Block Attack.
So DaGuy, just to clarify, you agree with me?
And I throw some more insights:
When an action without spell speed is performed by TP, I believe we have to assume that once both pass the opportunity to respond to the action, this response opportunity MUST end.
In the battle step, we can only activate spell speed 2 or 3 effects, but this sub step (and the whole battle phase) should be very similar to the other game phases, right?
A new example: in my Draw Phase I draw a card. I pass and my opp passes too. Now, still in the draw phase, I activate MST, targeting my opp only set s/t. The card reveals to be Drop Off and he tries to activate it now, because the last action was TP drawing a card. It seems to have the same logic too, and seems as a illegal activation of the card...
Well, I would like some feedback, opinions...
Thanks in advance
And I throw some more insights:
When an action without spell speed is performed by TP, I believe we have to assume that once both pass the opportunity to respond to the action, this response opportunity MUST end.
In the battle step, we can only activate spell speed 2 or 3 effects, but this sub step (and the whole battle phase) should be very similar to the other game phases, right?
A new example: in my Draw Phase I draw a card. I pass and my opp passes too. Now, still in the draw phase, I activate MST, targeting my opp only set s/t. The card reveals to be Drop Off and he tries to activate it now, because the last action was TP drawing a card. It seems to have the same logic too, and seems as a illegal activation of the card...
Well, I would like some feedback, opinions...
Thanks in advance
John Danker
Administrator
While I can't quote everything I'd like to and while I don't wish to debate this issue as I've done so already too many times, I'll give you a couple of posts off the L3 list that I can quote.
When many of the L3s were talking about turn player priority after the declaration of attack Dan posted this.....
---------------------------------------------
It doesn't matter because you don't only get '1' chance regardless of
who has priority.
Look at these possible outcomes. (Player 1 has priority at the start of
the Battle Step)
Player 1 attacks.
Player 1 does not activate anything, and wants to enter the Damage Step.
Player 2 activates Negate attack before they progress to the Damage
Step.
Player 1 attacks.
Player 1 activates Waboku.
Player 2 chains Negate attack.
[Musing that player 2 has priority at the start of the battle Step]
Player 1 attacks.
Player 2 doesn't do anything.
Player 1 wants to enter the Damage Step.
Player 2 activates Negate Attack before they progress to the Damage
Step.
Player 1 attacks.
Player 2 doesn't do anything.
Player 1 activates Waboku.
Player 2 chains Negate Attack.
You see that both situations end the same. If P1 wants to planned to
activate Waboku, P2 can get them to waste it. This is because P1 is the
turn player and decided when to move to the Damage Step, and P2 will
always get priority passed to him before the Step ends.
This does assume that P2 isn't a fool, and waits to activate Negate
Attack until the turn player wants to progress to the Damage Step.
-Dan
------------------------------------------------
A few post later this message appeared from Dan in response to another post..........
-------------------------------------------------
>>I don't see the point why Player 2 can pass, Player 1 can pass as well
and >>Player 2 gets ANOTHER chance to respond to the attack.
Because the Yu-Gi-Oh! TRADING CARD GAME is not Magic: the Gathering. And
that's why we love it.
The game is about having fun, and I will take this opportunity to thank all of you judges that put up with the people who just want to 'rules lawyer' the opponent out of playing their cards, instead of enjoying the
Duel.
-Dan
When many of the L3s were talking about turn player priority after the declaration of attack Dan posted this.....
---------------------------------------------
It doesn't matter because you don't only get '1' chance regardless of
who has priority.
Look at these possible outcomes. (Player 1 has priority at the start of
the Battle Step)
Player 1 attacks.
Player 1 does not activate anything, and wants to enter the Damage Step.
Player 2 activates Negate attack before they progress to the Damage
Step.
Player 1 attacks.
Player 1 activates Waboku.
Player 2 chains Negate attack.
[Musing that player 2 has priority at the start of the battle Step]
Player 1 attacks.
Player 2 doesn't do anything.
Player 1 wants to enter the Damage Step.
Player 2 activates Negate Attack before they progress to the Damage
Step.
Player 1 attacks.
Player 2 doesn't do anything.
Player 1 activates Waboku.
Player 2 chains Negate Attack.
You see that both situations end the same. If P1 wants to planned to
activate Waboku, P2 can get them to waste it. This is because P1 is the
turn player and decided when to move to the Damage Step, and P2 will
always get priority passed to him before the Step ends.
This does assume that P2 isn't a fool, and waits to activate Negate
Attack until the turn player wants to progress to the Damage Step.
-Dan
------------------------------------------------
A few post later this message appeared from Dan in response to another post..........
-------------------------------------------------
>>I don't see the point why Player 2 can pass, Player 1 can pass as well
and >>Player 2 gets ANOTHER chance to respond to the attack.
Because the Yu-Gi-Oh! TRADING CARD GAME is not Magic: the Gathering. And
that's why we love it.
The game is about having fun, and I will take this opportunity to thank all of you judges that put up with the people who just want to 'rules lawyer' the opponent out of playing their cards, instead of enjoying the
Duel.
-Dan
John Danker
Administrator
You might think so...but in truth we were all trying to get the same questions answered that have been presented in the earlier pages of this thread.
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
Dan said:>>I don't see the point why Player 2 can pass, Player 1 can pass as well
and >>Player 2 gets ANOTHER chance to respond to the attack.
Because the Yu-Gi-Oh! TRADING CARD GAME is not Magic: the Gathering. And
that's why we love it.
The game is about having fun, and I will take this opportunity to thank all of you judges that put up with the people who just want to 'rules lawyer' the opponent out of playing their cards, instead of enjoying the
Duel.
-Dan
A fallacious argument: (Improper Transposition)
Some rules are not exploited
These rules (A) can be exploited.
Therefore rules (B) which are opposite to (A) won't be exploited.
John Danker
Administrator
This may be "A fallacious argument" in your eyes, I'm afraid though, your eyes aren't what the rules are made by.
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
John Danker said:This may be "A fallacious argument" in your eyes, I'm afraid though, your eyes aren't what the rules are made by.
I drank a Root beer this morning, i had a stomach-ache this afternoon.
Therefore i won't drink a rootbeer in the mornings.
That's a fallacy, because as far as I know, I might have had the stomach-ache anyway.
Now for what dan said, do I know that Dan himself made an error in logic? No, i dont know, it would only be an opinion for me say.
However, regardless of what Dan's intents were, whether he was just quoting someone higher up, or whether he accidentally left out a sentence or two that were supposed to be there, the results ended up being an illogical statement.
He wrote that "If A were true, B would happen-- therefore we shouldn't allow A to be true." But he provided no evidence, that B would not happen if A were not true.
Maybe there is evidence out there that B would not happen, but Dan didn't provide any, and therefore the statement is illogical. The judge's list is not official-- i.e. not a source of proof itself-- and therefore the statement does not need to be considered a rule.
John Danker
Administrator
<soft chuckle> Grasping at straws aren't we?
Are we to assume then that any evidence you've presented quoting the judge's list isn't official and therefore we shouldn't consider it a rule?
I think you're missing something here. Konami and UDE don't NEED to provide proof of a rule being logical. As I've pointed out countless times, this is Yugioh, it's based on a comic book character who gets in contact with an ancient ruler....you want everything to be proven logical....I'm afraid you'd best play another game.....check that, you might be best go into science and forgt gaming as a whole if you want everything to be proven logical before accepting it.
<EDIT> In addition, I guess I'm confused that you consider the judge's list unofficial. Perhaps you were speaking of the L3 judge's list? I could see this argument....but just because you're unable to view it doesn't make it unofficial. If someone doesn't have a computer and can't view the FAQ does it make it unofficial? It's considered official by the judge's who view it when a statement is made by UDE officials just like the FAQ is or the standard judge's list is. It's considered official by those L3s who subscribe to it and those who monitor it. I'm waiting to see the statement by UDE calling their own judge's lists (either one of them) unofficial.....by all means, please point me to that information by them....I must have missed it.
Are we to assume then that any evidence you've presented quoting the judge's list isn't official and therefore we shouldn't consider it a rule?
I think you're missing something here. Konami and UDE don't NEED to provide proof of a rule being logical. As I've pointed out countless times, this is Yugioh, it's based on a comic book character who gets in contact with an ancient ruler....you want everything to be proven logical....I'm afraid you'd best play another game.....check that, you might be best go into science and forgt gaming as a whole if you want everything to be proven logical before accepting it.
<EDIT> In addition, I guess I'm confused that you consider the judge's list unofficial. Perhaps you were speaking of the L3 judge's list? I could see this argument....but just because you're unable to view it doesn't make it unofficial. If someone doesn't have a computer and can't view the FAQ does it make it unofficial? It's considered official by the judge's who view it when a statement is made by UDE officials just like the FAQ is or the standard judge's list is. It's considered official by those L3s who subscribe to it and those who monitor it. I'm waiting to see the statement by UDE calling their own judge's lists (either one of them) unofficial.....by all means, please point me to that information by them....I must have missed it.
I'm sorry to insist, and I know the game is about having fun as Dan said. But when you are playing a tournament, specialy the "big ones" you play it at least a bit seriously.
And I believe we have to know most of the rules and the mechanics to play correctly. And when real situations happen, mainly when resolution can take different ways depending on which is the correctly mechanic or rule, I believe it's important to discuss and stabilish a solid answer.
I'm not trying to bother, I'm trying to understand the logic behind all that was said. And I know all we have is arguments, without any official answer... But I would like to make another point:
Except for damage step (which is a sub step anyway), all the phases of Yu-Gi-Oh are very similar. I believe it's widely accepted that they follow the exactly same logic, right?
So, in the question concerning battle step and the "response window", tell me how would it differ from this situation (the same example I gave posts above with modifications):
TP is in his main phase. He has one Blade Knight and one Brain Control in hand.
NTP has only Mobius the Frost Monarch face-up and a set Bottomless Trap Hole (his hand is irrelevant for this example). He has 4400 lp (or less).
TP summons Blade Knight and pass. As NTP Mobius is stronger than Blade and Breaker, he decides to save his Bottomless since TP has still 8000 lp- he pass. After this summon, TP continue his MP1. He thinks for a moment and activates Brain Control, targeting Mobius. NTP realizes he will lose, because both Blade and the Monarch could finish the job.
But wait, NTP thinks- since Brain Control has not fully resolved yet and the last thing to occour was the summon, now I can still activate BTH, saving me.
Well, in my opinion, this type of activation doesn't seem legal or even fair, given the fact he had the opportunity to respond to the summon and passed.
MP1 and 2 are the only phases that allows us to activate normal spells, right? So, how would it differ from the situation:
TP was in his Battle Step and had a face-up Blade Knight, a Enemy Controller in his hand and 3 other cards (irrelevants for the case).
NTP had 1 face-up Chiron the Mage and one set Sakuretsu Armor.
TP declared an attack with Blade to Chiron. TP passed his priority. As Blade atk was only 1600, NTP decided not to activate his Sak and passed. Then TP declared: "well, as you passed, I will now activate Enemy Controller". NTP tried to activate Sak at this point...
They are in the battle step and the only difference is that in the battle phase we can only activate spell speed 2 or 3 effects. And I believe after the response window is closed, the direct connection to the attack MUST end. Of course, as multiple chains are allowed, cards without "when opponent declares an attack..." can be activated.
So, thinking logically and assuming the same mechanics must rule all the phases, why situation 1 seems to be completely illegal and situation 2, during battle step, would be different?
They seem to be very, very similar.
Sorry for the giant post, but I would like some opinions. And I will insist until I get some... (politely of course, and only trying to undestand the game a bit more).
Thanks
And I believe we have to know most of the rules and the mechanics to play correctly. And when real situations happen, mainly when resolution can take different ways depending on which is the correctly mechanic or rule, I believe it's important to discuss and stabilish a solid answer.
I'm not trying to bother, I'm trying to understand the logic behind all that was said. And I know all we have is arguments, without any official answer... But I would like to make another point:
Except for damage step (which is a sub step anyway), all the phases of Yu-Gi-Oh are very similar. I believe it's widely accepted that they follow the exactly same logic, right?
So, in the question concerning battle step and the "response window", tell me how would it differ from this situation (the same example I gave posts above with modifications):
TP is in his main phase. He has one Blade Knight and one Brain Control in hand.
NTP has only Mobius the Frost Monarch face-up and a set Bottomless Trap Hole (his hand is irrelevant for this example). He has 4400 lp (or less).
TP summons Blade Knight and pass. As NTP Mobius is stronger than Blade and Breaker, he decides to save his Bottomless since TP has still 8000 lp- he pass. After this summon, TP continue his MP1. He thinks for a moment and activates Brain Control, targeting Mobius. NTP realizes he will lose, because both Blade and the Monarch could finish the job.
But wait, NTP thinks- since Brain Control has not fully resolved yet and the last thing to occour was the summon, now I can still activate BTH, saving me.
Well, in my opinion, this type of activation doesn't seem legal or even fair, given the fact he had the opportunity to respond to the summon and passed.
MP1 and 2 are the only phases that allows us to activate normal spells, right? So, how would it differ from the situation:
TP was in his Battle Step and had a face-up Blade Knight, a Enemy Controller in his hand and 3 other cards (irrelevants for the case).
NTP had 1 face-up Chiron the Mage and one set Sakuretsu Armor.
TP declared an attack with Blade to Chiron. TP passed his priority. As Blade atk was only 1600, NTP decided not to activate his Sak and passed. Then TP declared: "well, as you passed, I will now activate Enemy Controller". NTP tried to activate Sak at this point...
They are in the battle step and the only difference is that in the battle phase we can only activate spell speed 2 or 3 effects. And I believe after the response window is closed, the direct connection to the attack MUST end. Of course, as multiple chains are allowed, cards without "when opponent declares an attack..." can be activated.
So, thinking logically and assuming the same mechanics must rule all the phases, why situation 1 seems to be completely illegal and situation 2, during battle step, would be different?
They seem to be very, very similar.
Sorry for the giant post, but I would like some opinions. And I will insist until I get some... (politely of course, and only trying to undestand the game a bit more).
Thanks
John Danker
Administrator
I realize that you want this all to be tidy and "logical"
In actuality the posts I quoted from came from a thread that I started on the L3 list asking the very same questions that most of the rest of you are asking....and stating the very same thing that many of you are stating....and siting the popular belief...for which I was quickly given a swaggering finger and the corrections noted in the quotes I've given from Dan.
As in many of the posts I comment on, originally I agreed and thought as the "popular beliefs" of the Yugioh community. The problem we run into is that much of this is poorly documented. What I'm doing when I post isn't stating my own beliefs, it's siting what I've been told or items that have been posted by UDE officials. So keep in mind here folks, this isn't me stating my opinion, it's me doing the best I can to relay the information I've been given. Weather you choose to accept it or not is up to you, however, you can very well bet that when you're judging at a major event and one of those L3s is your head judge, they'll be of the same thought pattern.
I can't seem to say this enough...but don't count on the rules and mechanics of the game of Yugioh to be one tight little logical package. I've been around this game long enough to know for certain that it isn't nor ever will be.
In actuality the posts I quoted from came from a thread that I started on the L3 list asking the very same questions that most of the rest of you are asking....and stating the very same thing that many of you are stating....and siting the popular belief...for which I was quickly given a swaggering finger and the corrections noted in the quotes I've given from Dan.
As in many of the posts I comment on, originally I agreed and thought as the "popular beliefs" of the Yugioh community. The problem we run into is that much of this is poorly documented. What I'm doing when I post isn't stating my own beliefs, it's siting what I've been told or items that have been posted by UDE officials. So keep in mind here folks, this isn't me stating my opinion, it's me doing the best I can to relay the information I've been given. Weather you choose to accept it or not is up to you, however, you can very well bet that when you're judging at a major event and one of those L3s is your head judge, they'll be of the same thought pattern.
I can't seem to say this enough...but don't count on the rules and mechanics of the game of Yugioh to be one tight little logical package. I've been around this game long enough to know for certain that it isn't nor ever will be.
Hehe. It's true.
I appreciate your work and thank you for bringing the official opinion.
But I'm glad that at the very least my arguments (and the arguments from many others) make sense.
And I would like to see one day this answer clarified specifically in the judge list...
Thanks
I appreciate your work and thank you for bringing the official opinion.
But I'm glad that at the very least my arguments (and the arguments from many others) make sense.
And I would like to see one day this answer clarified specifically in the judge list...
Thanks
John Danker
Administrator
You mean the judge list that you can view....those posts I quoted were from the judge list....another UDE Judge list.
DarkLogicianOfCaos
Eschew Obfuscation
Wow, this was fun to work through. Now I have (hopefully) something that I hope might clear things up??
Since this game is about mutual fun and the decency of fair play, taking turns and good sportsmanship.... The TP, after summoning his monster and passing priority to the NTP, who, not wanting to waste his Trap Hole, passes back, could/should say, so, we agree that the monster is successfully summoned and we can move on to the next portion of my main phase one, wherein I can activate normal Spell cards to my hearts content?
If NTP agrees, and TP activates a normal spell card (ala the earlier referenced Block Attack), does that not CHANGE the idea that the last thing to "resolve" was the summons of a monster, as there is no prioriy response to the summon when you activate a normal spell card (pirority response to a summon includes spell speed 2, 3 or monster effects, not normal spell)? (Assuming this is the case) Then why can you not both agree that the monster is summoned and both have allowed the response to summon window to close and say, "not in response to my summon, but as a seperate part of my main phase, I activate this spell speed 2 effect", and not allow a chain that is a response to a summon that you both agree the timing has passed?
On another note, going back to the previous post about attacking: It was always my understanding that there was a "declaration of attack" moment and then an actual attack moment, also known as "attack goes through" (which is VERY easy to recognize when attacking a face down monster, as it gets flipped face up at that point, but not so easy on a monster that is already face up. I guess you just have to agree that the attack declaration portion is over and you allow the attack to hit the target, but not neccesarily enter damage calculation--like what happens when a monster is flipped, the attack has gone thorugh, but you are not quite at the damage calculation portion for the effects of, say, Kiseitai, or Ancient Lamp). Anyway, maybe that was what Tiso was refering to . I mean, NTP responds to the declaration of an attack with Mirror Force, TP Trap Jammer's it. Resolve, past point of "declaration" and into the "attack goes through" or maybe another substep of "actual attack", but NTP can still activate cards like BoM, because he's not in the damage step yet (Must be in between parts to account for the different card effects), --hey shouldn't NTP, at this point, also still be able to after the above chain resolves, activate Magic Cylinder, because Magic Cylinder is activated in response to an attack and NOT a declaration of an attack? Would the sub-sub-steps look like this, then?
Enter Battle Phase (response?)
Declare desire to battle (response?)
Select attacking Monster (response?)
Select attack target (response?)
Declare attack (response?)
Attack accepted -Observable with NTP agreeing to flip-up F/D monster (response?)
Attack goes through-F/D is flipped (response? Kiseitai would out appply here)
Calculate Damage....well, from attack goes through and flipping, it's all; on the link to that BEAUTIFUL chart (above).
What do you think?
Since this game is about mutual fun and the decency of fair play, taking turns and good sportsmanship.... The TP, after summoning his monster and passing priority to the NTP, who, not wanting to waste his Trap Hole, passes back, could/should say, so, we agree that the monster is successfully summoned and we can move on to the next portion of my main phase one, wherein I can activate normal Spell cards to my hearts content?
If NTP agrees, and TP activates a normal spell card (ala the earlier referenced Block Attack), does that not CHANGE the idea that the last thing to "resolve" was the summons of a monster, as there is no prioriy response to the summon when you activate a normal spell card (pirority response to a summon includes spell speed 2, 3 or monster effects, not normal spell)? (Assuming this is the case) Then why can you not both agree that the monster is summoned and both have allowed the response to summon window to close and say, "not in response to my summon, but as a seperate part of my main phase, I activate this spell speed 2 effect", and not allow a chain that is a response to a summon that you both agree the timing has passed?
On another note, going back to the previous post about attacking: It was always my understanding that there was a "declaration of attack" moment and then an actual attack moment, also known as "attack goes through" (which is VERY easy to recognize when attacking a face down monster, as it gets flipped face up at that point, but not so easy on a monster that is already face up. I guess you just have to agree that the attack declaration portion is over and you allow the attack to hit the target, but not neccesarily enter damage calculation--like what happens when a monster is flipped, the attack has gone thorugh, but you are not quite at the damage calculation portion for the effects of, say, Kiseitai, or Ancient Lamp). Anyway, maybe that was what Tiso was refering to . I mean, NTP responds to the declaration of an attack with Mirror Force, TP Trap Jammer's it. Resolve, past point of "declaration" and into the "attack goes through" or maybe another substep of "actual attack", but NTP can still activate cards like BoM, because he's not in the damage step yet (Must be in between parts to account for the different card effects), --hey shouldn't NTP, at this point, also still be able to after the above chain resolves, activate Magic Cylinder, because Magic Cylinder is activated in response to an attack and NOT a declaration of an attack? Would the sub-sub-steps look like this, then?
Enter Battle Phase (response?)
Declare desire to battle (response?)
Select attacking Monster (response?)
Select attack target (response?)
Declare attack (response?)
Attack accepted -Observable with NTP agreeing to flip-up F/D monster (response?)
Attack goes through-F/D is flipped (response? Kiseitai would out appply here)
Calculate Damage....well, from attack goes through and flipping, it's all; on the link to that BEAUTIFUL chart (above).
What do you think?