Download Raid to get Legendary Loki ➡ t2m.io/TeamAPS_Aug24 + 2 strong Epics ⚡ Epic champions available only via my link and for new players ⌛ Hurry, Loki the Deceiver is a limited edition Champion, available by October 23rd by logging into RAID for 7 days
Hot take / limit special summon to 3 to 5 times per turn and two normal summons for each turn … it would make turns shorter and allow players to get their cards out the deck with the normal summons
@@Merilirem shit prolly decks so hand traps n shit that are tiered can still be used, but the decks and engines that are like busted strong each format arent
Yu-Gi-Oh's scarcity and rarity systems actively turn off players from moving from Master Duel to the physical game. You can make whatever deck you want online but if you want to play anything made beyond the past 2 years, it's near impossible to straight up acquire the cards let alone find cards at a reasonable price.
110% this. As someone who prefers to play with physical cards, it has been a struggle to find copies of stuff that isnt even all that popular or strong, regardless of age or rarity even! Would be nice if Konami had an official singles card store online for older cards. Especially stuff of lower rarities and wont ever see a reprint.
As someone who plays on db, master duel and have decks irl, 100% this. I remember a period of 4 years where I did not take yugioh seriously really competitively after dn went down and there was two times off hand I can recall where I didn't get back in partly because i looked at the price invoked and later unchained when they were new and I couldn't justify the price of either them. The only deck I ended up making when it was newer/newish was tri brigade because I loved the deck, but I refused to shell out for accesscode talker. I was panicking when there was a day that fraktal was spiking because I really don't think I should pay more then 20-30 dollars for a card and ideally it shouldn't be that much even. I very rarely do it unless I know it's a deck I am 100% am sure I am not gonna drop any time soon as tribrigade is still my favorite modern archetype and is one of my two favorite things to play currently. It's really hard to justify play physically because this is the golden era of yugioh sims imo. There's so many auto sims besides master duel and duelingbook along with past formats being more popular. It's hard to go from free or basically free, to spending usually hundreds and hundreds irl. Even more so if you don't have regular friends who play.
So much this! There are cards that only exist in high rarity with very few printings, so even if the card has long been surpassed by the powercreep I still can't find the cards to build a fun non-meta deck
Master duel is a bloody grind though. (After all the first free gem thrown your way/ after you play solo) you can’t make many decks unless u just copy the “best lists”. MD is very unfriendly to deck crafting and especially theory crafting/ testing cards.
hot take: I strongly believe that a lot of the issues with generic boss monsters pigeonholing combo decks into very similar endboards, can be completely solved by making the completely generic boss monster, slightly less generic. I don't think borreload savage should require a rokket tuner monster, but it definitely should require a dragon tuner. that way savage would be not be any harder to summon in the rokket deck, or rokket adjacent decks (d-link), but for combo decks that stray further than that like mannadium, those decks would have to jump through some hoops or run certain engines in order to make savage. That could do a lot for endboard variety.
Why the hell Crystal Wing doesn't have any type or attribute material requirements, let alone requiring Clear Wing, we'll probably never know. I suppose the last point has a small case against that restriction--Yugo summoning Crystal Wing by using Maliciousmagnet's effect on Clear Wing after the latter had been "stolen" by the effect of Neo Cipher Dragon--but my God, it makes less sense for it to be so generic. Same for Baronne de Fleur. Requiring Chevalier would probably be a little overboard, but y'know, it doesn't even have CRYSTAL WING'S so-called "requirement." To be clear I'm perfectly agreeing, I just think about those examples more than Savage.
3:45 The difference between then and now is that a complete newby getting destroyed by a meta deck would still be able to understand what's going on. Nowadays trying to get someone new to the game to understand why they lost is a way bigger hurdle than it was back then.
I go to locals and there’s people who started a month ago that are fully up to date with rulings timing’s and how to play, it’s all person to person, even 5 years ago when I started playing yugioh I had no clue what I was doing and felt like my opponent was over powered, it’s the same today just a little more intense, and a tear 0 format…
The problem with all the “limit the amount of special summons” that a lot of people throw around it’s that it doesn’t nearly hit every single deck at the same power level. Example: Salamangreat/hero have to do a lot of special summons to generate small advantage synergies inside their archetype engines in order to do a competent board, while something like Kashtira could easily throw around 2 specials and be pretty much okay with the loop they can do. I know the difference in power is noticeable but it can be applied to other decks as well, like tenpai. In the other hand, limiting special summon is not even the solution by the mere existence of decks like flowandereeze whose whole identity is normal summoning like you are special summoning.
Limiting special summoning would not only hurt weaker decks more but it would also drasticly increase power creep because now cards have to do even more because you can't play as many anymore. It would also hurt mechanics like tag out, Sky Striker or Vanquish Soul who tag out their monsters for others, they would be really hurt by this.
pretty much and the whole "limit special summons" has its own alternative testing bed in maxx c already anyway like while they arent exactly the same there does exist some comparison that can be drawn between completely limiting summons and deterring it overall a lot of so call "fixes" people come up with for arent really even fixes in the first place but rather just veiled attempts to masked their poor argument of how much better the game will be if it abide by their own house rules that favor their own personal preferences to their advantage while inhibiting everyone else as much as possible, a good example of this is to just look at the comment sections of any vids that try to give ideas about balancing maxx c as the majority of the ideas will just nerf the card into the ground until its either unplayable or there is no point in playing it which would be beside the point of the topic
Heres a real hot take: Bricking should be ENCOURAGED. One of my favorite things about master duel is the necessity to run a little bit of everything. Spot removal, floodgates, hand traps, etc. and there are hands where you brick because of drawing into all non engine. That should be a GOOD thing. The biggest issues with the game right now isnt even power level, its CONSISTENCY. It just feels like the top decks are incapable of bricking anymore which is a shame because the BEST games i have ever had were the ones where a sub optimal play was the best i had, and my opponent and i have to grind each other out. It goes back to what youre always saying about playing every game out.
@@8bitdiedie agreed. I was a player in the quasar era. Back when that was our ONLY Omni negate I'm the game. I remember 2 card quasar was INSANE as a concept, but still not guaranteed. It isn't even just one card combos, it's the fact that EVERYTHING is so easily searchable these days. Also how you'd sometimes have to play a tribute monster or two to get over specific threats. Caius and tytannial were EVERYWHERE back then. It's tiring that every deck has to be 100% gas.
conistency complaints are a power level complaints. nobody likes functionally one player games cause the other player lost by bricking. the issue is that decks are too high power which makes games less interesting. the best games are ones when the player which made better option judgement won instead of the only player that had real options.
I had a master duel game yesterday, Purely vs Salamangreat. I drew into what would've been full expurrely combo +imperm, but the opponent drew into 4 handtraps. He used every single one forcing me to salvage my field into just Utopic Draco future and imperm. That was one of the most balanced games I've had in a while, because we both spent all of our reasources to exhaust the other's. It left us with unoptimal boards, no hands, and praying as we tried to draw into a combo starter. He hit his first, and it actually felt fair. Those games will always be more fun then the usual "turn one win" games.
I just wish yugioh had more than 1 or 2 turns. In other card games I can think "dam I hope I draw x card soon" but in yugioh, im gonna be dead if I need x card, cuz everything is a huge beat stick now
We need more Yu-gi-oh! video games that have single player and exploration like they had in the old days. I loved the DS games in the 5D's era. Customizing your own character and getting to walk around Neo Domino while even getting to actually play speed duels with speed spells was great, I also had a lot of fun with the races you got to run on your duel runner. I hate that the games Konami is running are free-to-play ones that require having to spend lots of cash or grind a long time to get cards you want.
I think the anime had the right idea with battle city. By making it so extra deck monsters can't do stuff the turn they are summoned, giving them some sort of summoning sickness
Speaking of the extra deck, I think that maybe the max number of cards you can run in your extra deck should be tied to your deck's size. Like, a 5 card extra deck limit for 40 card decks, a 10 card limit for 50 card decks, and the full 15 if you're running a full 60.
@rickyl3819 Why limit the extra deck like that, though? I mean I don't know anything about competitive Yu-Gi-Oh, but that just sounds like a dumb pointless idea.
@@theanystrom2882 Partially because I sincerely doubt Konami is going to ban or errata all the generic extra deck monsters that they've printed to make them tie your hand in some way. That would probably be the better thing to do, but I don't see it happening. Currently, unless you're playing certain archetypes, there's no reason for you not to jam in 15 cards that you essentially always have access to, acting as an extra hand that can get you out of pretty much any situation. At least by tying it to main deck size, you have to trade draw consistency for extra deck versatility.
@rickyl3819 I don't use generic stuff, really. I try to stick to in archetype cards if I can other than some spells and traps. Fire Kings is the only deck I have that isn't pure Archtype cards other than spells and traps, it's got 3× Fencing Fire Ferret and 1× Sacred Phoenix Nepenthys(but they kind of fit the theme of the deck), and whatever the extra deck monsters the starter deck came with but I only ever use Garunix Eternity. So if there isn't enough of in archetype cards for a full extra deck, I will probably only have what there is in archetype. But I'm an extremely casual player that's only ever played with cousins.
@@residentgrey no of course not. It just has casuals leaving for easier more affordable games, pros leaving in droves for better prizing, and no new players because it’s impossible to teach to a new player without tying them to a chair for a month. I’m sure the fire will put itself out lol
@@bangerheadboyI’m surprised it hasn’t at this point. I mainly collect/play casual jank because it’s what I like, but I won’t even attempt the competitive scene because it’s a shit show.
@@bangerheadboyFacts. I dropped physical because I didn't want to drop $40+ per card to build the skeleton of a competent deck, went to MD only for a while, but then I realized the real problem was the direction the game design was going: Unfair decks vs Unfun decks - and I'm not down with either. Kashtira/Tearlaments was the epitome of it and the final straw for me. Dropped YGO for Commander, brought my wife and friends with me, and haven't looked back. Building a deck is less than half the cost for over double the cards, games last between 1-3 hours, new people are actually willing to try and learn Commander as opposed to backing away with fear at the prospect of learning YGO. I hate WotC as a company for their Calicult nonsense, but not as much as I hate Konami as a company for their anti-consumer practices and total apathy (or antipathy even) towards the design and balance of the game. WotC R&D will push out cards without playtesting them, Konami R&D is a sealed-off board room with dusty skeletons and a lich that have been in there since 1999. My cold take: Konami cares less about YuGiOh than the people who pay for it, and cares less about it as a whole than they care about any other franchise they've managed to fumble, mutilate, put on life support coating off of reputation and remakes, or even kill completely (i.e. Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, Castlevania, DDR, etc). Give it less than a decade and YGO will be reduced to the background images for pachinko machines in "arcades" (read: gambling dens/ trashy casinos) and all the cards will come from gacha vending machines.
I hate when people complain about floodgates but then dismiss the argument of running back row removal due to diluting their deck too much, but at the same time are ok with half their deck being hand-traps and interruption and the other half linear combo. Then they complain about opening five hand traps and no starters….
Because the handtraps they run are meant to counter meta decks specifically. Adding s/t removal when no meta decks are using floodgates just means that the moment you go against a meta deck and you draw the backrow removal you get punished. The moment you go against a floodgate deck and you don't have backrow removal in your deck you're essentially punished for focusing on what meta decks are weak to. Do you think you should be punished for only running counters to the most powerful decks in the format due to limited deck space? Because if you're fine with the idea of running other cards that have nothing to do with meta decks themselves then you'd be fine with maxx coming back and running 9 cards in every deck specifically because of it.
@@Honest_Mids_Masher I understand the point that handtraps are there because they can counter meta decks and combos and are generally more useful than s/t removal which possibly don’t come up in games. But my point is that everyone complains heavily about floodgates, so much to the point where most of them are all either at 1 or banned because people just refuse to play s/t removal vs handtraps that can also possibly brick into the wrong matchup but just about all handtraps are legal at 3. It’s the mindset of conformity that we are just supposed to focus on the meta instead of the game as a whole, we get annoyed but are also ok with losing to handtraps but on the off chance a floodgate is flipped, players scream and cry that that’s the problem with the game. Also no I despise Maxx C and believe it should be deleted from the game as well as any other handtrap that linger for a turn like droll and shifter.
@@blainejuliet1448 I mean they're right to complain about it. Almost everyone hates lingering effects and everyone also wanted a shifter ban and says that when droll is needed in a format it's not a good format. I don't see why floodgates should be excluded from this. We're supposed to focus on the meta because it's the only way other decks can actually stand a chance against it to even win a tournament. What's the point of running anti dragon cards for the blue eyes matchup when it's not even a good deck? It's impossible to prepare for every deck so why not go for the biggest threats which is the meta? Most handtraps aren't lingering floodgates and the ones that are people aren't ok with losing to. People are asking for shifter bans even though it counters Snake Eyes because of how much of an instant win it is compared to regular handtraps which are 1-1 interactions that can be played around, or chainblocked, or baited out. Floodgates as strong as summon limit or TCBOO is impossible for every deck to play around. Maxx C forcing you to dedicate the same 9 cards to counter it as opposed to anti-meta cards is the exact same thing floodgates promote. That's the issue. Unless if they're way lower powered as opposed to something like skill drain or Fossil Dyna and moreso something like maybe negating every fifth monster effect that's activated each turn then it'd be fine.
@@Honest_Mids_Masher I do agree that some floodgates are a little too powerful in the sense of flip a card into a matchup and just win like anti-spell into any pendulum deck or TCBOO into Salamangreat for instance but also it doesn’t change the arguement that all these have simple outs in several forms as mst, cosmic cyclone, etc (except for AntiSpell and Imperial order which I don’t approve of anyway). The difference with Maxx C, Droll, Shifter is that once they are discarded and you don’t have the out immediately in your hand in the form of your 1 allowed called by, the effect is now active and un-interactable, while s/t floodgates have to sit on the field and can be outed at any point if you can find the removal through possible draws. Like you said it is impossible to prepare for every deck but what’s annoying is that unless it’s meta we just choose not to and force it to be banned when there are plenty of outs to said cards. If it’s a matter of literally 3 cards being added to a deck of 40 becoming too much of a consistency problem for the players then maybe the meta is a little too strong and should be addressed instead of pointing figures at a whole aspect of the game that is designed to help against said meta and calling it a problem, granted yes floodgates work both ways but that’s what the removal is for. I will preface that I don’t play in tournaments and don’t want or care to due to the state of the game, I’m merely a “casual” player giving my 2 cents.
@@blainejuliet1448 Except it does especially when you go second to a deck that has multiple negates that stop the counters and it also changes when you realize that even combo decks can use floodgates (snake eyes was flipping summon limit until it got banned for example). Once again that doesn't change the fact either that in order to counter those cards you've mentioned you also have to make it much more difficult to stand a chance against the actual meta itself. With the floodgate handtraps droll is till the end of the turn, so is Maxx C and shifter those do wear off meanwhile with the floodgate spells and traps. They're always active until they're removed. Unlike the floodgate traps you dont need to draw the out and instead just wait for it to wear off (although you'd lose cause you basically got turn skipped). Except the thing is when it's not meta it's most of the time not a problem because non meta decks don't usually make use of autowin cards that just win almost every single matchup. Outside of floodgate traps hardly any cards have been hit for specifically being used by non meta decks because they don't just instantly win the game. 3 bricks in a lot of matchups can be soul crushing to draw into. Not to mention just 3 is very inconsistent to draw into. If that wasn't the case people wouldn't feel the need to have on average 12-15 handtraps in every deck and would actually be able to afford the deck space for backrow removal. While the meta is a problem this isn't a symptom of the meta (unless if we're gonna start blaming meta for not running more of these floodgates) rather it's the problematic design of floodgates that further promotes the "draw the out or lose" aspect of the game to a far worse degree than it already is.
Every* Extra Deck monster in an Archetype should require that archetype as material to summon it. Especially if they're clearly upgrades on an existing card, like Ruddy Rose Dragon and all the RDA upgrades. They should require Black Rose or RDA as a material. Edit: *Okay, not every, but all the big ones that are being splashed into decks at random? Yes, them. They should be locked to the archetype they're meant to support if their effects don't lock them there in the first place.
@@trollof229antthevariable9 burn and control are just decks that exist im talking like cool synergies between decks in general. While i dont like things being super generic i also dont think archetype locking every card is good either. By locking every archetype into a pure varient you kill the creativity in deck building that yugioh is known for
@@KillerrrbYep, at this point the game practically *needs* set rotation but it probably won’t happen because many fans will throw a hissy-fit. And tbf, they wouldn’t be completely wrong to do so either since one of the appeals of this game is being able to play any card from any era and combine them together.
Rotation would also screw with a lot of archetypes since konami is so fond of drip feeding us cards for them over the course of 3-5 sets, not to speak of support we receive years later.
I get the idea behind MR4 but the problem is Link Monsters. They're already ridiculously powerful and mandatory for 99% of decks now. The game would just become Link only if the other mechanics are crippled again. If you don't think that, look back to MR4 and look at how dead Pendulums are because of those rules.
This. I played competitively in Edison back in that period. Life made me have to quit for awhile. My deck was blackwings. I attempted to return when MR4 started and it did not do well for my deck so I chose not to come back as I didn't have my deck to use while learning all the new mechanics I had missed.
It’s also obvious that MR4 wasn’t actually trying to slow down the game. The only way MR4 would have actually slowed the game down by any meaningful capacity is if Link monsters were all terrible or average at best. I don’t mind the idea that extra deck monsters are so powerful that you’d basically need an extra monster just to give them a way for more than one to exist on the field, but Link monsters are some of the strongest monsters in the game! It just made it so that the new cards would be OP because old decks would have basically no chance to put up a solid counter board.
@@trueblueryu5713 MR4 was able to speed up the game with average link monster the only to slow down the game is to go back to MR4 bad all link 2 or lower and never print any again
We also can't retroactively add it back, as it destroys all the non-link archetype design that's happened since the rule revisions. How does Branded play in MR4? Ghoti? Runick Combo?
You should not be able to use monsters as material for extra deck monsters the turn the woulde-be-material monsters are summoned. (Unless it's an effect that specifically says otherwise like IP). This means a player has to keep his stuff alive for at least one turn and it prevents spamming out endless extra deck monsters. Extra deck monsters should be a reward in themselves for building momentum, but not a launching pad for 10 other monsters.
In response to the comment about paying LP for special summons, i still think that there should be no cost or limit to special summoning, however they should print more cards like Nibiru that can punish you for over-extending
I’d like to see stuff like “If your opponent summoned more than X times this/previous turn, this effect can’t be negated” or at least boost the effect in some way to help even the playing field.
They are. The Melchummy cards are literally punishments for decks who summon too much, and they don't suffer from the Maxx "C" problem where they have no restrictions and can't run away with the game after being played. Also, board breakers like Dark Ruler No More and Super Polymerization are designed to punish decks that special summon a lot.
@@8bitdiediewhat if there was a nibiru that if negated, would still pop/tribute like one thing on the field. that way the negate doesn't feel wasted, but neither does the nibiru activation. I like the idea of a card that can still do something but just weaker when negated. that way neither the negate nor the handtrap feels wasted
Hot Take: each hand trap type of card should be limited at 1 copy per deck, or limited to archetypal play, that way people can play the game, instead of getting angry and flipping the table.
@Legobrat86 honestly hand traps piss me off the most, like I have several irl but I keep them out of decks cause I believe and fair chances to build a board, the only deck I have hand traps in is my phantom knights deck amd that's it
I've said this before, but a rule change/patch will only ever be a temporary fix to a singular issue at best. one such example is the priority rule. before, any monster with an effect had priority to use it as soon as it's summoned but Konami changed it to only monsters with effects that proc on summon. This was in order to nerf cards that dominated the meta because of this rule like DAD and Brionac. At least until they started printing monsters with quick effects. it doesn't matter what rule changes you make in the game if Konami is just going to print cards that get around them or just straight up ignore them (i.e. "ignoring it's summoning conditions"). The only thing that can fix the game is a major change in card design philosophy.
My solution to the issue of players pushing new players away I totally agree, if someone seems new its better to hold back. If you're not sure just let them go first and see what they do, but just try to limit what you're doing, misplay a little. They're not gonna know and it lets them get a better handle on the game
@@steel5897You know that's been a running gag in the game for years, right? That whoever wins the flip and goes first is gonna win, so just do the flip and proceed to game 2, repeat for game 2 and/or 3.
So true. There should be a cost for superconsistency. If you opt for that, you should be punished in some regard. And that argument of "but it doesn't work against most meta decks" is stupid, because guess what, these other meta decks should also be struggling with floodgates if they don't have enough outs in their decks to draw them consistently. If anything, we should have more floodgates to incentive more diverse tools and less consistent decks, albeit floodgates shouldn't be just flip a card and it affects everything for free. It should cost something for these effects to be applied.
I once brought floodgates up once, saying they were okay. And someone told me that if floodgates are legal, they won't have enough consistency for cards that can deal with the meta. There was also the point that floodgates are only one card to activate as opposed to doing an entire combo. For me it came across as an excuse, because people couldn't ash a skill drain.
@@illdoittomorrow2368They're right though. You're literally ruining your chances to deal with the meta because of the fact that deck space is taken up by off meta blowouts that also can solely win the game on their own. Might as well just have Maxx C back in the game to take up 9 more deckslots.
@@VixYW i only run a few floodgates in my deck on master duel but i don't think I've ever seen a yubel player pop my shadow inprisioning mirror which just hard shuts down their deck. All they would need is a single MST, but none of them run it or any other spell and trap removal for some reason
@@princessrayneshia1293 Probably because they're too busy trying to stop snake eyes with cards that beat them. Do you think it's fair not being able to do anything for trying to be able to stand a chance against the best deck? Now if meta decks were running floodgates then people would actually start adding ways to remove spells and traps from the field. Everything people run depends on the meta.
Maybe it's a cultural thing, Konami doesn't listen, they're too arrogant, CEO/ Manager thinks it's okay to ignore the consumer but I'm done, this is a toxic game. Majority of products are for competitive play, and we've been waiting for a snake eyes hit for +1/2 a year? I had to leave this game, I love this game, but I don't care for competitive play, I don't like handtraps, 50% of decks being generic cards when they used to be traps is wrong. Games should take +5 turns not 3.
8:07 the problem with this idea is that it’s a misunderstanding of where a deck’s power lies. It’s the same reason the Maxx C argument kind of falls flat. There are always exceptions like Snake Eye, but the decks that will be hurt most by this kind of rule aren’t the top meta decks, it’s the rogue decks like Salamangreat, Madolche, etc, that NEED 10+ summons just to set up a relatively competent board
Here's my hot take. The only time Yu-Gi-Oh! hasn't been a game all about control and preventing your opponent from playing was before the first World Championship. Hand Control made up 100% of the Top 8, and the only time the winning deck lost was a mirror match. Since then, control was the only way to play. And once Invasion of Chaos dropped? Other decks may have existed, and they may have done decently at locals, but Chaos Control reigned supreme in basically every metric measured. The classic Yu-Gi-Oh! that Yugi-Boomers say they miss is either Metal Raiders-era vanilla beatdown with La Jinn and 7 Colored Fish or just kitchen table "Buy a bunch of packs and go" style dueling.
@@DAVALOSLUIS I can enjoy the meta when I'm in the mood for it, but yeah casual play is always gonna be top tier. I'm doing a virtual progression series with a friend, and theme decks are my go-to for a fun deck build.
Yugioh would benefit alot from a pokemon style teir system where only things of similar power level can be played against each other. It would make less blowout games and would also give a reason for weaker archetypes to be made instead of instantly being forgotten and relegated to pack filler. The only real issue with this is how it would handle staple cards because since they're used alot they would be in the higher teirs but a weak deck with an ash is a pretty big difference to snake-eye with an ash
@@darkwolf9637 im not into competitive but what would the tiers be based on? Just tiering the cards individually based on how good they are or would it be based on the archetype or something?
Anyone asking for MR4 to come back to slopw the game down never saw what was happening in MR4 competitively and was just pissy they'd always lose to their friend's Frightfur deck that just pumped out multiple Fusions to kill them immediately or some other shit because that was when the game was flooded with FTKs and psudo FTKs like Gumblar ripping away your entire hand or Gouki Extra Linking you. Also Extra Linking was an awful mechanic that never should've existed, but if you hate dealing with cards like Bow of the Goddess, IP Masq and Accesscode Talker, MR4 would only make you see them 50 times more frequently than they're played now
I remember when they announced linkuriboh and firewall for OCG. They had triple firewal + naturia beast combos from just the previews. Vrains was the dark age of the game. Every format was something like link 2 into a ftk
One thing to kind of go with the rarity take is that OCG cards should be legal to play in the TCG and vice-versa. It's really dumb that we can't because "Konami said so" especially when Worlds as an event is meant to bring both sides together
Addressing 3 ideas from the video: Adding a separate forbidden/limited combination list is a thing I’ve been advocating for in yugioh for a while if they aren’t going to use any set rotation. It lets older cards work with intended decks like people want in an eternal format, while keeping them from being busted in meta/ftk style decks. And I think it’s better than just having the “Legends” style card from Rush duels or duel links limit 1 style when there are decks full of limit 1/2 like Tearlament that are healthy to play while their cards are limited as they are. I do not think best of 1 is a healthy format for tourneys because of its sacky nature, and I really do love the idea of doing best of 3 with no side decks. I agree that side deck cards are usually your blowouts you’ll only ever run when you know they will be live in your opening hand like siding D barrier or evenly matched. As a person who’s done some BO1 tourneys round robin style into top cut they really can feel sacky, especially when you just lose the die roll every time, BO3 helps mitigate it by giving you more chances to win even if you lose the die roll. Last playing LP to special summon will completely murder any deck that already pays life points to do stuff like Dinomorphia, Punk, or Exosister. And those decks aren’t even like good. Getting only 1500lp back in end phase means you are now under summon limit with only ~2000 lp to survive your opponents turn lol, good luck.
The master rule 4 take is just bad, because the game hasn't significantly sped up since we left it, the difference is that link decks aren't as dominant. Master rule 4 only slowed the game down for like 2 sets, once link strategies started getting filled out then the game quickly returned to master rule 3 speeds, and once generic links started becoming good then it wasn't just the link centric decks that could do it. The only thing master rule 4 did was it nerfed pendulums to a more reasonable level and it made decks that have locks that prevent them from playing links unplayable
I think CIBR full power SPYRAL is more powerful than any MR3 deck was, save perhaps Fusion Sub Zoodiac. that was the second set with links.. I also think Metalfoes was fundamentally a fine deck, the pace of the game increasing did a lot to hurt pendulums and MR4 is where the strongest pendulum decks came out anyways.. with Electrumite.
Let's not forget that snake-eye/fiendsmith is a link deck, voiceless voice doesn't use the extra deck at all, the upcoming malice cards are links, etc. Just because we were beaten down by fusion tear and xyz kash for a bit doesn't mean master rule four wasn't always an extremely lopsided mechanic
To add on to the hand trap take, I think hand traps should be built into archetypes and instead of doing generic negates, they should be built more like a havnis where they generate you advantage to keep up with the turn player and give more nuanced interaction. Not saying completely remove negates, but overall make every archetype capable of unique interactions that put their own particular strategy into play
Returning to Master Rule 4 would probably completely decimate the game in an irreparable way. For a long time, even when Konami made support for certain decks to play under the restrictions of Master Rule 4, those decks were just unplayable. Not even in a bad way, like, those decks couldn't even function properly. A deck like Noble Knights, which relies on multiple extra deck monsters to play their deck could not play under these restrictions. This would probably be even worse now since Konami has developed decks that don't have link monsters, and decks that could use it, abused the hell out of the rulings. Does anyone even remember Gouki U-Link boards?
i hate extra deck board spamming. Bring mr4 back. Konami can retrain decks/cards to adapt along with buying new cards. This game has gotten too fast and op that the top players are quitting. It needs mr4.
Yeah, the special summon burn rule would actually kill pretty much any rogue deck. Also, it would make decks like Yosenju or Floowandereeze tier 0 meta threats.
Hot take, something like Yugioh Nightmare Tradabour or GX Spirit Caller would be perfect to draw new players, especially if done in a modern open world rpg format. You can have the exact same game we play irl, just with a dope single player and an online ladder
"Floodgates good for game, people just don't run enough S/T removal" - Problem with this statement is that decks that only rely on floodgates will add a lot of engine to protect floodgates such us runick Hugin, Decisive Battle of Golgonda or Soleam cards so just drawing 1 or 2 removals won't fix that. Also they aren't running just 1 card you need to protect yourself from. Another thing is that floodgates are never two sided. Nobody would put in Skill drain if that card would prevent them from playing the game. They would put cards that work fine and would only be bad for opponent, so it doesn't slow down anything, but only benefits those who play them Takes with LP for summons or back to MR 4 is just bizzare. This would work if you would reset game and start from new ( even so it's usually so short sighted ) but with current game would just remove huge part of decks from the game, mostly non meta decks. MR4 was a mistake because it would now prevent any deck that only plays 1 mechanic that is not Link to not do much. The take about kids getting loses in tournaments.. Honestly they shouldn't join tournaments first time they come with they anime decks. Play casual with people around, let them win sure, but in tournament this is unfair to people themselves if they would just let them win and lose their game because someone would get offended
its a reason why floodgates are terrible design. players are very good at making a symetrical effect not effect them so any balancing that requires symetry of impact is never going to be balanced. as well nobody runs weak floodgates so they are always worth putting effort into protecting.
It's not even just that. Handtraps have always been ran depending on the meta. For example ash seeing less play and D.D crow seeing more play during tearlaments format. Floodgates aren't used by meta decks and yet people are arguing that you should run counters to them even though what that does is give you potential bricks every time you go up against a meta deck and in the other way around if you don't run backrow removal because you want to be able to somewhat consistently counter the meta and you go against a floodgate deck you essentially get punished for trying to counter the meta instead of running back row removal for an off meta deck. Imagine being punished for trying to beat the strongest decks in the format, that's dumb.
The problem is that floodgates don't go anywhere. They actively prevent the game from being played by people. You can either play under them or you can't and not playing loses games. No card should stop people from trying to do stuff at the basic level. Any card that demands an out should probably not exist.
Structure decks should be more like the Tactical Try decks that showed up in OCG and Master Duel. Current structure decks aren't much "decks" as much as they are a box of singletons, some of them are almost unplayable if you don't buy multiple copies and that's very counter intuitive to new players. The ideal would be a deck with a functioning synergy and the necessary pieces to actually accomplish the deck's game plan (with unoptimized power, of course, leave space to the player to improve it on their own). And maybe a few extra tech cards included in the box so the player could have the incentive to experiment.
What would it be like if yugioh had a combo limit? Like you can only activate X card effects per turn. Maybe some old school and casual people would like that if it worked.
The thing with floodgates and "run more backrow removal" is that most of the ones in the game are not searchable by most archetypes. Therefore, even if you're running them, the game is just a "draw the out" non-game. Your removal cards are either near the top of your deck or they may as well not be in the deck at all. Konami would need to print a huge number of searchable removal options, which would mean that floodgate strategies become less used, meaning more dead cards in the deck - which creates terrible game feel, meaning people would run them less and floodgates would come right back over and over again. The end result is still sacky and annoying.
I feel like we shouldn't go back to Master Rule 4 as it would only really hurt decks without links, which in the current meta would only really be pet or rouge decks, most of the current meta decks can run an engine of links, and going back to making the game so reliant on them would only hurt low power none link decks. Meta wise, decks like Runick stun, Yubel, and Snake eyes would be almost unaffected, and those that it would hit, would basically be rendered unplayable off the top of my head, decks like Raidraptor, Suship, Superheavy Samurai, and Fluffal would be rendered unplayable in a meta that none of them are really problematic in anyway.
Mr4 is how the game should've been played. The fusion monster zone became the extra monster zone. You want more? Use the links. Your old decks that arent meta anyways cant be played? Request konami to make upgrades for those decks. This game is too fast and too op.
@@MANCO92687 MR4 would not fix the game being too fast or op, because links themselves are a main contributor to that pace of play, plus most meta decks would be unaffected, also, the extra monster zone was a new thing with links, it wasn't ever the fusion monster zone, I think you may be refering to how the Extra deck was called the fusion deck.
Thing about limiting special summons, is that it would be easier to just ban one card combos. If special summoning requires resources, it should be hard to replenish those resources, and u shouldn't have a way to gain so many back
Hot take: Most peoples ideas are terrible. They hardly pass the smell test of wether they’ll work in theory and are even worse in practice. Ex: Summon Limits
agree, a lot of so call "fixes" people come up with for arent really even fixes in the first place but rather just veiled attempts to masked their poor argument of how much better the game will be if it abide by their own house rules that favor their own personal preferences to their advantage while inhibiting everyone else as much as possible
@@UnicornLupus I've actually tested it, and it worked better then a thinked, resolves a lot of problems of modern yugioh design. In competitive level we'll need a new banlist thinked in this format, some archetypes like floow, kash, labirynth will need to go, i really enjoy playing labirinth and floow nowadays but there's no other way to fix the game i think.
@@UnicornLupusAt home? No in an environment with people that are hardcore meta players to show just how one sided the format would be and how little room there is for any deck to be playable except for one that turbo out a boss monster in a single summon. I wouldn't be surprised if every format was a tier 0 one The guy above suggested removing entire decks from being playable. That alone already shows just how bad it is.
The last take was by far the best. I would welcome paired bans to help keep some decks from abusing other archetype's cards to the point that the other archetype becomes unplayable due to the abuse of a card that isn't even that archetype's fault.
As a Pendulum player I'd like it if you could Pendulum Summon monsters from the face-up Extra Deck to any main monster zone instead of just the Extra Monster Zone, and with how a lot of current Pendulum Monsters having so many restrictions, and many of the generic end board pieces looking to banned such as apollousa, I:P, etc... i think the mr4 restrictions placed on Pendulums can be removed and nothing would change.
finnaly someone says the truth. Every yugi boomer thinks pendulum is too much and it is bad for balance when most decks will special summon more monsters with less restrictions, hell even blue-eyes can sometimes spam more monsters than most pendulum decks can and pendulums lose on lots of graveyard support and any backrow removal shuts them down.
@@gab4198 like bro, currently the best Summoning machines in the order of most powerful/broken are Links, Fusion, Xyz, Synchro, Ritual, and then you have Pendulum. I've heard the argument from many folks that the reason why Pendulums can never get their mr4 restriction removed was because "Pend for 5 from the Extra Deck is basically a Soul Charge you can use every turn", but than when not Pendulum decks are able to go plus infinity off of 1 card it's fine. Fusion and Rituals have way too many ways to circumvent their own drawbacks and go plus doing it and have the luxury of having consistent excess to the GY and Gy effects, Synchros generate stupid amounts of materials just to make them work, while Pendulum get the short end of the stick with them requiring their left and right most Zones to be empty (and those Zones can just disappear btw) and there are very few pend monsters that have effects when they are added to the Extra Deck, on top of that you go Minas 2 or more just to set up the scales and you need to set up Link arrows just to pend from the Extra Deck, also there are no good pend extenders that don't lock you to the ground.
@@nashcifer5666 exactly, the entire mechanic also just dies to cards like anti spell or diabelze or any card that places anything in the spell/trap zone. During master rule 4 the only generic link monster for pendulums was electrumite and he was the first of the links made for another mechanic to get banned, also for the only mechanic to still depend on links, for it to be the one with the least ammount of dedicated link monsters. Pendulum is also the only mechanic in the game that may lock you out of it and that is a flaw since the start, once a scale is in place you need it to destroy itself or destroy it by other card effect in order to place another card in its place, you get 2 zones and that is it, no room to take advantage of scale effects if card itself has bad scales. If they ever revamp pendulum summon they need to put back separate scales or a at least a property for the player being able to place scales in the spell/trap zones even if a card is already in there, sending those cards to the extra deck/gy when you do it (and also being able to play them even if those zones get blocked by other effects).
From ED to all main zones would be busted. Needing links is fine. We just need more that are designed for pendulums instead of the with corner zone, because in DL format you only get one zone.
Banned groups is what I've been wanting too. Like let Isolde still be run in Infernoble and Noble Knight decks, don't let them use Exodia or other degenerate cards to get that free looping of card advantage.
Honestly I see no issue with banned pairs. The only people it’ll actually affect are tournament players and if your unwilling to look a list of banned pairs then you shouldn’t be competing anyway
I unfortunately quit Yu-Gi-Oh not to long ago and the reason why is i went to my first Yu-Gi-Oh local event and i was running a decent cyber dragon deck and needless to say i wasnt even able to f.cking play thru my 5 matches i was in i wasn't able to do antthing cause everyone runs meta and the meta is too broken...now im not the type of person that needs to win to have fun but when your not even allowed to play the game with a deck that is suited to your cheap budget its just not worth it imo
My hot take: Seeing all the comments here and elsewhere about how to "improve" Yugioh, I'm glad none of them are in charge at Konami, to be honest. Konami may not be perfect, but I'd damn sure take them over the armchair designers.
For me Konami does a pretty good job. IDK wtf they were thinking with snake eyes but basically I just think the banlist needs some work. Limit Ash is my number 1 change id make
@haroldnecmann7040 not all applicable here, I'd rather have Konami messing up sometimes over you're typical yugiboomer "designing" cards and screeching about everything they don't like in the game and how it should be removed entirely
That guy talking about special summon burn mechanic is just a die hard Yosenju or Floowandereeze fan because that rule would make those decks a tier 0 super threats.
Sweeping game mechanic changes will not drastically improve the game. It only creates a new metagame where the existing decks are buffed and nerfed by the changes. The game environment as a whole is controlled by Konami's ability to add and remove cards from the game, the community's options are limited to either deciding for ourselves how we want to play the game or just hoping Konami makes decisions that we can live with.
one thing the guy who runs our local card shop is very firm about when people build sweaty decks. It'll only be fun once, and then no one will play with you.
I like the return to MR4 one. It was my favorite time of the game. It made Main Deck monsters mean more if you didn’t play links, and it was fun to figure out the best link monsters to include in your deck and the order in which you wanted to summon and the positioning. And the power level can be easily curbed by the banlist to prevent extra links if done right. Even now I always include link monsters in any deck just because they’re useful in general.
The worst take was unequivocally reverting the game back to Master Rule 4. In a vain attempt to slow the game down. I don’t believe that will work, because oppressive combo decks will still thrive in the game, just like they did during that era of TCG. It will just stunt and hinder rogue and causal decks to a grinding halt. Also; the Dominus Purge card seems excessively fucking restrictive; if I’m not mistaken, isn’t dark attribute the most represented in the game? This seems egregiously punishing for most decks.
I always love when people want to "ban" the handtraps. They're typically the same people that hate powercreep, when Handtraps stay around for ages. Effect Veiler has been good for ages. I think it kinda shows Konami can make a card that's "immune" to powercreep if they really try.
I believe the next master rule should be something along the lines of “player going 2nd draws until they have equal to the amount of cards turn 1 player has control and in hand combined +1, if less cards that is controlled draw 1” in other words if turn 1 player has 3 monsters 3 backrow and 3 cards in hand, turn 2 player starts with 5, opponent has 9 cards, so turn 2 will draw 5 making their turn 2 hand be 10 cards, this makes it so lets say turn 1 player has 9 disruptions for your 9 cards won’t leave turn 2 player with nothing to do so there is where the +1 comes in, also if they end on 4 cards total, turn 2 player will simply draw their turn normally as a 1 draw, the only flaw with this is the graveyard or banishment acting as a 2nd hand, however i’m sure this will fix the whole going 2nd strategy more so for a while until further calculations could be made to add anything else such as either put restrictions for the gy or more than likely just have those cards in the gy make the going 2nd player draw cards as if they controlled them if they would be activatable on their turn
I think floodgates are good but they should be continuous spells that must be activated before you perform the action they floodgate. That way, you can't just setup a board and then lock the opponent out during their turn. Vanity's Emptiness could be unbanned if it was a continuous spell that also said, "Activate only if you did not Special Summon this turn." Doing it this way also allows you to still do the action if the floodgate is removed during the turn it is activated which makes it not too much of a nerf. The goal is to make it so that only decks that can play through the floodgate would play it. The reason Vanity's was banworthy is because you could just combo off, set it, then activate it during the opponent's draw phase so they can't counter your board unless they drew a card that could out it.
Here’s my controversial take: Battles of Legend has lost its identity as a set. It used to be a set that imported the Animation Chronicle cards from that year alongside reprints, but since 2023’s Monstrous Revenge and this year’s Terminal Revenge, the anime card imports didn’t happen which led us to receive them later in a WP set.
Not a hot take but wanting to popularize this because a lot of people have been pushing this. Instead of drawing for turn your 6th card, going second players should start with 6 cards, removes drawing droll for turn, maximizes hand traps, saves time bc you know if the top deck is going to help you break the board or not instead of watching ur opponent combo hoping you top deck that out. Would be a very healthy addition to the game because going second is such an issue. That 6th card in your hand from the start makes a big difference
Slight counterpoint (though not a major one): effects that rely on your opponent drawing for turn (e.g. generaider field spell) are now practically bricks for the first few turns.
Hot take Before the last Master Rule revision The addition of Link Monsters generally did slow down the game a lot and outside of a few strategies such as link climbing, slowed the game down too much for people
The game was actually pretty slow before MR4 tho zoodiac format wasn't some crazy combo, fusion sub zoo was the only real culprit and norden had to be banned eventually anyway
@19:22; Cardfight Vanguard does something this with their Ban Restriction list as well. They "Choice Restriction" 2+ cards from being used together to prevent toxic combos from dominating / ruining the current meta, and in most cases it's targeted at against top meta decks so lower tier / rogue decks aren't really affected
1) They should make the required tributes for lvl 5+ monsters double! 4 tributes to summon a Dark Magician! 2) XYZ summons can only be done if you flip 3 coins first and get 2 heads! 3) All Link monsters have to be ripped in half after the first use each duel, and every deck needs to have 3 link monsters before a duel can even start! 4) You need to collect all pieces of exodia in your banished zone before you can use a monster effect from the hand! 5) Every deck must have at least three Ghost Rares, Starlight Rares and Quarter Century Rare cards before you can start a duel. Konami reserves the right to ban you for life if you miss one of these rarities in your deck! 6) You lose 100 LP at the start of the duel for each common and or reprint in your deck. You gain 1000 LP at the start of the duel for each 1st edition card in your deck. 7) Your deckbox needs to have a laminated name tag attached to it, made out of recycled Yu-Gi-Oh! Cards. The plastic around the tag is only alowed to be made in Japan. 8) Pot of Greed is mandatory in any deck, but for each copy of it a Watapon needs to be glued to the back of it. Double sleeving is mandatory for these cards. 9) Zayn Malik must be a referee for each duel on the planet before it can start.
Hahaha I know what Paul was talking about Like a yr ago when I was 13 I tried going to a locals with a terrible chaos deck and the dude ftk ed with frogs But now I'm loaded with kash scareclaw and a hero deck with some other rogue decks And this is kinda true but I had friends to duel with which did help so yh I kinda agree if U don't have friends of the same or similar age to duel with But then again he was my age and had a maxed out dino deck and wrekt me each time But he still taught me and showed me how to play and how to stop his deck and gave me cards like a nubiru and dark ruler to have a chance so
Hand Traps should be their own card type (or monster type like Neutral) so that they cannot be used for any other situation (tuning, combos with other monster types, etc.). This along with further rebalancing.
Banning hand traps entirely would change the meta significantly. I honestly think all hand traps should be limited or just banned. Ash having a 100 percent play rate should be the only sign we need that the card is broken. It's kinda like pot of greed. It has a basic generic effect but it's playability makes it too powerful. It can be triggered during any phase on either players turn. Veiler is less powerful but just as useful. The strategy right now is pray you draw 4 hand traps and 1 starter. When basically every deck has 15+ hand traps you know you have a problem. Ash needs to be limited. It been mandatory at 3 for how many years now?
@@haroldnecmann7040 you can have hand trap searcher because hand trap is not a type of card. That is why you search hand traps with other cards , for example, you special summon Ghost Ogre with E. Tele
While I’m definitely willing to try it out, one thing about the last comment of limits on things that can be played together, I do wonder if a game with over 10,000 cards as complicated as this would work well or if it would just mean people finding the next difficult to deal with combination. Somewhat related, but as a Madolche player, one thing I have loved is that most of the deck doesn’t lock me into anything, but because Peting and Meowcaroons do, I have to be creative with mixing the deck with anything. I tried TriBrigade Madolche and went undefeated with it. But, because of restrictions I had to make my TriBrigade plays first, and then could only link summon with beasts, winged beasts and beast warriors. Restriction, but still fun. So then I started questioning whether I could do a regular Madolche combo, while dropping D Shifter and getting a Madolche in play. And I landed on Labrynth Madolche which is super fun. Although perhaps it is a bit oppressive to leave my opponent dealing with a quick effect Tiaramisu, a negate, a compulse, a hand destruction, a graveyard shuffle and potentially other interactions all while being under Shifter, I do like the fun and thinking outside the box I had to do to come up with it.
How would APS feel about experimenting duels with increasing summon limit per turn as a rule for a video? Like: Turn 1 Player can summon 3 or 5 Turn 2 Player can summon 4 or 6 Turn 3 Player can summon 5 or 7 ETC
Cards that read “Cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this cards activation” should not exist. Negates are fine and can get out of control but at least they are interactive. Yes I am tilted about super poly.
Only cards that should have the “Cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this card” in their text should’ve been the god cards. 3 tribute requirement for a beat stick that can still be overpowered by something with higher attack would’ve been the only acceptable option in my opinion
I think a Best of 1 tournament could work if you're talking a round robin format, where losing one game because you got sacked or got stupidly unlucky doesn't kick you out of the tournament on the spot.
You may not be playing dark world correctly as it has the ability to set up things like an omni negate, a board clear, griffin lock, apollousa and has good synergy with trap cards such as skill drain and dimensional barrier. Alternatively you can handloop your opponent, using sliva, ceruli, gen and ken, akashic magician, talents etc. I’ve played dark world a lot and the goal in your first turn is to set up grapha and then something that will stun your opponent like the knightmare griffin or skill drain. Or just shuffle all the cards in their hand back to their deck. Second turn goal is to board break and make big bodies like reign-beaux and the fusions to otk. Hope this helps 👍
11:07 - Translation: "Just draw the out." ... MAXX 'C'!! 🤦🏻♂️ "So we should just bring back Maxx C into the game because there do exist cards to counter it? 🤔 Nice try.
My hot take is that I still think Yu-Gi-Oh is fun. Been playing since Starter Deck Kaiba and I love how fast, complex and difficult it can be. I also like how every Deck plays differently and has a different endboard. When I'm bored of playing a Deck, I can just switch and get a whole new experience. It has flaws sure, but every TCG does. Ask a MTG player about Powercreep and the Meta and they'll sound exactly like a YGO player. It's a great game and, all things considered, Konami does an amazing job supporting it. Just compare Master Duel to MTG Arena or Pokemon TCG Online.
the main way to avoid the best card.dek issue is a lot more types and archetype locks and non generic material. its keeps decks in a carefully planned lane that makes end boards and ED tools different while not killing mixing decks.
13:09 i dont want to go back to madter rule 4 per say because the design space for cards has changed too much and the Archetypal Links like Junk Connector wasn't enough. It was nice that Link Arrows ment something though. But I think it would be funny if we got a floodgate that more or less says "we're playing Master Rule 4" (requiring duelists to main generic links for their arrows)
Disagree with the floodgate guy. Even if you're running three of MST and cosmic cyclone it's still "bro just draw the out lmao". Hard disagree with master rule 4 as well because of how disproportionately it effects decks. Look at what deck has been dominating the meta for the past year: Snake-eye. It already only uses links so bringing it back would do nothing. Meanwhile almost every synchro deck out there becomes unusable because they're so reliant on having multiple synchros out at a time and links don't have levels for them to build with. You'd either kill half the decks in the game (regardless of how fast or even good they are) or konomi would have to print so many archetypal link support cards to keep them alive that you're pretty much right back where you started
Master rule 4 was a fantastic idea that konami just didnt commit to; and im not talking about "Master rule 5" but rather that even during master rule 4, we saw konami design and print link monsters that were and still are so astronomically comedically powerful that instead of reverting 4 so people didn't have to run links, like we complained about at first, but rather so people COULD run things other than links.
That change was arguably because the ocg lost like 50% of players moment it hit. So they basically just printed the vrains pack nonsense and the only saving grace for the tcg was the biggest offenders weren't here for most thier life
One way to change the current format is to implement a rule where the combined total levels of all monsters in your Main Deck must have a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 30. I think if you put a restriction on how many monsters you could have in your deck based on how many total levels there are would cut down a LOT of power towards many Decks. How powerful would any Snake-Eyes variants be if they couldn't run certain monsters because they have too many levels in their deck?
I think rather than relying on new cards to hamper the pace of the game, we need to limit the number of special summons per turn or finally implement a set rotation. We could just create new formats instead of only historic ones
Special summons aren't created equally so that doesn't help at all. Link summoning 1 for traptrix sera is alot less impactful on the gamestate than special Summon 1 kash fenrir Set rotation does nothing. We end up at the same place we already are. It doesn't force design changes. Just a forced change to players to pony up more money.
19:25 - I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS! Forget even banned pairs, why not have something like Duel Links' F&L list, where Limits are numerically-based (1, 2, & 3) and you cannot include more cards with an assigned number than that number itself, counting multiple copies of the same card independently--meaning decks cannot run more than a single card that's Limit 1, more than two cards that are Limit 2, etc..
I like how some of the older style decks are starting to make a small comeback in popularity due to new support. Heroes, Yubel, and Raidraptors are some good examples. Raidraptors has the new Rank 13, which is really strong going first. Heroes has always been a strong rouge-style deck that is capable of competing with the stronger level decks. I remember playing against a Snake-Eyes player on Master Duel and I was using the board breaker combo style for Heroes. I beat the Snake-Eyes player while having 5 interruptions on my field. I started playing with Raidraptors and learning the new combo with the Rank 13. I really like the deck, even though it has some weaknesses (not as many interruptions as compared to other deck and the deck heavily relying on hand trap interruptions against the opponent). Yubel has new support and combo as well, which makes the deck more annoying to play against. As far as the tier 0 decks, I think that Konami should do a better job of reigning those decks in so that lower ranked decks can have a better chance of competing. I like the idea of a pairing ban list. It would make things interesting.
I think that a best of 3 without side decking would be one of the best master rule changes konami could ever do. In the OTS that i go to almost no on ehas a side deck but we still play a best of 3. I think this is the most fun way to play because it's guaranteed that both players with have a chance to test their deck going firat and second but you have to think about how much deck space you want to sacrifice for board breakers and strictly going second cards. That makes deck building more interesting than putting all of your best combo peices and consistency cards and hoping you win the dice roll then overwhelming your opponent with cards that make their entire turn irrelevant.
Hot take: Unban Maxx C. If people are going to play degen special summon combos there need to be degen answers. Yes it's broken, but so are all the strats it punishes the hardest.
It dosent punish them though at all. The good decks are good because maxx c dosent affect them enough to matter. There's a reason fkse absoulety wipes the floor in MD. When you have the ability to have a combo that can sit on 2 bodies that cycle themselves back and 3 hand traps what's going thru that realistically
heres my hot take; rather then instead of possibly having best outa 3 without side deck the side deck is change into 2 different side deck for main deck and extra deck but both only has a limit of 5 cards each, players can still side in cards such as blowout cards or different extra deck monsters if not multiple copies but they're much more limited in what they can bring forcing the main deck and extra to be much more versatile innately
I heard "go back to MR4" and I could hear my poor Junk Synchron shudder, but maybe it'd make Konami realize that we want a way to play without relying on the flesh and blood of Junk Speeder (Also hope to catch you guys at ANYC if you guys are heading there Sunday!)
On hand traps: I don't like how hand traps are being lauded, but people hate cards like Triple Tactics Talent and Thrust (cards made to counteract them) and want them banned. It's absurdly hypocritical.
Talents and thrust work better going first which is the issue. Hand traps in theory bolster going second which has always been the harder position to play from. That's not hypocritical to not want the ability to make going first better
I liked the concept of master rule 4 but overall it ruined the game for alot of decks and essentially forced you to play link monsters even if your deck didn't revolve around them and in turn can make or break the deck itself. I do however feel like they should take some bits and pieces from that and apply a new master rule 6 to slow the game back down alittle bit.
10:49 - I guess you can consider this a hot take, but it's mainly my response to this point: The Zexal World Duel Carnival game was pathetically bare-bones, especially considering how many characters' stories they removed from Story Mode--and they're not exactly complicated things to translate, it's just lines of text on a screen--but the story scenarios we did get are FASCINATING. Vetrix gets to have his revenge on Faker but chooses to show mercy instead; the only other that I can recall off the top of my head is the Red Hat/"Player Character" route, and that's basically worthless apart from Brooke Walker's throwaway dialogue about you being "a legendary duelist who rebuilt a whole town...and once saved the whole world from destruction!" Even if it's mistaken identity, the nature of the scene implies that there's an actual character in Zexal lore who did that stuff. Even though that whole "dangerous mystery" that gets built up around you whiffs and goes literally nowhere, it ties into Brooke's comments, and there's too much of it overall to write it off as some in-universe lore. Especially since that kind of adventure is a regular Tuesday for both the Zexal anime and manga, except that this time Yuma's not the one adventuring.
I really like the idea of not having a side deck, since it forces the player to either accept limitations in their deck or choose to run a non-engine that could get them out of non-ideal situations. If you make the conscious decision to not have any back row removal, then you are giving up your counter-play in favor of another strategy. Make the game more than just Engine + Handtraps with all counters in side-deck.
I mean having side deck is ok, the main problem of Yugioh is card effect. They can reboot it all the card become only one effect card and side deck can have two effect.
it would realisticly make the game worse as it creates match up fishing. no side deck mainly work in pokemon cause decks are conistent so generic cards are easy enough to find at lower copies and the generic tools are there are only so things that can be an issue.
Best Hot-takes series in a while 🎉 Almost all takes/ ideas have their positive direction to create a better game in general, especially the Banlist for Pairs. If only Konami would take any 1 of these to test and see it's worth going forward..
This is fun series, hope you revisit it every now and then! And Thanks for including my provocative and somewhat obscene comment in the last hot takes video 😂
Whomever wins the coin toss is debatable because not all decks are built to go first, or second. Some decks are versatile enough to go off either way, so that kind of negates winning the coin toss. Where as if your deck is better going second and your opponents deck is better going first, then whomever wins the coin toss is determined by whom gets to choose if they go first or second and obviously if your deck does better going second then that's what turn your gonna choose to take, and same if your deck does better going first. So the only time you could actually loose a coin toss is if you have 2 going first or 2 going second players vs each other.
Hot take, I honestly think for any old format where Master rule 4 was around it would have completely got Konami to realize some of the mistakes sooner had it been in its current iteration. Look, I play Synchrons a deck that is actually unplayable because it's so focused around Synchro that even the link they gave it doesn't even help make things. The other piece in junk speeder won't even let you Link summon if you want to use it. Yet if you were to go back to some of those old formats with the current Master rule instead of how it was at the time there's just so many decks that would have played so differently and so many different top decks.
The P5 music always catches me off guard but you guys use it so often. Really makes me want to replay P5R, I can't believe I'm nostalgic for that game. Feels like it came out yesterday but the original version of P5 came out when I was in high school lol
@@TeamAPS Same here. Hell, that whole game moved me! Persona just does that to you. Can probably tell from my profile pic that I'm a huge Persona fanboy.
Complex bans are common but discouraged in Pokémon Smogon formats. You cannot use Baton Pass and Agility in the same pokemon. Or Swift Swim + Drizzle in some formats below OU. Or notavly i think Sandslash is soft banned because both of its abilities boost evasion/speed while in a sandstorm and you _want_ to pair it with Sandstream mons but that conbination is banned.
Download Raid to get Legendary Loki ➡ t2m.io/TeamAPS_Aug24 + 2 strong Epics
⚡ Epic champions available only via my link and for new players
⌛ Hurry, Loki the Deceiver is a limited edition Champion, available by October 23rd by logging into RAID for 7 days
Into the calebverse felt the caleb tingle
Nice that we finally got RAID SHADOW LEGENDS!
YESS!!! GET THAT BAG! I HATE GACHA GAMES! BUT GET THOSE PHAT STACKS KINGS!
Hot take / limit special summon to 3 to 5 times per turn and two normal summons for each turn … it would make turns shorter and allow players to get their cards out the deck with the normal summons
Cold take: yugioh needs more formats
I want a secondary format that has the same banlist as the current format, but only permits untiered decks
@@BOGOworms4sale Untiered decks or cards? because thats not the same thing.
@@Merilirem shit prolly decks so hand traps n shit that are tiered can still be used, but the decks and engines that are like busted strong each format arent
this isnt cold this volcanic hot take
@@Tachyon10007 Yeah, for konami :D
Yu-Gi-Oh's scarcity and rarity systems actively turn off players from moving from Master Duel to the physical game. You can make whatever deck you want online but if you want to play anything made beyond the past 2 years, it's near impossible to straight up acquire the cards let alone find cards at a reasonable price.
110% this. As someone who prefers to play with physical cards, it has been a struggle to find copies of stuff that isnt even all that popular or strong, regardless of age or rarity even!
Would be nice if Konami had an official singles card store online for older cards. Especially stuff of lower rarities and wont ever see a reprint.
Yeah I'm not paying more than 20 dollars for a singular card lmao
As someone who plays on db, master duel and have decks irl, 100% this. I remember a period of 4 years where I did not take yugioh seriously really competitively after dn went down and there was two times off hand I can recall where I didn't get back in partly because i looked at the price invoked and later unchained when they were new and I couldn't justify the price of either them. The only deck I ended up making when it was newer/newish was tri brigade because I loved the deck, but I refused to shell out for accesscode talker. I was panicking when there was a day that fraktal was spiking because I really don't think I should pay more then 20-30 dollars for a card and ideally it shouldn't be that much even. I very rarely do it unless I know it's a deck I am 100% am sure I am not gonna drop any time soon as tribrigade is still my favorite modern archetype and is one of my two favorite things to play currently. It's really hard to justify play physically because this is the golden era of yugioh sims imo. There's so many auto sims besides master duel and duelingbook along with past formats being more popular. It's hard to go from free or basically free, to spending usually hundreds and hundreds irl. Even more so if you don't have regular friends who play.
So much this!
There are cards that only exist in high rarity with very few printings, so even if the card has long been surpassed by the powercreep I still can't find the cards to build a fun non-meta deck
Master duel is a bloody grind though. (After all the first free gem thrown your way/ after you play solo) you can’t make many decks unless u just copy the “best lists”. MD is very unfriendly to deck crafting and especially theory crafting/ testing cards.
hot take: I strongly believe that a lot of the issues with generic boss monsters pigeonholing combo decks into very similar endboards, can be completely solved by making the completely generic boss monster, slightly less generic. I don't think borreload savage should require a rokket tuner monster, but it definitely should require a dragon tuner. that way savage would be not be any harder to summon in the rokket deck, or rokket adjacent decks (d-link), but for combo decks that stray further than that like mannadium, those decks would have to jump through some hoops or run certain engines in order to make savage. That could do a lot for endboard variety.
@@awesumsauce24 this exactly
Why the hell Crystal Wing doesn't have any type or attribute material requirements, let alone requiring Clear Wing, we'll probably never know. I suppose the last point has a small case against that restriction--Yugo summoning Crystal Wing by using Maliciousmagnet's effect on Clear Wing after the latter had been "stolen" by the effect of Neo Cipher Dragon--but my God, it makes less sense for it to be so generic.
Same for Baronne de Fleur. Requiring Chevalier would probably be a little overboard, but y'know, it doesn't even have CRYSTAL WING'S so-called "requirement."
To be clear I'm perfectly agreeing, I just think about those examples more than Savage.
3:45 The difference between then and now is that a complete newby getting destroyed by a meta deck would still be able to understand what's going on. Nowadays trying to get someone new to the game to understand why they lost is a way bigger hurdle than it was back then.
I go to locals and there’s people who started a month ago that are fully up to date with rulings timing’s and how to play, it’s all person to person, even 5 years ago when I started playing yugioh I had no clue what I was doing and felt like my opponent was over powered, it’s the same today just a little more intense, and a tear 0 format…
The problem with all the “limit the amount of special summons” that a lot of people throw around it’s that it doesn’t nearly hit every single deck at the same power level. Example: Salamangreat/hero have to do a lot of special summons to generate small advantage synergies inside their archetype engines in order to do a competent board, while something like Kashtira could easily throw around 2 specials and be pretty much okay with the loop they can do. I know the difference in power is noticeable but it can be applied to other decks as well, like tenpai. In the other hand, limiting special summon is not even the solution by the mere existence of decks like flowandereeze whose whole identity is normal summoning like you are special summoning.
Ya but you actually understand the game. People who suggest stuff like that just see a bunch of summons and suggest this 'genius' idea.
Fen pass would obliterate most decks under that restriction LMAO
Limiting special summoning would not only hurt weaker decks more but it would also drasticly increase power creep because now cards have to do even more because you can't play as many anymore. It would also hurt mechanics like tag out, Sky Striker or Vanquish Soul who tag out their monsters for others, they would be really hurt by this.
pretty much and the whole "limit special summons" has its own alternative testing bed in maxx c already anyway like while they arent exactly the same there does exist some comparison that can be drawn between completely limiting summons and deterring it
overall a lot of so call "fixes" people come up with for arent really even fixes in the first place but rather just veiled attempts to masked their poor argument of how much better the game will be if it abide by their own house rules that favor their own personal preferences to their advantage while inhibiting everyone else as much as possible, a good example of this is to just look at the comment sections of any vids that try to give ideas about balancing maxx c as the majority of the ideas will just nerf the card into the ground until its either unplayable or there is no point in playing it which would be beside the point of the topic
That and it makes cards like Summon Limit a rulings nightmare
A lot of rules I see people propose can simply be achieved by playing a few cards
Heres a real hot take:
Bricking should be ENCOURAGED. One of my favorite things about master duel is the necessity to run a little bit of everything. Spot removal, floodgates, hand traps, etc. and there are hands where you brick because of drawing into all non engine. That should be a GOOD thing. The biggest issues with the game right now isnt even power level, its CONSISTENCY. It just feels like the top decks are incapable of bricking anymore which is a shame because the BEST games i have ever had were the ones where a sub optimal play was the best i had, and my opponent and i have to grind each other out. It goes back to what youre always saying about playing every game out.
I hate that they made 1 card combos a common thing. It definitely plays a huge role in how fast-paced and crazily-consistent the game is nowadays.
@@8bitdiedie agreed. I was a player in the quasar era. Back when that was our ONLY Omni negate I'm the game. I remember 2 card quasar was INSANE as a concept, but still not guaranteed. It isn't even just one card combos, it's the fact that EVERYTHING is so easily searchable these days. Also how you'd sometimes have to play a tribute monster or two to get over specific threats. Caius and tytannial were EVERYWHERE back then. It's tiring that every deck has to be 100% gas.
conistency complaints are a power level complaints. nobody likes functionally one player games cause the other player lost by bricking. the issue is that decks are too high power which makes games less interesting. the best games are ones when the player which made better option judgement won instead of the only player that had real options.
I had a master duel game yesterday, Purely vs Salamangreat. I drew into what would've been full expurrely combo +imperm, but the opponent drew into 4 handtraps. He used every single one forcing me to salvage my field into just Utopic Draco future and imperm. That was one of the most balanced games I've had in a while, because we both spent all of our reasources to exhaust the other's. It left us with unoptimal boards, no hands, and praying as we tried to draw into a combo starter. He hit his first, and it actually felt fair. Those games will always be more fun then the usual "turn one win" games.
I just wish yugioh had more than 1 or 2 turns. In other card games I can think "dam I hope I draw x card soon" but in yugioh, im gonna be dead if I need x card, cuz everything is a huge beat stick now
We need more Yu-gi-oh! video games that have single player and exploration like they had in the old days. I loved the DS games in the 5D's era. Customizing your own character and getting to walk around Neo Domino while even getting to actually play speed duels with speed spells was great, I also had a lot of fun with the races you got to run on your duel runner.
I hate that the games Konami is running are free-to-play ones that require having to spend lots of cash or grind a long time to get cards you want.
there's legacy of the duelist it's not the same as the old games but you play through the anime ingame and it's kinda fun
100% agree! I still go back and revisit WC 2011 from time to time, it's so much fun. Tag Force 5 is also another personal favorite of mine
Tag Force 3, Tag Force 6 (it has a translation patch check it out) and WC2011 are the GOATS.
The tag force series on psp is still the best yu gi oh video games. Wish they made something like this on the console on a larger scale
I think the anime had the right idea with battle city. By making it so extra deck monsters can't do stuff the turn they are summoned, giving them some sort of summoning sickness
Speaking of the extra deck, I think that maybe the max number of cards you can run in your extra deck should be tied to your deck's size.
Like, a 5 card extra deck limit for 40 card decks, a 10 card limit for 50 card decks, and the full 15 if you're running a full 60.
@rickyl3819 Why limit the extra deck like that, though? I mean I don't know anything about competitive Yu-Gi-Oh, but that just sounds like a dumb pointless idea.
@@theanystrom2882
Partially because I sincerely doubt Konami is going to ban or errata all the generic extra deck monsters that they've printed to make them tie your hand in some way. That would probably be the better thing to do, but I don't see it happening.
Currently, unless you're playing certain archetypes, there's no reason for you not to jam in 15 cards that you essentially always have access to, acting as an extra hand that can get you out of pretty much any situation. At least by tying it to main deck size, you have to trade draw consistency for extra deck versatility.
@rickyl3819 I don't use generic stuff, really. I try to stick to in archetype cards if I can other than some spells and traps. Fire Kings is the only deck I have that isn't pure Archtype cards other than spells and traps, it's got 3× Fencing Fire Ferret and 1× Sacred Phoenix Nepenthys(but they kind of fit the theme of the deck), and whatever the extra deck monsters the starter deck came with but I only ever use Garunix Eternity. So if there isn't enough of in archetype cards for a full extra deck, I will probably only have what there is in archetype. But I'm an extremely casual player that's only ever played with cousins.
That just makes going first even stronger. Going second's strength is being able to attack first, and this removes that strength.
I genuinely think yugioh is beyond saving at this point
It does not need saving.
@@residentgrey no of course not. It just has casuals leaving for easier more affordable games, pros leaving in droves for better prizing, and no new players because it’s impossible to teach to a new player without tying them to a chair for a month. I’m sure the fire will put itself out lol
@@bangerheadboyI’m surprised it hasn’t at this point. I mainly collect/play casual jank because it’s what I like, but I won’t even attempt the competitive scene because it’s a shit show.
@@bangerheadboyFacts. I dropped physical because I didn't want to drop $40+ per card to build the skeleton of a competent deck, went to MD only for a while, but then I realized the real problem was the direction the game design was going: Unfair decks vs Unfun decks - and I'm not down with either.
Kashtira/Tearlaments was the epitome of it and the final straw for me.
Dropped YGO for Commander, brought my wife and friends with me, and haven't looked back. Building a deck is less than half the cost for over double the cards, games last between 1-3 hours, new people are actually willing to try and learn Commander as opposed to backing away with fear at the prospect of learning YGO.
I hate WotC as a company for their Calicult nonsense, but not as much as I hate Konami as a company for their anti-consumer practices and total apathy (or antipathy even) towards the design and balance of the game.
WotC R&D will push out cards without playtesting them, Konami R&D is a sealed-off board room with dusty skeletons and a lich that have been in there since 1999.
My cold take: Konami cares less about YuGiOh than the people who pay for it, and cares less about it as a whole than they care about any other franchise they've managed to fumble, mutilate, put on life support coating off of reputation and remakes, or even kill completely (i.e. Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, Castlevania, DDR, etc).
Give it less than a decade and YGO will be reduced to the background images for pachinko machines in "arcades" (read: gambling dens/ trashy casinos) and all the cards will come from gacha vending machines.
I hate when people complain about floodgates but then dismiss the argument of running back row removal due to diluting their deck too much, but at the same time are ok with half their deck being hand-traps and interruption and the other half linear combo. Then they complain about opening five hand traps and no starters….
Because the handtraps they run are meant to counter meta decks specifically. Adding s/t removal when no meta decks are using floodgates just means that the moment you go against a meta deck and you draw the backrow removal you get punished. The moment you go against a floodgate deck and you don't have backrow removal in your deck you're essentially punished for focusing on what meta decks are weak to.
Do you think you should be punished for only running counters to the most powerful decks in the format due to limited deck space? Because if you're fine with the idea of running other cards that have nothing to do with meta decks themselves then you'd be fine with maxx coming back and running 9 cards in every deck specifically because of it.
@@Honest_Mids_Masher I understand the point that handtraps are there because they can counter meta decks and combos and are generally more useful than s/t removal which possibly don’t come up in games. But my point is that everyone complains heavily about floodgates, so much to the point where most of them are all either at 1 or banned because people just refuse to play s/t removal vs handtraps that can also possibly brick into the wrong matchup but just about all handtraps are legal at 3. It’s the mindset of conformity that we are just supposed to focus on the meta instead of the game as a whole, we get annoyed but are also ok with losing to handtraps but on the off chance a floodgate is flipped, players scream and cry that that’s the problem with the game. Also no I despise Maxx C and believe it should be deleted from the game as well as any other handtrap that linger for a turn like droll and shifter.
@@blainejuliet1448 I mean they're right to complain about it. Almost everyone hates lingering effects and everyone also wanted a shifter ban and says that when droll is needed in a format it's not a good format. I don't see why floodgates should be excluded from this. We're supposed to focus on the meta because it's the only way other decks can actually stand a chance against it to even win a tournament. What's the point of running anti dragon cards for the blue eyes matchup when it's not even a good deck?
It's impossible to prepare for every deck so why not go for the biggest threats which is the meta? Most handtraps aren't lingering floodgates and the ones that are people aren't ok with losing to. People are asking for shifter bans even though it counters Snake Eyes because of how much of an instant win it is compared to regular handtraps which are 1-1 interactions that can be played around, or chainblocked, or baited out.
Floodgates as strong as summon limit or TCBOO is impossible for every deck to play around. Maxx C forcing you to dedicate the same 9 cards to counter it as opposed to anti-meta cards is the exact same thing floodgates promote. That's the issue. Unless if they're way lower powered as opposed to something like skill drain or Fossil Dyna and moreso something like maybe negating every fifth monster effect that's activated each turn then it'd be fine.
@@Honest_Mids_Masher I do agree that some floodgates are a little too powerful in the sense of flip a card into a matchup and just win like anti-spell into any pendulum deck or TCBOO into Salamangreat for instance but also it doesn’t change the arguement that all these have simple outs in several forms as mst, cosmic cyclone, etc (except for AntiSpell and Imperial order which I don’t approve of anyway). The difference with Maxx C, Droll, Shifter is that once they are discarded and you don’t have the out immediately in your hand in the form of your 1 allowed called by, the effect is now active and un-interactable, while s/t floodgates have to sit on the field and can be outed at any point if you can find the removal through possible draws. Like you said it is impossible to prepare for every deck but what’s annoying is that unless it’s meta we just choose not to and force it to be banned when there are plenty of outs to said cards. If it’s a matter of literally 3 cards being added to a deck of 40 becoming too much of a consistency problem for the players then maybe the meta is a little too strong and should be addressed instead of pointing figures at a whole aspect of the game that is designed to help against said meta and calling it a problem, granted yes floodgates work both ways but that’s what the removal is for. I will preface that I don’t play in tournaments and don’t want or care to due to the state of the game, I’m merely a “casual” player giving my 2 cents.
@@blainejuliet1448 Except it does especially when you go second to a deck that has multiple negates that stop the counters and it also changes when you realize that even combo decks can use floodgates (snake eyes was flipping summon limit until it got banned for example). Once again that doesn't change the fact either that in order to counter those cards you've mentioned you also have to make it much more difficult to stand a chance against the actual meta itself.
With the floodgate handtraps droll is till the end of the turn, so is Maxx C and shifter those do wear off meanwhile with the floodgate spells and traps. They're always active until they're removed. Unlike the floodgate traps you dont need to draw the out and instead just wait for it to wear off (although you'd lose cause you basically got turn skipped).
Except the thing is when it's not meta it's most of the time not a problem because non meta decks don't usually make use of autowin cards that just win almost every single matchup. Outside of floodgate traps hardly any cards have been hit for specifically being used by non meta decks because they don't just instantly win the game.
3 bricks in a lot of matchups can be soul crushing to draw into. Not to mention just 3 is very inconsistent to draw into. If that wasn't the case people wouldn't feel the need to have on average 12-15 handtraps in every deck and would actually be able to afford the deck space for backrow removal.
While the meta is a problem this isn't a symptom of the meta (unless if we're gonna start blaming meta for not running more of these floodgates) rather it's the problematic design of floodgates that further promotes the "draw the out or lose" aspect of the game to a far worse degree than it already is.
Every* Extra Deck monster in an Archetype should require that archetype as material to summon it. Especially if they're clearly upgrades on an existing card, like Ruddy Rose Dragon and all the RDA upgrades. They should require Black Rose or RDA as a material.
Edit: *Okay, not every, but all the big ones that are being splashed into decks at random? Yes, them. They should be locked to the archetype they're meant to support if their effects don't lock them there in the first place.
While that does sound like a good idea at first, it would slowly kill all creativity and janky/meme decks in the game
Agreed
@davidmitchell2421 there's still plenty of jank just in different styles such as burn/control.
@@trollof229antthevariable9 yea and those are good for the game
@@trollof229antthevariable9 burn and control are just decks that exist im talking like cool synergies between decks in general. While i dont like things being super generic i also dont think archetype locking every card is good either. By locking every archetype into a pure varient you kill the creativity in deck building that yugioh is known for
Yugioh would be fine without negates if they supported playstyles that didn't win so easily if not stopped.
100%
The game Just needs a huge reset on the game, they wanted to sell cards so bad they were willing to type anything as an effect lmfao.
@@Killerrrb essentially, just start actual rotations.
@@KillerrrbYep, at this point the game practically *needs* set rotation but it probably won’t happen because many fans will throw a hissy-fit. And tbf, they wouldn’t be completely wrong to do so either since one of the appeals of this game is being able to play any card from any era and combine them together.
Rotation would also screw with a lot of archetypes since konami is so fond of drip feeding us cards for them over the course of 3-5 sets, not to speak of support we receive years later.
I get the idea behind MR4 but the problem is Link Monsters. They're already ridiculously powerful and mandatory for 99% of decks now. The game would just become Link only if the other mechanics are crippled again. If you don't think that, look back to MR4 and look at how dead Pendulums are because of those rules.
This. I played competitively in Edison back in that period. Life made me have to quit for awhile. My deck was blackwings. I attempted to return when MR4 started and it did not do well for my deck so I chose not to come back as I didn't have my deck to use while learning all the new mechanics I had missed.
The idea behind MR4 was to force you to buy links at any cost even a vainilla link with pointing down arrow was broken
It’s also obvious that MR4 wasn’t actually trying to slow down the game. The only way MR4 would have actually slowed the game down by any meaningful capacity is if Link monsters were all terrible or average at best. I don’t mind the idea that extra deck monsters are so powerful that you’d basically need an extra monster just to give them a way for more than one to exist on the field, but Link monsters are some of the strongest monsters in the game! It just made it so that the new cards would be OP because old decks would have basically no chance to put up a solid counter board.
@@trueblueryu5713 MR4 was able to speed up the game with average link monster the only to slow down the game is to go back to MR4 bad all link 2 or lower and never print any again
We also can't retroactively add it back, as it destroys all the non-link archetype design that's happened since the rule revisions. How does Branded play in MR4? Ghoti? Runick Combo?
You should not be able to use monsters as material for extra deck monsters the turn the woulde-be-material monsters are summoned. (Unless it's an effect that specifically says otherwise like IP).
This means a player has to keep his stuff alive for at least one turn and it prevents spamming out endless extra deck monsters. Extra deck monsters should be a reward in themselves for building momentum, but not a launching pad for 10 other monsters.
that is very interesting. In the sea of bad takes this one is actually really thought provoking
In response to the comment about paying LP for special summons, i still think that there should be no cost or limit to special summoning, however they should print more cards like Nibiru that can punish you for over-extending
I’d like to see stuff like “If your opponent summoned more than X times this/previous turn, this effect can’t be negated” or at least boost the effect in some way to help even the playing field.
They are. The Melchummy cards are literally punishments for decks who summon too much, and they don't suffer from the Maxx "C" problem where they have no restrictions and can't run away with the game after being played. Also, board breakers like Dark Ruler No More and Super Polymerization are designed to punish decks that special summon a lot.
@@8bitdiediewhat if there was a nibiru that if negated, would still pop/tribute like one thing on the field. that way the negate doesn't feel wasted, but neither does the nibiru activation. I like the idea of a card that can still do something but just weaker when negated. that way neither the negate nor the handtrap feels wasted
@@AllThingsEntertaining Can you play Super Poly on "turn 0"?
@@Ticketman99 I get you think this is an own or something, but read super poly and then you'll understand why you don't need that
Hot Take: each hand trap type of card should be limited at 1 copy per deck, or limited to archetypal play, that way people can play the game, instead of getting angry and flipping the table.
@@Legobrat86 good luck then dealing with a broken endboard with 5+ negates
@Legobrat86 honestly hand traps piss me off the most, like I have several irl but I keep them out of decks cause I believe and fair chances to build a board, the only deck I have hand traps in is my phantom knights deck amd that's it
Bro what
I've said this before, but a rule change/patch will only ever be a temporary fix to a singular issue at best. one such example is the priority rule. before, any monster with an effect had priority to use it as soon as it's summoned but Konami changed it to only monsters with effects that proc on summon. This was in order to nerf cards that dominated the meta because of this rule like DAD and Brionac. At least until they started printing monsters with quick effects. it doesn't matter what rule changes you make in the game if Konami is just going to print cards that get around them or just straight up ignore them (i.e. "ignoring it's summoning conditions"). The only thing that can fix the game is a major change in card design philosophy.
My solution to the issue of players pushing new players away I totally agree, if someone seems new its better to hold back. If you're not sure just let them go first and see what they do, but just try to limit what you're doing, misplay a little. They're not gonna know and it lets them get a better handle on the game
I have a hot take.
Yu-Gi-Oh ttcg isn't fun, people enjoy victory not playing.
If that was the case then literal coin flipping would be just as enjoyable.
@@steel5897think about why people put up with it. Ever hear of sunk cost?
@@steel5897You know that's been a running gag in the game for years, right? That whoever wins the flip and goes first is gonna win, so just do the flip and proceed to game 2, repeat for game 2 and/or 3.
I like looking at the card art mostly
It is true. "Well I just don't wanna play cards that deal with 2/3 of the card pool" is by far the worst argument against floodgates.
So true. There should be a cost for superconsistency. If you opt for that, you should be punished in some regard. And that argument of "but it doesn't work against most meta decks" is stupid, because guess what, these other meta decks should also be struggling with floodgates if they don't have enough outs in their decks to draw them consistently. If anything, we should have more floodgates to incentive more diverse tools and less consistent decks, albeit floodgates shouldn't be just flip a card and it affects everything for free. It should cost something for these effects to be applied.
I once brought floodgates up once, saying they were okay. And someone told me that if floodgates are legal, they won't have enough consistency for cards that can deal with the meta. There was also the point that floodgates are only one card to activate as opposed to doing an entire combo. For me it came across as an excuse, because people couldn't ash a skill drain.
@@illdoittomorrow2368They're right though. You're literally ruining your chances to deal with the meta because of the fact that deck space is taken up by off meta blowouts that also can solely win the game on their own. Might as well just have Maxx C back in the game to take up 9 more deckslots.
@@VixYW i only run a few floodgates in my deck on master duel but i don't think I've ever seen a yubel player pop my shadow inprisioning mirror which just hard shuts down their deck. All they would need is a single MST, but none of them run it or any other spell and trap removal for some reason
@@princessrayneshia1293 Probably because they're too busy trying to stop snake eyes with cards that beat them. Do you think it's fair not being able to do anything for trying to be able to stand a chance against the best deck?
Now if meta decks were running floodgates then people would actually start adding ways to remove spells and traps from the field. Everything people run depends on the meta.
Maybe it's a cultural thing, Konami doesn't listen, they're too arrogant, CEO/ Manager thinks it's okay to ignore the consumer but I'm done, this is a toxic game. Majority of products are for competitive play, and we've been waiting for a snake eyes hit for +1/2 a year? I had to leave this game, I love this game, but I don't care for competitive play, I don't like handtraps, 50% of decks being generic cards when they used to be traps is wrong. Games should take +5 turns not 3.
8:07 the problem with this idea is that it’s a misunderstanding of where a deck’s power lies. It’s the same reason the Maxx C argument kind of falls flat.
There are always exceptions like Snake Eye, but the decks that will be hurt most by this kind of rule aren’t the top meta decks, it’s the rogue decks like Salamangreat, Madolche, etc, that NEED 10+ summons just to set up a relatively competent board
Here's my hot take. The only time Yu-Gi-Oh! hasn't been a game all about control and preventing your opponent from playing was before the first World Championship. Hand Control made up 100% of the Top 8, and the only time the winning deck lost was a mirror match. Since then, control was the only way to play. And once Invasion of Chaos dropped? Other decks may have existed, and they may have done decently at locals, but Chaos Control reigned supreme in basically every metric measured. The classic Yu-Gi-Oh! that Yugi-Boomers say they miss is either Metal Raiders-era vanilla beatdown with La Jinn and 7 Colored Fish or just kitchen table "Buy a bunch of packs and go" style dueling.
Drafting/playing super casually is way better than this meta shit tbh
@@DAVALOSLUIS I can enjoy the meta when I'm in the mood for it, but yeah casual play is always gonna be top tier. I'm doing a virtual progression series with a friend, and theme decks are my go-to for a fun deck build.
Yugioh would benefit alot from a pokemon style teir system where only things of similar power level can be played against each other. It would make less blowout games and would also give a reason for weaker archetypes to be made instead of instantly being forgotten and relegated to pack filler.
The only real issue with this is how it would handle staple cards because since they're used alot they would be in the higher teirs but a weak deck with an ash is a pretty big difference to snake-eye with an ash
@@darkwolf9637 im not into competitive but what would the tiers be based on? Just tiering the cards individually based on how good they are or would it be based on the archetype or something?
Anyone asking for MR4 to come back to slopw the game down never saw what was happening in MR4 competitively and was just pissy they'd always lose to their friend's Frightfur deck that just pumped out multiple Fusions to kill them immediately or some other shit because that was when the game was flooded with FTKs and psudo FTKs like Gumblar ripping away your entire hand or Gouki Extra Linking you. Also Extra Linking was an awful mechanic that never should've existed, but if you hate dealing with cards like Bow of the Goddess, IP Masq and Accesscode Talker, MR4 would only make you see them 50 times more frequently than they're played now
I remember when they announced linkuriboh and firewall for OCG. They had triple firewal + naturia beast combos from just the previews. Vrains was the dark age of the game. Every format was something like link 2 into a ftk
@@VictorFCI miss making people discard 4 with Elementsabers 😢
One thing to kind of go with the rarity take is that OCG cards should be legal to play in the TCG and vice-versa. It's really dumb that we can't because "Konami said so" especially when Worlds as an event is meant to bring both sides together
Addressing 3 ideas from the video:
Adding a separate forbidden/limited combination list is a thing I’ve been advocating for in yugioh for a while if they aren’t going to use any set rotation. It lets older cards work with intended decks like people want in an eternal format, while keeping them from being busted in meta/ftk style decks. And I think it’s better than just having the “Legends” style card from Rush duels or duel links limit 1 style when there are decks full of limit 1/2 like Tearlament that are healthy to play while their cards are limited as they are.
I do not think best of 1 is a healthy format for tourneys because of its sacky nature, and I really do love the idea of doing best of 3 with no side decks. I agree that side deck cards are usually your blowouts you’ll only ever run when you know they will be live in your opening hand like siding D barrier or evenly matched. As a person who’s done some BO1 tourneys round robin style into top cut they really can feel sacky, especially when you just lose the die roll every time, BO3 helps mitigate it by giving you more chances to win even if you lose the die roll.
Last playing LP to special summon will completely murder any deck that already pays life points to do stuff like Dinomorphia, Punk, or Exosister. And those decks aren’t even like good. Getting only 1500lp back in end phase means you are now under summon limit with only ~2000 lp to survive your opponents turn lol, good luck.
The master rule 4 take is just bad, because the game hasn't significantly sped up since we left it, the difference is that link decks aren't as dominant. Master rule 4 only slowed the game down for like 2 sets, once link strategies started getting filled out then the game quickly returned to master rule 3 speeds, and once generic links started becoming good then it wasn't just the link centric decks that could do it. The only thing master rule 4 did was it nerfed pendulums to a more reasonable level and it made decks that have locks that prevent them from playing links unplayable
I think CIBR full power SPYRAL is more powerful than any MR3 deck was, save perhaps Fusion Sub Zoodiac.
that was the second set with links..
I also think Metalfoes was fundamentally a fine deck, the pace of the game increasing did a lot to hurt pendulums and MR4 is where the strongest pendulum decks came out anyways.. with Electrumite.
Let's not forget that snake-eye/fiendsmith is a link deck, voiceless voice doesn't use the extra deck at all, the upcoming malice cards are links, etc. Just because we were beaten down by fusion tear and xyz kash for a bit doesn't mean master rule four wasn't always an extremely lopsided mechanic
To add on to the hand trap take, I think hand traps should be built into archetypes and instead of doing generic negates, they should be built more like a havnis where they generate you advantage to keep up with the turn player and give more nuanced interaction. Not saying completely remove negates, but overall make every archetype capable of unique interactions that put their own particular strategy into play
Returning to Master Rule 4 would probably completely decimate the game in an irreparable way. For a long time, even when Konami made support for certain decks to play under the restrictions of Master Rule 4, those decks were just unplayable. Not even in a bad way, like, those decks couldn't even function properly. A deck like Noble Knights, which relies on multiple extra deck monsters to play their deck could not play under these restrictions. This would probably be even worse now since Konami has developed decks that don't have link monsters, and decks that could use it, abused the hell out of the rulings. Does anyone even remember Gouki U-Link boards?
i hate extra deck board spamming. Bring mr4 back. Konami can retrain decks/cards to adapt along with buying new cards. This game has gotten too fast and op that the top players are quitting. It needs mr4.
@@MANCO92687 MR4 didn't solve extra deck spamming. It made it worse.
@@MANCO92687the biggest lie about mr4 is that it was made to slow the game.
@@MANCO92687Top players are leaving because they don't get good enough prizes for winning tournaments, not because of the format 🤦
@@Bakatora04 It was made to force people use links, it was never made to slow the game.
As a 5 year Ice Barrier player sincerely screw any ideas of a special summon limit.
Yeah, the special summon burn rule would actually kill pretty much any rogue deck. Also, it would make decks like Yosenju or Floowandereeze tier 0 meta threats.
You were playing before the support? Honestly crazy for that.
@@RaihoGeneral a fellow ice barrier enjoyer!
Please tone down the ding sound effect for future vids, it comes out like 10x the volume of everything else!
Dingaphobe
Hot take, something like Yugioh Nightmare Tradabour or GX Spirit Caller would be perfect to draw new players, especially if done in a modern open world rpg format. You can have the exact same game we play irl, just with a dope single player and an online ladder
"Floodgates good for game, people just don't run enough S/T removal" - Problem with this statement is that decks that only rely on floodgates will add a lot of engine to protect floodgates such us runick Hugin, Decisive Battle of Golgonda or Soleam cards so just drawing 1 or 2 removals won't fix that. Also they aren't running just 1 card you need to protect yourself from.
Another thing is that floodgates are never two sided. Nobody would put in Skill drain if that card would prevent them from playing the game. They would put cards that work fine and would only be bad for opponent, so it doesn't slow down anything, but only benefits those who play them
Takes with LP for summons or back to MR 4 is just bizzare. This would work if you would reset game and start from new ( even so it's usually so short sighted ) but with current game would just remove huge part of decks from the game, mostly non meta decks. MR4 was a mistake because it would now prevent any deck that only plays 1 mechanic that is not Link to not do much.
The take about kids getting loses in tournaments.. Honestly they shouldn't join tournaments first time they come with they anime decks. Play casual with people around, let them win sure, but in tournament this is unfair to people themselves if they would just let them win and lose their game because someone would get offended
you would have a point IF runick was actually a strong deck. I can even defeat runick decks with pure dark magician.
its a reason why floodgates are terrible design. players are very good at making a symetrical effect not effect them so any balancing that requires symetry of impact is never going to be balanced. as well nobody runs weak floodgates so they are always worth putting effort into protecting.
@@arbbar2674A Runick deck won a YCS now get back to me when dark magician does that.
It's not even just that. Handtraps have always been ran depending on the meta. For example ash seeing less play and D.D crow seeing more play during tearlaments format. Floodgates aren't used by meta decks and yet people are arguing that you should run counters to them even though what that does is give you potential bricks every time you go up against a meta deck and in the other way around if you don't run backrow removal because you want to be able to somewhat consistently counter the meta and you go against a floodgate deck you essentially get punished for trying to counter the meta instead of running back row removal for an off meta deck. Imagine being punished for trying to beat the strongest decks in the format, that's dumb.
The problem is that floodgates don't go anywhere. They actively prevent the game from being played by people. You can either play under them or you can't and not playing loses games. No card should stop people from trying to do stuff at the basic level.
Any card that demands an out should probably not exist.
Structure decks should be more like the Tactical Try decks that showed up in OCG and Master Duel. Current structure decks aren't much "decks" as much as they are a box of singletons, some of them are almost unplayable if you don't buy multiple copies and that's very counter intuitive to new players.
The ideal would be a deck with a functioning synergy and the necessary pieces to actually accomplish the deck's game plan (with unoptimized power, of course, leave space to the player to improve it on their own). And maybe a few extra tech cards included in the box so the player could have the incentive to experiment.
What would it be like if yugioh had a combo limit? Like you can only activate X card effects per turn.
Maybe some old school and casual people would like that if it worked.
The thing with floodgates and "run more backrow removal" is that most of the ones in the game are not searchable by most archetypes. Therefore, even if you're running them, the game is just a "draw the out" non-game. Your removal cards are either near the top of your deck or they may as well not be in the deck at all.
Konami would need to print a huge number of searchable removal options, which would mean that floodgate strategies become less used, meaning more dead cards in the deck - which creates terrible game feel, meaning people would run them less and floodgates would come right back over and over again. The end result is still sacky and annoying.
@@pieoverlord The solution is giving meta decks an answer to everything like tear - having a searchable MST or twin twister is a huge deal.
searchable? Generic floodgates arent. Most decks cant search handtrap.
I feel like we shouldn't go back to Master Rule 4 as it would only really hurt decks without links, which in the current meta would only really be pet or rouge decks, most of the current meta decks can run an engine of links, and going back to making the game so reliant on them would only hurt low power none link decks.
Meta wise, decks like Runick stun, Yubel, and Snake eyes would be almost unaffected, and those that it would hit, would basically be rendered unplayable
off the top of my head, decks like Raidraptor, Suship, Superheavy Samurai, and Fluffal would be rendered unplayable in a meta that none of them are really problematic in anyway.
Mr4 is the worst
That would ruin the game completely
Mr4 is how the game should've been played. The fusion monster zone became the extra monster zone. You want more? Use the links. Your old decks that arent meta anyways cant be played? Request konami to make upgrades for those decks. This game is too fast and too op.
@@MANCO92687 MR4 would not fix the game being too fast or op, because links themselves are a main contributor to that pace of play, plus most meta decks would be unaffected,
also, the extra monster zone was a new thing with links, it wasn't ever the fusion monster zone, I think you may be refering to how the Extra deck was called the fusion deck.
Thing about limiting special summons, is that it would be easier to just ban one card combos. If special summoning requires resources, it should be hard to replenish those resources, and u shouldn't have a way to gain so many back
Hot take: Most peoples ideas are terrible. They hardly pass the smell test of wether they’ll work in theory and are even worse in practice.
Ex: Summon Limits
agree, a lot of so call "fixes" people come up with for arent really even fixes in the first place but rather just veiled attempts to masked their poor argument of how much better the game will be if it abide by their own house rules that favor their own personal preferences to their advantage while inhibiting everyone else as much as possible
these people should try summon limits or whatever silly rule they come with at home so they can really see how bad it would be
@@UnicornLupus I've actually tested it, and it worked better then a thinked, resolves a lot of problems of modern yugioh design. In competitive level we'll need a new banlist thinked in this format, some archetypes like floow, kash, labirynth will need to go, i really enjoy playing labirinth and floow nowadays but there's no other way to fix the game i think.
@@UnicornLupusAt home? No in an environment with people that are hardcore meta players to show just how one sided the format would be and how little room there is for any deck to be playable except for one that turbo out a boss monster in a single summon. I wouldn't be surprised if every format was a tier 0 one
The guy above suggested removing entire decks from being playable. That alone already shows just how bad it is.
@@Honest_Mids_Masher They do that and the we get a format based only on Kahstira and Labrynth.
banned card groups would be so interesting to see.
It would be cool to see how that would play out.
The last take was by far the best. I would welcome paired bans to help keep some decks from abusing other archetype's cards to the point that the other archetype becomes unplayable due to the abuse of a card that isn't even that archetype's fault.
As a Pendulum player I'd like it if you could Pendulum Summon monsters from the face-up Extra Deck to any main monster zone instead of just the Extra Monster Zone, and with how a lot of current Pendulum Monsters having so many restrictions, and many of the generic end board pieces looking to banned such as apollousa, I:P, etc... i think the mr4 restrictions placed on Pendulums can be removed and nothing would change.
finnaly someone says the truth.
Every yugi boomer thinks pendulum is too much and it is bad for balance when most decks will special summon more monsters with less restrictions, hell even blue-eyes can sometimes spam more monsters than most pendulum decks can and pendulums lose on lots of graveyard support and any backrow removal shuts them down.
@@gab4198 like bro, currently the best Summoning machines in the order of most powerful/broken are Links, Fusion, Xyz, Synchro, Ritual, and then you have Pendulum. I've heard the argument from many folks that the reason why Pendulums can never get their mr4 restriction removed was because "Pend for 5 from the Extra Deck is basically a Soul Charge you can use every turn", but than when not Pendulum decks are able to go plus infinity off of 1 card it's fine. Fusion and Rituals have way too many ways to circumvent their own drawbacks and go plus doing it and have the luxury of having consistent excess to the GY and Gy effects, Synchros generate stupid amounts of materials just to make them work, while Pendulum get the short end of the stick with them requiring their left and right most Zones to be empty (and those Zones can just disappear btw) and there are very few pend monsters that have effects when they are added to the Extra Deck, on top of that you go Minas 2 or more just to set up the scales and you need to set up Link arrows just to pend from the Extra Deck, also there are no good pend extenders that don't lock you to the ground.
@@nashcifer5666 exactly, the entire mechanic also just dies to cards like anti spell or diabelze or any card that places anything in the spell/trap zone.
During master rule 4 the only generic link monster for pendulums was electrumite and he was the first of the links made for another mechanic to get banned, also for the only mechanic to still depend on links, for it to be the one with the least ammount of dedicated link monsters.
Pendulum is also the only mechanic in the game that may lock you out of it and that is a flaw since the start, once a scale is in place you need it to destroy itself or destroy it by other card effect in order to place another card in its place, you get 2 zones and that is it, no room to take advantage of scale effects if card itself has bad scales.
If they ever revamp pendulum summon they need to put back separate scales or a at least a property for the player being able to place scales in the spell/trap zones even if a card is already in there, sending those cards to the extra deck/gy when you do it (and also being able to play them even if those zones get blocked by other effects).
From ED to all main zones would be busted. Needing links is fine. We just need more that are designed for pendulums instead of the with corner zone, because in DL format you only get one zone.
@@gab4198Beyond the Pendulum exists.
Banned groups is what I've been wanting too.
Like let Isolde still be run in Infernoble and Noble Knight decks, don't let them use Exodia or other degenerate cards to get that free looping of card advantage.
Honestly I see no issue with banned pairs. The only people it’ll actually affect are tournament players and if your unwilling to look a list of banned pairs then you shouldn’t be competing anyway
I unfortunately quit Yu-Gi-Oh not to long ago and the reason why is i went to my first Yu-Gi-Oh local event and i was running a decent cyber dragon deck and needless to say i wasnt even able to f.cking play thru my 5 matches i was in i wasn't able to do antthing cause everyone runs meta and the meta is too broken...now im not the type of person that needs to win to have fun but when your not even allowed to play the game with a deck that is suited to your cheap budget its just not worth it imo
My hot take: Seeing all the comments here and elsewhere about how to "improve" Yugioh, I'm glad none of them are in charge at Konami, to be honest. Konami may not be perfect, but I'd damn sure take them over the armchair designers.
Leave the multimillion company alone
For me Konami does a pretty good job. IDK wtf they were thinking with snake eyes but basically I just think the banlist needs some work. Limit Ash is my number 1 change id make
@@haroldnecmann7040 You've added nothing to the discussion.
@haroldnecmann7040 not all applicable here, I'd rather have Konami messing up sometimes over you're typical yugiboomer "designing" cards and screeching about everything they don't like in the game and how it should be removed entirely
That guy talking about special summon burn mechanic is just a die hard Yosenju or Floowandereeze fan because that rule would make those decks a tier 0 super threats.
Sweeping game mechanic changes will not drastically improve the game. It only creates a new metagame where the existing decks are buffed and nerfed by the changes. The game environment as a whole is controlled by Konami's ability to add and remove cards from the game, the community's options are limited to either deciding for ourselves how we want to play the game or just hoping Konami makes decisions that we can live with.
one thing the guy who runs our local card shop is very firm about when people build sweaty decks. It'll only be fun once, and then no one will play with you.
I like the return to MR4 one. It was my favorite time of the game. It made Main Deck monsters mean more if you didn’t play links, and it was fun to figure out the best link monsters to include in your deck and the order in which you wanted to summon and the positioning. And the power level can be easily curbed by the banlist to prevent extra links if done right.
Even now I always include link monsters in any deck just because they’re useful in general.
The worst take was unequivocally reverting the game back to Master Rule 4. In a vain attempt to slow the game down. I don’t believe that will work, because oppressive combo decks will still thrive in the game, just like they did during that era of TCG. It will just stunt and hinder rogue and causal decks to a grinding halt.
Also; the Dominus Purge card seems excessively fucking restrictive; if I’m not mistaken, isn’t dark attribute the most represented in the game? This seems egregiously punishing for most decks.
Dominus purge is unplayable, however dominus impulse could see play here or there.
The LP take is basically how Maliss works without the 1500 LP gain during the end phase.
I always love when people want to "ban" the handtraps. They're typically the same people that hate powercreep, when Handtraps stay around for ages. Effect Veiler has been good for ages. I think it kinda shows Konami can make a card that's "immune" to powercreep if they really try.
I believe the next master rule should be something along the lines of “player going 2nd draws until they have equal to the amount of cards turn 1 player has control and in hand combined +1, if less cards that is controlled draw 1” in other words if turn 1 player has 3 monsters 3 backrow and 3 cards in hand, turn 2 player starts with 5, opponent has 9 cards, so turn 2 will draw 5 making their turn 2 hand be 10 cards, this makes it so lets say turn 1 player has 9 disruptions for your 9 cards won’t leave turn 2 player with nothing to do so there is where the +1 comes in, also if they end on 4 cards total, turn 2 player will simply draw their turn normally as a 1 draw, the only flaw with this is the graveyard or banishment acting as a 2nd hand, however i’m sure this will fix the whole going 2nd strategy more so for a while until further calculations could be made to add anything else such as either put restrictions for the gy or more than likely just have those cards in the gy make the going 2nd player draw cards as if they controlled them if they would be activatable on their turn
I think side decks need their own banlist. Like you can play evenly matched in your main deck, but it’s maybe limited to 1 in side decks
Me:I set one monster and 2 backrow.
Opponent:**proceeds to play a game of solitaire**
I think floodgates are good but they should be continuous spells that must be activated before you perform the action they floodgate. That way, you can't just setup a board and then lock the opponent out during their turn. Vanity's Emptiness could be unbanned if it was a continuous spell that also said, "Activate only if you did not Special Summon this turn." Doing it this way also allows you to still do the action if the floodgate is removed during the turn it is activated which makes it not too much of a nerf. The goal is to make it so that only decks that can play through the floodgate would play it. The reason Vanity's was banworthy is because you could just combo off, set it, then activate it during the opponent's draw phase so they can't counter your board unless they drew a card that could out it.
You can only summon 2 extra deck monsters per turn should be a thing
New rule for extra deck where every cards are limited to 1
Here’s my controversial take: Battles of Legend has lost its identity as a set. It used to be a set that imported the Animation Chronicle cards from that year alongside reprints, but since 2023’s Monstrous Revenge and this year’s Terminal Revenge, the anime card imports didn’t happen which led us to receive them later in a WP set.
Not a hot take but wanting to popularize this because a lot of people have been pushing this. Instead of drawing for turn your 6th card, going second players should start with 6 cards, removes drawing droll for turn, maximizes hand traps, saves time bc you know if the top deck is going to help you break the board or not instead of watching ur opponent combo hoping you top deck that out. Would be a very healthy addition to the game because going second is such an issue. That 6th card in your hand from the start makes a big difference
Slight counterpoint (though not a major one): effects that rely on your opponent drawing for turn (e.g. generaider field spell) are now practically bricks for the first few turns.
Hot take
Before the last Master Rule revision
The addition of Link Monsters generally did slow down the game a lot and outside of a few strategies such as link climbing, slowed the game down too much for people
Typed before this got covered in video
The game was actually pretty slow before MR4 tho
zoodiac format wasn't some crazy combo, fusion sub zoo was the only real culprit and norden had to be banned eventually anyway
@19:22; Cardfight Vanguard does something this with their Ban Restriction list as well. They "Choice Restriction" 2+ cards from being used together to prevent toxic combos from dominating / ruining the current meta, and in most cases it's targeted at against top meta decks so lower tier / rogue decks aren't really affected
1) They should make the required tributes for lvl 5+ monsters double! 4 tributes to summon a Dark Magician!
2) XYZ summons can only be done if you flip 3 coins first and get 2 heads!
3) All Link monsters have to be ripped in half after the first use each duel, and every deck needs to have 3 link monsters before a duel can even start!
4) You need to collect all pieces of exodia in your banished zone before you can use a monster effect from the hand!
5) Every deck must have at least three Ghost Rares, Starlight Rares and Quarter Century Rare cards before you can start a duel. Konami reserves the right to ban you for life if you miss one of these rarities in your deck!
6) You lose 100 LP at the start of the duel for each common and or reprint in your deck. You gain 1000 LP at the start of the duel for each 1st edition card in your deck.
7) Your deckbox needs to have a laminated name tag attached to it, made out of recycled Yu-Gi-Oh! Cards. The plastic around the tag is only alowed to be made in Japan.
8) Pot of Greed is mandatory in any deck, but for each copy of it a Watapon needs to be glued to the back of it. Double sleeving is mandatory for these cards.
9) Zayn Malik must be a referee for each duel on the planet before it can start.
Hahaha
I know what Paul was talking about
Like a yr ago when I was 13 I tried going to a locals with a terrible chaos deck and the dude ftk ed with frogs
But now I'm loaded with kash scareclaw and a hero deck with some other rogue decks
And this is kinda true but I had friends to duel with which did help so yh
I kinda agree if U don't have friends of the same or similar age to duel with
But then again he was my age and had a maxed out dino deck and wrekt me each time
But he still taught me and showed me how to play and how to stop his deck and gave me cards like a nubiru and dark ruler to have a chance so
Hand Traps should be their own card type (or monster type like Neutral) so that they cannot be used for any other situation (tuning, combos with other monster types, etc.). This along with further rebalancing.
The issue I can see is called by the grave it’s a key interaction with hand traps and it only works on monsters in grave
We need hand trap searcher
Banning hand traps entirely would change the meta significantly. I honestly think all hand traps should be limited or just banned. Ash having a 100 percent play rate should be the only sign we need that the card is broken. It's kinda like pot of greed. It has a basic generic effect but it's playability makes it too powerful. It can be triggered during any phase on either players turn. Veiler is less powerful but just as useful. The strategy right now is pray you draw 4 hand traps and 1 starter. When basically every deck has 15+ hand traps you know you have a problem. Ash needs to be limited. It been mandatory at 3 for how many years now?
@@haroldnecmann7040 you can have hand trap searcher because hand trap is not a type of card. That is why you search hand traps with other cards , for example, you special summon Ghost Ogre with E. Tele
Each archetype should have its own hand trap, something like mercourier
While I’m definitely willing to try it out, one thing about the last comment of limits on things that can be played together, I do wonder if a game with over 10,000 cards as complicated as this would work well or if it would just mean people finding the next difficult to deal with combination.
Somewhat related, but as a Madolche player, one thing I have loved is that most of the deck doesn’t lock me into anything, but because Peting and Meowcaroons do, I have to be creative with mixing the deck with anything.
I tried TriBrigade Madolche and went undefeated with it. But, because of restrictions I had to make my TriBrigade plays first, and then could only link summon with beasts, winged beasts and beast warriors. Restriction, but still fun.
So then I started questioning whether I could do a regular Madolche combo, while dropping D Shifter and getting a Madolche in play. And I landed on Labrynth Madolche which is super fun.
Although perhaps it is a bit oppressive to leave my opponent dealing with a quick effect Tiaramisu, a negate, a compulse, a hand destruction, a graveyard shuffle and potentially other interactions all while being under Shifter, I do like the fun and thinking outside the box I had to do to come up with it.
How would APS feel about experimenting duels with increasing summon limit per turn as a rule for a video?
Like:
Turn 1 Player can summon 3 or 5
Turn 2 Player can summon 4 or 6
Turn 3 Player can summon 5 or 7
ETC
Cards that read “Cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this cards activation” should not exist.
Negates are fine and can get out of control but at least they are interactive.
Yes I am tilted about super poly.
I don’t agree but super poly having that is a load
Only cards that should have the “Cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this card” in their text should’ve been the god cards. 3 tribute requirement for a beat stick that can still be overpowered by something with higher attack would’ve been the only acceptable option in my opinion
@@DAVALOSLUIS dark ruler no more and the likes of ultimate slayer are great cards lol. Going second sucks enough already in ygo
I think a Best of 1 tournament could work if you're talking a round robin format, where losing one game because you got sacked or got stupidly unlucky doesn't kick you out of the tournament on the spot.
I play dark world and it's hard to get by at my locals people playing OTK decks whichs ruins the fun for me
You may not be playing dark world correctly as it has the ability to set up things like an omni negate, a board clear, griffin lock, apollousa and has good synergy with trap cards such as skill drain and dimensional barrier. Alternatively you can handloop your opponent, using sliva, ceruli, gen and ken, akashic magician, talents etc. I’ve played dark world a lot and the goal in your first turn is to set up grapha and then something that will stun your opponent like the knightmare griffin or skill drain. Or just shuffle all the cards in their hand back to their deck. Second turn goal is to board break and make big bodies like reign-beaux and the fusions to otk. Hope this helps 👍
Thank yugi-jesus for droll and shifter amirite?
@@alexanderpondarius8586 even snake-eyes dies to droll and shifter, too high a standard for a deck like dark world 😭😭
@@makoto2427 depends on the hand (droll vs snake-eyes) where dark world auto loses to both...that was my point via jest......
11:07 - Translation: "Just draw the out." ... MAXX 'C'!! 🤦🏻♂️ "So we should just bring back Maxx C into the game because there do exist cards to counter it? 🤔 Nice try.
My hot take is that I still think Yu-Gi-Oh is fun. Been playing since Starter Deck Kaiba and I love how fast, complex and difficult it can be. I also like how every Deck plays differently and has a different endboard. When I'm bored of playing a Deck, I can just switch and get a whole new experience.
It has flaws sure, but every TCG does. Ask a MTG player about Powercreep and the Meta and they'll sound exactly like a YGO player.
It's a great game and, all things considered, Konami does an amazing job supporting it. Just compare Master Duel to MTG Arena or Pokemon TCG Online.
the main way to avoid the best card.dek issue is a lot more types and archetype locks and non generic material. its keeps decks in a carefully planned lane that makes end boards and ED tools different while not killing mixing decks.
A yugioh game, but its world war 2. Just beffore you get to and duel hitler he sends himself to the shadow realm!
13:09 i dont want to go back to madter rule 4 per say because the design space for cards has changed too much and the Archetypal Links like Junk Connector wasn't enough. It was nice that Link Arrows ment something though.
But I think it would be funny if we got a floodgate that more or less says "we're playing Master Rule 4" (requiring duelists to main generic links for their arrows)
Disagree with the floodgate guy. Even if you're running three of MST and cosmic cyclone it's still "bro just draw the out lmao". Hard disagree with master rule 4 as well because of how disproportionately it effects decks. Look at what deck has been dominating the meta for the past year: Snake-eye. It already only uses links so bringing it back would do nothing. Meanwhile almost every synchro deck out there becomes unusable because they're so reliant on having multiple synchros out at a time and links don't have levels for them to build with. You'd either kill half the decks in the game (regardless of how fast or even good they are) or konomi would have to print so many archetypal link support cards to keep them alive that you're pretty much right back where you started
Master rule 4 was a fantastic idea that konami just didnt commit to; and im not talking about "Master rule 5" but rather that even during master rule 4, we saw konami design and print link monsters that were and still are so astronomically comedically powerful that instead of reverting 4 so people didn't have to run links, like we complained about at first, but rather so people COULD run things other than links.
That change was arguably because the ocg lost like 50% of players moment it hit.
So they basically just printed the vrains pack nonsense and the only saving grace for the tcg was the biggest offenders weren't here for most thier life
Hot Take: Create a hand trap that stops opponents' special summons on your turn.
One way to change the current format is to implement a rule where the combined total levels of all monsters in your Main Deck must have a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 30.
I think if you put a restriction on how many monsters you could have in your deck based on how many total levels there are would cut down a LOT of power towards many Decks. How powerful would any Snake-Eyes variants be if they couldn't run certain monsters because they have too many levels in their deck?
so you can run only 7 lvl 4 monsters in your deck? or 10 lvl 3?
Really my guy
I think rather than relying on new cards to hamper the pace of the game, we need to limit the number of special summons per turn or finally implement a set rotation. We could just create new formats instead of only historic ones
Special summons aren't created equally so that doesn't help at all.
Link summoning 1 for traptrix sera is alot less impactful on the gamestate than special Summon 1 kash fenrir
Set rotation does nothing.
We end up at the same place we already are. It doesn't force design changes.
Just a forced change to players to pony up more money.
19:25 - I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS! Forget even banned pairs, why not have something like Duel Links' F&L list, where Limits are numerically-based (1, 2, & 3) and you cannot include more cards with an assigned number than that number itself, counting multiple copies of the same card independently--meaning decks cannot run more than a single card that's Limit 1, more than two cards that are Limit 2, etc..
I like how some of the older style decks are starting to make a small comeback in popularity due to new support. Heroes, Yubel, and Raidraptors are some good examples. Raidraptors has the new Rank 13, which is really strong going first. Heroes has always been a strong rouge-style deck that is capable of competing with the stronger level decks. I remember playing against a Snake-Eyes player on Master Duel and I was using the board breaker combo style for Heroes. I beat the Snake-Eyes player while having 5 interruptions on my field. I started playing with Raidraptors and learning the new combo with the Rank 13. I really like the deck, even though it has some weaknesses (not as many interruptions as compared to other deck and the deck heavily relying on hand trap interruptions against the opponent). Yubel has new support and combo as well, which makes the deck more annoying to play against. As far as the tier 0 decks, I think that Konami should do a better job of reigning those decks in so that lower ranked decks can have a better chance of competing. I like the idea of a pairing ban list. It would make things interesting.
I think that a best of 3 without side decking would be one of the best master rule changes konami could ever do. In the OTS that i go to almost no on ehas a side deck but we still play a best of 3. I think this is the most fun way to play because it's guaranteed that both players with have a chance to test their deck going firat and second but you have to think about how much deck space you want to sacrifice for board breakers and strictly going second cards. That makes deck building more interesting than putting all of your best combo peices and consistency cards and hoping you win the dice roll then overwhelming your opponent with cards that make their entire turn irrelevant.
Hot take: Unban Maxx C. If people are going to play degen special summon combos there need to be degen answers. Yes it's broken, but so are all the strats it punishes the hardest.
I agree.
It dosent punish them though at all.
The good decks are good because maxx c dosent affect them enough to matter.
There's a reason fkse absoulety wipes the floor in MD. When you have the ability to have a combo that can sit on 2 bodies that cycle themselves back and 3 hand traps what's going thru that realistically
heres my hot take; rather then instead of possibly having best outa 3 without side deck the side deck is change into 2 different side deck for main deck and extra deck but both only has a limit of 5 cards each, players can still side in cards such as blowout cards or different extra deck monsters if not multiple copies but they're much more limited in what they can bring forcing the main deck and extra to be much more versatile innately
I heard "go back to MR4" and I could hear my poor Junk Synchron shudder, but maybe it'd make Konami realize that we want a way to play without relying on the flesh and blood of Junk Speeder
(Also hope to catch you guys at ANYC if you guys are heading there Sunday!)
On hand traps: I don't like how hand traps are being lauded, but people hate cards like Triple Tactics Talent and Thrust (cards made to counteract them) and want them banned. It's absurdly hypocritical.
Talents and thrust work better going first which is the issue.
Hand traps in theory bolster going second which has always been the harder position to play from.
That's not hypocritical to not want the ability to make going first better
@@Fencer_Nowa Get rid of hand traps if you're going to get rid of the counters to them. Period, bottom line.
I liked the concept of master rule 4 but overall it ruined the game for alot of decks and essentially forced you to play link monsters even if your deck didn't revolve around them and in turn can make or break the deck itself. I do however feel like they should take some bits and pieces from that and apply a new master rule 6 to slow the game back down alittle bit.
10:49 - I guess you can consider this a hot take, but it's mainly my response to this point: The Zexal World Duel Carnival game was pathetically bare-bones, especially considering how many characters' stories they removed from Story Mode--and they're not exactly complicated things to translate, it's just lines of text on a screen--but the story scenarios we did get are FASCINATING. Vetrix gets to have his revenge on Faker but chooses to show mercy instead; the only other that I can recall off the top of my head is the Red Hat/"Player Character" route, and that's basically worthless apart from Brooke Walker's throwaway dialogue about you being "a legendary duelist who rebuilt a whole town...and once saved the whole world from destruction!" Even if it's mistaken identity, the nature of the scene implies that there's an actual character in Zexal lore who did that stuff. Even though that whole "dangerous mystery" that gets built up around you whiffs and goes literally nowhere, it ties into Brooke's comments, and there's too much of it overall to write it off as some in-universe lore. Especially since that kind of adventure is a regular Tuesday for both the Zexal anime and manga, except that this time Yuma's not the one adventuring.
Fun fact, yalls old place you recorded in actually was the same apartment complex I used to live in😹
I really like the idea of not having a side deck, since it forces the player to either accept limitations in their deck or choose to run a non-engine that could get them out of non-ideal situations. If you make the conscious decision to not have any back row removal, then you are giving up your counter-play in favor of another strategy. Make the game more than just Engine + Handtraps with all counters in side-deck.
I mean having side deck is ok, the main problem of Yugioh is card effect. They can reboot it all the card become only one effect card and side deck can have two effect.
it would realisticly make the game worse as it creates match up fishing. no side deck mainly work in pokemon cause decks are conistent so generic cards are easy enough to find at lower copies and the generic tools are there are only so things that can be an issue.
Best Hot-takes series in a while 🎉 Almost all takes/ ideas have their positive direction to create a better game in general, especially the Banlist for Pairs. If only Konami would take any 1 of these to test and see it's worth going forward..
This is fun series, hope you revisit it every now and then! And Thanks for including my provocative and somewhat obscene comment in the last hot takes video 😂
Whomever wins the coin toss is debatable because not all decks are built to go first, or second. Some decks are versatile enough to go off either way, so that kind of negates winning the coin toss. Where as if your deck is better going second and your opponents deck is better going first, then whomever wins the coin toss is determined by whom gets to choose if they go first or second and obviously if your deck does better going second then that's what turn your gonna choose to take, and same if your deck does better going first. So the only time you could actually loose a coin toss is if you have 2 going first or 2 going second players vs each other.
It’s confirmed. Don’t blame Konami!
Blame Team APS. 😡
I blame both sides, Konami for making cards too generic and duelists making them even more powerful than they already are.
@@djbaconbitzincTeam APS does not represent the playerbase at large
This makes zero sense.
Hot take, I honestly think for any old format where Master rule 4 was around it would have completely got Konami to realize some of the mistakes sooner had it been in its current iteration. Look, I play Synchrons a deck that is actually unplayable because it's so focused around Synchro that even the link they gave it doesn't even help make things. The other piece in junk speeder won't even let you Link summon if you want to use it.
Yet if you were to go back to some of those old formats with the current Master rule instead of how it was at the time there's just so many decks that would have played so differently and so many different top decks.
The P5 music always catches me off guard but you guys use it so often. Really makes me want to replay P5R, I can't believe I'm nostalgic for that game. Feels like it came out yesterday but the original version of P5 came out when I was in high school lol
That soundtrack MOVED me.
@@TeamAPS Same here. Hell, that whole game moved me! Persona just does that to you. Can probably tell from my profile pic that I'm a huge Persona fanboy.
Complex bans are common but discouraged in Pokémon Smogon formats.
You cannot use Baton Pass and Agility in the same pokemon. Or Swift Swim + Drizzle in some formats below OU. Or notavly i think Sandslash is soft banned because both of its abilities boost evasion/speed while in a sandstorm and you _want_ to pair it with Sandstream mons but that conbination is banned.