In a World - Yami Warlock broadwaymyway@adelphia.net >In a World? > >A "What if..." and "Theme" Yu-Gi-Oh! Article. > >Six months. > >If I can recall correctly, it was a six month dueling experience at a >local tournament. I've poured dollar after dollar, and have been >collecting a month or two before the initial U.S. release of the game, >into this wonderful game. I have had my best deck stolen and started from >the ground up. I've experienced victories, defeats, and even a card shop >closing. However, in the past six months, I have yet to see a trophy or >prize in my hands from winning a weekly tournament at my second card shop. > >Yet, I would hate myself if I won using their tactics. > >Yu-Gi-Oh! is a great, great game. I will admit that. But, as we all >know, it is far from perfect. With a seemingly endless flow of the same >cards finding their way into every deck, despite the infinite >possibilities the hard-working people at Konami and Upper deck seem to >offer us, we find ourselves in a quagmire of beat-down and control >decks. Personally, I too have traveled to the dark side of Yu-Gi-Oh!, but >when my deck was lost to the wind, I realized my faults and, definatly not >due to lack of funds, became a theme deck player. Despite the people's >jeers I get at the table for playing the "Quiji Board", pure Japanese >decks because I like the extended images, or just the fun factor involved >in using cards with mysterious text (of course, we all know what the >rulings are on their English counter-parts), or even not only using some >"worthless" cards like "Precious Cards from Beyond", but building a deck >around them! It's a hard life, but trust me, getting that combo that >gives you 100,000 life points, or pumps a 1200/800 to a 17,200/6400 is >worth any amount of the glory of winning a single tournament with a deck >packed full of 1900 level 4 monsters. Of course, these beat down, control >and discard decks do get the job done, very well might I add. It is, >after all, human nature to use all the force you can when and if >possible. However, I must remind the card community it seems on the >dangers of conformity which follow in using the most force that you >can. The deck you build is your identify - a reflection of who you are >and how you live your life. On that note, I present to you an interesting >thought. What if Konami/Upper deck took another turn to the game? What >if they decided to make some changes? Would it be for the better, or >would it crumble the game? Would it lead us further to an ideal card game >environment, like the varied styles and decks seen on the Yu-Gi-Oh! >anime? I'm sure even the #1 player of the game wouldn't mind seeing some >changes, and though my years of dueling experiences, I am proud to present >these words. > >What if Konami/Konami was to create a 1000+ card set, banning all >previous >cards not reprinted in this set, and "reset" the game? This was done >twice in the popular CCG: "Legend of the Five Rings". At one point, only >3 deck types could even stand a chance at tournaments - and each one would >always defeat one another. Going through their mistakes, they created new >standards for playing, still using old concepts, eliminating "broken" >aspects of game play. I could imagine very clearly Upper deck doing this, >although I'd give it a 1 out of 9,000,000 chance that they would. Imagine >a game where all those evil cards, like "Yata-Guarasu", "Fiber Jar", >"Cyber Jar" and even "Mystical Space Typhoon" were reprinted into weaker >versions of themselves? You wouldn't necessarily have to buy new cards, >just use the new rulings on the older cards. Would "Fiber Jar" be that >annoying if it had a life point cost? Would "Yata-Guarasu" be that feared >if Spirit monsters required a card like "Toon World" to play it? Of >course, by making a massive set that wouldn't eliminate many deck >arch-types (see next article for an incomplete (probably) list) would also >make it close to impossible to get a complete set! There would be almost >every card in the game reprinted! Of course, if multiple structure decks >were printed revolving around certain deck types, it wouldn't be all that >bad. If the set was divided into 7 or even 8 versions, it would also be >quite balanced and easier to find cards. This would not only help bring >in discouraged players who may have left the game because their decks were >stolen, they were always winning, or they got bored, but it would also >create a very powerful temptation for new players to enter a practically >new game. Even "Magic: The Gathering", the daddy of all card games, >"resets" itself all the time. > >What if everyone at your local store used a different deck type? Could >you imagine a deck without Graceful Charity, Pot of Greed, Mystical Space >Typhoon, Raigeki, Harpie's Feather Duster or Imperial Order? It sounds >foolish not to use the "staples", but with an average of 30 staple cards, >there's no room for flavor in your deck! It's almost comical how in every >set Konami/Upper deck tries to release another, or even two or three, new >"themes". Little does it seem, but these "themes" aren't just to make the >set seem more unison, they are made so people could make theme >decks! These aren't just for casual play either, as many people might >think. The problem we've ran into in the game is that, due to now >alternate "casting costs", like in "Magic: the Gathering", everyone can >use just about every card! Breaker, the Magic Warrior, for example, is >not just another strong 1900 monster with an excellent ability like "Spear >Dragon". It is a Magic Counter card: a deck arch-type rarity played in >the tournament scenes. The ironic part is, with each new set, and each >new theme added to the game, you'd think we'd see more and more theme >decks, when all we see are one or two cards from those themes getting >played with cards that are practically "rivals". Some theme decks include >Spirits, fiends (undead), fiends (demons), warriors, Black Scorpion >Raiders, insect (swarm), insect (lock-down), direct damage, direct damage >(Gravekeepers), Gravekeepers beak down, spell token, water (undersea), >water (sea-dragon), water (slime/revival), machine, gradius, Dark Paladin, >Toons, Zombies, flip-face down, Dragons, direct attacks, Inaba/Tornado >Wall/Imperial Order, Archfiend, revolution, Ogama (usually used as a >beatdown with cards like "Beserk Dead Dragon" and "Final Attack Orders"), >luck, jar (which is impossible due to restrictions, due to the power of >these cards in non-jar decks, which would run a discard strategy), goblin, >fusion, Amazoness, Bad Reaction, Blue-Eyes, Beast, Elma, Magical >Scientist, Red-Eyes, Ritual, Dinosaur, XYZ, Harpies, Wall, Union, >Egyptian, Occult Deck (Bakura deck), Destiny/Quiji Board, Exodia, >Guardian, Gate Guardian, Fairy-Meteor Crush, Relinquished, Masks Final >Countdown, Last Turn and Precious Cards from Beyond deck. The next set >will also offer level 1/2 decks and Angel/Fairy decks. I can even think >of a good cat-dog deck idea, and don't forget the Different Dimensional >cards and the recent Ninja deck! This isn't including the possibilities >for character decks: Kaiba, Yugi and the gang. Now many people will think >these decks will lose almost every game. They are half right. But this >won't be true if... > >What if Upperdeck banned cards? We've all heard of the 10 Forbidden >Cards >in Japan and Uppdeck's announcement saying they have no plans for banning >any cards, right? Well first of all that's incorrect. They do plan to >ban cards. How can I tell: They have a spot in the restricted list for >Forbidden Cards! Many people think Yu-Gi-Oh! will die with it's first >banning. That my friends is very incorrect. People in other games, like >Magic and L5R, beg for cards to be banned. How can you tell when a card >should be banned: 1.) if a card makes more than half a set 100% useless >due to it's outrageous power, it should be banned, 2.) if a card, which >can be used against a variety, and with a variety, of decks (like >"Tribe-Infecting Virus"), and will decimate more than 10 deck arch-types, >it should be banned, 3.) if a card is so strong, it not only works in >every deck, but turns the entire tide of the game in that decks favor at >little or no cost to that deck, it should be banned. That's almost the >entire restriction list. Ever notice a card in "Monopoly" that lets you >take an opponent's property for one turn? Of course not! People would >Mortgage the strongest property after it wears off and almost instantly >lose. The card "Change of Heart", by not making "Soul Exchange", "Jowls >of Dark Demise", and "Stash Steal" close to useless, and by destroying any >deck that relies on a single monster, is far to strong to be allowed in >games. "Yata-Guarasu", "Chaos Emperor Dragon", "Amazoness Swordswoman", >"Magic Cylinder", "Harpies Feather Duster", "Sangan", "Witch of the Black >Forest" and even "Elma - Dagger of Butterflies" shouldn't be banned, but >changed. In fact, wouldn't it be interesting if Upperdeck actually >un-restricted these cards and simply errated their text to eliminate the >most evil combos, or their usefulness in "just any deck". A spell card >from the next set, for example, "Dark Magic Attack" (Play this Spell Card >when you have a face-up "Dark Magician" on the field. Destroy all of your >opponent's magic and trap cards on the field) is a good example of how a >completely one sided card ("Harpies Feather Duster") has been given a >requirement, not only encouraging and strengthening a certain deck theme, >but a way to allow a broken card of this magnitude to exist >unrestricted! By banning cards, you won't lose options of cards to >play. You will gain options! Ever think of throwing in a "Destiny Board" >into your deck? Many players might think it foolish with Jinzo, Mystical >Space Typhoon, Heavy Storm, Harpies Feather Duster and Breaker the Magic >Warrior making the rounds, but if they were harder to play (see below), >then think of the possibilities for deck themes! > >What if Upperdeck followed the basic idea of "Tokui-Waza" from the >"Dragonball Z Trading Card Game"? This is the basic idea of promoting >theme decks by giving great benefits if all of your deck are cards of that >theme. Think of it for a second: Permanent Magic cards that can't be >destroyed which can be played from the deck by Sacrificing a monster of >that type to play them! Sounds too powerful, right? Not if those cards >negate the activation and effects, of just restrict the number, of other >cards you play during the game! Need an example? Lemme whip a little one >up for you: "Archfiend Lord - Permanent Magic - This card cannot be >played from the hand like a normal magic card. This card cannot be >destroyed due to other card effects. Offer as a tribute one of your >Archfiend monsters in order to play this card from your deck during your >main phase, then shuffle your deck. You may only have one Permanent Magic >card with the name Lord in it's title. As long as this card remains >face-up on the field, "Pandemonium" cannot be destroyed due to the effects >of an opponent's magic or trap card. If you summon 2 non-Archfiend >monsters while this card is face-up on the field, remove this card from >the game. All your Archfiend monster's get +500 ATK and DEF." I'm sorry >for making that, I just love making up my own cards. Back to the subject; >if they did this, any "broken" cards, like Yata or even Amazoness >Swordswoman wouldn't have to be on the restriction list ("You may only >play this card if 'Amazoness Lord' is face-up on your side of the >field"). If you think about it, this concept isn't that new! In fact, >it's what Konami has been trying all along with Toon World, the recent >(and older) Umi related cards, and even all the Necrovalley required >cards. If they did this, of course, they would have to release more cards >of the same themes in different sets, like the new Archfiend in the next set. > >What if Upperdeck allowed Japanese cards? This has been one of the >most >controversial issues for years, for some stupid reason. It is true that >many cards are easier to get in the Japanese structure decks, but at the >same time, you must remember many Japanese cards are close to impossible >to attain because of the 5 card packs and no guaranteed rare! Now lets >see what the outcomes of this situation would be. First of all, hardcore >American players might complain. They might call all their investments in >cards now worthless with cheaper Japanese staples found in starter >decks. Adversary, however, haven't you noticed with the release of many >staples in the Evolution decks and the new Invasion of Chaos booster >specials? Another complaint is that we can't read Japanese. Well, I know >I know the text and effect of every card in the game (well, I slowed down >around Dark Crises), and now we have a nifty netrep >(http://www.netrep.net) site with every usable card in the game with full >text and all! Sweet deal huh? Combined with the power of a printer, or >an actual copy of the English version of the song, you have yourself a >perfect recreation. The only other problem lies within the majority of >those who read Japanese and play by the Japanese rules. Of course, with >only a few ruling changes, it shouldn't be as hard to adjust to the game >than it would to learn about a new aspect like when Rituals were first >introduced in "Magic Ruler". Many people also say the rather offensive >statement: "This is America so we play with English cards." Not only is >this statement completely out of line for anyone playing a game like >Yu-Gi-Oh! which requires some intelligence, but rather ignorant >considering our acceptance of all cultures, especially Japanese culture by >simply playing this game. Not only are these things true, but we can use >French and other foreign cards as well! The only excuse left to not have >Japanese cards is to be some kind of racist, in which case you have many >more problems than playing against Japanese cards.