Let's Talk - (controversial opinion) OCG is meta slave region due to Maxx "C"

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

So, some of you will recall that not too long ago I made a thread showing some of the decks that got 1st and 2nd place at regional, and after Plunder Patrol got 1st and Scareclaw got 2nd at Lake Worth Regional, it got me thinking.

Scareclaw or Plunder aren't new decks, and among the decks listed in my previous thread, we've had Marincess, Salamangreat, HERO, and while not a 1st or 2nd place, Invoked Dogmatika Shaddoll got 3rd place at Dune Regional few days ago, and that deck is old a f.

We also know the exploits of some Rikka players such as Sunseed Jess winning the EU National a 2nd time in a row with Rikka.

Earlier this year we've even had Dark Magician get a top 8 at a regional in South America, I made a thread about it.

The TCG keeps having these old decks constantly top events to a point where what was considered novelty is now a norm.

On the other side of the aisle, where certain scrub on the forum claims that there's so much more diversity (bring numbers coward), beside Tearlaments, the only "old decks" that are seen doing stuff can be counted on a single hand that has missing fingers. You have Adamancipator, which is one of the strongest combo decks ever printed, having access to both Block Dragon and Grass, with brother being limited. Or, you've got Vaylantz, which as some people are now learning in MD, it's pretty much Stun but with none of the weaknesses of Stun.

For OCG, old decks aren't topping, let alone winning. When it comes to top 8s, top 4s and such, it's pretty much almost exclusively whatever the new thing is. Which honestly, to a scrub, might look like more diversity, I mean, look at it this way. "oh Swordsoul won this even and Marincess won this other event, Rikka won EU National again (congrats to Jess for the achievement), I've seen these decks before, there's nothing new, OCG has more diversity as its always something new topping".

Main reason being, OCG players are kinda forced to abandon older decks because those older decks can't keep up with both new stuff and Maxx "C". Vanquish Soul and Rescue-Ace aren't nowhere near as good in the TCG compared to how there were in the OCG, because one of their main selling point was their relation with the bug, Vanquish Soul abusing it better than other decks due to it being an Earth monster, and the firefighters by being able to play around it. That doesn't exist in the TCG so the decks have to stand on their own. The decks are good, but without the bug, they aren't as good.

The bug's influence on the OCG meta is so big that unless you're the best deck ever printed (Tearlaments) or one of the most unfair decks ever printed (Adamancipator) ya ain't seeing shelf life there, it's pretty much unofficial set rotation.

[Blind Oracle]

maxx c kills control and midrange decks. decks like rikka and plunder need to win a resource game and that just doesnt exist if your opponent can draw 3-6 cards off establishing a basic board. vs maxx c the only options are summon boarder or have a "♥♥♥♥ it we ball" mentality.

[Yerc2]

You're objectively incorrect, and showing you have no understanding of the game as per usual. Your trolling does not benefit anyone.

If you compare OCG tournaments to TCG tournaments, whether it be comparing them based on which archetype was recently released, or based on the date, the OCG almost always has a larger variety of decks performing well, and winning tournaments.

Your idea that the TCG is more diverse is delusional, and based on nothing that can be substantiated. You're just making baseless claims and ignoring reality. But that's what most of your posts here are like anyways.

People take Maxx "C" to increase their chance of being able to to play in the current meta when they would otherwise be locked out.
It would be backwards to take away tools that give the opportunity for weaker and older decks to perform well, while keeping stronger and more meta-defining cards exclusive to the newest and strongest decks, this would only hurts deck diversity, as seen in the TCG.

I wouldn't make a claim that any banlist is objectively better than the other, because people have different desired for the game and gameplay directions.
But you have to think, "what is the purpose of a banlist?"
If the goal of a banlist is to try to balance the game to increase the amount of cards and decks that are viable in the current environment, then the OCG's banlist is doing a better job than the TCG on that front, as nearly all tournaments show.

In the TCG, players are forced to play a smaller variety of decks to be competitive, because that banlist is more-so centred around making newer decks stronger(which is the result of general powercreep), and older decks weaker(by removing tools that older decks use).
The TCG requires people become meta-slaves even more than the OCG.

[Chaos 混沌 カオス]

While I don't disagree with everything Yerc2 says, I gotta admit he's a master concern troll.

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

Escrito originalmente por Chaos 混沌 カオス:

While I don't disagree with everything Yerc2 says, I gotta admit he's a master concern troll.

He's just copy pasting those replies.

"TCG has lower variety", well, ignoring the objective reality that that's impossible because if that was true, all these old decks that are winning events lately wouldn't be able to do it.

I mean, just use common sense, OCG is pretty much meta + Adamancipator, while TCG is meta + old rogue decks that can keep up because the bug isn't legal.

When's the last time Marincess won big in OCG? Or Salamangreat? Years ago. Whens the last time they won in the TCG? Last week.

Because of all these old decks alongside the meta, it proves the TCG has better diversity and a healthier format.

But hey, I welcome him to bring numbers rather than empty claims that he copy pastes.

[Knud den Store 🧙‍♂]

My solution to the problem is to print a card that is essentially Triple Tactics Thrust as a hand trap that can be used only on a clear field to "draw the out". Your opponent is less likely to commit if they know you got Sphere mode in hand, or Red Reboot or DRNM or Evenly Match etc etc.

Then we ban the Roach until it is given a proper errata.

[Silyon]

A lot of this echos things I've been saying for quite a while in other threads and been dismissed/mocked for. Which makes me smirk, won't lie.

Yup, YGO has a set rotation contrary to popular opinion. It's not a "hard" set rotation like in MTG where the company outright forbids cards that fall outside of a certain release window. Rather, it's a "soft" set rotation that's driven primarily by power creep. Sure, you can theoretically play any card that's ever been released, but in practical terms it's actually a small-ish pool of the 200-300 most recent cards and a handful of older staples that haven't had something eclipse them yet. That creates newbie traps that make deck construction and card evaluation much harder tasks in YGO than in other TCGs.

And yup, the Meta in either TCG or OCG is largely a popularity contest of the decks/archetypes that people have brought to recent noteworthy events. A deck's power is assumed biased on how many people are using it, but that's not a reliable metric by any means. Almost any archetype can be built in a way that's competitive enough to function in a competitive environment, so it's far more effective (and easier on the wallet) to find an archetype you like and keep refining it rather than chase what everyone else says is good.

Maxx C is Maxx C. Most of it's impact is psychological, it seems. I've won games through my opponent going +10 off of the bug, I've lost games where they only got a single card off it. What matters is your deck and how well you can pilot it, a good deck can play through any amount of advantage they might generate off of the bug and a skilled player with that deck can steer it to victory regardless. You tilt, you've already lost.

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

Escrito originalmente por Silyon:

Maxx C is Maxx C. Most of it's impact is psychological, it seems. I've won games through my opponent going +10 off of the bug, I've lost games where they only got a single card off it. What matters is your deck and how well you can pilot it, a good deck can play through any amount of advantage they might generate off of the bug and a skilled player with that deck can steer it to victory regardless. You tilt, you've already lost.

Yea....no.

If the opponent has any backrow removal (assuming Crystal Heart was used), Marincess as a deck cannot play through the bug. They give you too many draws for how little they end on, that's why you don't see it do anything in the OCG, yet however, they constantly manage to top events in the TCG.

I mean, outside of a towers, as that's meta specific and Marincess won't always run Crystal Heart, the end on a S/T negate with Aqua Argonaut and a monster negate with Wave, and from there on, it's whatever else hand traps they have in hand. To get to that board, they need to special summon like 8 times.

Marincess as a deck simply can't play through that much advantage.

A lot of other decks are like that as well, so there's no such thing as a "well built deck can play through any amount of advantage".

[Akemua]

Escrito originalmente por Chaos 混沌 カオス:

While I don't disagree with everything Yerc2 says, I gotta admit he's a master concern troll.

Just now realizing it? I've long stopped taking anything he says seriously.

[Kaulu]

You may be 100% correct, but damn if you don't seem to have an unending war going against the bug.

[HeraldOfOpera]

Escrito originalmente por C.C. アヌビス:

A lot of other decks are like that as well, so there's no such thing as a "well built deck can play through any amount of advantage".

There is such a thing, you just have to define "a well built deck" as one that can "play through any amount of advantage". This then results in it being impossible for 99% of decks to ever be "well-built" and the OCG meta by extension, which suggests that this isn't something that would be true of a well-built game. Fortunately, we were never dealing with a well-built game; we have a game designed by a mangaka with no intention of it ever being real and then licensed to a pachinko company.

[SadPlatty©]

Escrito originalmente por Silyon:

Maxx C is Maxx C. Most of it's impact is psychological, it seems. I've won games through my opponent going +10 off of the bug, I've lost games where they only got a single card off it. What matters is your deck and how well you can pilot it, a good deck can play through any amount of advantage they might generate off of the bug and a skilled player with that deck can steer it to victory regardless. You tilt, you've already lost.

While I will agree some of the power of C is in the mind (I love watching someone scoop once it gets activated); but it does also have card advantage which can easily disrupt others. Otherwise it almost helps skew luck for people going second, as it adds to their opening hand cards they otherwise needed a turn or 2 for.

In MTG - Instants and Flash are powerful keywords; they are YGOs "Quick-Play" mechanic. It is often that the best decks can draw "on demand" somehow and then use an Instant to flip the game around during a critical moment. Similar here - if someone top-decks Reigeki or Lightning Storm (while going second), Ash, or a number of other combo pieces enabling quick-play actions (like Starry special summoning and the like) - it can easily be them hitting the Nitros button on their deck.

YGO is however very luck driven; my Divine Beast/Dark World deck at it's best has Armityle out turn 1, and maybe even my Fallen Paradise; usually though I have Raviele out turn 1 or 2. The problem is my deck is mostly putting things into my hand though and then using cards to double summon - so Maxx C gets maybe 1 or 2 cards tops out of it. But last time the guy did get Ash and then fizzled my Paradise tutor trigger off my Chaos beast in the GY, but Raviele made it out. Unless they knew what I was doing - why not counter the 4k/4k instead, leaving me open?

And not being able to Mull outside of Fairy Mallet if your lucky to have it can also leave me with my 4 only non 4-star monsters (1 of each beast and CCucapac Apu). OR I could have 2 Grave Squirmers, Marshmallon, and Dark Resonator.

[Silyon]

I mean, really think about it for a moment. Maxx C does not negate anything, it doesn't remove anything, it just sits there as a lingering effect that lets the opponent draw a ton of cards while you go through your plays. The only thing making you stop your plays early is yourself, getting nervous about your opponent drawing into some other handtrap or board-breaker and then being able to combo off on your face.

These are threats that you have to plan for an anticipate regardless of if Maxx C was played. The bug changes nothing about that, You still need to have a gameplan for getting a Lightning Storm or Evenly dropped on you. Maybe without the bug you MIGHT not need to use that recovery plan, but not having a recovery plan at all is just plain stupid. You lose because of failing to prepare for the many boardbreakers in the game, not because of the bug itself.

Competitive decks in general and combo decks in particular are already built with the mentality of not really caring about your opponent's deck and commiting to their own gameplan. It doesn't matter if it's an Apollusa or a Barrone, it's a creature with a negate and your response is to force the activation through some targeted or sweeping removal so it doesn't mess with your starter. It doesn't matter if it's an Evenly, a Storm, or a Gozen/Rivalry, you're going to use a negate on it if possible and find a line to recover through if you can't. Most handtraps are Hard once-per-turns anyway, so it really doesn't matter if they draw into multiple copies of them and you ought to be expecting an Ash, Shifter, or Nib anyway.

Maxx C does not directly interfere with anything you're doing, so it's not REALLY worth responding to. It's bait, better to save your negate on the thing they draw that actually CAN mess with your plays. They can lose with 20 cards in hand just as easily as no cards in hand.

[Astrallight]

Escrito originalmente por Silyon:

I mean, really think about it for a moment. Maxx C does not negate anything, it doesn't remove anything, it just sits there as a lingering effect that lets the opponent draw a ton of cards while you go through your plays. The only thing making you stop your plays early is yourself, getting nervous about your opponent drawing into some other handtrap or board-breaker and then being able to combo off on your face.

These are threats that you have to plan for an anticipate regardless of if Maxx C was played. The bug changes nothing about that, You still need to have a gameplan for getting a Lightning Storm or Evenly dropped on you. Maybe without the bug you MIGHT not need to use that recovery plan, but not having a recovery plan at all is just plain stupid. You lose because of failing to prepare for the many boardbreakers in the game, not because of the bug itself.

Competitive decks in general and combo decks in particular are already built with the mentality of not really caring about your opponent's deck and commiting to their own gameplan. It doesn't matter if it's an Apollusa or a Barrone, it's a creature with a negate and your response is to force the activation through some targeted or sweeping removal so it doesn't mess with your starter. It doesn't matter if it's an Evenly, a Storm, or a Gozen/Rivalry, you're going to use a negate on it if possible and find a line to recover through if you can't. Most handtraps are Hard once-per-turns anyway, so it really doesn't matter if they draw into multiple copies of them and you ought to be expecting an Ash, Shifter, or Nib anyway.

Maxx C does not directly interfere with anything you're doing, so it's not REALLY worth responding to. It's bait, better to save your negate on the thing they draw that actually CAN mess with your plays. They can lose with 20 cards in hand just as easily as no cards in hand.

If the deck loses even with 20 cards from max c then the deck was bad already.

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

Escrito originalmente por Silyon:

I mean, really think about it for a moment. Maxx C does not negate anything, it doesn't remove anything, it just sits there as a lingering effect that lets the opponent draw a ton of cards while you go through your plays. The only thing making you stop your plays early is yourself, getting nervous about your opponent drawing into some other handtrap or board-breaker and then being able to combo off on your face.

These are threats that you have to plan for an anticipate regardless of if Maxx C was played. The bug changes nothing about that, You still need to have a gameplan for getting a Lightning Storm or Evenly dropped on you. Maybe without the bug you MIGHT not need to use that recovery plan, but not having a recovery plan at all is just plain stupid. You lose because of failing to prepare for the many boardbreakers in the game, not because of the bug itself.

Competitive decks in general and combo decks in particular are already built with the mentality of not really caring about your opponent's deck and commiting to their own gameplan. It doesn't matter if it's an Apollusa or a Barrone, it's a creature with a negate and your response is to force the activation through some targeted or sweeping removal so it doesn't mess with your starter. It doesn't matter if it's an Evenly, a Storm, or a Gozen/Rivalry, you're going to use a negate on it if possible and find a line to recover through if you can't. Most handtraps are Hard once-per-turns anyway, so it really doesn't matter if they draw into multiple copies of them and you ought to be expecting an Ash, Shifter, or Nib anyway.

Maxx C does not directly interfere with anything you're doing, so it's not REALLY worth responding to. It's bait, better to save your negate on the thing they draw that actually CAN mess with your plays. They can lose with 20 cards in hand just as easily as no cards in hand.

Please tell me you're trolling, because you can't be serious.

If Maxx "C" isn't negated, it's a lose lose situation. You either stop summoning and hope your opponent isn't able to OTK you, or you keep playing and they burry you in card advantage, which is the most powerful thing in Yu-Gi-Oh.

So while you have a choice, the choice is if you give your opponent the best floodgate in the game, or the best draw power in the game.

[Silyon]

Escrito originalmente por C.C. アヌビス:

Please tell me you're trolling, because you can't be serious.

If Maxx "C" isn't negated, it's a lose lose situation. You either stop summoning and hope your opponent isn't able to OTK you, or you keep playing and they burry you in card advantage, which is the most powerful thing in Yu-Gi-Oh.

So while you have a choice, the choice is if you give your opponent the best floodgate in the game, or the best draw power in the game.

No trolling from me. When have I ever trolled on these forums? I'm usually the one falling for the trolls because I can't tell the difference between bait and legitimate questions.

Here's the trick, damn near every deck is more than capable of OTKing you these days. There's so many ways of going into generic extra deck monsters from Accesscode to Utopia Double to Gustav into Leibe that it's hard to think of even one deck that doesn't have an OTK line they could be using. Better to always assume an OTK is incoming and be surprised that you're still alive when the dust settles. And Maxx C isn't required for any of them, it just lets you go win-more by setting up a negate board AND OTKing so the negates are pointless. No points for overkill in this game.

I understand the bug is annoying, even scary. I don't use it to begin with because I'd rather like it if people didn't scoop the moment it came down. But I've gone the extra mile for a while now and started simply not responding to Maxx C and conducting my plays as normal. Even took out my set of Ash's for Ghost Ogres entirely, Called by only hitting stuff like Havnis or Jet targets instead of being burned on the Bug. Wanna know what happened to my win rate for doing what common opinion says is the "wrong" thing?

Not a thing, stayed about the same. I have close enough to exactly the same win-rate agonizing over Maxx C as I do totally ignoring it. I encourage you to try it yourself and see if I might be on to something or not, heavens know my sample size is inadequate.