Raigeki is at 2, Dark hole is unlimited, a lot more

[Raven]

Can we please get Harpie Feather Duster to 2?

[TyranntX]

How about no?

[Soji]

duster to 2 and heavy storm to 3.

[Raven]

Originally posted by TyranntX:

How about no?

I know why we shouldn't but with the way konami does things, it would boost usage of CP and have people pull big on harpie. It's in their normal wheel house.

[Yerc2]

I feel like the existence of the extra deck and monster-vomiting combos makes monster removal a more mandatory effect than backrow removal. I often find myself needing to clear my opponent's monsters to win a duel, I rarely need to clear their backrow to do so.
So I think making HFD more accessible would be slightly widening the gap between meta decks and non-meta decks.

Please don't kill my Labyrinth and Argostars decks. :'(

[mr-p1ckl3]

wow wow wow. slow down dude. one is pretty good. 2 is totally disgusting !

[Thain]

And Call by the Grave to 3 as well.

[e-dood]

Originally posted by Raven:

Can we please get Harpie Feather Duster to 2?

They'll do it when they release the alt art for it.

[Papa Shekels]

Having played some unlimited tournaments with 3 duster, it's a little ridiculous to have access to it that often. You already have 4 copies of it with thrust, but the paradox is that thrust won't be live against the decks where you need duster the most. It may not seem like much, but having a backrow wipe basically guaranteed does a lot for the rest of your deck building and what you can afford to get away with. It sort of lets every deck play with the tenpai mentality of ignoring entire axes of the game. 2, maybe, but it would still get to pretty powerful as is

[¿¡Kloey!?²]

Put it to 2 if it helps benefit you.
But I say put it to 3 so it can be used to help me. - Ramblings of an Unchained player.

[Raven]

I'm just saying, people aren't punished anymore for over extending. I know why its bad to have too much HFD, but power creep is really getting up there, and I personally think over extending needs to be punished more besides Nib.

[G3]

Even if they unlimited these cards. People would still only run one copy. They already compete for deck space against all other non-engine cards. The Maxx "C" tax taking 8 of those spots minimum already. Plus, Them being Thrust targets would keep them at one to use the other spots for other Thrust targets.

[Papa Shekels]

Originally posted by Raven:

I'm just saying, people aren't punished anymore for over extending. I know why its bad to have too much HFD, but power creep is really getting up there, and I personally think over extending needs to be punished more besides Nib.

There isn't such a thing as overextending anymore, you have to give it your all because so will your opponent. If you draw a hand of 4 traps and none of them are judgment, you still have to set them all, use 'em or lose 'em. The risk of your opponent having one of the few specific blowouts to counter that does not outweigh the cost of making your endboard weaker when some decks can play through a full backrow as is.

I guess technically I'm a bit wrong on that front. There is such a thing as overextending in the modern day - pretty much exclusively tied to the mulcharmies. As broken as they still are, there is at least some level of counterplay to them, especially if you play a really powerful and versatile deck like mitsurugi or memento. The concept of pivoting plays to avoid giving the opponent draws is an actual consideration, as is the punishment for overextending into it. Notably different from "overextending" into maxx "C" or duster because in this case you actually have choices that don't equate to conceding the game

[Yerc2]

Originally posted by Raven:

I'm just saying, people aren't punished anymore for over extending. I know why its bad to have too much HFD, but power creep is really getting up there, and I personally think over extending needs to be punished more besides Nib.

Can you elaborate on what "over extending" means in this context?

If a player goes uninterrupted, they can consistently flood their board with multiple control effects to deny their opponent's play, which why every deck needs to take the 15 or so handtrap staples like Ash and Maxx "C" to counter that.
That's kinda just what the game has evolved into in general.

Is your position that you want more HFDs so that even when someone sets up a large board, people would have a more consistent time to clear their backrow?

With negates being as prominent as they are, and monsters being walking control machines, I question how effective an extra HFD would be against stronger decks. Compared to say, adding in another handtrap to hinder your opponent from building their board.

[76561199378662608]

Konami can't do that because these cards are a threat to their golden-eyes child dragon.

[Masuo15]

Do we really need to indirectly nerf Dark Magician even more?

Most monsters have some form of protecction against destruction; thats why the cards that do that (destroy monsters) are allowed on bigger numbers than the spells/trap removals. The few spell/traps that do have protection do need monsters to have it enable; they lack self protection.

I believe that might be the reason.