Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
If it were a strawman, we wouldn't see 3-5 posts A DAY ranting about the game and using these exact arguments. We do, and in fact we were arguing in just such a thread literally yesterday. Strawman means to make up an opposing position to argue against. We don't need to make up arguments when they're consistently posted, that's simply recalling and answering the points previously made.
Good, then we have the same definition. The key point then is "Intentionally weaker", which OP is not using. While the terms being used are a more generic average of these arguments, I have personally seen them used verbatim over and over in numerous threads and presume you have as well. Which makes your claim of "Strawman" not make sense. Is the issue that some of the nuance and examples are being left out for the clear sake of brevity? Or does addressing the core gist of the argument somehow "weaken" the argument itself?
Personally having seen something doesn't somehow automatically mean the other person was a serious person actually trying to make a point.
The point about the game being too fast isn't used by people who dislike modern Yugioh, it's an argument used by people who DO like it as justification for why it's actually good. Pretending that arguments YOUR SIDE uses are actually things the opposing side says is a strawman.
The meta is likewise not a point being referenced by people who hate the modern game's flow. It's primarily the complaint of people who DO like modern Yugioh, as should be obvious by the fact that it's talking about specific metagame interactions that require an indepth knowledge and understanding of the meta. If they're already engaging with the game to that extent, their stance cannot be against that game. There's at minimum a nuance there that is being ignored for the purpose of winning an argument against an enemy that doesn't actually exist. A strawman, one might say.
These are the things I've been saying. I know from our previous interactions that you're capable of parsing this level of nuance. Don't be obtuse, please.
Point 1 where I disagree with your assessment. The only person capable of deciding if any given argument or rant is a serious one is the original poster of the argument in the first place. You, me, or anyone else can choose to treat the post seriously or not, but that doesn't change the author's intent and in either case the intent doesn't factor into the worth of the ensuing discussion in any case. Plenty of fruitful discussions have followed in the wake of someone's trollish rant, even certain notorious and well-known trolls that make a return every few weeks.
So I remain confused on how exactly this person's post, which is taking the opposite stance in response to the usual flood of angry-sounding rants by assorted people, is any different from other such posts. Would you be making such an argument against it if it was buried on page 3 or 4 of a topic rather than the original post? If no, why is it different then?
This isn't a one-sided point like you're trying to make it out to be. You're saying that there are people in favor of the high speed of the game and quote it as reason to play this game over it's competitors. You're willfully ignoring the equal (or greater) number of people complaining about "coinflip games", "20 minute combos", and "Summon Spam", each of which are negative comments about the speed of the game and how much is capable of getting done in the span of a single turn. All there is to say on this one, your selection bias is showing.
Said "enemy" (such a loaded term, use "Opponent" instead) does exist and the evidence of their existence is self-evident. The only leg you have to stand on is arbitrary dismissal of those topics that would disagree with you, which is in turn an example of false generalization (Or cherry-picking evidence, if you prefer).
I agree, arguments involving "The Meta" should necessarily involve those deeply invested into the game as it stands and leave newer or inexperienced players out of the discussion entirely. In reality it doesn't work that way, one of the first questions most new players approach veterans with is "What is meta?", often because they're sick of losing and want to start winning. They then proceed to attempt to build a "meta" deck and preform better for a time because the basic performance of the deck itself is often greatly improved over whatever they were running. This creates the commonly-held belief among newer players that you have to play a Meta deck in order to compete in this game, which we both know is abjectly false. It's only after brushing with "the meta" and it's associated trial-by-fire that those players that stick it out long enough to become skilled even start to branch out into their own pet decks or gimmicks. This, while certainly not ideal, is the real progression most players end up having with Yugioh.
So no, the Meta is of prime importance to new players no matter how much veterans choose to either downplay it or advocate for it. They use meta picks to excuse their lack of skill while it develops (or not, as the case may be), and those that elect to announce their departure from the game always end up quoting "The Meta" or various aspects of the game's flow like "Long combos" as specific reasons for doing so.
Disagreement does not mean I'm being obtuse. I find you're using the Strawman argument incorrectly by reason of your own cherry-picked biases, which omit the tens of times such arguments have arisen in the past week alone. You wish to dismiss those times as being "invalid" by some nonobjective personal measure that I don't abide by. Naturally you disagree. What more is there to say?
So you're a new player that has never played classic Yugioh trying to convince others modern Yugioh isn't as bad as it is? That alone really puts this post in perspective.
It isn't, and we'll get to why.
Most decks in the game that aren't meta have no way of doing that and simply get shut down for having a chance to do anything, but since you've never played older decks you obviously wouldn't know that. While the lack of a mana system means that turns are more explosive and you can do a lot more in them you're still limited by what you can draw, so while theoretically if you're playing a meta deck you can do a lot more in a single turn if you're playing a normal deck built around an archetype and not just loading up on the current flavor of the month you're going to have an abysmal experience.
Most decks don't have a "hole", that's the whole point of setting up a board with enough negates to prevent you from playing any counters you may have been fortunate enough to draw in your opening hand. The only decks that are better off going turn 2 are decks that are just that laughably overtuned and can't be interacted with like Tenpai or even Gimmick Puppet due to their field spells.
Because most of the "top players" play meta.
Tell that to the people that don't play meta and have exhausted every option to them both in archetype and generic. I get that you're a new player that never played Yugioh during its golden age, but come on man.
Play something like pure MPB against Tenpai. Go on, I dare you.
That's just a roundabout way of saying "just play meta", your mindset of disrespecting the people who have been playing much, much longer than you and telling them to copy and paste whatever garbage the people that nobody would ever want to play with have come up with is telling.
No it doesn't, because Tenpai is in the minority of decks that are better going second because its field spell literally prevents interaction and it can easily OTK you. It'd be like if I pointed at Aroma and said "See? Keeping your LP high matters!" while ignoring Dinomorphia exists. Statements that are generally true aren't "defeated" when a deck bucks that statement because of its specific mechanics unique to it.
Nobody uses Threatening Roar and moreover hate cards are hardly useful outside of fighting the specific deck you're bringing them for. It's like bringing Cursed Seal of The Forbidden Spell hoping on the off chance to not only go up against Yubel but to hit their Nightmare Pain, and that's also hoping they don't have some form of negate to compensate for it. Your suggested "tech card" is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ meme strat, and really just highlights how overtuned Tenpai is.
Absolutely false, and you'd know that if you weren't a new player.
Because said "variety" is the overwhelming minority of games, not because of your excuse appealing to a psychological phenomenon.
As a Rogue player that idea is laughable, unless you're running a bunch of handtraps as a crutch you'll never in a million years do so.
I'm genuinely curious how you do so, because the fact Ash has an 80% usage rate and Maxx C has a 90% usage rate is indefensible. There's not a single card in the game that should be anywhere near used that much, especially when there's hundreds if not thousands of cards now.
Not gonna bother addressing this because this is the first time you're right and I 100% agree that the roach is an issue if nothing else.
You're wrong, and I'll address why.
Unless they're playing meta it literally couldn't matter less, unlike the decks you're clearly more familiar with most decks don't have enough alternative ways of searching their deck or using effects that are crucial to establishing a board. You Ash a Junk player's Junk Speeder they're completely stopped, same with Imperming either of a Monarch player's squires, or Imperming an Abyss Actor's Hyper Director, etc. etc.
Unless you know they're going to make a negate at the end of their main phase.
The only people that should ever be using Droll are Trickstar players going for the Droll lock, why would any meta sheep be using anything other than 3 Ash, 3 Maxx, 3 Imperm, an Effect Veiler, and then quickplay spells like Called By or Forbidden Droplet. In the last 100 games you know how many times I've been hit by Droll? Once. That's it.
It doesn't because that's never how it plays out, you open a decent hand, set your traps, normal summon a monster, use its search effect to make your plays, get Ashed, and then are incapable of doing anything.
I suppose it might be different for a meta player, considering they're spoiled for choice when it comes to search effects and the like.
They're a crutch meta players abuse for free wins by preventing your opponent from playing the game, they take no skill, are more powerful and faster than even most floodgates, and 90% of the decks in the game currently die to a single Ash.
I'm not even surprised you consider floodgates an issue yet don't have the same problem with handtraps, it's really typical.
Before I tear your argument apart I will grant you both of these, Gimmick Puppet cards need to be hit by the banlist and Barrier Statues shouldn't have been printed to begin with.
These however, I will not. Both of those cards are balanced. Not only do both floodgate both players but the former doesn't prevent you from activating cards entirely and the latter demands a 1000 LP cost on top of that.
No there isn't, acting like there's any difference whatsoever between floodgates and a negate heavy board when chances are you don't even have enough cards hand to play through it makes the distinguishment between the two not only arbitrary but absurd. either both forms of preventing your opponent from playing the game are fine or neither are, enough of this nonsense where once is fine because "technically if you somehow magically start with 9 cards in your hand you could probably squeeze an effect past all of the negates.
False, that's not how it plays out in practice in the slightest. Both prevent your opponent from playing the game entirely, the fact that their is an eventual limit to the amount of negates the opponent has doesn't matter when it's more negates than you have cards in your entire hand.
No, you have a fundamentally flawed perception of stun, combo, and Yugioh in general because you're a new player that has never Yugioh during its hey day.
I agree with one exception: Exodia FTK is alright, it's inconsistent and actually nice to see over all the other FTK decks that are more common.