Multchummy Purulia - "Maxx "C" at home"?

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

https://twitter.com/YuGiOhNewsTCG/status/1779490122133618777

To me, this looks like a much more balanced version of Maxx "C". Yes, Maxx "C" is utter cancel, but this one is much more balanced, especially since it can backfire quite wonderfully as it doesn't incentivize the opponent to stop summoning.

Anyway, discuss.

[Lazer]

This seems more like Floo hate than a replacement for Maxx C, this card misses the mark big time
no draws for:
-link climbing or summong extra deck monsters (very bad design decision)
-special summon from the main deck (very bad design decision)
-special summon from GY (okay)

but draws:
-for normal summons

[Terminal Desolation]

This card seems really interesting, I like it as a replacement to the roach. Maybe Konami will finally ban it? Biggest concern I can see right now is that you can theoretically use this AND Maxx C, though that does make it much easier to deck out by drawing. That sounds absurd. I don't think we can have both cards legal simultaneously.

[Astrallight]

With this card coming then a ban on Max C would be the most logical. You cant have this and Max C in the same format.

So I see this: The new card gets released and Max C finally gets banned. And best of it, it only works from cards normal/special summon from hand.

[Ghost X]

at this point i'm COPING so hard that they're gonna finally ban Maxx c, and even on MD...


* COPIUM INTENSIFIENS *

[Revolution Swellow]

ocg is going to ban the c probably

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

Originally posted by FIX THE SHUFFLE KONAMI:

ocg is going to ban the c probably

Hopefully, as that card should've been banned years ago.

[1337Cammy]

Originally posted by Terminal Desolation:

This card seems really interesting, I like it as a replacement to the roach. Maybe Konami will finally ban it? Biggest concern I can see right now is that you can theoretically use this AND Maxx C, though that does make it much easier to deck out by drawing. That sounds absurd. I don't think we can have both cards legal simultaneously.

Getting the C banned with this as a replacement sounds very unlikely to me.

This card is really restricted with being basically dead draws if you got them in your hand exactly after going 2nd as your first turn, which makes your deck quite alot more inconsistent.

I think, especially for Master duel, this is enough of a reason to call it balanced and simply move on to something different to hit for the banlists.

[Lazer]

Originally posted by Lazer:

This seems more like Floo hate than a replacement for Maxx C, this card misses the mark big time
no draws for:
-link climbing or summong extra deck monsters (very bad design decision)
-special summon from the main deck (very bad design decision)
-special summon from GY (okay)

but draws:
-for normal summons

This card is so bad for the game if you read it a second time, it will hurt midrange and especially rough decks more than brocken combo decks, combo decks dont special summon all that much from the hand anyways, or they can spam around the card where they can make you draw enough cards and end something like on an Apollousa where youre forced to shuffle your entire hand except 1 card?

Summoning from the Main Deck is where real unfair advantage is built and it doesnt get punished, who designed this?

Funny how nobody here and everywhere reads the card and thinks about that but as long as it kills the bug apperantly every bad design decision is fine?

[Revolution Swellow]

it's not a

Originally posted by Lazer:

Originally posted by Lazer:

This seems more like Floo hate than a replacement for Maxx C, this card misses the mark big time
no draws for:
-link climbing or summong extra deck monsters (very bad design decision)
-special summon from the main deck (very bad design decision)
-special summon from GY (okay)

but draws:
-for normal summons

This card is so bad for the game if you read it a second time, it will hurt midrange and especially rough decks more than brocken combo decks, combo decks dont special summon all that much from the hand anyways, or they can spam around the card where they can make you draw enough cards and end something like on an Apollousa where youre forced to shuffle your entire hand except 1 card?

Summoning from the Main Deck is where real unfair advantage is built and it doesnt get punished, who designed this?

Funny how nobody here and everywhere reads the card and thinks about that but as long as it kills the bug apperantly every bad design decision is fine?

it's not about killing the big insect, it's about making him ''fair''

[Pastor Shotty McBangJump]

Considering that it seems to imply that it won’t be the only card in its ‘archetype’ due to its effect restriction, it’s likely we’ll get more cards like it that draw cards under different circumstances, like summoning from the deck, extra deck, or graveyard.

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

Originally posted by Thain:

I don't get the second effect. Player A goes first. Player B activate 'card', resolve. During End Phase, Player A has only 1 card on hand, Player B has 13 cards on hand. So Player B shuffle random 12 cards back into the deck leaving Player B only has 2 cards in hand during MP1 of Turn 2?

It's cards controlled, so field counts as well, but yea, that's how the effect works.

[Thain]

Originally posted by C.C. スパークル:

It's cards controlled, so field counts as well, but yea, that's how the effect works.

I edit too slow, this is what I wanted to say.

I don't get the second effect. Player A goes first. Player B activate 'card', resolve. During End Phase, Player A ended with 3 cards on field, Player B has 13 cards on hand. So Player B shuffle random 10 cards back into the deck leaving Player B only has 4 cards in hand during MP1 of Turn 2?

In that case, nope. Seems useless. It doesn't change the fact Player A still can build 3 omni negates and still have hand trap.

Personally. Not meant for deep discussion, just opinion. It would be better if it is 'opponent control and on hand +6'. In addition, during End Phase, if you control no cards and there is 1 or less card in the GY or Banished Zone, change to +10 and remove 'random'.

[C.C. 折オリ枝 の 夫]

Originally posted by Thain:

Originally posted by C.C. スパークル:

It's cards controlled, so field counts as well, but yea, that's how the effect works.

I edit too slow, this is what I wanted to say.

I don't get the second effect. Player A goes first. Player B activate 'card', resolve. During End Phase, Player A has only has 3 card on field, Player B has 13 cards on hand. So Player B shuffle random 10 cards back into the deck leaving Player B only has 4 cards in hand during MP1 of Turn 2?

In that case, nope. Seems useless. It doesn't change the fact Player A still can build 3 omni negates and still have hand trap.

Personally. Not meant for discussion, just opinion. It would be better if it is 'opponent control and on hand +6'. In addition, during End Phase, if you control no cards and this is the only card in the GY or Banished Zone, change to +10 and remove 'random'.

I think it's fine, as it only draws for summons from hand, so it's not gonna be as easy to reach the cap compared to if it were on all summons.

[Thain]

Originally posted by Hoshi:

No.

It's basic algebra. It's (x+6) where x is the number of cards your opponent controls. The difference gets shuffled into the deck.

If your opponent normal or special summons from hand 8 times and ends on 5 cards on field, you draw 8 times, making the total number of cards in your hand 13 and the number of their cards controlled 5, to which we add 6, getting 11.

13 - 11 is 2, so you shuffle 2 cards in your hand back into the deck, leaving you with 11.

EDIT: The shuffle only happens if the number of cards in your hand if there's a non-negative difference.

It's not difficult to understand, just lengthy to explain.

So the 'difference' is which exactly? Difference of Player A cards control and Player B cards on hand OR difference of Player A cards control and Player B cards on hand +6? My understanding should be former. The '+6' only apply to condition check, not part of the apply effect. So in your example, you still have to shuffle 8 cards back into the deck.

Also, you may summon a bunch of times but still ended with only 1 monster/card on the field.

[Zelwy]

the ''if you control no cards'' make it fine in my book... one of the bothersome things about maxx c is your opponent using it after they make a board, although I wonder if max c was banned would people play this? that is quite a restriction.