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
2. We already had this discussion
^
Discussion was about dark magician which has been nerfed prove any of my points wrong.
Your last topic was how Witchcrafters was P2W not DM
Here's some math:
Circle = Nav.
3 Rod + 3 Circle = 6 copies of Circle.
Going first, this provides you a 79.34% chance of opening with Circle
Going second, 87.09%
If we take into account having a way to get to DM *besides* circle, you have a 46.11% chance to open Circle + DM + Nav going first and 60.54% chance going second.
2 Rod + 3 Circle
First = 71.83% chance to open Circle
Second = 80.62% chance to open circle.
DM + Circle (no searching DM with circle)
First = 41.07%
Second 55.44%
The difference is by 5%.
The deck has not been hit anywhere near hard enough for it to be considered a "nerf".
In my experience playing as and against, Witchcrafters are pretty weak against backrow. The above example of Chain Disappearance is a great example.
Losing 5% chance of getting circle first turn is still a nerf. It's just not a big one.
It's also too difficult to properly consider all of the cards that could summon Dark Magician that might be in the deck and their individual conditions (if any). Navigation is the most common and requires that DM be in the hand to use, thus is two more cards to need immediately available.
If Chain Hole didn't require that Verre's effect be used in response to an activation, it would be a valid negation. Next best thing is Divine Wrath, which can be used against her in the damage step as a counter trap.
I'd argue the strongest monster in duel links history is Aliestar the invoker. Since he is a an incredibly splashable monster that can even make you go +1 from resolving his effect. The fact invocation can steal your opponent's resources is another crazy strength of the card. Aliestar (and his fusions) have caused a lot of cards to be limited on the banlist just for existing. There was even a KC cup where 8 of the top 10 players played an invoked variant.
Nope, the strongest monster in DL history was Shi En. A card that can destroy another Six Samurai to protect itself while also having effect destruction immunity cause of it's tuner while also having the ability to negate 1 spell/trap from activating. Six Samurai was tier 0, Invoked was never tier 0
If Shi en is the most powerful monster in duel links, then why isn't he played right now? Like he is a strong boss monster, but during the time in Six Sams hay day, the meta was pretty much taylored for them to beat since most decks relied on S/T effects to function, and didn't have many impactful monster effects to remove Shi En with. Six Sams were technically never T0, but they were pretty much the best deck in that format.
Also why does it say you were banned? I haven't seen all your posts, but you seem to be pretty civil from what I have seen?
So true.