Thanks but it was 100% my ISP. LOL

I’m fine with progress being made overall in the series but I think it’s important to retain certain aspects of what makes the series/franchise interesting and engaging. The series is a collection of hunting games rather than some kind of boss rush type deal. I’m not saying that every single thing needs to be exactly the same in every single game but it should still be very evocative of the fact that it has that core hunting fundamental. Your early game gathering would allow you to get a good understanding of the environment and as you continue to progress to the game and you continue to engage with the world you’d potentially notice that there’s all these resources and what not that are available to you. Whether you use that for preparation or maybe on the fly when you find yourself in a rough spot it’s up to you and the circumstance. Realistically you probably won’t have to gather then combine things all that often but the process of engaging with it makes the world feel a little bit more cohesive. This is why I used the example of the hot air balloon that can show you the monster. It’s not really some thing that alters your progression it’s an aspect of the overall world. That in particular doesn’t necessarily have to be an aspect of the world for example given what is the basis of world story was of outward expansion. It’s really just meant to be there as an example of like “oh hey this is kind of a tying point that shows us the guild is actually somewhat involved in what we’re doing”. I didn’t have a main point really? I think there’s some amount of QoL that can actually be called such but it feels like to some degree it was done in a way that both inhibits immersion and overreaches to the point of shifting the landscape of the game. Like the fact that it’s supposed to be the traversal game but almost all of your hunts take place in an arena it’s just weird. Because fundamentally you to think that would mean you get to engage with more areas, more of the world, you are getting to explore on a different axis due to the new mechanic…but in practice we just kind of pummeled monsters in an arena for most of that game. I wasn’t trying to be general really. I was being relatively specific.

The win rate when going first is a sub 3% difference which goes along with our understanding that going first is inherently more advantageous than going second. Maxx "C"'s impact on this isn't wholly negligible, however, seeing how close the rates are Maxx "C" from a going 1st player is likely turning winning situations into unlosable situations. This is an aspect of the "control no cards" stipulation on the Mulcharmy cards being a good thing. It has a meaningful impact in allowing for more games where a winning position can be challenged while reducing the likelihood of it being a non-game. On the opposite end Maxx "C" when resolved going 2nd has a 9.7% higher win rate. That's a ~26% (47/37.3) overall increase in total win percentage. But how does it do that? By presenting an overwhelming card advantage. That still isn't fair because what 1 card converts to is ambiguous. Attempting to balance around card advantage in this way is not a net positive with regards to the gameplay it causes.

@@lulzvg Turn 1 players also generating advantages with their basic combo. Depending what decks you play, you can still get more advantages than opponent's Multcharmmy. So, this is more fair if Turn 1 players generating advantages and turn 2 got nothing?

Hmmm.... They shuffle back in end phase, so this isn't like maxx c deck out reversal strat... You're actually just helping them craft a custom hand. So I don't see how that helps you win

@@dragon-id5uj when i say 9 trillion i mean that literally not figuratively

When u have 0 cards left in deck and r forced to draw either for manual draw phase or due to maxx c or mulcharmy. U lose

"Tenpai's done, their Field's Limited!" Meanwhile their other Field Spell, -Sangen Mystic Mine- Summon Breaker, is still running free.

There isn't a "reasonable" way to play around them. That's the whole issue really. Either way it goes you're effectively in an "open the out" situation. Open one of the cards you listed or Droll, be playing a deck that doesn't care like Lab or Paleo, or be lucky enough to open something along the lines of Reichheart and two handtraps to hope flipping Twinsaw w/ 2 HT is enough to allow you to get a second turn. "I'll just go second G2." Assuming you win G2 are you gonna scoop G3 if they have it because you have no counterplay or way to mitigate the value they generate? If you do that's valid but also exemplifies why these cards are too strong. They may not overtly stop you from doing something the way Shifter does but they do result in you being punished in the same ways you would be for playing into Maxx "C". Trying not to generalize too much but its a very similar gameplay experience.

​@@lulzvgmaybe game 3 they're hoping to go into time with spooky dogwood lolol

Prolly b/c it has otherwise exploitable weaknesses if you are prepared for it? It's still strong ofc but I'd imagine people are worried about the same stuff they are usually when playing Tenpai into a board.

We've been in coin flip formats before. In fact we can probably use statistics and history to predict in what exact way yugioh will suck next, and how many formats until a very brief 3 month 'balanced game' format appears.

Snake-Eye Azamina Sinful Spoil Fiendsmith, Yubel Unchained Fiendsmith, and Ryzeal are still the best Decks in the upcoming days iirc.

They make going 1st even worse than going 2nd when you don't open Ash/Droll to stop them with the added bonus that Droll would be negging yourself in most decks. A standard Marincess 1 card combo if BT whiffs is: NS Blue Tang -> Link Blue Slug -> SS Seahorse from hand -> Link Sea Angel -> Link Anemone -> Activate Ocean -> SS Tang from GY -> Coral Triangle. (Truncated.) Purulia draws 2 & Fuwa draws 4. The final hand size would be 6 and 8 assuming they don't hand trap you at all beyond that. Due to how Ocean works the Mulcharmy user gets to keep up to 11 cards in hand. With how easy it is to put game on board for so many decks taking the gamble of "I won't summon anything" is asking for a loss. Playing into it at all is putting your opponent in the positive. I made the example of 1 field, 1 monster, 1 set card because that is something Ryzeal can do. Even in that situation the opponent gets to keep up to 9 cards. The +6 aspect of these cards in practice is one of the worst parts because in the hypothetical the going 2nd player does hand trap the going 1st player more, whether due to opening more HT or drawing into them, they'd *never* have low enough hand to shuffle anything back. That means they get to Purulia + 2 HT and still start with 5 cards. Fuwa would start them on 7. In most situations these cause *more* inequality. These are objectively better designed than Maxx "C". That is 100000000000% true. But that doesn't make them well designed.

Additionally, shuffling back resources off the mulcharmys in end phase is not that big a deal; if we look at Super Rejuvenation in Dragon Turbo as an Edison example. After drawing half the deck, most of it gets discarded due to hand size, yes; but the upside is essentially CHOOSING a custom 6 card hand NO bricking. EXACT answers/outs. PERFECT amount of gas.

Like imagine "extremely graceful charity". Draw six cards then shuffle 5 back. That spell would be CRACKED. Now put it on a hand trap that also gives your opponent the alternate path of making the weakest board possible...

All fun and games until ur opponents sets up a board turn 1 and THEN maxx c how is that making turn 2 stronger??

this is the most surface-level analysis you could possibly make. you will one day design yugioh

I should have more explicitly talked about the balancing bit so thanks for mentioning it. That's why all the Nibiru stuff is there b/c we have that issue where themes are designed around the roach or it and our methods for mitigating roach themes wholly determines how palatable the format is at times. It makes me feel the Mulcharmy cards were made to bridge the inequality regardless of if it's a good thing to do or not. I'm not gonna read too deeply into Skarlon's post but will agree being bereft of agency does remove a lot of the enjoyment of the game.

"I think that the Mulcharmies are part of the classic hand trap problem of being a band-aid for YGO's going second issues. The thing there is that this means they aren't actually fixing how terrible it is to go second" - How is it possible to fix this then? Would you fundamentally change the way Yugioh plays? What changes would make Yugioh going first and second perfectly balanced? It sounds that way since you think introducing new cards in order to try and balance it is a "band-aid". Going first is better in almost every type of two player strategy game. Even something like chess which has no RNG, both players have perfect information and the pieces are perfectly balanced still has issues with white being stronger than black. "Now we're going to balance going second around the idea you're resolving this card every game, lol. Or perhaps it's better to say the player going first gets to not play?" - That's not what it's saying at all. This is literally the nature of card games. Sometimes you don't get to play and you just lose because of no other reason than you drew badly. Again it sounds like you're talking about a fundamental change to Yugioh to fix the issue. I'd be really interested to know what you think this could possibly be since it can't be based on bringing out new cards since in your view it doesn't work since you don't draw them every game. Card games are designed around variance. Lets say after a large sample of games without a card going first has a mean win rate of 60% with 95% within 2 standard deviations of the mean. Then lets say after a card is introduced the mean win rate changes to 50% with 95% within 2 sd. You might not draw that card every game in which case it was useless but in this scenario it would have fixed the issue of going first vs going second. I didn't watch the Farfa video but everything you talk about in your final paragraph is about issues that are just inherent to card games. Having to draw the out, opening the nuts, opening a hand of complete bricks is the nature of card games. No matter how good you are someone way worse than you could draw the 1%, perfect sequence of cards to FTK you or open with Exodia and win instantly and you don't get to play. With card games you have to look at the variance and plays over a large number of games.

Thank you for the concern, dear, but I actually do know how card games work. The problem isn't just win rate. It's the fact that going second often means you don't get to make any meaningful decisions that game at all, because YGO is extremely fast and based around restricting your opponent's ability to play entirely. I would say that of all seriously played competitive games YGO has the most situations where you simply get locked out of making any meaningful decisions or skill expression whatsoever because the format is currently very "compare hands". Many pros mentioned this as a problem in Snake-Eye format, for instance - the only real way to trade well with the deck was hand traps, and you have very clear points where you needed to use them, so most games between competent players were decided entirely by the opening hands. This is not particularly enjoyable for a game supposedly about skill expression. It also is a lot more frustrating as turns get longer and longer so the "will I draw my one relevant board breaker" problem means you sit through a 20 minute plant combo to see if you can draw the second Evenly Matched - these are all examples of how it's not just about the nature of draws being random, but also, the way the gameplay itself unfolds with the current card design quality. As an example, Maxx "C" is actually quite good at making the extreme combo decks that the OCG keeps printing not the best decks in the format - but I don't think that the games decided by Maxx "C" are particularly fun for either person playing. It just makes the combo decks very all or nothing where they either get to go full combo through most interruption, or they have to give up playing early and basically just do nothing before they lose. It's kind of stupid design all around - mathematically Maxx "C" but only for going second would be great for improving the win rate of player 2, but if it does so by taking all the decision making out of the games it gets played in, that's just a "band-aid" on the problem of going second being bad. It fixes the win/loss result, but it doesn't mean that the card design is at all good for the game or produces a fun play pattern. In general, players do not actually enjoy the feeling of the entire game being dependent on if they draw a specific card or not - this is one aspect of why so many people hate Stun. This may be a crazy concept, but it actually is possible for games to be more than a binary "did I draw the out or not". As for the last paragraph, if you didn't watch the video then I'm not sure why you're arguing with me about what you think I'm saying regarding it. I guess if you don't want to spend the time to see what I'm actually talking about I don't see much reason to spend time drafting a serious response to what you're saying there. Incidentally, since you seem rather incredulous about the concept: Konami changes the rules to address gameplay issues all the time. Player 1 drew for turn before Duelist Alliance. Pendulums used to come out of the extra without zone restrictions. Ignition effect priority existed. When the nature of modern card design runs up against the rules, something has to change - and there are times when there's just too many cards for them to address the issue with anything other than a rules change. It's been done before and I think there may come a point where the nongame nature of the card design will become so pervasive that they'll have to look into modifying the rulebook again. That's all.

​@@NARFNra I should preface this by saying that I'm still relatively new to Yugioh. I've only really been playing it regularly for about a year so I'm not as jaded and bored of it as a lot of people that have been playing it for decades. I have been playing TCGs for about 15 years though. There was no concern from my side. I was explaining the variance of card games because quite a lot of what you said originally gave the impression that you didn't understand it. I disagree on the first point. You have far more skill expression in Yugioh than most other popular card games, at least all the ones I've played. Take magic for example, sure you don't really get locked out in some games in exactly the same way as you do in Yugioh, but in magic you can draw nothing but lands for 5 turns in a row or conversely draw no lands and end up not playing the game anyway. Even when you do you'll be making mostly one or two decisions a turn and most of the time they're not that meaningful. Compare that to Yugioh where you often have many meaningful decisions to make each turn, at lot of times even during your opponents turn. There's also Pokemon which is even worse, the game basically plays itself and there's no interaction on your opponents turn at all. One piece is the main other popular TCG at the moment that we can compare it to and again I've played this quite a bit and it feels like child's play compared to the amount of meaningful decisions you get to make in Yugioh. If you're talking about competitive games in general, outside of TCGs, then that's comparing apples to oranges and your point becomes redundant. You have exponentially more skill expression (literally) in chess and can never get locked out of making meaningful decisions until you're in forced mate so there's no meaningful comparison to make. I agree with the point about it being frustrating when someone is comboing off and that is a real issue in Yugioh that puts a lot of people off, myself included to start with. No one wants to sit there for 20 minutes watching someone play solitaire when you've got no hand traps and no way to interact in the hopes that you draw your board breaker only to not draw it and scoop. That's an inherent problem with Yugioh and I'd be interested to know your solution to that aside from killing all combo decks. However conversely when you're on the other side as long as its not a long boring linear combo then a lot of the skill expression comes from maximising your board with what you've been given. Think something like branded, you can easily sit there for 5-10 minutes going through the optimal way to sequence things to play around hand traps and the optimal order of things to send to GY, things to fetch based on what you've got in your hand. The slightest change or one additional card in your hand can completely alter the sequencing and therefore your end board. That for me is where the skill expression and fun in Yugioh is so it's a double edged sword. On Maxx C I agree with you, it makes games very unfun, in particular if you set up a full board and can then Maxx C on your opponents turn that's feels extremely bad to play against. Where I don't agree however is that a Maxx C only going second takes all the decision making out of games. There is a lot that goes into both deck building and structuring your combos to play around Maxx C .An example to use branded again is ending on Sanctifier dragon with Quem and Albaz in GY versus going through albion, lubellion, mirror jade and even granguignol to maximise your board. I asked this many times in my previous comment which you didn't respond to but what would be your alternative that you don't consider a band-aid? It's fairly trivial to criticise bad game design but it's not that constructive unless you offer some kind of alternative. "This may be a crazy concept, but it actually is possible for games to be more than a binary "did I draw the out or not"." - It doesn't really make sense what you're arguing here and I'm sorry but again this makes me think you don't understand variance in card games. All card games inherently have this problem. Of course you can minimise it but this situation of having to draw the out is going to come up in every single card game you play and isn't unique to Yugioh. To insinuate that Yugioh doesn't have more to it than just drawing the out is very disingenuous. I didn't watch the video as I said, but you said a lot of things in the final paragraph that are again inherent issues with card games in general and that's what I commented on. I wasn't responding at all to your comments related to the video. Yugioh isn't going to fix the issue of having to draw the out sometimes or sometimes drawing a completely bricked hand and not being able to play without not being a card game anymore. I know that Konami changes the rules to address gameplay issues from time to time, but what you seem to be asking for are fundamental changes to the way the game works. Again I'll ask and hopefully this time get an answer, what is your solution? What would you change to fix the issues with going second that doesn't act as a band-aid?

​@@Kewickviper I'm not gonna lie, you are coming across as comically condescending here and it doesn't really make me want to engage with you. If you hear someone say that there is more to a game than draw the out gameplay and your conclusion is that they must be some sort of idiot that doesn't get how variance works, then I feel like you just flat out aren't trying to understand what I'm saying. I thought about replying a lot more but honestly I just don't care that much. I literally played MtG for over a decade and only started with YGO in the last 3 years. It fundamentally feels differently to get to make plays even with some land issues than it does to go into 5 negates and instantly lose. But take your argument W I guess. (I could provide an example rules change, like "player 2 draws their 6th card so they can more easily scoop if they know itll be irrelevant turn 1", but there's no point to a theoretical suggestion when i can't test it on a large scale and factor in real win rates from MD. Konami could. I don't have to provide an exact fix to criticize a bad attempt to fix it.)

Idk what kind of response you were hoping for lol.

@@lulzvg just get a better mic

@@idkdontask7142 I'm open to criticism and people pointing out the audio issues are a given. It's not the first time. I cannot afford one. At present and for the past few months I have been jobless. This would have been fixed ages ago if I wasn't.

Out of pocket as hell. Why u gotta be rude about it?

This is such a childish comment, the quality of the argument has nothing to do with the equipment used to record it. Grow up 🤣🤣

It's quite outdated as Swapfrog is limited to 1 so I'd suggest looking for Paleo-Tear videos instead.

One of many glossed over decks I suppose?

@@lulzvg brother I don’t play digimon, the algorithm has blessed you

@@xMikeyHardyx now THAT is funny

Oh yeah I saw that in real time & its a good example. I've spoken poorly of Masques decks b/c of the inherent inconsistency that exists when trying to integrate the playstyle as well as the impact they had on the game's overall landscape. But for the individual bosses? They are valid options (mostly). Greedon and Lia are pretty unique cases. For Greedon even with the new support you can build into the old playstyle and win on the back of multiple restands but as you mentioned Greedon Masques allows for a different axis of play and the benefits of that were definitely impactful enough to make it just as worthwhile as the base form if not better. Lia meanwhile benefitted a lot from running both Masque and Vivace b/c they provided tools that compliment each other but it also wasn't the most common train of thought. I do think it's fine though b/c it's a given we won't always see the options. We just need to be mindful to not be obtuse.

Creating the Vaal video is painful purely because I deleted my script twice accidentally LMAO. I'm working on it tho.

?

@@lulzvg in the video you said some people said the card would be bad even without the lock.

@@alicepbg2042 Ah. It was a pretty common reaction and argument I saw in general throughout the day in a few places. Twitter, disc, forums, etc.

Thanks. I think your assessment is on point and the mic thing is something I'll def fix when I can afford to. This 100000000% wasn't scripted much. I mostly made this one out of exasperation so I'm glad the cobbled together nature of this doesn't take away much. I do script/bullet point to some degree but think a few of the vids end up suffering due to the mic b/c I'll end up needing to re-record things and other aspects of the video def suffer due to me pushing things out hastily. It's quite reassuring to hear things like this b/c as long as I've played this game and tcgs in general it feels the points I've wanted to touch on would frequently have a lot of general pushback. People being more willing to engage w/ alternative povs as of late helps a lot.

you dont need to really be smart just net deck the latest meta stuff and call it a day

Yes it doesn't interfere with anything you may want or need to do. Even though I like to leverage not activating her effect at times it's too good to use for baiting out ash or other interactions.

I know the feeling. When the Jurrac support just got revealed I saw alot of people dismiss it for Dinosaurs because the "Dinosaur" lock locked them out of their Dragons. On top of that, for Jurracs one card combo typically means running 6 level 1s in your deck. These drawbacks ment that if they used Jurracs they couldnt end on like 7 negates. That being said, Jurracs now have a 1 card combo that typically ends on 1 summon negate and 2 chances for a complete board wipe on the opponents turn. So not only is that still very powerful, if your combo gets stopped you still have 4 cards in your hand to followup. On the otherhand, if you do pull off your combo its pretty likely youll have followup next turn... usually when standard dinos come into play as they are good at cleaning things up/going 2nd thx to UCT. Whereas a going first build of pure standard dinos has trouble following up their plays next turn Jurrac Dinos have other things I like about them but the point being that the Dino community pretty much dismissed them for the already existing standard build, which includes the WANTED engine and a small Evolsaur package. However when I tried playtesting the standard dino decklist the community goes by I end up drawing the evolsaur package alot, which you dont want to draw, or you typically have to discard 1-2 cards which can be awkward. You also lose to Droll far more often... idk not a fan. Meanwhile the Jurrac/Dino hybrid is working far better for me. Fire Kings is another example, I think people undervalue a pure control variant of the deck, cause if people play pure fire kings they plan to use 2-3 playmakers and hope they can play through handtraps. My build doesnt run the wanted engine and cuts down on Ponix and Ulkanix in favor of more handtraps + Avarata Control. I just think having an on demand monster negate to both protect your plays and disrupt the opponent is more valuable than forcing yourself to play through handtraps/opponents board. For reference I have been playing the game since 2008 and while Dinosaurs are not my main deck, I have always have had an affinity for Dinosaurs playstyle for some reason. First when it was Jurrac synchro spam and once again since I enjoy the playstyle of Dinos after the structure deck. Back in 2013-15 I picked up Fire Kings and its arguably my most fav deck of all time; so when Fire Kings got a Structure Deck I was hyped beyond belief.... and then it turned out to be super good... oh yea Fire Kings all day every day lol. Snake Eyes? Dont care about them whatsoever.

I think there's truth in that statement in general. There's always going to be a lot of factors in consideration but at base the potential for viability exists.

tbh it's not bad it's just funny

Even then stuff like Exo falls into that last category and still aren't on that level of bad. But nonetheless it's engaged with less. Bit sad that having the quality alone is enough for a write-off.

omg same The logo kinda looks like the Drago symbol in Beyblade lol

To preface this I'm actually working on something rn so I'm not capable of re-watching the video at the moment to see what I said/did but I think I can give context for these? For the clip yeah 100% and I am pretty sure I did not directly address this because: 1. I'm dumb 2. Somewhere in my mind I assumed anyone who cared enough to watch this would realize that but I think I at most indirectly imply this with using Martha first in the examples? Will bear it in mind if I ever get around to trying to make an actual breakdown video for the deck. Beyond that I wanted to include the math you did here but thought it would have been a bit much and reneged on doing so. I get a lot of complaints about numbers when I do write ups for other stuff so I let the concern bleed over LOL. I did want to make it clear I wasn't suggesting building _exactly_ like I did is necessary & more just putting the reasons for my considerations out there so I'm glad you pointed all of this out and I'm pinning it. I went w/ what I did because I felt more comfortable with it & that's all it is in the end. Like iirc 3 Returnia 2 Arment is a 50% of seeing 1 and adding the third Arment only pushes it to 57% assuming you stay at 40 cards? So I get where you're coming from. And for sure on the fragility bit. It's more fragile for sure but nowhere near the level it often seems to be represented as. I _think_ I used the Armored XYZ stuff in the Arment vid & I've used it irl mained for a bit directly after AGOV? It's just Full Armored Dark Knight, Xyz Armor Fortress, 1 spell, and 1-2 trap right? I like the package a lot and we often have 2-4 ED slots open anyway.

Armored XYZ? Never heard of this card - how do you suggest, or have tips for it to works with Exosisters. Exosisters is one of my favorite archetypes but if I can stop their board early on, I struggle past turn 3. Thanks for your input if you respond.

@@rustinpeece06 to play around Nibiru in hands without Martha, you can make Mikailis and search Pax/Vadis. Then overlay Xyz Armor Fortress onto the Mikailis and detach 2 to search Armored Xyz and Full-Armored Xyz. Set the two traps and pass. On opponent’s turn you can use the Full-Armored Xyz to overlay into Full Armored Dark Knight Lancer. At any point you can banish Full-Armored Xyz to equip Mikailis to Lancer, giving it destruction protection and attaching one of your opponent’s monsters to it as material (non-targeting). The Vadis has to be used at any time after summoning Lancer since it Exosister locks you, but banishing Full Armored Xyz allows you to trigger Martha yourself if you summon it. Pretty neat tech to play around Nibiru that mainly uses 2 Extra Deck slots, but does require 2 garnets in main deck which is why is mainly a side-tech option.

I don't understand why but this comment isn't showing up on the video even though I can see it in studio. imgur.com/a/0KwNywe There's the answer.

​@@rustinpeece06 if you stopped them you do have a chance to create your board and Control the game, if they stopped you, you better have HT's for the third Turn, if not that's Yu-Gi-Oh

I don't think any of what you said is in any way gatekeep-y. I'd like to think the casual to semi-competitive bit is the case on average but I've also seen those who consistently go to and perform well at events have a similar purview & inclination towards dismissal. So I think what you said is totally on point and I don't blame people not having the perspective for evaluating things on those alternative axes. It's nonetheless frustrating that it seems to stretch beyond that into competitive discussion in this game in particular more so than any other I've played. Been on YGO since 2001 for extra context. Dunno why but OCG cards were in local stores and some people had family who could tl.

Etrian Odyssey V! It's one of my favorite series. I think that the videos MBT, APS, Farfa, Josh, Jesse, and others have put out discussing some of these things has done a lot to help shift povs I do think any instances of discussions help drive people to taking a step back and thinking about it all. It's really disappointing that dismissal is often the base reaction to different things. Like I'm often unsurprised by some decks performing well but it's only because it's usually something I looked into. The fact they did is/should still be exciting, right? But often times you get anything from dismissal to attempts at discrediting the performance. Which is insane b/c regionals are still 10 round events before top cut oftentimes.