Consistency Hits are Trash

[Streamed Live on 29th May, 2024]
Thumbnail Picture from: / masterduelsite
Stream: / joshuaschmidtygo
Main Channel: / @joshuaschmidtygo
VOD Channel: / @joshuaschmidtvod
Twitter: / gamebreak0r
Channel managed by: Tyl0o | / tyl0o
Music: Mario Kart 64 - Winning Results
#JoshuaSchmidt #stream #yugioh

[@Flyce_9998]

I like consistency hits best when there are alternative starters or extenders that aren't currently being played because they are weaker or more vulnerable, so the consistency can stay the same at a cost

[@PyckledNyk]

One for one finna be skyrocketing in usage

[@WhipLash42o]

The consistency doesn't stay the same in that case, that's why they're worse lmfao.

[@mrsquadbot]

@WhipLash42o Yes it becomes worse but not because of its worse consistency but worse card quality. For example of you just replace the hit Ash and Wanted with Poplars and OSS you'll still get to your desired end board the same amount of time as before, but it's a worse alternative since you're more vulnerable to handtraps and your grind game and follow ups are much worse than before

[@kusanagi-no-tachi5303]

​@@PyckledNykI've already been using OfO, so

[@jeanpitre5789]

Literally snake-eyes birch being unplayablely bad because poplar and ash are completely broken good by comparison

[@MarioLopez-xs3vc]

This is less a hit to consistency than it is to the grind game. Less copies of Wanted means Witch's discard is an ACTUAL discard more often, and that extra draw coming up less often means less chances of drawing extenders or hand traps(and with how late into your turn you can draw with Wanted, to the point where you can save it for NEXT turn, you can REALLY increase your chances of seeing either non-engine or a more important Engine piece you're currently missing). Snake-Eye is going to have to build around making heavier use of Oak, which is both brickier and a LOT more vulnerable to Ghost Belle just for having an effect that CAN manipulate the GY(the ACTIVATION of its effects can ALL get negated even if you only ever pick up from Banishment with it, which is an annoying ruling).

[@MrThemelloman]

I hate that ruling

[@flamehaze59]

Yup 👍🏻 That's a stupid ass ruling

[@mrsquadbot]

Kinda disagree for specific decks like Snake Eyes and to an extend, Spright, since their hyper consistency is half their appeal. Bonus when said consistency hits also hits other aspects like grind game or follow us like the Wanted to one since that means they only get to recycle OSS once, Ash to one also means they can't search itself in your turn for free follow ups anymore. Obviously power hits are good/better when a deck has a glaring problem like Block Dragon but for decks like Kash where every single one of their cards are problematic consistency hits are decent to at least deter the cards from splashed, unless you advocate to completely delete all their cards from existence Dragon Ruler style

[@gamingsuperun]

Problem is, consistant decks end up using generic support such as snake eyes using IP to interact on your turn and the consistancy is a problem. If the deck was hyper consistant but couldnt put up interaction under the idea that they can recur on their own turn thst would be fine but that is never the case, and if it is nobody would play the deck.

[@mrsquadbot]

That's literally not a problem when the main strength of pure Snake Eyes was them being able to run twenty or more non engines and turn the mirror into handtrap war snooze fest. So what if they adapt and add other archetypes into their deck, that encourages deck building creativity and they'll have less room for non engines. That's much better than TCG who just swap out Baronne and Savage with Dispater and Omega and call it a day with close to zero change in main deckbuilding

[@lancevandertooth1810]

Now lullaby of obedience and calling snake eye ash is actually a reasonable option.

[@Alexalibur13]

Consistency hits are still needed because you can't always hit ban something to change the playstyle without completely neutering the deck, something Konami is trying to avoid in MD. 1 wanted 1 ash means you don't have to worry about how many they have in hand. once you see the ash, you know they don't have any other one, and can interrupt accordingly. They should ban Poplar though. That card is outrageous with a level similar to Kitkallos and Elf, deck lives and dies with that card.

[@ct1296]

“You don’t have to worry about how many they have in hand” is a strange take - with the effects being HOPT, it’s actually more scary to know the opponent isn’t holding unuseable duplicates of engine cards, since they’re more likely to have handtraps or live extenders. I genuinely can’t think of a deck that Konami has hit the consistency of that a) needed to be hit and b) couldn’t have been dealt with in a more meaningful way. Spright they could’ve banned Elf, Kash they could’ve banned Arise, Lab didn’t need hits but banning DBarrier / EEV would make it less sacky/frustrating, SHS could’ve lost Scarecrow, Runick could’ve banned the floodgates, etc.

[@joanaguayoplanell4912]

I prefer Sinful Spoils to get banned. That card turns the deck into basically Zoodiac, in the sense that there is never a reason not to play it on any deck that happens to have a level 1 fire.

[@mrsquadbot]

@ct1296 Ash being able to search itself is super scary though, eliminating them from doing that on your turn is good

[@Alexalibur13]

@@ct1296 They could ban floodgates for runick but Runick having every single card full is scary in a Bo1. You would rather decks be weaker into grindgames and worse hands on average than piss off your customers by deleting their decks out of the game.

[@ct1296]

@@mrsquadbot oh yeah don’t get me wrong, I think Ash to 1 is a decent hit due to all the non-consistency reasons (grind game, recursion etc). I just hope they hit the deck in a more meaningful way later down the line, rather than hitting something like Bonfire or Witch. My gut says that Ash to 1 and either Oak or Temple to 0 would be enough to make the deck functional but manageable (even if Wanted were to go back to 3).

[@fryenchill2817]

I think your opinion on consistency, especially concerning Snake-Eye, is narrow-minded. Snake-Eye is good because most of its one-card starters are also extenders. It is incredibly difficult to stop them with just one hand trap because they just need any other second starter to extend past. But instead of just talking out my ass on this, let’s talk actual numbers: Assuming typical TCG ratios, pure Snake-Eye has a 90% chance to open at least one starter. With the new banlist, this is now a 78.34% chance. With the TCG banlist, you have a 58.2% chance of opening 2 or more starters (slightly less likely to actually extend in the case of duplicate cards, but alas) With the new Master Duel banlist, that’s just a 36.69% chance. This means Snake-eye can lose to a single handtrap about 11% more often. It goes deeper than that though. If Snake-Eye opens Diabellestar, Wanted, or Ash, they can play around Droll cleanly, but opening other starters lose to the card. Opening such a starter has a 74.18% chance of happening in the TCG. However, this only happens in 50% of games in Master Duel. Now, they can alleviate the raw consistency issue by playing supplemental engines, such as Parallel Exceed (safest option) or Superheavy, but these introduce the potential for more dead, unplayable hands, as well as playing into droll more often.

[@thecrimsonreaper7106]

The biggest proof that consistency hits matter is purely, that deck was tier one and now i see it maybe once every 50 games

[@sammydray5919]

Consistency hits in a small number do nothing much but when the cumulate into a large number of consistency hits, it basically acts like poison and slowly kills the deck because while it may still have its theoretical ceiling, it just becomes so inconsistent that it feels awful to play it. At that point maybe banning stuff to keep the deck playable, albeit with a lower ceiling would have been preferred.

[@mrsquadbot]

@sammydray5919 Bud the deck literally just shot up to tier 2 recently over the new baby noir support and one semi limit buff

[@tmaz9474]

Purrely is kind of a bad example though; one of the decks main consistency cards is My Friend Purrely, and hitting any one of their spells makes it impossible to reveal 3 of the same card, so getting what you want/need is no longer a given. To an extent, this makes it comparable to "banning" one of Purrely's searchers rather than just being an issue of not drawing a card as often. Snake-Eyes and Tearlements (in MD) are perfect examples of why "pure consistency hits" are bad. Yes, the hits mean that the decks are now less consistent/more vulnerable to handtraps, but it doesn't actually affect the power level of their plays. Snake-Eyes play the same combo regardless of whether Ash/Wanted are at 1 or 3, Tearlements play the same Kitkallos -> TearKash combo regardless of whether Perlerino/Havnis/Kitkallos are limited, etc. Following that train of though, if people think that the Snake-Eyes/Tearlement endboards are a problem, Konami should straight-up get rid of whichever card enables that endboard. And if it's not a problem, don't hit the deck at all. But the approach of "we're still letting deck X get away with making all of their broken plays, but you need to be more lucky " is, quite frankly, stupid.

[@salat8735]

@@sammydray5919 now that is wrong. To clarify: it is absolutely possible to play any deck with consistency hits. Yes, it might not work always, but it’ll always be technically playable. Now, let’s take a deck like Mathmech. You ban circular. Now the deck is unplayable, congratulations. Banning cards is always going to kill more decks than consistency hits. A deck doesn’t need to be competitively viable for people who enjoy to play the deck play it. They play because they like the deck, even if it is inconsistent.

[@akycthe8235]

Nah, I have to disagree. You talk as if every single deck is a one-card combo deck with 4 other cards in hand being hand traps. Consistent hits do not always mean my opponent is going to play the game or not whenever they have a starter card in hand. A deck with consistent hits also means that they often open with fewer combo pieces in hand, making them more vulnerable to the opponent's hand traps. They are also forced to play a weaker combo line with weaker starter card and form a weaker board whenever their best combo starter is not in hand, no?

[@ryuuohdeltaplus7936]

TCG players and their obsession with consistency is just baffling. They don't even acknowledge that hitting consistency enough that it makes interruptions actually matter is a good thing, but instead they call it off as "SACKY". This ultimately results in the TCG banlist philosophy of "All or Nothing", either a deck is hyper-consistent and playable or it's unplayable garbage, which I absolutely hate.

[@tmaz9474]

​@@ryuuohdeltaplus7936 What's more baffling is people who won't acknowledge that consistency hits are in fact NOT enough. The recent Limit-One festival in MD was a perfect example, whenever people opened their starters, they still ended on the same boards as they would've in ranked. Yes, the decks might've been less consistent, but if you're on the receiving end of a Baronne + Savage board, you don't tell yourself "Well, I may have lost, but I'm glad they can't end on this as consistently", you ask yourself "How the fuck did they still open a hand that ended on this BS with every card at one". Which is exactly why hitting consistency without hitting power ceiling gets called "sacky", rightfully so. If Baronne/Savage are an issue, don't just say "we'll leave them be, but we'll make them less consistent to access" - just get rid of these MFs. Or if Baronne/Savage are an issue because of OSS/Ash (and their searchers), leave Baronne/Savage be but get rid of the cards that give players easy access. OR, if Baronne/Savage are NOT an issue, just leave the deck untouched. The only valid reason to hit cards like Wanted/Ash without banning them is because part of Snake-Eyes' power is there grind game, which gets worse with fewer copies. But since we're talking CONSISTENCY here: reducing the consistency of a deck's first turn play, but keeping the power ceiling is just plain stupid.

[@ryuuohdeltaplus7936]

@@tmaz9474 Using the Limit 1 event as "proof" is pointless. Every handtrap is limited in it, which means opening interruptions is vastly hampered. Also Baronne and Savage bans are absolutely NOT for balance reasons, it's because the TCG higher ups cannot milk them for money anymore because RA01 made them easily accessible and cheap, and they banned those instead of actually hitting the Snake-Eyes cards, because they're still milking those for money. Baronne and Savage aren't even as widely played as HalqDon format anymore, and you only see those being turbo'd in Snake Eyes, and Mannadium and Infernoble Knights (which aren't even top-tier decks), and peering into the OCG metagame, those two are played even less.

[@tmaz9474]

​@@ryuuohdeltaplus7936 1.) The only reason I mentioned Baronne and Savage specifically was because they were the cards that actually got hit. It should be easy to realise that those were only placeholders for any cards which people claim is "problematic", be it Masquerena, Apollousa or whatever card could be used for this argument. The point was not about specifically Baronne/Savage being problematic, the point was that if X and Y card are problematic, reducing the consistency of a deck while still letting it have access to X and Y card is dumb. 2.) "Using the Limit 1 event as "proof" is pointless. Every handtrap is limited in it, which means opening interruptions is vastly hampered." this is quite the ironic statement. The whole discussion is about consistency hits and RNG. If they open full combo and you don't open enough handtraps to stop their plays, it doesn't matter how many HTs you are allowed to play. Arguing that a deck dies more easily to handtraps because of consistency hits is the same old argument of "just draw the out lmao" that people like to bring up, but that's not how a game should be balanced, simple as that.

[@xCorvus7x]

9:09 See, this is a pretty important statement. Do you include in how a combo plays out how resilient the resulting board is, not just how strong it is on turn two of the game but also what plays could follow up, so that you don't immediately lose if that board is broken? About a minute later in your chat, mistilteinn calls this the longevity of a combo (if I'm not mistaken). When you express how consistency hits lead to frustration, you seem to focus very much on the duel that is currently played leaving out the context of the game at large. You'll most likely not play just a single game with a deck, so this variance due to the less harsh restrictions is certainly noticable for both the one playing the deck in question as well as their opponents. (Though, if you were to only play a single game total with a deck, you'll not get any impression whatsoever of the deck's consistency as you literally care about nothing but the opener you actually drew.) Besides, if a consistency hit really has the result you describe, whoever plays that deck has a choice: either bet on opening what they need regardless which means they'll have to accept the games where they can't do anything because they didn't draw those engine pieces, or change the build of the deck, i. e. play differently. If they choose the former, the times where they can't do anything are their losses, it's a risk they took. If they choose the latter, that mere consistency hit did actually change how that deck is played. I'm not against banning Snake-Eye cards per se but bans are not the only way to change how a combo plays out. (Technically, having to accept a higher number of losses due to bricking is also a change in how a deck is played, but that's besides the point.) Furthermore, how much people enjoy playing the game is not just a matter of consistency, i. e. decks doing the same thing every time reliably, but also the ceiling, i. e. what the deck can possibly do. Is there really not some room, even within competitively enjoying the game, for having a bit more possibilities with a deck that just aren't _all_ possible to realise at the same time due to consistency issues?

[@ryuuohdeltaplus7936]

Also another point I want to add: since when did "feels" become a valid point for balancing the game? Josh has been repeating how consistency hits is bad because it "feels" bad that your opponent sacked you by playing the same combo line or how it "feels" bad if you bricked.

[@xCorvus7x]

@@ryuuohdeltaplus7936 Well, do one's impressions of the game not matter for assessing its qualities and flaws? Are they not actually essential to that end? Feelings are just as much a part of reality as everything else, feelings are facts (they may be fleeting and rather conditional but a lot of things are).

[@colinbrown74]

The thing about Snake-Eyes is there’s only 3 kinds of hits to the deck: - Consistency hits - Hits that do nothing - Hits that murder the deck Because every card used in Snake-Eyes either searches a card to potentially start the combo OR is run at 1. The only thing that defies this is Snake-Eye Flamberge Dragon which is commonly run at 2. Though I don’t really know if putting it to 1 does enough also.

[@FakeHeroFang]

Putting Flam to 1 basically means you can't effortlessly play around Nibiru anymore, and it would be a hard brick if you draw it without a discard outlet.

[@itsmetristan3671]

You can also hit the ED payoffs it utilizes for its turn 1 end board (Baronne, savage, apo, I:P, and after that if we've got to go further there's Dis Pater and Omega).

[@mrsquadbot]

@@itsmetristan3671 The most recent YCS champion himself said the synchro monsters only came up twice the entire time he plays in the tournament because its a handtrap format, you can ban their entire synchro line and they dont give a shit, its just that that's their best winmore line if they have more extenders to spare

[@itsmetristan3671]

@@mrsquadbot I'm not talking about just the synchros. Apo and I:P are included in that list.

[@mrsquadbot]

@@itsmetristan3671 Appo I can understand, but please dont tell me youre afraid of IP into SP. Just because its generic doesnt mean its bad

[@choco699]

I don’t think “changing a deck” will always be a good idea. He goes on to say that banning original sinful or flamberge would completely change how the deck plays, and yes that is true. However, Snake eyes is an archetype without a good boss monster, without a good payoff and without any sort of comeback potential when you play ONLY snake eye or related cards. Banning one of the core pieces of a relatively powerful but seemingly unfinished archetype will do nothing but hurt the deck to the point where they need more playable cards in archetype. Maybe we need a boss link 4 monster, or maybe a link 2 that sends a continuous spell to add/special summon a snake eye card - only if you were to ban flamberge. Sinful means they would probably lose all consistency because you have to throw out all the diabellestar cards. Changing how a deck is played may turn over its meta status, but it won’t always be good.

[@brolteon2740]

I tried naturia horus for 3 games and it was absurd how easy it was to calamity lock that I never wanted to touch that deck again. I tried a couple just going for the cosmic blazar for more balance but its just not as good, calamity really needed to go.

[@shapular]

I prefer consistency hits over the TCG philosophy of banning decks into unplayability. Being able to do something less consistently is still better than consistently being able to do nothing. Thunder Dragon was completely unplayable in the TCG until the most recent banlist because their boss monster was banned. Mathmech, SPYRAL, Pendulum, Prank-Kids, and Zoodiac are all at some level of unplayable since they have key cards banned, some long past when they were fine to come back.

[@UncleJrueForTue]

TCG won't give us 1 Zoodiac Barrage even though the best cards in the deck are all banned/limited in the exact same manner as the ocg. I just noticed a few weeks ago when looking at the OCG banlist, that they just have good cards like Dragonic Diagram at 3. TCG wouldn't let something like that come back to 3 until like 2026 when they wanted to sell some destruction/tribute based archetype that puts field spells into play from the deck off of a 1 card combo for the affordable price of 1200 dollars.

[@randombadchannel8700]

Not to mention how the TCG is very quick to ban budget options

[@UncleJrueForTue]

@@randombadchannel8700 That's because Konami of America hates us filthy Yugipoors. Sidenote: Collectors, Yugi finance, and Rarity wh*res seem really common in the US. It might just be the something in the water since MTG has similiar problems with some of it's playerbase.

[@randombadchannel8700]

@@UncleJrueForTue true true.

[@UncleJrueForTue]

@@randombadchannel8700 My comment got shadow banned, so just to reiterate since YT sucks: KONAMI OF AMERICA HATES US YUGIPOORS!

[@Ragnarok540]

Consistency hits are bad, but killing decks outright is worse. While the banlist is mostly a marketing tool, used to make people get the newest cards, it should be used also to balance the game and not just to make feel people bad about their previous investments.

[@ryuuohdeltaplus7936]

The TCG banlist philosophy is hated by a lot of players for a very good reason.

[@plantseason290]

Where can we draw the line though with combo? 1 card combos are lame solitare. Decks that are too consistent tend to not care as much about interuption/play around them. In turn, lame cards like droll have to be made. Combo decks are only cool when the payoff isnt just guaranteed. Thats why consistency hits are good.

[@plantseason290]

You could add the link mechanic to old yugioh and it'd do awful because getting the bodies on board long enough would be difficult enough to warrant the reward of summoning Appolousa for example.

[@TURBO1000YuGiOh]

ENCHANTRESS TO 3!

[@Pompoen796]

Soon !! (I hope)

[@freezingcicada6852]

I do think consistency hits matters. Not with Snake-eyes or Tearlament for sure; cause they have 12 starters or can set up a guarantee rebound if they do get disrupted. Tearlament cause, all the names could be 1 of's and mill 8 alone can be enough otherwise they have mill 5 options/ field spell searchers from the Graveyard While other decks, have 6? If its lucky, and/or use funky engines/ extra deck stuff. And at the mercy of a good top deck

[@sidoniocolorado8594]

Consistency hits are needed this format due to most of the decks having one card combos and its a major issue now is the deck building cause now they just run a absurd amount of hand traps snd a small engine and their goid to go. Other decks suffer cause they have to run the same amount of hts just to even have a turn thus hindering deck building in the process.

[@TgsMaverick]

As someone who plays kash in both TCG and Masterduel, I enjoy the deck SO much more in TCG because it's still a consistent deck, and it's still good and competitive while not being absurd because they directly attacked the problem aka Ariseheart. In Masterduel? Feels like I'm just playing a slot machine not knowing if I get to play or not. And if I DO get to play, then my opponent feels extra miserable because I get to use Ariseheart. So no matter what, one of us is probably going to be miserable.

[@doorto6152]

Yeah. People like playing their cards. I’m a branded player. Back when Mirrorjade first came out, I’d much have preferred a BiR limit or ban over all the consistency hits. The deck’s issue was its endless grind game. The consistency hits don’t address that issue and just make games sacky.

[@mrsquadbot]

I don't know how anyone can say they enjoy Kash TCG more with a straight face when instead of having its own identity and iconic boss monster, albeit toxic, you now make heatsoul/IP/Appo pass, and the maindeck cards are still proven problematic anw when it's splashed in plenty of Snake Eyes list.

[@Mighty-Eight]

​@@mrsquadbot True

[@khiemnguyen4444]

@@mrsquadbot True, I play Kashtira solely because of Ariseheart, without him, I don't know if the deck i play feel like a Kashtira deck or not.

[@jest5837]

I prefer consistency hits than bans, a lot of the time banning just makes decks straight up unplayable or barely playable so everyone that spent money on them just loses. Consistency hits can still make you lose to the same combo but it's pretty much the same as getting a barely playable hand, it's just bad luck and it happens.

[@TheColdestplay]

i agree, conistency hits are not it, but i prefer consistency hits to making a deck outright unplayable. so the only hits i can think of that lower the decks ceiling without making it unplayable is flamberge to 1 and/or poplar to 1.

[@user-fu9hc3oi3l]

Princess to 0 bro. EZ.

[@TheColdestplay]

@@user-fu9hc3oi3l that's just hitting all fire decks for no reason, since the card is completely fine by itself compared to ip, apo or sp. I much prefer a flamberge hit to that

[@user-fu9hc3oi3l]

@@TheColdestplay Salad can live without Princess. Same for pure FK and variants that aren't FKSE. SE is the only deck that would be utterly ruined without her, because she's responsible for their extension, multilayered interaction and grind game all at once. I won't be upset if it's Flamberge who gets the axe, but it and Princess can't exist at the same time. Might as well hit the one that isn't a massive brick.

[@ignithyahomura6488]

​@@user-fu9hc3oi3lThis feels like the same logic that KoA used when banning Linkuriboh. The thing is, if X deck is making *insert generic but not staple card here* but *insert generic but not staple card here* isn't a problem in any other deck, is it the card's fault or is it the deck's?

[@mrsquadbot]

@user-fu9hc3oi3l Please don't tell me you unironically think the problem with SE is a single target pop and Zealantis OTK line that they can just swap with Accesscode or four mats Zeus lines

[@heulg.darian2536]

I like the master duel way, some times consistency hits and power creep is all a deck needs to go out of meta. Which means that later on they can slowly release those limits and find the sweet spot where the deck is fine but not busted. Currently outside of a single copy of destiny fusion and celestial adventure prank kids are full power. Meanwhile meow mu is banned in TCG and Gryphon is banned in OCG.

[@weijie8662]

"it just change the statistic" well tbh it is good enuf, meta deck that too consistent is troublesome. This will also weaken their grind game. lower rate of starting optimal hand and weaker grind game is a good hit imo.

[@F3XT]

Joshua finally remembers there's something called power level and hitting a starter isn't always a consistency hit. I'm sure sometime ago he would say that back in toss format hitting engage or gazelle was a consistency hit

[@bchavez149]

I come to yugioh for the consistency, just nerf what is consistently made or done and make them end on less or end on something more manageable. Also there needs to be an errata or retrain of Block Dragon that is a Hard Once Per Turn.

[@amienabled6665]

My naturia horus deck in shambles rn, now I can't calamity lock to victory 😔

[@gigadon120]

2 card combo? What's the line? Got a tcg list?

[@minepool4343]

​@@gigadon120naturia has easy access to lvl 4 tuners and has a good discard in the trap, Horus has easy access to lvl 8 bodies, 8+4=12, there you have it

[@hanktheorange]

​@@gigadon120 Not worth playing in TCG with sacred tree limited imo

[@amienabled6665]

​@@gigadon120sacred tree limit hurts alot but if you really want to the core of the deck imo is 3x Naturia Camellia 2 - 3x Naturia Mole cricket 3x (in this case 1x) Naturia sacred tree 2x blessing (might be better at 3 in the tcg due to sacred tree being limited) 1x Synchro Rumble 3x Horus Imsety 2 - 3x King sarcophagus 1x all the other horus monsters 1 - 3x Walls of the Imperial Tomb ED: Crimson dragon any generic lvl 12 synchro monster King calamity The lines are simple summon Naturia camelia send sacred tree to the gy to add naturia blessing use gold sarc to send atleast 2 horus monsters to the gy (only 1 if you used Imsety to search and or 0 if the other card you sent to the gy was another Horus monster) Summon a horus monster from the gy then synchro into a lvl 12 or crimson dragon if you summon crimson dragon first be sure to search synchro rumble (it summons a tuner monster from the gy and can banish itself to protect your synchro monsters from destruction) use either synchro rumble or naturia blessings to summon naturia camelia to the field then summon another horus monster. synchro summon into either crimson dragon(if you haven't already) or whatever generic lvl 12 monster is in your ED. Finally on your opponents stand by phase use crimson dragon quick effect to target your lvl 12 synchro, shuffle back into the ed crimson dragon then summon king calamity

[@PersonaPrime]

@@hanktheorange Plus, Centurion Horus does it better in TCG.

[@SR3TG119]

The big reason for these consistency hits is largely due to md being bo1 format. Komoney will always want to have some sort of sacky nature in the game. It’s what keeps this gacha machine turning

[@drew5121]

Not enough consistency. That’s the issue. We need 17 more decks with a poplar and more level 10 synchros and more hand traps and more ways to special summon level 4 or lower monsters that special summon more monsters that XYZ into more monsters that being back other monsters. That’s what this game needs. Pure chaos.

[@oneeyeopennation5870]

Now time to unban plushfire to bring back full power Pepe 😂

[@That_Daily_noko]

Limit plushfire I can handle it I promise 😈

[@cthree1676]

That would imply unbanning shock master and HELL NAH

[@arjanzweers6542]

Nah, keep the Shock locked

[@arjanzweers6542]

Also you would need to reintroduced MR3

[@esrohm6460]

now that i think about it when rite goes to 3. how did no one ever build based but replace prank kids with snake eyes and diabelstar. diabelstar is a 7 for 10 synchro and when you sin for ash/bonfire for polar do you not need to activate normal summoned monsters effects for rite

[@kingtakeo8782]

Nah it’s case by case but in general consistency hits are good. SP little knight to 2 was dumb. SE Ash to 1 is good. Can’t explain it properly sorry

[@Sairenz]

Sure its low the celling of deck but limited 1 event already prove SE has so many started card so doesnt matter anyway jus ban the card at this point

[@kingtakeo8782]

@@Sairenz don’t get me wrong some cards should just be banned, however there’s still value in limited and semi limited. It’s more prevalent in cards such as snatch steal or harpies feather duster.

[@Sairenz]

​@@kingtakeo8782 agree, but in SE case value to limited the card seems to low

[@ryuuohdeltaplus7936]

@@Sairenz Limit 1 event is a worthless indicator of deck strength. You do realize that every single handtrap is limited in that event, which means opening enough interruptions is not happening?

[@skyzip4k171]

But with ash at 1, couldnt you summon oak and poplar off flamberge, and add back ash with oak?

[@GrapplingBook]

I kinda love the approach they’re taking in MD

[@comettcg8830]

in a world where it's all about gameplay, and competitive aspect, where if a deck get murdered by banlist everyone can just smile and move to another deck, I wholly agree that 'just consistency hit' is not ideal for reason Josh mentioned, it feels even more sacky losing to that 1-of starter. On the other hand straight up murdering a deck/playstyle will still make significant amount of players unhappy, like for example when plant pile get hit, and or imagine if somehow they decide to ban Empen, I think the deck would crumbles and might as well doesn't exists. And finding a fine line of needing to weaken the deck, but not killing it is it's own hardship. Hence at least I still very appreciate this 'consistency hit but there's more' as Josh explained the nuance of SE Ash impact, that it is a consistency hit but it has further implication.

[@ryanager8029]

Unfortunately for the non-consistency hits, that usually gets other decks whacked in the process. Say they wanted to weaken Snake-Eye and Fire King SE by hitting Sunlight Wolf. That hits Salamangreat too. This is why I really like the Duel Links banlist. It functionally has 7 tiers of restriction, not just 4. It has Forbidden, Limited, Semi-Limited and Unlimited, plus limit 1, limit 2 and limit 3. (The duel links banlist never explicitly mentions the Limited and Semi-limited cards, as these are cards available in bundles or level up rewards, such as Monster Gate or Linkuriboh being limited to one copy by being only available as a single level up reward (both at lvl 35 oddly enough), or Altergeist Multifaker being semi-limited) With Limit 1, Limit 2 and Limit 3, you can have a total of 1, 2, 3 cards in your deck from that pool. So you cannot have 2 Orcust Harp Horror, 2 Scrap Recycler for instance, since that would be 4 limit 3 cards. What this does is it functionally bans cards from overperforming decks, while letting underperforming decks keep powerful cards, or even restrict access to staple cards. Imagine Salamangreat Sunlight Wolf being hit to 3, alongside Snake-Eye Ash, Poplar and Promethian Princess. It would effectively limit all 3 of Ash Poplar and Princess and ban Wolf from Snake-Eye, while leaving Salamangreat running at worst 2 Wolf 1 Princess.

[@ChazzzyF]

I pretty much agree with you on consistency hits, and also agree that Ash's consistency hit is more than a normal consistency hit, but also without a major change to Yu-Gi-Oh's design philosophy, more consistency hits are going to feel like this, cuz of the 1 card combo problem you've talked about. Its hard to make changes that aren't ultimately just consistency hits when you have 1 card combos everywhere because banning the 1 card that is full combo tends to kill the deck, if that makes sense. I feel like it'd take a serious design overhaul at this point to start making decks where banning a card to try and affect a deck's playstyle doesn't just break the combo it was designed to do to the point where its unplayable while also having that deck be playable in the first place.

[@ChazzzyF]

Like, take Mathmech Circular as an example. Mathmech's been nowhere since Circular's banning in the TCG. It doesn't have the capacity to do what it used to anymore. Banning the 1 card combo kills the combo. Would the deck have survived if they banned, say, Sigma instead? That way Circular can't send a guy that reborns itself to start your plays on its own, and you have to open Circular + an extender like Addition or Subtraction to do the combo? Possibly? But that also could have just made it so Mathmech doesn't function the way it was designed to anymore and gets obliterated by all the other decks who got to keep their 1 card combos. Obviously I'm just using this as an example, but a lot of times these archetypes feel like Jenga towers. Take out a regular piece and not much changes, but take out a load-bearing piece and the whole tower comes crumbling down.

[@OlgaZuccati]

"Of course they open ash and wanted" -Joshua on stream

[@verbalengine95]

I think his argument applies more to a Bo1 game where most of the gameplay is on ladder than a Bo3 game where tournament play is the primary focus In a tournament setting you can't afford to play an inconsistent deck, even if it wins when it goes off, but climbing ladder your consistency rate only has to be over 50% for you to eventually rank up

[@lilina7578]

I never understand why it has to be either hit engine or consistany i think both can have merrits and it should be considered.

[@starbomber]

11:02 reminds me how, Maxx "C" used to be legal in the TCG but it was at 1 for a while. Which felt terrible because it just meant when you had Maxx "C" activated on you it *felt worse*.

[@manava13skplayer50]

even in MD the most use i got out of adventure was playing them with suships and the most annoying part of was the equip spell bouncing rather than the negate ngl.

[@Jeff11170]

Calamity had a 100% win rate when it touched the field

[@jeanpitre5789]

The fact the card exists is kinda broken. Cards that are essentially "skip your opponent's turn" shouldn't be in the game. Calamity lock is just as oppressive as gimmick puppet lock and I hate that it gets ignored by comparison.

[@blackbody3151]

TCG players when the banlist doesn’t make a deck unplayably bad.

[@Exisist5151]

It sucks to get rolled by a deck that does an unfair thing. It happening less frequently is good, but something unfair never happening is very pleasant. “Getting high-rolled” by limited cards feels very bad. Especially since people will prepare for limited cards less so, encountering them anyway is doubly painful in that you, rightfully, prepared less for it, yet are still subjected to it.

[@andreabrighenti761]

It's easy to say when your banlist are not four f*cking months apart if not more. You need to realize a deck can go even a year being tier 0 or 1 if it's not touched properly. At the same time they are a lot less likely to hit a deck harder in TCG because there are a lot more money involved. It's easy to hit bonfire when it's a UR, it's a loss for them if bonfire costs 80 dollars.

[@ArberKryemadhi]

I was down for banning snake eyes ash

[@nuclearcrayons3511]

Banning Oak would have been so much better.

[@malaxianos374]

I will be happy to banish a one of snake eye ash with Runick decks

[@HavokFGC]

i agree and disagree with your arguement for me i like that ash is limited because it means your interuption on ash hurts them more esp in a longer grind game just being able to negate ash and stop that cards future impact in the game is so nice but i do agree flamberg or original sinful spoils is the better hit but this is definitely a hit im not upset about

[@MomirViggwilv]

What the fuck? A good MD banlist?

[@MrMark28]

I think consistency hits happen when changing the way the deck works ( “the way the combo plays out”)would make it unplayable or knock down quite a few tiers.. Remember, they are a company that needs to make money to pay their workers.. there will never be a banned list where all decks are even and same consistency. Think of virtual world in the tcg when they banned VFD. It changed the combo, and the deck just became dead. (I’m not saying VFD should have stayed btw) I like the ban list when there is a tasteful hit of consistency and combo changes.

[@CounterFairy_TCG]

I think consistency and power hits at the same time is the way. The skill of haveing a plan B if you don't draw starter/combo is almost missing atm.

[@dantex05gaming]

@Joshua Schmidt I think something like a consistency hit towards something like snake-eyes does make snake-eyes play differently and it makes other hand traps more susceptible to stopping snake-eyes from popping off. One perfect example, is droll and locke. Prior to the banlist, droll and locke wasn't really all that impactful when you normal summon ash and add poplar to your hand. Now, reducing the consistency of ash makes bonfire more reliant on getting ash to the hand and it makes droll more impactful in stopping the snake-eyes combo.

[@mr.ethechromeleonpaladin8898]

I agree Branded hits in masterdeul are so numerous that the bricks way to often to be playable.

[@FakeHeroFang]

MD Branded is so cursed, people play 60 because it lets you fit Thrust, playsets of Shrouded Dragon, Lubellion, High Spirits, etc., whereas 40 card is like gambling on which 5 singletons you're going to draw this time. It's so fucking weird lol

[@kgamer142]

I like the consistency hits since it keeps the identity of the deck. I’d rather have two tear names than three if we get to keep kitkalos

[@dragullongblackfang8073]

If you lower the top you just make the most consitent deck stronger because newsflash they can adapt to the hitwhile other decks die like we saw in the tcg that banlist workt so well at stopping snake-eyes please

[@Punmaster9001]

I'm a returner to the game, from the original release of the game, I've been playing catch up since covid hit. It took me over a year to finally get a handle on much of the changes that came to the game since I left. The short version of the story is I discovered the new (to me) Thunder Dragons added to the OG concept and like play testing it, in both games MD and LOD:LE, and the cards I bought about 6ish months before Colossus was limited to 1. I learned a bit too late about the beauty of Verte and it's power to fusion summon, and how well it works with Thunder Dragons. I recently realized how useful One for One is in the deck, and in a similar way, how Linkuriboh (only realized this after it was banned) benefits the deck. Which them banning it because of snake--eyes didn't make things better. I know my deck isn't meta competitive, but I enjoy how it works, and I have a few one of starters that work well with it, that are either banned or limited, but having multiple options makes for more interesting play, unlike when I watched two people play, one with snake-eyes, and the other player listed off what the first one would play as if he was psychic. As much as I like the idea of having 3 Pot of Greed cards in a deck built around Exodia, keeping the game balanced is more fun long term.

[@CHAOSfirst1]

EXceed is now good in snake-eyes to push through ht copium

[@skormfuse]

I like hits that hit the end board more yeah but I also like consistency hits even on top of that because sometimes it evens the playing field a bit especially in the case of one card starters or in decks that use other locations like resources like tear. because because some archetypes just invalidate others and will keep doing so even if the end board or combo is hit. because at the end of the day that archetype is still getting resources in a efficient enough manner to invalidate a decent amount of game. and really a consistency hit is needed to just let more of the game be playable over just watching and reacting to the end boards they choose to make.

[@NightyKnight09]

I like a game where I get to do my thing and the opponent gets to do there’s and we are just trying to stop each other from getting ahead. It’s why I found tear and snake eye mirror matches fun. They were very consistent and skill was the largest factor. Hitting things that are just way too much to play around or through I think are the problems like calamity. The game shouldn’t be decided by pulling off a single combo but that doesn’t mean combos should be super difficult to pull off in my opinion. I think the ceiling of the combo is the concern

[@Pincsi01]

What if in which seems to be their philosophy, their problem is just that the deck is too good, and takes up too much room, not what it does? Then you wouldn't want to change how a deck plays, you deliberately wouldn't want to cripple it if possible. Changing how a deck plays changes its power level too, but it's a much more upsetting and intrusive change, with possible unforeseen consequences, which are something they have been avoiding in master duel as much as they could. If the deck becomes worse, diversity increases, and you didn't have to make SE players feel ripped off by deleting the deck as they know it, isn't that a win?

[@mikimiki9109]

now soul release really cooks snake eyes

[@Hitoridoodles]

Consistency hits lower a decks win rate but it also increases frustration as both the player and the opponent.

[@stefaniagerardo7562]

se can just play shs engine tho, even if it is slightly worse

[@vinhnhu9381]

I think the hit is good because the strong point of SE is its consistency, its end board is breakable

[@Kkkracker]

⁠​⁠@@vinhnhu9381it is absolutely not breakable 90% of the time

[@Kkkracker]

⁠@@vinhnhu9381also they can just play Melodious when it comes out or Shs or Fiendsmith these consistency hits do none the only thing they hit with this is the grind game which isn't bad tbf

[@Justcallmeaqua420]

​@@stefaniagerardo7562not if they used a spell

[@CrisisCore62]

Snake eyes as en engine in other decks Snake eyes Horus go BRRR

[@alexandergeorgiev74]

Now have to use kash engine 🚒

[@PyckledNyk]

Josh is right, as long as a card is searchable and those searchers are unhit, the card is still viable. It’s just that many people only build their decks by playing playsets of their good cards.

[@qwertyg3666]

I feel consistency hits would be an excellent balancing mechanism if not for one card combos.

[@FakeHeroFang]

With 1 Wanted 1 Ash, Droll is still hit or miss, but it's reaching a point where it might hurt the deck more often than not.

[@654321yhtaeD]

I still think spright elf needs it effect changed. It should take a lv2 and a spright to make it

[@queenbrightwingthe3890]

Alot of link monsters should be restricted to its own archetype

[@cheesycheese7100]

​@@queenbrightwingthe3890Makes the game more restrictive no? It's nice to have a variety of options

[@user-yz6fd1yn4l]

​@@cheesycheese7100to a point but cards like barrone arent restrictive enough

[@cheesycheese7100]

@@user-yz6fd1yn4l I can get behind that. I'm not saying we need to keep all of that, it's just nice to have a variety of combo options beyond archetypes

[@tmaz9474]

@@cheesycheese7100 It's nice to have options, but it's also boring to see the same dozen monsters played in every single deck. Snake-Eyes are a perfect example of why cards should have more restrictions, it's kind of stupid that they can go plus a million of one card and still make every relevant ED boss monster in the game because you are not locked into anything.

[@GlacierMoonDragon]

Consistency Hits are fine if a card has multiple use cases or have other purposes besides the typical line.

[@chrishowell1417]

Natura Horus makes calamities real good

[@karasu_strg6365]

Kashtira and tearlements cards are missing on this list

[@theazuredemon4854]

My thoughts on Hot Red Dragon Archfiend King Calamity are this; it did not become toxic UNTIL Crimson Dragon got printed, and Centur-Ion Manadium made it easy to make 2 level 12 Dragon synchros, so Crimson Dragon was the one that needed to go since it similar enough to Cyber-Stein that warrants the banning of Crimson Dragon, not Hot Red Dragon Archfiend King Calamity.

[@Amine-re5rp]

But then there is other cards that let u synchro in opponent turn so what do u do u ban them or crimson (for exemple etude of the branded,formula synchro, tg monsters etc..)

[@tmaz9474]

Hot take: any card that says "your opponent cannot activate cards/effects for the rest of the turn" should be banned, regardless of how difficult it is to access them.

[@theazuredemon4854]

@@Amine-re5rp Oh shit, I forgot Etude of the Branded exists mostly because I don't have any Bystial monsters at all. As Formula Synchron, that card is so hard to summon that they only way it CAN get banned is if Konami prints absurdly broken support for it which would need to ban that support card instead. Does T.G. even play Hot Red Dragon Archfiend King Calamity...? If so. have they ever topped with it recently...?

[@theazuredemon4854]

@@tmaz9474 Hot Red Dragon Archfiend is supposed to be a "win more" card in the modern era, however Yu-Gi-Oh! Players have found a way to turn a "win more" card into a "you automatically win the game" card, and Konami just enabled that bad behavior.

[@Amine-re5rp]

@@theazuredemon4854 my point was more since it makes also other deck/archetypes capable of being not healthy for the game just remove the unhealthy card and be sorry for the one who played it "fairly" even if such concept doesnt exist in competitiv scene, if u play comp u want to win, if u play local to have fun yeah its a shame (I know this is Master duel but its just to explain what I mean by that)

[@bennett754]

I just wanna point out that Jet and Blue on 2 are consistency hits...

[@user-yz6fd1yn4l]

Why did he say consistency hits are bad then described a consistency hit with extra steps

[@iamdanieloliveira]

As he said in the video, they're not JUST consistency hits. Ash to 1 for example also lowers the deck's grind game and (to some extent) its power ceiling. Ash from 3 to 2, on the other hand, was 100% a consistency hit, as you'll rarely need to go through 3 Ashes over the course of a game and you could easily replace the 3rd Ash with a number of other cards.

[@user-yz6fd1yn4l]

@@iamdanieloliveira I'm saying when he said ban diabellstar for instance he said it won't allow them to diabellstar for spoils which is just a consistency hit and nothing else

[@tmaz9474]

@@user-yz6fd1yn4l Yeah just a consistency hit, it's not like the sinful spoil cards have GY effects or anything like that

[@user-yz6fd1yn4l]

@@tmaz9474 yes diabellstar my favorite sinful spoils spell card

[@ozimantv]

Consistency hits are ONLY justifiable for 1 reason. Hitting the CONSISTENCY cards (not searchers) is the only thing. For example, sky striker engage was a good semi limit and a limit for a while because that card is too strong when you open it just like a pot card. On that note also pot cards or cards like chicken game being limited is reasonable as they are generic consistency tools or VERY splashable consistency tools. Usually these cards have a "draw" attached to them.

[@michaelgsable]

Small world: blossom - veiler - ash veiler - blossom - ash

[@Matheuslinspicollo]

chain droll

[@tmaz9474]

@@Matheuslinspicollo "Hurr Durr just draw the out"

[@mauer1]

consistency hits in masterduel are a little bit different, because of the sheer amount of duels. in addition to it beeing bo1

[@raizen4597]

The deck would do the same thing but not often as someone expect, yes it create frustration because your opponent could sack you open full combo even having low chances like tear on the OCG having multiple cards limited and still mill names. But on the other hand, this is reducing the number of players using that deck on paper. From a gameplay prospective could be unfun i agree with you but from the number prospective is not. You need to know, the developers of a videogame usually would look the numbers on the data of the game and the feedback of the players. Developers try to make the game better but doesnt mean they play the game as a regulat player you know what i mean? Its reasonable think like that for someone that barely or not even playing the game.

[@meliorbutterfly]

Its Joever

[@Zeroyue622]

What do you mean by back to 3? Rite is NEVER at 3, adventure and bystial got hit before they came out!!! Why can’t they do that to something else like snake eyes?

[@worthywill9294]

Honestly, the only SE hit I'd be happy with are banning flamberge and/or poplar.... Arguably flamberge because it's basically block dragon. Tho the folks saying poplar have a good point. Granted, appo and I:P would probably fall in the category of "wrong reason, right punishment" should they get banned *(I:P could be S:P but w/e)*

[@lamaj9750]

Every time i see SE in master duel I drop cuz I ain’t dealing with that

[@Timeater]

It's what they want to achieve with the consistency rather than the consistency itself. I prefer to ban the cards that create the toxic boards like Apolloussa, Baronne, Savage and alike.

[@Wortigon2000]

why calamity of all the cards... Calamity was the entire reason behind why I built a Red Dragon Archfiend deck... I have a snake eye deck, but I don't really mind those getting hit. I don't like that archetype that much. I have questions about the unlimits though. Like, Engage? Welldamn. Back when I built my sky striker deck, it was on 1. I might have to revisit that deck, and rebuild it, as now there are a ton of extra cards I could put in it. Monkeyboard? Oh no. Pendulums are gonna be more common I guess... The level reduction I couldn't really care about less, but the free search for a 2nd scale, now that part is kinda worrysome, as some pendulum strategies are very damn powerful/insane. And as I never played pendulums, only the odd 1-1 pendulum monsters that end up in speedroids (1 level 7 synchro, who also just so happens to be pendulum, and 1 level 2 main deck monster that has a search on normal summon. Not the rest. The rest of the pendulums in that archetype are pretty bad.) Rite of Aramesir is possibly a problem, as the adventure package can be splashed into a ton of stuff, and it can be a pain in the a$$. Steam is a weird card there though. I mean, it wasn't good enough to be in my blackwing deck. I don't even know why it was still not unlimited before. Sudri is better. Vata is better. Shamal is better. Simoon is better. Zephyros is better. f*cking Harmatang is better. I just can't see how or why Steam was ever limited in the first place. Oh well, I'm happy with all the hits except Calamity. Bring back Calamity :( He's the 1 big boss of the Red Dragon Archfiend archetype that my Red Dragon Archfiend deck was centered around. 12 starters for 1 part of the combo, 9 for the other. If I get 1-1 of both in my starting hand, that's a pretty damn solid line into King Calamity. On the opponent's turn. That said, I know that Synchron/Stardust was abuing it every now and than,. sometimes even other decks. What did chat say? Naturia Horus? idk how those would abuse it, but I guess it must be possible if they complained about it. As for how to handle Snake-Eye: ban f*cking poplar.

[@bomberhood7234]

Centurion is going to abuse Calamity once it comes out.

[@Wortigon2000]

@@bomberhood7234 idk what that is, all I see here is one of my decks getting kicked in the nuts as it's main line's end boss got swiped from the equation. I guess I could still go for Hot Red Dragon Archfiend Abyss, or Red Supernova Dragon, but those 2 are less effective in saying "f*ck you" to the opponent. Don't get me wrong, omni negates, and boardwipes are plenty awesome in their own right, but less so than telling the opponent to just skip their turn, with a few set cards at most.

[@bomberhood7234]

@@Wortigon2000 Basically, Centurion easily makes level 12 synchro monsters. So they can summon a LV 12 summon crimson dragon tag it out and boom. Calamity is out. I feel ya because I play RDA as well but honestly, I have had some success with the deck even without Calamity out.

[@Jose-yc6sc]

I think they should have kept SE ash at two and banned oak personally

[@flamehaze59]

OMG 😢 They've hit King calamity!! Noooo, why?? They should've hit the toxic Snake-Eyes harder instead!! But it's a solid start when SE Ash is on 1

[@arrownoir]

Ban original sin.

[@navindranohar5734]

I think playing dd crow will help

[@ShikanRaider]

I would just put Original Sinful Spoils to 0 and the rest can all be at 3.

[@jacobwoodard818]

Lets get real the only real problem that over tuned decks like Snake-Eyes are caused by cards like Apallousa and in the Dis Pater versions case Omega. They need some hits like banning Oak so their resource loop isn't as strong or as seemingly infinite but the cards that decks that have been over-tuned to the extent Snake-Eyes has take advantage of cards like Apallousa to easily is the biggest problem and if the strongest thing they can do make S:P, Princess, Dis Pater, etc. then it isn't that bad thats about what every other deck is doing now. The problem with decks like Snake-Eyes primarily comes from the easy access to monsters that simply make them to good. All Konami does by leaving these types of cards alone is ensure that over-tuned decks become op and get overused by everyone the instant they become playable. Decks need to increase in power and consistency but if they over do it and/or give cards like Apallousa a free pass then it ruins the game until they fix it. They might have left Apallousa because its a counter Nibiru and it only negates monster effects but the simple answer to Nibiru is to ban it. It makes good and strong decks like Sharks and pure White Woods bad and if it was gone the game would be better because there would be less need for Konami to make monster negates aside from spell/trap negates and it would interesting decks like White Woods to be good and for decks like Sharks that almost never if ever have taken first place in a YCS to do so at least once in their existence. Realistically for Shark if Nibiru was to get banned you could make double Bahamat and if they both get negated you just sit on hand traps and Draco Future. This would be possible in that scenario thanks to the new support Sharks have coming. Pure White Woods wouldn't be afraid to make Diabelle either if Nibiru was gone.

[@christianacosta4846]

I can’t stand by consistency hits when archetypes are just killed, like elf and kit are fine with the hits in md and more fun tbh

[@starboyjedi13]

Wouldn't it be better if they banned generic big boss monsters like Baronne & Savage?🤔 Both of those cards are omni-negates & makes Snake-Eyes even more powerful than it already is.

[@cedrusnguyen5188]

And how do you think Snake-eye get to Baronne and Savage? By opening Ash AND Diebelstar. This list is directly hitting that, without screwing over decks that Konami forgot to give a decent boss monster.

[@mrharvy100]

Nope consistency hits are fine when said deck has stupid level of consistency. Deck needs to be normalized. Wanted to 1 and Snake Ash to 1 does more against SE then a Barrone ban.

[@elin111]

Then they draw the Snake Ash anyways and nothing changes

[@Pincsi01]

@@elin111 It hurts not only consistency but followup too, and a big part of SE's strength is followup. Sure, you can make the same endboard, but when has the endboard on its own defined the best decks?

[@maunabesanika]

Consistency hits are fine considering we got pretty much new banlist every month, they cant always do big banlist every month, they also cant do banlist every few months because people will ask "where's banlist?" everytime

[@privatepika2052]

Hitting barrone is just as stupid as hitting ash, wanted and bonfire.

[@TriasHierarchia]

We've had nothing but consistency hits for 6 months straight in MD and it's been miserable.

[@CrisisCore62]

Flamberge to 1

[@jzriw]

Honestly they should just ban Flamberge

[@LeAndre_McCoy]

On my birthday

[@SkinlessMaple]

You make video talking about deckbuilding saying consistency is everything in yugioh, yet you also say consistency hits are bad!?

[@MrAlakazam1000]

People have to stop bitching about wanted drawing a card, it's to make up for witch needing to discard a card for its summon not to mention oss also negs a card like sure there are ways to play around it but the cards are balanced around themselves

[@Saltymoles]

Beaver is at 1 in md?😂💀

[@Saltymoles]

Also how is pendulum still bad with electrumite in md?

[@bomberhood7234]

They tried so hard not to hit elf.

[@Justcallmeaqua420]

​@@Saltymoles because archtypes are somewhat of a nothing burger that need better extra deck cards to work well

[@marcopaolo1643]

I want Divine Temple banned so they can no longer play around Nib or OTK with their lvl 1s.

[@giuseppevaccaro7521]

Calamity didn't deserve it

[@BlackBeartic229]

Lol Lmao even It definitely needed to go. No excuse for its existence.

[@giuseppevaccaro7521]

@@BlackBeartic229 there are other turn skip that are easier to make but are still legal

[@BlackBeartic229]

@@giuseppevaccaro7521 No. No there are not lmao. Well outside of puppet but Sanctifire should be banned too Any deck that could make level 12s or shit out 3 synchros and can quick synch could make Calamity and lock. The only thing easier is Puppet Lock and as I said before Sanctifire needs to be banned too. And even if what you said was true 1. It still has 0 place in the game. 2. The other turn skips can get banned too idc

[@giuseppevaccaro7521]

@@BlackBeartic229 go search how easy it is to make Kali yuga, I'll wait

[@BlackBeartic229]

@@giuseppevaccaro7521 Launch should be banned too. Just because I said Calamity deserves to be banned does not mean I think Launch should stay. Kill that and Yuga disappears.

[@husseinalheloo1725]

Consistency Hits are so bad