THE FORMAT IS TOO WIDE

Patreon:
/ ggygo
Riw Hobbies:
riwhobbies.com/
ChainLink:
chainlinktcg.s...
Code: GGYGO
CloudSupplyCo:
cloudsupplyco....
Grimoire:
www.grimoireac...
Code: GGYGO5
Dragonshield:
dragonshield.c...
Code: GG5
GEM:
gemaccessories...
Imperium:
www.imperiumdu...
Code: ggygo10
Metafy: metafy.gg/@ggygo
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / gg__ygo
Instagram: ...
Business email: [e-mail]
Like the content?
Find me live streaming Yugioh here: / gg_ygo
Want to support me as a content creator? streamlabs.com...

[@jonnykapygo179]

I disagree with the notion that more diverse formats are bad. if anything, this just means that the game is healthy and you have a variety of decks you can play now instead of focusing on either a top 1 deck or top 3 deck etc. I also don't think that this makes siding less skillful, if anything it makes it even more. if I know what decks are currently the prospers in the format, my side might look close to what others are siding because we're all either siding the same cards or something similar. Now that we are in a more diverse format, you can't side for a specific deck, but more for what your deck is weak against and how to combat it. that also means you can side for the other styles of decks (control, combo, midrange). Yes, some side cards will be the same throughout all lists, but different players are going to go about different cards and therefore players playing the same archetype may side differently depending on what they think they need to side for. if the pro's are going to complain about it, then they need to figure out what their current deck's weakness are and side accordingly, because the players that prefer this kind of format will thrive and top.

[@lifedeather]

Yeah it’s laughable these “pros” suddenly can’t handle when a new deck enters the equation that isn’t one of the two meta decks they prepare for. If they call themselves pro or competitive players they should be prepared for any deck and situation. The majority of players want fun, pick their favorite theme, do anime duels, and diverse formats allows them to do that with their favorite decks and do well

[@Blitz0555]

​@lifedeather it is literally impossible to be prepared for everything. The best competitive players can do is find cards that hit multiple match ups, but even then it's practically impossible to be prepared for everything. You really can't fill a side deck with every counter you need for every deck. I love diverse formats, but even I have to acknowledge they often aren't all that good when compared to 4-5 deck formats.

[@yuseifido5706]

A format being diverse does not inherently mean that it's healthy or balanced. The gameplay can still be terrible and luck can still matter more than skill

[@lifedeather]

I like seeing diverse decks where a lot of different themes can shine and you aren’t stuck with players playing the top 2 meta themes and that’s it.

[@DNNYYCLR]

I think that these wide format with many decks was Kazuki Takahashi's vision for the game.

[@Trickaz94]

Not really a wide format when every deck plays the same fuckin boss monsters, it's only baronne, sp and ip, not really diverse if you ask me

[@solarifle]

To me, the "quality" of a format is most dependent on how it feels to play with and against the decks. This goes both ways; 2022 nats had a ton of decks you could play, but it felt awful because so many decks were adventure dpe piles that ran a ton of bricks and aimed to scythe lock you. Ishizu Tear might have been great to play with, but absolutely awful to play against if you weren't on Tear yourself. Most of the most popular past formats are not only diverse in options, but actually fun to play with and against.

[@bubymaru]

Best comment

[@turtle-bot3049]

Widely diverse formats take a different skillset to master them. Not that the skillsets from less diverse formats dont also apply in diverse formats, but that extra layer of skills required adds to the requirements of doing well. - In tier 0 formats such as tear format, the skills that are rewarded the most are technical play and an understanding of a specific deck/matchup/interaction at the deepest level. - In a widely diverse format, the skills that are rewarded the most are flexibility, adaptability and broad knowledge/understanding of the different overarching playatyles within yugioh. The format being diverse, doesn't mean its better or worse than a tier 0 or triangle format, its just different. It's why I'm not a fan of saying truly diverse formats like the current one is "bad" and "all about variance", because it's not. It's about utilizing and mastering a different skillset to suit the different format. Its also not about learning what 30 different decks do, its about being able to understand what a deck is trying to be (combo, control, aggro, stun, midrange, etc.) and using the understanding of how to beat those overarching playstyles to adapt and make good decisions to play around and have a good shot at beating whatever deck you go up against. Sure, it sucks to go up against the one deck you didn't prepare for/that catches you off guard, but that comes back down to what I said above about figuring out what the overarching playstyle of the deck is and playing/interacting/siding accordingly.

[@morningstarrss]

True. But for most players, and this ain't about my big dawgs at top level play, diverse formats feel amazing but at top level play nah. I would rather have wide formats tbh

[@lifedeather]

Yeah wide format so much more fun and diverse instead of 2 top decks. Most players are more casual and fun, only small % are Uber competitive maxed out players.

[@ectoOLDACC]

i personally love wider formats cause it means that you're not funneled into playing certain decks and also for side decking it means that every card counts, as in you have to decide what covers the widest array of decks rather than having 6-12 of those slots being limited to being "the out"

[@lifedeather]

Yeah more diverse, more variety, different matchups each time. More fun

[@DeathUsagi]

I think we might be going into a bit more less diverse format due to all the incoming Diabellestar and Fire Support, and starting to leave older decks behind.

[@natanmoses674]

100% going into a fire format, especially when Promethean princess releases. There is just gonna be too much until we get something with more power.

[@metalmariomega]

There's no such thing as a GOOD "Tier 0" Format. Mirrors by definition are always going to have an element of luck to them due to the limited levels of skill expression, card choice you can apply towards them, meaning the opening hand variance is what ultimately determines the outcome when decks and skill levels are equivalent. And anyone who doesn't WANT to play the mirror directly is going to put everything into running sacky hard counters to the top deck of the format. And those decks honestly ruin the format even more than the ACTUAL Tier 0 deck, ironically enough. Wide formats have the opposite issue where everything comes down to staple choices. And while some people make a big deal out of Side decks when it comes to staples, Extra and even MAIN deck choices matter a ton when deciding where your coverage wants to fall under, it's more important to win the blind when you can't be sure you can have what you need in your side for a given matchup, so you can't really blind for going first or second specifically anymore. The thing about that though is, wide formats actually DO favor a specific type of deckbuilding where you either run a small engine with tons of netural staples in the main that can be sided out for more specific ones when going first or second or against a specific strategy is known, or running mutli-engine builds that cover a variety of situations and can be sided off in their entirety when one proves to be a liability for a given matchup. You have to think of it more as an entirely different style of play that favors certain builds of decks rather than certain decks themselves, which requires a different type of evaluation than the one current Yu-Gi-Oh pros tend to favor. There's always trends when it comes to staples and engines no matter how wide a format gets, you have to focus on those to do well, NOT the decks being used.

[@Harmonic14]

Tear format was one of the most skillful formats period, let alone tier 0 formats. The deck was so consistent and so good at playing on turn 0 going 2nd that skill was a major component in that matchup

[@invertbrid]

Definitely not, tier 0 by itself aleady bad as u locking ppl out of options.

[@Pleia_Ds]

When you run out of side deck slots, it’s time to reconsider some main deck slots

[@masterdan39]

From a competitive player’s pov, this is a bad take. Diverse formats make you a better player because it forces you to actually build your deck and side deck to cover as many matchups as possible. There are plenty of good, generic side cards that can be played that deal with a multitude of decks. Wide open formats also shows you what type of player you really are, whether you’re a one trick pony that can only do one thing and one thing alone, or you can be the best and be confident and beat anything that gets in your way of that top, whether it be locals or up to a YCS.

[@SeveNStarSeveN]

You cannot deckbuild for a wide format, that is contradictory. If there are actually like 10 possible decks that are all equally powerful, you cannot build each one of them. In the main deck you would take a consistency hit, and in the side deck you simply don't have enough space. This is why matchups can also feel very luck dependent. I guess screw me because I didn't prepare for the 5 purrely players and got matched with 3 of them. It removes skill from the game because there is too much variance, you could also be the best yugioh player by playing with a shovel stuck up your ass and in massive pain, but I am not going to do that to prove that I am the best and most confident. This is also auxillary to the main issue but wide formats often have one of these two problems 1. Decks are all playing a similar playstyle like DPE turbo or 2. There are decks that have really bad matchups with each other resulting in more decks being playable and thus meaning that the game becomes luck dependent.

[@DonMarzzoni]

Unless they give us 5 extra side deck slot, you are wrong.

[@SeveNStarSeveN]

@@DonMarzzoni At that point it kinda ruins the point of a side deck though, because you might as well just start smokescreening into different decks for different matchups.

[@ak47dragunov]

@@SeveNStarSeveN You side deck for the matchups that scare you the most, and main non-engine with wide application for the others. OP's post is not contradictory at all

[@masterdan39]

@@SeveNStarSeveN you can definitely deck build for a wide format. Your main deck will not take a consistent for the most part. Unless you’re playing a deck which requires all 40 cards to be strictly engine, you have space to play around with; play the best non engine cards that: 1. Boost consistency, and 2. Cover a wide range of decks. We already do that. Ash, veiler, imperm, nib, and to a lesser extent droll, see a lot of play in the main decks already. Then you side for what you believe are the most popular decks going into an event. That’s where research and play testing comes in. With 15 cards in the side deck, you side good, generic cards for the most part, with 3-5 cards saved for what your worst match ups will be. If let’s say you’re playing Kashtira, and your worst match up is labyrinth, side in cosmic cyclone and ghost belle; guess what, those cards are also good against other decks. Worried about orcust but don’t have enough space for system down? Ash and nib are honestly all that you’d need, and if you have phantazmay in the side deck (another great generic card) you’ll be more than fine. You’re never supposed to be prepared for everything. That’s where skill and luck comes in. Luck is a big part of any tcg already, may as well be a good player and have luck work on your side by preparing as much as you can for any given event.

[@GianLello]

Variance is crucial for this game, we don't care about studying 30 decks, majority of auers don't even study 5 decks anyway, but a wide meta let majority players to have more fun

[@victors-9711]

Minority take. Majority of players enjoy wider formats.

[@אוריכהן-ל3ט]

Agreed

[@lifedeather]

Agreed, these 1% Uber competitive players aren’t absolutely not the majority of players who simply prefer a casual fun experience of duel monsters.

[@Rougelifestyle]

Thank you!

[@manleyfgc7981]

nah

[@GianLello]

Amen

[@christopheraponte306]

The reason i enjoy this format is that its truly a test for deck builders. Yes top players will suffer because no, you cannot prepare for everything. Ive lost to some real odd deck choices recently, it can be frustrating, but another part of me marvels at the creativity that diverse formats allow. Trust me, though, after the next wave of snake-eye support, this will no longer be a diverse format lol

[@smsamurai93]

Competitive players have forgotten that DECK BUILDING is itself an expression of skill and get mad when their net decked list doesn't top because they don't know how to build for their specific environment.

[@vyraall8430]

This January format is amazing, might be the next Edison format that people come back to. I agree that for people trying to win YCS's that wide formats can suck but we are still consistently seeing the top players still topping YCS's. These wide formats just really raise the skill level needed to find consistent success.

[@Deviser22]

I wholeheartedly agree, isnt it more of a testament to a pro players skill level to consistently top a diverse format, not just understanding 3-4 decks in a room, but understanding your match up spread across 9-15 decks in the room?

[@lifedeather]

@@Deviser22yeah if a “pro” player can’t handle anything outside the top 2 meta decks are they really a “pro” player 😂

[@Xenonfuji]

I prefer the December format tbh

[@Deviser22]

@lifedeather I won't say that pro players that are incredible in a tier 0 format aren't skilful, I still believe there's a great amount of skill expression when you have an incredible knowledge of a mirror match, it's just a different skill set to learning a wider format, it's I guess it's just the issue of having time to learn a diverse format to the extent of a tier 0 format

[@TemporalDelusion]

Absolute truth right here.

[@dangernapalm]

This format actually feels really fun and refreshing outside of the cost.

[@Jrodguez]

I personally like being able to play what I want and be competitive . I felt like during tear format it was “play tear or lose “ now the decks I enjoy have a fighting chance

[@Trey50Daniel]

Variance is the greatest level of skill expression possible and allows players to actually learn the nuances of the Yu-Gi-Oh card game. If you are learning only one or two decks, then you only understand essentially those two mechanics. Yes, you'll learn new mechanics in each new format when there's a "new tier 0 deck", but many of the top decks tend towards a singular type of strategy - flood the board and build up interruptions for my opponent's turn.

[@randommaster06]

You prefer narrow formats. That's fine, just make sire you understand that it's a preference and not shared by everyone.

[@MaxxCTCG]

I think two parts of what makes a good format is that you can genuinely interact with your opponent without being locked out of the game. I think this is liked by all player types. I think another thing to consider is the player's perspective. I think there are three main perspectives, viewing experience, pro-competitive experience and semi-competitive experience. I think depending on your position it changes what you enjoy. I don’t think “semi-competitive players” should be seen as a slight. I consider myself in this category, even though I would like to move to the pro-competitive section. I think outside factors affect this more than just not being good enough. I think part of being in the “pro-competitive section” relates to having high levels of interest, time and monetary means to attend events without all three. I think it is hard to reach that level. “Pro-competitive players” attend many high level events, lots of time testing, expenses for travel and playing the most competitive cards ($$$). It makes sense that wider formats will be harder to prepare for making the time and money spent less more frustrating. I do think you can adjust how you side and decks you play to be overall more resilient and use cards with more coverage, but it still only goes so far. I don’t think making statements that diverse formats = bad is a great take. I think there is more to discuss than that. But I think we need to consider the amount that goes into events for them is different and understand the frustration. But even in diverse formats top players are still consistently topping events. “Semi-competitive players” still play to win, but attend less events, have less time investment and monetary investment, due to various reasons not always a choice. I think people's conditions shift around depending on the player. I think these players prefer playing the deck they enjoy then just what is the best deck for an event. Leaning towards more diverse formats.I don’t think it’s fair to say competitive players are lazy. But I think competitive players should be more understanding of the ease and enjoyment that comes from playing a good deck you enjoy versus the deck you feel you have to play to compete. “Viewing Experience” relates more to watching experience, then game play. When it comes to overall viewing experience diverse formats are more interesting round to round, from a general audience perspective. I think this has to be due to the amount of players that fall into a semi-competitive vs pro-competitive audience. I think the nature of non games due to side decking is its own problem in many formats, diverse or narrow. Even though they might be more apparent in narrow formats.

[@gracehelberg880]

I think wide formats tend to be more fun at the locals and OTS championship level because I think the inherently more causual style allows for a variety of decks to win and that can be fun. But I also understand the frustration of players who want to take it to the next level and are not sure what to plan for. But the major problem with Tier 0 or near Tier 0 formats is that it can stab the community right in the heart and soul; at locals. It feels like most people don't quit the game because of doing poorly at a big event, they quit because they really enjoyed having 3-4 hours of fun at locals and now it's a drag of either being priced out or playing a subpar strategy while everyone else is on Meta. I think it sucks that sometimes I literally do not have an out to one of my opponents cards in my main, side or extra. But that should be something we as a community should be hating on more is uninteractable monsters, not open formats. And as someone who likes to do well at bigger events, I like the idea of needing to play more "shotgun shells" that can hit a wide variety of decks at lower power and less "silver bullets" that hit less decks harder. And I personally think that something about YuGiOh I like is that there are certain decks that are meta because they play well in the meta but don't punch down very well and that allows some more underexplored decks to sneak through

[@setsana_inc]

Diverse format is fun at a locals level and Triangle/tier 0 format, from what you said, is fun at a regional/YCS level. The second half of 2023, which was wide, was fun with a noticeable amount of returning/new players I personally know.

[@happo6449]

Even if you're correct (which you are not imo), a format can't be judged as good or bad solely depending on how many decks are viable in said format, but rather you have to evaluate the format in how "fair" said format is. For example, Tear 0 was "good" because it was really grindy and very skillfull, but Gouki or Pepe formats are bad simply because they were not fun to duel against. This is the same thing, but with diverse formats. If there are 10-15 decks between tier 1 and tier 2, but all of them promotes grindy games and skillfulls interactions (like tear), who really cares if it's diverse or not. What really matters is that we get interesting and fun gamestates and not auto win turn 1 decks or floodgates turbo decks like Kashtira.

[@grodon909]

I'm pretty casual, but I can understand some of the competitive points. I think the biggest problem that I noted is that a lot of people who dislike a diverse format come at it from a self-centered standpoint. The main arguments against formats like this are that it becomes difficult to deckbuild and the variance puts you in scenarios where the luck from facing certain players trumps some of the player skill. And I do understand that. But I think it's a very narrow view. It's a problem that mainly impacts hypercompetitive players. You mentioned that if a new player was getting into yugioh, you could tell them to play whatever, but frame that like its a bad thing. I'd frame that as a FANTASTIC thing. The player has a viable options for what they can do. They can pick a combo deck or a midrange deck, or a pseduo-control deck (which granted are more midrange nowadays). They can pick decks based on art. They can pick based on nostalgia. They can pick based on cost. Like, if a player doesn't have a huge budget, I could tell them to try something like Unchained, or Tri-Fire and they can have as a good time, learn the game, and have a chance to win. If they don't know how to side well, it's less impactful because the high variance help people learn what works or doesn't work in practice, and speeds up knowledge acquisition. For the more experienced but still casual or less competitive players, it opens them up to try new or different decks. The more decks there are in a format, the higher the chance that a player has something that they enjoy playing just due to the higher variety of playstyles. Let's say you like Lab (It's me, I like Lab). In a narrow format, you either don't get to play the deck you like; or you get to play it, but it's strong enough that people specifically side hate against you. In more diverse formats, you have more freedom to play things you like, and lower chances that you'll have hate sided against you. It's really just bad for the players who want to be able to have a set plan against every contingency to win. But with that, consider the "health of the game" that people like to try to bring up. Most people who argue against a diverse format due to the "health of the game" have pretty nebulous reasons for thinking that. In reality, people are still going to go to events, decks are still going to top. The game will eventually move back to more narrow formats, and things will change over time as they always do. The risk of actually losing competitive players in this format specifically it probably pretty low, just because they've already spent $100 on S:P, and $150 on a horus engine or $400 on Sinful Spoils; most of them are locked in, and even if they don't play for a format, they'll probably be back in a format or two. I think this becomes important as an argument of scale as well. What is a worse or better situation, all things considered, for the game as whole? If a small number of competitive players are disgruntled because of increased variance? Or if the substantially larger number of casual players stop playing because they can't play decks they like, have to constantly play against decks they don't like, and/or can't afford to play competitively? I feel like the answer in this case is clear.

[@grodon909]

I will also say that this doesn't touch on another argument that could be made: competitive players should deckbuild differently. If you're unable to account for the diversity through the side deck, then you have to change your deckbuilding philosophy. How can I build my deck to play against multiple unknown strategies? I think it adds a different type of fun to deck-building. But that's a totally different argument. I also don't think that skill is completely erased. Looking at the YCS tops pre-Jan 1, a lot of good players are still topping the events. If the variance of decks was truly so high that skill is not a factor, we wouldn't see Josh winning his 4th YCS and Pak doing top 8 in 2 consecutive YCSs in that format.

[@philo2677]

I think the silver bullet argument is valid and I see a problem with your counterargument that all cards are a silver bullet for something. Even though ash is insane against branded and lab, they were decks designed to have strengths and weaknesses and obviously konami R&D would know about the weakness to ash, and ash is played at 3 in main in the vast majority of decks and metas ever since it came out. Ash is also a generally good card that at worst trades decently with most decks. When ash is drawn it creates SOME nongames against branded and lab but it isn't autowin against either. And there generally isn't enough space in the side deck for most decks to be playing even more targeted hate like Grave of the Superancient Organism for Branded or like Royal Decree for Lab (yeah they can just pop it on your turn with lovely sometimes but you get the point). On the other hand its a problem when a format is so narrow that side decks or even maindecks can be full of targeted hate that sucks against the field. For instance in tear format when all rogue players were maindecking 9 bystials. Clearly that wasn't good enough to elevate lesser decks or else it wouldn't have been a tier 0 format. But then if they played against eachother, and they weren't light or dark decks or weren't graveyard reliant, these rogue decks pop off on eachother uninterrupted because there are less or no other handtraps. So to have a fighting chance against tear they sacrifice their chances against many other decks going second. Or they go first against tear and end on full combo + 2 bystials in hand functionally ftking, ruining individual matches while having statistically no shot at topping major events. Or rogue blind making abyss dweller game 1 etc etc hell even tear was blind making abyss dweller turn 1. Diversity creates formats where everyone is forced to play cards that are generally good against many decks instead of cards that are only good against specific decks. Yes its true that cards that are generally good against many decks can be silver bullets just as much as targeted hate can be. Droll vs combo is an obvious example. But I think that diversity prevents this from being taken to an extreme. I think there is a sweet spot of diversity where it becomes bad and we have probably surpassed it. There does become a point where the amount of decks to learn and matchups to test is absurd and siding becomes too weak. Although even in a small format you will be forced to play with rogue from time to time so in a way its kind of unavoidable. On the other hand I think its likely the format will narrow when the rest of the fire support comes out so its only a matter of time. As a side note, I think that Konami is kind of hitting the wall in terms of game design that can shrink the format through power creep that players won't hate. Tear pushed milling as a mechanic to the limit and punished your opponent for looking at your boss monsters the wrong way and locals dried up. Kash was degenerate as hell nongame generator besides the mirror and people hated that too. Fire king is the latest in absurdly layered interaction that doesn't give a damn about board breakers and plays well through most handtraps with most hands, but it never stops your opponent from playing outright and the layers can be cleaved through - which rules by the way and seems to be the solution konami currently has to the problems with yugioh's game design - but it will struggle to invalidate decks to the extent that tear and kash did.

[@Entinu94]

Fire Kings only got support, not a full archetype. That archetype existed something like 10 years ago. It might be even further back. I say this because I remember dueling against my friends, some of whom ran Fire King, and laughing at them clearing my board and hitting for a lot of damage when I tried to get rid of their Garunix and Nephthys with effects instead of battle.

[@W_Sir_Morpheus]

Too long bud

[@b.b.927]

@@W_Sir_Morpheus tiktok fried your attention span too hard huh?

[@cbyt8759]

I agree on all of your points, but while diverse formats absolutely suck for highly competitive players, it feel’s amazing for casual and even semi-competitive players. I definitely think its easy to understand the argument against diverse formats though and not sure why people try to shame those players about it

[@lifedeather]

Yeah the majority of players aren’t these highly competitive players. It’s the more casual and fun loving players who want variance, anime themes, picking their favorite art or playstyle, diverse formats are amazing in that anything can do well and win instead of stuck to 2 things if you want to win.

[@Harmonic14]

​@@lifedeatherthat's what locals and regionals are for. When it happens at a YCS where player skill is tested, it's not exactly great

[@Entinu94]

@@Harmonic14 It takes more skill to face multiple different decks than just winning a mirror match because you sided in the counters to your own deck.

[@randomprotag9329]

@@Harmonic14 its the eternal game design flaw high power card games have they can't do lots of decks are viable and a skill testing format at the same time.

[@cruderschmidt]

Everyone has a favorite style of play that they want to do well with. Switching from deck-core to deck-core can be fun to learn new things, but refining a list and tailoring it to perform at its best is my favorite kind of yugioh.

[@christopheraponte306]

Damn straight

[@Maze86753]

How long should any deck be truly viable? I’m thinking about it and there are SO few decks with staying power. Usually takes some big wave of support after the fact

[@digitalmon]

I personally think that diverse formats test a different type of deck building skill. Where's in a narrow format you can achieve greater depth of knowledge, the wider format rewards decisions in deckbuilding that prioritizes flexibility. I think it demands better in the moment desionmaking and technical play as you are less likely to run into a situation that has come up in testing before. Diverse formats are where 60 card pile deck engine mashups do really well. I personally think that's beautiful. The players who win tournaments in diverse meta are just as skilled as the players who do well in narrow metas, but the key distinction is that the state of the meta rewards different styles of deckbuilding.

[@godmarkos]

For the players that are not the highest level players, which is the majority of players, a diverse format is much more enjoyable because of the variety players are allowed to enjoy and win with

[@lifedeather]

Yeah, majority of players want to play their favorite themes. Have fun with diverse decks and matchups, do anime duels and have fun with their friends. Not be stuck in 2 meta decks, everything else sucks format.

[@Harmonic14]

​@@lifedeatheranime duels are dumb and boring. 2 competitive decks being played well is much more interesting

[@aVo_001]

Competitive players have every right to criticize a format they struggle to navigate. That being said, a wide format is the selling point of YuGiOh. The more archetypes you can play the less an average player feels restricted. I remember HAT and DUEA formats and the diversity then. I wasn’t very good. But I played Baby Raccoons and Constellars anyway and even I was able to steal match wins against Geargias, Mermails, HAT and so on every once in a while. I knew my decks weren’t the best but I felt I could still play and put up a good fight. The moment the format shifts to only playing 1-3 three probably $500-$1000 decks I honestly am tempted to quit. The wideness of the format brought me back to the game last year. I hope it keeps going.

[@mattcaston9546]

Free games don't equate to skill either in a 3 deck format. It's cheese. I understand what you mean, but I just found it interesting to hear you make that argument is defense of the criticism that competitive players are being "lazy" in this format.

[@gabrielmorrisroe7814]

I have a buddy that I play video games with from time to time that used to play at an ultra competitive level and this is the same problem I run into with him. After awhile you lose all of the “fun” that goes into the game and the only way you can have fun is by always winning or ruining the other players experience. When he plays with me and my other friends who are at a much lower skill level, he doesn’t have a good time at all because he expects us to play at that level but he doesn’t realize that we have a ton of fun playing the way that we do… kinda sad

[@g_pribeiro]

From what I've understood is not something simple as diverse or tier 0 but being able to play a deck the person wants *at rogue level* cuz (almost)no one didnt like tear because it was skill expressive but because the tier 0 creates a scenario where ur either "forced" to play the deck or a counter made with that 1 deck in mind where in a diverse format the player doesnt feel chained and can play a deck that better suits their playstyle even knowing they wont perform as well as a tier 1 deck, TOSS format still had dlink, guru, altergeist, crusadia, etc so i think that if a format has clear meta decks but theyre not so strong that they gatekeep rogue decks from performing we have a format that allows players to prepare for thw meta decks and have space for rogue players and i think the next format is going into that direction

[@michaelmirza1933]

I think this take is incredibly entitled. Since when was competition supposed to be easy? YCS’s aren’t there to be a breeze. Evaluate the format and make your decisions based on the format. Non diverse formats literally kill the game. The game becomes boring, you see the same interactions, and you funnel 100% of your brain power to “being prepared” when really it’s just less work than preparing for a deeper format.

[@ethanfoxall3804]

I think you would get your point across better if you stopped bringing up tear, man. That deck dropped local attendance up to 60% in some cases, and if you weren’t on tear, you were losing to it. OR you had all anti tear cards and lost to anything else. Where your point is stronger is narrow formats. 3-5 tier 1 decks and everything else. Gives some variety and consistency in siding but some room for rouge to have some chance. Anything more narrow gets stale and boring for the majority of players

[@ChazBlanks]

I'm on the opposite side of the discussion. I rather have twenty plus decks and play cards that cover a range of decks. In wide open formats is when i like to play decks like Marincess, Floowandereeze and Scareclaw because you can play non engine plus playing at locals is great for understanding matchups. Now a days i would probably be playing either Labrynth or Fire Kings because of the amounr of non engine i can fit as well as tech cards plus blow out cards that have a big cover spread. Honestly it takes more skill to understand matchups, knowing how to side and sticking with one deck that has 50/50 matchups and honestly comes down to your opening hand.

[@McKayCameron]

I really hate the argument that players cant prepare for every deck in the format. Thats true for a casual player but if youre a pro player, theres no reason you shouldnt know how to counter 20-25 decks. You might not have the silver bullet for all of them but the litny generic handtraps are definitely strong enough to account for this. Theres numerous other games out there where you have to know way more about opponents strategies than yugioh yet yugioh is the only game ive played where the pro players have this opinion, its v bizarre

[@lifedeather]

Exactly. If you are a “pro” or competitive player, you should be prepared for every deck in the game not just being like “I know how to beat the other top two meta decks, I’m so good at this game”. Are you really a good player if you suddenly falter to anything besides the top 2 meta decks in the game? That’s like a person saying they are good at math, they can solve any additional subtraction and multiplication problem but give them one division problem and they falter…

[@metalmariomega]

There's always trends when it comes to things like engines and staples. The problem with this game's competitive scene is that WAY too many players like to focus on just the deck cores, when an actual deck's play style can vary widely depending on the supplemental engines used and the methods employed to ensure they can fit certain staples whether they be extra deck monsters or hand traps. We need better coverage of the generic options used besides just tier lists, there's exactly ONE channel I see covering the rate% of staples, and only recently have they occasionally added coverage of common extra deck monsters used as extenders or end pieces. And there's still almost no data on commonly used engines, or the best ways to play/disrupt them, instead we just get a bunch of deck profiles using similar pieces and focusing on describing their strengths, with little emphasis on their weaknesses and workarounds to those things.

[@Harmonic14]

​@@lifedeatherthat's the dumbest analogy I've ever heard... it's not remotely close to relevant lmao

[@randomprotag9329]

do you have examples of the decks you think it can actually counter 20-25 decks and the power level of the format those decks are in or you a casual who has no idea about competive yugioh.

[@McKayCameron]

@randomprotag9329 it's not about decks countering decks, it's about handtraps and board breakers being so generically strong that the only way you could be underprepared for a deck is of you didn't know what it does which is a player issue not a game issue

[@WarriorUnknown]

I think a wider format is fine. We've been having an increase of players in locals and bigger events because of it!

[@AbstractTheArtist]

Diverse formats lead to ingenuity and progression, people who understand the game in full and have mastered their ability to navigate it are rewarded, it is superior.

[@chrisneftic]

💯% better format wide formats are enjoyable!

[@rayd6400]

I like a wide format. More surprises, just like life.

[@TheWitchBoi]

I disagree with this. I would say its an actual skill issue. You will always see some of your best players in your local area at the top tables at regionals regardless of the format. Tier 0 formarts does not make you a good yugioh player, it makes you a good tearlament player, or a good gouki player.

[@Harmonic14]

Yikes this is a bad take lol

[@TheWitchBoi]

@@Harmonic14Ooops dont care lol

[@MaxxCTCG]

I think the reason we are in these diverse formats is due to power creep. I think the difference is that in past formats there was more of a gap between power levels and that isn't really the case anymore. But the other 1.5 and tier 2 decks are a lot closer in power level and since a lot of tier 1.5 and tier 2 decks are still decent and can do well you just keep adding to the pull of solid decks. Unless they release a new set like power of the elements that declass those decks then I think we will have this issue on and off for a while. But then when they weaken those decks then the go to the pool of solid decks again. I think it is just an issue of current power creep

[@Ace2066]

Bad take

[@DonMarzzoni]

Extremely bad

[@NutLump]

Youre talking about what we didn't have in wide metas and not looking at what we have now. We have a lot and there needs to be a "culling". This is huge because it happened when •Banishing became important •Graveyards became a 2nd hand •New summoning mechanics happened •Banishing FACE DOWN became a thing. With stun decks being so important or prevalent, something had to happen and wide formats/metas are crucial to take a fresh look at the game and figure out whats next. A lot of people who dont like the "surprise" random loss to something weird like "Oops i somehow made a Ojama Kashtira deck", is annoying but something has to give when cards are becoming so expensive and strategies require SO much prior knowledge that it kills off new potential players.

[@pointymason]

A wide format is fine provided there's enough time to solve it. The issue Yu-Gi-Oh has is that the product releases are so frequent that the format changes well before people can solve it, so wide formats always turn into a crap shoot.

[@DG_Raizen]

Regardless of anyone's opinion, Konami is going to go the most profitable route. In this case, a diverse format means they can sell more product. Keep in mind that Konami doesn't make money off of singles, so it makes business sense to keep the format diverse as it makes more of the set viable, and thus sellable. High end players who prefer tall formats would either have to demonstrate an ability to impact the bottom line or simply wait until Konami inevitably creates the next busted archetype.

[@lifedeather]

Yeah otherwise what’s the point of making support for all other archetypes if only 2 decks matter…

[@Maze86753]

I don’t even think this is true for Konami profit incentives. They would prefer the decks that print support in the latest set be THE best by a wide margin since people want to buy the newest product. Idk man

[@T.D.B-TheDeckBuilder]

The Argument about You cant prepare for everything imo is not fully true anyway. Ive been to YCS Events in Tier 0 Spyral format and ive still played like 6 or 7 different decks in swiss. I dont think the argument of not preparing for things just doesnt correlate. There is always times that you dont have an answer and you lose. Thats the nature of side decking and card games in general. There is inherently randomness down to your opponent, and you kind of just have to move on and deal with it

[@callmekermy9946]

Gg pleased with snake eyes being close to a tier 0 engine, sucks we're going from an extremely diverse format to one that's mainly compromised of the same (or at least very similar) combos and end board every game.

[@darethepolarbear5647]

I think that the “preparing your talking about” is siding in crazy blowout cards against the matchup, which I don’t think is perfect either. The preparation in these wide formats is playing optimally in the game and not before the game in the side I believe, and me personally I find it very interesting (although hard to side for haha)

[@Giru]

The issue is largely what side decking has become, which no longer cares about covering your decks weaknesses or transforming it's strategy and instead opts for silver bullets against popular meta decks. Playing a wide variety format is its own skillet, but by no means is it bad for the game.

[@plantseason290]

Traditional deckbuilding is becoming a lost art now that people expect their archtypes to do all the work for them.

[@Harmonic14]

​@@plantseason290traditional deck building? You mean cramming the shiniest cards in your collection in your deck to bring to the playground? You do realize that old Yugioh was so narrow in deck building that meta decks often played 20+ of the same staple cards and just had slightly different engines with them, right...?

[@ducky36F]

People keep wondering “what will be the next Edison?” You know what made both Edison and Goat popular? And ultimately why goat started to decline and people looked for another format? They were wide and unsolved formats where you could build and discover new things. Formats like tear (and I get you liked it and that’s cool) were solved on release. 3 of every tear, 3 of every Ishizu and as many bystials as you can fit and that is your deck and if you don’t want to play tear you are playing shifter deck and prey or three of every bystial and pray. It gets stale much, much faster. Put it simply formats like this one are the ones that will be looked at in 10 years (if the game moves on and this gameplay becomes nostalgic to people) due to being wide and unsolved, people will make jokes about “face me in tear mirror to prove your better” the same way they do about dragon ruler but no one will actually play it.

[@semicedevine6918]

One solution is to increase the amount of games that each player has to win per round against unique players in order to move up in an event. By increasing # matchups won (picture 1 player having to play 3 other players in order to move up in a round of 64), skilled players will still be winning after a certain number of games because they have consistent game plans in spite of what may have been initial unlucky loses, whereas unskilled players that could have gotten very good matchups against a small number of decks would be forced out of the tourney because winning once is not the same as winning ten times.

[@plantseason290]

I just dont believe that a format narrowed down to 3 decks that are nearly guaranteed to win against all other decks is exactly skill expression. Most of the time its just new meta decks doing the work for the player.

[@Harmonic14]

You have 0 clue how competitive play works then. If you played a meta deck, you'd get absolutely folded by someone who actually spent enough time with it to build a strong deck and navigate niche interactions

[@plantseason290]

You have absolutely zero clue what the word "generalization" means. Of course at top level play you have to understand many smaller interactions. By picking a meta deck, you will usually bypass a lot of those like handtraps, boardbreakers, etc.

[@plantseason290]

​@Harmonic14 go ahead and make your opinions on someone you don't even know. It doesn't take a genius to know that someone who knows more about the game is gonna win more often. But some decks only take you so far.

[@Xx3SPAZxX]

Yeah I'm gunna echo all the other commenters saying wide formats are better than narrow formats. Shows the game is healthy and it makes players build toward the strengths and weaknesses of their own deck instead of just mailing or siding a game ending card against the best deck. You're coping thinking silver bullets don't end games or decide games just by themselves. Also diverse formats are better for new players because they can play a deck that fits their style or personality instead of being forced into 1 deck they might not even enjoy playing or maybe the deck isn't beginner friendly. I think most of your points are coming from a tournament brain and you're not taking into account the feelings of casual players that actually affect the health of the game more

[@Xx3SPAZxX]

@@whales312 Not true at all. Casual players usually have a favorite deck

[@Xx3SPAZxX]

@@whales312 Do you have proof of this? cause in my experience when a casual players deck is not good enough to even sniff a win they just quit or go to a different format... which btw is not what konami wants

[@Xx3SPAZxX]

@@whales312 and who are you to decide that?

[@Xx3SPAZxX]

@whales312 nobody's butt hurt ur just making statements of fact that I don't agree with so I'm asking for proof. Nobody asked you for your opinion so if you give it don't be surprised if you're critiqued

[@Xx3SPAZxX]

@whales312 because winning is fun dummy. Nobody likes losing unless your a loser. Look up the definition of casual

[@falcowolf27]

Yugioh it's almost a pay to win game. Let's accept that. Diverse formats help in this because they make the game more balanced, giving other decks the opportunity to compete.

[@sanketower]

Oh boy, you are gonna regret this once we get Tier 0.5 Fire King / Snake-Eye format...

[@jorgelgarcia6619]

Don't worry brother everything will change when the fire nation attack. Fire kings are full power should reduce the thickness of the format

[@kartenspieler0863]

I think in this format I am at least able to cover 95% of the meta. At the moment I am missing cards to counter Centur-Ion. Everything else should be covered with my side.

[@turtle-bot3049]

If you have cosmic cyclone in the side already (for lab/R-ace) then you're covered for most of centurion already. Hit the field spell with it when they go to quick synch on your turn and that cuts off their plays. Chaining imperm to crimson dragons effect is also strong (or forcing its effect out as well since calamities misses timing).

[@kartenspieler0863]

@@turtle-bot3049 The problem is that Cosmic Cyclone is not worth it against Rescue Ace and it’s only mediocre against Labrynth. So I don’t see the reason to play it.

[@stuckmeister7750]

​@turtle-bot3049 cosmic is not nearly impactful enough against race/lab, and you'll never resolve imperm on crimson dragon, because you'll have to play a card in MP before they ever start summoning dudes from S/T zone

[@PalkiaDialgaGiratina]

After reading a lot of the comments, I can see both sides. Yes, variance and being less able to prepare for, let's say, predictable matchups is frustrating from a competitive standpoint. But the thing is, don't we as an audience almost always get excited when we see a rogue deck go past top 64 in a meta that is solved? I remember watching the Hero vs Runick Fure Hire feature match for NAWCQ, and the cheers were resounding, with some of that being just love for an anime deck. But the point sits, we always sit up in our seats when we see rogue vs. meta, hoping maybe inside that the rogue deck pulls off a win. It makes people feel positive and get excited for the game. Also, I have to agree with commenters that wide formats do allow for different expressions of skill. The game was never designed such that you could win all the time. The point is to make you think and play better, and that typically comes down to mastery of the basics and fundamentals. If you can't counter every matchup, you can focus on your deck's strengths, what will get you to your wincon faster? What will you do against control, or aggro, or combo? It's not necessary to pit wide vs. narrow, they just allow the game to be played differently. I wish we could see some numbers for attendance at events during the wide format, or maybe even sales data, which is a decent indicator of seeing if the game is growing.

[@brave1_007]

5:10 I disagree, I think telling a new player that is joining the game when the meta is diverse "Pick up any deck that you like, and if you'll do well with it" has a lot of appeal. 7:30 I disagree here in thinking "Variance =/= Skill". It's not the same skill as practicing/preparing for the top decks, but it's still a skill. That skill being "How good am I at adapting/playing against a deck I've never/barely played against" 8:55 "You cant simply prepare for everything" Yeah thats kinda the point. IMO you should add more cards to your side deck that deal with a wider variety of decks, and not just the best ones. (For example: I always like having at least 3 backrow removal cards in my Side deck no matter the format, just in case I go up against a backrow deck thats good or bad) 9:23 I fell like this depends on what type of player your are. If you're a casual player that just goes to locals/big events to have fun, playing against a lot of different decks can be fun. I understand the appeal to focusing on only a handful of decks (or even just 1 in a tier 0 format), because you want as much control in your tournament experience as possible. BUT you have to understand, for a lot of people, (especially casuals) part of the appeal of the game is that so many different things can happen. Variety is the spice of life. 9:39 I'm the opposite. Especially in like Tear format, were it felt like everyone was playing almost the exact same card list. The game basically felt like chess. Feel free to disagree with any of my points. For context: I don't go to locals/events and only really play online via EDOpro or Dueling Book casually. I like keeping up with all the new products/cards being released and trying out new decks. I've been playing this game for like 6+ years. I mostly play rogue decks, but tryout and play meta decks If I really like them. Im in the grey area between causal and competitive.

[@Harmonic14]

"I don't go to locals for events" That's all you needed to say

[@ViserionGames]

I'd much rather play against 9 different decks in the day than see the same 3. It's just way more interesting to play against for me.

[@Harmonic14]

Then you're not a competitive player. That's fine, but it makes competitive play extremely annoying

[@mimik2098]

​@@Harmonic14 not my fault you're a one trick pony

[@jboyzboas]

I think wider formats are because more people are able to play the decks they want. Instead of being “forced” to play 1 of 3 decks or a specific deck in a tier zero format. No format is forever, it’s constantly changing, so I suggest playing it to the best of your ability and then doing the same in the next type of format.

[@alexanderbatterbee8369]

i think the healthiest formats are the ones with up to 5 really good decks with a few anti meta rogue options floating around. that atleast has been my experiemce

[@jing4122]

I understand where the crux of the argument comes from, however i find that wide formats allow for more players to join in as they can afford to jump into the game with options without having to drop so much money on a top top deck

[@lifedeather]

Yeah they can pick their favorite theme and deck to play without worrying about only picking from 3 options. Anything can do well!

[@nicolasguzman6743]

Yeah tearlament tier 0 format was great, you could go 2nd and they would winda lock you on your turn 1. Super fair, balanced and not toxic at all. LMAO this guy is just spitting BS. Wide formats are better 100% because diff people get to play their decks, not just the top player who always want to play the most meta relevant decks (which is stale and boring).

[@nicolasguzman6743]

or if you went 1st they could still winda lock you with the handtrap lmao

[@Kev0718]

While I tend to like diverse formats the downside is that strategies or decks evolve within formats. In a diverse format that is a lot of decks to constantly have to pay attention to and keep up with their new techs or playing style. That is not necessarily a bad thing it’s just a big time commitment that some people can’t do because of other things going on in their life.

[@alexanderpondarius8586]

Some people dont like to play what everyone else is playing. I agree that maybe we have too diverse of a format to where you cant account (in side) for the amount play styles in the format. So yeah i think Konami could whittle down the amount of deck viable but tier 0 formats just dont suit the majority of the playerbase

[@lifedeather]

Thank you, the majority of player base aren’t these top 1% go to every tournament hyper competitive toxic meta only care about winning players. Most players want to have fun, play different and fun archetypes and theme, have anime duels and more. There’s more to this game or any game than the competitive scene. The majority of players prefer variance and having fun over 2 meta decks to win with.

[@Harmonic14]

​​@@lifedeatherI don't get why you think playing to win is toxic or unfun... That's the attitude that gives casual players a bad name

[@KFC-Warrior]

My issue more specifically is a wide format where all the decks do something toxic. Branded is a perfect example, several decks better than it, despite it having the puppet lock. If we had a wide format where every deck doesn't do anything seemingly "unfair" it'd be a lot better. Maybe the format wouldn't be so wide to begin with if that was the case though, one can argue. The latest banlist gives me confidence we are heading in the right direction though. I think you've misplayed slightly by mentioning that tear 0 was a good format. People are gonna pick on that point specifically and (unfairly) discredit the actual premise of the video based on that.

[@STEPHxCA]

Well this is just one of those formats where you gotta take the good with the bad my guy

[@prairietan]

Wide format it best format.

[@firespawnie537]

The format is wide and there are pros and cons. The pros are mostly that you can play whatever you want and make it viable. The cons are that most power cards are generic and too expensive(S:P looking at you) or hard to find and they make all the difference regardless of what you are playing and if a new deck with very strong core comes , then combined with the broken generic cards it becomes tier 0. Me and my friends play our own banlist and we have forbidden power cards like S:P,dimensional barrier,dimensional shifter etc...

[@UTgohan]

Your right you can’t prepare for 30 decks but neither can your opponent, everyone is on an even playing field then, just side the cards that you think works best for your “worse” matchups, that’s the problem with modern yugioh players if they can’t side for everything then the game is not fun, I rather have a diverse format then seeing the same 2-3 decks

[@Harmonic14]

It's not just a matter of siding... It's the fact that you can lose at the highest level of competitive play because of variance when skill should be the primary factor in success

[@UTgohan]

Anyone can lose to anyone

[@mimik2098]

​@@Harmonic14then why are top players topping YCS's consistent when according to you the meta is so skilless, maybe idk things like flexibility are a skill ?

[@SpainLord]

Diverse meta are the best because it lets more people pick their favorite deck or strat and still do well. Nobody feels forced to heavily invest in the top 3 strats because theres actually 8 or more viable ones. And i dont think they are any less skillful than smaller or tier 0 metas, they are just harder to play because you are required to have more knowledge, be more prepared. And frankly blaming loses on variance is such a bad excuse, you can play during tier 0 format and still face rock stun and deck out strategies at any round of the tourney, even if its unlikely. Regardless of the format, you can still lose to ftks or bad luck because you drew the one unplayable hand your carefully deckbuilt deck has. You know what having a bad tourney experience is? Entering a tourney you know you have no chance at because its tier 0 format and no matter what you do, you have 0 chance to even have fun because the power level is so different between your tier 2 or rogue deck and the deck that plays during both turns. What could you have done different? Play a better deck is the only answer,which deck couldve made a difference? one of these 2 or 3, hope you like them,too bad if you dont.

[@lifedeather]

Exactly, more decks, more variance, more fun. What’s the point in playing a game if you know there’s only going to ever be two types of enemies/decks. Having surprise and variance and seeing what other decks do makes the game what it is and fun. Otherwise you better delete all the archetypes in the game except the two strongest ones and leave it at that.

[@marquesligor]

I actually enjoy a format with more decks in it, it’s more fun to me, having that variety of matchups because it just forces you to have to think on the fly and I love that. Most of the time your deck only has like one or two decks/strategies that counter it, so you side for those and then just have fun with it. Yugioh is a very competitive game but at the end of the day it’s still a game and it’s meant to be played to have fun, that’s just my take on it though

[@stevencole162]

I feel like every format is pretty wide open after a new ban list - until players really start to narrow down what works best. But personally, I like seeing a wide variety of decks played, it reminds me on the anime.

[@Leavememalone]

As someone that’s coming back into the game and playing in my first open meta. It’s been quite challenging to get used to. I came back towards the end of arise heart oppression. And playing tear into that format was a nightmare. Last format was a bit better. But I did learn more about how to play with all of these decks running around. It’s true! Really, just do what you want lol. I’m now about to go to my first regional in years and it’s a bit nerve wracking because what do I prepare for. Fire king is in its prepubescent form and Mannadium has been up next for 5 formats (not down playing bc this deck has replaced sinfernoble), rescue got a slap on the wrist and lab went untouched. Kinda feels like purgatory in a sense.

[@rangeless]

I think it depends on the local scene but isn't it fun to play against a different deck every week

[@lifedeather]

Exactly, people fail to realize variance is what keeps the game fun and interesting/fresh. Otherwise make the game 2 decks only and erase all other archetypes.

[@Harmonic14]

​@@lifedeathersome people prefer skillful games over playing random decks

[@iSniffSharpie]

I think the meta at this time is just unsolved. Going into PHNI, I think it’s obvious that the decks to beat are going to be Snake-Eye Fire King and Labrynth. Although I feel like this is an unsolved format, I really like the fact that any number of decks can top. It makes it more exciting to see what players are cooking up at the rogue level and bringing in to tournaments. I love the fact that we had Abyss Actor and Plunder Parroll tops post AGOV. As a viewer and player, I really love the idea that anyone can bring any strategy and possibly end up with a top at a regional or YCS.

[@artemisfowl3998]

Its a matter of different preferences tbh. Some people like wide formats others don't. There's nothing inherently wrong with a wide format. It certainly takes a different skill than what yugioh players are used to, but it is a skill nonetheless. For example, wide formats reward decks which have strong core engines that don't rely on non-engine as much. If your core engine can't beat enough decks due to not having enough side deck slots to cover matchups, then you've just picked a weak deck for the format, no more no less. As long as the format is diverse with varying playstyles and doesn't contain intolerable floodgates (like scythe), I generally have no complaints. I don't care if "pro" players don't like the format, their opinions don't matter more than anyone else's.

[@randomprotag9329]

there is def stuff good and bad with a wide and narrow format. its a question of what is wanted which effects what matters and does not matter.casual formats lean towards the wider side as losing though luck becomes less important while competive formats favor narrower to keep the format more of an test of skill.

[@INib_]

I hope konami makes more runick type archtypes that will have engine out to everything but if you don't need those specific cards they can still be useful. Best example of this is runick destruction a card that has in engine utility against backrow decks mostly or some field spell and continues spell heavy combo decks that might not be good into every match up but into match ups where it's bad you can still use it to summon the new level 9 fusion or just as instant fusion meaning you won't get best value but still get it to some extent.

[@aarondelgado6569]

I think we are moving into a triangle format with these next to sets where the big three are gonna be fire king, race and lab

[@gugandalf]

Nice video! I don't necessarily agree because I believe the "concession" about the side deck of different matchups is a very good element of the game, showing skill instead of playing a blowout specific card you have generic staples which provides interaction. The argument of "siding" for "siding" is kinda like "draw the out for the out" which is more random than the choices of deck

[@siftheadsdude]

Tbh I feel a lot of people kinda missed the point(s) of the video. I get a more diverse format can be enjoyable because you have a variety of matchups, which in turn makes the game more interesting for a lot of people, myself included. But on the flip side, when it comes to technical play (especially mirror matches), side decking, and getting into the game/depth of it, he makes some good talking points about a smaller scale format. A lot of these comments seem like they’re responding to the title, not the video itself

[@KeitrenGraves]

I personally prefer when formats are more diverse because as a watcher and player, I don't like seeing the same 2 decks every single time.

[@DG_Raizen]

The only way to limit the format is to hit the generic engines, board breakers, and other powerful cards hard. Basically, anything that can make a deck run at a high level without being in archetype, or an archetype engine (Runick for example) that can be splashed into other decks would have to be limited or banned.

[@brolteon2740]

I dont agree with the narrow formats make it easier to join the game because most people that are trying to join the game arent immediately trying to top events, theyre probably just trying to resonate with a playstyle they can wrap their head around whether its tier 0 or tier 8. i got into modern yugioh post covid bc i thought super quants were cool and yeah I got my ass beat a lot but the fun I had mostly came from the learning and other people showing me how their favorite deck works from tri-brigade to reptilliane. it was so fun and to me, thats what made joining the game so worthwhile, the sheer abundance of playstyles. Looking at everything from a meta stand point where “its either topping a regional or its unplayable therefore we only need to care about 4-5 of the top decks” is whats ruining the perception of the game and making it harder to join.

[@MissingNo_]

Teaching a new player meta deck play lines is just having the memorize responses. What happens when that new player goes against an opponent who misplays and because the new player hasn't memorized that step they still lose because they don't know how to actually play the game. Id like to point out 2016 Pokémon worlds where the winner was a Japanese player who came up with a decklist no one considered that beat all of the meta decks. 3 main strategies ruled that meta. Thats a lot more skill of figuring out a deck thats viable rather than being forced into playing what's meta in a narrow format. Wider format you get to play what you like and be competitive rather than being for to choose one or the other.

[@sirernest546]

2:10 i remember running a ton of anti-tear cards ( bystials, ultimate slayer) and just bricking against floo. My locals was miserable at that time.

[@duyknguyen]

Diversed Meta is okay.. But we actually need a Format where it's ACTUALLY diversed from the current "Negates centric" playstyle of even 16 tournament archetypes still "feel" like the same "Baronne+SP decks" in different flavors 😂 Something like "A Format for DM dedicated era" alone since their archetypes' Power Level are actually pretty balanced and most importantly.. "FUN" 🎉- latest coming Flame Swordsman, Gate Guardian, DM, Blue/Red-eyes, Toon, Gaia and even Chimera Beast and the Upcoming Yugi Slient-Gandora!! and Yes, I do sound like a Yugi-boomer that truly love the game..

[@INib_]

3:49 garura was 40€ and spright elf was 30+ sprind was like 15 rulakllos and kaleido were all some money, bystials were also a lot of money

[@Cardlimits]

while I'm glad you can find joy in facing the same 3 or less things on a loop in an event, that isn't really enjoyable to almost the whole rest of the community of card games

[@shootinggod1694]

I find it crazy ppl complain when ppl be having 10 min turns to set up things where u can’t even play but then complain about the bullet from stopping you from playing the game or limit all the negates that get set up for you even playing the game a card for everything getting negated

[@Harmonic14]

This has nothing to do with the topic, and big negate boards haven't been relevant for a while lol

[@mikey10126]

I personally like a wide format but can understand the argument for why it's frustrating. I will say tho even in a wide format there's still 2-3 decks that people think are the best choices, which makes other decks come out of the woodwork that are counters to it that see play just because they beat that deck.

[@AzzaUk]

Surly just make your side to what you are weak to. I think it's more fun

[@Harmonic14]

You're not competing at a high level if that's your take lol

[@gurilla889]

I agree I went to Oaklahoma with Marincess over the weekend ready to cook fire king and saw a different deck each table and it didn't end well. That being said I prefer a meta were anything is viable as it's just more fun

[@MDagonic]

One thing about the Tear format and it's price tag. On one hand I will say, that the deck was somewhat "expensive" (not as much as some engine rn - but that's another topic) BUT I think Tear was one of the cheapest Tier 0 Format Deck. But for the real topic: I think it is extremely hard to have here the one perfect solution. This whole discussion of "is a wide format good, or is a narrow format more skillful" boils down to one question: what does person x wants from the game. I can absolutly understand, that it's much better for high competitive players if the format is as narrow as possible (eg Tear Format) But from a more casual and familiar local view wide formats are fun, because you can play what you believe is fun and have a good time. For you as a competitor narrow is better and I believe you are one of the few content creator, who brings his arguments in a reasonable to the public. But even than - maybe such wider formats could be good even for competitors because it allows more experimentation, which could lead to a more narrow format again. Overall I love your short essay-esqe videos. keep them going.

[@GG_YGO]

It's wild the amount of hate I'm getting but 🤷‍♂️

[@mimik2098]

​​​​​​@@GG_YGO It's completely justified bro, it's a shit take and your points are really bad too, narrow decks easier to get into ? Really bro ? If anything it's the opposite because wider decks means more cheaper decks can compete too not locking out people trying to get into the game that can't spend 1k on cardboard, wider formats are formats where people are not as priced out as they usually are Also wide formats unskilled ? Bs that's your skill issue, wide formats value things like flexibility and being able to adapt on the fly in your plays which are litteraly a form of skill expression according to litteraly everyone but you and punishes one trick ponies, there's a reason why the top players are consistent and you don't see 5 year olds winning YCS's

[@randomprotag9329]

other games get closer to that 1 perfect solution by lowering the power level so that unexpected is more doable against unprepared. yugioh has not done this so extra diversity comes with the more of an trade off.

[@Malister23]

I agree that the format is too wide which sucks cause you cant prepare for everything and decks have rough matchups were you basically have to accept that you cant win at all I also dont think that skill matters at all in a diverse format, sure knowing the basics is great but you cant say "oh they won the tournament while playing against 12+ different decks, they are definitely a skilled player", cause sometimes its your day and sometimes it isnt On the topic of siding I dont remember a format where " Silver bullets" Really did a whole lot of work, if that was the case then the meta wouldn't really exist because of the "silver bullets".Sure they can win games but not every single time they resolve. The only thing thats good in a wide format is creative deck building but this is starting to disappear cause we are heading into a fire format so we have the answers on what cards we should play

[@eddiegomez2200]

Just had a few points of contention. First is when you talk about how variance doesn’t equal skill. I actually agree but Tearformat was a tearzero format with arguably the highest variance because of mills. Second you talk about not siding backrow removal because the format is too wide to know. It thought it was generally known that in a wider formats you play more general cards to help in the side, as the format condenses you start to see more match up specific cards in the main/side, this is a normal trend. Finally silver bullets in my opinion take away a lot of skill expression and are way more prevalent in smaller formats. I’m not saying wider is better but I think it’s not so black and white. I actually think our format right now is one of the healthiest ever. It definitely is hard for new players to jump into competitive right now though with 15+ strats.

[@Rxslc]

Lmao i literally tested vs fire king lab and rescue ace so much for our regionals and played 0 of them. My side deck was useless