What is the most annoying yugioh card you had seen(if you duel)

ΛΔ wrote:

But despite that, I'm still gonna say they won't be banned, because tins. Super Rejuvenation totally is though.

I hope that stupid seven star sword thing is too lol!

ΛΔ wrote:

That being said however, my biggest gripe personally is just in terms of cards which the cost plainly doesn't allow for any real downside. Along with the amount of abusable +1 currently in the game.

Like the reason why Pot of Greed is banned is because it allows for a guaranteed +1. So why Konami is now making cards which do this in spades is beyond me

Agreed. So agreed.

ΛΔ wrote:

and almost makes me want to see CED - Envoy unbanned. Just to have a way to punish this sort of playstyle.

Some people have been talking about it... I wouldn't even be surprised to see Raigeki come back at this point.

Wynn wrote:

lol, How do you know why there make strong cards? And why do they? lol

Honestly?
It's because of money. I know this may get completely off-topic, but Konami is making all the cards in each booster pack stronger than the previous one because they want people to buy the new cards. And the banlist is purposefully supporting this. Last year, people thought they would hit either Inzektor Dragonfly or Hornet, but not both. But Konami did hit both. People would've still played Inzektors, but Konami had stopped selling ORCS by that point and wanted to sell the newer packs, so they killed the deck. It's also why, instead of limiting Tour Guide, they just banned Sangan. Tour Guide is still over $15, but Sangan isn't worth anything. You may not believe me, but it's true. Konami is a company, and making money is their incentive. It's as I mentioned earlier, play with the new cards or flat-out lose.

Wynn wrote:

How do you know zenmaighty was made with the intent of the hunter loop? This is the loop your refering to right? Isn't it possible it was an accident that was corrected. lol

Yes it is. And it's too much of a coincidence. Zenmaighty, Hunter, and Rat were all released in the same booster (ORCS), and I'd hope that they playtest their cards before releasing them. And if you're still not convinced, read this, written by a Konami executive:
http://www.konami.com/yugioh/articles/?p=3644#more-3644

Seven Star Sword being banned would be purely retarded, so I'm gonna say no to that.

The thing with Rejuvenation is it allows Dragon Ruler decks to play out their whole hand, only to gain it all back with no downside. Not to mention the fact that Rejuvination's effect stacks, and if you draw into another with it you can activate that new one then due to it being a quick-play.

Hippocampus wrote:

ΛΔ wrote:

But despite that, I'm still gonna say they won't be banned, because tins. Super Rejuvenation totally is though.

I hope that stupid seven star sword thing is too lol!

ΛΔ wrote:

That being said however, my biggest gripe personally is just in terms of cards which the cost plainly doesn't allow for any real downside. Along with the amount of abusable +1 currently in the game.

Like the reason why Pot of Greed is banned is because it allows for a guaranteed +1. So why Konami is now making cards which do this in spades is beyond me

Agreed. So agreed.

ΛΔ wrote:

and almost makes me want to see CED - Envoy unbanned. Just to have a way to punish this sort of playstyle.

Some people have been talking about it... I wouldn't even be surprised to see Raigeki come back at this point.

Wynn wrote:

lol, How do you know why there make strong cards? And why do they? lol

Honestly?
It's because of money. I know this may get completely off-topic, but Konami is making all the cards in each booster pack stronger than the previous one because they want people to buy the new cards. And the banlist is purposefully supporting this. Last year, people thought they would hit either Inzektor Dragonfly or Hornet, but not both. But Konami did hit both. People would've still played Inzektors, but Konami had stopped selling ORCS by that point and wanted to sell the newer packs, so they killed the deck. It's also why, instead of limiting Tour Guide, they just banned Sangan. Tour Guide is still over $15, but Sangan isn't worth anything. You may not believe me, but it's true. Konami is a company, and making money is their incentive. It's as I mentioned earlier, play with the new cards or flat-out lose.

Wynn wrote:

How do you know zenmaighty was made with the intent of the hunter loop? This is the loop your refering to right? Isn't it possible it was an accident that was corrected. lol

Yes it is. And it's too much of a coincidence. Zenmaighty, Hunter, and Rat were all released in the same booster (ORCS), and I'd hope that they playtest their cards before releasing them. And if you're still not convinced, read this, written by a Konami executive:
http://www.konami.com/yugioh/articles/?p=3644#more-3644

Ok, maybe wind up loop wasn't a mistake lol.
But saying they want money isn't realy suprising, they are a business. The thing is, going for a good game and making profit doesn't suddenly mean thy have poor ethics lol. A power scale isn't bad for a game it keeps players interested. I mean the fact the game not only is still going but seems to be getting stronger, what is wrong with that? lol. I mean you still see to like the game, or you seem like that inbetween complaints lol.

ΛΔ wrote:

Seven Star Sword being banned would be purely retarded, so I'm gonna say no to that.

The thing with Rejuvenation is it allows Dragon Ruler decks to play out their whole hand, only to gain it all back with no downside. Not to mention the fact that Rejuvination's effect stacks, and if you draw into another with it you can activate that new one then due to it being a quick-play.

Haha, yeah I wouldn't mind Super Rejuv being banned. I used to have a Dragon Exodia deck back in 2011, and I dismantled it because it was so boring for both me and my opponent, so I know very well how that card works. That's another very good example of a card made a long time ago and years later becoming a problem in the meta due to its bad card design.

Wynn wrote:

Ok, maybe wind up loop wasn't a mistake lol.
But saying they want money isn't realy suprising, they are a business. The thing is, going for a good game and making profit doesn't suddenly mean thy have poor ethics lol. A power scale isn't bad for a game it keeps players interested. I mean the fact the game not only is still going but seems to be getting stronger, what is wrong with that? lol. I mean you still see to like the game, or you seem like that inbetween complaints lol.

Haha it's probably the latter. I really do enjoy playing Yu-Gi-Oh (and because of that I would never switch over to Magic like some of my friends have done), but there are just some things I don't like about the game, one of which is the skyrocketing power creep. I don't mind if the power level rises a little at a time; like you said there's nothing wrong with the game still going strong all these years. But it's been rising exponentially as of late, and this is why some decks that were viable even a couple of years ago aren't even worth touching today.

So I guess the real problem is that I just don't like the meta because it's too narrow, and I wish the game was more balanced all around. But if people play the same deck forever and don't update their decks, then they won't buy new cards, and Konami would go out of business. So it's a vicious cycle lol.

Hippocampus wrote:

ΛΔ wrote:

Seven Star Sword being banned would be purely retarded, so I'm gonna say no to that.

The thing with Rejuvenation is it allows Dragon Ruler decks to play out their whole hand, only to gain it all back with no downside. Not to mention the fact that Rejuvination's effect stacks, and if you draw into another with it you can activate that new one then due to it being a quick-play.

Haha, yeah I wouldn't mind Super Rejuv being banned. I used to have a Dragon Exodia deck back in 2011, and I dismantled it because it was so boring for both me and my opponent, so I know very well how that card works. That's another very good example of a card made a long time ago and years later becoming a problem in the meta due to its bad card design.

Wynn wrote:

Ok, maybe wind up loop wasn't a mistake lol.
But saying they want money isn't realy suprising, they are a business. The thing is, going for a good game and making profit doesn't suddenly mean thy have poor ethics lol. A power scale isn't bad for a game it keeps players interested. I mean the fact the game not only is still going but seems to be getting stronger, what is wrong with that? lol. I mean you still see to like the game, or you seem like that inbetween complaints lol.

Haha it's probably the latter. I really do enjoy playing Yu-Gi-Oh (and because of that I would never switch over to Magic like some of my friends have done), but there are just some things I don't like about the game, one of which is the skyrocketing power creep. I don't mind if the power level rises a little at a time; like you said there's nothing wrong with the game still going strong all these years. But it's been rising exponentially as of late, and this is why some decks that were viable even a couple of years ago aren't even worth touching today.

So I guess the real problem is that I just don't like the meta because it's too narrow, and I wish the game was more balanced all around. But if people play the same deck forever and don't update their decks, then they won't buy new cards, and Konami would go out of business. So it's a vicious cycle lol.

I know what you mean. Though I do have to beg to differ I think the current meta is pretty vast. I can think of 10 decks that can compete, even if only 5 you might consider truely being at the top. lol. Teledad was a time with a poor meta lol. Though it can stink to watch your fav deck go out of style lol. But isn't it soo much more rewarding to watch your poor outdated deck steal a win from a meta deck?

Wynn wrote:

I know what you mean. Though I do have to beg to differ I think the current meta is pretty vast. I can think of 10 decks that can compete, even if only 5 you might consider truely being at the top. lol. Teledad was a time with a poor meta lol. Though it can stink to watch your fav deck go out of style lol. But isn't it soo much more rewarding to watch your poor outdated deck steal a win from a meta deck?

It's so much more rewarding when a deck that has never even been in the meta and doesn't come from a prefabricated structure deck beats a meta deck, or even has a good ratio at all. Well I guess that's what flocks us to this forum, am I right?

Sometimes, though, I wouldn't mind going back to some earlier formats and playing with older decks like Teledad, Goat Control, Necrotempest, etc., or even all the way back to pre-IOC lol. Considering I didn't really know that much about the game when I first started, and I was absent from it from 2006-2010, I missed out on a good portion of Yu-Gi-Oh's history.

Hippocampus wrote:

Wynn wrote:

I know what you mean. Though I do have to beg to differ I think the current meta is pretty vast. I can think of 10 decks that can compete, even if only 5 you might consider truely being at the top. lol. Teledad was a time with a poor meta lol. Though it can stink to watch your fav deck go out of style lol. But isn't it soo much more rewarding to watch your poor outdated deck steal a win from a meta deck?

It's so much more rewarding when a deck that has never even been in the meta and doesn't come from a prefabricated structure deck beats a meta deck, or even has a good ratio at all. Well I guess that's what flocks us to this forum, am I right?

Sometimes, though, I wouldn't mind going back to some earlier formats and playing with older decks like Teledad, Goat Control, Necrotempest, etc., or even all the way back to pre-IOC lol. Considering I didn't really know that much about the game when I first started, and I was absent from it from 2006-2010, I missed out on a good portion of Yu-Gi-Oh's history.

Can't argue with any of that lol. It was good debating with ya I look forward to doing it again sometime.

Wynn wrote:

Can't argue with any of that lol. It was good debating with ya ;)I look forward to doing it again sometime.

And I'm glad you enjoyed it. You've also been very mature throughout all this and I appreciate that. But you know, what's a forum without discussion?

Gem-Knight Fusion has got to be the epitome of bad card design

Easily spammable and recyclable? check

Cost that isn't even a "cost" at all? check

Ridiculously hard to counter? check

Allows for and even encourages mindless monster spam? check


I've been doing some messing around with the archetype recently. Though these thoughts are from long before, and its actually been the biggest reason why I've pretty much avoided playing the deck for so long. Which hilariously, every problem here could've easily been avoided if the card said "You can only use 1 "Gem-Knight Fusion" effect per turn, and only once that turn." at the end of its card text.

Gem-Knights just need to become meta-tier already so this awful card can get banned.

ΛΔ wrote:

Gem-Knight Fusion has got to be the epitome of bad card design

Easily spammable and recyclable? check

Cost that isn't even a "cost" at all? check

Ridiculously hard to counter? check

Allows for and even encourages mindless monster spam? check


I've been doing some messing around with the archetype recently. Though these thoughts are from long before, and its actually been the biggest reason why I've pretty much avoided playing the deck for so long. Which hilariously, every problem here could've easily been avoided if the card said "You can only use 1 "Gem-Knight Fusion" effect per turn, and only once that turn." at the end of its card text.

Gem-Knights just need to become meta-tier already so this awful card can get banned.

The thing is, this card is too archetype specific. The summoned monsters are not even broken at all, and are easy to be countered (bottomless trap hole, compulsory, etc).


Asking for this card to get banned is ridiculous. This card sometimes can become a dead draw and bad top deck. Not to mention it would really injured Gem-Knight seriously, IMO they'll lose almost 50% of their power (I've tasted how they play without Gem-Knight Fusion. It's slow. Really). This card is the main summoner of the Gem-Knight fusion monsters, so I don't think it'll be banned anytime soon. Besides, Gem-Knight haven't topped any tourney so far, IIRC.

Constellar deck -_-*

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

The thing is, this card is too archetype specific.

The summon requirements are typically just a  small step under from the omni-HEROes so they aren't hard at all to pull off

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

The summoned monsters are not even broken at all

They certainly aren't, but they can be more than a problem if allowed to free-roam swarm.

I mean let's look here. We have


A fusion that can bounce the backrow with little to no effort

A fusion that prevents your opponent from responding to its attack

A fusion that can pop a faceup card (normally you'd be going for a monster for obvious reasons) for no cost

A fusion that can boost itself, again with little to no effort, that also has built-in pierce

A Flame Wingman lite fusion with a built-in Blade Armor Ninja effect


2 cards that can effortlessly deal with the opponent's field, 1 that has built-in protection, and 2 that can take out huge chunks of your opponent's LP. Again, these aren't broken on their own. But when allowed to swarm, I'd honestly say they become just barely under it. Which Gem-Knights can very easily and effortlessly do.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

and are easy to be countered (bottomless trap hole, compulsory, etc).

Too bad your opponent could just recycle the spell and try again, effortlessly wasting your counter. Which if they used Lazuli and/or Obsidian as a material then this is basically guaranteed to be a thing.

Not to mention the deck has PLENTY of ways to swarm out materials to use.

All this does is make it into a really unfun guessing game for when to activate your cards. Which yes, this can apply to any deck. But for one that can recycle its key card for what is basically no cost at all it just completely ruins the game.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Asking for this card to get banned is ridiculous. This card sometimes can become a dead draw and bad top deck.

So can lots of other badly designed cards. I fail to see your point.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Not to mention it would really injured Gem-Knight seriously, IMO they'll lose almost 50% of their power (I've tasted how they play without Gem-Knight Fusion. It's slow. Really).

So Konami needs to make them a new fusion spell that's still good for them, but also doesn't allow you to just be able to play with the mindset of "if my monsters gets removed I'll just immedietely summon another one."

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

This card is the main summoner of the Gem-Knight fusion monsters, so I don't think it'll be banned anytime soon. Besides, Gem-Knight haven't topped any tourney so far, IIRC.

Why I said they need to top one already.


As of now the card only really has 3 real counters I know of.

1. Non-Fusion Area
2. Macro Cosmos
3. Cursed Seal of the Forbidden Spell

First nobody will be running, or even siding. As aside from a small few decks (HEROes, Gem-Knights, GBeasts, etc) nobody runs fusions. And even for the decks that do run fusions they typically put in Xyz as well, possibly synchros too. So its a non-threat.

Second can't even be effectively run in a lot of decks. Also both this and the one above have the problem of needing to be face-up on the field. Which considering how much backrow removal is running rampant right now is certainly a problem and makes both "solutions" that likely won't even last for more than 3 turns.

Third is the best, but a -1 and a specific one at that makes it pretty mixed on which decks can actually utilize it. Though its certainly the best here, and arguably the best in general. As this could also be a very effective side against Prophecies, turning their Judgments and etc into dead draws and effectively destroying the mill speed the deck has.

ΛΔ wrote:

2 cards that can effortlessly deal with the opponent's field, 1 that has built-in protection, and 2 that can take out huge chunks of your opponent's LP. Again, these aren't broken on their own. But when allowed to swarm, I'd honestly say they become just barely under it. Which Gem-Knights can very easily and effortlessly do.

This seems to sum up the point as why I always wonder the cause of my defeat against Gem-Knight because they're not broken on their own.

I always feel like 8000 LP isn't enough when beaten by Gem-Knight. Now I see your point. Multiple big monsters get summoned, beaten my field, take a big amount of my LP. gg.

So this then begs the question: why AREN'T Gem-Knights topping? They're still definitely selling, since many of them were included in Hidden Arsenal 7, so it's not like Konami isn't pushing them.

But how well do they fare against the likes of Fire Fists, Mermails, and Evilswarms, for instance? If people would rather play those decks in tournaments, then there's no way Gem-Knights would ever be a threat in the metagame.

And as for your proposed counters, that is why Macro Rabbit will always be a top deck (until Rabbit gets banned, which may be never).

Hippocampus wrote:

So this then begs the question: why AREN'T Gem-Knights topping?

Because everything that is topping is a billion times worse and outspeeds the deck with no effort.

Hippocampus wrote:

They're still definitely selling, since many of them were included in Hidden Arsenal 7, so it's not like Konami isn't pushing them.

Hidden Arsenal packs are literally just new cards from the Duel Terminals tough. Which that thing is now over last I saw, unless Konami just decides to make a Duel Terminal for the TCG with a bunch of TCG exclusive cards and maybe some OCG imports too.

Also, from what I remember seeing Gem-Knights are actually pretty worthless. So aside from a few Xyz which you should be running assuming your deck doesn't just 100% rely on fusions (which by the way if I know this is your deck, then I'm gonna immediately switch over to my Chaos build with double Kycoo, Anti-Spell, Cursed Seal, Jowgen, Rai-Oh, etc and then laugh when you can't do anything due to entirely relying on a single gimmick) you could probably make the deck with under $20.

Hippocampus wrote:

But how well do they fare against the likes of Fire Fists, Mermails, and Evilswarms, for instance? If people would rather play those decks in tournaments, then there's no way Gem-Knights would ever be a threat in the metagame.

September can't come fast enough.

My favorite thing about the meta is people creating new creative decktypes. My least favorite is people just mimicking off other decks.

We've long passed the first thing this go round, and have been in the second way too long for my liking.

Hippocampus wrote:

And as for your proposed counters, that is why Macro Rabbit will always be a top deck (until Rabbit gets banned, which may be never).

Not sure what you're getting at here, but alright.

ΛΔ wrote:

Because everything that is topping is a billion times worse and outspeeds the deck with no effort.

Then you should be complaining about everything that is topping, not Gem-Knights [/sarcasm]
In all honesty, Gem-Knights aren't the only poorly designed archetype in this game. But that's honestly what happens when power creep spirals out of control. Hence my entire debate with Wynn on the previous page lol

ΛΔ wrote:

(which by the way if I know this is your deck, then I'm gonna immediately switch over to my Chaos build with double Kycoo, Anti-Spell, Cursed Seal, Jowgen, Rai-Oh, etc and then laugh when you can't do anything due to entirely relying on a single gimmick)

Well I think you just solved your own problem lol. Now the question is: will CHAOS decks ever become meta?
And again, the answer is probably no.

ΛΔ wrote:

September can't come fast enough.

My favorite thing about the meta is people creating new creative decktypes. My least favorite is people just mimicking off other decks.

We've long passed the first thing this go round, and have been in the second way too long for my liking.

I guess if you count pre-fabricated archetypes and structure decks "new creative decktypes".
But I agree. The only thing creative about this format's meta as far as I know was splashing the Genex engine in Mermails, and that wasn't even innovative considering it has been an engine since Fishborg OTK.

ΛΔ wrote:

Hippocampus wrote:

And as for your proposed counters, that is why Macro Rabbit will always be a top deck (until Rabbit gets banned, which may be never).

Not sure what you're getting at here, but alright.

You mentioned Macro Cosmos as being a counter card to a Gem-Knight deck, albeit a situational one. Macro Rabbit uses this card to the fullest potential in its own strategy as well as defeating Gem-Knights (and many other decks) with ease. So it's always going to be a top deck for the forseeable future. If Gem-Knights can't beat them, then like I said, there's no way they'll be able to top.

Hippocampus wrote:

ΛΔ wrote:

Because everything that is topping is a billion times worse and outspeeds the deck with no effort.

Then you should be complaining about everything that is topping, not Gem-Knights [/sarcasm]

Alright.

Dragon Rulers being allowed to mass swarm huge beatsticks that can revive themselves and bring out Xyz monsters that laugh at whatever your opponent does, while having a backrow and handtraps as backup isn't fun at all.

Spellbooks are just plain stupid with way too much consistency, especially with Secrets and Judgment both being allowed to run around at 3.

Evilswarm do NOT need a mass-selection Forbidden Lance-like card that is also easily searchable with said card that searches it also being able to hinder a lot of counter-plays outside of attacking. Which is a terrible idea to do as Evilswarm's primary focus is swarming so they're obviously gonna have a lot of backrow monster hate. Which if they're running triple Dress as well then you may as well just gg.

Hippocampus wrote:

ΛΔ wrote:

(which by the way if I know this is your deck, then I'm gonna immediately switch over to my Chaos build with double Kycoo, Anti-Spell, Cursed Seal, Jowgen, Rai-Oh, etc and then laugh when you can't do anything due to entirely relying on a single gimmick)

Well I think you just solved your own problem lol. Now the question is: will CHAOS decks ever become meta?
And again, the answer is probably no.

Except a lot of these cards aren't really splashable in a lot of my other decks, not to mention a good amount of these can hinder me as well.

Hippocampus wrote:

ΛΔ wrote:

Hippocampus wrote:

And as for your proposed counters, that is why Macro Rabbit will always be a top deck (until Rabbit gets banned, which may be never).

Not sure what you're getting at here, but alright.

You mentioned Macro Cosmos as being a counter card to a Gem-Knight deck, albeit a situational one. Macro Rabbit uses this card to the fullest potential in its own strategy as well as defeating Gem-Knights (and many other decks) with ease. So it's always going to be a top deck for the forseeable future. If Gem-Knights can't beat them, then like I said, there's no way they'll be able to top.

Funny thing, Rabbit is insane for Gem-Knights as well.

> Rabbit to double Tourmaline/Garnet/Sapphire > if you have Gem-Knight Fusion already, likely gg

If you don't > overlay into Lavalval Chain > effect dumping Gem-Knight Fusion > banish Gem-Knight to retrieve > likely gg


Summoner Monk can also be pretty bad here, allowing you to pull out a fusion/xyz material for no cost due to spam-recycling Gem-Knight Fusion has

ΛΔ wrote:

The summon requirements are typically just a  small step under from the omni-HEROes so they aren't hard at all to pull off

The difference is, miracle fusion can use material from graveyard. Omni-Hero also have many monsters that can special summon itself from hand. While GK Fusion practically needs cards from hand or field. It's a -2 card on its own, -1 if you used its effect to add it from graveyard to hand. +0 if you use Obsidian or Lazuli. But that's because Obsidian and Lazuli are good card. Not the GK Fusion itself.  

ΛΔ wrote:

They certainly aren't, but they can be more than a problem if allowed to free-roam swarm.

I mean let's look here. We have


A fusion that can bounce the backrow with little to no effort

A fusion that prevents your opponent from responding to its attack

A fusion that can pop a faceup card (normally you'd be going for a monster for obvious reasons) for no cost

A fusion that can boost itself, again with little to no effort, that also has built-in pierce

A Flame Wingman lite fusion with a built-in Blade Armor Ninja effect


2 cards that can effortlessly deal with the opponent's field, 1 that has built-in protection, and 2 that can take out huge chunks of your opponent's LP. Again, these aren't broken on their own. But when allowed to swarm, I'd honestly say they become just barely under it. Which Gem-Knights can very easily and effortlessly do.

Actually, the monsters with bouncing effect, requires bad cards (aqua-type monsters) and have low ATK points. The real problem is Topaz, which if you combine with right card, capable of pulling OTK, and to lesser extend, Citrine and Prism Aura. The swarming point is true, but so does many other decks. Swarming isn't something new to YGO these days. The problem is how difficult it is to counter them or to pull it off.  

ΛΔ wrote:

Too bad your opponent could just recycle the spell and try again, effortlessly wasting your counter. Which if they used Lazuli and/or Obsidian as a material then this is basically guaranteed to be a thing.

Not to mention the deck has PLENTY of ways to swarm out materials to use.

All this does is make it into a really unfun guessing game for when to activate your cards. Which yes, this can apply to any deck. But for one that can recycle its key card for what is basically no cost at all it just completely ruins the game.

And at the same time, the Gem-Knight player also wasted their resources. Remember when I said it's +0 even after the player already used either Lazuli or Obsidian? Summon again with the monsters gained from Obsidian or Lazuli? It'll be minus this time, should the fusion countered with those cards other than solemns. Not to mention the Gem-Knights in graveyard are limited. You can't always use them to take the GK Fusion.

ΛΔ wrote:

So can lots of other badly designed cards. I fail to see your point.

Name them.

ΛΔ wrote:

So Konami needs to make them a new fusion spell that's still good for them, but also doesn't allow you to just be able to play with the mindset of "if my monsters gets removed I'll just immedietely summon another one."


Why I said they need to top one already.


As of now the card only really has 3 real counters I know of.

1. Non-Fusion Area
2. Macro Cosmos
3. Cursed Seal of the Forbidden Spell

First nobody will be running, or even siding. As aside from a small few decks (HEROes, Gem-Knights, GBeasts, etc) nobody runs fusions. And even for the decks that do run fusions they typically put in Xyz as well, possibly synchros too. So its a non-threat.

Second can't even be effectively run in a lot of decks. Also both this and the one above have the problem of needing to be face-up on the field. Which considering how much backrow removal is running rampant right now is certainly a problem and makes both "solutions" that likely won't even last for more than 3 turns.

Third is the best, but a -1 and a specific one at that makes it pretty mixed on which decks can actually utilize it. Though its certainly the best here, and arguably the best in general. As this could also be a very effective side against Prophecies, turning their Judgments and etc into dead draws and effectively destroying the mill speed the deck has.

Even if they didn't side it, people would still find a way to beat them. Remember there are many many destruction cards these days, capable of destroying those fusions. Ophion also kills Gem-Knights. Torrential, Bottomless, they're still roaming around even in this era.

Yeah, gem knights I think are completely fair. They gain advantage and can swarm but there advantage only lasts as long as there have the card folder to minus. Once a gem knight player reaches 2 cards in hand he is basically screwed. Espically since he could top bad. THe deck needs high card advange to make its power plays so any high trap based deck (compuls, bottomless, torriental) can hinder then very quickly. If a gem knight player does well it is because they are a good player not because the deck is broken.

Current YGO mechanics sometimes triggers annoying or unfun condition in some cases. Like when your opponent starts to swarm while you don't have any counters. Especially when they swarm big monsters and you start to lose a lot of LP in single turn. Can turn the game into unfun condition if you only barely counter it and get owned next turn.

Game is supposed to be fun, but if thing similar like that happened of course it'll be annoying. Sadly, in this YGO era thing like that happened more frequently than in the past. I've been experienced that, and it's not fun if it's happened too often.

This is true Eria, but the nice thing is yugioh seems to give ways to OTK and ways to stop it . Which is the nice thing. Cards like dark hole punish people who try and swarm to fast and don't finish the game off. lol .
So it seems decently fair to me. and gem knights hold a simiar value since thre were brought up presicly. Gem knights going big makes then lose card advantage and they can't regain it late game so for them to work they need to be used correctly. Nothing wrong with that. right?

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

The difference is, miracle fusion can use material from graveyard.

Gem-Knights also have their own miracle... sorta

Problem is it sucks due to trap+destroys summoned monster at end phase, so nobody really bothers to run it.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Omni-Hero also have many monsters that can special summon itself from hand.

I

uh

No they don't?

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

While GK Fusion practically needs cards from hand or field. It's a -2 card on its own, -1 if you used its effect to add it from graveyard to hand. +0 if you use Obsidian or Lazuli. But that's because Obsidian and Lazuli are good card. Not the GK Fusion itself.

This part is missing something else here.

That being that if the opponent can generate massive field advantage and do a lot of damage in a single turn just from a -1, they're going to unless they have good reason not to.

Also Gem-Knights have PLENTY of ways to get the cards they want. So unless the player just plays their cards haphazardly, they can easily manage fine with a -1 and possibly even gain it back in a turn or so.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Actually, the monsters with bouncing effect, requires bad cards (aqua-type monsters)

Because Snowman Eater and Treeborn Frog are "bad cards".

What?

Actually I get the feeling you could possibly make a pretty decent Frog-Knight deck.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

and have low ATK points.

The card effects also scream "GET ME OFF THE FIELD", so chances are if you bother summoning him you're going to get rid of somehow that same turn.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

The swarming point is true, but so does many other decks. Swarming isn't something new to YGO these days. The problem is how difficult it is to counter them or to pull it off.

The thing is though that also, most cards that swarm do their thing and then stop unless your opponenet plays something else to get it to swarm again OR has a specific requirement to its effect so it can't just be endlessly abused. 

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Not to mention the Gem-Knights in graveyard are limited. You can't always use them to take the GK Fusion.

Not limited enough.

-1 from grave is nothing, if other decktypes could recycle their key card with a -1 from grave they would. Unless its Macro.

At the very least it should've been a -2. It'd still be kinda stupid, but not AS stupid then.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Name them.

Ok I was either typing without thinking or completely forgot which cards I was thinking of here.

But seriously, unless its something horribly generic that you can be guaranteed to use (I'm talking Pot of Greed levels here) pretty much ANY card can be a bad topdeck, with cards that would generally be good topdecks possibly ending up as bad ones as well simply due to the current game state.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Ophion also kills Gem-Knights. Torrential, Bottomless, they're still roaming around even in this era.

1. Ophion kills MANY other decktypes, and is just plain stupid a card.

2. Torrential is possibly the WORST thing you could use to counter a Gem-Knight player, unless you do something like chain Threatening Roar or have Battle Fader/Gorz/Swift Scarecrow in hand

3. most ideal here, but hey semi-limited

monster destruction certainly still exists, but saying "hey these aren't that bad because they can be destroyed" is kinda poor logic to me.


But seriously, the closest thing I can compare Gem-Knight Fusion to would be Sinister Serpent. Which depending on how you look at it could be better or worse.

ΛΔ wrote:

Gem-Knights also have their own miracle... sorta

Problem is it sucks due to trap+destroys summoned monster at end phase, so nobody really bothers to run it.

Yes. That's why they don't count.

ΛΔ wrote:

I

uh

No they don't?

Yes they do.

Bubbleman, Photon Thrasher, and Blue Mountain Butterspy. These cards are even searchable via ROTA.

ΛΔ wrote:

This part is missing something else here.

That being that if the opponent can generate massive field advantage and do a lot of damage in a single turn just from a -1, they're going to unless they have good reason not to.

Also Gem-Knights have PLENTY of ways to get the cards they want. So unless the player just plays their cards haphazardly, they can easily manage fine with a -1 and possibly even gain it back in a turn or so.

And then opponent would make an easy comeback, if they have lots of resources (depending on how good your deck is). As long as your LP isn't 0, there's always a chance to turn the table. Against GK, it's not a hard thing to do. Remember what I said about destruction cards.

ΛΔ wrote:

Because Snowman Eater and Treeborn Frog are "bad cards".

What?

Actually I get the feeling you could possibly make a pretty decent Frog-Knight deck.

If you use Frog and Eater, it would drop the consistency of using Gem-Knight, and chance of summoning cards like Topaz, Zirconia, and non Aqua Gem-Knight monsters would be reduced. Especially in Frog-Knight, which may focused on summoning the Aqua-type Gem-Knight fusion monsters, and they are arguably the worst type of Gem-Knight fusion monsters. The sub-par bouncing doesn't help. Especially when it needs to leave the field in order to do so. And I already mentioned their low ATK before, correct?

ΛΔ wrote:

The card effects also scream "GET ME OFF THE FIELD", so chances are if you bother summoning him you're going to get rid of somehow that same turn.

Which makes more minus. He'll leave the field because he'll be fusioned again most of the time.

ΛΔ wrote:

The thing is though that also, most cards that swarm do their thing and then stop unless your opponenet plays something else to get it to swarm again OR has a specific requirement to its effect so it can't just be endlessly abused.

Gem-Knight fusion isn't endlessly abused too. It's limited to field, hand and grave resources.

ΛΔ wrote:

Not limited enough.

-1 from grave is nothing, if other decktypes could recycle their key card with a -1 from grave they would. Unless its Macro.

At the very least it should've been a -2. It'd still be kinda stupid, but not AS stupid then.

Um, I think you misunderstood. I'm not talking about -1 from grave. It's -1 after you counted all the advantage. You got -2 when you summoned a fusion monster. And when you add the fusion from grave, it's +1. So, the total is -1 from -2+1. I'm talking about your advantage.

ΛΔ wrote:

Ok I was either typing without thinking or completely forgot which cards I was thinking of here.

But seriously, unless its something horribly generic that you can be guaranteed to use (I'm talking Pot of Greed levels here) pretty much ANY card can be a bad topdeck, with cards that would generally be good topdecks possibly ending up as bad ones as well simply due to the current game state.

Ok.




And, as I said before, GK Fusion is very limited to GK archetype. It's just a polymerization with additional effect to add it from grave, and limited only to Gem-Knight monsters. Basically when Konami designed it, they thought Fusion is very2 underwhelmed because of Polymerization is -2. So they created a fusion archetype.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Bubbleman, Photon Thrasher, and Blue Mountain Butterspy. These cards are even searchable via ROTA.

2 of these aren't HEROes per-se, so I'm not counting them. While the third is horribly specific on when you can actually use it.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

And then opponent would make an easy comeback, if they have lots of resources (depending on how good your deck is). As long as your LP isn't 0, there's always a chance to turn the table. Against GK, it's not a hard thing to do. Remember what I said about destruction cards.

Because every deck just runs Evilswarm levels of monster hate or even has the ability to.

Right.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Gem-Knight fusion isn't endlessly abused too. It's limited to field, hand and grave resources.

Except grave resources almost NEVER become a problem if your opponent isn't running Macro or pulling Kycoo shenanigans. This comes from me playtesting with the hybrid Thunder Engine build I posted in the deck forums, so now imagine it with a more pure build.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

Um, I think you misunderstood. I'm not talking about -1 from grave. It's -1 after you counted all the advantage. You got -2 when you summoned a fusion monster. And when you add the fusion from grave, it's +1. So, the total is -1 from -2+1. I'm talking about your advantage.

No, I know you're talking in terms of field/hand.

I'm just saying that the cost for retrieval is way too low for what the card can do. Especially when you can effortlessly pull off moves like Chain-dumping it to grab ASAP.

Kirikaze Fuuma wrote:

And, as I said before, GK Fusion is very limited to GK archetype. It's just a polymerization with additional effect to add it from grave, and limited only to Gem-Knight monsters. Basically when Konami designed it, they thought Fusion is very2 underwhelmed because of Polymerization is -2. So they created a fusion archetype.

and this is why its bad card design

Fusions have PLENTY other ways to be brought out now without Poly, certain decks can obviously utilize it better but generally all the decks with big fusions have something (HEROes have Miracle and various other tech-choice cards, Machines to a degree have Overload Fusion, Dragons have Dragon's Mirror, Miracle Synchro Fusion for said synchro fusions, and then there's all the shenanigans Instant Fusion and Fusion Gate can pull off, etc

If Konami really wanted to do something to make fusions better they should've just made a decent generic fusion spell, and no I'm not saying to just copy/paste Gem-Knight Fusion as a generic fusion spell.

D.d crow gem knight fusion :Dlol.
Not saying counters make cards less broken. but just saying. lol.
I don't think gem knight fusion is broken. It only makes the deck playible. Abuse of the deck(which I don't think is done) would be blamed on obsidean and lazzi(I is horrible speller) they are the ones that plus off of being fused. THe deck can be good if played right, but that doesn't mean the deck is broken. Karakuri have some insanely broken moves to along with 20+ other decks. If ya want to complain about something broken why not complain about something like elemental dragons that plus off of stupid effects way more.
Or spell book judgement day, how much card advantage does that bank? And your picking on little Gk fusion lol. Good? Yes, Broken? No. lol If there ever become a problem just side anti fusion zone lol. or side it currently if you find them so broken lol.

Oh and I stand by my first comment ever in this topic(if I recall) Pale Beast "Is" the most annoying card ever, just barely above e dragons lol