Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So I went to a Cross Worlds release tournament on Saturday, out of 98 entrants I got 35th place with Starterku. However I can honestly say that this is the first time I have not had fun playing this game, and that is because of Mecha Frieza. Mecha Apes and Mecha GT are the absolute worst thing to happen to this game. Turn 2/3 kills are more common than not, the decks can awaken on turns 2/3, and flood the board with a 10+ card hand in the same period. It is Yu-Gi-Oh levels of degenerate.

Bandai attempted to address the issue, but their response was more insulting imo than anything:

http://www.dbs-cardgame.com/strategy/cross-worlds/mecha-frieza.php

Their answer apparently is to play two god awful decks, one of them being a Cell deck with no 17's...

I am taking a break from the game for awhile until they fix it, which will hopefully be soon. The game is in a BAD space right now, and I can only hope that Bandai doesn't turn this into another Naruto/Power Rangers/Digimon/*insert Bandai CCG name here* (and yes I know those were all Bandai of America but obviously the apple doesn't fall far from the tree)

Anyone else experiencing these problems? Sound off below.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I... Did they... Wha...

Dude, I know Yu-Gi-Oh! is an inhospitable and disastrous card game environment, but I don't think Konami EVER responded to a seemingly broken strategy by saying "We understand that you don't know how to counter it, here are some ideas." Shit, that's barely something Bushiroad would even THINK about doing. How god damn condescending can you get o-O
In fact, I don't think I've EVER seen a company respond with something like that o-O That's straight-up PR suicide.

I also want to address the "as we have in the past" comment; This game is still in it's early stages. They're 3 sets in, with maybe a year of high-tier competition. It is too soon to say "as we have in the past," not just because it is dismissive of the complaint ("Eh, don't worry, we're on top of it"), but because this puts forward the notion that this issue has happened before. Which, to be clear, it hasn't to this degree (as far as I know). And by putting that issue in people's minds, when you're only 3 SETS IN, you paint the picture of problematic design where you're breaking the game constantly. I can't speak for it on a competitive level, but if this is the truth, that is a bad sign, and if it's not, this was a stupid statement.

 

And I will clarify, I'm not personally bothered by that statement. But the god damn business student in me is screaming at them to just make a statement of "We want to ensure you that we are keeping a close eye on the competitive environment of this game, and will respond as necessary with erratas if it continues to be a problem". This is reassuring, infers that they have been watching the environment, and doesn't have any negative connotations with how the game was prior.

/rant

Also, sorry to hear about your experience Shoryu. I've managed to dodge competitions so far, so it's disappointing to hear it's like that before I can even try Xeno-Trunks |:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. Honestly I am amazed I did as well as I did. 7 rounds of Swiss and 3 of my matches were Mecha. 1 I lost, 1 I tied, and 1 I won, and I will freely admit that the only reason that I won the one I did is because the guy's version was sub optimal as all get out. Round 5 I played a Masked Saiyan player (that leader is fun btw) and he said I was his FIRST non Mecha player. Out of 98 entrants Top 16 had NINE Mecha variants.

But, yes to your other point, their response was comically inept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let the butthurt-rage becomethe hate that fuels you.... use that hate to destroy all the others....

 

Tis what I did in pan z. Once I let the butthurt flow and joined the darkside I got-gud. I built the meta first and killed the meta decks. You'll crush freezers soon enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry guys, I think they handled this well.

* They agreed with the community, they didn't belittle them.
* They said they'll do something if it doesn't work out.
* They offered the answer instead of being vague and insulting.

I've never seen any company straight up say 'This is how you do it, here are some sample decks that should have a really good match up.'. I really appreciate that.

Maybe you guys don't remember how Panini treated us? :/ Wizards are about as bad as Panini.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Denithan said:

Star Wars reference. He's tempting you to the dark side |: DON'T FALL FOR IT, SHORYU. YOU ARE HERE TO BRING BALANCE.

Oh I got the SW reference, I just didn't understand the context lol

12 hours ago, Vile said:

You'll crush freezers soon enough.

Once I figure out how to attack on Turn 1 sure lol

5 hours ago, Artificial Human said:

I'm sorry guys, I think they handled this well.

* They agreed with the community, they didn't belittle them.
* They said they'll do something if it doesn't work out.
* They offered the answer instead of being vague and insulting.

I've never seen any company straight up say 'This is how you do it, here are some sample decks that should have a really good match up.'. I really appreciate that.

Maybe you guys don't remember how Panini treated us? :/ Wizards are about as bad as Panini.

Disagree 100%. They basically said, hey we know this deck consistently wins on Turn 2/3 where you can't do literally anything about it, here are two counter decks that are fuck awful and don't even have the basic cards decks of that color need (Did they forget about CBL? Seriously?). Like I said before, the Cell deck doesn't even have 17s in it! How tf does that happen? It just speaks to me that they clearly don't understand their own game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta agree with Shoryu here. Their response is based on the assumption that the players don't understand the game enough to be able to formulate decent enough counters to the deck themselves, and argues that it's balanced because there are specific match-ups that can outlast it. It feels like arguing that Zoodiacs was perfectly balanced in Yu-Gi-Oh, because if you can wear out those first couple of turns, they ran out of resources, and then to take that a step further, tell people that they aren't playing the right cards/counters and it is their own fault. It's shifting the blame from the card designers onto the players, and that is never a good sign in a company like this.

And I don't quite get how you didn't get a sense of belittlement in that act alone. Giving sample decks is one thing, but they explicitly stated "we understand that not everyone knows how to counter this strategy." They immediately put the onus of blame on people not being good enough at the game, and ultimately came across as reluctant to put Mecha Frieza on a watch list despite acknowledging that the deck has created a less hospitable environment.

Also, straight up, using something like this to plug your product and tell people to buy specific cards so that you can use their strategies to stop the meta is not cool |: That is literally like Konami going "You want to deal with this OP deck? Go buy more of our product."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and another thing is, while there are counters to Mecha (not the crap Bandai posted though) this still doesn't solve the problem because it is perpetuating a degenerate meta. Play Mecha or the decks that counter Mecha, and that is it. There is also the fact that Mecha is a problem in general and will continue to be even more so the further the game goes along. There are so many archetypes that are just better to run in Mecha than in the archetype they are supposed to be run in because of how the card operates. Mecha Apes is the PERFECT example of that. If Apes really were limited to running effectively in Bardock decks, it wouldn't be a big problem, but the fact that Mecha does it SO MUCH BETTER is the problem. It is just bad design through and through.

It really is the world's easiest fix too. Just make Mecha like virtually every other leader with similar "Activate: Main" effects and limit it to once per turn. Just that simple change solves the whole problem. It stops it from being completely broken, but makes the card and its decks still usable. The added bonus being that it frees SO MANY other decks to being viable again.

Also, personally, I don't believe any of the counters for Mecha are as good as Mecha itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, so I wasn't around for the earliest PanZ meta (and I know this is a complete side). I've heard about Black Krillin and NamPic, but Orange Ginyu? I was always told it was Blue Ginyu who was the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Denithan said:

Wait, so I wasn't around for the earliest PanZ meta (and I know this is a complete side). I've heard about Black Krillin and NamPic, but Orange Ginyu? I was always told it was Blue Ginyu who was the problem?

Honestly, any color Ginyu was a top tier deck in set 1.  Orange was crazy energy beats that were helped by his level 1 and 2 powers, Red was MPPV rush, Black was just a great style anyway so black Ginyu was good, and Blue was for more ally support and was generally the best against other Ginyus.  Orange and Blue were the most played during set 1.

 

2 hours ago, sh0ryu_repp4 said:

There are so many archetypes that are just better to run in Mecha than in the archetype they are supposed to be run in because of how the card operates. Mecha Apes is the PERFECT example of that. If Apes really were limited to running effectively in Bardock decks, it wouldn't be a big problem, but the fact that Mecha does it SO MUCH BETTER is the problem. It is just bad design through and through.

THIS!  Spot on.  I sit down to craft decks and Mecha does a lot of stuff better than many other leaders.  IMO, this is a better reason to nerf Mecha than the fact that he can win by turn 2/3.

 

And about the argument that he can win by turn 2/3.....

Yes, he certainly can.  But 1/2-cost blockers have been around since set 1 and have seen very little use.  The same people who complained about Vegeta's crit effect in set 1 were the same ones who argued that 1/2-cost blockers were garbage and laughed at those who played them.  Does this solve everything? No, it does not.  But the community shouldnt complain about aggro if they're not willing to at least consider all of the defensive options at their disposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, The Bear said:

Yes, he certainly can.  But 1/2-cost blockers have been around since set 1 and have seen very little use.  The same people who complained about Vegeta's crit effect in set 1 were the same ones who argued that 1/2-cost blockers were garbage and laughed at those who played them.  Does this solve everything? No, it does not.  But the community shouldnt complain about aggro if they're not willing to at least consider all of the defensive options at their disposal.

This is true, but it really doesn't matter when you can only play ONE blocker and the opponent has 5+ battle cards on the field the next turn, where the previous turn they had none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Vile said:

I dunno what you're talking about. A17 can get 18 out turn 2. :P

 

Also isn't there a 1 cost Trunks? 

Are you referring to the fact that the 17 leader can get out the twin 18 on turn 2? That is true, but she isn't a blocker. And yes there are two 1 cost Trunks, and again, neither of them are blockers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They let you play the free blocker......

18 gets Krillin 

Trunks gets Videl

 

It's elementary my man! Use that noodle!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sh0ryu_repp4 said:

This is true, but it really doesn't matter when you can only play ONE blocker and the opponent has 5+ battle cards on the field the next turn, where the previous turn they had none.

I disagree.  I can't tell you how many games have come down to one negated or blocked attack.  And Vile is right to point out the free blockers; the leaders that can play blockers for free (A17, Trunks, Gohan, etc) have an inherent defensive advantage over decks that dont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Bear said:

I disagree.  I can't tell you how many games have come down to one negated or blocked attack. 

I am absolutely sure they have, games of my own as well.

But not on Turn 2...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>turn 1- trunks

>drop mai

 

 

>Turn 2 - 18

>Drop Krillin

 

I'm not saying it's flawless but it's a possibility to looking into. That FB group is so against blockers that I left becuase they don't ubderstsnd how to adapt to the meta, rather they just know how to netdeck. I suggest playing something outside the norm. Multi class into that rouge(deck)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×