Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Your idea sounds fun and would likely work. My only concern is this game is already complex and a lot of people seem unable to keep up with it as is. So I went for something super simple and easy to manage and design for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Set 7 alone is not nearly as limiting as set 1. Freezing set 1 and it’s reprints in other sets will blow the meta wide open. The only exception is to keep Energy Sphere. 

There are so many good attacks and blocks from set 1 and it’s getting old. Just look at how many set 1 cards are played in the ToP. I think people are uncomfortable with idea of losing their “staples” and having to start from the ground up but this is the only way to freshen things up without over complicating the game.

Removing the core of this game that it was built around is the only way to make more room for new strategies. Yes the game will start unbalanced. Ideally the next sets will patch up the obvious emerging  strats in a fresh new way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jaith1 said:

There are so many good attacks and blocks from set 1 and it’s getting old. Just look at how many set 1 cards are played in the ToP. I think people are uncomfortable with idea of losing their “staples” and having to start from the ground up but this is the only way to freshen things up without over complicating the game.

Dude, banning either set is going to complicate the game a pretty reasonable amount unless you're only playing on OCTGN/online sims, or have a near encyclopedic memory of what cards came from what set. Especially since you're disallowing reprints, which becomes its own complicated mess when you're a more casual player. Shit, I'll throw myself under the bus here: I almost definitely couldn't tell you what cards are reprints of Set 1, and any response to this that goes "You should educate yourself if you want to play," or "just go through Set 1 and remove every card from there from all your decks" can go stuff itself. I'd just straight give up the game because that's too finicky for me to care. And it's not that I'd lose Staples, it's that I don't want to go back and check if any given card is allowed while I'm brainstorming decks for fun. Same issue I have with rotations in Pokemon, only worse, because that one allows me to play reprints.

The ONLY reason I wouldn't have this same issue with Set 7 is because we didn't get reprints of the cards there. That one, I can easily just go onto OCTGN, say to exclude cards from Set 7, and port those decks over to real life. If Set 1 was in the same boat, then I'd be more open to it, but in both cases, it's going to make deck building more complicated.

Besides that though, I don't think banning either Set 1 or Set 7 would actually change the game in too many drastic ways. We'd rotate into a new set of staples per color if we dropped Set 1, because honestly, there are plenty of Freestyle staples and cards that came after that do similar things in each color. We'd have a meta, maybe two, where things were up in the air as to what cards are considered "tried and true," then we'd settle into staples because that's realistically how card game communities behave. We'd probably see a lot more in the way of Reality Check and co. though.
As for banning Set 7, FanZ has already been balanced around Awakening MPs, so you'd realistically just lose a couple of tools that are pretty easily replaced.

Share this post


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

then we'd settle into staples because that's realistically how card game communities behave.

It's because the staples are just too good, its not some superstitious behavior developed by card game communities. Orange Stare Down and Blue Betrayal are guaranteed BANISHES of any set-up, drill or ally (universal board control that banishes as a secondary effect... any semi-serious player understands that you CAN'T NOT include it). Its simply lazy game design, if Orange staredown required you to banish a drill you control for guaranteed universal board control then i could respect it a bit more. If powerful effects came at a cost then this game would have had so much more depth to it. This is why Red and Namekian will always be my favorite styles because they toyed with this theme. If you lowered your anger or had enough dragon balls in play, certain cards became better. 

As of now, its pretty safe to say that a lot of decks kinda build themselves. Every style has their cookie cutter blocks more or less, every deck is running their staple attacks, and staple freestyle cards, maybe there is freedom for around 20 cards but I think its more like 10 cards. That is boring, and its been that way since Set 1. By now it should be obvious what the Set 1 cards are because you see them all the freaking time! If the reprints irk you then just avoid the starter set cards all together, but I know that you would be perfectly capable to adapt to this change. Its really not as bad as it sounds.

Why stop at VTP? If anything banning VtP gives supreme kai and orange combative complete monopoly on recycling key cards that are needed. Visiting the Past is the best thing Set 1 had, in my opinion we should take the rest of the garbage with it. I think a game without Namek Dragon Balls, Time is a Warrior's tool. How many red decks are there that don't run red blocking hand? How many blue decks don't run head knock and betrayal? Literally there was a Knowledge Piccolo deck almost unchanged since set 1 in the ToP, I don't know what else there is to say. 

I think the game would change drastically because I am pretty sure every strategy would get nerfed except for saiyan broly. that would need to be addressed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, I think you're overestimating how much of a change this would actually effectuate. Especially in a post-Reality Check universe in regards to Stare Down and Betrayal. It might knock down how MANY cards people have that are universal board control, but it still wouldn't change things too dramatically.
As for Neck Beam, Blue DOES have other cards that de-level, and otherwise would probably just work around a couple of DB techs.
Also, I've never really thought of Red Blocking Hand as one of the more broken Red cards. A common one, sure, but I don't think it's broken or too good o-O

In my view, Black is probably the Style most deeply affected by dropping Set 1 just because those cards are actually pretty vital to a lot of their strats, and they don't have adequate replacements. Everyone else will probably be fine. Namekian might see some dramatic shifts and changes, but tbh, Earth Dragon Balls have literally got all the same support as Namek Dragon Balls do, + 1 with Radiant and a LOT of other cards (I'm not actually sure why Namek Dragon Balls are still run over EDBs. The effects are better, but only marginally so, and the extra support REALLY pushes DBV a lot harder).

Also, straight up, no. It's not obvious what cards are Set 1. I could not tell you without actually checking a database, except by the old card style. I came into this game at Set 6, and my interactions with almost all of these cards have been reprints. For me to know what Set 1 cards are requires me to constantly go back and check, which... No? Shit dude, I don't even own any cards actually from Set 1.

Remember that only America really has any kind of adequate scene with this game (someone feel free to correct me if else-wise), and I don't think anyone from outside (excluding the most die-hard fans) would engage with that kind of change. If you want to actually effectuate change WITHOUT alienating someone like me, then dedicate a FanZ set to errata'ing the stronger Set 1 cards, and actually give them flavor. While you're at it, go back and fix some MPs. Fuck knows, Broly needs some addressing, Awakening Goku is a mess, and old MPs like Ginyu are dust in the wind.
And ftr, I mean, dedicate a FanZ set to this. Nothing new. Just erratas.

Also, it's not a superstitious behavior in card games? It's just how things go. People see certain cards and strategies do well competitively, on a frequent and common basis, then adopt them into their own decks. It is exactly because they're good that they become staples, and again, we'd just get a new set up of staples. It wouldn't blow the game open in this amazingly creative way, just modify it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2018 at 0:37 AM, Denithan said:

Dude, I think you're overestimating how much of a change this would actually effectuate. Especially in a post-Reality Check universe in regards to Stare Down and Betrayal. It might knock down how MANY cards people have that are universal board control, but it still wouldn't change things too dramatically.
As for Neck Beam, Blue DOES have other cards that de-level, and otherwise would probably just work around a couple of

Also, it's not a superstitious behavior in card games? It's just how things go. People see certain cards and strategies do well competitively, on a frequent and common basis, then adopt them into their own decks. It is exactly because they're good that they become staples, and again, we'd just get a new set up of staples. It wouldn't blow the game open in this amazingly creative way, just modify it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There still needs to be some ground work laid out before rotation starts to happen. Rotation is a fickle beast that isn't as simple as, "let's just delete stuff from the game". A game needs to be built and developed with rotation in mind. It's only part balance mechanic. The other benefits are why you build for rotation.

The first and most obvious benefit is that it allows developers to develop free from the constraints of older sets. It's impossible to test for every situation and this becomes more obvious as the game grows and more unaccounted for broken interactions happen with each new set. With rotation, you can use a temporary fix such as an errata or ban and then wait till the problem cards go into legacy, which is a format the developers need not concern themselves with.

The other benefit is Meta. As more sets release, it becomes harder to account for possible situations. A smaller format with a controlled meta is more viable as competitive and less likely to fall victim to RNG and Variance being the reason people win. It also alleviates the time needed in research and development for deck design. The whole purpose of competitive play is to see how well you can circumvent RNG and Variance and create consistent wins. While variety in decks is good, variance itself defeats competitive play and makes it feel more like 5 card draw. Think about Yugioh and the number of times the meta was, "who draws the most crippling hand at the beginning". This is why Archetype design is crucial and something they failed at in PanZ that I think they are getting better at with FanZ. Archetype design allows you to simulate variety without over-contributing to variance by keeping things to defined strategy concepts. This allows you to refresh the game without having 80 different deck types in a single meta where every deck is a 60 card deck of 60 different cards. For example, the Sword Archetype is a type of Physical Beats with its own unique twist, but essentially it is still Physical Beats and falls into the triangle of deck types and requires key elements that are consistent in the deck type to function. I'm not sure I explained this part as well as it is in my mind, the key is that Variance isn't good, but variety is and rotation can help with this. 

The next benefit is entry point. Getting new blood is how you grow your brand and account for old blood leaving. Rotation allows new blood to buy in at a certain point, buy sets going forward, and eventually the stuff they missed rotates out. At that point they are now even, collection wise, with the old blood and competitive play becomes about skill and not about how deep their wallet was at entry and how far back they could buy for the old broken cards that are now rare and expensive. 

The biggest benefit is it reduces the need for pure power creep. While there are instances where Power Creep might be needed, such as the lack luster MPs presented in the early sets, it generally is frowned upon in competitive and casual environments alike. 

From there, if you need specific cards from legacy sets you reprint them in new sets or create new cards with new names that are modified with balance for the current block in mind. While this does contribute to balance, balance is just a way to sum things up. This game would have benefited with rotation in mind from the ground up, however, I guarantee you rotation wasn't a thought when the first 3 sets were released. With sets 5, 6, and 7, power creep became their form of rotation, however because set 1 cards are instrumental to the styles they are in, it isn't working. Rotation could have started with the block beginning set 15. At set 15 set 1 could rotate out, with each set in succession rotating out as new sets come out. This would leave you with a large but varied pool and provide some benefit. However, that all rested on building the game with rotation in mind. It's still possible, but there is some foundation work to lay out and it NEEDS to be in place first. Not rotate and then fix the holes. They should design with the idea of the rotation going forward and then when ready rotate. This minimizes the impact, reduces culture shock, and has the highest chance of retention. For cards that are printed in multiple sets, you just use the version from the sets that are tournament legal. Eventually, all versions of the unwanted cards will rotate and this is the method that will create the least amount of confusion. Remember, rotation involves rotating the set. If you were to rotate the card names in the set like what sounds like is being suggested in this thread, you create confusion and if a card can appropriately return to the standard format you will require a retcon ruling. It's easier to just say cards printed in set x and forward are standard. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, @Jaith1, what are you trying to say? Because so far, it has come across as you touting that getting rid of Set 1 will create this amazing, imaginative, diverse environment in the game. Which I promise it won't, as literally any game with extensive banlists that has attempted to ban staples will tell you (ala. YGO). You get rid of one group of staples, people will MAKE another group of staples out of the cards that do well and are consistently strong, BECAUSE they do well and are consistently strong.

Secondarily, I maintain, banning all cards from set 1 by name is an unreasonable ask for a mostly dead game with a cult community when they have been reprinted so often. You will straight up lock the doors on new players, because who the hell would bother with that for a game they're not already into.

As for the stuff @Majin Goo has said, I'd be down for rotations if they do set it up right. Mostly, I'm looking at MPs there; either excluding them and their named cards from Rotations (the worse option), or rotating them back around in the next set, updated for the current format (the better option). I am curious though, what steps would you be looking at to introduce rotations into this game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Werent all the premier masteries frozen in the panz awakening meta? If i remember right i think they were only going to allow the most recent 2 sets of masteries. 

I can see its flaws but its simple enough to implement and any one can understand. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Littlebig said:

Werent all the premier masteries frozen in the panz awakening meta? If i remember right i think they were only going to allow the most recent 2 sets of masteries. 

I can see its flaws but its simple enough to implement and any one can understand. 

No, there were only 2 frozen Mastery Cards in PanZ and they were later brought back with MP restrictions just as the game died. However, FanZ kept the two Mastery Cards frozen and have added 3 more Mastery Cards to the list, only 1 of which is from the first set. Oddly enough, FanZ put effort into Drill Memory to fix Retribution antics and Panini had already made that fix for Retribution with their final CRD. Though FanZ's only applies to style drills, Panini's fix applied to all drills while using Orange Retribution Mastery. 

6 hours ago, Denithan said:

As for the stuff @Majin Goo has said, I'd be down for rotations if they do set it up right. Mostly, I'm looking at MPs there; either excluding them and their named cards from Rotations (the worse option), or rotating them back around in the next set, updated for the current format (the better option). I am curious though, what steps would you be looking at to introduce rotations into this game?

First - You have to have a large enough card pool to maintain variety and interest. Unfortunately, because FanZ sets are so small, there isn't really a strong solution for this other than waiting for there to be enough FanZ sets or them doing one large set that brings along anything they deem still reasonable in the meta. Both solutions are taxing and would take time.

Second - Your player base needs to be informed of the intent, how the process will be implemented, and then given enough time to prepare. This allows players to begin taking into account the changes that are coming and allows them the ability to come to terms with the idea. Sadly though, you will lose people as there are those that would rather play in a Legacy format that has no semblance of balance whatsoever than to be told they need to use new cards. And yes, I promise you these people will still have these feelings even in a f2p game. However, this does allow new people easier access even when money isn't a factor. This is because the burden of study to become competitive is less taxing and they can slowly dive into legacy at their leisure if they want. 

Third - They need to further their design concepts and experiment more with Archetypes. If you build Archetypes and expand on them within the block, occasionally throwing more content to older Archetypes that are still relevant to standard format, rotation hurts less. They relied on older sets to be the foundation to new Mastery Cards in PanZ and this hurt the idea of rotation. Mastery, MPs, and Archetypes receiving functional support at release and then FULL support in future sets would mean that past cards would be less necessary for the Archetype to work. From there you just make sure at rotation you have something fun to replace Archetypes that are leaving and something solid to replace generic staples that aren't copy pasta. 

Those are the first 3 things I would implement before rotation. With that said, you could write a book on the proper design, implementation, and upkeep of competitive rotation for table top games. With that said, number 2 is the most important. Transparency with the process will help maintain trust with the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2018 at 6:22 AM, Majin Goo said:

Example Sensei:

Goku Sensei
Knowledge: 1
Continuous: All attacks do +1 stage of damage.
Power: Banish the bottom card of your discard pile to draw the top card of your Life Deck.

I completely forgot about "Sensei Deck" and "Sensei Deck Only" cards which would completely solve the Tug, Wall Breaker in every Sensei Deck issue. Just have to make watered down or alternate versions. I think your example is fantastic. I just don't trust the FanZ guys to reign it in as much as you tried to.

On the subject of set rotation, I don't think it'd be too bad for the game. There's just too many set 1 staples that will never go out of style otherwise. It would certainly switch up the staples but at least some cards that never made the cut would actually see the light of day. It's far too late to implement set rotation. Firstly because the sets are small as was said and especially because the current cards are designed to be on par with Panini's biggest offenders. There's no room for the game to settle down because the power creep is comfortably stable. It's not going anywhere without another full reboot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2018 at 11:16 AM, Denithan said:

Alright, @Jaith1, what are you trying to say? Because so far, it has come across as you touting that getting rid of Set 1 will create this amazing, imaginative, diverse environment in the game. Which I promise it won't, as literally any game with extensive banlists that has attempted to ban staples will tell you (ala. YGO). You get rid of one group of staples, people will MAKE another group of staples out of the cards that do well and are consistently strong, BECAUSE they do well and are consistently strong.

Yes you are right, we will just have a new set of staples, and I don't think that's a bad thing. Anything new will be amazing, imaginative and diverse for me but the set 1 ban have to coincide with a new release and perhaps a few other restrictions.

Let's talk about obvious staples: Blue Betrayal and Orange Staredown. Okay so these are banned, and as result MP's that have board control (Broly, Cooler, Piccolo) become a lot more viable.  You are right, it would be a mess. Universal guaranteed (secondary effects), unspherable board control is arguably "non-interactive". You are always going to see them in decks. Things like Black Refusal are a lot more interesting to me. I like cards that sacrifice assets for big gains, it brings depth to the game. In order for those cards to exist you need to ban the "safe" choices with huge benefits. Red Energy Blast is almost okay with me, it can't banish set-ups and if your opponent has no drills/allies and you do, you have to banish your own stuff. Red Lightning Slash is a lot more interesting, there it has to HIT and you lower your anger 2 levels. But nevertheless I am okay with banning it all. 

7 hours ago, Mysterious Youth said:

On the subject of set rotation, I don't think it'd be too bad for the game. There's just too many set 1 staples that will never go out of style otherwise. It would certainly switch up the staples but at least some cards that never made the cut would actually see the light of day. It's far too late to implement set rotation. Firstly because the sets are small as was said and especially because the current cards are designed to be on par with Panini's biggest offenders. There's no room for the game to settle down because the power creep is comfortably stable. It's not going anywhere without another full reboot.

Exactly, the new Orange Energy Ball is a fantastic and interesting card in my opinion, but if its competing with cards like Orange Power Point, then it will never see play.  I think Namekian and Black as a style are almost in that boat as well, when you consider how long Knowlege Piccolo is still around and that this Conflict SKai certainly feels like Devious Krillin 2.0... I don't think its too late to do rotations, but it will certainly be a mess. I will continue to play the game regardless, and I like the FANZ stuff, especially this new Piccolo/MVegeta MP's synergizing with the useless Set 4 red stuff (Quick Jab, Collision, Smash). 

 

But if we go back to the original point with the VTP ban, we have effectively made Supreme Kai and Black Smoothness drill stronger because what other MP/style can readily reuse cards from their discard pile? Orange Combative, Pikkon, and Kami can?

Black Smoothness makes it a lot easier to hold onto a sphere while other styles will have to flounder around without a VTP for a sphere option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Black Smoothness defiantly gets some spot light now but it will still be somewhat unreliable given that it is limit 1 per deck and there is still a lot of straight board hate with no recoil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another card I'd like to bring up is Red Panic, a card that absolutely shouldn't exist.

The double-edged aspect of playing DBV with Red Ascension Mastery (since it can banish a Ball off your deck) is essentially gone. And couldn't this be a limit 1 card? Limit 2 even? No, it's gotta be at 3. A cheap, lazy way to make Red DBV work when the baseline for similar effects before Red Panic was Information Gathering. It even gets around a DBV mirror match if you had to banish a Ball your opponent owned and they somehow cleared it allowing you to Red Panic it back in... You can make the argument that Red DBV hasn't gotten support in a while (I'd argue it doesn't need any) but this is too dumb and easy.

Is Red DBV dominating events? Of course not but DBV Ascension Trunks is such a stupid deck to play against. There's just not a lot most decks can do to cover anger, board hate, forced passes/skips, and crits/DBV hate simultaneously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mysterious Youth said:

Another card I'd like to bring up is Red Panic, a card that absolutely shouldn't exist.

The double-edged aspect of playing DBV with Red Ascension Mastery (since it can banish a Ball off your deck) is essentially gone. And couldn't this be a limit 1 card? Limit 2 even? No, it's gotta be at 3. A cheap, lazy way to make Red DBV work when the baseline for similar effects before Red Panic was Information Gathering. It even gets around a DBV mirror match if you had to banish a Ball your opponent owned and they somehow cleared it allowing you to Red Panic it back in... You can make the argument that Red DBV hasn't gotten support in a while (I'd argue it doesn't need any) but this is too dumb and easy.

I’d be interested to hear what kind of decks you play. 

Red Panic is kinda dumb because it can be used more than once from a Trunks Sword slash (situationally). But let’s be fair and acknowledge that you should be running some kind of discard hate (a minimum of 5-6 discard pile haters). We have SKai/Pikkon/Kami, Combative Mastery, Weighted Clothes, Super Nova, Saiyan Rescue, Saiyan Menace, Red Panic, Blue Positioning Drill. I’m sure there are more... discard pile hate might the the most neglected staple there is in this game.

I wonder if anyone has tried Red Panic with Cooler’s Rebirth by the way... now THAT’s really dumb.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jaith1 said:

discard pile hate might the the most neglected staple there is in this game.

 

This can't be stressed enough. When someone tells me they're having problems, this is usually the first thing I look for. Because of how this engine works, you have to have solid recursion built in. Because of this, one of the most crippling strategies is to attack their ability to recur cards.

This is why I used Devastating Blow for so long. Great hate at no cost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Devastating Blow is my favorite card in the game. I simply can’t build a deck without it.

Heroic Quick Blast is also fantastic. What would that Conflict SKai do vs a Heroic Quick Blast attached? I guess just crit it off, nevermind... I still run it and it is definitely useful in Ruthless Unleashed decks where you don’t want blocks on the top of your discard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run Devastating Blow in most of my decks, thank you very much. But nothing stops them from using Ascension and banishing Panic off the top and like anything, just because there's answers doesn't mean it isn't stupid. There aren't any good answers to forced passes/skips which Trunks has in spades. You're most likely not going to stop Trunks' Evo 3 picking up a Sword Slash and skipping your action. The timing of the Dev Blow is crucial which sometimes it just doesn't work out especially if Red Panic hits the discard because of the damage from Dev Blow for example. I'd run more discard hate if I could but some styles just don't have enough. There's also little you can do if they build up a good amount of Red Bribe and Red Relaxation.

I like Quick Blast, but in Ruthless it's tough to fit a set in. It's more freestyle cards which can screw up your game plan especially if they crit it off at the wrong time and as an attack it's obviously lousy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2018 at 4:35 PM, Mysterious Youth said:

Without a side/Sensei deck, you can only tech for so many matchups but not without ruining your gameplan or taking out things you'd rather use. Perhaps that's just how people like it where you're meant to just auto-lose to specific BS (cards/interactions, not necessarily certain playstyles) or dead draw a tech card a lot of the time but I personally wish that weren't the case.

I honestly think Card Advantage and "bricking" in this game aren't as tight as they are in Magic or Yugioh, so I kind of like the current lack of side deck as it makes matchups feel more meaningfully different.

I'm glad that Visiting the Past is gone from my arbitrary bias against staple cards or anything too good in colorless in TCGs.  I used to be all aboard the Ban/nerf Time is a Warrior's Tool train simply because I didn't like seeing it in every deck, but it's so meta-defining and I really don't want to see beatdown go more rampant than it already is.  I'm primarily a Namekian main, so my color isn't really hurting for defense in the event of it getting removed....maybe it would've been smarter to give Namekian and Blue a Time equivalent card instead of actually just reprinting Time from the old Score game....but the damage has been done.

Share this post


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

 I used to be all aboard the Ban/nerf Time is a Warrior's Tool train simply because I didn't like seeing it in every deck

To be honest, I could never get on board that train just because I liked the presence of a Joker/Wild Card that could swing an entire combat your way just by being dropped. And hell, Time doesn't even really do that, it just negates the opponent's offense. If you have a dead-hand, Time won't magically fix it and give you any advantage.
Now in an ideal world, sure, there'd be something set-up so every Personality/Trait got one such card, but from a design/balancing perspective, that would easily become a nightmare.

I don't think I'd call Time a meta-defining card though. It's a one-of staple run in every deck, but very few decks are actually based around any substantial abuse of Time is a Warrior's Tool, or really designed to combo with it. Presence =/= Defining a meta.

Like, I'd say Orange Retribution Mastery was a meta-defining card because of how it changed the face of Orange decks. Likewise, I'd agree that cards like Blue Betrayal and Neck Beam are style-defining (if not meta-defining) because of how they've influenced the entire style. Time hasn't really influenced anything, it's just always been... There. The first, and pretty much only, wild card of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... if Time is banned, then I am fairly sure the meta would shift. Broly would be stronger. Period. 

Therefore, it’s safe to argue that Time is Warrior’s tool is a meta defining card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't actually know how much the meta WOULD shift. Like, would Broly get stronger, or would he just perceptively get stronger because more people would feel more confident running him?

It becomes a question of how good is something VS presence. Like, when Tachikaze first launched in the new era of Vanguard, they were a top deck. After a couple of weeks, and the hype around it died, it became one of the worst performing decks. And the only difference, since this was before another set launched, was that there were less people playing Tachikaze. Thereon, less chances for the deck to simply luck out. We're actually seeing a very similar thing right now after Exculpate's release, where RP decks have become a fan favorite from hype, but aren't actually that great in performance. Just, when you have enough people playing it, luck of the draw will eventually tip the scales.

I'd argue Pan/FanZ is similar to Vanguard in that luck plays a VERY definite part of it. So it stands to reason, if we see a lot more Broly decks, that Broly would perceptively be in a stronger position in the meta. But I don't know if the simple removal of Time would make match-ups that are historically bad for Broly, no longer an issue.

Likewise, I don't know if anyone would really change their builds too much if you removed Time. It's a 1-of card that's not really formative for the majority of decks, so realistically, people would probably try to replace it with either an omni-block like Enhanced Reflexes, or would go for another tech. In that way, I wouldn't say it's meta defining. If 90% of your deck and game plan wouldn't change because of a card's removal, then that card isn't a defining part of your deck.

(also, if your deck is entirely dependent on drawing 1 card out of 60 to win against Broly, then your deck has a terrible match-up against Broly.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let’s remember that 90% of decks don’t seem to change to begin with. We have our staples. 

Broly only needs 1-2 combats with your pants down. Time is a get out of jail free card. It’s that simple. It sounds like you have never been in jail with Broly ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jaith1 said:

 It sounds like you have never been in jail with Broly ;) 

Oh, I 100% have. I actually used to build decks SPECIFICALLY to deal with Broly when I first came into the game, because I HATED him. And to this day, I uphold that Broly is way too strong of an MP since he has no trade-off, or downside. He's not spectacularly weak to anything, nor does he really have bad match-ups.

But let's not pretend like Time balances Broly out. He's still a strong MP, and he can still compete even WITH Time around. Time hasn't discouraged people from playing him. In that argument, BROLY is the meta-defining card.

As I said, Time is a wild card that shuts down all aggro decks for a turn. But it's not really influencing the game beyond that.

As for the staples thing, I'm really more focused on game plans than deck make-up. Like, Ret and Double Bicycle Kick were both meta-defining cards, the latter because decks were actively changing to abuse it as much as possible (Uppercut and what not), and the former because it changed a LOT of Orange decks.
Blue Neck Beam and its kin resulted in a Blue playstyle that can be entirely focused around Life Card damage and delevelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my perspective TiaWT is nothing more than an "oh shit" button and for the most part has always been. In the early stages of PanZ it was a bit oppressive, but this wasn't because of TiaWT's design. Namekian at the time was extremely oppressive given its ability to push all three victory conditions efficiently. At first, it could achieve two of those victories without ever entering combat. The only way to really win was to get in one or two really good combats, capturing a few balls and gaining an advantage on Life Cards. However, Namekian could efficiently cycle TiaWT over and over again. Hell, by the end of set three I played a Slug deck that damn near could use TiaWT every turn. So for the most part, I think most TiaWT protesters are still experiencing the bad taste the early state of PanZ left. 

However, by the end of set 6 TiaWT, while in every deck, did little more than stall for a turn. In many cases, most of my decks including some aggro would still win despite a TiaWT being played. While I understand it's in everything it doesn't define the meta. If it disappeared today, it wouldn't affect any of my 30 decks at this point. Even Namekian decks that continuously recycle the card would just recycle other things and continue to have what equates to 100+ life card decks. 

There was a time I would say TiaWT could be consider oppressive, troublesome, or even centralizing, but it isn't at this point. 

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


×