In my previous "BanList prediction" I usually present a solution to ban Heavy storm and create a decent game state. And even I always failed, I still think Heavy storm should be banned and Konami knows it, that's why Konami creates Storm, Absorbing jar and Inzektor. Most recently, Fire king appears like a way to punish players for use backrow destruction and bring back Sacred phoenix of Nephthys to the competitive game. Haze beast can't be target them, so few magic or trap cards can stop them. Also, Harpie ladies destroy all the backrow thanks to their field spell card. With all this backrow hate, Heavy storm shouldn't be on the game, however it is. And apparently there are still reasons for that.
Right now, most decks don't play backrow cards, many moves can be review like: "Player A use MST on Player B MST". Chaos Dragon, Hieratics, Mermails, Agents, and many others just don't play a trap at all. In fact, a guy in a recent YCS played a machine monster smash and topped, proving again that using backrow is overrated. Only DinoRabbit can use backrow successfully due to Laggia effect. Fire fist, dino rabbit and ophion have a lot of backrow control on this game. And if we ban heavy storm, all these decks will be stronger than ever, even if rabbit goes to one. So, my doubt here is: Is Heavy still healthy for the game?
Konami needs to find a solution to this nonsense, because we should be to use magic and trap cards. The first and good solution is Fire Fist, maybe the second archetype capable of search their magic and trap cards (the first deck to do this was Infernity, searching all the barriers in one turn). Even if you use Heavy storm against Fire fist, they can easily search for more. The deck remain me a lot to Gladiator beast because they are focus in battle, even though they have a mechanism to destroy spell, trap or monsters on the field. However, give the possibility to use magic or trap cards to one deck is not the solution to make heavy storm unplayable or less broken. Konami needs to ban heavy storm and substitute it for some cards that create the same fear on people (like inzektor just to make us feel in the past format).
the game right now have plenty of strategies capable of deal with backrow cards. Also, konami already designed strategies capable of destroy backrow fields. So, we will see if heavy storm finally goes to 0 again or not.
I remember times when heavy was banned and giant trunade was at 1, and I don't think it was better for backrow, no destruction, right, but only 1 turn with no backrow because of trunade (all decks relyed a bit on backrow on that times) and a synchro otk on your face, so I don't see the point, at least heavy storm can be faced with destruction-preventing cards, such as musakani on six sam, white dragon ninja on ninjas, a lvl 3 common monster for fire fist, and starlight and the big revolution is over for all (that last an epic protection card for backrow, and not limited, but pleople doesn't play strong backrows, that's all, and if play cannot make a decent defense of their resources because monster spam is the way now (and is not a complain, I play spam decks myself). If we think about breaking strategies and changing the strategies, we should talk about macro cosmos and dimensional being 6 cards destroying lot of decks sooner than heavy storm, they make themselves the most boring and powerull deck on this format, macro rabbit.
ReplyDeleteMythos
Monster spam is the way to go now, that's completely true and maybe the main reason why backrow defense cards usually fail.But it is easier just banning heavy storm than removing all the broken monsters in this game.
ReplyDeleteI'm not an expert on this game and I feel far from the competitive scene, so I' don't know if heavy storm should be really banned or not. What I am sure is that setting cards is not what it used to be.
If ur not an expert on this game, I'm a total noob, xD, just say I think heavy is broken, but as broken as much other cards, even think bls is harder than heavy (and I don't want him to be banned, I bought one 2 months ago, xD). I'm not arguing against u, I understand ur arguments, and know they're good, but think they're other cards who need a ban sooner than heavy storm, and some of them banned that will do much more harm on the same way (talking about the trunade formats) because there is less common resources to stop it or are strategically worst than that ones (not to talk about the difference between the huge revolution is over and solemn judgment, or dark bribe). I'm pretty comfortable this format, and I just expect the next one isn't like the , making inzektor inzektor and inzektor the only 3 decks who can win something (for that one fire fist and fire fist, maybe fire kings, xD, but anyway lot of fire). About that, on the title is fire fist named, u think as I think that they'll be beaten on next banlist? people say it's too soon, but I see them pretty broken, domination most games except on counter decks, having searchable search engine, searchable support engine and a lot of space for control cards, just like ssam on their release, and they was hitted a month later, what's ur opinion?
ReplyDeleteMythos
Yes, there are cards more broken than heavy storm, and maybe some of them will be hit by the banlist. But my post was only about heavy storm and how it can shape the meta. I'm confortable with the meta too, by the way.
ReplyDeleteFire fist is nice, but is so different from the rest of the decks. Fire fist is all about battle phase. While, mermail, wind-ups, inzektor, Hero, six sams and dino-rabbit are center on heavy destruction and control. I tried Fire Fist and feel really weird with a hand not capable of stop rescue rabbit effect or dragonfly effect or megalo eff. I don't think they will be hit on the banlist. In fact, if you put a first turn catastor on the field, more than half of the cards on fire fist are uselless, and they will have to waste a lot of resources just to get rid of him.
I think the game needs a strong change to make Fire fist a real meta deck, maybe if they have their own GB chariot could be perfectly broken.
I haven't tough about that before your post, have my own ideas about them, but all u said is perfectly sensitive. Anyway I expect poor of that banlist (march banlists never get a balanced format, bring nerfs for older decks to sell the new stuff), but I enjoy sharing that predictions and points of view :3.
ReplyDeleteP.S: I tough about fire fists more like I tough about six sam, less able on their own than other archetypes, but searchable deck with low number of cards (maybe 16 monsters and 12 spell/trap, being able to get a strong trap control (well, traps or other stuff, crows, veilers, even trago/gorz for otks).
Mythos
P.S.2: ur a judge, if my memory is ok, tiger king cannot negate rabbit eff? dragonfly surely yes, I think, but not sure about rabbit (for the removing thing, maybe it's considered activated out of the game)
DeleteTiger king can only be actived in your turn, and only negate the monsters that are currently on the field. So, if it is not your turn, and your opponent summon a new monster and use his effect, there is nothing you could do about it. Whether you used tiger king effect in a previous turn or not.
ReplyDeleteOh, with currently I supposed means currently on the field till the effect ends, things like sangan or card trooper, eff negated, but when go out of field they regain their effects.
ReplyDeleteMythos
Many people thought the same thing, but No. Tiger king is barely useful to negate gachi, zenmaines or maestroke, so they can die in one battle. Which means tiger king is almost a lame boss monster.
ReplyDelete