Originality

First topic message reminder :

Ya know, I've been thinking. What ever happened to being original with your deck? Seems like today people want to use the latest meta in Yu-Gi-Oh, and although the duels can be tough and give you a workout, there seems to be, for me, a lack of fun with the duels now-a-days. I don't know, maybe it's just nostalgia, but why should we focus on meta-geared decks and not originality? Because all I'm seeing now-a-days is nekroz this and Burning Abyss that and tellarknights.

Speaking of originality
2 days ago, i was on regionals, irl tournament, playing totally random deck (anti-meta i like to say) 3 of each hands, tengu, blackwing gale etc....
I ended up with 3-3 score, it could have been 4-2, and possibly top 16, but did huge missplay that costed me match

anyway, my point is that u can have fun, and do pretty nice score with fun deck as well
(btw, no, i didnt face with fun deck (volcanis, nekroz, qlips etc...)

Riot...i dont say you have to stick...thats why i say we need more verity...you are just to rock headed to understand me...You don't have a different opinion, you are just nostalgic...I am as well, but you cant bring the past. All you can do is try and settle with the future

Pepchoninga wrote:Lol Orignal Yu-gi-oh decks didnt have any sinergy...thing is it was all for fun, and the decks of the charapters were shit even for that time...But i can say that some of the meta decks are better then others...I think they are the same level and if we have 20 more archetypes in that same level yugioh, atleast for me, woud be 10 times more enjoyable

Pep in Original Yugioh you had to combine few cards to bring something powerful.

You had to get 2 monster to summon blue-eyes And if that didnt work set a magic cylinder and wait for game xD Belive ive watched my cousin play at that time xD It was better in GX era

then you know that summoning a blue-eyes or setting a magic cylinder weren't the only ways the win

They werent...tho they were one of the more common ways to do it...Well later in the game there were quit alot more ways but still...

I wish the game is little bit simplier however we need new meta.

I think we need the idea to mix archetypes and not stick with one, in my opinion. Also, try not to be competitive at times. I play to have fun, I also play to win, but 75% of the time, I at least want to have fun

You can always mix archetypes...we just need more decks and more veriaty that can batlle with the new meta

i personally think the game would benefit from a complete meta nuke everything tire 1 getting substantial hits we've quite literately as some have said above had most of our meta decks over a year now - the few that have come in early this year but anyway as i was saying a substantial meta nuke would reset and refresh the game state allowing both old and new decks to rise up and yes while we will probably see new decks take the spot of our old top tier decks that may not necessarily be a bad thing

Logic is well nonsence...you cant have a deck like Gladiator Beast be meta...Not because they are a bad archetype its because everything new is better...And no i dont think that meta shoud be nuked...Its not overpowered...every deck can lose and every deck can win...Overpowered stuff are long in the ban list...

idk where half of that came from there pep but regardless the "meta" is overpowered to an extent thats why they are "meta" and yes as you said every deck can win and every deck can lose but the percentage of other decks wining vs these decks wining is staggering and at this point i will again say that the meta needs to take some serious hits maybe not a complete nuke as i earlier suggested but i and many others will agree hits definitely need to be made 1 thing for sure tho konami being konami stellars will get hit and probely nekroz will get a direct hit stellars for winning worlds and nekroz for having a strong showing

Now let me tell ya something. Everything i said was clear i think. dont wanna sound offending its just that what you are saying is not gonna make the meta better...You know Infernities and Dragon rulers for instance...I dont think they coud have compared with today's meta even if they were still with all of there cards, but lets say they were...We woud now have both strong decks that are older and strong decks that are newer...But now what you are suggesting woud not in any way make the game better...They will most likely end up making some of the meta decks somewhat unplayable. What will happen then? New archetypes will come that will be just as overpowered as the last ones and will then be nuked as well...and that becomes a cycle...Do you think that this is better then having 40 archetypes with the same level of power and capability of winning consistently and then maybe giving a bigger chance of people comming up with ideas of mixed archetypes that woud work just as well as the pure archetype builds? Think about it and stop saying the same thing...try and think beyond what you already have as an opinion. And then tell me honestly dont you think this sounds just a litlle bit more right?

Pep do you realize if you have 40 different decks with same power that would be not be meta? Also, why doesen't Konami unban then all of D Rulers stuff? They gived Rulers two formats!! Two formats! Shaddolls, Tellars and BA are in game for 1,2,3,4, this is their 5th format! Qlips are in game for 4 and Nekroz for 3. And I agree with TR, Tellars will probably got hit, and they deserve to.

Tbh I like this meta, because there is so many decks that can do something. Many tier 1 and 2 decks. If there was no nekroz i'd say this is one of the best metas so far.
Ik u guys wont agree with me, but just look geargia, d rulers and older formats
There werent so many decks
i like current meta
shaddoll, qlips, ba, tellar, nekroz
there are also yosenjues, ritual beasts etc.

I think that there are plenty of metas, maybe even a bit too much, in my opinion. I just want Konami to stop making metas and have people start coming up with original ideas rather than giving up and going with a meta

Well you just dont understand...You think its that easy...And mostly that its Konami's fault...

ima change my opinion a bit here (as Ive done a bit of reading "research and the like") again a larger influx of archetypes wont help creativity cause even if you could find a way to make them equal in power we will find the one that is most consistent and make it better then the rest its just what we as people do.

I will also say yes the current meta needs some hits and will most likely get them its konami there gonna hit shit (especially the decks that had a good showing at worlds they love doing tht for some reason).

That being said it looks like even with the hits konami is making that they are trying to keep the game in a more stable and long lasting state that is why we are seeing theses decks stay at the top for as long as they have now does that mean that we will keep seeing new archetypes come out that are as or even more powerful than our current meta? most likely not of course there will need to be new decks that will be able to compete so you will see the odd few that will be as powerful or even more powerful come in from time to time but imo we will mostly see decks that can have a decent standing with current decks and in the same instance we will see decks that will lean a bit away from the power and just be for a lack of a better term a more fun/interesting deck rather than competitive and im ok with that. This of course wont do anything for originality unless we do get archetypes that are readily splash-able or they do away with archetypes completely (i personally don't see how they could but you get my point) but we will hopefully see a larger pool of decks/archetypes to pick from.

That was my idea...also seeing today's meta you can very well tell me, do you think there is a deck thats that much better than the others? I can't say so...just because a deck is topping more on tournaments doesn't mean that a deck is better then the other meta decks...And lol mate again you just don't really think about it that much...Of Course sometimes if we have more archetypes of the level of the current meta we will have someone come up with an idea that will make a deck much better then other (For example the Djinn Lock used by Nekroz) . here comes the real part of Konami...they see something that makes a deck more overpowered then the list o best decks, well they will ban it...You still don't completely get me, tho you will soon...

i get you pep but i think its you who don't get me on this 1 pep in my last comment i never said that any deck was better than the other i just stated due to the performance that said decks have had konami being konami will ban certain if not key cards from the deck why they would choose to do this idk but more than likely we will see it happening tho i agree that konami at this point are doing a decent job monitoring the meta situation (as you said above the djinn lock) if the past is any indication (Dragon rulers, infernites) stellarknights will take hits and possibly even major hits sense they have not sustained any hits sense there release and konami at this point would be just in taking hits at them not major hits but hits none the less and moving onto nekroz they had a huge showing as well witch means konami will probely indirectly hit them to slow them down or they will hit them directly just enough to put a kink in there armor but not see the deck dead tht is of course unless konami wants them gone (tho i dont see tht happening)

don't get me wrong i believe that the current meta is pretty balanced for the moment but yeah its not that any 1 deck is better than the other in the meta game at this point its konami being konami and its also the reactions of players in turn as well that will most likely lead to the "top decks" getting impacted

Well now you basically said i was saying this whole debate...with the minor thing that if we have more decks like Tellars there would not be a need to Ban cards that are not overpowered, or give a deck unfair advantage...Now for me it is useless for us to debate this since all we do is say what we think is right and dont see what the others are trying to say so i will urge people to stop debating over something they can't really change (Me including)

although i'm shaddoll fan i have to say tellars are really good deck
not op, but still pretty good
when i saw them for the very first time i hoped there will be more decks like tellars
but nah....

I'm completely opposite. I don't want more decks like Tellars, they're actually the deck I hate most in this meta.

You dont understand...You think meta is shit cuz its old...if the meta was 40 decks you woudnt think its that bad...

Pepchoninga wrote:You dont understand...You think meta is shit cuz its old...if the meta was 40 decks you woudnt think its that bad...

Man I understand everything but you're the only one who doesen't understand. True I don't like the meta because it's old. But I didn't liked it even when it was new. Btw, don't you realize, that 40 meta decks is not meta, it's rogue. Meta can't have 40 decks.