Would making all of the banned cards unplayable until turn 10 or later balance them?

[Christen57]

Pot of greed is banned because it lets you draw 2 cards for free with little to no drawback. However, in other card games like Magic The Gathering, there are cards that let you draw 2, 3, or even 4 cards for free with little no drawback, and those cards are considered fair.





These cards are considered fair because they all require a certain amount of "mana" to activate. Mana is usually generated through the use of "land" cards, which can only be played once per turn. Divination, for example, requires 3 mana to activate. You must play a land card for 1 mana, wait until your next turn, play another land card for 1 more mana, wait until your next turn again, and then play another land card for 1 more mana, giving you a total of 3 mana to activate it and draw 2 cards.

Pot of Greed can be played right away. You don't need to wait until you've generated enough mana to play it. If you changed Pot of Greed so that you did require mana to play it, then it would make it a fair card, but that would require Konami to redesign the entire game in order to incorporate any kind of mana system, so the best thing to do would be to just make it so that you can have Pot of Greed in your main deck or side deck, but you cannot play it during the duel until a certain amount of turns have already passed.

This would accomplish 3 things.

First, it would simulate a mana system for all of the currently banned cards without forcing Konami to implement an actual mana system.

Second, it would make Pyro Clock of Destiny a viable card in the meta, since you could play it to let you move the turn count forward by 1, thus allowing you to have access to your powerful cards much quicker. Although, do keep in mind that Pyro Clock of Destiny is, by itself, a minus 1 in terms of card advantage.



Third, it would create more depth for the game and make things more interesting (Example: A Pendulum Player could max out on 3 copies, each, of Performapal Skullcrobat Joker, Performapal Monkeyboard, Astrograph Sorcerer, Majespecter Unicorn Kirin, Double Iris Magician, and Performage Plushfire, but if they choose to do so, then they risk having a hand full of brick/dead cards in their opening hand during the early stages of the game, while at the same time, if they manage to survive the first 9 turns of the game, then they will be able to dominate with all of those powerful cards during the late stages of the game).

Likewise, in Magic The Gathering, while you could play a bunch of cards that say things like "draw 4 cards for free," "discard your hand and draw 7 cards for free," "special summon 4 dragons from your deck onto the battlefield for free," "discard your opponent's entire hand for free," "look at your opponent's deck and summon 1 of their monsters onto your side of the battlefield for free," or "take control of all monsters your opponent controls for free," it isn't recommended that you do so, because all of these kinds of cards will usually require large amounts of mana to play, and you will have a bunch of brick/dead cards during the early stages of the game.

I think this would be great for the game and make things a lot more interesting. Also, keep in mind that this only applies to cards that are banned, not cards that are limited, semi-limited, or unlimited.

[__Blank__]

Magic involves Land Cards

Nuff Said

[MrAwesomePG]

I remember you from the DN forums.
Putting an arbitrary limit on when banned cards could be used wouldn't do anything to make them more balanced.
If anything, no one would want to play them at all because they'd be virtually unplayable since most games don't even last that long unless you're intentionally trying to stall.

Also, there's already enough mechanics in the game to worry about already, we don't need a 'mana'-like system ON TOP of all that.

[Christen57]

What about limiting it to like 5 turns instead of 10? Would that make them playable?

[__Blank__]

Putting an arbitrary limit on when banned cards could be used wouldn't do anything to make them more balanced.If anything, no one would want to play them at all because they'd be virtually unplayable since most games don't even last that long unless you're intentionally trying to stall.

[Christen57]

What I was thinking was that, while games do often end very quickly, they don't end very quickly all the time. So I figured that if you play against a fast-paced opponent and you think the game is going to end quickly, you put the banned cards in your side deck, and if you face-off against a player who is played a slow-paced deck then you can side in the banned cards because you're more likely to be able to survive long enough to use them in the slow game.

[__Blank__]

What I was thinking was that, while games do often end very quickly, they don't end very quickly all the time. So I figured that if you play against a fast-paced opponent and you think the game is going to end quickly, you put the banned cards in your side deck, and if you face-off against a player who is played a slow-paced deck then you can side in the banned cards because you're more likely to be able to survive long enough to use them in the slow game.

I am going to break down this segment, because you clearly do NOT understand the meta as it currently is, and think it's still 2002. let me rehash, this isn't as slow as Goat Control, this isn't as "Slow" as Dragon Ruler Dragunity or Judgment Book was, it is a LOT faster than it used to be.

If you are NOT running meta, then you WILL be beat unless your opponent "bricks" kind of meta. There are rogues here and there, but unbanning the banned cards (When they were banned for a reason) without knowing how it would impact the game is ridiculous from my perspective), and a total mistake if done.

Let me go to your MTG references for instance, the Sorcery that requires 3 mana (and mana is required to PLAY cards in MTG, which is totally different and has a drawback) vs yugioh's pot of greed, which is a literal automatic +1 with "no tapping", no "phase skipping", literally there is no room for it having "little drawback" because it has no drawback other than "being an idiot and activating it in the same column as an opponent's Set (infinite impermanence / infinite transience)" which would result in pot of greed being negated for no drawbacks (a -1 in other words for the PoG user).

The other Sorcery is Draw 3 cards, but cost 2 *any* mana, and 2 *water* mana, this limits it to decks that run a blue theme (of sorts) or dual land decks that serve as Water+Other. Trust me I know both CG's enough to lecture your ear off if you are interested in learning.

Then you got tidings, which while it is Draw 4, it costs 3 *any* mana, and 2 *water* mana. This means that you need to *again* be running a water theme decks, or dual lands that run water. So again these 2 cards in themselves are limited to anything water. My Goblin Deck that focuses on Goblin spam and Burn Damage cannot "benefit" from this as a result. Pot of Greed however, has no specified cost that a specific deck would be limited to, rather it has "no drawback" and can be run in anything. If we made it to 1, it would be run in literally EVERY deck, because you either -1 against IO, 1-1 against Ash, 2-2 against Droll & Lock Bird, or you +1 assuming nothing happens. It's an automatic +1.

Have I convinced you that you cannot compare CGs because the mechanics make the functions of gameplay incomparable?

What I was thinking was that, while games do often end very quickly, they don't end very quickly all the time. So I figured that if you play against a fast-paced opponent and you think the game is going to end quickly, you put the banned cards in your side deck, and if you face-off against a player who is played a slow-paced deck then you can side in the banned cards because you're more likely to be able to survive long enough to use them in the slow game.

They do not end quickly all the time, due to grind games, and counter responses, also the newer introduction of the overused "Evenly Matched" which tempts people NOT to commit to the board turn 1, usually resulting in the opponent setting up a board that can counter react, to even out the pace of the game. If you do not run evenly, or your opponent knows you do not, you're essentially screwed. Especially at a YCS.

I see people compare their "Locals" to counter argue this kind of logicline, so please if you do argue it, do not use "It won a regionals / locals" as a reason because I will shoot that argument down rather harsh jsuk.
The real issue is that you want it to be more akin to MTG to allow these kind of cards, introduce these mechanics as viably healthy for the game, but realistically it's toxic for the gamestate.

While you could side them out against a fast-paced deck, the real question I got is assuming this ever happened (Trust me it won't even in theory but I will play along), if I cannot use Pot of Greed until Turn 5, and the Meta (as it is as of today this format, and the prior 1-2 formats) has remained as fast NO it's gotten FASTER with Danger! Archtype my bad... Why would I run pot of greed (at all) when I can easily go through what I need or search it? Id rather run more cards I can use right away to reduce my chances to brick. Also note their is NO Mullligan Rule in Yugioh, whereas with Magic there is.

[-Vantage.Princess-]

Well, he is right in one thing "Games end quickly". Most of the yugioh games end in the 5-7th turn and is because most of the effects are not balanced, wich makes this game fair, because if everything is unfair nothing is unfair. (Konami's Common Sense)

https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Evenly_Matched
(Ban the opponent's entire field face-down for no cost)
https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Red_Reboot
(They saw that Evenly Matched was a ridiculous effect and they had to design a counter to that) ̶t̶o̶ ̶m̶a̶k̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶m̶o̶n̶e̶y̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶r̶s̶e̶

[xDEADCENTREx]

Evenly Matched added Skill to the format, from preventing people from making unbreakable boards and baiting responses to 1 card wipe board because of unfair setup.

Red Reboot was used more as a hard counter to trap decks, because burn is so annoying to face IMHO, so let's agree to disagree there.

[eyal282]

Pot of greed is banned because it lets you draw 2 cards for free with little to no drawback. However, in other card games like Magic The Gathering, there are cards that let you draw 2, 3, or even 4 cards for free with little no drawback, and those cards are considered fair.





These cards are considered fair because they all require a certain amount of "mana" to activate. Mana is usually generated through the use of "land" cards, which can only be played once per turn. Divination, for example, requires 3 mana to activate. You must play a land card for 1 mana, wait until your next turn, play another land card for 1 more mana, wait until your next turn again, and then play another land card for 1 more mana, giving you a total of 3 mana to activate it and draw 2 cards.

Pot of Greed can be played right away. You don't need to wait until you've generated enough mana to play it. If you changed Pot of Greed so that you did require mana to play it, then it would make it a fair card, but that would require Konami to redesign the entire game in order to incorporate any kind of mana system, so the best thing to do would be to just make it so that you can have Pot of Greed in your main deck or side deck, but you cannot play it during the duel until a certain amount of turns have already passed.

This would accomplish 3 things.

First, it would simulate a mana system for all of the currently banned cards without forcing Konami to implement an actual mana system.

Second, it would make Pyro Clock of Destiny a viable card in the meta, since you could play it to let you move the turn count forward by 1, thus allowing you to have access to your powerful cards much quicker. Although, do keep in mind that Pyro Clock of Destiny is, by itself, a minus 1 in terms of card advantage.



Third, it would create more depth for the game and make things more interesting (Example: A Pendulum Player could max out on 3 copies, each, of Performapal Skullcrobat Joker, Performapal Monkeyboard, Astrograph Sorcerer, Majespecter Unicorn Kirin, Double Iris Magician, and Performage Plushfire, but if they choose to do so, then they risk having a hand full of brick/dead cards in their opening hand during the early stages of the game, while at the same time, if they manage to survive the first 9 turns of the game, then they will be able to dominate with all of those powerful cards during the late stages of the game).

Likewise, in Magic The Gathering, while you could play a bunch of cards that say things like "draw 4 cards for free," "discard your hand and draw 7 cards for free," "special summon 4 dragons from your deck onto the battlefield for free," "discard your opponent's entire hand for free," "look at your opponent's deck and summon 1 of their monsters onto your side of the battlefield for free," or "take control of all monsters your opponent controls for free," it isn't recommended that you do so, because all of these kinds of cards will usually require large amounts of mana to play, and you will have a bunch of brick/dead cards during the early stages of the game.

I think this would be great for the game and make things a lot more interesting. Also, keep in mind that this only applies to cards that are banned, not cards that are limited, semi-limited, or unlimited.

If you use Pot of Greed on the correct turn, it would mean you can immediately use another card.

If you use a mana costing card at turn 1, which I imagine you can, and there's a 1 mana card of graceful charity, you would be able to use less cards, because you have -1 in mana advantage.

Imagine pot of greed had a restriction "You cannot control monsters whose combined stats is over 3500" so most omni negates stop working.