Duelingbook Forum

Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Ruler
Mystic mine

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Angel
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)

What would be Vanity's Angel? Do you mean Vanity's Ruler?

That being said, Dragoon is fine, just hit the Verte Anaconda.

Assuming you mean Vanity's Ruler, there's no reason to ban it, yes Drytron can summon it with ease, however, its still a monster that can be easily removed from the field or even have its effect negated. Its attack isn't even high enough to be a real threat. That isn't going into Vanity's Fiend which is a lot easier to summon, but isn't as searchable which has the same weaknesses.

Renji Asuka wrote:That being said, Dragoon is fine, just hit the Verte Anaconda.

After getting sacked by it in casual matches, I can say that Dragoon is a roadblock that rouge decks HAVE to play, I can see why the OCG banned it.

Renji Asuka wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Angel
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)

What would be Vanity's Angel? Do you mean Vanity's Ruler?

That being said, Dragoon is fine, just hit the Verte Anaconda.

Assuming you mean Vanity's Ruler, there's no reason to ban it, yes Drytron can summon it with ease, however, its still a monster that can be easily removed from the field or even have its effect negated. Its attack isn't even high enough to be a real threat. That isn't going into Vanity's Fiend which is a lot easier to summon, but isn't as searchable which has the same weaknesses.

unless you have a way for odd-eyes pendulums to take out dragoon it still in that needs to be banned zone to me

Renji Asuka wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Angel
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)

What would be Vanity's Angel? Do you mean Vanity's Ruler?

That being said, Dragoon is fine, just hit the Verte Anaconda.

Assuming you mean Vanity's Ruler, there's no reason to ban it, yes Drytron can summon it with ease, however, its still a monster that can be easily removed from the field or even have its effect negated. Its attack isn't even high enough to be a real threat. That isn't going into Vanity's Fiend which is a lot easier to summon, but isn't as searchable which has the same weaknesses.

I always prefer to hit problems instead of enablers. I would rather hit the problem itself (Dragoon) than hit the cards that make it a bit easier to summon. If we hit Verte, players can still activate Red-Eyes Fusion, and then that spell becomes a sacky card or something.

Vanity's Fiend and Ruler should also go, whether or not outs exist. They disallow healthy interaction.

Christen57 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Angel
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)

What would be Vanity's Angel? Do you mean Vanity's Ruler?

That being said, Dragoon is fine, just hit the Verte Anaconda.

Assuming you mean Vanity's Ruler, there's no reason to ban it, yes Drytron can summon it with ease, however, its still a monster that can be easily removed from the field or even have its effect negated. Its attack isn't even high enough to be a real threat. That isn't going into Vanity's Fiend which is a lot easier to summon, but isn't as searchable which has the same weaknesses.

I always prefer to hit problems instead of enablers. I would rather hit the problem itself (Dragoon) than hit the cards that make it a bit easier to summon. If we hit Verte, players can still activate Red-Eyes Fusion, and then that spell becomes a sacky card or something.

Vanity's Fiend and Ruler should also go, whether or not outs exist. They disallow healthy interaction.

I rather hit enablers than "problem". Mystic Mine is a perfect example, the engine that the deck ran was a problem. 3 Lilith, 3 Trap Trick, 3 Metaverse for a grand total of 12 Mystic Mines in your deck, Mystic Mine wasn't the problem, how it was played was the problem. If everyone is able to spam Dragoon, we have to look at how its being spammed in every deck, which is why Verte Anaconda is a problem in this instance.

Not only that, but keeping the enablers, just allow the same situation to happen that people would would complain about. Say Dragoon does get banned, we already know Konami is fine with making cards are strong as Dragoon, so what makes you think they won't make a card like it that is spammable by the same enablers?

Even if people will spam Red-Eyes Fusion, you forget, they can't summon anything else, so they can't make a multi negate board. And that is implying they're still willing to spam it.

renji is correct

If you want another example as to why you hit enablers look at birthing pod in modern mtg



For just 1 creature, 1 mana of any color and 2 life you could pull any creature 1 cmc greater than your sacrifice. This allowed decks to splash all sorts of creature cards. Birthing Pod, like Verte, is only as good as the pool it can pull from and can give decks access to creatures they would otherwise wouldn't consider playing. There are differences, pod enabled way more plays and combos and was the key card to the decks that ran it.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Christen57 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:What would be Vanity's Angel? Do you mean Vanity's Ruler?

That being said, Dragoon is fine, just hit the Verte Anaconda.

Assuming you mean Vanity's Ruler, there's no reason to ban it, yes Drytron can summon it with ease, however, its still a monster that can be easily removed from the field or even have its effect negated. Its attack isn't even high enough to be a real threat. That isn't going into Vanity's Fiend which is a lot easier to summon, but isn't as searchable which has the same weaknesses.

I always prefer to hit problems instead of enablers. I would rather hit the problem itself (Dragoon) than hit the cards that make it a bit easier to summon. If we hit Verte, players can still activate Red-Eyes Fusion, and then that spell becomes a sacky card or something.

Vanity's Fiend and Ruler should also go, whether or not outs exist. They disallow healthy interaction.

I rather hit enablers than "problem". Mystic Mine is a perfect example, the engine that the deck ran was a problem. 3 Lilith, 3 Trap Trick, 3 Metaverse for a grand total of 12 Mystic Mines in your deck, Mystic Mine wasn't the problem, how it was played was the problem. If everyone is able to spam Dragoon, we have to look at how its being spammed in every deck, which is why Verte Anaconda is a problem in this instance.

Not only that, but keeping the enablers, just allow the same situation to happen that people would would complain about. Say Dragoon does get banned, we already know Konami is fine with making cards are strong as Dragoon, so what makes you think they won't make a card like it that is spammable by the same enablers?

Even if people will spam Red-Eyes Fusion, you forget, they can't summon anything else, so they can't make a multi negate board. And that is implying they're still willing to spam it.

Mystic Mine is a problem because it's unhealthy for the game and the reason things like Metaverse and Terraforming got hit.

I don't think Konami is "fine with making cards as strong as Dragoon". What I do think is that even Konami makes mistakes, and they know this, which is why they try to correct those mistakes through banlists/erratas. Konami probably didn't know cards like Pot of Greed would be so powerful when they first made those cards. Konami can't always predict exactly how strong/abusable every card they print will be. When Konami realized Pot of Greed was too strong, they corrected their mistake by hitting the card and not taking it off the banlist since. I don't think Konami would have been "fine" with super powerful cards like Pot of Greed existing if they knew exactly how strong and abusable it would be. If they really were fine with super power cards existing, I doubt we would have a banlist.

Christen57 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Christen57 wrote:
I always prefer to hit problems instead of enablers. I would rather hit the problem itself (Dragoon) than hit the cards that make it a bit easier to summon. If we hit Verte, players can still activate Red-Eyes Fusion, and then that spell becomes a sacky card or something.

Vanity's Fiend and Ruler should also go, whether or not outs exist. They disallow healthy interaction.

I rather hit enablers than "problem". Mystic Mine is a perfect example, the engine that the deck ran was a problem. 3 Lilith, 3 Trap Trick, 3 Metaverse for a grand total of 12 Mystic Mines in your deck, Mystic Mine wasn't the problem, how it was played was the problem. If everyone is able to spam Dragoon, we have to look at how its being spammed in every deck, which is why Verte Anaconda is a problem in this instance.

Not only that, but keeping the enablers, just allow the same situation to happen that people would would complain about. Say Dragoon does get banned, we already know Konami is fine with making cards are strong as Dragoon, so what makes you think they won't make a card like it that is spammable by the same enablers?

Even if people will spam Red-Eyes Fusion, you forget, they can't summon anything else, so they can't make a multi negate board. And that is implying they're still willing to spam it.

Mystic Mine is a problem because it's unhealthy for the game and the reason things like Metaverse and Terraforming got hit.

I don't think Konami is "fine with making cards as strong as Dragoon". What I do think is that even Konami makes mistakes, and they know this, which is why they try to correct those mistakes through banlists/erratas. Konami probably didn't know cards like Pot of Greed would be so powerful when they first made those cards. Konami can't always predict exactly how strong/abusable every card they print will be. When Konami realized Pot of Greed was too strong, they corrected their mistake by hitting the card and not taking it off the banlist since. I don't think Konami would have been "fine" with super powerful cards like Pot of Greed existing if they knew exactly how strong and abusable it would be. If they really were fine with super power cards existing, I doubt we would have a banlist.

You missed the point with the Mystic Mine example. That engine that I told you, would still exist even IF Mystic Mine was banned, and FYI, there is a few Flood Gate Field Spells that do exist, and if Konami was willing to make cards like Mystic Mine, do you really think the problem would be gone if it was made? If Konami made Mystic Mine, it's only a matter of time before Konami creates a more powerful version, even if years later. We would still have that engine which would create the same problem. Its all about addressing the issue so the issue can't come up again. That is why enablers are hit.

Because of this, Verte Anaconda IS the lynchpin that allows Dragoons to be spammed. You ban that, and players are more likely not to play Dragoons outside of Red-Eyes/Dark Magician, in which case, the card is quite okay.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Christen57 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:
I rather hit enablers than "problem". Mystic Mine is a perfect example, the engine that the deck ran was a problem. 3 Lilith, 3 Trap Trick, 3 Metaverse for a grand total of 12 Mystic Mines in your deck, Mystic Mine wasn't the problem, how it was played was the problem. If everyone is able to spam Dragoon, we have to look at how its being spammed in every deck, which is why Verte Anaconda is a problem in this instance.

Not only that, but keeping the enablers, just allow the same situation to happen that people would would complain about. Say Dragoon does get banned, we already know Konami is fine with making cards are strong as Dragoon, so what makes you think they won't make a card like it that is spammable by the same enablers?

Even if people will spam Red-Eyes Fusion, you forget, they can't summon anything else, so they can't make a multi negate board. And that is implying they're still willing to spam it.

Mystic Mine is a problem because it's unhealthy for the game and the reason things like Metaverse and Terraforming got hit.

I don't think Konami is "fine with making cards as strong as Dragoon". What I do think is that even Konami makes mistakes, and they know this, which is why they try to correct those mistakes through banlists/erratas. Konami probably didn't know cards like Pot of Greed would be so powerful when they first made those cards. Konami can't always predict exactly how strong/abusable every card they print will be. When Konami realized Pot of Greed was too strong, they corrected their mistake by hitting the card and not taking it off the banlist since. I don't think Konami would have been "fine" with super powerful cards like Pot of Greed existing if they knew exactly how strong and abusable it would be. If they really were fine with super power cards existing, I doubt we would have a banlist.

You missed the point with the Mystic Mine example. That engine that I told you, would still exist even IF Mystic Mine was banned, and FYI, there is a few Flood Gate Field Spells that do exist, and if Konami was willing to make cards like Mystic Mine, do you really think the problem would be gone if it was made? If Konami made Mystic Mine, it's only a matter of time before Konami creates a more powerful version, even if years later. We would still have that engine which would create the same problem. Its all about addressing the issue so the issue can't come up again. That is why enablers are hit.

Because of this, Verte Anaconda IS the lynchpin that allows Dragoons to be spammed. You ban that, and players are more likely not to play Dragoons outside of Red-Eyes/Dark Magician, in which case, the card is quite okay.

Yes, that Lilith Trap Trick Metaverse engine would still exist even with Mystic Mine banned, but the difference is that that engine wouldn't be as degenerate or unhealthy for the game. The only other closest floodgate field spells to Mystic Mine would be Array of Revealing Light, which only stops monsters with specific types from attacking and only the turn they're summoned, The Seal of Orichalcos which only stops monsters from attacking your weakest monster, and the Ghostrick field spells which only stop monsters from attacking face-down monsters, and Clear World which only stops players who control 2 or more dark monsters from attacking.

No other field spell completely stops all kinds of monsters from both attacking and activating effects in all locations, no other field spell would be or has ever been as degenerate with the Lilith Trap Trick Metaverse engine as Mystic Mine, and no other field spell did as well on a competitive level with the Lilith Trap Trick Metaverse engine as Mystic Mine did.

Christen57 wrote:
Yes, that Lilith Trap Trick Metaverse engine would still exist even with Mystic Mine banned, but the difference is that that engine wouldn't be as degenerate or unhealthy for the game.

You can't know that. And that's the point. Given konami's track record, something that could abuse the engine isn't a matter of if but when.

Debt wrote:

Christen57 wrote:
Yes, that Lilith Trap Trick Metaverse engine would still exist even with Mystic Mine banned, but the difference is that that engine wouldn't be as degenerate or unhealthy for the game.

You can't know that. And that's the point. Given konami's track record, something that could abuse the engine isn't a matter of if but when.

I think Konami does learn from it's mistakes, maybe not all the time but a lot of times they do, which is why they don't print any more Pot of Greeds or Confiscations or anything like that. I think Konami will learn from this and remember not to print another super unhealthy field spell for the game that locks out too much.

Christen57 wrote:

Debt wrote:

Christen57 wrote:
Yes, that Lilith Trap Trick Metaverse engine would still exist even with Mystic Mine banned, but the difference is that that engine wouldn't be as degenerate or unhealthy for the game.

You can't know that. And that's the point. Given konami's track record, something that could abuse the engine isn't a matter of if but when.

I think Konami does learn from it's mistakes, maybe not all the time but a lot of times they do, which is why they don't print any more Pot of Greeds or Confiscations or anything like that. I think Konami will learn from this and remember not to print another super unhealthy field spell for the game that locks out too much.

The reason why Konami doesn't make more pot of greeds is because we have different variants of pot of greeds to use. Also you're implying that Konami made a mistake of making cards like Pot of Greed or Confiscation, when they weren't a mistake. Pot of Greed was used in the anime a lot, that is why it took it awhile to be banned. Meanwhile Konami printed cards like Firewall Dragon, which was the cause of FTKs and loops, and took them like 2 years to ban. They willingly created the Danger! Archetype, which is one of the most powerful engines that was ever created. Hell Mystic Mine was even approved to be printed. So do you honestly think they won't ever make a busted card that could be used to stop opponent in their tracks while letting enablers for it to run free?

Heck, there's a reason why Instant Fusion and Norden are still banned. Same with Brilliant Fusion, all are enablers that people had used. (Instant Fusion more than Norden).

Also targets that can screw the opponent with the engine I listed for Mystic Mine, Mystic Mine, Summon Over, Lair of Darkness (Combine this with Super Poly and it really hurts), depending on the format Fire Prison, Domain of the True Monarchs, Summon Breaker, Zombie World (Depending on the match up), Secret Village of the Spellcasters (depending on your deck), Necrovalley (depending on the match up), Future Visions (banishing your opponent's normal summon can be crucial). And this isn't even including what else Konami can make, and isn't considering what other field spell that they'd make that can harm the opponent. This is why Metaverse was limited instead of Mystic Mine. (Yes I know Mystic Mine was put to 2, in the same list, which only enforces that Metaverse was a bigger problem.)

As for Verte Anaconda targets, it again leads into what Konami is willing to make and how accessible it is.

Renji Asuka wrote:

Christen57 wrote:

Debt wrote:
You can't know that. And that's the point. Given konami's track record, something that could abuse the engine isn't a matter of if but when.

I think Konami does learn from it's mistakes, maybe not all the time but a lot of times they do, which is why they don't print any more Pot of Greeds or Confiscations or anything like that. I think Konami will learn from this and remember not to print another super unhealthy field spell for the game that locks out too much.

The reason why Konami doesn't make more pot of greeds is because we have different variants of pot of greeds to use. Also you're implying that Konami made a mistake of making cards like Pot of Greed or Confiscation, when they weren't a mistake. Pot of Greed was used in the anime a lot, that is why it took it awhile to be banned. Meanwhile Konami printed cards like Firewall Dragon, which was the cause of FTKs and loops, and took them like 2 years to ban. They willingly created the Danger! Archetype, which is one of the most powerful engines that was ever created. Hell Mystic Mine was even approved to be printed. So do you honestly think they won't ever make a busted card that could be used to stop opponent in their tracks while letting enablers for it to run free?

Heck, there's a reason why Instant Fusion and Norden are still banned. Same with Brilliant Fusion, all are enablers that people had used. (Instant Fusion more than Norden).

Yeah, Konami seems to hit a combination of problems and enablers, not really just 1 or the other. They hit enablers like Norden, but also problems like True King of All Calamities.

Christen57 wrote:

Renji Asuka wrote:

Christen57 wrote:
I think Konami does learn from it's mistakes, maybe not all the time but a lot of times they do, which is why they don't print any more Pot of Greeds or Confiscations or anything like that. I think Konami will learn from this and remember not to print another super unhealthy field spell for the game that locks out too much.

The reason why Konami doesn't make more pot of greeds is because we have different variants of pot of greeds to use. Also you're implying that Konami made a mistake of making cards like Pot of Greed or Confiscation, when they weren't a mistake. Pot of Greed was used in the anime a lot, that is why it took it awhile to be banned. Meanwhile Konami printed cards like Firewall Dragon, which was the cause of FTKs and loops, and took them like 2 years to ban. They willingly created the Danger! Archetype, which is one of the most powerful engines that was ever created. Hell Mystic Mine was even approved to be printed. So do you honestly think they won't ever make a busted card that could be used to stop opponent in their tracks while letting enablers for it to run free?

Heck, there's a reason why Instant Fusion and Norden are still banned. Same with Brilliant Fusion, all are enablers that people had used. (Instant Fusion more than Norden).

Yeah, Konami seems to hit a combination of problems and enablers, not really just 1 or the other. They hit enablers like Norden, but also problems like True King of All Calamities.

I edited my post to add a bit more detail, so might want to look again since I didn't want to double post. As for this, it really depends on the situation. Sometimes the problem cards should be hit, such as CED back when it was released and was played along side Yata Garasu, there wasn't any real enablers for that outside of Witch of the Black Forest and Sangan, which both did see themselves on the banlist much later if I recall. Meanwhile Gateway of the Six was a huge enabler for Six Sams, which is why it was hit.

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Ruler
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)
Mystic mine

Dragoon ban is ok, the OCG did it.

Mystic mine banned? Put it at 1 - 2 is ok, its just duelingbook singles where Mystic Mine is really problematic (Konami generally look at matches and mystic mine is easy to side even mine burn).

Vanity's Ruler and Vanity's Fiend? Are you serious? Are you a magic the gathering player or something?

sophia124 wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Ruler
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)
Mystic mine

Dragoon ban is ok, the OCG did it.

Mystic mine banned? Put it at 1 - 2 is ok, its just duelingbook singles where Mystic Mine is really problematic (Konami generally look at matches and mystic mine is easy to side even mine burn).

Vanity's Ruler and Vanity's Fiend? Are you serious? Are you a magic the gathering player or something?

they prevent special summons just by being on the field

AnimeMasterDub wrote:

sophia124 wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:Vanity's Fiend
Vanity's Ruler
Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon (or at least make it limited to 1)
Mystic mine

Dragoon ban is ok, the OCG did it.

Mystic mine banned? Put it at 1 - 2 is ok, its just duelingbook singles where Mystic Mine is really problematic (Konami generally look at matches and mystic mine is easy to side even mine burn).

Vanity's Ruler and Vanity's Fiend? Are you serious? Are you a magic the gathering player or something?

they prevent special summons just by being on the field

Flundereeze is laughing at them

greg503 wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:

sophia124 wrote:
Dragoon ban is ok, the OCG did it.

Mystic mine banned? Put it at 1 - 2 is ok, its just duelingbook singles where Mystic Mine is really problematic (Konami generally look at matches and mystic mine is easy to side even mine burn).

Vanity's Ruler and Vanity's Fiend? Are you serious? Are you a magic the gathering player or something?

they prevent special summons just by being on the field

Flundereeze is laughing at them

Then ask Flundereeze how can odd-eyes pendulum decks beat Vanity's Ruler and Vanity's Fiend

AnimeMasterDub wrote:

greg503 wrote:

AnimeMasterDub wrote:they prevent special summons just by being on the field

Flundereeze is laughing at them

Then ask Flundereeze how can odd-eyes pendulum decks beat Vanity's Ruler and Vanity's Fiend

Never heard of monster negation?