| We hope you enjoy your visit. You are currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you will be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you are already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Sinister Serpent; Cure for reaper impact? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 4 2006, 06:39 PM (206 Views) | |
| Indignation | Aug 4 2006, 06:39 PM Post #1 |
Ancient Duelist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Does anyone remember when SS was banned? I remember that the cards people complained about got banned but rarely anyone complained about SS and it still got banned. SS without GC or TER at 3 cannot be abused to a game breaking degree as much as say many of the other cards we have (snatch, Chaos sorcerer, Torrential etc...). It also helps against the overaggressive/overextending plays made commonly in this format. I think unbanning SS would be a slow start to undoing the major impact of card advantage. Card advantage has become way too important. Losing one card (in terms of advantage) even in a starting hand makes too big an impact in todays game. What do you all think? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Aug 4 2006, 07:35 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Sinister serpents banning was basically because it is a brainless card. And If you ban the cards the sinister combos with then u also open urself up to again breaking the format by removing its more skillful aspects. |
![]() |
|
| Indignation | Aug 4 2006, 08:27 PM Post #3 |
Ancient Duelist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
at the time it was banned (a format better than this) its comboable cards were banned to. There is nothing atm that is abusable enough to be more gamebreaking than what we have now. GC doesnt even need to banned if it comes back. Not having it makes cards like spirit reaper more mindless. |
![]() |
|
| |Loaded Dice| | Aug 4 2006, 08:51 PM Post #4 |
|
College Nut
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It really was stupid banning it with the other stuff. But when they decided on the "new" format at the time, they should have realized what they were doing. Since graceful was goon along with tribe, there wasn't really anything to support. Well if it does come back, graceful should be banned [/duh]. |
![]() ![]() Thanks Leonheart My New Trade list | |
![]() |
|
| Jedah | Aug 4 2006, 10:34 PM Post #5 |
|
Unregistered
|
I disagree. Sinster is abuseable with TIV and GC, but not what are the chances of drawing those two cards? It's the exact same chance as drawing Night Assailant with GC. And TIV back wouldn't be TOO broken either. |
|
|
| Indignation | Aug 5 2006, 09:48 AM Post #6 |
Ancient Duelist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
TIV is banned lol. Sinister with GC isn't even that bad anyway considering people +1 with it all the time (treeborn, night assailant or chaos food) and those always end up as +1. Thats why if sinister was unbanned it would make these +1 less gamebreaking. Sinister doesn't win games by itself, everything it won with is gone. One chaos sorcerer can win games just by itself. It's obvious sinister would do more godd than any little harm it might do. |
![]() |
|
| StorM | Aug 5 2006, 12:03 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Deck Building Teacher.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
it got banned because tribe infecting virus + sinsiter serpent = like free lightning vortex. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 1000th Post: Jan 26 2007, 12:43 AM | |
![]() |
|
| |Loaded Dice| | Aug 5 2006, 05:21 PM Post #8 |
|
College Nut
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No, because format then had ring, graceful, pot, bls, tiv, etc. Ugly broken format lol. |
![]() ![]() Thanks Leonheart My New Trade list | |
![]() |
|
| Jedah | Aug 5 2006, 11:41 PM Post #9 |
|
Unregistered
|
[SARC]WHAAAAAAAAAAT??? TIV IS BANNED???!!! NO WAI!!1[/SARC] Lol. I'm just saying that Sinster Serpent IS abuseable with TIV, but perhaps even TIV should return (<--zomg blasphemy). But I agree with your latter point: "It's obvious sinister would do more godd (good) than any little harm it might do." I want the Serpent back. |
|
|
| Indignation | Aug 6 2006, 09:22 PM Post #10 |
Ancient Duelist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
i like spelling good, godd ok. XD |
![]() |
|
| StorM | Aug 7 2006, 10:43 AM Post #11 |
![]()
Deck Building Teacher.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
yea, i agree with whats said above, sinister serpent is the anti yata card imo. |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() 1000th Post: Jan 26 2007, 12:43 AM | |
![]() |
|
| Sentinel | Aug 10 2006, 05:51 AM Post #12 |
Powerful Duelist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Serpent is one of my fav banned cards. For the fact of with that one, it really can go either way. There are a lot of viable points to banning and unbanning it. I really wouldnt mind if it returned but i doubt it will. |
![]() |
|
| Fubuki Tenjouin | Aug 16 2006, 10:15 AM Post #13 |
![]()
Superb Duelist
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Who didn't see this card being banned in the future? I'm glad. Every turn having a card that can be used in place of other cards isn't exactly what we call balanced. |
![]() [CODE]<a href="http://z9.invisionfree.com/Solar_Dusk_Academy"target="_blank"><img src="http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/3285/sdaaffiliatebuttonvt2kf8.jpg" border="0" alt="A Yu-Gi-Oh! role play forum that shines brighter than the sun itself."/></a>[/CODE] | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Yu-Gi-Oh! Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
1:15 PM Jul 11
|
Acid Haven created by Sarah & Delirium of the ZNR





![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)














1:15 PM Jul 11