|
|
Post by ragda on Jul 15, 2014 12:44:51 GMT -6
I wouldn't outright say that changing the replacement of Field Spells to no longer be considered destruction was just because of Geartown. It's the main example of that mechanic in action sure, but to assume that IT was solely the reason would be overreaching a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by BurnForGame on Jul 15, 2014 12:49:58 GMT -6
So, no one realized that I was sarcastically referring to Geartown there?  This change had Geartown partially in mind. It had to, unless there's some new card or series of cards coming that would have made it silly otherwise. I don't particularly like this new rule, as decks dedicated to a Field shouldn't be able to simply keep it on the field so easily, but I suppose it doesn't really bother me any... Of course it would... Hence the bold. I do hope everyone's clear on this now. I feel like we're getting bogged down here, when the reality is that the topic has been discussed rather thoroughly. |
|
|
|
Post by bystander on Jul 15, 2014 16:24:21 GMT -6
That was just speculation on my part, as indicated by my wording. I don't know anything new is on the way. I was just saying that there's the chance of it. Wouldn't surprise me if they did this. Konami seem to be basing their recent structures off the GX era. CyDra, LS, HEROs have a structure now. I would be shocked if we don't see a GB, AG, CB structure decks @ some point. |
|
|
|
Post by ragda on Jul 15, 2014 16:51:15 GMT -6
So, no one realized that I was sarcastically referring to Geartown there? This change had Geartown partially in mind. It had to, unless there's some new card or series of cards coming that would have made it silly otherwise. I don't particularly like this new rule, as decks dedicated to a Field shouldn't be able to simply keep it on the field so easily, but I suppose it doesn't really bother me any... Of course it would... Hence the bold. I do hope everyone's clear on this now. I feel like we're getting bogged down here, when the reality is that the topic has been discussed rather thoroughly. I was referring to this: Yeah, but that's not an optimal play. That's the point. It was determined that Geartown was too easy to trigger by the old game mechanics, so they changed them. Then again, for all we know, there's some new Ancient Gear monster coming down the line that would have been way broken if Geartown could easily summon it... It can never be known if Geartown was even one of the causes. Maybe they just decided to change for completely different reasons. But yeah this topic has been covered enough, methinks. Speaking of the new rules, some folks on DN still don't know of them or don't like them. Yeah, I know it's DN, but that's just stil... ugh. |
|
|
|
Post by bystander on Jul 15, 2014 17:33:39 GMT -6
Well they are going to learn the hard way.
I haven't come across another player that activated a field spell against me, 1 had 2 copies of Fusion gate in hand. Didn't activate either of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by troza on Jul 16, 2014 2:44:30 GMT -6
People will take time to get these new rules about the fields spells... They are becoming better and we might see the return of lots of decks with field spells.
|
|
|
|
Post by bystander on Jul 16, 2014 8:56:00 GMT -6
They better I want to see how I can captilize off a second field spell.
|
|
|
|
Post by troza on Jul 16, 2014 9:22:51 GMT -6
So far, Necrovalley will become even bigger... that's the biggest change I can see...
|
|
|
|
Post by ragda on Jul 16, 2014 10:37:36 GMT -6
Grand Spellbook Tower also sticks around longer. Sadly.
The Seal of Orichalcos is a bit better too.
|
|
|
|
Post by bystander on Jul 16, 2014 11:28:00 GMT -6
True. The one thing that could destroy The Seal of Orichalcos is no longer a thing to worry about.
Right now the only way to deal with is negating the spell on activation.
|
|
|
|
Post by BurnForGame on Jul 16, 2014 14:54:21 GMT -6
True. The one thing that could destroy The Seal of Orichalcos is no longer a thing to worry about. Right now the only way to deal with is negating the spell on activation. That, or destroying it twice in one turn, of course. With stuff like Double Cyclone and Artifacts, one card could essentially clear The Seal! I just don't like how they changed a fundamental rule of the game like it was nothing. Why should both players be able to have a Field Spell? There was strategy to it before. There's enough stuff one has to try to destroy in the backrow, but now Field decks going at it will have to spend even more removal on cards like those. |
|
|
|
Post by bystander on Jul 16, 2014 15:01:57 GMT -6
Because when it was just one field spell, the player who controlled the field spell generated huge advantage for themselves.
Think about the DW field spell, or the Spellbook tower.
|
|
|
|
Post by BurnForGame on Jul 16, 2014 15:13:54 GMT -6
Yes, but it was still destroyed when the opponent played their own Field, thus balancing the mechanic. Now, if the opponent of one of those Fields draws their own Field, the advantage generation could still continue unchecked. How is that okay?
|
|
|
|
Post by Drillwarrior on Jul 16, 2014 15:27:40 GMT -6
Yes, but it was still destroyed when the opponent played their own Field, thus balancing the mechanic. Now, if the opponent of one of those Fields draws their own Field, the advantage generation could still continue unchecked. How is that okay? Wait and see if anything problematic happens before you rage about it. It could do absolutely nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by oooxp on Jul 16, 2014 15:31:05 GMT -6
Its a pretty fair rulings so far..although it makes it slightly harder for me to deal with decks like gravekeepers, I could live with it.
|
|
This change had Geartown partially in mind. It had to, unless there's some new card or series of cards coming that would have made it silly otherwise. I don't particularly like this new rule, as decks dedicated to a Field shouldn't be able to simply keep it on the field so easily, but I suppose it doesn't really bother me any...
.png)
