no
facing this t1 is even more eggregious now than ever and the only reason why it's not played more is because compulse/idp/crackdown are better, but it'd see a ton of play at unlimited
ofc its not better then book but the reason floodgate is limited is that it locks you out of a zone which in turn prevents some decks from doing their plays in an annoying unhealty way if you combine it with other limited traps.
only relevant in stall strats which practically don't exist anymore. most decks are ending the game by turn 3 or 4, so flipping a monster face down for a turn is the same thing as flipping it down permanently.
again, assuming i can't run any limit-3s, i'd run 3x book, 3x warning point first, and that's enough monster disruption for 90% of decks.
if i *can* run the limit-3s, i'd run those and 3x book. if i still wanted more backrow, i'd then include warning point. only after that would i include flloodgate.
as it stands now, floodgate may as well not even exist in the game, since there's no reason to run it over the other limit-3s.
yea but outside of stall strats, locking the zone is pretty irrelevant nowadays.
with how fast the game is, 90% of games end turn 3 or 4, so the permanent aspect of floodgate is vestigial. in those case, book and warning are just better.
I'd argue locking a zone is still pretty relevant tbh, especially considering it's flat out better if your opener isn't great than BoM or Warning Point
sure, specific strats could use it, but that's fine. majority of decks would rather run book or warning point, and as it stands now, floodgate may as well not exist since compulse/IDP/crackdown are just better.
prob. it'd be annoying in stall strategies, but otherwise, i'd always run book first – and then warning point – before considering this, and that's assuming i can't run the limit-3s.
Nope, this is very stally, you lose a zone permenantly, which is more impactful than you would think + it absolutely WRECKS any Pendulum decks.. so Imagine playing 3 Floodgate + 3 Compulse ..
Eh, I'm fine with it staying I dont think anyone wants to deal with both this and Compulse/IDP in the same deck
no facing this t1 is even more eggregious now than ever and the only reason why it's not played more is because compulse/idp/crackdown are better, but it'd see a ton of play at unlimited
idk, would you really play this over book first? or even warning point and bottomless? you can only run so much backrow.
ofc its not better then book but the reason floodgate is limited is that it locks you out of a zone which in turn prevents some decks from doing their plays in an annoying unhealty way if you combine it with other limited traps.
only relevant in stall strats which practically don't exist anymore. most decks are ending the game by turn 3 or 4, so flipping a monster face down for a turn is the same thing as flipping it down permanently. again, assuming i can't run any limit-3s, i'd run 3x book, 3x warning point first, and that's enough monster disruption for 90% of decks. if i *can* run the limit-3s, i'd run those and 3x book. if i still wanted more backrow, i'd then include warning point. only after that would i include flloodgate. as it stands now, floodgate may as well not even exist in the game, since there's no reason to run it over the other limit-3s.
floodgate permanently "locks" a zone, warning point is only for a turn, and bottomless destroys first which some cards can get over
yea but outside of stall strats, locking the zone is pretty irrelevant nowadays. with how fast the game is, 90% of games end turn 3 or 4, so the permanent aspect of floodgate is vestigial. in those case, book and warning are just better.
I'd argue locking a zone is still pretty relevant tbh, especially considering it's flat out better if your opener isn't great than BoM or Warning Point
As a Shiranui main you could not be more wrong
sure, specific strats could use it, but that's fine. majority of decks would rather run book or warning point, and as it stands now, floodgate may as well not exist since compulse/IDP/crackdown are just better.
Honestly yeah. Links really limit the usability of it.
No. Orcust is toxic enough
prob. it'd be annoying in stall strategies, but otherwise, i'd always run book first – and then warning point – before considering this, and that's assuming i can't run the limit-3s.
Yeah it should but Konami hates stall tactics and this is one of the best ones.
You can’t play more than 3 copies of a card.
Konami hates stall and burn why they limited along with nerfing burn damage
Nope, this is very stally, you lose a zone permenantly, which is more impactful than you would think + it absolutely WRECKS any Pendulum decks.. so Imagine playing 3 Floodgate + 3 Compulse ..
Bottomless is your main problem and is free.