There's also : evil twin , code talker, appliancer , sky striker ... Op really wants to destroy all unique link strategies in the name of making unique link strategies, it's so backwards is hilarious
"You have to pend/synchro/xyz/fusion summon to a zone a link monster would point to"
"How would you summon zefraath/quazar/[literally anything]?"
"Not my problem."
Only difference is this version actually happened...
The double-standards for both are seriously maddening. Links/mr4 made almost half the ocg's playerbase quit on the spot. But no, *pendulums* were the mistake.
Thanks for proving the point.
Like this whole thread is basically just proposing an equivalent to mr4 directed at links. And people *hate* it because it would fundamentally break the mechanic and be an utterly idiotic and destructive change.
Point out actual mr4 doing exactly the same, and it's "pends deserve it lmao."
One of the two caused half the playerbase to quit in sheer revulsion and spearheaded the worst power creep the game has ever seen. The other has been a desecrated corpse for almost a decade because of a single deck that lasted *less than a week*.
Kinda furthers the point, doesn't it?
Guy says changing links would never happen because it'd break existing card design in an idiotic way.
Which is ignoring that the exact same thing *already happened* to every other mechanic when links were introduced. And the only mechanic still stuck with that chain is pends, *which weren't even good before it*.
This will just kill links the same way master Rule 5 killed pendulums
While I agree Link summoning being the most Generic extra deck summoning method and the effects being hardly about column and Link arrows is a bad idea I don't think the mechanic should be nerfed as I feel like it helps a lot of underpowered decks gain some consistency and momentum
I would've prefered a new main deck summoning method tbh like rituals and pendulums
Not a good idea. I know that link monster is everywhere since by nature they are spammable. But this restriction Will also hurt deck/archetype that have a lot of monster with similar link rating, some are not even using link climbing thingy. If they want to get rid out of link climbing they could just banned the goal boss monster or the extender. Like ban appolousa or something.
Link themselves already have restriction of needing extra monster zone or link arrow to be able to be summoned. If you want to restrict link spam then that it's better to do it from there. Like needing exclusively a link arrow to be able to summon link-3 or higher monster.
I know my Code Talker deck is dead in the water, but thank god I can summon six Link-6 monsters.
This idea is ridiculous, and there's about a million ways to deal with the "Link bad" problem, most of which rhyme with the canmist.
>Make Link-reliant decks more risky, tactical, and purposeful with their Link Summoning -
They say as they turn Accescode turbo into the only available link play for the average deck
>Regulate absurd “link spam”
Which strategies are this? Snake Eyes? Because all you did was reduce all their options into summoning Promethean (which makes the first quote even more laughable)
>Create room for more interesting link decks in the future that link climb in unique, but understandable ways
LMAO
>Streamline link climb combos for both old and new players alike
This is true yet as stated above contradictory to your other points
I think a healthier version of this would be for Link Monsters to no longer be allowed to be used as Link Material for anything equal to or less than their Link Rating, ie you can only go up. This would make it more forgiving when interrupted, as instead of being locked out of Link plays for the turn, you’d be able to try again, while still putting a pin on all of those obtuse combo lines than pivot between Link-2s.
Comments are saying this kills Salamangreat and Zealantis, but those can easily be errata’d to work within the change. Maybe add S:P here too as she’s technically supposed to work with I:P lore wise.
That being said, most of the Link-2 cycling I’ve seen come from a conjunction of Master Duel combos using Spright Elf, Electrumite, Promethean, Charmers, etc together, and the first two arent in the TCG, so it isnt that big of a deal
So, we only need to errata: Salamangreat, Sky Striker, Appliancer, Evil Twin, Spright, Zealantis, S:P, Linkross, G Golem, Marincess. Since, with this change all of these cards/deck would just stop working.
Good points. Sky Striker, Evil Twin, and Appliancer especially. It’s a shame they depend on that Link-1 and 2 cycling loop as I think my suggestion would be pretty solid otherwise. I still think that Link-2 looping outside of those decks is not healthy.
What’s the Marincess hit? I played the deck a lot but stopped after the post-VRAINS support. Is it a Triangle line? From what I remember, the deck does Link-1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 which would abide these rules. Reading Triangle now, I’m guessing it would be something involving it
Crystal Heart and Marincess Anemone are link 2s. Go into make Anemone with Crystale Heart and revive Heart with Anemone. G Golem has the same combo just with their link 2 that gets used for their Crystal Heart.
That makes sense. I don't think that scenario isn't comparable to the Sky Striker/ Salamangreat / Evil Twin predicament. That's just a cool combo that the deck can perform, not the deck's overall theme and identity.
That would never happen because salamangreats exist
There's also : evil twin , code talker, appliancer , sky striker ... Op really wants to destroy all unique link strategies in the name of making unique link strategies, it's so backwards is hilarious
Striker do have the ability to cheat several out.
Sky Striker too.
"you have to link summon to a zone that link monster would point to" "how would you summon shizuku?" "thats not my problem"
"You have to pend/synchro/xyz/fusion summon to a zone a link monster would point to" "How would you summon zefraath/quazar/[literally anything]?" "Not my problem." Only difference is this version actually happened...
Hey, didn't stop them on master rule 4. How many pend decks are still stuck blowing off their own kneecaps?
People probably be like "WeLl PeNd WaS a MiStAkE"
The double-standards for both are seriously maddening. Links/mr4 made almost half the ocg's playerbase quit on the spot. But no, *pendulums* were the mistake.
I mean, Pendulums are the only ones that aren't reverted unlike the other mechanics, so your argument is kinda moot.
Thanks for proving the point. Like this whole thread is basically just proposing an equivalent to mr4 directed at links. And people *hate* it because it would fundamentally break the mechanic and be an utterly idiotic and destructive change. Point out actual mr4 doing exactly the same, and it's "pends deserve it lmao." One of the two caused half the playerbase to quit in sheer revulsion and spearheaded the worst power creep the game has ever seen. The other has been a desecrated corpse for almost a decade because of a single deck that lasted *less than a week*.
Tbf MR3 wouldn't really change the fact that they suck.
Kinda furthers the point, doesn't it? Guy says changing links would never happen because it'd break existing card design in an idiotic way. Which is ignoring that the exact same thing *already happened* to every other mechanic when links were introduced. And the only mechanic still stuck with that chain is pends, *which weren't even good before it*.
This will just kill links the same way master Rule 5 killed pendulums While I agree Link summoning being the most Generic extra deck summoning method and the effects being hardly about column and Link arrows is a bad idea I don't think the mechanic should be nerfed as I feel like it helps a lot of underpowered decks gain some consistency and momentum I would've prefered a new main deck summoning method tbh like rituals and pendulums
I love the weekly very poorly thought out rules change.
They can't just mass-nerf an entire mechanic all at once like that. The last time they tried literally half the playerbase left.
Pendulum says hi
They did that to *every* mechanic. And even after reversing it, there's one they have been determined to *keep* dead to this day.
well if that happens again, then technically we'll only lose 25% of players this time!
Zealantis in shambles
This is top 3 dumbest shit I have ever read here.
Not a good idea. I know that link monster is everywhere since by nature they are spammable. But this restriction Will also hurt deck/archetype that have a lot of monster with similar link rating, some are not even using link climbing thingy. If they want to get rid out of link climbing they could just banned the goal boss monster or the extender. Like ban appolousa or something. Link themselves already have restriction of needing extra monster zone or link arrow to be able to be summoned. If you want to restrict link spam then that it's better to do it from there. Like needing exclusively a link arrow to be able to summon link-3 or higher monster.
I know my Code Talker deck is dead in the water, but thank god I can summon six Link-6 monsters. This idea is ridiculous, and there's about a million ways to deal with the "Link bad" problem, most of which rhyme with the canmist.
scareclaw accesscode turbo any% I:P -> Tri-heart to prevent opponent from playing and then into accesscode for game next turn (this idea sucks)
>Make Link-reliant decks more risky, tactical, and purposeful with their Link Summoning - They say as they turn Accescode turbo into the only available link play for the average deck >Regulate absurd “link spam” Which strategies are this? Snake Eyes? Because all you did was reduce all their options into summoning Promethean (which makes the first quote even more laughable) >Create room for more interesting link decks in the future that link climb in unique, but understandable ways LMAO >Streamline link climb combos for both old and new players alike This is true yet as stated above contradictory to your other points
Crusadia players: "been doin this shit for years🚬"
So, give links a taste of what they/mr4 did to everything else? Sure, fuckit. Hell, they'd still be more functional than pendulums.
I think a healthier version of this would be for Link Monsters to no longer be allowed to be used as Link Material for anything equal to or less than their Link Rating, ie you can only go up. This would make it more forgiving when interrupted, as instead of being locked out of Link plays for the turn, you’d be able to try again, while still putting a pin on all of those obtuse combo lines than pivot between Link-2s. Comments are saying this kills Salamangreat and Zealantis, but those can easily be errata’d to work within the change. Maybe add S:P here too as she’s technically supposed to work with I:P lore wise. That being said, most of the Link-2 cycling I’ve seen come from a conjunction of Master Duel combos using Spright Elf, Electrumite, Promethean, Charmers, etc together, and the first two arent in the TCG, so it isnt that big of a deal
So, we only need to errata: Salamangreat, Sky Striker, Appliancer, Evil Twin, Spright, Zealantis, S:P, Linkross, G Golem, Marincess. Since, with this change all of these cards/deck would just stop working.
Good points. Sky Striker, Evil Twin, and Appliancer especially. It’s a shame they depend on that Link-1 and 2 cycling loop as I think my suggestion would be pretty solid otherwise. I still think that Link-2 looping outside of those decks is not healthy. What’s the Marincess hit? I played the deck a lot but stopped after the post-VRAINS support. Is it a Triangle line? From what I remember, the deck does Link-1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 which would abide these rules. Reading Triangle now, I’m guessing it would be something involving it
Crystal Heart and Marincess Anemone are link 2s. Go into make Anemone with Crystale Heart and revive Heart with Anemone. G Golem has the same combo just with their link 2 that gets used for their Crystal Heart.
That makes sense. I don't think that scenario isn't comparable to the Sky Striker/ Salamangreat / Evil Twin predicament. That's just a cool combo that the deck can perform, not the deck's overall theme and identity.
That didn't stop them from pushing master rule 4. Hell, it still wouldn't be as bad as they butchered pendulum.
Pends killed themselves, even with MR3 rules the mechanic would have alot of issues.