Joshua Schmidt Reacts to SHOULD THE SIDEBOARD EXIST? - Magical Hats
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 07. 2023
- [Streamed Live on 5th July, 2023]
Original Video: • SHOULD THE SIDEBOARD E...
Stream: / joshuaschmidtygo
Main Channel: / @joshuaschmidtygo
VOD Channel: / @joshuaschmidtvod
Twitter: / gamebreak0r
Channel managed by: Tyl0o | / tyl0o
#JoshuaSchmidt #stream #yugioh
Farfa forgot his adderall this episode. Man could not sit still for 5 seconds.
The thing about Pokemon not having sideboard is that there's so much more drawing and searching in that game. Yugioh doesn't let you search for generic cards outside of thrust, and 1 brick in a 5 card hand can lose you the game. In Pokemon, you can draw 20+ cards in a turn.
There was a period of time in the game where you could draw your entire deck, then recycle it entirely from the graveyard and almost draw it entirely again in almost *any* deck, not just stupid gimmick decks
@@StormKidProductions Thus, they banned the supporter that recycled, not the busted draw pokemon.
Exactly this. There is no such thing as an unsearchable tech card in Pokemon
@@benjaminphilippe2810 It seems like a lot of comparisons that are made between Yugioh and other card games without perspectives on what it's actually like to play those games. In the whole rotation debate, Magic was constantly brought up. Standard Magic is hard to find locals for, and new cards don't make much of an impact on other formats.
@@carlosmiguel1105 are you sure? Before I played Yu-Gi-Oh I played magic (2016-) and every locals I went to had standard fnms
I still like the suggestion a chatter did in a prior Magical Hats Reaction:
Open Decklist, side before G1 and stick with it for the full match.
Probably doesn't solve everything, but at least you can't anymore side to specifically go first / second and the problems that stay around can then be put on the banlist like it should be done anyway.
Game 1 is always the most interesting in a TCG/OCG match because people actually have to think about unknown factors and try to make ad-hoc plans as they learn what they're matched against. The sidedeck turns games 2 and 3 into "swap as many hard counters against your matchup into your deck as possible" and both players just rely on drawing those to immediately win the following games. The sidedeck is a victim of every consequence that combo-turbo YGO has developed over the years.
Hear me out. Banlist 2
We could have a Side Deck Banlist that affects only the Sideboard. So, for example, if Evenly Matched gets a Side Ban, you cannot have in the Side Deck, but still can play it at 3 in the Main Deck.
Was gonna say this, completely agree. And that banlist should be brutal against floodgates of all kinds as well as generic powerful go second/first cards.
This reminds me of the EDH(commander) format in magic the gathering there used to be two ban lists one for maindeck cards one banlist for who could be your commander, a creature that is effectively always "in your hand". But then the format runner axed the second list and combined them because they felt it would be too complex of a concept for people to understand they are almost certainly wrong by virtue of the people that would be confused playing games like MTG or YGO which are more complex by leaps and bounds than comprehending two lists.
Hey, it seems we both thought of the same idea independently.
I don't think they should b banned but I think a better option is hard limit one of each card to sidedeck
Then most deck will aim for blind second first match and put in all the blowouts and put their main engine cards into their side no?
I want side decks for the sole purpose of possibly seeing someone smoke screen into another strategy games 2 and 3. I don't think we will ever see that again but it's always hype whenever it happens.
My girlfriend was playing Spright Superheavies before the banlist and she'd smoke out all of the Superheavy stuff for handtraps and boardbreakers, with the idea being that people would side in their S/T removal and Ogres for the Superheavy stuff and she'd simply play through and OTK via Mosquito. It was neat to see, but she didn't get to play it long before the banlist hit.
I would absolutely love it if suddenly Game 2, out comes the P.U.N.K. engine out of nowhere.
I still do that. It's always funny seeing the eyes of my enemies when I board into Invoked during game 2+.
Smokescreen side decks aren't that uncommon.
I remember when decks smokescreen into numeron when f0 was legal.
Not that the smokescreen was terribly fun though.
The thing is, if you're using up 15 cards in your side deck, you kind of need a complete blowout strategy to compensate.
Early links, I realized that trickstar and mekk invoked have tiny engines and play similar non-engine. One goes first, the other second. Beautiful.
Later I realized both decks are reliant on their side decks, because both engines are so weak.
The side decking dilenma being discussed in this episode is basically a culmination of power creeping: every card doing too much, or too many things, which indicates that games are often decided in 2 turns, so getting turn skipped or floodgated one turn just means you lose on the spot. Floodgates aren't really easier to out in Edison format, but you have way more turns to try to draw out of it. I think YGO is more fun than any other card games because of the freedom of play you often have especially in game 1, but post side it definitely turns into an arms race of drawing the blow out vs the counter to the blowouts.
There's no going back on this, if we are being realistic. I think a compromise you can make is reducing the side deck size, so you can make people choose between blowout versus specific matchups (like D barrier vs specific matchups) or cards that cover more matchups but are lower impact (like D.D Crow)
We should really have a best of 3 no side deck tournament. Would be really interesting to see what cards leave the permanent main deck because they’re not good against every matchup. Maybe that would promote more decks because not everyone would play things like nibiru in the main.
I think trap players would be more miserable because cosmic cyclone/twin twister and duster will be in everyone's list.
So same as best of 1?
@@Ddiaboloerdid you even watch the video
@@fortant691 I mean yeah it might. But if those are in everyone’s main deck then it would be taking up a decent amount of space usually used for hand traps or other blowouts for combo decks. Thus, boosting combo decks
@@Salati00 In the context of testing to see what cards remain in the main deck without siding, then best of 3 is functionally identical to best of 1 because you can't prepare for a matchup either way.
Again, the side deck is not the problem. Is the floodgates / blowout cards that are the problem.
Why do you only see one side of the issue it goes both ways as josh said @31:15
@@ASoldierify he got evenly matched too many times
It is more than just that. The game's powercreep has gone too high. The power level has to be brought down SIGNIFICANTLY or they have to make MORE decks like Tear that can do everything in engine at all points in the game. Those are the only two solutions to this current problem.
A weird aspect of this sort of thing from the perspective of someone who played MtG for years: The thing about the sideboard in MtG is that it's partially there to deal with "degenerate combo decks". The way that sort of deck is balanced in MtG is that you have an excellent game 1 because no one mains answers to them, but then games 2 and 3 are a huge uphill battle because you have a giant target painted on your head and the hate cards are extremely good at stopping you - all the GY hate in the game vs Dredge, for instance.
The funny thing though is that as far as modern YGO goes, every deck plays like a degenerate combo deck by MtG standards, unless it's an obsessive lockdown control strategy. So you don't really have that sort of balance because it ends up being that every deck has side options that ruin every other deck's day, and then furthermore the game is so fast that you can't really sit around a few turns hoping to draw the out (whereas in MtG you get a decent number of draws just from the slower pace of the game, AND there's a mulligan mechanic to make it easier to find the silver bullets you need). So the side deck serves an obvious purpose - giving you the answers needed to beat decks your engine doesn't give you room to stick in your main - but it's developed into an awkward situation where it's just too easy to ruin everyone else's day instead of creating interesting gameplay using the SD.
Ultimately, I think I agree with the take that it's not really just a Side Deck problem - it's the nature of modern day YGO card design that makes it so easy to create non-games.
I think the toxic side decking is more of a mentality change rather than a format or card pool thing. Modern Goat decklists do side triple trap dustshoot, which wasn’t nowhere near as standard during that era.
if u really think about it, floodgates are just a thing rn because we were gaslit into not playing mst anymore
Getting rid of the side deck is such a silly solution to some cards being overpowered when you know you’re going first or second
Maybe konami should introduce something like a banlist just for the side deck. This why they could “ban“ all the blow out cards from the side board
Actual good suggestion ngl
or maybe just ban the blowouts entirely.
Farfa literally says this in the vid fam
Master Duel had that mini event where you could use a going first and a going second deck, I think that could be a decent replacement, there are definitely issues with that,
Yeah I really liked that tryout event but it was a problem how people just played stun first and shit like numeron second. Hope they do that again but limit the amount of cards that both decks can differ from each other to like 15 cards. If it fixes that issue I'd want that to be implemeneted in ranked ASAP
@@mynameisjohnjackajoe yeah going first people often either played hard stun or ftks, and going second people played all these go 2nd board breaker decks
I remember seeing someone suggest that you should only be able to side after game 1. Whatever you side in/out is now set in stone for games 2 and 3, thus making it so people will be motivated to use the side deck to allow their deck that has a bad matchup to adapt for the particular deck it is going against rather than merely side to go first/second.
Interesting. I agree it shifts the focus more onto matchup rather than going first/second, while still allowing for dedicated first/second cards to guarantee winning game 2.
No side could potentially promote better deck building decisions and strong meta calls, and also, imo, potentially healthier board states. If you add utility cards to your extra deck like Knightmare Phoenix or Tornado Dragon, as a way to cover bases, it would lower the power ceiling of decks who would otherwise use those slots to propel stronger boards. Those who build for high reward fields now have the weakness of being less versatile against other decks. Also, it could promote interesting main deck techs. A card like Linkslayer might see play in Cyberse as it is an extender and that can also be backrow hate card going second if needed.
I think it would make match up nuances wayyyyy more interesting. A rogue deck having a native out to say, a meta strat, would incentivize people to play that strategy and be a sleeper meta call for an event. As a very, very loose examples, let’s take a monster that can be targeted, but not destroyed or banished. A deck that natively had bounce effect would be valued in that meta, lets say Altergeist Silquitos or Salamangreat Miragestalio. Even strats that could Rank 4 / Synchro 6 consistently would look at Castell/Honor Ark or Brionac as a tech choice. Again, very loose example, I’m sure there’s better options; those are what come to mind.
It would be cool to see combo lines differ more in match ups and it would be very skillful imo, if only for the fact that you have to adapt and be very aware of what resources you have to out whatever strat the opponent has, without side board blow outs doing all the heavy lifting for you
But, ultimately, the core of the issue imo is that blow out cards should not be sideable. I think a side board banlist, as crazy as that sounds, would fix a lot of issues. Or just flat out ban blowouts and adjust the banlist according to the ripple effect that would introduce
One last point I want to make, tagging off of the “blow outs are the problem”. There is a second problem in Yugioh: decks can find lethal on the drop of a dime. This is the real reason blowouts are too strong, because you simply do not have the luxury of folding a single turn. If you do not answer a board, or find lethal of your own, you will lose on the next turn, either bc the opponent dealt it through damage or put up a board that you cant contest on the next draw so theyll do the remaining damage then
In formats like Edison, if you are on the receiving end of a floodgate, or even if youre in a bad position and cant out a threat, it’s okay, as you have a few turns to deal with it unless your opponent sacks you with a Windblast Mali Diva line or something. Games go longer, so you have more time to find the out. Draw passing feels bad, but it doesnt auto lose. I’ve seen good players keep cards to their chest until they find a piece that can get help them push through. Think of how players set Solemn a turn before they drop a Heavy Storm. Time is a resource in those formats.
Modern doesnt have that luxury; you either win with your starting hand or you lose because of it.
Thank you Josh for providing your opinion on this topic. I always love hearing people talk about yugioh
This comes up in Magic a lot. Old formats have massive blowout cards in the side deck, but smaller formats are more about narrow, efficient answers to your opponent.
Cold Take: Side Decking would be Good if Floodgates in general weren't in the game
Problem is adding Blowout Floodgates obviously
Board Breakers that instantly win like Evenly are also a Problem.
I think it would be good if certain cards aren't allowed in the side deck
Look the problem is not the side deck, the problem are the over powered blowout cards or floodgates which are also necessary because of power creep. It is a chain of necessary evils to keep alive the cash cow for konami.
At 29:20 when he is talking about there being a time when there was more utility in the deck with cards like mst, that is because mst was a staple that was good against every single deck that format. Mst was good because everyone was playing some amount of trap cards in the main as defensive cards.
I think the sidedeck is fine, there are just some cards that are legal that really shouldnt be. Cards like Lightning Storm, Harpies Feather Duster, Evenly, D-Barrier, your choice of dumb floodgate, shifter. But like, we have a banlist. We can just ban these cards. No need to throw out the baby with the bathwater, just put a bunch of 1-card "I win" cards to 0 and we can continue to have the sideboard around for tech options to make matchups less lopsided based on coinflips.
Mr5 or 6 idk needs to make going second better. Maybe the game will be unbalanced in the first one or two formats or you will have a going second meta but i think that the game needs to innovate on that.
While i think farfa is righ on paper, i dont see konami releasing a banlist where they ban like 90 cards. And without it, I just cant see sidedeck being healty
I think it's more likely than the sidedeck getting axed completely
I think a solution would be to make a separate banlist for the side deck, where you can't put those cards in side but still can play them in main
My lunch was good too.
After watching the original video I have to admit I'm a side deck hater now, I hate that the main deck mostly has just generically decent cards and the side deck is just full of silver bullets for other decks.
I've been playing rikka sunavalon since pote, and my locals is infested with backrow decks (like sky striker, eldlich, labrynth) and a couple of times I just came at the locals with duster, 3 galaxy cyclones and 3 evenlies and topped the local. Did it suck to draw galaxy cyclone against spright going first game 1? Yes, but it's just a tradeoff imo for that card being so good at covering me from my bad matchups; not every player will want to make that tradeoff every time, and that's the cool thing about deckbuilding imo; side decks make deckbuilding a worse experience (most of the time) and are just the home of floodgates/silver bullets that make non games.
The one good point of the side deck is that it can make a lot of niche traps (that otherwise would never get played, besides maybe a 1 off thrust target) some space to shine. Continuing from my rikka example I really liked aoi and pollinosis in the side, they weren't too oppressive and could let me expand the ways I could interact with my opponent (in a fair way)
1:19-2:13 im glad someone as big as Josh is bringing up these points
Someone get Farfa some adderall lmao
Gigabrain idea: Additional banlist applied for the side deck. If you want to play those cards, you have to main them.
I think it would be nice if you could SB before G2 but not before G3 - this makes siding for play/draw much worse, since presumably you will have 1 game of each remaining (unless the match ends after 2 games). This reduces the power of the blowouts like dimensional barrier while retaining the ability to sculpt your deck to have better answers for a certain matchup or w/e
I’’m convinced this would actually make stuff worse. The player who won game 1 could still side in cards in the exact same way as people do now, and hope to blowout the opponent so there will never be a game 3. They’ll just play the crazy strong going seconds. If they win game 2 then they don’t have to worry about the fact that the cards they sided in would be dead cards on game 3.
But the player who lost game 1 now has to balance their side deck between going first and second because they HAVE to take the match to game 3 in order to win. So while the player who won game 1 can afford to pick his sides specifically to help in the very next duel, the other player has to side in hoping to win the next TWO duels.
Only allowing side decking after game 1 just benefits the guy who won game 1 way more (as if winning the dice roll wasn’t already OP).
Reduce the size of the sideboard from 15 to 10 to create more tension between picking die roll specific blowouts and versatile match up improving cards.
I feel like no sideboard best of 3 would force more creative deckbuilding as well as an actual back and forth in comparison to either one person sweeps or the other person sweeps.
The Banlist needs to be able to hit more cards. And you don’t even have to ban everything. Limiting a lot of the toxic/floodgates pushes players back to use their creative ways to build not only their deck but their side as well. Either that, or make game 3 decided with a die roll .
Trap decks have a solid risk to be very busted.
Traps are very often designed to trade one-for-one, which means that the monsters that can remove cards (which are usually locked behind some sort of card investment) don't have nearly as much of an impact against that as against monster-heavy endboards where, say, spinning Kaleidoheart is actually worth the card investment on your part.
We just need a side deck banlist for floodgates/crazy blow out cards and I feel like that could create a very healthy or at least interesting environment
I think another solution is for decks to evolve to avoid being blown out. For example, some Branded players are experimenting with a Dogmatika engine, which would seem counterintuitive but it lets them play around Ash and D Barrier.
Altergeist is receiving new support, and while the combo-heavy style that Pak and Dcayed promoted is not going to be good, it will mean that Evenly Matched and LS are less good into those matchups.
You can also make blowouts more punishing to use. Right now, for example, if your Evenly Matched gets negated, or your opponent i.e. flips Iron Wall, you just lose your BP and went minus without accomplishing anything. So they could become high risk high reward cards.
We could also make blowouts more specific to avoid a stagnant format. So for example, D Barrier could be split into 5 cards, with each card preventing the Summon of something different. The reason D Barrier is so toxic is because it's not very risky to side into because it can be used to counter several different strategies.
I also don't agree that blowouts necessarily win you the game. Evenly Matched in particular skips your BP, which means your opponent will necessarily have another turn, which also means you need to do something on MP2 to make that card worth it. It also means that if your opponent has several layers of interaction (i.e. hand traps or GY), an Evenly Matched hardly solves your problems.
So idk I think there's other things to think about other than "ban all blowouts".
What about a sidedeck banlist? Would it be too complicated or even solve anything?
Magical hats is just the lads talking about something and Joshua being right about whatever that thing is.
Just change the rules to not deciding to go first or second
Because knowing if you're going first or second is where the extreme blowouts are sided
i think for the Side deck to be a non-toxic part fo the game, and actually, for the game to be less toxic in general, cards should go in and out of the banlist more frequently, like, maybe this format D barrier is absolutely toxic, but maybe next format is a healthy card, so it should be banned this list, but unbanned next, and if it becomes toxic ban it again, making the banlist more fluid and less of a stone slab where cards go to die for years could be one way to keep not only the side deck, but the whole game in check
Hey Josh, I posted this in response to the original video and I was wondering your thoughts on it if you have the time to read it. (It’s quite long and I did my best to trim it down)
Question:
What is different about your opponent winning the die roll and going first in games 1 & 3, and they go first in game 1 & 2 due to 2 die rolls?
The primary difference I see is both games in the second case neither player knew whether they were going first or second. So they cannot side D-barrier or cards like that else they risk having those in their deck when going second.
An argument is “It is not fair to go first twice in a row”. I agree with a caveat. The current system the player who wins the first die roll goes first twice. That also is not fair. Why does order matter if in either case we accept that the unfair portion of this is going first multiple times?
I think 2 changes could remedy the system, discourage side deck floodgates, and promote turn-agnostic deckbuilding:
1.) If you win the die roll: you go first, there is no decision.
2.) Before the start of each game after siding: you roll dice to determine who goes first.
People may say “Decks that prefer first are buffed in that system.” The opposite is true. It is equally likely that person goes first or second every game. In the current system it is at least a 50% chance 1 die roll allows one to go first twice. This is unfair, and variation can be toned down by adding in more die rolls.
This logic is seen in a deck that guarantee wins going first, and guarantee loses going second: The current system allows this deck to win 50% of the time (1 die roll). This new system requires them to win at least 2 die rolls to win the game (2 to 3 die rolls)
It is possible in this system going first decks never go first. It is possible in this system going second decks never go second. Due to this, decks designed to play a specific turn are punished and turn-agnostic deckbuilding is rewarded. This thought applies to turn-specific cards as well.
Side decking one time, or only after game 1. Or a 55 card side deck
I think the thought that Yugioh would mass ban blowout cards is unrealistic but i think in the next master rule they can make cards exclusive to the Main like if you wanna play D-barrier it has to be in your main deck so that way now your only playing D Barrier if one you deck can fit it in like uh Lab or at the cost of consistency and the side deck is no long just a storage unit for matchup specific win buttons. I’m not a fan of nerfing certain strategies either I think instead of banning tear spright and branded into unuse they should just print more archetypes on par with them.
Wish they had kept the sus imposter part of the show
side decking for a lot of decks is just siding in cards that auto win the game, floo for example going first i side the storms maybe fissure or stuff like thrust/talents and going second i side evenly drnm shifter all theese things auto win a lot of matches, but thats just from floo perspective i havent really played other decks yet, i think bo3 without side deck would be probably fun since then you would need to play specific stuff like backrow removal
I would just ban traps from the side. And then just put a tag on cards like lightning storm that forces them to be put in the main deck when you want to play them.
Put every blowout and floodgate to 1🤔
my take is the side deck should be monsters only (and maybe 10 cards instead of 15). That way floodgates, dbarrier etc aren't allowed but you can still take out dead main deck cards in favor of hand traps etc.
Of course you could still side shifter, iblee or mannequin cat / sanctifire targets, but those are generallly a lot more balanced than the back row stuff (ban shifter tho please).
Surprised no one suggested to give the side deck its own banlist.
When floodgates all gone(banned) im fine with the side ^^
What about a separate banlist for side decks? You can ban all floodgates from being played side (this is not negotiable) and maybe some countertraps if they are too universal (judgement for example, if you want to negate spells/traps you could play dark bribe instead and strike for monsters), and then limit/ban going second blowouts/HTs (DRNM to 1 so combo decks have less to fear post side if their opponent doesn't main 3 or Magnamut and Druiswurm to 1 so if you're just playing Bystials as counters to light/decks and not as engine like in Dlink you are forced to play the worse ones).
Once again all these problems can be solved with SET ROTATION
How exactly?
@@ttkrystal8329 because the bullshit cards that make sure you lose once you go to game two would not all exist
@@aka_Ingmar and neither would whole decks ppl have enjoyed for a long time. Rotation would also make the game much more expensive and difficult to keep players playing because you'll rotate into formats that a lot of people won't want to play in and there's no solution to that other than wait until the next cycle. Why would I want to play a game I have to take a whole year off of and id have to spend 1500 dollars for one deck just to play??
I wait for the day that someone uses the side deck to hold a completely different engine so Game 2 is an actual shock and not just "ah yes the evenly". Like imagine going Game 2 against something like Labrynth and then suddenly P.U.N.K. comes out.
You know what solve this issue...set rotation 🎉
No side deck means death to all rogue decks and all deck creativity
I'm just gonna throw this question out there. Should the banlist take the side deck into account? Like D barrier game 1 main deck is really not that powerful, but game 2 D barrier from the side deck can win you the game.
Here's a hot take: have a different banlist for the side deck.
Unlimit stuff like Reboot and Lightning Storm from the main deck banlist, but put stuff like Evenly and TCBOO on the side deck banlist.
That way, Dinosaur can still play Lightning Storm and True Draco can still play TCBOO, but people who add them as side deck blowouts specifically can't use them.
Not with you here Josh.
The fact no one likes to rely on blowout cards post game 1 doesn't convert into "nowadays the side deck is bad".
Sure, as a feature it had seen better days, but maybe the game as a whole had?
I mean, preparing for a torney you have to seriously take in account 10+ deck including variations. And among them you have spell focused decks, monster spam ones, Ikea which is in a very weird spot...
I do really struggle to recall a period where you can't find some solid side option with a large spectrum.
You need to rely on cards like Virus, fragrance, skill drain, Golem/Sphere to steal a game against strategies you are no match for with just your engine.
Personally I don't like the state of the game, yet in a format without a sideboard you'd be able to play lists with a broken engine and a lot of space for non-engine.
I don't see anyone running triple Virus, thus the time the Lab player finds its one copy it would feel way more sacky than realizing he had sided in multiple copies.
We need a side deck ban-list lol
Actually, someone said something pretty nice in the comments. Just roll for it each round. The definitive choice of first or second is the issue. Side, then roll for it each round.
Separate forbidden/limited list for side decks?
I love about 90% of blizzards effect but it’s so cool that I would like it to be not OPT
When will people learn how to balance the audio in react videos, like the video will be super quiet so I turn it up and the moment Joshua speaks he blows my ear drums out.
I just lost the coin toss 9 times in a row in Master Duel :/
the side deck should have its own ban list. Like if evenly was legal if main decked by not side decked it would be fine
Because of the current power level of the game, we need those horribly designed equalizers or floodgates in the side deck. If Konami lowered the power level of the game and decks like manadium, darkworld or that sort of combo decks that rely solely on the die roll were assessed, we could have a bo3 format with no side board, or with a healthy sideboard
Farfa being farfa
You can always count on mbt and coder having opposite opinions
@editor please turn off background music while there is already background music in the video!!
Maybe a F/L list for the side board making you main some of those cards
Would be interesting if the player who goes first is not allowed to side. Would hinder going first bc it’s already too strong. Blowouts are fine tbh.
Ah yes, let me side in floodgates game two and my opponent can cry about it
@@Jrpg_guy I can’t think of a single deck that would have an issue playing against floodgates going first. Bc going first decks either have negates or pops. So like what floodgate would u lose to when going first? Like your going to go second and set a skill drain and pass? Hope and pray it has survived somehow?
@@josephreis2915 thats the casr if the person going 1 second game has the floodgate or not. Because they decide who goes first they basically can side anything and your opponent has to accept the lose. It make whoever goes first and wins or lose wins or loses basically the entiry match
@@Jrpg_guy no no no. The player who loses still gets to decide who goes first or who goes second. But if the player who loses decides to go first (which they will 90% of the time) they will not be allowed to side deck. So instead of both players siding and then afterwords the player who loses announces who is going first and who goes second, the announcement happens in the beggining,
I guess the one funny situation that may arise here is if player A wins game one, player B decides they want to go second and puts in a million board breakers, then player B wins game 2. And then player A decides to go second for game three (which means now player A is going first while maindecking a bunch of hard go second cards).
This is a super niche scenario and its one that only comes up in a meta game where board breakers > better than main deck. Which honestly knowing how Konami likes to print busted board breakers. May very well be a case. But even in this weird case, it’s still adding an element of skill and psychological mind games that could create interesting scenarios. It also punishes players who try and take advantage of midrange decks by allowing them to go first, knowing they can’t make unbeatable boards, and then siding hyper specific floodgates/board breakers.
But I think the best part of this is that it discourages players from playing insane go second only board breakers in their main deck game one, bc they can’t just side it out going first game two for insane floodgates that win you going first. So cards like talents and droplets will see more play than evenly and dark ruler in the main deck (which is honeslty healthy). It also allows for the side deck to continue, which is good bc conceptually the side deck is very healthy as a player gains so much advantage going first the game needs a way to balance the odds.
And lastly, and most importantly, it has natural checks and balances, that doesn’t rely on Konami (which both Joshua and farts have MUCH TOO MUCH faith in) as we know we can never trust Konami to fix a fundamentally broken part of the game, aka players being able to play summon limit/anti spell game 2/3, through the utilization of the ban list and card design.
@@josephreis2915 i wouldn't call droplets and talents really healthy. Droplet in most cases will negate the opponets board for probably a spell you activated anywqy and a monster in hand or similar. And talents is 3 broken stalpes in 1. And don even mention thrust, every spell/ trap in game wtf. This cards are not healthy. Problem here is truly kobamis greed and them not giving any shit of balancing the game. We have reacheed the point where basically you lose if you don't win on your turn one usually (depends on your deck, but you know what i mean)
What about side deck ban list? Like.... you can either main the card or you cant play it.
before watching anything my opinion would be drop the side, it encourages maybe not the best deck building. or at the very least would encourage more thoughtful deck building. also and this is just me perhaps if we lose a side 20 in the extra?
but still best of threes
Ich sag nur eins . Sidedeck Banlist 😆😀😅
For all these "side in a bunch of blowout cards" there is an easy solution. Don't always pick "Ill go first" after loosing a game. If you see your opponent load a bunch of stuff, let them go first. Half of his hand will be dead.
The prooblem with that is that since ygo's meta is so fast-paced, you'd much rather force your opponent to do the board-breaking rather than the opposite. Even when you run a going second deck, it doesn't matter if your deck can go second if your opponent has more answers than you have useable cards your hand.
@@yirash47 I don't know you but I never have an issue doing either. If your deck can't, you should redesign it.
Gage missed the part where “the real game is in games 2 and 3” was said ironically. No one actually thinks that
What about… A side deck banlist??
Late to the party, but interesting topic
I would say if yugioh didn't have a sideboard then I be more in favour of a mulligan system
No. The side deck is perfect right now in YGo. You cant compare it to Pokemon. Pokemon doesnt really have counter cards and also you can draw your entirr deck or search any card if you want to in ANY DECK not just meta
Side deck would never go away cause Konami would sell less cards
Honestly the problem with Yu-Gi-Oh is that the game design allows for one player to take too many consecutive game actions and as long as that is a thing the game can never be healthy
Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but I think this series would be so much better without the "fake take" gimmick. As an excuse for these 4 to have a podcast it's fantastic.
Man if only after awhile certain cards were not legal to play that slows the games down
hear me out, side deck BUT you have to side same type cards. if you want evenly you have to side out traps for that. want dark ruler of ash, well sucks to be you. this way it should be way harder to side a million auto win cards
This just means only trap decks get to play floodgates lmao
@@Xenonfuji isn't that a good thing? if your opponent goes full wombo combo and then flips some stupid floodgate you can't play under thats horrible, but trap decks would play floodgates in main deck anyways but the answer to them is spells something combo decks play but they would need to give up consistency or power to do so
@@esrohm6460 nonono. It's not a good thing. No deck should be able to play floodgates. Floodgates need to be banned. I'm saying this as someone who has played labrynth since release
@@Xenonfujior trap deck could side solemn better because they dont always need to main it when floodgate just offer better option than a single interaction unless opponent draw out backrow blown card
@@abdurachmanromzy4778 I think floodgates are unhealthy and should go. I exclusively play control. It does not make it so control decks can compete. It makes it so control games are non-games.
I mean, if you're gonna have a best of three but without side decking, wtf else do you do during the downtime other than switching turns? I think of siding as a strategic pause between duels, because without siding, best of three matches would just be like three best of ones. So all things considered, I don't think it's not unwarranted for people to correlate best of three with the side deck.
people are lazy and want to use barrier vs branded, but also branded player are lazy bcs they dont want to combo of witout resolving branded fusion
Majority of your games are sided so it is more than just the regular game.
I'm in favor of the side deck, but I wouldnt mind trying a no side format to see how it goes.
But part of this is deck building, and for some reason yugioh players are allergic to the concept. If d barrier is popular, don't use a deck that loses to it. If you lose to Evenly, play counters to stop it.
I actually can't remember the last time I instant lost due to one card, because I purposefully plan around each scenario. Its typically the odd rogue deck that counters me, which is why I like sides to try and do something about it.
you're introducing additional volatile elements by saying "just don't play decks that die to d barrier" because many archtypes are designed that way. Let's take Purrely for example that is extremely weak to D Barrier. Can you play something like, for example, Dark World to facilitate link plays into it? Yes, but if you play low count, it is not reliable, and if you play high count, you have way fewer spots to actually play non-engine/going second cards.
I don't think all floodgates/turn skips are equal and shouldn't be treated as such, but D Barrier is definitely on the stronger side.
"Don't play decks that lose to D-Barrier"? That's ridiculous. That means that EVERY deck either doesn't use the extra, or uses a variety of monsters of different types. That line of thinking homogenizes every deck. No more fusion-based decks like Branded or Invoked, no more synchro strategies like Swordsoul, etc. D-Barrier is a toxic floodgate that has no place in this game, especially because it just makes going first even more of a free win. Evenly Matched is exactly the same - lots of decks just do not have an out to it and also can't sit on a 1-2 card endboard w/o getting guaranteed OTK'd. Jesse Kotton on Traptrix has no answer to a 6-year old opening evenly matched other than praying he opened a judgment.
@Avermra
Well, yeah, that's the point, it's a trade off. Would you rather lose to d barrier or have a slightly unconsistent deck.
In a meta where d barrier is everywhere, I would use Dark World link engine. When the d barrier is out of the meta, then get rid of the engine and boost your consistency.
If neither of these options make the deck competitive enough, then look at a different deck.
@AL-ry5ly
First, I played Traptrix and did fine with it, because I countered evenly using a combination of crossout designator, solemn judgment, and lancea. You could use the theorion combo if you want something more consistent.
And no every deck does not loss to d barrier. You use links or other summoning mechanics. If your deck relies on one summoning mechanic, then combine it with something else or in branded case, play on your opponents turn.
When d barrier is out of the meta then you can play your uni-type deck, but when it is in the meta then play something else. It's just that simple, I don't know what to tell you.
@soulstarved4116 "if this card is being used, stop playing entite decks" is proof that a card is objectively toxic for the game.
Farfa was especially unfunny this episode. Maybe he really forgot to take his meds
In best of 3 without a side deck, it’d be more like a real game. Nothing changes between matches in fighting games. Being forced to consider spell trap destruction in your deck is something I’d like to see.
What they meant when they said "Game 2 & 3 is where it happens" was that the game's results gets defined by the blowout cards. 2 out of 3 games have those, therefore Yu-Gi-Oh! is a game with a majority of games decided by whether or not an appropriate blowout was drawn. TT Thrust very much made the issue worse imo.
The problem is the game is effed either way. Unless they ban like 500+ cards, then the blowouts in the side deck are mandatory. That is just where we are in the game at this point.
New rule: Only the person that lost the first duel is allowed to side after game 1.
I think no side deck would actually make game 1 matter. Because now you can just insta scoop game without playing a card cause you know you’ll do better with the side deck. But I see gages side too and I enjoy the side deck. As long as it’s best of 3 I’m happy.
Having some experience with older Magic formats, especially Vintage, while side deck blowouts are pretty common and occasionally rather frustrating, “we should remove the side deck” and “we should stop people from siding blowout cards” are objectively stupid takes. Being able to side cards that are only useful in specific matchups makes for fewer losses at deck selection and less bricking, and therefore more fun games overall.
There is also the decision process of do you side in the hate for the sideboard hate. I've played Dredge and Affinity quite a bit in Modern in the past and always had to make the decision of whether to risk bringing in a possible dead enchantment removal to prepare for something like RiP or Stony in game 2 and hope they didn't bring in something like Yixlid Jailer or Kataki. I feel added decision trees are generally better for games both in game and outside of the game, and a philosophy like this could even be beneficial to be adopted by Yu-Gi-Oh players with a caveat that their decks of choice can afford these decisions.
What if in games 2 and 3 both players side board before deciding who goes 1st or 2nd.
That- that is what we do. It has always bee ln like that
That’s already how it is.
I will never not be amazed at Gage's completely ass-backwards takes. Argues the side deck is needed to be able to put in outs to unfun floodgates in games 2 & 3, when it's pretty much the exact opposite.
God, I got so annoyed with Farfa in this. I don't really think it's funny to come onto a discussion and just dick around and distract people. Joseph has more patience than I do.