5:24 it’s funny. I had commented on a recent video that I found it weird how yugioh has a rule where if one player messes up a boardstate, both players get a warning for it and how this rule would be weird if applied to other games and sports. And now this video comes out with a literal textbook example of why that needs to be the case.
It isn't weird in any strategic game where an ignored procedure error can put you at an advantage or disadvantage. It's why I dont get magic the gathering ruling that if you forget beneficial triggers that's fine even when they're mandatory. because it's not fine, your opponent is getting advantage by proxy of you not triggering the beneficial effect.
I actually like that ruling a lot, if something is mandatory, it really is both players responsibility to make sure the game plays out correctly. Honestly it’s weird other games don’t do this.
@@jarzz3601 I'm saying that without this rule, rule sharking would be a lot more common imo. Imagine if the opponent knew that you made a mistake while resolving an effect, but didn't tell you, and then called a judge for it a few plays later. He could claim that he didn't know and there's be no way to prove it.
Hilairously, the Set Rotation guy had an argument for Illegal activation. Set Rotation says two field spells WITH DIFFERENT NAMES and the guy set 2 Zombie Worlds by his own admission.
What was the situation there, did the player try to play another copy of a field spell that was in field, or did he just use an effect of what set rotation put on field?
I think in the first duel, the guy wanted his sullek to be negated as bait so he could do something else, so when his opponent accidentally used the declare effect, he probably thought something like I gotcha and then was disappointed when his opponent said it was pretty much a misclick, so he called the Judge to force the activation so he could then do whatever he had planned to do after baiting out the negation. Basically he was sharking over a misclick of declare effect and you didn't force his opponent to actually activate what was accidentally declared so he said "no" to you because he wanted you to change your mind.
this is why master duel has a big plus. shady plays or trying to cheat is not possible because if you choose an effect and said yes, you can't retract it. and also they know if chain can be or can't be activated if you have the target that isn't legal. the meta of the game is ass because its basically new packs or bust (specially runick right now) but one thing i will give big props is almost 99% of loophole about game mechanics, chain links and even handtraps are quite honest... even if you try your hardest to toggle on and off, there's always a distinction that something is activatable vs no cards at all can be activated. only 1 or 2 cases where shit like infinite loop or a monster gate ruling coder did 9-10 months ago that is not correct and its Master duel's fault. but so far... at least no bugs abour ruling
There are 3 problems with simulators like this imo: 1) unless you always wait on everything handtraps/other traps are pretty telegraphed 2) if you genuinly misclick you can't take it back 3) sometimes you can't respond to certain actions if you don't toggle on everything I know that all these issues can theoretically be fixed (just always toggle on everything lol) but then every turn takes three times as long which also kinda sucks. I'm not saying simulators are overall bad, I'm just saying that for actual irl tournament practise I'd always default to DB
There was that issue a while back with Fateful Adventure and opponents quickly denying the search of Dracoback on Normal Summon, then immediately clicking to search Gryphon Rider, so that the player might think the search is for Dracoback and not Ash it. In real life they might say, "Effect to search?" and you could ask "for what?" to get clarification. In Master Duel at the time, it was not shown which of the two effects were used and you simply had to pay attention to the delays. That was close to cheating.
Fun fact, at 2am today I had a tearshizu player always draw a card and add. The first time they did it I didnt notice cause I was tryna make a board w a crusty hand(runick striker dont ask I felt like a menace) and I didnt catch it but it felt off that he had 6 cards when he uses havnis and milled 3 and only triggered a sulliek he milled. Then he did it again on his turn drawing 1 then adding, which I caught cause the numbers didnt add up. Luckily he stopped but fuck.(He was probably dozing off like myself so I'll give the benefit of the doubt)
So are you saying that for such a long time almost all the DB judges decided to be on Team Dzeef? Ya know cuz Dzeef is obviously the poster child for Altergeists. Honestly he's even moreso the poster child than Emma Bessho aka Ghost Girl who plays them in the anime. Now I wanna see Dzeef to cosplay as or wear a Halloween costume of Ghost Girl from YGO VRAINS cuz that would truly be hilarious.
Red really thought that the opponent had to declare their effect for them or something? Probably should've gone straight back to beginner, to be honest, if they can't grasp such a simple concept and instead argue about it.
I am so glad we did away with the "both players have to keep track" thing in magic. Causes an ungodly amount of sharking and angle shoots. Also with the way the stack works a lot of bullshit could be shortcut.
So as a YCS Judge I can concur that we play weird shit. While at the hotels for Friday my roommate was playing Battlin Boxer, a few other judges were playing Ice Barriers, Trap Stun, Tellarknights and myself as a Cubic Enjoyer. Some of us are tired seeing the same decks so I fully understand busting out the sauce at random as they wonder why is this a thing.
Bruh I feel like 90% of the judge calls he takes one of the players is just trying to get an easy win like yes judge he made a mistake give me the win 🤣
Brother there are too many people like that crystal beast player in DB. They never say what effects they are using or even declare them then they get pissy when you ask for clarification and instead try to play faster.
I feel like it's not quite fair to warn someone for their opponent's effects - if you're playing against an unfamiliar deck you'd have to bring the pace of the game to a near standstill to stop them and read each card entirely. Technically appropriate, esp. for very serious play, but not very nice to your opponent.
It’s fun to play weird decks when you have the knowledge to pilot them against the meta. Judges have the knowledge 🤷🏻♂️. Playing meta is just too easy for them and probably gets boring.
Oml, I swear tear players do this, oh I forgot to mill shit on purpose. It always when the game state isn’t going their way that they suddenly remember, oh I got to mill more
So question. Can you activate sulliek, no effect. Then after the chain resolves, activate the effect of sulliek? Or do you need to wait until that turn is over
CynicalApex ok just wanted to verify this I kinda trolled a guy at a regionals and he got very upset. I actually let him take the play back. I activated sulliek while he had spright carrot and spright red on the field I didn't declare activation of effect He then chained carrot After resolution I activated sulliek effect targeting red He said I already activated it, I said yes I activated the card, but didn't activate the effect So he said ok well then I activate carrot now because I couldn't activate it before However carrots text reads "when a card or effect is activated" Am I correct in this ruling logic? Also, does carrot negate the effect of sulliek permanently ? If they chain to the activation with no effect? I actually didn't think of this
Quick tearlament knowledge for everyone Sulliek is a continuous trap that has a negate effect However Sullieks negate effect actually cant be activated upon you flipping the trap, in order for you to negate something with Sulliek it has to be able to sent to the graveyard and it cant do that when its face down. Technically speaking you should be able to activate uts negate upon flip but for some reason you have to use it in a new chain i think Pls correct me if im wrong but I think thats how it works
Pretty sure this is incorrect information. Like any continuous trap you can either activate the trap and not use its effect or activate the trap and use its effects. Of course this only applies to continuous traps that have optional effects such as shaddoll schism to fuse or sulliek to negate. I think you were thinking of the case where cards like royal oppression had to be face up in order to chain to an inherent special summon, since the inherent special summon wouldn't start a chain to give you the opportunity to activate oppression in response.
I don't really agree on "its equaly both players fault for an illegal play that didnt get noticed", its gonna be the turn player going to get advantage by doing an illegal play also you know your own deck way better than your opponent and you are naturally more attent to your own play than your opponent is, so if even tho you know and play your deck you commit an illegal play from it then its your fault in the first place and only in the second place your oponent fault.
I will say i disagree with equal blame on both players for one player not properly resolving his effects. while the opponent should keep there eye out and pay attention for it i would say its more 80%(effect owner) 20%(other player) just due to it, Especially in the case where the effect owner said what the effect was and then didn't properly commit it, that's arguably cheating(though in this case it coder didn't deem it to give an advantage)
I don't think there are enough tiers of warning to distribute blame like this. It's the equivalent of a slap to the wrist for both players, with a warning to pay attention next time.
@@Mernom I dont disagree with the warning to both player but more coder's wording making it sound like the opponent is equally at fault when they even clarified that there opponent declared effect, they acknowledge it and looked at there graveyard presumably for any effects they might be able to activate or to plan a response this turn or next. If it wasn't for the fact that it benefited tear to mill that would straight up be ignoring a negative effect of a card. I will say in this situation I feel like it was the proper response as again it only really hurt the effect player
@@Jcrrjr Then that is the worst community service ever. With all the idiots, racists, and everything else that just Coder has dealt with, I'm surprised the judges haven't begun to demand compensation for how many brain cells and sanity levels they've lost by now XD
Yeah I've seen similar rulings come up in other videos and it's honestly pretty bs. I'm sure Coder is correct on how Konami has decided it's ruled, but it makes absolutely zero sense to give a warning to both players for one players mistake.
@@DaShikuXI But it really is though. You shouldn't have an obligation to know what your opponents cards do. The punishment for accepting what your opponent does as correct should just be accepted game state. It makes no sense to punish a player who was not involved in making the mistake.
@@lunarrequiem9553 The reason to make it both player's fault is in case your opponent forgot to do something good for themself. Just as a hypothetical not related to any specific cards, if my opponent did something that was supposed to make them draw a card but forgot to draw, I get an advantage by not reminding them they need to draw. Both players getting a warning should discourage me from choosing to let my opponent forget to draw. And I'm not sure about the policy, but I would think noticing my opponent forgot to draw and intentionally not saying anything would actually be cheating. So a warning on both ends equalizes the penalty for when you can't exactly tell whether either player "chose to allow" the illegal game state or if it was a mistake from both players.
if the requirement for being a DB judge is playing weird decks, why not make the yajiro invader ftk combo guy a judge?
Because that guy doesn't play weird decks he plays esoteric decks
Dawnstar for judge frfr
Which one, GCD or Dawnstar?
GCD is needed elsewhere
Dawnstar doesn’t just play weird decks I think they can legitimately become a judge
Bro, why is it that hard for Red to understand that he needed to declare an effect before passing prio to respond lmao
When you don't give proper priority pass but then try to suggest that they say 'think' even tho they couldn't do anything in the first place.
Yeahhhh that was pretty funny. "My opponent took so long to respond to my effect wow" when he didn't even specify which effect he was using lmao
Yugioh players reading their cards challenge (Impossible!!!)
I bet he saw the "legally cheating" drama and thought he could just do it with this card on db instead
@@Mitchello457 I mean as it was stated, when it came to Fateful Adventure there were 2 different activation timings while this one I believe doesn't.
"Do I look like a nerd to you?"
Yes, definitely.
judge calls are becoming my fav part of this channel.
For me? Always has been.
@@duelmasteryuya1205exactly what I was going to say
Definitely.
Also because lots of Kevin's recent videos have just been him complaining about some deck he lost to.
The judge calls are nice.
Facts their just too funny not to watch
Same
5:24 it’s funny. I had commented on a recent video that I found it weird how yugioh has a rule where if one player messes up a boardstate, both players get a warning for it and how this rule would be weird if applied to other games and sports. And now this video comes out with a literal textbook example of why that needs to be the case.
Rulesharking is a drug for the petty
It isn't weird in any strategic game where an ignored procedure error can put you at an advantage or disadvantage. It's why I dont get magic the gathering ruling that if you forget beneficial triggers that's fine even when they're mandatory. because it's not fine, your opponent is getting advantage by proxy of you not triggering the beneficial effect.
I actually like that ruling a lot, if something is mandatory, it really is both players responsibility to make sure the game plays out correctly. Honestly it’s weird other games don’t do this.
@@saraakthefgomaster7694 what are you on about?
@@jarzz3601 I'm saying that without this rule, rule sharking would be a lot more common imo. Imagine if the opponent knew that you made a mistake while resolving an effect, but didn't tell you, and then called a judge for it a few plays later. He could claim that he didn't know and there's be no way to prove it.
Hilairously, the Set Rotation guy had an argument for Illegal activation. Set Rotation says two field spells WITH DIFFERENT NAMES and the guy set 2 Zombie Worlds by his own admission.
No, one was ZW one was planet
What was the situation there, did the player try to play another copy of a field spell that was in field, or did he just use an effect of what set rotation put on field?
The first thing my brother and my friend told me when getting back into modern Yugioh was verbatim; READ YOUR FUCKING CARDS!
The age old expression that transcends all trading card games = RTFC. "Read the fucking card."
I think in the first duel, the guy wanted his sullek to be negated as bait so he could do something else, so when his opponent accidentally used the declare effect, he probably thought something like I gotcha and then was disappointed when his opponent said it was pretty much a misclick, so he called the Judge to force the activation so he could then do whatever he had planned to do after baiting out the negation. Basically he was sharking over a misclick of declare effect and you didn't force his opponent to actually activate what was accidentally declared so he said "no" to you because he wanted you to change your mind.
this is why master duel has a big plus. shady plays or trying to cheat is not possible because if you choose an effect and said yes, you can't retract it. and also they know if chain can be or can't be activated if you have the target that isn't legal. the meta of the game is ass because its basically new packs or bust (specially runick right now) but one thing i will give big props is almost 99% of loophole about game mechanics, chain links and even handtraps are quite honest... even if you try your hardest to toggle on and off, there's always a distinction that something is activatable vs no cards at all can be activated.
only 1 or 2 cases where shit like infinite loop or a monster gate ruling coder did 9-10 months ago that is not correct and its Master duel's fault. but so far... at least no bugs abour ruling
EDOPro is much better automated platform ,MD is P2W scam and ppl fall for it lmao
@@kirintoudou3366 eh? Never tried edo but a lot of friends of mine said its scuffed as fuck
There are 3 problems with simulators like this imo: 1) unless you always wait on everything handtraps/other traps are pretty telegraphed
2) if you genuinly misclick you can't take it back
3) sometimes you can't respond to certain actions if you don't toggle on everything
I know that all these issues can theoretically be fixed (just always toggle on everything lol) but then every turn takes three times as long which also kinda sucks. I'm not saying simulators are overall bad, I'm just saying that for actual irl tournament practise I'd always default to DB
There was that issue a while back with Fateful Adventure and opponents quickly denying the search of Dracoback on Normal Summon, then immediately clicking to search Gryphon Rider, so that the player might think the search is for Dracoback and not Ash it. In real life they might say, "Effect to search?" and you could ask "for what?" to get clarification. In Master Duel at the time, it was not shown which of the two effects were used and you simply had to pay attention to the delays.
That was close to cheating.
@@timaeus22222 that was the whole dkayed thing right? He saw that "tech" in Master duel and thought you could apply it to IRL Events
Judge calls? Judge Calls.
Fun fact, at 2am today I had a tearshizu player always draw a card and add. The first time they did it I didnt notice cause I was tryna make a board w a crusty hand(runick striker dont ask I felt like a menace) and I didnt catch it but it felt off that he had 6 cards when he uses havnis and milled 3 and only triggered a sulliek he milled.
Then he did it again on his turn drawing 1 then adding, which I caught cause the numbers didnt add up. Luckily he stopped but fuck.(He was probably dozing off like myself so I'll give the benefit of the doubt)
Absolutely love this content, people are wild
My judge plays runic magical musketeers
pretty normal
based
The owner of the shop is the judge, he plays against players in the by rounds cause he doesn’t like leaving some one out
its entertaining but this series highlights why i dont bother with manual simulators.
It's the best way to play online for people who play the actual tcg, so it's great at what it's supposed to do.
100% valid. There's a deceptive amount of finagling that is required to play. Automation is really, really convenient
"can my opponent write Think?" think about what lol, you haven't declared what effect you're using!
So are you saying that for such a long time almost all the DB judges decided to be on Team Dzeef? Ya know cuz Dzeef is obviously the poster child for Altergeists. Honestly he's even moreso the poster child than Emma Bessho aka Ghost Girl who plays them in the anime. Now I wanna see Dzeef to cosplay as or wear a Halloween costume of Ghost Girl from YGO VRAINS cuz that would truly be hilarious.
Red really thought that the opponent had to declare their effect for them or something? Probably should've gone straight back to beginner, to be honest, if they can't grasp such a simple concept and instead argue about it.
I am so glad we did away with the "both players have to keep track" thing in magic. Causes an ungodly amount of sharking and angle shoots. Also with the way the stack works a lot of bullshit could be shortcut.
So as a YCS Judge I can concur that we play weird shit. While at the hotels for Friday my roommate was playing Battlin Boxer, a few other judges were playing Ice Barriers, Trap Stun, Tellarknights and myself as a Cubic Enjoyer.
Some of us are tired seeing the same decks so I fully understand busting out the sauce at random as they wonder why is this a thing.
I don't even play yugioh outside of master duel once in a while, but I'm here for the chaos
Declaring card effect is not optional on DB as unlike master duel where it'll highlight the effect DB doesn't.
Is the line between an action being a PE Minor or Cheating just whether the missed action was beneficial or not?
in general procedural errors are when it's a mistake and cheating is when it's on purpose it can be hard to tell the two apart though
@@jarzz3601 So what you're saying....is to make it simple, everyone is cheating, have a nice day? XD
@@vgmaster02 yes
Coder in the thumbnail is beating the kids
“But can he tell me next time he’s thinking for that long???” Bro you didn’t give him anything to ‘think’ about…. Tf?
Bruh I feel like 90% of the judge calls he takes one of the players is just trying to get an easy win like yes judge he made a mistake give me the win 🤣
Minor spelling mistake. I win.
Another slapping video from the man!
7:00 is that dkayed on an alt?
Need some Coder ASMR. "Explaining how chains work because you're a dumb dumb"
Judge calls are so funny to watch. People misplay a lot and yeah, most yugioh players are illiterate.
Brother there are too many people like that crystal beast player in DB. They never say what effects they are using or even declare them then they get pissy when you ask for clarification and instead try to play faster.
I feel like it's not quite fair to warn someone for their opponent's effects - if you're playing against an unfamiliar deck you'd have to bring the pace of the game to a near standstill to stop them and read each card entirely.
Technically appropriate, esp. for very serious play, but not very nice to your opponent.
With the Cap, you look like a Nerd Coder, yes
The judge I know played altergeist for a long time - is it a curse?
Don't get the Longrange Programwriter angry >:(
That ending, lmao
It’s fun to play weird decks when you have the knowledge to pilot them against the meta. Judges have the knowledge 🤷🏻♂️. Playing meta is just too easy for them and probably gets boring.
didn‘t the same thing with the rainbow player, happen at another judge call video? Or do you use some snippets multiple times?
Oml, I swear tear players do this, oh I forgot to mill shit on purpose. It always when the game state isn’t going their way that they suddenly remember, oh I got to mill more
7:00 legal cheating
When you said no Yu-Gi-Oh for 12 days, thought you meant 0 Yu-Gi-Oh content on TH-cam either.
So question. Can you activate sulliek, no effect. Then after the chain resolves, activate the effect of sulliek? Or do you need to wait until that turn is over
Yes. Once the chain resolves, you may use the effect of sulliek to negate
CynicalApex ok just wanted to verify this
I kinda trolled a guy at a regionals and he got very upset. I actually let him take the play back.
I activated sulliek while he had spright carrot and spright red on the field
I didn't declare activation of effect
He then chained carrot
After resolution I activated sulliek effect targeting red
He said I already activated it, I said yes I activated the card, but didn't activate the effect
So he said ok well then I activate carrot now because I couldn't activate it before
However carrots text reads "when a card or effect is activated"
Am I correct in this ruling logic?
Also, does carrot negate the effect of sulliek permanently ? If they chain to the activation with no effect? I actually didn't think of this
@@GeminiMoto activating carrot in response to the trap activating sounds fine.
Aww duelbook glad i just play jank so i dont have to make judge calls
Quick tearlament knowledge for everyone
Sulliek is a continuous trap that has a negate effect
However Sullieks negate effect actually cant be activated upon you flipping the trap, in order for you to negate something with Sulliek it has to be able to sent to the graveyard and it cant do that when its face down. Technically speaking you should be able to activate uts negate upon flip but for some reason you have to use it in a new chain i think
Pls correct me if im wrong but I think thats how it works
Pretty sure this is incorrect information. Like any continuous trap you can either activate the trap and not use its effect or activate the trap and use its effects. Of course this only applies to continuous traps that have optional effects such as shaddoll schism to fuse or sulliek to negate. I think you were thinking of the case where cards like royal oppression had to be face up in order to chain to an inherent special summon, since the inherent special summon wouldn't start a chain to give you the opportunity to activate oppression in response.
What was the Rhymestyle tweet he was talking about?
Excuse me hi hello. My opponent activated Pot of Greed, then proceeded to draw 2 cards from his deck? What the fuck?
I dont understand these people. Is he arguing that the Tear player should mill 3 more cards lmao
Cookies mustache
I don't really agree on "its equaly both players fault for an illegal play that didnt get noticed", its gonna be the turn player going to get advantage by doing an illegal play also you know your own deck way better than your opponent and you are naturally more attent to your own play than your opponent is, so if even tho you know and play your deck you commit an illegal play from it then its your fault in the first place and only in the second place your oponent fault.
I will say i disagree with equal blame on both players for one player not properly resolving his effects. while the opponent should keep there eye out and pay attention for it i would say its more 80%(effect owner) 20%(other player) just due to it, Especially in the case where the effect owner said what the effect was and then didn't properly commit it, that's arguably cheating(though in this case it coder didn't deem it to give an advantage)
I don't think there are enough tiers of warning to distribute blame like this.
It's the equivalent of a slap to the wrist for both players, with a warning to pay attention next time.
@@Mernom I dont disagree with the warning to both player but more coder's wording making it sound like the opponent is equally at fault when they even clarified that there opponent declared effect, they acknowledge it and looked at there graveyard presumably for any effects they might be able to activate or to plan a response this turn or next. If it wasn't for the fact that it benefited tear to mill that would straight up be ignoring a negative effect of a card. I will say in this situation I feel like it was the proper response as again it only really hurt the effect player
Something tells me Kampai2 watches Dykaked videos on how to "legally" cheat.
What was the tweet?
Out of curiosity, do DB judges get paid at all?
No they are volunteres
Community service
@@Jcrrjr Then that is the worst community service ever. With all the idiots, racists, and everything else that just Coder has dealt with, I'm surprised the judges haven't begun to demand compensation for how many brain cells and sanity levels they've lost by now XD
Coder gets paid in stream and TH-cam content other people just kinda do it.
Chets
😂😂😂😂😂
Wow early what a nice surprise
nerd
Still not my fault :3
Yeah I've seen similar rulings come up in other videos and it's honestly pretty bs. I'm sure Coder is correct on how Konami has decided it's ruled, but it makes absolutely zero sense to give a warning to both players for one players mistake.
@@lunarrequiem9553 It's not one player's mistake.
@@DaShikuXI But it really is though. You shouldn't have an obligation to know what your opponents cards do. The punishment for accepting what your opponent does as correct should just be accepted game state. It makes no sense to punish a player who was not involved in making the mistake.
@@lunarrequiem9553 The reason to make it both player's fault is in case your opponent forgot to do something good for themself. Just as a hypothetical not related to any specific cards, if my opponent did something that was supposed to make them draw a card but forgot to draw, I get an advantage by not reminding them they need to draw. Both players getting a warning should discourage me from choosing to let my opponent forget to draw. And I'm not sure about the policy, but I would think noticing my opponent forgot to draw and intentionally not saying anything would actually be cheating. So a warning on both ends equalizes the penalty for when you can't exactly tell whether either player "chose to allow" the illegal game state or if it was a mistake from both players.