Not every archetype should be competitively viable, thats just too much to ask from konami and it would power creep the game too rapidly. Im fine with meme tier archetypes coming out allot of the time then just one or two support cards given over time to break them, they dont nessecarily need to make a card playable on release
Like atlantean archetypes create counter fire king archtypes or amazones for harpies and shaddolls for machima mayhem and blue eyes for dark magician or whitchcraft for charmers or traptrix again dark world
The diversity of archetypes is good. The problem is they're not created equally and some don't get enough support, especially when they're xenophobic and don't allow other cards of similar types to work in tandem with them.
Its a good thing when archetypes dont mix, it's what keeps them balanced. Now cyber angel is dead because of drytron and konami's failure to restrict deck building.
@@exeledusprince9165 I disagree for the most part, unless Konami were to create more generic support. I wouldn't be able to create any of the decks I have if they were restricted and none of my decks are meta. Keeping things pure, imo, hurts the fun in deck building because it becomes almost automated in a way.
@@juanabreu3002 but look at the way cards like Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon and Crystron Halqifibrax terrorize lower tier decks, by either making them unable to compete or being the cause of them losing cards on the banlist. If I want to use a Synchron deck, I cant, because there is a completely unrelated card that is so OP and generic that caused one of my most important pieces to be banned.
That one is called Constellar, but yeah, I would like a support that help both Constellar and Satellarknights together, like how the new Hero support did to Elemental Hero and Destiny Hero. Heck, I don't even mind if they fuse both together into a big archetype like HERO, because their concept as a archetype are so similar anyways. As of right now the only card that connects both of them Stellarknight Constellar Diamond, and I want more support like that to come out.
what you are struggling to propose, I think, is having an actual identity for the Sub-Types or at least some archetypes that would connect them together under one umbrella. Like if generally all Fairy monsters utilized disruption, so that many Fairy-based archetypes could potentially borrow a card or 2 from each other and players could see some kind of relationship. Yugioh's monster identities have always been all over the place and I think it's legitimately too late to try to course correct this now, sadly.
I see that pendulum cards behave as a "subtype" deck. Archetypes don't matter as much to build a pendulum deck. With Synchros it feels similar because synchros need tuners. Maybe as the game developed, extra deck mechanics are like the true subtype attribute in Yu-Gi-Oh
@@KalebAlfaro More like they're the only truly consistent thing that could even be called a sub type. It just indicates the issue even more. The fact that monsters are more divided/categorized by their summoning type than their actual intended flavor type is a problem.
I was really surprised going to Magic and seeing how they handle archetypes. There is always support for the five colors. When they release a new set they have the intended archetypes(the strixhaven schools) but because of the five colors they can also fit into other places like red deck wins or tribal decks.
Magic doesn’t really care for archetypes, mostly colors and what they usually do and even then they break the color chart sometimes. Magic cards are designed to interact with essentially every other card, in contrast to yugioh where archetypes usually only play well with each other! Glad I quit yugioh and found a game like MTG to let creativity reign instead of building around an archetype
well tbh magic doesn't realy have archetypes they only have strategies one can play after and print new support for those different strategies. And they're kinda creative with that, so now I can play Mill in 500 different ways and never get bored of just wanting to mill out my opponent~
Unrelated but I hate MTG deck names. Why can't you just call it Red Aggro, which is what it is, why's it gotta be "red deck wins" I get it with more micro stuff like Cawblade, since that's a very specific deck in a very specific format. But general archetypes (like an aggressive red deck) shouldn't really have those kinds of names imo.
MTG has color identities, some set-specific clan strategies, and “tribes” (creature types, synergistic effects referencing creature types), but yeah, by and large it does not have the same level of self-contained self-referencing YGO has, to the point that it pretty much revolves around offering archetypes as pre-prescribed strategies and decks. On the other hand, that’s partly a consequence of their resource management systems. MTG controls power levels with mana cost, but YGO’s only way to do that with Level 4-and-lower monsters and effect cards is to limit what they can be played with/interact with. The self-contained archetypes are a balancing mechanism in a game where most things cost nothing to play.
The problem (our opinion) is when they release a new archetype there are not enough cards to actually build an archetype deck of 40 cards. We just did a video using Ancient Guardians and all three Ogdoadic, Ursarctic, and Solfachord archetypes don't have enough different cards to make a pure archetype deck. This prevents you from exploring them to their full extent because they aren't playable archetypes on their own. I think this is partly because they constantly release so many archetypes without adding support for the prior. And without enough support the decks just aren't relevant - at all - This was the case with Ursarctic, Ogdoadic, Solfachord, live-twin cards, and many others.
@@JoseAntonio-qe5hy And when we want more support for those unfinished archetypes they would just release new supports for Dark Magician or Blue Eyes again, because nostalgia SELLS!
I think 1 of the problems is that Konami doesn't balance the game so that other/older archetypes can thrive. They balance so that they can sell new and future products. But yeah I would love new support that connects archetypes together.
Switch back to type and attribute, and always have new support for every type and attribute in each booster. That way you can always find new cards for "your" deck. Themes within those like "lightsworn' for lights that focus on milling, or other things can evolve and fade away with time, but they need to focus less on printing cards that refer to card names in an attempt to slow down the game and have all cards focused mostly on supporting the built-in types and attributes.
I think Konami should come out with like 5 archetypes a year, and really hype them up and support them the entire year. And all these bonus deckbuilding sets should be for old archetypes as legacy support.
Legacy support is useless as 9 times out of 10, The newest deck out at the time still fodder stomps you and that's due to the fact legacy cards exist because these decks are old and outdated like if they were such relevant decks then they would not require to be supported to begin with and get this legacy cards are bad at face value as they most often not they dont father the play style of deck their supporting
@@bob74h67 yeah but not everything has to be meta. If every deck was tier 1 do you really have a meta then? Old decks don’t necessarily have to be meta to be good. Just brought up to date with good support
Isn't the concept you're suggesting already present in Yu-gi-oh? Like with HEROs. You've got generic HERO support, then support for the subcategories of Elemental, Destiny etc etc
Seems like he’s calling for the game to have more focus on umbrella organization reminiscent of Heroes. It honestly seems like it’d make sense. Obviously the umbrella support would be stronger with some archetypes than others, but it would still allow for more mixing and leave fewer totally dead in the water.
@James Barton-Johns You can read my comment on this, I suggested to make "Support Mini Boxes" where only older archetypes get new support cards and reprints of their more expensive staples, if any.....That means no new archetype introduction, no new generic staples just pure archetype support
They could definitely slow down on the creation of new archetypes and start updating older ones more. At least bring older ones to a point where they are more consistent and can play with the higher end decks.
Vanguard recently improved its "archetype" structure even further by... sort of getting rid of them. There used to be 23 different clans that you could play (and your deck had to be just one clan) and there used to be issues with clan support. With the new Overdress series, those clans have been condensed into 5 nations. For example, Apex Ruler Bastion and Hexaorb Sorceress are two decks with different playstyles. But because they are in the same nation, any support for that nation will likely help both decks at the same time.
I really appreciated all of the world legacy line. The way krawlers, mekk-knights, crusadia, orcust, knightmare all in some way kind of relate to each other is so cool and I want them to continue making archetypes like that
@@mageside yeah, because Konami deems story at most a reason to promote their cards. They are happy if 90% of the text is in the effect box. Complete bottom up (as opposed to gradual shift to top-doen you get in a loreconsistent world) design that does not leave the tunnels.
Older archetypes need to be fully fleshed out, or have their known unreleased cards, released. New support for older archetypes is ok, but they need effects to fix some drawbacks or enhance what they previously can do. The new shooting star dragon t.g. ex, (what was wrong with the word "expansion" by the way) it was just an alternate version of the prior shooting star, just easier to summon but with a different effect cost, there was no drastic difference. Black Rose got a new dragon that literally was a marring of Black Rose and Stardust effects. But Exspansion, being of the T.G. set, didn't get anything from the other archetype....
I think they need to pull over a lot more of the OCG cards quicker, Shark isn't even a true archetype cause it lacks direct "Shark" support that's only in OCG or anime.
@@warriorofgod2700 it's in the ocg, it will be released eventually. I was talking about cards that even the ocg doesn't have. Anime/manga exclusive cards. (And "this card can't be used in a duel." I hate that.)
@@thecowboyofoklahoma5866 i feel ya on that. One of the reasons i dont play competitively (outside of shaddolls) is simply lack of viable support (whether it be from the cards dont exist, or they're locked away for years in the ocg). I just used crystal beasts and zenith because i love that deck for almost no reason and even with crystal bond and rainbow bridge, they still dont have that "x-factor" card to give them that push to be usable.
I feel like there was a really cool period between 5Ds and Zexal era, when a set of archetypes would come out at relatively the same time, and they would build up in power together over like a year to a year and a half's worth of sets, and as that format went on, new archetypes would be grafted into the meta and eventually the archetypes would hit full power and either be nerfed on the F&L list or get soft power-crept to make way for a new format. Occasionally surprise support would come out that would jumpstart an old theme back into the meta, which was super hype. Examples: - DUEA had BA, Shaddoll, Stellars, which all got gradually more support over the format and kept competing for the top spot, with Qliphorts coming in as the new challenger (hah) part way through. - The long-running rivalry between Mermails and Fire Fist that lasted throughout 2013 and 2014, which at the same time had Spellbooks, Geargia, and a couple others come in and out of contention as support came out (with Rulers briefly ruining the pattern). - Blackwing vs X-Saber vs Infernity, which had continuous support over the early 5D's era, with Scraps, Machina and Plant/Synchron and others coming into the field along the way. That always felt fun, because you could build a deck and compete with the others, and each deck would get steadily more powerful and interesting with time. At the same time, there were shake-ups and new contenders thrown in that always kept things feeling fresh. That feels like the optimal way to go.
You hit the nail in your video. Less archetypes, more support for "types" or more support for "Attributes so it's possible to play some cards from different Archetypes together. If it's Attribute focused there can be several different "types" of monsters in the deck like early Yu-Gi-Oh was.
I think the too many archetypes problem comes from a far too heavy emphasis on wanting archetypes to immediately become tier 1/tier 2 meta changing contenders. Whenever new archetypes show up people don't really focus on how cool they are or how fun they might be - the topic of discussion is immediately "will this change the meta." So when an archetype comes out, doesn't change the meta, then people lose faith in that archetype and instead of printing cards for an archetype people have already given up on, they try again until it sticks (Drytron, Virtual World, Eldlich, etc). Or even when they do print support, people don't pay attention to it because it still has no meta impacting power. I think the other issue is that people don't want to go "backwards" on the meta, at least not for some time. Sky Striker had its time. SPYRALs had their time. People roll their eyes at Dragon Link because Dragon Link has already been good for a long time and they're tired of playing it or playing against it. New archetypes give people something to believe in or offer some kind of potential that this will be the one to finally change the meta around a bit. Support for older archetypes that people have already forgotten about don't have that kind of impact, and it's why archetypes become forgettable in the first place. They're forgettable because when they were released they didn't impact the meta in a way that made people maintain attention on them. It makes the graveyard list of "dead" archetypes kind of long, but at the same time it's what people want. People want a brand new deck to take over and reshape things and not just return to 3 years ago format or whatever.
It'd be cool to see the APS guys dabble into MtG and share y'all thoughts. It doesn't have to be any particular format just some good old fashioned kitchen table games.
What you mention (Basic Generic Cards) is what is happening right now in the Rush Duels format. The format has archetypes yes, but it is better to play with cards that are not typical of the archetype. This is because there are many generic cards that can be inserted in any deck (Not to mention that you can combine two archetypes in one since the cards have no restrictions like the TCG archetypes). All Vanilla monsters have some use in Rush Duels (Even the one with 0 Attack and Defense)
I sometimes think that the deckbuilding sets should support older archetypes instead of introducing new ones, even though some of the best decks were introduced in those sets. I think it's better to have the older decks get the support they need
Yep. As soon as the video started I immediately thought of vanguard's clan system (prior to overdress). There's 24 frequently supported clans and a few extra "special clans." Each of the 24 clans is further divided into sub-clans and archetypes (the only difference is that sub-clans have more cards). It's a system that I actually really like because each clan has its own general playstyle which is then further developed by the individual archetypes. Like you said you can use any of the support from the overarching clan in any of the archetypes even if it's not directly intended for it. Another thing which depending on the player may either be a bonus or a detriment is that clans are key in clan fight, in which you can only play cards from one clan in a deck (with the exception of cray elemental which can be used in all clans). This causes cards and strategies to be partitioned so that a broken card in one clan doesn't affect any other clan and the strategies aren't mixed. There are 2 issues that I do see with archetypes in vanguard though. For one thing, not every archetype gets constant support. They certainly are revisited more often than archetypes in Yu-Gi-Oh, but as seen in V-Series, the concept of archetypes is mostly abandoned in favor of just giving generic clan cards. Additionally the way that booster boxes are packaged is that they will only have a certain set of clans in them so you would have to wait until a set containing a clan that you play to maybe get support for an archetype for that clan. Despite this, I still like the clan-archetype system because you can wind up with some really unique playstyles and find the one that best suits you rather than playing a deck that you're just ok with.
Having so many archetypes let’s people feel like they have their own deck. That’s why I hate anime based decks. They don’t feel like it’s my own, it just feels like a cheap copy. However, I found my deck with the Prophecy. Instead of buying new decks, I upgraded all the cards to the highest rarity, I have other spellcaster “generic” support, and I buy “broken” the spells/traps when they come out. I have played the deck in all the variants. I can tune it with newer support spellcasters. Etc. Now I have played for over 13 years. I have played; fabled Dark Magician Mystic piper Nurse burn Vampires Karikuri Atlantians/Merfolk Wind up Zombie variants Nordics Plant variants And several others. I just felt like none of them were really my play style. I found the Spellbooks and just fell in live instantly, with their history/lore/ play style etc. I do love my fableds and vampires though, more so for the art work. I mean playing meta decks is cool, But being able to go back and find all the hidden gems is always fun.
@Team APS Plus. A simpler way of what you are trying to say is, whenever a new "Clan" support comes out, sometime it can help the one "Archtype" but sometime it can also help other decks of the same Clan. I think a very good example of this is "Ghostie Leader, Beatrice." Beatrice is a made to create a new deck playstyle archtype call "Ghosties." However, she is actually played in a deck call "Nightrose." So you will ask, why do you play Beatrice in a Nightrose deck, when they are made for different archtypes? The main reason is because of Beatrice's 2nd skill that allow Nighrose to revive a unit from drop (essential extend the combo). That is how some card design is made in Vanguard. When new cards are released, it can be used by other decks of the same clan. But now going forward, overDress will go by nation, but card design will be similar. You can find some differences in oD such as "Diabolic Boys" in Dark State where new cards specifically ask for you to have a certain unit on the board. But, there are still cards without restriction that you can "Splash" into other decks of that Nation.
Funny thing about Vanguard is that sellers have a trouble with pushing it since they weren't allowed to mix attributes until the new retool so Bushiroad had to hammer out like significantly more product to support them all. Or rather from this perspective, Vanguard couldn't really make archetypes that were detached from old ones specifically because it would tangibly and directly harm their bottom line due to the very nature of the game. In my opinion, making archetypes as they are now is more or less fine. They come and go and there's a lot of pack filler but that's the nature of experimenting. having some archetype cards that shave off the archetype name in favor of their traits (such as Rekindling's 200 DEF stipulation and Atlanteans generic Water support) to keep things healthy. Within reason, since if you make them too powerful you get stuff like Electrumite, Isolde, and Needlefiber.
"Had to hammer out significant amount of product". This argument is outdated the moment OverDress become a thing. Instead of a new set every month, they are releasing new set every 3 months instead because the nation system that replaces the clan system enables it (This statement is directly from the current producer of the game btw). Not only giving breathing room for Vanguard players in that 3 months period, they also have time to actually playtest the cards enough that they don't powercreep (at least not too much like from the V format).
remember when sets were half star vaders, half eradicators and half liberators, while the non MC clans got shafted hard during breakride era? yeah, balanced *pffffft*
I don't really find an issue with so many archetypes, in fact that's why I prefer Yugioh. Being able to pick between so many depending on my playstyle or mood is just really nice to have, and seeing random support from time to time for old archetypes I used to play really reinvigorates me to look back on older archetypes once again
lol i hav 2 things to say honestly i like that there's a lot of archetypes because it lets you play in whatever way you like. But i feel like too many of them are forgotten because they just realllly bad. i just wish that every archetype was somewhat memorable also what if they made one set a year be designated to supporting archetype
@6:50 Dragon Ball Super TCG does that. They usually get you hyped up for support for a certain color. I like how they keep the effects and skills of cards kinda specific to certain colors. Like green will usually pop cards or make you discard cards, blue Is good for energy manipulation, etc..
My archetypes list that needs the attention Jurrac Earthbound servant Predataplant Performapal Red-eyes Darkworld Infernoid Performage Red/stardust Iron-chain Vylon Triamid
I think any of the hidden arsenal archetypes and their extended families should get good support. It'd be cool to see one of those archetypes get a random top in an event. But not all archetypes and support is created equal for example Dragunities receiving new support and also could receive the dragon link strategy to get stronger.
One of the weirdest things about Yu-Gi-Oh! that we recently discussed with some friends is how they are so selective about legacy support for archetypes. One of the weirdest things is how there are occasional support for old school stuff that even works or requires the OG stuff (including Dark Magician, BEWD etc.), but then we have so many exciting and unique ideas that got thrown away EVEN if they introduce some kind of continuation. One of the best examples would be the Hidden Arsenal storyline. So many of those archetypes have been discontinued to the point that even when they got a spiritual successor, it was only similar in art, but had no relations. Which is so weird because those were already undersupported, and it was the perfect opportunity to create something new and exciting for them, but they always preferred creating new and new archetypes. I think this comes from the fear of how generic the original card game was when it all started, and they are afraid of something coming up from the past that would work perfectly fine with them - which is ironic, because it ALWAYS happens regardless.
Its funny you mentioned Vanguard because their recent reboot actually merged the Clans into Nations. And while this is much better for support (every main set booster provides support for all decks), its come at the cost of some old Clan visual aesthetics getting partially lost and ending up only on support cards with the current 2 boss monsters of each Nation only pulling from 2 of the Clans that were merged into it, leaving 2-5 other boss monster aesthetics currently with no representative. I bailed on Vanguard during the middle of their V Series era for YGO and honestly the amount of archetypes was a positive that got me hooked because there were so so many neat ideas. Yes only a dozen if that are "viable" but the wide breadth of creativity got my brain going really hard on deck building. Merging all the recent and some older Plant support into a really fun defensive control deck. Getting to actually play with the Ritual Mechanic and getting to cherry pick the cool utility monsters in blue. And then my personal jank favorite of Galaxy-Eyes Dragonmaids. Yes there's maybe too many, but like you said, lots of decks have been getting spot support since the end of Vrains sets. And MR5 (4.5? 4 version2?) means that older extra deck archetypes aren't REQUIRED to use links anymore. If Chemicritters can get support in our year of 2021 I think its okay for there to be a buffet of choice that we splash generic support into.
Total facts. I love trying the new ones each set, but it's hard to invest in any since you know you'll just forget about them anyway when the new ones come out.
I agree on the idea of easing up on the number of archetypes released per year, I think a lot of the cooler ones die out too quickly. As well, I'm kinda on the fence about if an archetype should receive all their cards all at once or some here and a bit more in the next set. I think they should receive enough to be meta viable, and then get some cards later on to boost the strategy as an archetype and not something generic that anything could use. I think Adamancipator is a good example as with help from block dragon and gigantes, they rose to top tier competitive tables and got support later on for themselves, mind you there wasn't much but support is support. Same thing with eldlich, they just got a fusion monster and they can be played better as a pure archetype then adamancipator (as much as I love adamancipator). So tldr, I agree on less archetypes and focus on other ones so they can be viable for competitive play but not sure where I stand for the release of support for new archetypes.
@@eduardogutierrez3753 Variety/Different strategies within an archetype. It would be cool to play a control strategy in game 1 then smoke screen into an aggro strategy in game 2.
it honestly doesn't make sense why they would advertise cards on TV if they weren't going to release them in real life AT THE SAME TIME, it's kinda like they're trying to act with a semblance of integrity about being a big ol advert for the card game or something... they can have dignity but just accept the fact that the anime is a big old advertising machine for the card game...
I think the way forward would be releasing extra deck monsters in future sets that make it possible to better integrate thematically relevant archetypes in the same deck. As an example. There are many ways of building a blue-eyes deck. Suppose that there is or was a time where the best variant of a blue-eyes deck does not include the "with eyes of blue" cards like Maiden or Master. Might a path towards better archetype integration happen if they released a card called "Dragoon - with eyes of blue" Link 2 / 3 monster, requires one blue-eyes monster and one spellcaster monster. Whilst this card is on the field all spellcaster monsters on your field or in your graveyard are also dragon type monsters. Banish one dragon type monster from your graveyard and target one card on the field or in your hand. That card's name becomes Blue eyes white dragon. That may not be the best example but the idea is to create cards that support the idea of using one existing archetype to support another more thematically relevant archetype so that people are less tempted to splash in random engines that are unrelated like brave or phantom-knights. Because Yugi does not have gamewide rules concerning card interaction like vanguard. I don't think a more vanguard approach is useful. Rather given how competetive Yugi is. Success would be more likely by organically making archetypes supoort each other with the use of making the links between them competetively good enough to have a chance.
Paul I get what ur were saying with family line. A certain theme like hero theme neo-spacian, destiny heroes, elemental heroes, and masked heroes, evil heroes, etc. I think that ur idea to organize the archetypes is a good idea. I think that Konami should introduce 6 new archetype each year with like two new archetypes per a main set with each year having about 3-4 main sets a year .
Six samurai did a similar thing. Started with “the six samurai” and “shien” cards. Later released “legendary six samurai” then “secret six samurai” all one family but different. Now I just wish for more haha
I like to think that generic cards (Zeus, Accesscode Talker, Halqifibrax, etc) are made the way they are because they are meant to be transversal support for all archetypes. Also I had never thought about this before but after watching your video I think I would love a MR that includes some sort of lore book/guide that eventually would help to give support to whole families of cards.
I once decided that I was gonna start a "every deck ever" project, where I build every deck that can be built. And that project lasted right up until I looked up how many archetypes there are. (And also how expensive some old card are.) It would up being something to the effect a bit over 300 different decks, and a lot of them would be hard to really make a deck out of at all.
I think the closest thing we have to a house archetype is dragons since a lot of its support is generic. I am with you that we get a lot of "fodder" archetypes. Machines also feels like a house archetype as well. Since I don't buy product I despise the fact that I can buy a whole "subtier" archetype for like 5 bucks outside of the one card thst makes them work which is at 10 forcing a fun deck into prices not worth the cardboard.
It's difficult to have an edge and be extremely knowledgeable of matchups when there's simply too many archetypes to remember along with their combos and interactions with your cards.
You're point at 3:00 is a good one for example I'm building ogdoadic but with lightning overdrive coming next week I'll probably be playing drytron again and most of my ogdoadic cards are still in the mail.
Playing free-to-play in Master Duel has allowed me to discard the option of buying selection packs (ie. the new archetypes) because of the gem shortage, and focus more on the secret packs, learning a new archetype once a month, updating previous archetypes with cards or archetypes that might fit better, and perhaps adding in newly added SRs and URs that came out in selection packs. I have so many decks that I've worked on this year: Plunder patroll, fur hire, Appliancer, Shiranui/Mayakashi, Mekknights, Crawler, morphtronic, solfachord, harpies, graydle, Aesir gods, Awakening of the posessed, World chalice, mermail, fortune lady, etc. I sometime dread the addition of new archetype cards for weather because that's just extra cards I need to create but thats something else. Overall, I love the archetypes of yugioh, learning new types of strategies, constantly thinking about ways to improve my decks (without checking for decklists or creating the UR staples) and its been really fun. And the non-rotating nature of yugioh really helps because these really old archetypes that existed from the duel monster days can still be played to this day and even if there isnt much support, you could play such along with other complementary archetypes to bring out their strengths and what not. The lore of the archetypes are cool too. That being said, the archetypes in secret packs are fairly playable and there are VERY minor archetypes hidden in the legacy packs so.... im not sure what I think
Can I say that outside of Volcanics during the time of _Secrets of Eternity_ , I don't like how they'll sometimes release one--I repeat... ONE new support card and it isn't fixing the archetypes' core issues or if it IS a good card... It's like the best card in the archetype now and it's not enough either. Most of the time, more than ONE good card to actually improve older weaker archetype. Sometimes, the archetype is too outdated like Cyberdarks that... You basically have to run some crazy Frankenstein's monster of a Deck just for that archetype to do anything. Like the new Field Spell is crazy... But it is for Cyberdarks. There are also SO MANY ARCHETYPES that you never know when your favorite is getting any. I popped off when I saw the new GUSTO support in _Dawn of Majesty_ and the cards are very good but not enough for Gusto to be Tier 1. But at LEAST they feel much better to play now.
I wanna see more support for monster types to push on what makes them unique or help push the general playstyle/gameplan for these monster types. Especially the more obscure monster types like Pyro, Thunder, or Insect for example. I also would love to see more sub-archetypes like the Infernoble Knights for example. Not only do they bring in a different feel of play, but they can also help the existing archetype because it's a sub-archetype.
As Konami... this is how I would structure things. I'd break the product down into four separate things each releasing 3 things a year. The Core Set that moves the game forward, the Reprint set that has not only the cards that need to be reprinted but any card that has been errata'd, the Support set that is mean to only release support for archetype that need it in an attempt to bring every archetype up to a rogue level(which might be hard to judge since archetypes can mix), then finally collectors set that hold things like ghost of the past, gold series, and the duelist packs. What a setup like this would do is allow any new archetype that would come out in any of the three core set releases about a 4-month window to breathe before any other potential new archetype could come out. Allow them to break that new archetype in two for the core set and support set so that the support set will sell regardless of if people care about the other archetypes that happen to be supported in this set. The reprint set will of course sell due to obvious reasons, and finally, the collectors set will sell due to bring cards that you may want at a higher rarity.. and well the hot ticket collector cards. Could even though in the alternate artwork stuff here as well.
Konami does do that whole clan thing that was described. They did it with world legacy and are now doing it with the Albaz storyline. I personally enjoy these kind of story archetypes because even if my deck doesn’t get support the next part in the story can potentially help my deck. I have a crusadia-mekk knight deck and a orcust deck and I loved seeing those two archetypes interact. My main issue is that Konami makes too many generics but that could help with the fact that there is too many archetypes, that’s why we have more mixed archetypes when it comes to deck building. Sorry for the long post.
I'm mainly an MTG player (although currently transitioning to vanguard) and what you describe at the beginning of the video is very similar to an issue mtg has called product fatigue. New product will be announced/start spoilers/ be released so often that you'll get hyped in the spoiler season and then a month into the new set you'll be hyped about something else coming out in 2 months
I think the ideal way would be to create retrains of older cards that work on different archetypes so it incentivates mixing them for better results. Take the Giltia retrain revealed a few days ago, it supports Red Eyes, Jinzo and Fisherman. If you could do more cards like that maybe they can make some archtypes to be more closely related to each other. Ofc, it would have to involve a lot of hard work, but i think the best way to do this is to create support that pushed people to mix and experiment with archtype support and combinations.
There is a distinct lack of support for certain archetypes, while others appear to get new cards every couple of months. I find that extremely frustrating as a player who has been wanting new support for my deck for like two years(a year-and-a-half, maybe)
How I interpretted Paul's idea: there should be pillars within yugioh that focus on a few specific themes within the game. Then when archetypes are released the archetypes are designed around these pillars of yugioh with unique enough effects to remain their own archetype while still working with other archetypes of the same pillar. Thus allowing new archetypes whenever Konami wants while also allowing new archetypes to be mixed in with old ones of the same pillar.
Let the core booster sets have a 50/50 ratio when it comes to archetypes, half of them being new archetypes and the other half being support for older archetypes
One of the solutions would be to make more attribute related cards like they did in phantom darkness. The entire set was based around the dark attribute. There were no archetypes involved to my knowledge, except for some single pieces of support. I want to see cards like Allure of the Sea or Fire Armed dragon. Or maybe Dark Guardian of the Fortress #0 and Skybound Spirit.
Honestly I think the sheer number of different archetypes is a strength of Yugioh because you have SO many different ways to go about playing the game (even though in practice, the competitive circuit really all seems to come down to stopping your opponent from playing the game). Sure, not all of them will be supported as much as others, but tbh, not every deck necessarily needs to be super good or have a ton of depth to it imho. It's fine for some of them to just be made to have fun or make you approach the game differently. But I totally agree that they at least need to release enough cards to create a coherent deck when an archetype first comes out, or else you risk losing interest. As fast as ygo sets come out relative to other games, three months (at best) is still quite a while to wait for new cards when a deck isn't even fully playable yet.
In retrospect, I think it would have been better if some archetypes had similar playstyles, for example, the lv. Monsters, armed dragon, mystic swordsman, silent magician, etc, all had the same core mechanic of utilizing weaker monsters to snowball into special summoning larger ones each turn, or how E-heroes and roids had the common concept of using the same couple main deck monsters to make various fusions so there was almost always a fusion monster to make out of your opening hand. If there were archetypes that played similarly, but had different typing and themes, it would've gone a long way in slowing power creep and allowing some cards (like Lv. Up) to be interchangeable between decks and relevant for a longer time, and it would have allowed a little more "player expression" through deck building. Having a playtime exclusive to one archetype helps that archetype stand out, but at yhe same time it kind of feels like a rpg where abilities are tied to cosmetic armor, so getting certain gameplay benefits requires your character to look a certain way. It would be cool to get another mix-and-match fusion archetype like e-heroes but in a fish/sea-serpent or fairy type deck.
From what some of my friends are saying they are editing how the clan system works for cardfight vanguard to enable the mixing of clans or something like that.
they could release cards which name multiple archetypes (armed dragon ojama) which would help show the big picture synergy. maybe a battlewasp speedroid wind synchro support continuous spell etc
I've played Vanguard for years and I understand what you're saying Paul. "clans" have unique identites and abilities. I'm as experienced in YGO but I struggle to find identity in some decks. There are certain Link monsters who are just so dang good that it can be slotted into nearly all decks and is sometimes better than the boss monster of those archetypes. Feels bad man
i get what you're saying, its sort of like the world legacy stuff where theres multiple arcatypes under one banner and they all are a different flavour of the same thing but with different playstyles. i really like how guard dragon and crusadia can be their own deck and splashed in with stuff like orcust or mekk knights. maybe more stuff like that also yugioh needs to slow down on the arcatypes, too many times a new arcatype comes out and they are missing a good boss monster or something to actually enable their plays and it comes out like a year or two later, these arcatyes just feel incomplete on release
I think new archetypes are good cause it gives people different chances to find what fits them. But on the flip side they do need to make sure older types are given new support so people are able to keep playing their favorite.
I agree there is too many of them. I do think there are ways to fix this anyone remembers Steelswarm, and Evilswarm? I do think that would be a more interesting direction and a good thing for archetypes overall.
I wish there was more dark level 2 support around this archetype, Cali Go Crow and umbrel Horror helps but it's still too small of a card pool, if we got a new dark rank 2 xyz based archetype then I could see this being great.
Nah I get you Paul. I look at S-Force and think why it couldn’t have been a theme tied to banish Psychics or Time Thieves instead of just being insinuated with just lore. I look at EARTH Machine and I love that it incorporates Infinitraks, Machina and Trains and you can use ALL of them.
I wish they would not decide beforehand how meta an archetype will be. It's clear some archetypes are "designed to be" bad and marketed to Casuals only which I don't get. Casuals would enjoy powerful decks too and competetive players would have more variety and less stale formats. Invoked, Salamangreat and BA are great examples of popular meta AND casual decks.
I like the range, but I think I agree some do come and go too quickly, and a lot get forgotten, a lot of interesting mechanics or cool artwork and I would like to play one rather, than it just be forgotten. E.G. I love Weather Painters, I top and locals a lot with it, but it really does need the 7th colour of the rainbow to finish it and it just needs more consistency. I know that is to me, but there are a lot of cool looking decks which just need a little more, and they just get nothing, they would rather make a new or one or print more heroes or utopia.
A good example of a forgotten archetype is Constellar, they’re cool because they can modify their levels and it would just be a really good archetype if they got synchro support and a good counter trap.
Always love listening to you talk about these things. They seem ranty on the outside but viewers quickly realise that your complaints are based on a strong love for the game. Keep up the great work Paul!
In my opinion at this point eugeo has so many archives that we only really need to release 1 or 2 big ones a year and then we can trink a Lin 1 or 2 cards of different kind of art types to kind of fill out the packs. Slowly bringing other archives into a current metal's power level so that way we can still play some of our old favorite archives maybe not competitively but to get them to a more fun deck/rogue dextadus
Agreed with the "Clans" thing. Tribrigade is a fantastic candidate for Konami to turn toward that style. Also makes for awesome long running lore when cards start to belong to larger groups of cards. Like all the spellcasters connected through all the shared lore, those are also a great candidate for the 'clan' treatment.
I like alternative win condition's and liked the frequent mill iron chains could do when I played legacy of the duelist. But realized they never made future cards for the arcytpe which was disappointing, I know the deck isn't good since mill isn't good especially in yugioh but still liked the idea at least.
Maybe a good way to retool it is only release new archetypes in the four core boxes each year with the side products supporting either those new archetype or older archetypes, or just include generic cards.
The problem is the random archetypes that have 3 cards and dont go anywhere, digital bugs, glacial beast, triamid, and many more, why do they have to be archetypes? Even lyrilusc just recently got enough cards to justify being an entire archetype.
this is why I personally try to go with an archetype that has some solid generic support so that I can at least continue to use it and even swap between a few of them. A great example is plants, they have a lot of different archetypes and a decent amount of solid generic support cards making it possible to play quite a few of the different plant archetypes.
Support is too inconsistent in power and frequency, or absent. Ice Barrier was in dire need of support for over a *decade* and when it finally received it, the support was lackluster, and they'll probably never see another new card again at this rate.
It would be cool if for maybe the last 3 months(or maybe the first 3 months) of the year every product would be legacy support. Having a specific time for Konami to focus on creating and players building anticipation for legacy support would be cool instead of throwing a couple legacy cards here and there.
I took a break from this game because of how slow my favorite deck is supported. I just literally told my friends to notify me when I got supported lol.
The Banlist is the closest thing to Thanos's snap. It can be said that they applied a "Thanos's snap" with the Rush Duels format since no TCG archetype is compatible in the format (The format has its own archetypes, but many cards there are quite generic that you can combine it with anything)
Dude you make a lot of sense. Imagine them connecting Dragunity, Mist Valley, and Harpies?! Something like the cards that brought Raidraptors and PK together?
I think the more important issue is that konami needs to stop making garbage unplayable archetypes and actually make them somewhat work
Not every archetype should be competitively viable, thats just too much to ask from konami and it would power creep the game too rapidly. Im fine with meme tier archetypes coming out allot of the time then just one or two support cards given over time to break them, they dont nessecarily need to make a card playable on release
No there are not garbage archetypes your wrong
@@Lizardgreininja47449 me when i lie
I think all archetypes should get at lest rogue level
So it can hold it’s ground and take on some things in the meta
Like atlantean archetypes create counter fire king archtypes or amazones for harpies and shaddolls for machima mayhem and blue eyes for dark magician or whitchcraft for charmers or traptrix again dark world
The diversity of archetypes is good. The problem is they're not created equally and some don't get enough support, especially when they're xenophobic and don't allow other cards of similar types to work in tandem with them.
Example utopia get way to much support and volcanics like they we are still waiting for Thier support
Its a good thing when archetypes dont mix, it's what keeps them balanced. Now cyber angel is dead because of drytron and konami's failure to restrict deck building.
@@exeledusprince9165 I disagree for the most part, unless Konami were to create more generic support. I wouldn't be able to create any of the decks I have if they were restricted and none of my decks are meta. Keeping things pure, imo, hurts the fun in deck building because it becomes almost automated in a way.
@@juanabreu3002 but look at the way cards like Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon and Crystron Halqifibrax terrorize lower tier decks, by either making them unable to compete or being the cause of them losing cards on the banlist. If I want to use a Synchron deck, I cant, because there is a completely unrelated card that is so OP and generic that caused one of my most important pieces to be banned.
*Digital Bugs* 👀
Costellars to satellerknights was a family archetype and I think we need more things like that.
That one is called Constellar, but yeah, I would like a support that help both Constellar and Satellarknights together, like how the new Hero support did to Elemental Hero and Destiny Hero. Heck, I don't even mind if they fuse both together into a big archetype like HERO, because their concept as a archetype are so similar anyways. As of right now the only card that connects both of them Stellarknight Constellar Diamond, and I want more support like that to come out.
Yeah, I’m kind of annoyed that the Satellerknight archetype doesn’t really support Constellar
Yes, just like Phantom Knights and The Phantom Knights, my favorite family archetype :)
Is the new starryknight cards part of constellar n tellarknight?
@@AruruAruna dont think so since it doesnt have any xyz plus the starry in starryknight is holy in japanese
what you are struggling to propose, I think, is having an actual identity for the Sub-Types or at least some archetypes that would connect them together under one umbrella. Like if generally all Fairy monsters utilized disruption, so that many Fairy-based archetypes could potentially borrow a card or 2 from each other and players could see some kind of relationship.
Yugioh's monster identities have always been all over the place and I think it's legitimately too late to try to course correct this now, sadly.
This could further be expanded upon by giving the attributes similar identities.
I see that pendulum cards behave as a "subtype" deck. Archetypes don't matter as much to build a pendulum deck. With Synchros it feels similar because synchros need tuners. Maybe as the game developed, extra deck mechanics are like the true subtype attribute in Yu-Gi-Oh
@@KalebAlfaro More like they're the only truly consistent thing that could even be called a sub type. It just indicates the issue even more.
The fact that monsters are more divided/categorized by their summoning type than their actual intended flavor type is a problem.
When Konami announced Despian cards I felt they should have just called them darklords... Is basically the same concept
It was sort of like that back in the day. Like fire monsters generally had burn effects and water types could swarm easily.
I was really surprised going to Magic and seeing how they handle archetypes. There is always support for the five colors. When they release a new set they have the intended archetypes(the strixhaven schools) but because of the five colors they can also fit into other places like red deck wins or tribal decks.
Magic doesn’t really care for archetypes, mostly colors and what they usually do and even then they break the color chart sometimes. Magic cards are designed to interact with essentially every other card, in contrast to yugioh where archetypes usually only play well with each other!
Glad I quit yugioh and found a game like MTG to let creativity reign instead of building around an archetype
well tbh magic doesn't realy have archetypes they only have strategies one can play after and print new support for those different strategies. And they're kinda creative with that, so now I can play Mill in 500 different ways and never get bored of just wanting to mill out my opponent~
Unrelated but I hate MTG deck names. Why can't you just call it Red Aggro, which is what it is, why's it gotta be "red deck wins"
I get it with more micro stuff like Cawblade, since that's a very specific deck in a very specific format. But general archetypes (like an aggressive red deck) shouldn't really have those kinds of names imo.
@@pablomadrid6962 a lot of the names for different deck types were made by middle aged men in the 90s sooooooo there a little weird some times
MTG has color identities, some set-specific clan strategies, and “tribes” (creature types, synergistic effects referencing creature types), but yeah, by and large it does not have the same level of self-contained self-referencing YGO has, to the point that it pretty much revolves around offering archetypes as pre-prescribed strategies and decks.
On the other hand, that’s partly a consequence of their resource management systems. MTG controls power levels with mana cost, but YGO’s only way to do that with Level 4-and-lower monsters and effect cards is to limit what they can be played with/interact with. The self-contained archetypes are a balancing mechanism in a game where most things cost nothing to play.
The problem (our opinion) is when they release a new archetype there are not enough cards to actually build an archetype deck of 40 cards. We just did a video using Ancient Guardians and all three Ogdoadic, Ursarctic, and Solfachord archetypes don't have enough different cards to make a pure archetype deck. This prevents you from exploring them to their full extent because they aren't playable archetypes on their own. I think this is partly because they constantly release so many archetypes without adding support for the prior. And without enough support the decks just aren't relevant - at all -
This was the case with Ursarctic, Ogdoadic, Solfachord, live-twin cards, and many others.
Yes the problem isn't the amount of archetypes, the problem is the amount of unfinished archetypes.
@@JoseAntonio-qe5hy And when we want more support for those unfinished archetypes they would just release new supports for Dark Magician or Blue Eyes again, because nostalgia SELLS!
@@sekaihunter9378 and hot take i don't even care that much for either any more because of all this bs support
Same problem happened with my beloved Rikkas, and Jurracs (why only one back row card?).
I think 1 of the problems is that Konami doesn't balance the game so that other/older archetypes can thrive. They balance so that they can sell new and future products. But yeah I would love new support that connects archetypes together.
Switch back to type and attribute, and always have new support for every type and attribute in each booster. That way you can always find new cards for "your" deck.
Themes within those like "lightsworn' for lights that focus on milling, or other things can evolve and fade away with time, but they need to focus less on printing cards that refer to card names in an attempt to slow down the game and have all cards focused mostly on supporting the built-in types and attributes.
I think Konami should come out with like 5 archetypes a year, and really hype them up and support them the entire year. And all these bonus deckbuilding sets should be for old archetypes as legacy support.
Legacy support is useless as 9 times out of 10, The newest deck out at the time still fodder stomps you and that's due to the fact legacy cards exist because these decks are old and outdated like if they were such relevant decks then they would not require to be supported to begin with and get this legacy cards are bad at face value as they most often not they dont father the play style of deck their supporting
@@bob74h67 yeah but not everything has to be meta. If every deck was tier 1 do you really have a meta then? Old decks don’t necessarily have to be meta to be good. Just brought up to date with good support
No your wronv
No yugioh should not have that team aps
Isn't the concept you're suggesting already present in Yu-gi-oh? Like with HEROs. You've got generic HERO support, then support for the subcategories of Elemental, Destiny etc etc
Too bad stuff like that always favors one than the other
Only if some archetypes got as big of a support as "Hero" archetype has....My God, you can play Heroes in so many different ways....
Isn't Heroes like the only example of it though? LMAO
Seems like he’s calling for the game to have more focus on umbrella organization reminiscent of Heroes. It honestly seems like it’d make sense. Obviously the umbrella support would be stronger with some archetypes than others, but it would still allow for more mixing and leave fewer totally dead in the water.
@James Barton-Johns You can read my comment on this, I suggested to make "Support Mini Boxes" where only older archetypes get new support cards and reprints of their more expensive staples, if any.....That means no new archetype introduction, no new generic staples just pure archetype support
They could definitely slow down on the creation of new archetypes and start updating older ones more. At least bring older ones to a point where they are more consistent and can play with the higher end decks.
No your wronv
Vanguard recently improved its "archetype" structure even further by... sort of getting rid of them. There used to be 23 different clans that you could play (and your deck had to be just one clan) and there used to be issues with clan support. With the new Overdress series, those clans have been condensed into 5 nations. For example, Apex Ruler Bastion and Hexaorb Sorceress are two decks with different playstyles. But because they are in the same nation, any support for that nation will likely help both decks at the same time.
Haha link joker go brr
I really appreciated all of the world legacy line. The way krawlers, mekk-knights, crusadia, orcust, knightmare all in some way kind of relate to each other is so cool and I want them to continue making archetypes like that
it's too bad Konami didn't anything with them to make them meta viable...
@@mageside yeah, because Konami deems story at most a reason to promote their cards. They are happy if 90% of the text is in the effect box. Complete bottom up (as opposed to gradual shift to top-doen you get in a loreconsistent world) design that does not leave the tunnels.
No other archetypes are good I don’t like it that much your wrong
Older archetypes need to be fully fleshed out, or have their known unreleased cards, released.
New support for older archetypes is ok, but they need effects to fix some drawbacks or enhance what they previously can do.
The new shooting star dragon t.g. ex, (what was wrong with the word "expansion" by the way) it was just an alternate version of the prior shooting star, just easier to summon but with a different effect cost, there was no drastic difference.
Black Rose got a new dragon that literally was a marring of Black Rose and Stardust effects. But Exspansion, being of the T.G. set, didn't get anything from the other archetype....
I think they need to pull over a lot more of the OCG cards quicker, Shark isn't even a true archetype cause it lacks direct "Shark" support that's only in OCG or anime.
We Code Talker players are still waiting for Heatsoul. It's been 50 years.
Ive been sitting on max rarity crystal beasts. When will i get zenith? Probably never
@@warriorofgod2700 it's in the ocg, it will be released eventually.
I was talking about cards that even the ocg doesn't have. Anime/manga exclusive cards.
(And "this card can't be used in a duel." I hate that.)
@@thecowboyofoklahoma5866 i feel ya on that. One of the reasons i dont play competitively (outside of shaddolls) is simply lack of viable support (whether it be from the cards dont exist, or they're locked away for years in the ocg). I just used crystal beasts and zenith because i love that deck for almost no reason and even with crystal bond and rainbow bridge, they still dont have that "x-factor" card to give them that push to be usable.
I feel like there was a really cool period between 5Ds and Zexal era, when a set of archetypes would come out at relatively the same time, and they would build up in power together over like a year to a year and a half's worth of sets, and as that format went on, new archetypes would be grafted into the meta and eventually the archetypes would hit full power and either be nerfed on the F&L list or get soft power-crept to make way for a new format. Occasionally surprise support would come out that would jumpstart an old theme back into the meta, which was super hype.
Examples:
- DUEA had BA, Shaddoll, Stellars, which all got gradually more support over the format and kept competing for the top spot, with Qliphorts coming in as the new challenger (hah) part way through.
- The long-running rivalry between Mermails and Fire Fist that lasted throughout 2013 and 2014, which at the same time had Spellbooks, Geargia, and a couple others come in and out of contention as support came out (with Rulers briefly ruining the pattern).
- Blackwing vs X-Saber vs Infernity, which had continuous support over the early 5D's era, with Scraps, Machina and Plant/Synchron and others coming into the field along the way.
That always felt fun, because you could build a deck and compete with the others, and each deck would get steadily more powerful and interesting with time. At the same time, there were shake-ups and new contenders thrown in that always kept things feeling fresh. That feels like the optimal way to go.
You hit the nail in your video. Less archetypes, more support for "types" or more support for "Attributes so it's possible to play some cards from different Archetypes together.
If it's Attribute focused there can be several different "types" of monsters in the deck like early Yu-Gi-Oh was.
I think the too many archetypes problem comes from a far too heavy emphasis on wanting archetypes to immediately become tier 1/tier 2 meta changing contenders. Whenever new archetypes show up people don't really focus on how cool they are or how fun they might be - the topic of discussion is immediately "will this change the meta."
So when an archetype comes out, doesn't change the meta, then people lose faith in that archetype and instead of printing cards for an archetype people have already given up on, they try again until it sticks (Drytron, Virtual World, Eldlich, etc). Or even when they do print support, people don't pay attention to it because it still has no meta impacting power. I think the other issue is that people don't want to go "backwards" on the meta, at least not for some time. Sky Striker had its time. SPYRALs had their time. People roll their eyes at Dragon Link because Dragon Link has already been good for a long time and they're tired of playing it or playing against it.
New archetypes give people something to believe in or offer some kind of potential that this will be the one to finally change the meta around a bit. Support for older archetypes that people have already forgotten about don't have that kind of impact, and it's why archetypes become forgettable in the first place. They're forgettable because when they were released they didn't impact the meta in a way that made people maintain attention on them. It makes the graveyard list of "dead" archetypes kind of long, but at the same time it's what people want. People want a brand new deck to take over and reshape things and not just return to 3 years ago format or whatever.
It'd be cool to see the APS guys dabble into MtG and share y'all thoughts. It doesn't have to be any particular format just some good old fashioned kitchen table games.
Here I am still waiting for my Castle of dark illusions support.
Volcanics welcome to the club
Im waiting for barians archetype support
All of the cards would have odd stat numbers lol
@@abdullahamr9941 Bruh I've been waiting since Metal Raiders...rofl.
@@prehistoricplayer1132 lol same, been waiting since 2002, come on Konami where's the support?
I remember when every deck was comprised of generic staple cards and nothing else.
Back in the middle ages of YGO.
What you mention (Basic Generic Cards) is what is happening right now in the Rush Duels format.
The format has archetypes yes, but it is better to play with cards that are not typical of the archetype. This is because there are many generic cards that can be inserted in any deck (Not to mention that you can combine two archetypes in one since the cards have no restrictions like the TCG archetypes).
All Vanilla monsters have some use in Rush Duels (Even the one with 0 Attack and Defense)
Lol middle ages of yugioh. I remember those days.
I feel so old reading this.
@@brunosanto3488 Doesn't matter since nobody's playing it
The best ages. You could do goody shit like mix decks with your opponent and still get a functioning deck
I sometimes think that the deckbuilding sets should support older archetypes instead of introducing new ones, even though some of the best decks were introduced in those sets. I think it's better to have the older decks get the support they need
Yep. As soon as the video started I immediately thought of vanguard's clan system (prior to overdress). There's 24 frequently supported clans and a few extra "special clans." Each of the 24 clans is further divided into sub-clans and archetypes (the only difference is that sub-clans have more cards). It's a system that I actually really like because each clan has its own general playstyle which is then further developed by the individual archetypes. Like you said you can use any of the support from the overarching clan in any of the archetypes even if it's not directly intended for it. Another thing which depending on the player may either be a bonus or a detriment is that clans are key in clan fight, in which you can only play cards from one clan in a deck (with the exception of cray elemental which can be used in all clans). This causes cards and strategies to be partitioned so that a broken card in one clan doesn't affect any other clan and the strategies aren't mixed. There are 2 issues that I do see with archetypes in vanguard though. For one thing, not every archetype gets constant support. They certainly are revisited more often than archetypes in Yu-Gi-Oh, but as seen in V-Series, the concept of archetypes is mostly abandoned in favor of just giving generic clan cards. Additionally the way that booster boxes are packaged is that they will only have a certain set of clans in them so you would have to wait until a set containing a clan that you play to maybe get support for an archetype for that clan. Despite this, I still like the clan-archetype system because you can wind up with some really unique playstyles and find the one that best suits you rather than playing a deck that you're just ok with.
There can never be too many archetypes! But there can be too much time waiting for Volcanic Support
You said pretty much what needed to be said........except:
Day 820 of waiting for Good Pyro/Volcanic Support to arrive in the OCG/TCG..........
Volcanic support is pretty much a dead meme.
Payne96! The man the myth he legend! That’s honestly crazy that you’re still keeping track. What a legend.
Facts
Having so many archetypes let’s people feel like they have their own deck. That’s why I hate anime based decks. They don’t feel like it’s my own, it just feels like a cheap copy.
However, I found my deck with the Prophecy. Instead of buying new decks, I upgraded all the cards to the highest rarity, I have other spellcaster “generic” support, and I buy “broken” the spells/traps when they come out.
I have played the deck in all the variants. I can tune it with newer support spellcasters. Etc.
Now I have played for over 13 years.
I have played;
fabled
Dark Magician
Mystic piper
Nurse burn
Vampires
Karikuri
Atlantians/Merfolk
Wind up
Zombie variants
Nordics
Plant variants
And several others.
I just felt like none of them were really my play style. I found the Spellbooks and just fell in live instantly, with their history/lore/ play style etc.
I do love my fableds and vampires though, more so for the art work.
I mean playing meta decks is cool, But being able to go back and find all the hidden gems is always fun.
@Team APS Plus. A simpler way of what you are trying to say is, whenever a new "Clan" support comes out, sometime it can help the one "Archtype" but sometime it can also help other decks of the same Clan. I think a very good example of this is "Ghostie Leader, Beatrice." Beatrice is a made to create a new deck playstyle archtype call "Ghosties." However, she is actually played in a deck call "Nightrose." So you will ask, why do you play Beatrice in a Nightrose deck, when they are made for different archtypes? The main reason is because of Beatrice's 2nd skill that allow Nighrose to revive a unit from drop (essential extend the combo). That is how some card design is made in Vanguard. When new cards are released, it can be used by other decks of the same clan. But now going forward, overDress will go by nation, but card design will be similar. You can find some differences in oD such as "Diabolic Boys" in Dark State where new cards specifically ask for you to have a certain unit on the board. But, there are still cards without restriction that you can "Splash" into other decks of that Nation.
Funny thing about Vanguard is that sellers have a trouble with pushing it since they weren't allowed to mix attributes until the new retool so Bushiroad had to hammer out like significantly more product to support them all. Or rather from this perspective, Vanguard couldn't really make archetypes that were detached from old ones specifically because it would tangibly and directly harm their bottom line due to the very nature of the game.
In my opinion, making archetypes as they are now is more or less fine. They come and go and there's a lot of pack filler but that's the nature of experimenting. having some archetype cards that shave off the archetype name in favor of their traits (such as Rekindling's 200 DEF stipulation and Atlanteans generic Water support) to keep things healthy. Within reason, since if you make them too powerful you get stuff like Electrumite, Isolde, and Needlefiber.
Ah yes, the TCG sin of "Unmixable Attributes".
@@thatman666 tbf. Attributes in vanguard work differently than attributes in yugioh. So its not as dumb as you think.
"Had to hammer out significant amount of product". This argument is outdated the moment OverDress become a thing. Instead of a new set every month, they are releasing new set every 3 months instead because the nation system that replaces the clan system enables it (This statement is directly from the current producer of the game btw). Not only giving breathing room for Vanguard players in that 3 months period, they also have time to actually playtest the cards enough that they don't powercreep (at least not too much like from the V format).
remember when sets were half star vaders, half eradicators and half liberators, while the non MC clans got shafted hard during breakride era?
yeah, balanced *pffffft*
How to make literally just about any archtype work. Add invoked
I don't really find an issue with so many archetypes, in fact that's why I prefer Yugioh. Being able to pick between so many depending on my playstyle or mood is just really nice to have, and seeing random support from time to time for old archetypes I used to play really reinvigorates me to look back on older archetypes once again
Yeah.
lol i hav 2 things to say
honestly i like that there's a lot of archetypes because it lets you play in whatever way you like. But i feel like too many of them are forgotten because they just realllly bad. i just wish that every archetype was somewhat memorable
also what if they made one set a year be designated to supporting archetype
@6:50 Dragon Ball Super TCG does that. They usually get you hyped up for support for a certain color. I like how they keep the effects and skills of cards kinda specific to certain colors. Like green will usually pop cards or make you discard cards, blue Is good for energy manipulation, etc..
My archetypes list that needs the attention
Jurrac
Earthbound servant
Predataplant
Performapal
Red-eyes
Darkworld
Infernoid
Performage
Red/stardust
Iron-chain
Vylon
Triamid
I want more barians support since this is zexal year
@@ryogaiisharkiikamishiroiin2682 I also want more battlewasp support
I think any of the hidden arsenal archetypes and their extended families should get good support. It'd be cool to see one of those archetypes get a random top in an event. But not all archetypes and support is created equal for example Dragunities receiving new support and also could receive the dragon link strategy to get stronger.
digital bugs, batteryman, malicevourous, battlin' boxer, hazy flames, dinomist, igknights, god there are lots
Firekings
One of the weirdest things about Yu-Gi-Oh! that we recently discussed with some friends is how they are so selective about legacy support for archetypes. One of the weirdest things is how there are occasional support for old school stuff that even works or requires the OG stuff (including Dark Magician, BEWD etc.), but then we have so many exciting and unique ideas that got thrown away EVEN if they introduce some kind of continuation. One of the best examples would be the Hidden Arsenal storyline. So many of those archetypes have been discontinued to the point that even when they got a spiritual successor, it was only similar in art, but had no relations. Which is so weird because those were already undersupported, and it was the perfect opportunity to create something new and exciting for them, but they always preferred creating new and new archetypes. I think this comes from the fear of how generic the original card game was when it all started, and they are afraid of something coming up from the past that would work perfectly fine with them - which is ironic, because it ALWAYS happens regardless.
I like the structure decks that give you most of an archetype and a couple pointers to understand how they're supposed to work
At this point changing the number of archetypes retroactively is pretty much impossible
Its funny you mentioned Vanguard because their recent reboot actually merged the Clans into Nations. And while this is much better for support (every main set booster provides support for all decks), its come at the cost of some old Clan visual aesthetics getting partially lost and ending up only on support cards with the current 2 boss monsters of each Nation only pulling from 2 of the Clans that were merged into it, leaving 2-5 other boss monster aesthetics currently with no representative.
I bailed on Vanguard during the middle of their V Series era for YGO and honestly the amount of archetypes was a positive that got me hooked because there were so so many neat ideas. Yes only a dozen if that are "viable" but the wide breadth of creativity got my brain going really hard on deck building. Merging all the recent and some older Plant support into a really fun defensive control deck. Getting to actually play with the Ritual Mechanic and getting to cherry pick the cool utility monsters in blue. And then my personal jank favorite of Galaxy-Eyes Dragonmaids.
Yes there's maybe too many, but like you said, lots of decks have been getting spot support since the end of Vrains sets. And MR5 (4.5? 4 version2?) means that older extra deck archetypes aren't REQUIRED to use links anymore.
If Chemicritters can get support in our year of 2021 I think its okay for there to be a buffet of choice that we splash generic support into.
Total facts. I love trying the new ones each set, but it's hard to invest in any since you know you'll just forget about them anyway when the new ones come out.
Ur on drug?
I agree on the idea of easing up on the number of archetypes released per year, I think a lot of the cooler ones die out too quickly.
As well, I'm kinda on the fence about if an archetype should receive all their cards all at once or some here and a bit more in the next set. I think they should receive enough to be meta viable, and then get some cards later on to boost the strategy as an archetype and not something generic that anything could use.
I think Adamancipator is a good example as with help from block dragon and gigantes, they rose to top tier competitive tables and got support later on for themselves, mind you there wasn't much but support is support. Same thing with eldlich, they just got a fusion monster and they can be played better as a pure archetype then adamancipator (as much as I love adamancipator).
So tldr, I agree on less archetypes and focus on other ones so they can be viable for competitive play but not sure where I stand for the release of support for new archetypes.
We just need more support for older archetypes, I just want more variety.
There’s literally hundreds of archetypes lol what more variety you want??
@@eduardogutierrez3753 that's what I thought lol
@@eduardogutierrez3753 Variety/Different strategies within an archetype. It would be cool to play a control strategy in game 1 then smoke screen into an aggro strategy in game 2.
We get a ridiculous amount of support for older archetypes. Hell this series of main sets is focused on giving different anime archetypes new support.
@@crackpointfivelive9418 Side deck allows you to do that and I'm sure there is a decent midrange deck that can do this anyways. Just need to look
Still wish we could get a lot of the anime exclusive archetypes that we're missing tho
I'm waiting for earthbound servant
Konami, I want my Stormriders...
it honestly doesn't make sense why they would advertise cards on TV if they weren't going to release them in real life AT THE SAME TIME, it's kinda like they're trying to act with a semblance of integrity about being a big ol advert for the card game or something... they can have dignity but just accept the fact that the anime is a big old advertising machine for the card game...
There WILL be a tomatotopia!
I think the way forward would be releasing extra deck monsters in future sets that make it possible to better integrate thematically relevant archetypes in the same deck.
As an example. There are many ways of building a blue-eyes deck. Suppose that there is or was a time where the best variant of a blue-eyes deck does not include the "with eyes of blue" cards like Maiden or Master. Might a path towards better archetype integration happen if they released a card called "Dragoon - with eyes of blue" Link 2 / 3 monster, requires one blue-eyes monster and one spellcaster monster. Whilst this card is on the field all spellcaster monsters on your field or in your graveyard are also dragon type monsters. Banish one dragon type monster from your graveyard and target one card on the field or in your hand. That card's name becomes Blue eyes white dragon.
That may not be the best example but the idea is to create cards that support the idea of using one existing archetype to support another more thematically relevant archetype so that people are less tempted to splash in random engines that are unrelated like brave or phantom-knights.
Because Yugi does not have gamewide rules concerning card interaction like vanguard. I don't think a more vanguard approach is useful. Rather given how competetive Yugi is. Success would be more likely by organically making archetypes supoort each other with the use of making the links between them competetively good enough to have a chance.
Paul I get what ur were saying with family line. A certain theme like hero theme neo-spacian, destiny heroes, elemental heroes, and masked heroes, evil heroes, etc. I think that ur idea to organize the archetypes is a good idea. I think that Konami should introduce 6 new archetype each year with like two new archetypes per a main set with each year having about 3-4 main sets a year .
Six samurai did a similar thing. Started with “the six samurai” and “shien” cards. Later released “legendary six samurai” then “secret six samurai” all one family but different. Now I just wish for more haha
I like to think that generic cards (Zeus, Accesscode Talker, Halqifibrax, etc) are made the way they are because they are meant to be transversal support for all archetypes. Also I had never thought about this before but after watching your video I think I would love a MR that includes some sort of lore book/guide that eventually would help to give support to whole families of cards.
I once decided that I was gonna start a "every deck ever" project, where I build every deck that can be built.
And that project lasted right up until I looked up how many archetypes there are. (And also how expensive some old card are.)
It would up being something to the effect a bit over 300 different decks, and a lot of them would be hard to really make a deck out of at all.
I think the closest thing we have to a house archetype is dragons since a lot of its support is generic. I am with you that we get a lot of "fodder" archetypes. Machines also feels like a house archetype as well. Since I don't buy product I despise the fact that I can buy a whole "subtier" archetype for like 5 bucks outside of the one card thst makes them work which is at 10 forcing a fun deck into prices not worth the cardboard.
It's difficult to have an edge and be extremely knowledgeable of matchups when there's simply too many archetypes to remember along with their combos and interactions with your cards.
You're point at 3:00 is a good one for example I'm building ogdoadic but with lightning overdrive coming next week I'll probably be playing drytron again and most of my ogdoadic cards are still in the mail.
Playing free-to-play in Master Duel has allowed me to discard the option of buying selection packs (ie. the new archetypes) because of the gem shortage, and focus more on the secret packs, learning a new archetype once a month, updating previous archetypes with cards or archetypes that might fit better, and perhaps adding in newly added SRs and URs that came out in selection packs. I have so many decks that I've worked on this year: Plunder patroll, fur hire, Appliancer, Shiranui/Mayakashi, Mekknights, Crawler, morphtronic, solfachord, harpies, graydle, Aesir gods, Awakening of the posessed, World chalice, mermail, fortune lady, etc. I sometime dread the addition of new archetype cards for weather because that's just extra cards I need to create but thats something else. Overall, I love the archetypes of yugioh, learning new types of strategies, constantly thinking about ways to improve my decks (without checking for decklists or creating the UR staples) and its been really fun. And the non-rotating nature of yugioh really helps because these really old archetypes that existed from the duel monster days can still be played to this day and even if there isnt much support, you could play such along with other complementary archetypes to bring out their strengths and what not. The lore of the archetypes are cool too. That being said, the archetypes in secret packs are fairly playable and there are VERY minor archetypes hidden in the legacy packs so.... im not sure what I think
I know what you mean; I've been building _Lightsworns_ for over a decade now....
Your vanguard deck description literally defines Pendulum
Can I say that outside of Volcanics during the time of _Secrets of Eternity_ , I don't like how they'll sometimes release one--I repeat... ONE new support card and it isn't fixing the archetypes' core issues or if it IS a good card... It's like the best card in the archetype now and it's not enough either.
Most of the time, more than ONE good card to actually improve older weaker archetype. Sometimes, the archetype is too outdated like Cyberdarks that... You basically have to run some crazy Frankenstein's monster of a Deck just for that archetype to do anything. Like the new Field Spell is crazy... But it is for Cyberdarks.
There are also SO MANY ARCHETYPES that you never know when your favorite is getting any. I popped off when I saw the new GUSTO support in _Dawn of Majesty_ and the cards are very good but not enough for Gusto to be Tier 1. But at LEAST they feel much better to play now.
I wanna see more support for monster types to push on what makes them unique or help push the general playstyle/gameplan for these monster types. Especially the more obscure monster types like Pyro, Thunder, or Insect for example. I also would love to see more sub-archetypes like the Infernoble Knights for example. Not only do they bring in a different feel of play, but they can also help the existing archetype because it's a sub-archetype.
As Konami... this is how I would structure things. I'd break the product down into four separate things each releasing 3 things a year. The Core Set that moves the game forward, the Reprint set that has not only the cards that need to be reprinted but any card that has been errata'd, the Support set that is mean to only release support for archetype that need it in an attempt to bring every archetype up to a rogue level(which might be hard to judge since archetypes can mix), then finally collectors set that hold things like ghost of the past, gold series, and the duelist packs.
What a setup like this would do is allow any new archetype that would come out in any of the three core set releases about a 4-month window to breathe before any other potential new archetype could come out. Allow them to break that new archetype in two for the core set and support set so that the support set will sell regardless of if people care about the other archetypes that happen to be supported in this set. The reprint set will of course sell due to obvious reasons, and finally, the collectors set will sell due to bring cards that you may want at a higher rarity.. and well the hot ticket collector cards. Could even though in the alternate artwork stuff here as well.
Konami does do that whole clan thing that was described. They did it with world legacy and are now doing it with the Albaz storyline. I personally enjoy these kind of story archetypes because even if my deck doesn’t get support the next part in the story can potentially help my deck. I have a crusadia-mekk knight deck and a orcust deck and I loved seeing those two archetypes interact. My main issue is that Konami makes too many generics but that could help with the fact that there is too many archetypes, that’s why we have more mixed archetypes when it comes to deck building. Sorry for the long post.
I just want more archetypes with synergy like Fableds and Dark Worlds
Archetypes that support eachother
I think you explained it well. I played vanguard, so I pictured a chart in my head how you explained the grouping and it made sense to me
I'm mainly an MTG player (although currently transitioning to vanguard) and what you describe at the beginning of the video is very similar to an issue mtg has called product fatigue. New product will be announced/start spoilers/ be released so often that you'll get hyped in the spoiler season and then a month into the new set you'll be hyped about something else coming out in 2 months
I think the ideal way would be to create retrains of older cards that work on different archetypes so it incentivates mixing them for better results. Take the Giltia retrain revealed a few days ago, it supports Red Eyes, Jinzo and Fisherman. If you could do more cards like that maybe they can make some archtypes to be more closely related to each other. Ofc, it would have to involve a lot of hard work, but i think the best way to do this is to create support that pushed people to mix and experiment with archtype support and combinations.
There is a distinct lack of support for certain archetypes, while others appear to get new cards every couple of months. I find that extremely frustrating as a player who has been wanting new support for my deck for like two years(a year-and-a-half, maybe)
How I interpretted Paul's idea: there should be pillars within yugioh that focus on a few specific themes within the game. Then when archetypes are released the archetypes are designed around these pillars of yugioh with unique enough effects to remain their own archetype while still working with other archetypes of the same pillar. Thus allowing new archetypes whenever Konami wants while also allowing new archetypes to be mixed in with old ones of the same pillar.
Let the core booster sets have a 50/50 ratio when it comes to archetypes, half of them being new archetypes and the other half being support for older archetypes
I would love if they would like a scheduled release for support so you know when you can expect the support or just release a few of them a year
A big help would be to make structure decks for the different archetypes. That way, they’re easy to get, if not with new support in them as well
One of the solutions would be to make more attribute related cards like they did in phantom darkness. The entire set was based around the dark attribute. There were no archetypes involved to my knowledge, except for some single pieces of support. I want to see cards like Allure of the Sea or Fire Armed dragon. Or maybe Dark Guardian of the Fortress #0 and Skybound Spirit.
7:45 nah, you explained it well and I totally agree.
Mist Valley and Gusto could've been a class.
Honestly I think the sheer number of different archetypes is a strength of Yugioh because you have SO many different ways to go about playing the game (even though in practice, the competitive circuit really all seems to come down to stopping your opponent from playing the game). Sure, not all of them will be supported as much as others, but tbh, not every deck necessarily needs to be super good or have a ton of depth to it imho. It's fine for some of them to just be made to have fun or make you approach the game differently.
But I totally agree that they at least need to release enough cards to create a coherent deck when an archetype first comes out, or else you risk losing interest. As fast as ygo sets come out relative to other games, three months (at best) is still quite a while to wait for new cards when a deck isn't even fully playable yet.
In retrospect, I think it would have been better if some archetypes had similar playstyles, for example, the lv. Monsters, armed dragon, mystic swordsman, silent magician, etc, all had the same core mechanic of utilizing weaker monsters to snowball into special summoning larger ones each turn, or how E-heroes and roids had the common concept of using the same couple main deck monsters to make various fusions so there was almost always a fusion monster to make out of your opening hand. If there were archetypes that played similarly, but had different typing and themes, it would've gone a long way in slowing power creep and allowing some cards (like Lv. Up) to be interchangeable between decks and relevant for a longer time, and it would have allowed a little more "player expression" through deck building. Having a playtime exclusive to one archetype helps that archetype stand out, but at yhe same time it kind of feels like a rpg where abilities are tied to cosmetic armor, so getting certain gameplay benefits requires your character to look a certain way. It would be cool to get another mix-and-match fusion archetype like e-heroes but in a fish/sea-serpent or fairy type deck.
it's nice to hear that APS plays vanguard as well I hope I can see those in this channel as well
The fact this video came out the same day as rata releases an archetype archive on 3 forgotten tiny archetypes says everything really XD
From what some of my friends are saying they are editing how the clan system works for cardfight vanguard to enable the mixing of clans or something like that.
they could release cards which name multiple archetypes (armed dragon ojama) which would help show the big picture synergy. maybe a battlewasp speedroid wind synchro support continuous spell etc
I've played Vanguard for years and I understand what you're saying Paul. "clans" have unique identites and abilities. I'm as experienced in YGO but I struggle to find identity in some decks. There are certain Link monsters who are just so dang good that it can be slotted into nearly all decks and is sometimes better than the boss monster of those archetypes. Feels bad man
Would be interesting too see Yugioh with less archetypes overall and more open-ended cards like Magic. Maybe that is what Goat format is?
I agree. But personally I’d say abolish archetypes
Yugioh with open ended cards become an absolute shitshow unless they nerf all the generic cards to oblivion.
The pain of "building a deck but it turns out to be bad" is the epidemy of the S-Force lmao
i get what you're saying, its sort of like the world legacy stuff where theres multiple arcatypes under one banner and they all are a different flavour of the same thing but with different playstyles. i really like how guard dragon and crusadia can be their own deck and splashed in with stuff like orcust or mekk knights. maybe more stuff like that
also yugioh needs to slow down on the arcatypes, too many times a new arcatype comes out and they are missing a good boss monster or something to actually enable their plays and it comes out like a year or two later, these arcatyes just feel incomplete on release
Lightsworn became twilightsworn, vehicroids kind of became speedroids
Genex kept rebranding only to become a complete mess.
Certain archetypes over the past year or so have seemed like one-hit wonders. Adamancipator, Drytron, and VW come to mind.
Is that just me?
I think new archetypes are good cause it gives people different chances to find what fits them. But on the flip side they do need to make sure older types are given new support so people are able to keep playing their favorite.
I agree there is too many of them. I do think there are ways to fix this anyone remembers Steelswarm, and Evilswarm? I do think that would be a more interesting direction and a good thing for archetypes overall.
Shout outs to my Malicevorous boys.
The best support the archetype has is BARDICHE.
I wish there was more dark level 2 support around this archetype, Cali Go Crow and umbrel Horror helps but it's still too small of a card pool, if we got a new dark rank 2 xyz based archetype then I could see this being great.
Nah I get you Paul. I look at S-Force and think why it couldn’t have been a theme tied to banish Psychics or Time Thieves instead of just being insinuated with just lore. I look at EARTH Machine and I love that it incorporates Infinitraks, Machina and Trains and you can use ALL of them.
I really like the approach Konami did in combining archetypes. Like with FA and UA, and Phantom Knight and Raidraptor.
I wish they would not decide beforehand how meta an archetype will be. It's clear some archetypes are "designed to be" bad and marketed to Casuals only which I don't get. Casuals would enjoy powerful decks too and competetive players would have more variety and less stale formats. Invoked, Salamangreat and BA are great examples of popular meta AND casual decks.
I like the range, but I think I agree some do come and go too quickly, and a lot get forgotten, a lot of interesting mechanics or cool artwork and I would like to play one rather, than it just be forgotten. E.G. I love Weather Painters, I top and locals a lot with it, but it really does need the 7th colour of the rainbow to finish it and it just needs more consistency. I know that is to me, but there are a lot of cool looking decks which just need a little more, and they just get nothing, they would rather make a new or one or print more heroes or utopia.
A good example of a forgotten archetype is Constellar, they’re cool because they can modify their levels and it would just be a really good archetype if they got synchro support and a good counter trap.
Always love listening to you talk about these things. They seem ranty on the outside but viewers quickly realise that your complaints are based on a strong love for the game. Keep up the great work Paul!
Like it or not. Yu-Gi-Oh needs a reboot
In my opinion at this point eugeo has so many archives that we only really need to release 1 or 2 big ones a year and then we can trink a Lin 1 or 2 cards of different kind of art types to kind of fill out the packs. Slowly bringing other archives into a current metal's power level so that way we can still play some of our old favorite archives maybe not competitively but to get them to a more fun deck/rogue dextadus
Agreed with the "Clans" thing. Tribrigade is a fantastic candidate for Konami to turn toward that style. Also makes for awesome long running lore when cards start to belong to larger groups of cards. Like all the spellcasters connected through all the shared lore, those are also a great candidate for the 'clan' treatment.
I think generic arctype support could help many decks like cards that support all pendulum or could be useful in any warriors deck etc
I like alternative win condition's and liked the frequent mill iron chains could do when I played legacy of the duelist. But realized they never made future cards for the arcytpe which was disappointing, I know the deck isn't good since mill isn't good especially in yugioh but still liked the idea at least.
Maybe a good way to retool it is only release new archetypes in the four core boxes each year with the side products supporting either those new archetype or older archetypes, or just include generic cards.
The problem is the random archetypes that have 3 cards and dont go anywhere, digital bugs, glacial beast, triamid, and many more, why do they have to be archetypes? Even lyrilusc just recently got enough cards to justify being an entire archetype.
this is why I personally try to go with an archetype that has some solid generic support so that I can at least continue to use it and even swap between a few of them. A great example is plants, they have a lot of different archetypes and a decent amount of solid generic support cards making it possible to play quite a few of the different plant archetypes.
Support is too inconsistent in power and frequency, or absent. Ice Barrier was in dire need of support for over a *decade* and when it finally received it, the support was lackluster, and they'll probably never see another new card again at this rate.
It would be cool if for maybe the last 3 months(or maybe the first 3 months) of the year every product would be legacy support.
Having a specific time for Konami to focus on creating and players building anticipation for legacy support would be cool instead of throwing a couple legacy cards here and there.
LIGHT Fairy family...
The Sanctuary in the Sky: "Am I a joke to you?"
Them: Too many archetypes!
Landstar Archetype: Am I a joke to you?
I took a break from this game because of how slow my favorite deck is supported. I just literally told my friends to notify me when I got supported lol.
Yugioh is in desperate need of a Thanos Snap
The Banlist is the closest thing to Thanos's snap. It can be said that they applied a "Thanos's snap" with the Rush Duels format since no TCG archetype is compatible in the format (The format has its own archetypes, but many cards there are quite generic that you can combine it with anything)
Dude you make a lot of sense. Imagine them connecting Dragunity, Mist Valley, and Harpies?! Something like the cards that brought Raidraptors and PK together?